|

| |

The Future of Indian Democracy
Vinay Lal
[First published as “Can Democracy Survive?”, in India
Today, 13 December 2006, pp. 32, 34.]
For a country with a very long past, many in India now seem to be resolutely
focused, when they are not consumed by the demands of daily living, on
the future. Indeed, one of the many reasons why the BJP and their allies
may have lost the last general election in 2004 is that the advocates
of Hindutva, in particular, have been obsessed with ideas about the gloriousness
of the Indian and specifically Hindu past, though the obsessions of the
young are doubtless very different. With a campaign revolving around the
idea of “India Shining”, one might have thought that the BJP
was poised to prevail. Certainly, if the persistent invocations of the
“new India”, the roaring economy, and the entrepreneurial
and aggressively capitalist spirit of India are any guide, at least the
Indian middle classes have signified their assent to the idea that an
economic rather than a political conception of democracy will drive the
Indian future.
Democracies everywhere present a complex scenario of tensions between
constraints and liberty, unfreedom and freedom, the imperatives of the
modern national security state and the aspirations of a free citizenry,
but perhaps nowhere more so than in India. The very fact that India has
repeatedly been able to mount general elections, and on a scale nowhere
else witnessed in history, is adduced as evidence of the strength of Indian
democracy -- an accomplishment that seems all the more remarkable given
the precarious state of democracy in most of the world. Not all institutions
of civil society are equally robust, but it is an indisputable fact that
there are strong people’s and grassroots movements. The same Supreme
Court that sentenced Mohammed Afzal to death, notwithstanding the failure
of the state to produce decisive evidence against the condemned man, also
acquitted other men for want of evidence. Similarly, if the press has
often been a bulwark of support to élites, the vigilance of the
English-language press during the anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat in 2002
cannot be denied. There have been important legislative gains for ordinary
people, including the passage of the National Rural Employment Guarantee
Act, the Forest People’s Land Rights Bill, the Right to Information
Act, and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, but it is
also widely conceded that progressive legislation, for example on the
practice of dowry, can coexist alongside a resolute determination to prevent
its implementation. The law can obfuscate problems as much as it can help
to relieve them, an outcome all but assured when the state has no substantive
commitment to the idea of an open society and distributive equality.
In thinking about Indian democracy and its future prospects, commentators
have lavished far too much attention on “politics” in the
narrowest conception of the term. There is much speculation, for example,
on whether India might move towards a two-party system or some variation
of it, with the Congress and the left parties constituting one bloc and
the other bloc being constituted by BJP and its allies. But this kind
of scenario has little room for parties such as the Bahujan Samaj Party
(BSP) and the Samajwadi Party (SP), which together dominate politics in
Uttar Pradesh, where efforts by the Congress to reinvent itself do not
hold much promise of success. In the General Elections of 2004, the Left
Front won 60 seats and came to hold the decisive swing vote. While so
far the left has show little inclination to revolt, and West Bengal is
rapidly retooling itself to become attractive to the corporate world and
foreign investors, the possibility of genuine and irreconcilable differences
developing between the Congress and the Left Front should never be minimized.
Consequently, in addressing the question of the future of Indian democracy,
one is asked to think well beyond political parties, regionalism, the
two party-system, and other like considerations. If there is still considerable
hope for Indian democracy, it is because it still has several distinct
sources of renewal. First, and foremost, there is the people’s wisdom.
Time after time the illiterate electorates of India have shown better
judgment than the educated, though whether the likes of Chandrababu Naidu,
the former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh who fancied himself a CEO
and attempted to transform the state into a technological mecca even while
the agricultural countryside was being roiled by suicides of farmers driven
to desperation, ever learn a lesson is another matter. I am reminded of
a conversation that transpired in 1927 between Gandhi and a visiting clergyman,
Reverend Mott. When Mott asked Gandhi what gave him the cause for the
greatest hope, Gandhi unhesitatingly referred to the people’s capacity
for nonviolent resistance despite the gravest provocations. And when Mott
queried Gandhi on what filled him with the greatest despair, Gandhi said:
“The hardheatedness of the educated is a matter of constant concern
and sorrow to me.”
The wisdom and resilience of ordinary people has been exemplified not
only at the ballot box, but in grassroots movements and cultural practices
of syncretism. Secondly, the Constitution of India remains, despite attempts
to subvert its emancipatory provisions, a document and a vision that continues
to hold out the promise of equality, justice, and opportunity. It has
survived the wreckage of an authoritarian executive and will outlive the
Supreme Court’s present disposition to allow massive land grabs
in the name of progress and development. Thirdly, though Mohandas Gandhi’s
assassins never seem to rest, the spectre of Gandhi remains to haunt,
guide, and inspire Indians who are resistant to everything that passes
for “normal politics” and have not entirely succumbed to the
oppressions of modernity. As I have elsewhere written, Gandhi took great
risks and was not in the least cowed down by history, the sanctity of
traditions, or scriptural authority. Some six decades ago, Indians entered
into a tryst with destiny. Now is the time to gamble everything on the
unique experiment that constitutes Indian democracy.

|