Saturday, April 12, 2014

Rulers or representatives?

On 10 April people of Delhi voted in the general elections. The arrangements were fantastic. The atmosphere was relaxed. An awning protected voters from the sun as they walked into the center. Bouquets of flowers were tied to the poles supporting the awning. Sealed mineral water bottles were there for anyone thirsty. The staff were courteous. An old man was brought in to vote on a wheelchair. Red carpets lined the floors to the booths which were clearly numbered. You presented your identification, your left index finger was marked and you went behind a screen to press a button against the person you wished to vote for. It was over in a couple of minutes. But what does this whole exercise, costing hundreds of billions of rupees and interfering with ongoing Board examinations, really mean? For us it is simply electing a person to represent our wishes in parliament and to pass laws which will fulfil those wishes. For politicians becoming a member of parliament is about becoming a VIP, living in expensive bungalows in Lutyens Delhi, roaming around with gun-toting guards, travelling free of cost in trains and planes, and if one can worm one's way into a minister's post then it is a path to untold riches. For criminals it means being absolved of all crimes because winning an election is taken as a mandate to continue. ' Democracy ' comes from 2 Greek words - ' demos ' which means ' common people ' and ' kratos ' which means ' rule '. So democracy is supposed to be rule by common people but for Indian politicians democracy ends with elections after which they will do as they please and any protest will be met with extreme violence. That is why China's GDP was less than ours in 1990 but is now 4 times our GDP. While in China " delivery of basic public goods like roads, electricity, drains, water supplies, and schools where teachers actually show up " is the norm " The legitimacy of democracy in many ways absolved Indian governments from the necessity of performing." Rewards being infinite Indian politicians will resort to any trick, no matter how dirty, to win. Facing a rout in the elections because of the destruction of the economy the Congress is now trying portray Mr Modi's marriage as some sort of sleaze when everyone knew about it all along. Mr Modi was married in 1968 at the age of 17 years but never lived with his wife. It seems that she is still married to him and is devoted to him so that she prays for him to become prime minister. The present Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh was merely a puppet while Ms Sonia Gandhi ruled. Do we really want these scum to represent us?

No comments: