Home > The Parliament vs. Public

The Parliament vs. Public

E. Surendranath is an alumnus of Siddhartha Dental College. NTR Health University

The title itself is illogical in ideal terms, but in practical terms it makes sense.  Parliament is nothing but a democratic institution and democracy is nothing but a ''popular'' system.  Both the charisma and flaw of the democracy is in the same ''popular'' system.  the charisma is me in disguise of my representative will rule myself,  and the flaw is if I am not educated and empowered I can ruin myself and my society.  The unfortunate thing is that the second one is more prevalent and so many are excluded from growth and are deprived badly.  And the result of deprivation is grievances and now who ever addresses his grievance would be deemed as his unofficial leader (while the official one is his elected unrepresentative leader). Even if his grievances are orally addressed but not through a policy, we will follow him and make him a civil society leader, a messiah and this messiahnism or a heroic worship of a man can give a death blow to democracy. Ambedkar in his own words said that ''individual worship in a democracy can make him more autocratic and so institution itself will be in great trouble ‘here Indira Gandhi can be quoted as an example.

Now it again seems like a diarchy, one is having an official mandate that is through elections, and the other having unofficial mandate through public support. and so the question arise as who is powerful ? Who should rule? This is resulting in friction. We often see our own representatives as enemies and take slogans against them via our unofficial leader. Now these unofficial leaders due to their mass following can dictate terms to the parliament, causing breach in privilege of our parliament and amounting enormous pressure on it. What happens due to this pressure? Well the answer is policy paralysis, which has ramification effect on economy, external and internal affairs. what if a civil society leader is pressing on parliament to make laws ? Well that is nothing but ''failure of democracy''.

Democracy is number politics, anyone having majority mandate will be a ruler, no matter how he acquires that majority. This gives rise to sectarian politics. Electioneering and luring the voters. Uneducated and uninformed voter is more vulnerable to this system. Even technically and economically literate people are politically and socially illiterate and so that is the reason why even educated people are lured in vote bank politics. After being looted many a time by this sectarian politics we unite into a civil society irrespective of caste and creed, but the unfortunate thing is this unity is short lived.

Civil society can give only band aid solutions to a chronic problem. The real leader will not blame the system, they will try to understand the system and correct it, but today civil society leaders are concentrating more on blaming the system.

The answer lies in bridging the gap between person and the society. If this gap is filled by civil society and NGOs, by educating the public, instead of blaming the system, then we are certainly going to evolve.

 

 

The views represented in the article are solely of the author