Death of Democracy Once again

Democracy has been proven to be one of the most powerful political systems in the world. However, the very word “democracy” is often used, misused, defined and redefined as it suits the people in power. The founding fathers of our constitution defined democracy as “a government for the people, by the people and of the people”. But there is a catch; they forgot to define “people”. They did not mention government for whom? Government selected by what kind of people and? Government elected by what means? And this catch has been put in place and used/misused/abused by politicians, guided by their greed and hunger for fame, money and most important of all power.

Till six months back people in Darjeeling hills were seen harping on the tune of “a need for the democracy to prevail in the hills”, and championing this cause was a newly formed party that reflected the voice and aspirations of the unhappy minority, whose voices were either suppressed or muted for 20 long years. This new party was supposed to be different as it did not start or begin; it in fact (as one of my friends put it) erupted from the grass roots against the atrocities and indifference of the various levels of government, be it local, state or central.  

Like anything new, people were at first intrigued, curious and weary of the new party on the block that dared to challenge the authority of no less than Subash Ghishing and GNLF. With passage of time this new party started to emerge as a serious political force; fuelled by people’s frustrations and apathy of the 20 year misrule of Subash Ghishing, this new party went on to slowly win the support of masses and emerged as the force that could not only challenge, but also unseat Ghishing and his party.

During its formative weeks or months, this party championed the right of the people to choice. The main platform of this party was opposing the inclusion of the Darjeeling Hills under Scheduled Sixth of the Indian constitution, as it was described as “anti-people and anti-community”. Majority of the people in the Darjeeling Hills to be frank did not even know what Sixth Scheduled actually meant. However, no one liked the idea of ones community being divided on the lines of tribal and non-tribal basis. No one liked the idea of being left out from that decision making process, which would definitely have effected them in a big way and most important of all no one liked the idea of another 20 years of Ghishing’s or GNLF’s rule.

So, people from all walks of life supported this newly formed party, a party which wanted people’s voice to be heard, a party that wanted people to be consulted when important decisions were being made and a party that was democratic as it did not allow leaders, it only allowed the people, the individuals to decide what was to be done. Any politician wanting to join this party (realizing that the wind had changed its course) would not be directly allowed to join this new party as long as he was not accompanied by majority of people from his own ward or area. People were very happy with this arrangement as this was as democratic as it would get. And that was the main factor for the phenomenal raise of this party from scratch to the most powerful political force in the Darjeeling Hills.

But, as goes the quote “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to truly test a man's character, give him power”. So people through this party started to realize the power, which comes from belonging to the majority. People, who had been suppressed, oppressed and made to act like robots or puppets, now had the power in their hands to change whatever wrong was being practiced in the past and start afresh. They received further boost from the fact that both the Central and West Bengal government realizing the futility of the exercise decided to scrap the proposed Sixth Scheduled Bill.

Perhaps, as they say “this was the straw that broke the camels back”, people now realized that could not only change the past practices, but they could look back at the past to decide a new future for them. No wonder, they decided to look back at the past, and got stuck at that point where they realized that any form of opposition can be dangerous. Any opposition allowed to walk free, may lead to eventual demise of the new party. Since, the whole new party phenomenon was formed and based on the premises of rebellion, the rebel themselves now seem to be afraid of being administered a dose of their own medicine if any sort of opposition is not nipped at the bud.

“Two Families in Pandam Ostracized”… “Two Individuals Ostracized From the Society in Ghoom Bhanjyang”… “House of GNLF Leader Burnt Down in Pokhreybung”… and so on and so forth reads the headlines these days. This gets one feeling very uncertain regarding the restoration of democracy in true sense in the Darjeeling hills now or any time soon in the future.

History, always repeats itself and that worries me no ends; because of our past mistake in not having a healthy opposition, the Darjeeling Hills were pushed back by 20 years. Let us not repeat that mistake again. Let us have a healthy position and a healthier opposition, so that in case of need we the ordinary people always have something to fall upon. At this critical point in time the role of leadership becomes paramount. The leaders must be strong enough to prevent their cadres from being emotionally swayed, bold enough to take any sort of criticism healthily and have enough faith and dedication in their work to believe that people will always support their work as it is for the general benefit of every one and not just themselves.

E.A Stevenson once said “A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular.” It is not only prudent but necessary for people to realize that in order to keep the democracy working we need to allow every voice in the society to be heard. People have every right to take any instance that they feel suits them the best, even though their sentiments may not belong to the popular line of thought. It is important to understand that being in opposition party does not necessarily translate to being opposed to the idea of any kind. Be it the idea of better livelihood, development or achieving Gorkhaland.

In this context some questions need to be considered sincerely and seriously, why can’t we allow people to decide for them, what they may consider to be the best? Is it really necessary that all the people in the hills must join one party to achieve Gorkhaland? Is it really important to be opposition free? And the most important question of all… Is it really healthy for a democratic society to have no opposition of any sorts? The answer if we look in the past is NO.

Ignazio Silone once said “Liberty is the possibility of doubting, the possibility of making a mistake, the possibility of searching and experimenting, the possibility of saying No to any authority - literary, artistic, philosophic, religious, social, and even political.” We must not forget that, the revolution that we talk of and talk about today was not only for opposing Sixth Scheduled, it was also for opposing the powers that had done all they could to suppress our liberty, our freedom of choice and our right to say no. Let not allow that situation to arise again by suppressing and forcing people to join the most popular party right now.

Finally, I leave you with the immortal lines as stated by Ayn Rand “Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual)”.

Hope, I made some sense.

Upendra