Direct democracy is as yet not in practice in India. In U.S. that is practiced at state levels. We had some stray incidences when a minister had tried to have direct voting on issues of public concern however, that did not work so well. It was voting by casting a rupee note in the ballot to favor the proposal. It was expected that the money so collected shall be used for the purpose. Our constitution does not have any provision for such an experiment in direct democracy.

Experts have different opinions on the subject. Recent ballot in California State was for allowing marijuana smoking, and in that the majority vote favored the smoking of marijuana. In some previous cases the results were very encouraging.

Democracy means people’s opinion. In the initial level in villages and even at present time we see villagers voting by raising hand to favor or not favor a proposal. The difference between indirect democracy that we are practicing and direct democracy is in numbers. In direct democracy all citizens must vote to get the correct idea about the opinion of the people. In indirect democracy we see that even if very few people exercise their voting right, the election is accepted, a person with much less votes is seen declared elected. This makes it clear that in indirect democracy sometimes a minority vote can get passed and get an opportunity to sit in the House of Representatives. This practice has caused entry of many untoward individuals in the House of Representatives. Our present parliament and also assemblies are examples in point. Political parties are at advantage in indirect democracy. In direct democracy we get correct idea about what the majority wants and so theoretically that is the correct form of democracy. However, some experts point to some disadvantages in the system. Success of a democracy depends upon the quality of the people. If majority people are substandard a wrong or unethical proposal can get passed, recent example of California State is an example in point. That means moral values are at risk in direct democracy and that is the reason why many experts on the subject are weary of direct democracy. Nevertheless, we see that even in indirect democracy moral values are at risk when we see our own democracy, where we see political parties are getting criminals elected.

We also see that whether it is a so called democratic system or any other, only the leader of the people is the last voice. That means we may opine that the people prefer to have some one person to head the State. For example we see the working of Shiv Sena in Mumbai. That organization claims to have a democratic system but actually what we see is that only Bal Thakaray is the opinion for any issue. Same experience we get with other parties such as NCP or Congress. The question is if this is the state of affairs, why we want to pretend to have a democracy at all.

One expert told me that to have a reasonably workable democracy the society should have its majority educated and ethically conscious. Their ideas of good and bad be very clear and only in that society we can have a successful democracy, then it can be in any type, direct or indirect. So long as we do not have our society up to that mark any form of democracy we accept, that is going to be in trouble.

Power of rule corrupts many and that is one defect of democratically elected persons. They when get power of ruling on people the satanic desires often rise in them and they begin to work as if they are owners of the State. This is experienced in bureaucrats also. They are not elected but do wield power over ordinary people. For example police, they misuse the authority vested in them so that they become a menace to ordinary people whom they are actually supposed to protect. The protector becomes the predator. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Bottom line is; any system of rule we choose the risks of misuse of ruling power is always present. We depend too much on our press or media to voice the people but I see that many political parties and people have hijacked press by owning it and through that they continue to misguide the ordinary people. To protect moral values of the society we need something much stronger than just democracy. We had many centuries of rule of kings, despots. In that many thinkers from the west saw injustice and immorality, and so they introduced the concept of democracy in the last century. Imagining that it is the answer to the problem but alas, that has not worked. One researcher told me the problem lies in the quality of masses. If they are under-quality any type of rule we introduce bad element is going to break through and take over. Present direct democratic decision at California of legalizing marijuana in an example in point. 

I invite you to visit my other blog if you are interested in stories.

Ashok Kothare’s Blog

You may visit Ideas and tips on any subject for intelligent discussions.