Is india a Democracy

[rinkusheoran]

Democracy:-The term comes from the Greek:dēmokratía "rule of the people",which was coined from dêmos "people" and Kratos "power".
-The common people, considered as the primary source of political power
-Government by the people or their elected representatives
I was reading somewhere and i come across the word DEMOCRACY which we all have read/listened so many times but never gone and pondered over it( some of you might have done it) what does it means? That is why i am started the samae by giving few of the meaning of this.

Democracy is a political form of government in which governing power is derived from the people or by means of elected representatives of the people But if you look at the current govt that we have in that out of appr 38 ministers including the Minister from the coalitionn partner which are aounrd 6 , it does not include the minsters of state. With the little math it leaves me with the 32 cabinet ministers where our Pm having other 4 deoartments. We have 11 n could be 12 minister which are RajaySabha members that is around 50% of the cabinet portfolia by the Rajay Sabha MPs.We all know the Rajay Sabha members are not elected but nominated by the so called high command.
So Question that comes to my mind are
Where are the MPs who were elected by people to lead them?
Do you really think they can work for people or will they work for whom, who nominated them?
Can they be held accountable for the things that they are doing, obviously they are responsible but not accountable as they are doing it for their high command because they are the ones on behest hey are there?
Is it just means voting once in five years( if we dont have by elections) and our job is done?
I heard about the 49-0 option in election but never saw the same, if at all it is ther then why election commision does not tell it to people?

Disclaimer-Me not follower of any political party. We have Congress in the center so thought of relating to it and talk.

 

[virj]

In India, we certainly have one form of democracy. There are 1000 types of democracy. In india we choose party not leaders where as in others like China and US they choose leaders. Diff in China and US : In US they can choose leader as well as party out of two but in China they can only choose the leader as there is only one party.

Ours is westminister system and westminister work like this.

 

[sjakhars]

Those who are in doubt read this:

The princely state of India

1. how hereditary is Indian politics? How did the 545 MPs in the 15th Lok Sabha enter politics?
No Significant Family Background 255
Family 156
Student politics 47
Business 35
RSS 18
Inducted 16
Trade union 10
Royal family 7
Maoist commander 1

2. Which political party was the most hereditary? (Or, what percentage of a party’s MPs had reached the Lok Sabha through a family link—excluding parties with fewer than five MPs?)
RLD 100 per cent (5 out of 5)
NCP 77.8 per cent (7 out of 9)
BJD 42.9 per cent (6 out of 14)
INC 37.5 per cent (78 out of 208)
BSP 33.3 per cent (7 out of 21)
DMK 33.3 per cent (6 out of 18)
SP 27.3 per cent (6 out of 22)
CPI(M) 25 per cent (4 out of 16)
JD(U) 20 per cent (4 out of 20)
BJP 19 per cent (22 out of 116)
AITC 15.8 per cent (3 out of 19)
Shiv Sena 9.1 per cent (1 out of 11)
AIADMK 0 per cent (0 out of 9)
TDP 0 per cent (0 out of 6)



http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?269931

 

[sunildabas]

"People get the government that they deserve."
India is totally democratic,people do have the authority to choose the kind of government they like & a good example will be results of Bihar polls. people in Bihar voted for development rather than the caste system. also if if u see the movie " no one killed jessica" when the media & public put the pressure on government & courts, justice was delivered. so if the public really wants any major changes they can get the desired results, of course they will need determination & will to do it.

 

[arvindc]

Government in India is formed by a nexus of corrupt politicians, greedy media, and money power. These powers change the people's perception and people seldom get to choose leaders of their choice.

The increasing numbers and magnitude of scams by governments is a proof of this. People do not want to be governed by a corrupt and greedy person. So had the government really been "rule of the people", such scams would not have occurred or at least their numbers would have gone down.

 

[arvindc]

"People get the government that they deserve."
India is totally democratic,people do have the authority to choose the kind of government they like & a good example will be results of Bihar polls. people in Bihar voted for development rather than the caste system. also if if u see the movie " no one killed jessica" when the media & public put the pressure on government & courts, justice was delivered. so if the public really wants any major changes they can get the desired results, of course they will need determination & will to do it.

On the Jessica lal murder case, if this what you call justice in democracy, then yes, in India, one is free to do everything, even murdering someone in full public view and still walk around freely.

What percentage of India's population has such resources to get justice? If it takes staging of public protest for 11 years to convict such a murderer, then what about the poor people who get killed, raped or tortured day by day. How can they justice, when they have start over again with business as they have to feed themselves and their children. What about someone, who's entire family get's murdered and has no one left to fight? Is there no justice for them in democracy?

 

[saluram]

Karnataka ka hal?

karnataka ke bjp vidhan sadsayon dwara dwara vidhan parishad ke upsabhapati ke khilaf avishwas parstav pass karakar unhe hatana kya bharat desh me kamjor ho rahe loktantra ki shuruwat hain.
yahan vidhan sabha me roj naye natak dekhne ko mil rahe hain kya yahi bharat ka loktantra hain?

 

[cooljat]

.


ये साली कांग्रेस की सरकार देश चला रही है या बिजनेस ???

http://www.bhaskar.com/article/NAT-petrol-prises-rises-again-1757393.html?HT4=

 

[kapdal]

Democracy:-The term comes from the Greek:dēmokratía "rule of the people",which was coined from dêmos "people" and Kratos "power".
-The common people, considered as the primary source of political power
-Government by the people or their elected representatives
I was reading somewhere and i come across the word DEMOCRACY which we all have read/listened so many times but never gone and pondered over it( some of you might have done it) what does it means? That is why i am started the samae by giving few of the meaning of this.

Democracy is a political form of government in which governing power is derived from the people or by means of elected representatives of the people But if you look at the current govt that we have in that out of appr 38 ministers including the Minister from the coalitionn partner which are aounrd 6 , it does not include the minsters of state. With the little math it leaves me with the 32 cabinet ministers where our Pm having other 4 deoartments. We have 11 n could be 12 minister which are RajaySabha members that is around 50% of the cabinet portfolia by the Rajay Sabha MPs.We all know the Rajay Sabha members are not elected but nominated by the so called high command.
So Question that comes to my mind are
Where are the MPs who were elected by people to lead them?
Do you really think they can work for people or will they work for whom, who nominated them?
Can they be held accountable for the things that they are doing, obviously they are responsible but not accountable as they are doing it for their high command because they are the ones on behest hey are there?
Is it just means voting once in five years( if we dont have by elections) and our job is done?
I heard about the 49-0 option in election but never saw the same, if at all it is ther then why election commision does not tell it to people?

Disclaimer-Me not follower of any political party. We have Congress in the center so thought of relating to it and talk.

Rinku,

I think you have answered the question yourself- Democracy is a political form of government in which governing power is derived from the people or by means of elected representatives of the people.

This is the practise in India. The elected representatives are in the Lok Sabha (legislature) and through vote of confidence or no confidence, they decide whose goverment (executive) would be there. No govt. can rule without the consent of these elected reps. Additionally, the elected reps in the legislature are responsible for passing all laws. Technically speaking, who eventually becomes a minister has nothing to do with democracy. Like in America, only the President is elected directly, and then he appoints his secretaries (ministers) as he chooses- none of them are elected.

You may have genuine qualms about the quality of the democracy. It is a very reasonable argument that India is a dysfunctional or highly ineffective democracy. But democracy it is- without any question. Also, one may think one form of democracy is better than another form. Like there is a direct form of democracy, where all decisions are taken by people. So basically if any new law has to be passed, it has to be through a vote of all citizens (referendum). I believe the Swiss still do this for the more important laws. But it may be a bit difficult in a huge country like India. Within representative democracy that India has, one can argue for parliamentary or presidential form. But the bottomline is that as long as the laws or lawmakers are chosen by the people, it is a democracy without any question.

 

[singhvp]

Rotten or Fresh - an apple will remain an apple and can not be called something else merely because of its poor or better quality. Similarly, the prevailing system of governance in India is democracy beyond doubt. However, depending on its proven dismal record and inefficacy in India one can call it differently prefixing some adjectives like 'bad democracy' 'failed democracy' or 'pseudo democracy' etc. but it is still a democracy which needs complete overhauling. Unfortunately, no other political system can become a better substitute than the present democracy for Indians. Its success and failure ultimately depends on people's perception, awareness, participation and character. In a society like ours, ridden with gautravaad, casteism, religious bigotry, regionalism and nepotism, the electorates also have to share the blame as they are given a choice of secret ballot. The politicians of all hues, who have been continually undermining this institution, exploit the above mentioned differences or weakness of the electorate for their shallow political gains by playing the caste and religious cards. The blame game will continue and so will this system with gradual reforms. Given the bewildering variety of ethnicity and the sharp divide among the Indian society, the potential of any mass revolution is nowhere in sight.

 

[fateh]

Friends, every body knows that we have democratic system of governing. The aim of our public/leaders after independence was to have democracy in our country & we have democracy in our constitution, in text books & few lectures delivered/written by certain power holders. As I hae seen, experienced & discussed the toppic at various political, legal, educational & executive forums, I strongly feel that we have no democracy on ground and in real sence. Our nation is governed by totally selfish, cruel, greed & crininal dictetors and worst part is they are not responsible for their misdeads also because they are ruling on the name of their political party & democracy. Keeping my openion aside and considering that we all know the meaning & ingredients of democracy, let us discuss the toppic a fresh.
a) Is our public know the meaning of democracy?
b) Have we experienced democracy before our independence?
c) In the abscence of above, can our public think, immagine, fit , demmaned and ensure implementation of democratic functioning of our govrning bodies?
d) is democratic functioning of ruling bodies possible in the society whose thinking, decision making & actions are totally controlled by casteism, religionism, areaism, favouritism, gondaism & selfishness?
e) Is public free to select their candidate?
f) Is public free to elect their choice candidate?
g) I think public is only have freedom of voting for candidates selected by dictetors or join the battery of dictetors.
h) As we know that we have system in which political party having majority forms the govt/gorning bodies at various levels, Is any political party functions/managed democratically, when such party comes to power can they really function democratically?
i) Is our elected repersentatives free to express their views in Assembaly/parliament etc specially when his views are contrary to their party line?
j) Is our executive including the head the President, free to function?
k) Is our judiciary free to function & is common person free to criticise misdeads of judiciary?
l) Is our media belongs to public, is not owned/controlled by power holders/dictetors and is media free to function in real sense?

In Indian democracy the grass is free to grow as much as it can and the donkey is free to eat as much as it can. regards

 

[sunildabas]

@Arvind Chaudhary, though Mr Kapil & Mr V.P.Singh have explained it very well there in posts, but i think my questions to u will it make more clear.
Can u or anyone for that purpose can vote to the candidate u like?
Can u or anyone for that purpose stand for elections as for mla, mp etc?
if u still do not agree with me, pls tell ur definition of democracy, may be i m wrong & it will help me understand better.

 

[shivamchaudhary]

.
ये साली कांग्रेस की सरकार देश चला रही है या बिजनेस ???

I strongly agree with you, Jit Ji. Congress making this country hollow. They are quite running a business here.

अभी तो और देखना बाकी है, किस तरह ये लोग जनता को निचोड़ कर कचरे के डिब्बे में फेंक देंगे.. पैसा तो इनके पास बहुत सा इकठ्ठा हो चुका है ...

 

[cooljat]

.

The Princely State of India + hereditary Politics = Aristocratic (fake) Democracy!

 

[rinkusheoran]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/omars-noc-not-needed-to-hoist-flag-at-lal-chowk-bjp/739575/

this is what i mean when i said we are not living in a democracy , CM of our state is having second thoughts about someone hoisting a flag and that too on Republic day,
or PM can not disclose the list of black money that govt has
our goverment can not hang a person accused in parliament attack
our govt is spending crores on a terrorist and he gets better facilities then the people standing outside his barracks to guard him?
If someones wins a olympic meddle he gets crores and someone who takes bullet on his chest or head protecting nation gets pennies, and pizza reaches faster then a ambulance.
For example , mandate was against congress in haryana but still they formed the govt with the other people dont you think independent MLAs or be it MPs should not allowed to part of any govt as they are given support agasint govt or the opposition??
We are still acquiring the lands on the basis of 1894 land acquisition act which britisher formed at that time and people vehmentely opposed that and today people in govt are going with that only so dont you think we are still ruled by those only color has changed ( not if you consider madam maya)??


I mean people gave definition for different kind of democarcy but i never got what i kind of democracy we are living in or should i go by the meanings given in dictionary because if i go by the practise of it in inida then it definitely dont looks one ???

 

[sunillathwal]

I mean people gave definition for different kind of democarcy but i never got what i kind of democracy we are living in or should i go by the meanings given in dictionary because if i go by the practise of it in inida then it definitely dont looks one ???

This should help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:democracy_Index_2010_green_and_red.png

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

Indian democracy is labeled as "flawed democracy". Score: 7.28 out of 10. Given the diversity, vast area and huge population-- I would say India fares quite well.
There is always a scope of improvement but I am optimistic about democracy in India. As literacy rate (and HDI) increases in India, democracy will get only better.

Remember, we are still a young democracy (~63 yrs). [we are still carrying many curses of colonial rule: Illiteracy, huge defense expenditures thanks to volatile neighborhood, etc. I mean, literacy rate in India was ~ 12% in 1947; no matter how sincere government is, it will take time to increase it to 100%.]

Sometimes, we just don't appreciate what we have. An episode of tyrannic rule would have helped the whining individuals to appreciate the democracy, however flawed, that we have.

 

[ashutoshgrewal]

Democracy:-

But if you look at the current govt that we have in that out of appr 38 ministers including the Minister from the coalitionn partner which are aounrd 6 , it does not include the minsters of state. With the little math it leaves me with the 32 cabinet ministers where our Pm having other 4 deoartments. We have 11 n could be 12 minister which are RajaySabha members that is around 50% of the cabinet portfolia by the Rajay Sabha MPs.We all know the Rajay Sabha members are not elected but nominated by the so called high command.
So Question that comes to my mind are
Where are the MPs who were elected by people to lead them?
Do you really think they can work for people or will they work for whom, who nominated them?
Can they be held accountable for the things that they are doing, obviously they are responsible but not accountable as they are doing it for their high command because they are the ones on behest hey are there?
Is it just means voting once in five years( if we dont have by elections) and our job is done?
I heard about the 49-0 option in election but never saw the same, if at all it is ther then why election commision does not tell it to people?

Disclaimer-Me not follower of any political party. We have Congress in the center so thought of relating to it and talk.

Hi,

Every state appoints a cabinet to assist the head of the state/government. The President of the US also appoints a Cabinet including Secretary of Department of State, Defence, Treasury, Justice etc. They are appointed solely on the discretion of the President by the approval of the senate. None of them are elected officials.

I don't see your point at all. As for having to include members of other parties in the cabinet, I think you've forgotten the last government under the leadership of BJP. The divide was much worse there than here.

Obviously they are answerable to judiciary. How effectively that is implemented is another issue.

or PM can not disclose the list of black money that govt has

Swiss banks have made it clear that they would be willing to come up with a/c details of any individual if the government of that country asks for it. None of the parties have come out and presented such a bill in the Parliament.

our govt is spending crores on a terrorist and he gets better facilities then the people standing outside his barracks to guard him?

As for your point about keeping Kasab alive - HE IS A TROPHY. You can kill him for instant gratification or reap the long term benifits. First time in decades, we've amassed this global support in regards to terrorism coming from Pakistan. Before this nobody cared if Indians died because of terrorism. US, UK, French and Russian leaders have criticized the Pakistani government in open.

Also, this is the only way. Like it or not we can't go head to head with Pak. They've got very less to lose compared to us. Shrewd diplomacy seems to be the only way out.

For example , mandate was against congress in haryana but still they formed the govt with the other people dont you think independent MLAs or be it MPs should not allowed to part of any govt as they are given support agasint govt or the opposition??

How do you call having 40 out of 90 seats a mandate against Congress. Yes, the party fell short of a majority and it is not a clear majority, but how does it prove that mandate was against Congress?

Mandate was clearly against the INLD (32/90) who failed to capitalize on anti-incumbency. It was only under INLD's govt. kidnappings, extortions etc. happened in Haryana.

and pizza reaches faster then a ambulance.

This means we've an inefficient goverment and very efficient private sector. I agree with most of your premises but the conclusions you've come to seem totally inappropriate to me. I think the solution is to privatize medicare but that has its cons too. A trip to a dentist is Rs. 100 in India and $250-300 in US (even though half of the doctors in US are Indians). Is that the kind of medicare you want? Many westerners are preferring India over their home country's medicare because it is cheap and probably as good as their country.

I see your point that we've a lot to improve but there are already many things that we should be really proud of and shouldn't indulge in outrightly rejecting the progress made.

BR,
Ashutosh

 

[fateh]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/omars-noc-not-needed-to-hoist-flag-at-lal-chowk-bjp/739575/

this is what i mean when i said we are not living in a democracy , CM of our state is having second thoughts about someone hoisting a flag and that too on Republic day,
or PM can not disclose the list of black money that govt has
our goverment can not hang a person accused in parliament attack
our govt is spending crores on a terrorist and he gets better facilities then the people standing outside his barracks to guard him?
If someones wins a olympic meddle he gets crores and someone who takes bullet on his chest or head protecting nation gets pennies, and pizza reaches faster then a ambulance.
For example , mandate was against congress in haryana but still they formed the govt with the other people dont you think independent MLAs or be it MPs should not allowed to part of any govt as they are given support agasint govt or the opposition??
We are still acquiring the lands on the basis of 1894 land acquisition act which britisher formed at that time and people vehmentely opposed that and today people in govt are going with that only so dont you think we are still ruled by those only color has changed ( not if you consider madam maya)??


I mean people gave definition for different kind of democarcy but i never got what i kind of democracy we are living in or should i go by the meanings given in dictionary because if i go by the practise of it in inida then it definitely dont looks one ???

Brother, you are very right in observation of the situation on ground. Ofcourse these problems are existing mainly due to lack of rule of law, weak & selfish leadership and even public, it has less concern with type/form of Govt/Governing system. However, I fully agree with you that on ground there is no democracy at all for which we all leaders & public to be blamed. Earlier Goondas were ruling with the help of wealthy, contractors of religions& chamchas in their own names, now also Goondas are ruling with same aids but in the name of their party under the cover of democracy. Theoritically we are having democracy but in practice, it is not visible at all atlist to me, may be that I have weak eye sight. Democracy doesnot exists in our attitude, thinking and practice. you can see central, state or any organisation/goerning body and go a step ahead, see the family, the feeling the democratic autmosphere is not seen at all. We are still ruled by dictators in the name of democracy.

 

[arvindc]

This should help.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

Indian democracy is labeled as "flawed democracy". Score: 7.28 out of 10. Given the diversity, vast area and huge population-- I would say India fares quite well.
There is always a scope of improvement but I am optimistic about democracy in India. As literacy rate (and HDI) increases in India, democracy will get only better.

Just by glancing through the index, I could note few surprises.
1. France being listed under "Flawed democracy"
2. Singapore (points 5.89) is listed even worse then India.

The point here is, freedom does not totally depend on what envisaged in constitution. Even a monarchy can provide freedom to people (like in Akbar's era). It all depends on how the ruler rules.

Real democracy lies where ministers are servants and not master of public. How many such ministers do we have in India? How many public sector employs think that way?
In countries like France and Singapore, government employs, like police officers, actually think of themselves as servants of public.

 

[sunillathwal]

Just by glancing through the index, I could note few surprises.
1. France being listed under "Flawed democracy"
2. Singapore (points 5.89) is listed even worse then India.

The point here is, freedom does not totally depend on what envisaged in constitution. Even a monarchy can provide freedom to people (like in Akbar's era). It all depends on how the ruler rules.

Real democracy lies where ministers are servants and not master of public. How many such ministers do we have in India? How many public sector employs think that way?
In countries like France and Singapore, government employs, like police officers, actually think of themselves as servants of public.

I think it is hard to come up with any 'ranking' which can truly reflect the real democracy/people's freedom level. Singapore's ranking is not at all surprising. Singapore is a bit 'Chinese' when it comes to the political rights for people. And as article clearly mentions that criterion for ranking is based on the right to vote, fair polling, etc. and not on the basis of how rich/poor or healthy people of a particular country are!

One can always give his/her definition of real democracy. Chinese govt also claim that theirs is the the best system for public welfare and they have stellar economic growth to back their claim. Cuba has one of the best health-care system in the whole world, among few other nice things. Does that makes Cuba a real democracy?

There are Chomsky type guys who claim that USA and many other developed nations are worst because- apparently- people have freedom of speech but NOT the freedom of thoughts!! Hard to argue with such philosophical tirades!!

I mean you make any list... I can always find something to criticize your list.
Indian democracy (or democracy in general) ensues that people choose their ministers (MPs to be precise) which essentially means people are the MASTERS; how the elected candidate behaves- as a servant or as a tapori is a non-issue. It also provides you the right of approaching judiciary if your constitutional rights are abused (by policemen or ministers). Thats all democracy can do.

See, democracy is not about electing the right person but electing the most popular person. If criminals and corrupts are sitting in parliament today, it is because people wanted them to be there. as simple as that. [One can question the the back-door entries (Rajya Sabha) but that is one of the loop-holes existing in the our system!!]