I read a piece in the "Times of India" of today, written by Manoj Mitta, an old friend of mine (regrettably with whom I am not in active touch like with many people). I thought it was an eloquent piece which juxtaposed the question of economic growth with that of democracy and the will of the people. He said this in the context of the ongoing Telangana agitation and seemed to have surmised that even if there are problems of the economic variety they should perhaps be set aside for the democratic expression of the will of the people. I had read a similar argument when the UPA was voted into power in the year 2004 and when the Sensex crashed by then unprecedented four hundred points in one day. This crash happened because of the combine of Communist parties had sixty two seats in the Lok Sabha and the fate of the Congress led UPA was felt to be very much in the hands of the Communists. The then Finance Minister, Mr. Chidambaram had to speak to the captains of the industry and allay their fears. Then this piece appeared on one of the websites where the writer claimed that the will of two billion Indians was less significant than the economic activity in a two kilometre radius in Mumbai. My friend Manoj is not saying something like this at all. But if the situation was akin to this, he is clear about where his loyalties are. They are with the people, their will and democracy. How I wish the argument was so simple. Let me tell you a story here. In the year 1998 when I was much younger and hot headed I got into an argument with Prof. Gurpreet Mahajan of the Centre for Political Studies, JNU. I had gone to do a refresher course and Prof. Mahajan was speaking about John Rawls, Multiculturalism and Democracy. She concluded that the definition of democracy should be "fairness". I challenged this notion of hers and when she explained why she felt it was what it was, I accused her (very uncharitably and in a most rude manner for which I apologized to her) of performing mental gymnastics. She told me then that to always stick with the definition of democracy as will of the people was untenable.
Over the years (there have been almost thirteen of them now) I have time and again pondered over this question without getting anywhere close to an answer. The question came back to me again today when I read Manoj's article. Really democracy in operation does not lend itself to any easy definitions. Prof. Mahajan had pointed out to me that it was not easy or possible to establish what the will of the people was. Is it unchanging and always well deliberated? Is it the majority will and in that case what about those who do not subscribe to that majority will? Difficult questions indeed and that is why I have asked myself if democracy is a problematique (as in a source from which a number of problems emanate). And to me it seems that it is. Within the boundaries of a nation state is it possible for one set of people to claim the original sons of soil position and on the basis of it, demand rights for separation? What about the other side? To me this seems like a divorce settlement. If both parties agree, then it can proceed further to things such as settlement of the monetary variety. But if one of the parties refuses, then there is no progress. There is no court that can impose a divorce even if one of the partners refuses it. I suppose the Telangana separation issue will have similar problems.
And to conclude this I have another question (not to Manoj, none of my questions are aimed at him. They are aimed at myself and no one else). It is nice to believe that in the determination of societies, economics should not have a role. But then to me it seems as if the political is generating itself out of the economic, and when it is so, is it possible to separate democracy from economic considerations? Aren't the Telangana people saying that they want economic benefits of their own region accruing to them? And in that case if separation will lead to worsening of the economic condition, is it worth it? It is nice to believe like in the Eagles song that "love will keep us alive". But the question is, really can it? Even in the face of economic adversity? Many questions, many thoughts but no satisfactory answers.
No comments:
Post a Comment