Is 'Democracy' the only solution?

We all go to vote after every 5 consecutive years (if all goes well) in India and 4 years in America as well. Did you wonder what actually is democracy, it's not merely to elect your choice as your ruler or just an idea to form elected form of government but much more then that.

So, is democracy the best form of government? or there shall be alternative for that too or is there already an alternative with us?

Dr. BR Ambedkar says that "Democracy is not merely a form of government; it is primarily a mode of Associated Living of conjoined communities, communicating with each other. It is essentially an attitude of respect and reverence towards our fellow men" on the same hand we hear him saying "Democracy is only a top dressing on an Indian soil which is essentially undemocratic"

Basically democracy can be understood in two ways:

One is the narrow form of government that is highly procedural and Second is the Broad one, the value system and way of life and the essence is empowerment of masses.

Currently we are living in age of democracy but who knows what comes next? the way Russia and China are moving it seems that we have a player in the world to counter democratic ideals as both the countries are communist although both are different in their own way of communism as china is more economically open and liberal than Russia.

If we go by what Gandhi ji says, than the democracy should give birth to 'Swaraj' that is person should be able to govern himself and he was against the centralization of power in one hand and rather wanted a Ram Rajya which is stateless where the centrality is of human beings, centrality is of human dignity, following the principles of equity and self determination.

But if Gandhi ji is the father of our Nation then these ideals are missing today.

Today we have a very very strong central government with huge concentration of power in it's hands. So, this directly conflicts with our Father of Nation views.

If we understand what DR Ambedkar said then, he says that is is not enough to have one man and one vote, there has to be one man, one vote and one value. He says that, liberty is protected not by law but by social, moral conscience of society and the democratic form of government pre-supposes democratic society, which might not be the case.

Democracy is also a majoritarian government where the majority rule over others, so will that be fine to say that democracy will ensure liberty? Can we say that for whom the majority of people will vote will ensure liberty and the rights of the people. Well, I have serious doubts and I am sure you must be as well.

If you go look at how French, the Arabs, the Asian countries and the western nations are governed then we see all of them majoritarily are democratic except the middle east and Russia- China , North Korea, Brunei etc. So don't we see human right abuses in democratic countries? Of course there are the abuses, we see that daily in news through different means that state finds a way to exploit it's power and it's not on the political party only but this happens no matter who is in power. Also, is it assured that everyone would expect good life of freedom and liberty in Non- democratic nations and will get it? (Read about the Preamble of the constitution here)

I will leave you with that question.

Overall, democracy was based on the ideals of human rights, the natural rights (that every human being has right from the day we are born), liberty, freedom of choice etc. so we need to introspect that are we really democratic today? Does the state ensure that these ideals are something we shall get no matter what. Figure this out...

stay tuned for more.

(Become our Member and get a chance to feature your post. Check here)

---