One of the constant bickering I have about Kejirwal is his "referendum" style of democracy. It has somehow dawned on him that asking people what they want is the best form of democracy. Therefore, for everything from whether to form the government or to fight an election or where to fight etc, everything seems to be formed on the show of hands or sent SMSes.
Kejriwal's this style of referendum, in my opinion, is not based on genuine concerns of people or their views on the subject but to give fig leaf for Kejriwal should he fail to succeed. If somebody asked him why he formed a government with his staunchest enemy Congress' support, he can conveniently say it was people\s choice. If you ask him why he cut the electricity prices or gave free water he can say it is peoples' wish. Or (like he is going to) be defeated by Modi at Varanasi (if at all he has gumption to contest) then he can conveniently blame it on external parties - the people.
Kejriwal's this kind of democracy - a democratic decision making mockery - is a democracy of irresponsibility and escapism. By going to people he will never be able to take the decisions that are good for people, but will always end up compromising on what is good for what sounds good. Under no circumstances will his form of mohalla democracy ever succeed. It has not, and will not, succeed even at the Panchayat level nor will it succeed at the state or national level. Why, will such a democracy (democratic decision making) properly work at a family level? The obvious answer is no.
The best explanation of why democracy self-destructs comes from a quote recently quoted by Art Cashin, cross quoting from Martin Armstrong, and who in turn quotes from an author whose antecedents are not found or verified. However, irrespective of the origins of the quote, the quote superbly encompasses how democracies almost always takes the easy route for distribution and in turn weaken them to extent of destruction.
Quote from "Don't tread on my entitlements"
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over a loss of fiscal responsibility, always followed by a dictatorship. The average of the world's great civilizations before they decline has been 200 years. These nations have progressed in this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back again to bondage."*
Read it to under stand why democracies have inherent fallacy. And especially Kejirwal style of people's democracy will only accelerate such a process.
Also, if you do not yet understand it, reread it for it will explain in a snapshot the major objections to most of the objections to the UPA and Congress' socialistic largess handed out over past few years like Food Security Bill, MNEGRA and reservations etc.
It is for this reason Kejirwal's style of people-made-decisions democracies will never take the decisions which will be beneficial to them in the long term but will concentrate only on immediate beneficial feedback.
***
Note: *If you look at the supposed progression of the civilization and compare it to the state of India, it becomes clear that we are very close to the end. The exact position of where we are will change depending on the viewer and circumstances but it is unmistakable that the rot has sunk too deep. Only way to get rid of this rot, lethargy and grinding inertia is to have a immediate and important 'turning point.' The time is ripe for transformational leadership, but if it will succeed is entirely up to chance.
Update:
A short explanation to Kejirwal style unsuitable politics is to assume an almost-real scenario. If Kejriwal was to ask a crowd if they want 50% reduction in electricity tariffs, most of the hands will go up for Yes. If Kejriwal was to ask if the crowd wanted 700 liters of free water every month, most would chime in yes. If Kejriwal was to ask the crowd if it was okay to rise the price of LPG by Rs400 or Petrol by Rs20, most would say no.
The problem is, most answer and hence decide for commons, based on what they want and not what is essential or good for community. Reducing tariffs or free water may not the most important step to take for long term prosperity but cutting the subsidy and instilling energy conservation certainly is, but yet the decisions are made irrespective of that logic.
Almost all will be happy but will not be right. And what will be right will not make them happy.
Kejriwal and his style of mohalla "please-all" politics is a sure failure.
Comments
Post a Comment