This essay presents an interesting case of a nation called India, a young country of 1.43 billion humans, nearly one-fifth of the humanity, and growing. The nation started enjoying democracy only after the British left the subcontinent in August 1947 and when the nation gave itself a constitution on 26 January 1950. Before that, the 565 princely states of the Indian subcontinent were ruled by monarchies. It has been 74 years since democracy was born in the country. After a promising start and a little more than six decades of vibrancy, the Indian democracy has acquired a more authoritarian shape has been increasingly showing its teeth in the last decade. The main reason being many powerful and influential individuals from the upper class of the majority community believe the Indian democracy has not served their religion and the nation, but instead appeased the minorities.
Democracy, as any structure, is as good as the robustness of its foundations (the Constitution) and the pillars (the institutions), which can easily be undermined by dereliction in the sworn duties by the guardians of democracy when they are pushed by an authoritarian Executive and a slavish Legislative.
Rise of an authoritarian India
India has emerged as a major power player in the world, wielding a significant influence on all major economies, in particular, the western democracies who want to tap into its huge consumer market and professionally educated human resources. Despite serious questions arising in recent years about the neutrality of its election commission, controversial electoral bond scheme and Electoral Voting Machines (EVMs), subservient law enforcement, disappearing freedom of press and expression of common people, especially the vocal critics of the government, the western beneficiaries incredibly appease it under the guise of a mutual interest-based relationship. Audaciously, while addressing to the US Congress, when prime minister Modi claimed India was mother of democracy, not only the US lawmakers applauded him, the rest of the democratic world also kept quiet and implicitly sealed that claim.
Is India mirroring its strong neighbour across the Himalayas, unbelievably with a complicit or implicit support of its democratic trading and strategic partners?
At best, Indian democracy can be unbelievably entertaining at times, yet spicy. However, in its compromised, subverted form, it can be likened to any communist dictatorship, past or present. Unlike western democracy, Indian democracy allows politicians to exploit sectarian and ethnic divisions and use gods and religions in their emotional speeches for harvesting votes from the vulnerable and the gullible.
In the last 124 years, the world population more than quadrupled; however, India grew much faster and took nearly 50 years less than the rest of the world to grow fourfold. Its historical rapid growth, exacerbated by a phenomenal growth in capitalism in the recent years, has increased its poverty and further widened the inequality between its wealthy and the poor.
Despite an insidious growth of authoritarianism, its leadership outrightly rejects a ‘flawed’ democracy tag that it has earned, based on low scores on tangible parameters of democracy, from various credible global agencies.
Role of religious nationalism
In India, the religious rightists despise the terms ‘secular’ and ‘global’, motions override the logic, and the historical past obscures the present. The idea of redemption of an imagined glorious past is driven and promoted actively by the right-wing nationalists, rather than to address the everyday survival issues of more than a billion Indians. Intrinsically, the people believe in hierarchy in every imaginable way – social, religious, caste, class etc. Awareness of egalitarianism is generally non-existent; and human inequality and disparity in equity are conveniently justified by the ‘law of karma’ without any serious thought. Powerful humans and celebrities are worshipped as demigods.
A phenomenal growth in authoritarianism in Indian in the past decade may be attributed to a corresponding growth in capitalism and religious nationalism in the country.
Rise in religious nationalism – driven by a deeply hateful rejection of globalisation by the nationalists and active glorification of a distant past India – appears to be one major reason, amongst several other pertinent reasons, why a privileged and influential section of the majority community may have developed a strong likeness to authoritarian dictatorship, leading to a phenomenal rise of sacrosanct demigods, such as Mr Modi, who is worshipped as a strong and visionary leader and whose obvious flaws are conveniently ignored. Little do they know that dictators owe loyalty to none except themselves. Sooner or later, all people suffer due to egregious abuses of human rights committed by their ‘beloved’ authoritarian leaders.
In authoritarian regimes, only a few individuals from the ruling party – the front benchers – control the parliamentary proceedings and drafting of the polices, whereas others – the backbenchers – follow their leader like monkeys.
The question is: ‘In an authoritarian regime, can backbenchers serve their respective constituencies? If not, how can an authoritarian regime claim to be a democracy?’
Crony capitalism feeds Indian authoritarianism
At present, Indian democracy, which is a hybridised form of a skewed democracy, crony capitalism and dictatorial authoritarianism, can be likened to a watermelon, with a thin democratic green shell covering an authoritarian red core. The formula is simple: nurture crony capitalists and, in exchange to electoral votes, provide 5 kgs of free rice per month to each of nearly 810 million people to survive, which is designed to not only gain some legitimacy to their actions but also to justify their exploitation of the poor. While the wealthy live life king-size, the poor serve them tirelessly as workers and domestic slaves and massage their ego.
Thanks to capitalism, has authoritarianism now become acceptable as ‘new’ democracy? Don’t capitalism and authoritarianism go hand and glove with each other, as both need each other to thrive?
The current social hierarchal structure, which is abominably justified by the upper class as per the unverifiable law of karma, is not much different from the past. It comprises masters and servants, without any equality or equity, and with a struggling middleclass in-between that enjoys a lollypop in the mouth and eyes a carrot dangling in the distance.
A magician who sells dreams in exchange to votes also sells the dreamers to the capitalists. Is dreaming wrong? No, it is not, but trusting the magician is absolutely wrong!
Historically, from time to time, the human gullibility and known vulnerabilities have been cleverly exploited by megalomaniacs, who ascend to power by gleefully climbing the stairs of democracy but end up being undemocratic, ruthless and authoritarian dictators, as wolves in sheep’s clothing. After strengthening their grip on the power, they use all possible tricks of the statecraft and connivingly exploit the human fallibility of the corruptible few who assist them in benefiting from the loopholes in the legal and electoral processes. After stealing the elections from the people, they use the law enforcement agencies to crush every legal challenge or voice that questions them and their electoral crimes.
India’s intriguing back-slide
Soon after winning the 2014 general election in India, Mr Modi called himself the ‘prime servant (‘pradhan sevak’ in the Hindi language); however, within a decade, just before the 2024 general election, he publicly doubted his biological birth and, to reaffirm his sacrosanct demigod status, claimed he was Godsent.
Half-truths – spoken before or during an election – are much more damaging than blatant lies because they pass convincingly, with greater ease and a much higher probability of planting destructive seeds in the minds of even the most educated but gullible individuals, with desired effect, who get deranged and become the most potent weapons in the armoury of dodgy, semi-educated politicians.
Based on numerous reports emerging from India, thanks largely to the wizardry of Indian EVMs, his party emerged as the largest single party in the parliament, and, with the assistance of his NDA coalition partners, he formed the government despite failing to cross the majority, 50-percent mark.
It is alleged, the actual number of seats genuinely won by the ruling party are less than half of the seats that it has claimed. Soon after forming the government, to set a firm example to his critics, Arundhati Roy, the Booker Prize-winning novelist, is reported to be facing charges, under the UAPA (anti-terror) law, for a speech that she gave 14 years ago, in 2010, when Mr Modi was not the prime minister. Roy has been an outspoken critic of the Modi administration from the very beginning, on social injustice and for its policies and laws that target the minorities. It is alleged that the draconian UAPA law has been used routinely by the Modi government to silence Indian journalists, academics, lawyers, poets, activists, and civil society members who criticise him for letting down the common people and failing to fulfil his electoral promises.
Reportedly, in the Indian parliament, if the elected members of the opposition are regularly denied the right to speak by the Speaker of the House, who turns of their microphone, how can India claim to be a parliamentary democracy?
The Speaker of the House is the political and parliamentary leader of the House, and, therefore, the most important position in the House of the Parliament. One who acts on behalf of only the Executive and does not allow a fearless parliamentary debate before passing or rejecting parliamentary bills, does not deserve to be elected to the Speaker’s position. A person who is not impartial and fair and does not earn and carry respect from the Opposition, does not deserve to sit on the Speaker’s chair.
Can judiciary save Indian democracy?
An independent and robust judiciary, an impartial election commission, uncorrupted and unbiassed law and order, and a free press are the necessary checks and balances for the survival of a democracy, separating it from an autocracy. Where the institutions fall, or are weakened and corrupted, democracy is rendered non-existent. Where one of them becomes rogue, hope remains the others exercise their full constitutional empowerment without fear or bias, and in a timely manner, to pull the fallen back on to the rails.
Importantly, a functional democracy needs a capable, incorruptible and robust watchdog. No organisation can serve better than the judiciary as that watchdog. Only a robust judiciary can separate a banana republic, with kangaroo courts, from a liberal, functional democracy. Emerging and potential dictators can only be stopped by judiciary, failing which the history repeats itself.
Logically, therefore, judiciary may seem to be the last reliable post of defence of a liberal democracy, the last bastion against authoritarian and power-hungry regimes that make unlawful transgressions and trespasses into the foundations of democracy. But is it too much to ask from it; after all, these guardians of democracy are also human beings with families and intrinsic human vulnerabilities, which can be exploited by power and turned against the? Nonetheless, where judiciary falls, Constitution falls and democracy dies, there is no turning back; thereafter, humans are expected to behave as sheep, sans privileges.
To save the Indian democracy from anti-people authoritarian dictators, therefore, it is paramount that Indian students, right from the primary school level, are made aware about their Constitutional rights and duties towards their nation; in short, what it means to be an Indian. The salient features of the Constitution must be taught mandatorily to all school students – public or private schools, or religious or regular schools – in their regional and native languages.
Constitution defines a country. It represents a people – the people who make the country. It is sacred and must be considered as sacrosanct by all people, especially by those who are entrusted with the duty of protecting it from malicious intentions and aggressive advances of the Executive and the Legislative. Where Constitution is tampered for wrong reasons, the spirit of the country dies.
A sad realisation
Democracy can quickly transition into dictatorship, imperceptibly, like cancer, with not many obvious symptoms in the beginning. In some cases, sadly, it is too late to recover, as democracy can disappear within the blink of an eye. When it is gone, humans struggle like a fish out of the water.
Human greed has no bounds but only the wise know how to manage their dark side whereas the fools kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Material greed and hunger for power bring misery to one and all.
Narcissistic or megalomaniac dictators never operate alone, they are backed (and used) by numerous similar minded psychopaths and sycophantic beneficiaries, albeit with a lesser sting, some of whom get exposed, but mostly remain faceless. At the end, most beneficiaries cleverly escape the justice. It is never one person, dictators are only the spearhead, and numerous persons form the main body of the spear.
A political leader who lacks empathy and compassion can turn out to be much worse and, in fact, much more dangerous than a robot who may do a better job at the top, without any personal bias, greed or intrinsic human fallibility. Is it surprising that authoritarian and far right regimes, in both advanced and developing economies, get most support from mainly the wealthy and privileged class who enjoy power and a king-size life, but fear the poorer and unprivileged masses.
Not very dissimilar to archaic monarchies, power continues to remain the privilege of a few, whereas most others are given an illusion of power, such as in the voting process. In democracies, authoritarian leaders don’t care for the people, all they need is the people’s vote to claim legitimacy and justify their election to the office. Where the votes are uncertain, elections are surreptitiously stolen from the people – by hook or by crook – by the individuals who control the election commission and the law enforcement, using time proven tricks of the statecraft. After they usurp the power, the functional style, general tone of speech and public behaviours of authoritarian dictators can be compared closely to the erstwhile monarchs.
The ‘state’ of democracy is directly proportional to the ‘sense’ of democracy in its educated and wealthier classes who control, directly or indirectly, the privileges and the power, as well as the political narrative in the country. Can it be said that, in intrinsically patriarchal communities, if such classes are traditionally authoritarian, misogynist and believers and promoters of a hierarchical social and power infrastructure – sans egalitarianism, humanism or secularism, or with a poor sense thereof — a country can never be truly democratic unless and until the hierarchical, social power structure is dismantled through formal education and employment of the overwhelming poor and unprivileged masses?
To conclude, is it too much to expect from India, especially from its powerful nationalists and elites, to return the country to democracy considering they may not actually know what that means? Can the Indian democracy in its characteristic authoritarian form be deemed acceptable by the proponents of democracy the world over?
Copyright © Bill K Koul
Bill K Koul, 29 June 2024 (Perth, Western Australia)