It is ironic that just as several countries in West Asia are embracing some form of political self-determination, democracy is having a hard time in most countries where it has been the defining political process for decades.
Greece (where democracy was founded) and Italy, for instance, find themselves being ruled by appointed bureaucrats. And while there are horrified – mostly English – voices expressing concern about the abrogation of democratic principles, the truth is that this trauma is simply the worst-case outcome of the failure of democratically elected governments in Europe to communicate to their constituents the obvious fact that you always have to pay for your pleasures. Democracy in Europe has morphed into an unsustainable populism.
And then, of course, there’s the US model, the impact of which is best described by a statement from Occupy Albany (a junior relative of Occupy Wall Street), which reads, in part: “The interests of those who purchase influence are rewarded at the expense of the People, from whom the Government’s just power is derived. We believe that this failure in our system is at the core of many interconnected issues we face as a society, and its resolution is a key to a just future. We therefore demand true democracy decoupled from the corrosive influence of concentrated economic power…”
It remains to be seen whether/how Mr Obama, in his second term, will be able to materially change this “private profits, public pain” model.
In India, we, too, know this model well. And while the new mantra of “inclusive growth”, the extra activism of the judiciary and, of course, the on-the-streets action led by “Anna-ji” all point to an increasing public disillusionment with the systemic status quo, the signs from richer, global democracies suggest that we may not be thinking far and wide enough.
Perhaps in these early years of the 21st century, democracy, as commonly understood, has run its course. Perhaps a greater degree of central control, delivered with technological élan, will define the politics of the future.
In any case, the 21st century is shaping up as the century of China, which has mastered the art of blending control with successful use of a market economy. Of course, the “control” part of the model sticks in the throat of all of us highly privileged, liberal, educated people. What about Tiananmen Square, we say, and Ai Weiwei, the imprisoned political activist/artist? What about labour practices and intellectual property?
All reasonable questions from our standpoint, but irrelevant, I would say. What matters is what the Chinese people think. But, we can never know what they think, we tautologically respond. They are not free.
But their economy is growing upwards of nine per cent and has been for a decade. And, I would bet, will for a decade more.
So, what’s with these questions when your own system is falling apart?
Indeed, there are other “democracies” that have taken pages out of the Chinese book (not that the book is originally Chinese) to deliver value to their people. Everybody acknowledges Singapore, which has a sustainable strong growth model with limited freedoms, particularly of the media. And then there is Turkey — again, limited media freedoms, but an economy that is (and will continue to be) the toast of Europe.
Closer to home, Sri Lanka has come out of the war with a hard-nosed, ostensibly democratic regime, delivering strong growth and, wonder of wonders in this Third World of ours, an amazingly clean capital city.
I was at the fabulous and funky Galle Face Hotel in Colombo for New Year’s Eve — 3,000 people writhing by the Indian Ocean, allahoakbar! But that was nothing compared to a party that the government – yes, you heard me – organised on the Galle Face Green at which there were 30,000 people partying till eight in the morning. Our room overlooked the green and what was amazing was that when we woke up at 9.30 and looked out on the green, there was not a single scrap of paper or other trash. The government had had it cleaned up within an hour.
So, OK, they favour their friends (who doesn’t), are overly(?) authoritarian and limit media freedom. But they are delivering growth (is it sustainable?) and, importantly, a higher quality of civic life.
Not coincidentally, all the countries I have listed exercise varying degrees of media control, which suggests that this may be a key element of the future. Kapil Sibal’s recent comment may have been a piece of this.
With the bastions of democratic freedoms suffering the symptoms of excess, the pendulum of global political ideology is swinging – unsurprisingly – towards a greater degree of social control. Wisely managed, this could signal the start of a really brave new world.
