Inadequacy of Democracy By T.S. Khanna, May 21,2013.

Foundation for Better Government

(www.bettergovt.blogspot.com)

May 21, 2013.

Inadequacy of Democracy

By T.S.Khanna, May 21, 2013

The prevailing form of democracy was designed for legitimacy and stability of government through consent of the people.  To avoid misuse of power and overreach of government, power was divided along with checks and balances.  Efficiency, economy, and accountability were ignored.  The only concern at the time was to structure the government and its operations according to the Constitution.

That is why, the democratic operations are too sluggish for public satisfaction and there is no accountability from Congress or its members.  In the absence of any goal orientation in the system, the Constitution, instead of serving as a vehicle to achieve selected goals, was regarded a goal in itself.  Collective mind in democracy becomes weak, warped, and confused.   Its ability to take hard decisions is replaced by the art of postponing them.  Look at the ever going issues of illegal immigration or budget deficit.  No wonder most of the governmental operations are process oriented, not product oriented.

Political and social exigencies of modern times demand governments to select goals/priorities and meet or beat the deadlines in an economical and efficient manner.  The prevailing democracy is not equipped for such actions.

To select the right goals/priorities and their strategic pursuit, it is imperative that the most qualified and best suited persons be placed in public offices.  Quality control of elected officials may be brought about by imposing prerequisites for voters’ and candidates’ eligibility (discussed in detail elsewhere).

Human mind has a weakness of ignoring or minimizing the long range dangers or disasters even when the trends are obvious.  Instead, only short range solutions are sought even when they promote long range disasters.

A case in point is population-----a sure-footed monster gaining momentum.  More than 1900 years of population growth showed a 2 billion mark in the early 1900s; hundred years later, now, the population is more than 6 billion.  At this rate of growth, sustenance would not be possible with the available resources.  Before long, “man-hunt” may acquire a different meaning.  People justify morality to suit their needs.  Imagine children being hunted for dinner delicacies.  The morality of cannibalism can revive the law of jungle: Survival of the fittest (strongest).

Yet, no government, except for China, is giving any consideration to avert the monster.  Democracy is not even equipped to do so.

The rate of population growth is highest among the poor and the poorly educated.  Instead of discouraging, democracy promotes population growth through the welfare programs designed for stability by vote buying.  With each newly born child, welfare benefits increase.  Increasing population of the poor and the poorly educated enhances their negative impact on the prevailing form of democracy where only the numbers count.

Constitutional Amendment I forbids Congress to make any laws that may prohibit the free exercise of any religion.  This has created most complex problems.   Religion in America meant Christianity in different forms without fundamental differences.  Up until the 1950s, Judeo-Christian values prevailed without any challenge.  After WW II, there has been an influx of immigrants importing variety of religions with conflicting values.  In addition, the Judicial System has been super-imposing secular values running counter to the values of most religions, e.g., same sex marriage.  In this process, bonds of common values that bind the society have been weakening.  Amendment of the Constitution at this stage is almost impossible.  Diversity, without strongly binding common values, can become a great liability.

 This shows that problems created by democracy are not necessarily resolvable through democracy.

Most of the frustration of the people in democracy is related to corruption in government.  The present form of democracy is not equipped to eradicate corruption.  In fact, the seeds of corruption are built in the system by allowing public contributions for candidates.  After election, the successful candidates cater to only those who supported them during the election and in proportion to their support.  It results in a government of the people, by some of the people, for some of the people.

In the preceding paragraphs, some thoughts have been presented to ignite the readers’ interest to re-evaluate the present form of democracy and shore up its weaknesses.  All democratic nations may re-examine their respective systems and add sufficient flexibility to meet the challenges of the changing times.