|
IT MAY HAVE THE SAME INTENT AND OBJECTIVE,
BUT CANNOT HAVE THE SAME DEFINITION AND PROCESS !
1. Since "changing" democracy would be seen
as an almost blasphemous statement , we in India/Asia should
refer to the need to "enlarge democracy" because so far as
per past efforts the majority do not seem to have "equal opportunity".
In India where we have established a strong democracy over
the last 50 years, the intended benefits have not accrued
and still elude the majority. While it would be very difficult
for the 'developed world to accept the logic of change for
enlargement, we in India and Asia must initiate this enlargement
based on economic logic.
2. Economic freedom is the basic expression
of modern democracy. This is totally dependant on infrastructure
which provides the 'equalisation'. This means that the process
of 'democratization' can be defined in terms of fiscal freedom,
freedom linked to association, work and profession; and
finally democracy and its growth can be monitored by development
of infrastructure.
3. Democracy as designed by the founding
fathers more than 2 centuries ago in America, focused on "individual
rights as the central right which would lead to freedom and
equal opportunity for all those living within a society".
It was correctly assumed that the 'trickle down effect'
would equalize the population, because the focus of governance
was on providing infrastructure . The success was assured
because of low population spread over a large land mass!
4. Crime and terrorism have been the single
beneficiaries within modern democracy as we have seen an exponential
rise in both these over the last few decades. THEY THRIVE
AND SURVIVE ONLY BECAUSE OF DEMOCRACY as those within society
who abide by the rules of social, moral and legal laws are
handicapped by their inability to combat behavior that is
specifically "devoid" of any such rule, social obligation
or humanitarian logic. Attempting to fight these forces with
"conventional linear logic" would be a waste of resource,
and for countries like India where resources are limited this
can be a huge loss. While we have to stay within the laws
of democracy, the definition will require REINTERPRETATION
to combat terrorism and crime. They will soon combine to create
an even larger problem.
5. Retaining the objectives of democracy
to "equalize society, regions, countries and the people of
the world", we in Asia must accept that so far our management
has been ineffective to transfer democratic opportunity from
"individuals to society". There are many who have remained
"more equal than others" for decades with no change in limited
opportunity for the majority. We thus must use legal infrastructure
to accelerate the process of transfer of opportunity. This
can come about through 'enlargement of the scope of democracy
through change in its process of implementation'. This
also takes into account and corrects the ever increasing economic
force of crime and economic destructive power of terrorism.
6. IN PRINCIPLE, THE CHANGE IN INTERPRETATION
WILL MEAN THAT THE DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS OF ANY PERSON, BODY OF
PEOPLE, CITY,REGION, OR COUNTRY WILL DEVOLVE AND EXTINGUISH
IN FAVOUR OF THE NEXT LARGEST UNIT, BODY OF PEOPLE,CITY, REGION,
OR COUNTRY.
This alone can protect us all because:
- Individual rights have to give way to rights of society
or a larger body of citizens.
- Society must give up its rights for the benefit of the
city or region.
- The region cannot retain its rights over the needs of
the state/country AND FINALLY
- Even a country cannot retain its sovereign status for
the sake of the World!!
The intent of democracy is thus retained which must be to
protect the "next largest constituent that requires protection".
|