Editorial:-
Democracy is perhaps the most optimistic of all systems. Unlike Communism or for that matter even Capitalism, it endorses a lot of faith in the people and allows them the final say in the shape of the future. While other systems keep the decision-making rights limited to a few hands, democracy lets the people decide every five years whether they want the course of things to change or a particular path to continue. But one is also noticing a growing cynicism in how people view elections, their elected leaders and the process of governance. But then again, cynicism, perhaps, is a very urban, white-collar weakness, at least in the Sikkim context, because even as passionate, and often belligerent debates raged on politics in these settings, voter turnout in these areas were noticeably lower than in the rural belts. It was also in these urban, government office circles that one saw cynicism peak even as elections drew closer. The moment the electorate gets influenced by jeeps and gypsies full of hollering youth as yardsticks of a leader’s “hold,” they reveal how they have distanced themselves from the real issues at hand, because these are noticed and discussed through a term in office and not in the final weeks of an election campaign. Elections might be fought on lung-power and muscle, but they are won in the very personal experience of the secret ballot. Fresh inductees and daily crossovers are not evidence of influence or popularity, they are merely recourses taken either by the spineless or the opportunist. Political parties are expected to build their support base with the power of ideology and vision and this should be a continuing process. When converts are won at the brink of elections, they are either purchased or coerced and should not be taken at the face-value of the claims. At best, these are ploys to stay in the news, at worst, they are engineered to misrepresent popularity indices. The voter, at the end of the day, decides which button to press based on his or her rating of the candidates and the believability of the party. Sikkim has seen all the stereotypes played out through even the most recent campaign; and while there was nothing new in the hyperbole and claims and counterclaims, one hopes that cynicism of the urban areas has not infected rural Sikkim. Cynicism makes people lazy, disinterested and detached, none of which works well for representative democracy and can prove the worst handicap for electoral politics. Thankfully for Sikkim, the more than handsome voter turnout suggests that electoral democracy still finds favour with the Sikkimese. The results on 16 May will reveal how coherently they express themselves.
Democracy is perhaps the most optimistic of all systems. Unlike Communism or for that matter even Capitalism, it endorses a lot of faith in the people and allows them the final say in the shape of the future. While other systems keep the decision-making rights limited to a few hands, democracy lets the people decide every five years whether they want the course of things to change or a particular path to continue. But one is also noticing a growing cynicism in how people view elections, their elected leaders and the process of governance. But then again, cynicism, perhaps, is a very urban, white-collar weakness, at least in the Sikkim context, because even as passionate, and often belligerent debates raged on politics in these settings, voter turnout in these areas were noticeably lower than in the rural belts. It was also in these urban, government office circles that one saw cynicism peak even as elections drew closer. The moment the electorate gets influenced by jeeps and gypsies full of hollering youth as yardsticks of a leader’s “hold,” they reveal how they have distanced themselves from the real issues at hand, because these are noticed and discussed through a term in office and not in the final weeks of an election campaign. Elections might be fought on lung-power and muscle, but they are won in the very personal experience of the secret ballot. Fresh inductees and daily crossovers are not evidence of influence or popularity, they are merely recourses taken either by the spineless or the opportunist. Political parties are expected to build their support base with the power of ideology and vision and this should be a continuing process. When converts are won at the brink of elections, they are either purchased or coerced and should not be taken at the face-value of the claims. At best, these are ploys to stay in the news, at worst, they are engineered to misrepresent popularity indices. The voter, at the end of the day, decides which button to press based on his or her rating of the candidates and the believability of the party. Sikkim has seen all the stereotypes played out through even the most recent campaign; and while there was nothing new in the hyperbole and claims and counterclaims, one hopes that cynicism of the urban areas has not infected rural Sikkim. Cynicism makes people lazy, disinterested and detached, none of which works well for representative democracy and can prove the worst handicap for electoral politics. Thankfully for Sikkim, the more than handsome voter turnout suggests that electoral democracy still finds favour with the Sikkimese. The results on 16 May will reveal how coherently they express themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Readers are invited to comment on, criticise, run down, even appreciate if they like something in this blog. Comments carrying abusive/ indecorous language and personal attacks, except when against the people working on this blog, will be deleted. It will be exciting for all to enjoy some earnest debates on this blog...