Swaraj And Democracy: Challenges And Reforms

Source: Indian Express
GS II: Indian Polity and Governance- Democracy, Decentralization, Local Governance, Constitutionalism 

Why in the News?

An Indian Express article examines the need to rethink modern democracy and highlights the Gandhian idea of Swaraj as a framework for strengthening citizen participation, decentralization, fraternity and democratic accountability.

News in Brief

• The idea of Swaraj, as interpreted by Mahatma Gandhi, goes beyond choosing rulers and includes self-regulation, shared norms, dialogue and responsible citizenship.
• Democratic renewal requires not only strong institutions but also everyday democratic practices based on participation, patience, vigilance and community engagement.
• The article highlights the need to rethink the scale and structure of democratic governance, including greater decentralisation and decision-making closer to citizens.
• Indian thinkers such as Mahatma Gandhi and B.R. Ambedkar offer ideas such as Swaraj and fraternity that can contribute to discussions on strengthening democratic life.

Swaraj and Democracy

• The conventional understanding of democracy as self-rule mainly concerns the relationship between citizens and rulers.
• Citizens have an equal right to choose their representatives and subsequently hold them accountable.
• However, this approach does not adequately address another important question: How should citizens relate one another and to themselves?
• Mahatma Gandhi gave the idea of Swaraj a broader meaning.
• It was not merely rule of the self, but also rule over the self.
• Thus, democracy is not simply about changing rulers through elections; it also requires citizens capable of self-regulation, dialogue, cooperation and responsible participation in community life.
• This connects with Dr B.R. Ambedkar’s emphasis on fraternity as an essential condition for a successful democracy.
• Therefore, democracy requires not only good institutions but also democratic practices and a democratic culture.

Democracy as a Culture of Continuous Cultivation

• In Mukulika Banerjee’s work Cultivating Democracy, the metaphor of cultivation suggests that democracy cannot simply be established once and then left to function automatically.
• Like agriculture, democracy requires continuous nurture, patience, vigilance, hope, community participation and development of shared norms.
• A democratic society therefore needs strong community bonds and fraternity.
• Democracy also requires developing political leaders and creating a shared vision that can be renewed and rearticulated for every generation.
• Political participation should not become the preserve of a small class of professional politicians; citizens should participate as active members of the democratic community.

Indian Thinkers and Democratic Renewal

• Several Indian political thinkers of the 20th century questioned conventional models of democracy and provide ideas for rethinking its institutional design.
• Dr. B.R.Ambedkar
  • Ambedkar emphasised fraternity as a precondition for democracy.
  • Political equality cannot remain meaningful when society continues to be divided by deep social hierarchies.
• M.N. Roy
  • Roy advocated the idea of party-less democracy, questioning the excessive role of political parties in democratic governance.
• Jayaprakash Narayan
  • Narayan advocated the reconstruction of Indian polity, with greater emphasis on decentralisation and people’s participation.
• Rammanohar Lohia
  • Lohia proposed the idea of Chaukhamba Raj (Four-Pillar State), which envisioned political power distributed across different levels rather than being concentrated at the centre.
  • Although these proposals did not receive complete acceptance in their own times and cannot simply be adopted in their original form today, they provide a basis for questioning some of the assumptions of modern democracy.

Four defects in institutional design of modern democracy

• Excessive Scale
  • Modern democracies operate on a scale that can make meaningful self-rule difficult.
  • Nation-states and even their federal units can become too large and distant from ordinary citizens.
  • This creates a gap between citizens and decision-making institutions.
• Mismatch Between Problems and Power
  • There is often a mismatch between where a problem emerges and where the power to solve it is located.
  • A local problem may require a local solution, but decision-making authority may remain concentrated at a higher level.
  • Therefore, it is necessary to build the architecture of democracy from the bottom up, beginning with:

Village/local councils → higher levels of government → national governance → global governance

• • This should follow the principle of subsidiarity:
    • Matters that can be decided at a lower level should not unnecessarily be transferred to a higher level.
• Problems with the Electoral Calendar
  • Elections held every five, four or even two years can be simultaneously too short and too long.
  • They can be too short for governments to pursue and demonstrate the results of long-term policies.
  • They can be too long for citizens to effectively check arbitrary or excessive use of power.
  • This creates a challenge for continuous democratic accountability.
• Majoritarianism and Concentration of State Power
  • A simple electoral majority can provide a government with control over the enormous coercive and administrative power of the modern state.
  • According to the article, majoritarian outcomes should therefore be understood in relation to the institutional design of modern democracy rather than simply as an accidental problem.

Three Structural Problems of Democracy

• Caste, Class and Economic Inequality
  • The social hierarchy of caste and class can undermine the principle of one person, one vote.
  • Formal political equality may coexist with substantial social and economic inequality.
  • The caste system and capitalist economic structures can contribute to the concentration of social and economic power, making equal citizenship difficult to realise fully.
• Corporate-Controlled Mass Media
  • The contemporary media system can affect the possibility of an informed democratic public opinion.
  • Concentrated ownership and corporate control may contribute to:
    • Under-information
    • Misinformation
    • Unequal access to information
    • Manipulation of public opinion
    • Possibility of democratic capture
  • A healthy democracy therefore requires an informed citizenry and diverse information sources.
• Political-Party Oligarchies
  • Political parties can become dominated by entrenched leadership groups, creating barriers for new entrants.
  • Such party oligarchies can perpetuate the influence of a small political elite and reduce responsiveness to ordinary citizens.
  • A 21st-century constitutional framework should therefore consider institutional mechanisms dealing with:
    • Concentration of economic power in corporations
    • Flow of information through mass media
    • Political decision-making within political parties

Rebuilding Democracy from the Bottom Up

• The crisis of democracy cannot be addressed merely by changing constitutional text.
• Democracy needs both institutional reform and democratic social practices.
• A renewed democratic architecture could focus on
  • Decentralisation of power
  • Stronger village and local councils
  • Application of the principle of subsidiarity
  • Continuous rather than purely electoral accountability
  • Greater citizen participation
  • Reduction of excessive concentration of economic power
  • More diverse and accountable media
  • Greater internal democracy within political parties
  • Promotion of fraternity and social cohesion
  • Development of a culture of self-regulation and responsible citizenship
• The broader lesson from Swaraj is that democracy should not be understood merely as choosing governments.
• It should also involve citizens having meaningful control over matters affecting their lives and developing the social relationships and institutions necessary for collective self-rule.

Conclusion

The idea of Swaraj offers a broader understanding of democracy by linking political freedom with responsible citizenship, decentralization and community participation.

Strengthening local institutions, ensuring wider participation and addressing social, economic and informational inequalities can help make democracy more inclusive, accountable and participatory.

UPSC Prelims and Mains Practice Question

Consider the following statements,

1. The Gandhian idea of Swaraj extends beyond political self-rule to include self-regulation, responsible citizenship and community participation.
2. The principle of subsidiarity implies that decisions should, as far as practicable, be taken at the lowest level capable of addressing the issue effectively.
3. The idea of Swaraj is primarily concerned with strengthening centralised state authority to ensure uniform governance.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3

Answer: A. 1 and 2 only

Mains Practice Question

Q) Democracy is not merely a system for choosing rulers but also a culture of self-rule, fraternity and continuous citizen participation. Discuss in the context of the Gandhian idea of Swaraj and the challenges facing modern democracies. (250 words)

Daily Current Affairs: Click Here

Rate this Article and Leave Feedback