It is impossible to talk about democracy in the subcontinent without an eye on ground reality and how democracy works (or rather doesn’t!) in practice. Theory is all very well but ordinary people judge on results; hence as Platinum stated dictatorships are often welcomed.

Ashik, I said before that I think you offer only cynicism, shading into outright nihilism, on this issue. Human rights abuses of an army are abuses of democracy, and you correct them by punishing those who abuse the democracy, not by pining for a dictatorship.

Sid and Billy talk about democracy like they’re both copy and pasting from the same Wikipedia link.

I talk about democracy from the heart and mind, platinum. If you took the time to read my responses you’d see why I believe that India is going to be the grand narrative of the 21 st Century, precisely because there is no other nation on earth that faces so many problems, and yet is commited to progress on the path of democracy.

How can you say that we cannot have liberty under a military ruler, only under a democratically elected one, when Pakistan today is a documented living example that the exact opposite is true?

I know all that, I read all that. You completely miss the point I have been making. In the long term, democracy, the people enfranchised, and all attendant cultures of responsiveness and change, is more supple, and more flexible, and more progressive, than a blind, lazy faith that there will always be a strong man who knows what is best for the people. Always. Forever.

But this democracy requires attention. It requires patience. It requires cussed determination to face down threats, to work out difficulties. That is all a part of the process of bringing change to a society. If Pakistani society only wants to trust a strong man in charge, when is Pakistan going to get on the railway tracks to take them forward, the commitment to that guiding principle that will bear fruit in the future?

…when applauding change one shouldn’t forget those for whom change will not come.

How do you know that change will not come? If you want to effect change now and in the future, which system of governance is more suited to effect responsiveness to the poor or the marginalised? A democracy, or a ‘benign dictatorship’?

The education system is rubbish unless you go private…the economic system is a mess, and the political system is corrupt. Take your pick as to which one needs to be looked at first. When human rights are so low on the agenda, sod womens’ rights.

As for India, I don’t disagree that there are great things happening there, however, it makes me sick when there is this brushing under the carpet of abuse, corruption, and religious baiting that is rife…when applauding change one shouldn’t forget those for whom change will not come.

India has had a muslim president of parliament, the PM is a sikh, and there have been numerous dalit MPs. And even a ‘hijra’ (transgender) MP.

Under President (General) Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan had freedom of speech and a free media, the same things that eventually made him immensely unpopular and bought him down.

Under Asif Ali Zardari, The Pakistani version of the FBI is being used to track down people who send derogatory chain text messages about Zardari (this is an actual police case), anti government voices in the media have been silenced (Zaid Hamid, Ahmed Quereshi), draconian laws have been introduced, and when the president made a spelling mistake in the guest book at the Quaid’s Mausoleum and it was highlighted in the press, government officials came, tore out that page and replaced the message with another one.

How can you say that we cannot have liberty under a military ruler, only under a democratically elected one, when Pakistan today is a documented living example that the exact opposite is true?

It is impossible to talk about democracy in the subcontinent without an eye on ground reality adn how democracy works (or rather doesn’t!) in practice. Theory is all very well but ordinary people judge on results; hence as Platinum stated dictatorships are often welcomed.

Ordinary people have no way to exercise their judgement in dictatorships, and yes, even in your imaginary “benign” authoritarian regimes.

India’s Democracy is far from perfect, and yes, it is inefficient when compared to China’s regime. I do not believe India could organise the Olympics, something the Chinese did spectacularly. But then again, the Chinese regime can do whatever projects they want at the expense of its people, and there are pockets of abject poverty in many parts of China. Which foreigners are not allowed to see.

In the end, India is developing slowly… but you know what? This development is done despite the government. Governments can fall, but India is sustained by its people and private sector. Whereas, what do you think is going to happen when the communist regime goes down? Much of the private sector in China is owned by the State!

I am also encouraged by India’s technological feats: cost-efficient cars, 4th fastest supercomputer in the world, rockets that explore the moon… There is so much that is wrong about India and its Democracy, but I would rather have our model than China’s or any of your South Asian benign dictatorial regimes.

The quantity of generalisation and hyperbole in that passage has reached the critical mass at which it sucks up all the oxygen in the room.

‘Nonsense. The Indian Army stays in its barracks because it understands what the Indian Republic is all about. It does so because there is a culture of democracy,’

The same Indian army which has shown it’s ‘respect’ for human rights and the rule of law by committing horrific human rights violations and acting as an army of occupation in Indian Occupied Kashmir where more than 60,000 have perished? The same Indian army which is ‘trusted’ so much in Assam? How many Kashmiri elections has the army helped rig? I think you and i must differ as to meanings of the ‘culture of democracy’ of which human rights is an inalienable part.

It is impossible to talk about democracy in the subcontinent without an eye on ground reality and how democracy works (or rather doesn’t!) in practice. Theory is all very well but ordinary people judge on results; hence as Platinum stated dictatorships are often welcomed.

China is creating forces of social change eg. middle and commercial classes which in the middle to longterm future as Platinum has stated will help evolve a more democratic tradition and decentralization which is in-keeping with Chinese sentiments and values

How will that middle class develop a democratic tradition in the straightjacket of a commisariat dictatorship? Democracy is decades of disputation, cussed insitutions, independent checks and balances, a free press, an enfranchised population. You just want the state to be organised along the lines of a strong man to preserve inchoate ‘family values’. I would pity Bangladesh if your worldview gains ground. India is a stronger country, and will be a stronger and freer country in the coming century precisely because it is moving in the OPPOSITE direction to that which you describe here — a dictatorship with arbitrary notions of ‘culture’ as the justification for the power of men who you would be happy to cede all democratic process to.

And there is a school of thought which sees the only reason Indian army has not taken over as in BD and Pak is because of practicalities

Nonsense. The Indian Army stays in its barracks because it understands what the Indian Republic is all about. It does so because there is a culture of democracy, and the Army knows its place. The army serves the state. The state does not serve the army. Which is how the Pakistani army seems to orientate things.

Democracy is the best form of governence but requires a receptive culture to nurture and underpin it. China is developing this. Otherwise we have the likes of Bangladesh and Pakistan and to a lesser extent India where we have parliaments, parties and elections but nothing changes. Where a country’s entire national treasury is seen as nothing more than a leader/their family’s personal savings account to spend as they see fit while their countrymen starve.

China an India suffer from many similar problems but China is better and quicker able to deal with them than India.

And there is a school of thought which sees the only reason Indian army has not taken over as in BD and Pak is because of practicalities eg. ruling a country of billion souls rather than impediments of strong institutions and love and respect for democracy.

The truth is though, cynicism is the simplest, and laziest thing in the world. India, and her neighbours, deserve more than that, especially because there is so much to be cynical about. Democracy is a high line embodiment of the dignity and rights of man and woman. That is a guiding, organising principle that survives the corruption and failures and iniquities that is the reality in a country like India. What other guiding principle do you want in the 21st Century? That in one hundred years they should be ruled by Mr ‘Benign’ Dictator who (the likes of Ashik says), knows what is good for you?

Actually, I dunno why people wet themselves in paroxysms of delight about Obama’s “minority status”. India has been electing minorities to power for generations. In fact India had a woman prime minister when the UK had Enoch Powell and there was racial segregation in USA.