Personalized democracy...a few thoughts

I have been trying to understand politics since some time: not just Indian politics, but politics in general. I have read some excerpts of Marx, a book by Chomsky, another by Diamond and so on...

I have not yet arrived at any clear understanding of the same. What I have gathered is that democracy has a very personal definition. It can mean one thing to me & another to you. There is NO established framework of democracy.

We understand communism & its failures, but democracy, as a concept, evades us in general (not just me). That is exactly the reason why each democratic nation has its own version.

What unnerves me is that a person is chosen by the voters, and assumes power to perform acts on behalf of the voters for a said period of time. This gives rise to 2 problems:
1. assumes power
2. said period of time
(the very basics of the system)

1. when the representative assumes power, he or she ceases to consult the voters again. Not literally, but it is largely seen that power can silence the public word. This means that the representative is generally free to do what he or she chooses, as long as it can be controlled by the power vested in the person (whether it is right or wrong is immaterial). Also, power-groups, interest-groups and similar informal / underground institutions come together to bribe / chide / influence the representative to swing the course of action. Here, it should be noted that its easier to influence one person than the whole population. So we are actually narrowing our power instead of distributing it (as should be done in a democracy), and allowing it to be manipulated.

2. Since the representative is in power only for a brief period of time: very simply put- power corrupts, and the outlook is quite myopic. Long term goals go for a toss, and the Beta syndrome hits the representative. He or she promises to do better NEXT time (meaning they want to be voted next time). Short term goals rule, and hence some interest groups are favoured over others. More importantly, the representative is always busy performing acts that aid his or her success in the next election cycle.

So, as i see it, we are:
1. narrowing our power & concentrating it
2. cutting it into parts over time & in effect, losing out on our long term goals

The latest advertisement by IDEA cellular set me thinking. The representative asks the people via SMS everytime there is a decision to be made. That is ofcourse a utopian idea, but somewhere it clicks by giving power to everyone. However, our political systems are expert in crippling that idea through brainwashing & mob-theories, for which i need not give any examples - the recent newspapers will do.

So, what could be a way out of this? Since democracy has a personal definition, how about a personalized democracy? The constitution grants us several basic rights. Beyond that, its just a mess of laws, acts & amendments gathered since the British era. What if we are given a chance to chuck all that away, and be able to follow a pattern which suits us?

At first thought it is absurd, immensely complicated (for legal / political systems), impossible, downright stupid and maybe insane!

But a deeper look may provide us with glimpses of answers that we may be looking for. Maybe, its not the right thing to do. However, what if it is atleast the right direction to follow? Would that not matter? So here it is....

If each one of us is allowed to form our own set of rules, I think a perfect analogy would be the Hindu religion. It is so personal that no one person can claim to own / direct / prescribe it. Those who try to manipulate it stand out easily (self-proclaimed Hindutva activists), while those who want to follow can do so without any pressure. It is a loose composition of crores of believers living in perfect symphony with each other, respecting each other & yet each one having a unique set of guiding systems!

I am only able to provide an analogy through Hinduism, since I am not qualified to provide answers to political turmoil. However, if a religion can be compiled in such a manner, I believe it is comparatively easier to compile a political system!

It is like each one of us having ipods or computers from a different vendor. The basic rules are the same, but the tweaks are varied. It provides freedom of belief, freedom of movement from one sub-system to another & more importantly, it is impossible to influence it single handedly!!!

Those who want to be led & not be disturbed with the politics can choose one system, those who want to be active participants can choose another system, and so on...

This is just the tip of my discussion; there are many ideas that are bubbling away, but are yet hard to frame into mere words. I would welcome a discussion on the above aspect to shape future posts.