India’s trajectory as a ‘democracy’

The project of democracy is essentially about the liberty of the individual. After all, adherence to social mores and cultural values can be upheld under any form of government.

Democracy, the culture of it, the practice of it, the spirit of it is to lift a nation by empowering its individuals, enabling each one to be thus lifted. That is what it is intended to do.

In one of his essays, C.S. Lewis told us, ‘[The] first qualification for judging any piece of workmanship from a corkscrew to a cathedral is to know what it is — what it was intended to do and how it is meant to be used. After that has been discovered the temperance reformer may decide that the corkscrew was made for a bad purpose, and the communist may think the same about the cathedral. But such questions come later. The first thing is to understand the object before you: as long as you think the corkscrew was meant for opening tins or the cathedral for entertaining tourists you can say nothing to the purpose about them.’

To think of democracy as purely a series of elections is to mistake form for substance. It is more than tribal struggles over succession.

There is no difference between a tyranny and an elected autocracy if the underlying condition is that the State suppresses the individual in both, by curbing their freedom of expression, corralling their opinion and their autonomy and enforcing uniformity of thought.

This may sound extreme, but in democratic systems, the judge must liberate the individual from the tyranny of the State. This flows from the correct assumption that all forms of the nation-state seek to bind the individual, because she is a nuisance in the smooth running of the apparatus.

You can read the meaning of the words above into any event in our country — to speak of any particular event would be a distraction. As a writer, one is interested in the direction and the possibilities, if any, of change. One is also observant of how the general population responds to the shifts produced by the State.

It is not especially productive or necessary to elaborate on the details of these shifts. This is because they have been in the domain for long enough (we are now in Year 12 of this dispensation) and endorsed through elections. But it is instructive to go through the headlines and then, if interested, the reader can look up the details and assess whether what is happening here is an empowerment of the individual and the deepening of democracy — or its opposite.

The State is leading us in a particular direction and, given how long it has done so under current management, we have long left the shallows. This direction has been revealed to us through legislation.

Here’s one set of laws:

• Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act 2018,

• Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act 2019,

• Uttar Pradesh Vidhi Viruddh Dharma Samparivartan Pratibandh Adhyadesh 2020,

• Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act 2021,

• Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act 2021,

• Karnataka Protection of Right to Freedom of Religion 2022,

• Haryana Prevention of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act 2022.

Here’s another:

• Maharashtra Animal Protection Act 2015,

• Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act 2015,

• Gujarat Animal Preservation (Amendment) Act 2017,

• Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Act 2017.

...and here’s a third set:

• Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act 2019 — aka the UAPA,

• Right to Information (Amendment) Act 2019 — pertaining to RTI,

• Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damage to Public and Private Property Act 2020,

• Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules 2017,

• Aadhaar and Other Laws (Amendment) Act 2019.

The years are important because they show us progression, movement. They have brought us to where we are today. Behind the events that occupy the news stories is this structure that is now in force through law, with each tooth ratcheted in and immovable.

You can have a well-managed tyranny — and there are examples of these around the world, particularly in and around our neighbourhood. The ‘management’ here is purely of an economic nature; the individual has to surrender her autonomy and liberty, whether or not she wants to.

Unfortunately, there are no examples to be found of a democracy that blossoms under systemic suppression. The rewards and the fruits of democracy are achieved through the intensification of freedom and not through suppression. The recognition must be that the free individual will be more productive, more creative and more capable.

The road that leads away from this does not lead towards success.

Unless, of course, success is defined as the systematic and gratuitous hobbling of individuals and groups — and the joy that is derived from doing this.

Views are personal. More of Aakar Patel’s writing may be read here