More participatory democracy, less burden on rulers

by Susantha Hewa

A Shramadana (collaborative work) in a village is a good example of participatory democracy in action, where it is “of the villagers, by the villagers, for the villagers”. Of course, a few would organize and lead but they don’t stand to benefit more than the others. The coordinators would get their due praise for leading but they are not any more materially benefitted than the rest of the villagers.

They organize it for the common good and, as such, they want the whole village to participate and contribute so that there wouldn’t be idlers or freeloaders who would thrive on the sweat of the others.

The general principle of this kind of Shramadana – the participation of all for the benefit of all, seems to be the better alternative to the ‘representative’ democracy in our country, which has thus far amply benefitted the representatives and deluded the masses. Our brand of representative democracy has slowly and unmistakably empowered the representatives and weakened the masses that are said to be supreme. The empowerment of the representatives is good in so far as their power is used for the betterment of the masses.

However, as we can see today, the empowerment of the politicians has been inversely proportional to that of the masses, which is a travesty of true democracy, which, after all, is expected to empower people. Democracy is said to work better when the rulers are held accountable for their actions, instead of people being made to pay for the sins of the former, as it is happening today.

Our rulers breezily invite people to ‘join hands’ with them, but can they be more explicit about what they mean by that? Surely, if what they mean is more participatory democracy- allowing more space for people to participate in deciding on important national policies, they would have wished people to be more active rather than confining themselves to voting at the next election.

However, our rulers have never shown any interest in considering the views of the public in decision making. However, their inclination to sternly distance the public from the realms of active politics, curtail freedoms of expression, bring in repressive laws to stifle social media, etc., can only mean that what they mean by joining hands is mere rhetoric.

If joining hands is to be understood as “working harder” in their respective fields, all we can say is that people have already been working hard enough, many of them, merely to eke out an existence and that they have never been the beneficiaries of their hard work. All their work has ended in making them poorer by the year while those who have come to politics to ‘serve the masses’ have always been living in grand style.

In other words, our democracy, in its existing form, which bars people from gaining reasonable space for participating in decision making, has served only the politicians, plentifully at that.

Thus far, voting every five years or so has been, more or less, an act of revenge; to ‘punish’ the incumbent regime. This may not be the best version of democracy in an informed and proactive society. Asking people to join hands with them every time they have ruined the economy seems to have only one meaning and that is “be ready to suffer more”.

Allowing people to take a more active role in democratic politics instead of just consigning them to be voters as they have been all these years, would save our politicians from the unpleasant task of explaining why people should suffer further. After all, there can be a more people-centred democracy where more citizens are made to be active in politics – if politics were to mean the active participation of as many citizens as possible in working towards the wellbeing of all – not the usual stuff of power games and plundering of national wealth with impunity – politicians’ job wouldn’t be to explain every now and then why things are going bad. Instead, it would allow politicians to apportion to the public their share of responsibility in governance.

Today, the incumbent regime is telling us that it is taking unpopular decisions, as if nobody would know it unless it is announced! However, they don’t tell us that those “unpopular decisions” (a) are unpopular only among the masses and not among political parasites and sycophants (b) are taken for no fault of the people (c) are taken so as to make the people pay for the sins of the crooks (d) shouldn’t be misread as ‘bitter now but beneficial in the long term’ as many people would tend to interpret it, and, last but not least, (e) would eventually turn out to be unwise, unproductive and unsustainable. In short, taking “unpopular decisions” will not merit adulation, if those unpopular decisions are likely to give added license for the selfsame politicians to justify taking still more unpopular decisions with no benefits to the people.

The reality is that all these years, our politicians have gradually distanced themselves from the common people, relying on the police to handle those who dare come out for street protests as a result of their being denied of involvement in “active politics”- which, incidentally, is not the same as ‘party politics’, which we have very little to thank for considering the present crisis.

Democratic politics have to be more proactive and civilian friendly, where the citizens, without being passive, can indirectly participate in governance without allowing our representatives to become more and more aggressively empowered. We can see what the country has come to as a result of this total faith in what we have understood as representative parliamentary democracy, which has gradually deteriorated by strengthening the hands of the rulers and disempowering the citizens whose sovereignty is said to be inviolable.

In a strong and healthy democracy where people can live a decent life with dignity, they may, instead of protesting against taxes, ask for tax increases to ensure more comfort, better facilities and cleaner environment that will enhance the overall feeling of a contented life. The idea of people demanding tax increases isn’t mere fiction. George Monbiot, writer, environmental and political activist reports an instance where people in Porto Alegre- city, capital of Rio Grande, southern Brazil, where a large number of people had asked the city council to raise their taxes (Out of the Wreckage).

Sri Lankans would love to pay more taxes if they know how to manage it with their monthly income and if they know that such taxes will be used for their benefit and not as an easy alternative to let the tax evading sharks off the hook.

Can our rulers convince the people that their taxes will pay dividends one day?