Democracy, Discussion and Dissent

   ‘When power outstrips ability, we will fall on evil days’ - Dr. S. RadhaKrishanan 

Voltaire in his book The Age of Louis XIV said, “It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.”  Discussion, dissent, debate and development may be elucidated as the fundamental constituents of a Parliamentary Democracy. 

On the recent ban on a Television Network imposed by the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting for revealing crucial and sensitive information they defended it by saying, “The government’s decision was a direct violation of freedom of media and therefore the citizens of India had amounted to harsh censorship imposed by the government reminiscent of the Emergency.”  Freedom is best utilised when its worth is perfectly prized. In India, citizens have the right to freedom of expression; it is given more value than economic and cultural advancement. In true sense freedom is respecting your freedom, others freedom while respecting your country’s freedom. It is regulated by provenance, self-regulation, legislation and regulation by large. Dissent is acceptable, appreciable and understandable but disintegration is not. 

The definition of democracy is comprehensive and has been expanded, to describe a credo that insists on the right and the capacity of people, acting either directly or through representatives to control their institutions for social purposes. Such Weltanschauung places a high value on the equality of individuals, Rule of Law and emancipates individuals from restraints upon their freedom. It insists that necessary restraints be imposed only by the consent of the majority and that they conform to the principle of Rule of Law. So dissent and discussion is more or less an implied abstract notion.  It is hard to deny that India’s most remarkable achievement has been to maintain over 7 decades, the world’s most populous democracy. Barring the totalitarian hiatus of the mid’ 1970s, India’s political democracy has not been supplanted by any non- military or military dictatorship. It will remain an overlong wonder that India’s innumerable agonizing troubles did not pilot the body politic towards some kind of authoritarian solution for any length of time. What is more remarkable is India’s resolution of the democratic corroboration.  Democracy along with wide consultation has evolved within the bona fide structure, a living political organization which has affected in some way or the other almost every level of society. 

Dialogue is the best way to resolve complications. It is the only way to reach decisions that are tolerable to everybody. Dialogue is the primary means of evading and resolving conflict. What separates democracy from other political institutions is the principle and practice of resolving dissimilarity first and foremost through dialogue. Plurality of views means including all voices in the political debate. Dissent may be defined as disruption of status quo. Webster dictionary defines Dissent as to withhold assent or approval or to differ in opinion. Democracy accepts the right of its citizens to demurral decisions that they disagree with. Dissent and protest stretch our ability to take censure.  Discussion and dissent strengthens the commitment and beliefs of citizens by rational assent and favourable build out principles. Dissent reveals a rudiment fidelity to a country, a society or a community. The constitutional ethics of a democratic society also establishes limits for tolerance, pluralism and freedom to dissent. In a constitutional democracy each individual is guaranteed the legal and fundamental right to freedom to also challenge its fundamental principles. However, while the constitution defends the right to dissent, citizens must be capable of developing laic sentiments that do not destroy the social fabric. Judicial or legislative limitations of individual freedom and tolerance guaranteed by the democratic constitution should be inherent to the quintessence pervading democracy itself.  

The democratic citizen, on whose vote the legitimacy of the entire political mechanism rests, is called upon to reason using his own brain (and to vote in solitude and as an individual), and associate with others to exchange information and opinions, to change his or her mind and then change it again, if necessary. Dissent is a constitutive virtue of democracy. Rather than corroding social ideals, as authoritarians and conservatives believe, it strengthens partiality and cooperation between citizens. Dissent reveals a fundamental loyalty to a country, a society or a community – John Stuart Mill. 

Our progenitors have provided us with a Republic, with a Constitution, with a Democracy and it is our responsibility to preserve that.