Democratising democracy (2)

AS for its scientific aspect, democracy as a behavioural science dwells on the organic link between the ruling corps and their citizens on one hand and individual societies among and between them on the other (drawing eclectic cues from others).

Take the instance of fundamentals of civil and human rights. In a sane environment, none really needs to overstretch the adherence and obligatory issues of individual freedom and liberty as the necessity for such unhindered flows.

Some precursory datelines; the United States (America) in 1776 during its hard-won war of independence against its old cunning ‘uncle’, Britain and with its victory, the then world took notice that, so, it was possible for a people under subjugation to fight their way to sweet freedom.

Not quite long after, France in 1789 had a similar experience during its encompassing revolution and its entire society as it were dismantled virtually everything reminiscent of its iniquitous old order.

Over time, the culminations of these societal upheavals coalesced and part of which characteristically came to be universally known as the tripod of equity, egalitarianism and liberty.

So far, so bad for the adversarial type of democracy as being practised in any part of the planet earth. In some demonstrable ways, what distinctly distinguish India from China is while India, especially its top political leadership, readily yields to periodic and successive elections, China’s Politburo, which practically amounts to antiquity of some dinosaurs, tenaciously holds on to power at the expense of healthy succession-process.

By this needless burden at its power hierarchy, China is yet to be accorded global respectability despite its run-away economic success story. Whereas India, though a similarly emerging economic giant, commands effusive remark; in fact, often described as the world’s largest democracy! Imperatively brought to the fore is the essence of democratising democracy, particularly when one crosses the demarcating lines between just make-believe democracy cum conduct of elections and decidedly choosing democratisation in entirety as a patterned way of life.

Herein lie the crucibles of making democracy and what it fundamentally stands for to grow deep to a societal foundation. This goes beyond the mere rituals of scheduled elections, power tenacity, perks of officialdom and spoilage system.

By the intra- and inter-efforts of nations and individual-personalities at large, democratisation issues transcend national borders with the eternal vigilance of checks-and-balances watchers such as human rights campaigners, equitable economic-order crusaders, and peace-at-all-cost advocates.

For some, the current terror campaigns being witnessed in length and width have largely to do with the serial failures of democracy, its consequentially created voids and related shortcomings. Pushed to a puritanical point, the unfolding religious radicalisation and faith-coercionist in a way occupy the existing empty space of the Westernised-induced amoral vices.

These range from the unimaginably criminal gulf between the continually rich and seriously impoverished have-nots, gun violence culture, homosexuality and other libertine indulgences. Democratising democracy can be likened to the repentant ways turn-around cookies come home to roost and it is typical of pushing a failed technological breakthrough back to the scientific laboratory for recasting of some sort.

An attempt to make the democratisation project perform better and more enhanced can begin by professionalising politics, a main gateway to the democratic processes. For instance, sequel to our collapsed socialisation process and failed system, politics has come to be regarded as an all comers’ avenue, of a last resort where all else has failed, for all shades of characters.

It has been made a bobby-lain minefield for less of desirable, honest, willing, patriotic, successful, well-mannered people but more of deviant, undesirable, willful, dishonourable, Machiavellian, despotic folk and the effects have been made so glaring for all of sane and sound mind to see.

For democracy in its beauty, intent, purpose and skills to manifest; politics, as against being a dirty game for never-do-wells, has to be widely driven by the minimal ethics of nobility, solid integrity background, unambiguous public service testimony and records and associated virtues. These are required for excellency of performance.

Politics should be taken as a means to a fulfilled end (i.e. public-spirited service) rather than be an evil-end (a devilish device for treasury looting, killing fields, fetish-laden route to power hierarchy) in itself.

Emphatically, deliberate efforts have to be made to create a conducive atmosphere wherein politics is raised to an art-level of a calling for selfless and honourable service.

By implication, politics would be regarded as an avenue with inherent hallmarks of bequeathing memorable legacies of quality service in good governance, transparency as well as sincerity of purpose, altruistic leadership, foundational consolidation of constitutional frameworks and good names-referrals spanning successive generations.

What is more, politics by this high pedestal would be coexistent with a prevailing consciousness that it is those who have some things of value to offer that would dare venture in to the political arena. Initially, this advocacy may sound so academic and utopian; however, does that ageless Chinese cliché not admonish that the journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step? •Concluded. gokeomolade@hotmail.com