What is the difference between democracy and majorityism ? If 3 out of 5 people agree on a wrong thing then a wrong thing should be done ? I never fully understood the difference. Any opinions ?
RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by PP on Dec 30, 2007 07:04 PM Permalink
Good question. If you ask me both (democracy and majority-ism) are synonymous. As they say - be a Roman in Rome. Look what is happening in Gujarat. Right or wrong, Gujarat gave a verdict and we should be happy about it and accept it. The problem arises when people start thinking/talking about all the good that would have happened otherwise. :-)) I hope you get what I mean. I am still confused. Pls add more to this to clear my doubts. lol.
RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by Rash on Dec 30, 2007 07:12 PM Permalink
Well PP A true democracy is synonymous only with real freedom and its human rights records abuses is no worse than its neighbours. On the contrary, in a system where a state minister can openly justify murder and still allowed to cling to his office is a sham democracy.
RE:RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by PP on Dec 30, 2007 07:54 PM Permalink
Hi Rash, I still believe what happened in Gujarat(riots i mean) was an aberration. It should not have happened. But what happened after that(last 5 yrs) has been great and there in lies the strength/power of democracy.
RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by sachin jain on Dec 30, 2007 07:11 PM Permalink
Difference is that in democracy it is never as simple as 5 v/s 3. More likely it will be 500000 v/s 300000. Not to forget that 800000 minds will also discuss and debate before they decide. Also one must not attempt to discredit democracy by putting right v/s wrong. Aim of democracy is to choose the best from many good alternatives (wrong ones i.e. if there are any get eliminated in the begining itself.) Yes, democracy is not perfect, but then we don't know yet a better form.
If root cause of your pessimism is election results of Gujrat and Himachal then don't forget that one can't fool all the people all the time. Winners have to perform. Performers win and those who do not loose.
RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by RRRChola on Dec 30, 2007 07:12 PM Permalink
Democracy is the final outcome of individual shortcomings - dishonesty, injustice, corruption. Democracy is a blanket provided by the unjust, corrupt and materially strong individuals to cover their own faults along with the faults of their weaker cousins at the expense of the righteous individual.
If each man was righteous, had inner strength of beliefs to withstand the onslaught of evil, democracy is not needed, since such a society will always be ruled by a just ruler.
RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by Rash on Dec 30, 2007 07:17 PM Permalink
If each political leader becomes righteous then how come they rule in india where different communities reside. They always scratch their backs to turn around the democratic rules by dividing communities.
RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by Rash on Dec 30, 2007 07:26 PM Permalink
BJP ha good joke In a system where a state minister can openly justify murder and still allowed to cling to his office is a sham democracy.
RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by Bhardwaj Velamakanni on Dec 31, 2007 12:14 AM Permalink
If the majority feels that the murder is justified then thats it - it becomes a law! The terms RIGHT and WRONG are relative and they will be determined by the Majority in Democracy and by the Ruler in Autocracy!
RE:RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by RRRChola on Dec 30, 2007 07:21 PM Permalink
A righteous ruler is always just irrespective of community, humanity comes first, rest of the things follow.
RE:RE:RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by viswanatha seshadri on Dec 30, 2007 07:48 PM Permalink
Yes. 'Communities' must be: 'unifiers based on commonalities'. Those which stand for separateness in society, not agreeing to common laws for human good, should not be considered 'communities', should be dismissed as 'disunities'. 'jihaadi' moslems in India come under this category. They should either unite under a common law to work for total welfare of the nation, or remain guest citizens without franchise; otherwise, they should leave for countries of their real preference.
RE:democracy Vs majorityism
by viswanatha seshadri on Dec 30, 2007 07:26 PM Permalink
Right. Countries, cultures dominated by wrong-deciding majorities, will soon decay and die, only countries, states whose majorities stand for humanism and justice with welfare for all will survive over the centuries.
'Survival of the fittest' is the rule for cultures and countries also. 'dharmo rakshati rakshitah': the true 'right' is that which protects the practitioner, proof of pudding in the eating.
MahaagaNapati mantra ends: 'sarvajanam me vaSam aanaya swaahaa', meaning 'make the surviving hunanity move progressivly merging into ever-greater 'goodness' [vasam = vareNye Samanam]; it is the basic commitment to truth, harmony, non-violence, welfare for all[satyam, ritam, ahimsaa, sarvatra subhikshaa, sarva-jana-sowkhya], which has enabled the indic non-conquesting non-converting civilization survive over many millennia despite conq/conv waves from outside. It will continue to survive.
