We normally define democracy as the govt of the people by the people and for the people.It is been apparent for some time that this is sentimental drivel. The more appropriate defintion of democracy as practised in real life is that it is in the nature of a competition between a few elite groups for control of a nation for a defined period. In south asian countries however we would have to search for yet another definition: democracy as a myth where dynasties attempt to gain legitimacy by an appeal for public sanction of their rule.But this time the myth of Benazir as a democratic figure has been well and truly burst.well she can join the hallowed revolutionary who ruled as long as he could walk and then handed over power to his brother. Personally,i prefer the U S neocons to the hyprocrazy of our socialist pseudos.
RE:dynastic politics
by yohayoha on Dec 30, 2007 10:52 PM Permalink
We should have a amendment to constitution to ban children of politicians from becoming politicians then only we will see new leaders.
RE:dynastic politics
by Jungle Boy on Dec 30, 2007 11:02 PM Permalink
You have Congress (Gandhi parivar, Scindia et al) ,Communists (Karats - are they related?) and DMK in power ... are you dreaming ... how the hell would you pass this amendment
RE:dynastic politics
by Bala Krishnan on Dec 30, 2007 11:02 PM Permalink
You cant solve a cultural problem only by a legislative act.We have to face the demons within us .
