Outcomes of Democracy

In-text Questions

Q1. Did we reach these conclusions in Madam Lyngdoh's class? I loved that class because students were not being dictated any conclusions.

Answer:

Yes, in Madam Lyngdoh's class in Chapter 2 of the Class IX textbook, students discussed and arrived at the conclusion that democracy is a better form of government compared with dictatorship or any other alternative. They felt democracy was better because it promotes equality among citizens, enhances the dignity of the individual, improves the quality of decision-making, provides a method to resolve conflicts, and allows room to correct mistakes. The students were not dictated any conclusions; they reasoned and debated to reach these conclusions themselves.

Q2. Is democracy all about coping with multiple pressures and accommodating diverse demands?

Answer:

Democracy is not only about coping with multiple pressures and accommodating diverse demands, but this is certainly an important part of it. In a democracy, different groups and individuals have different needs, interests and demands. The government has to balance these competing pressures and accommodate diverse demands through deliberation, negotiation and compromise. However, democracy is also about accountability, responsiveness, legitimacy, promoting equality and dignity, and providing freedom to citizens. So, while accommodating diverse demands is a key feature, it is not the only thing democracy is about.

Q3. Can you think of what and how the government knows about you and your family (for example ration cards and voter identity cards)? What are the sources of information for you about the government?

Answer:

What and how the government knows about us:

• Ration cards – for food security and public distribution system.
• Voter identity cards – for electoral rolls and voting.
• Aadhaar cards – for identity verification and access to various services.
• Birth and death certificates – for vital statistics.
• Income tax returns – for taxation.
• School and college records – for education data.
• Property records – for land and property ownership.
• Health records – for public health programmes.

Sources of information for us about the government:

• Newspapers, television and radio.
• Internet and social media.
• Government websites and portals.
• Right to Information (RTI) Act.
• Public meetings, gram sabhas and ward meetings.
• Elected representatives and political party offices.
• Government offices and officials.
• Non-governmental organisations and civil society groups.

Q4. So, the best outcome of democracy is that it is a democracy! That is what we have discovered after all this mental gymnastics?

Answer:

This humorous comment captures an important truth: democracy's greatest achievement is that it establishes a democratic system of government that is accountable, responsive and legitimate. While democracy may not always produce the best economic outcomes or fully eliminate inequality and poverty, its ability to generate support for itself and to give people a government that is their own is a significant outcome. The fact that people overwhelmingly support the idea of democracy, even when they are dissatisfied with its practice, shows that democracy has value in itself. The mental gymnastics help us understand that democracy is not just a means to an end but also an end in itself.

Q5. Cartoon on this page and next three pages tell us about the disparities between the rich and poor. Should the gains of economic growth be evenly distributed? How can the poor get a voice for a better share in a nation? What can the poor countries do to receive a greater share in the world's wealth?

Answer:

Should the gains of economic growth be evenly distributed?

Yes, the gains of economic growth should be evenly distributed because:

• Economic growth benefits everyone, and it is unjust for a small number of ultra-rich to enjoy a highly disproportionate share of wealth and incomes while the poor struggle to meet their basic needs.
• Unequal distribution of wealth leads to social tensions, conflict and instability.
• It undermines the democratic principle of political equality, as economic inequality translates into unequal political influence.
• For democracy to be meaningful, all citizens should have a fair share in the benefits of development.

How can the poor get a voice for a better share in a nation?

• Through democratic participation: voting, standing for elections, and participating in decision-making processes.
• Through collective action: forming unions, pressure groups and movements to demand their rights.
• Through awareness and education: knowing their rights and using tools like the Right to Information Act.
• Through political representation: electing leaders who are committed to the welfare of the poor.
• Through government policies: demanding policies that reduce inequality, such as progressive taxation, social security, and public spending on health and education.

What can the poor countries do to receive a greater share in the world's wealth?

• Demand fairer terms of trade in international markets.
• Seek debt relief and increased development assistance from rich countries.
• Promote regional cooperation and collective bargaining among developing countries.
• Invest in education, health and infrastructure to build their own capacity.
• Attract foreign investment on fair terms and ensure that the benefits are shared equitably.
• Reduce corruption and improve governance to make better use of their own resources.

Q6. What would be your verdict on democracy if you had to base it purely on economic performance of democratic regimes in terms of growth and equal distribution?

Answer:

If I had to base my verdict purely on the economic performance of democratic regimes in terms of growth and equal distribution, I would conclude that democracy's record is mixed:

• Economic growth: The evidence shows that on average, dictatorial regimes have had a slightly higher rate of economic growth (4.42 per cent) compared to democratic regimes (3.95 per cent) between 1950 and 2000. However, when we compare poor countries under dictatorship (4.34 per cent) and poor countries under democracy (4.28 per cent), there is virtually no difference. So, democracy does not guarantee faster economic growth, but it does not lag significantly behind dictatorships either.
• Equal distribution: Democracies have not been very successful in reducing economic inequalities. In countries like South Africa and Brazil, the top 20 per cent take away more than 60 per cent of national income, leaving less than 3 per cent for the bottom 20 per cent. Even in democracies like the USA and UK, inequality is high.

Verdict: Based purely on economic performance, democracy does not appear superior to dictatorship. However, we cannot judge democracy solely on economic grounds because democracy has other positive outcomes—accountability, responsiveness, legitimacy, dignity and freedom—that are equally important. Therefore, while democracy may not be the fastest route to economic development or equality, it remains the best form of government because it respects the dignity and freedom of citizens and produces accountable and legitimate governments.

Q7. Democracy is a rule of the majority. The poor are in majority. So democracy must be a rule of the poor. How can this not be the case?

Answer:

While it is true that democracy is a rule of the majority and the poor constitute a large proportion of voters in many countries, democracy does not automatically become a rule of the poor because:

• Economic inequality translates into political inequality: The rich have greater resources to influence elections, fund political campaigns and lobby for policies that benefit them.
• The poor are not a homogeneous group: They are divided by caste, religion, region, language and other identities, which prevents them from acting as a unified political force.
• Vote-bank politics: Political parties may appeal to the poor for votes but may not actually implement policies that benefit them once in power.
• Lack of awareness and organization: The poor may not have the education, information or organizational capacity to demand their share effectively.
• Elite capture of institutions: The bureaucracy, judiciary and media may be dominated by the wealthy and educated classes, making it difficult for the poor to get their voices heard.
• Short-term electoral considerations: Governments may focus on immediate electoral gains rather than long-term structural changes that would reduce poverty.

Thus, democracy does not automatically lead to the rule of the poor. However, democratic participation and collective action by the poor can help them get a better share in power and resources.

Q8. All you are saying is that democracy ensures that people do not break each other's head. This is not harmony. Should we be happy about it?

Answer:

Yes, we should be happy about it because democracy's ability to prevent violent conflict is a significant achievement. While it may not produce perfect harmony, democracy provides a peaceful mechanism for resolving differences and negotiating competing interests. In non-democratic regimes, internal social differences are often suppressed, and when they erupt, they can lead to violence and civil war. Democracy, by contrast, allows for the expression of social divisions in a peaceful and institutionalised manner. The fact that people do not break each other's heads is itself a valuable outcome, especially in societies with deep social divisions. Democracy may not create perfect harmony, but it creates the conditions for peaceful coexistence and gradual progress towards greater justice and equality.

Q9. The above cartoon and graph illustrate a point made in this section (Dignity and freedom of the citizens). Underline the sentences from this section which connect to the cartoon or graph.

Answer:

The sentences from the section 'Dignity and freedom of the citizens' that connect to the cartoon (Rosa Parks Still Inspires) and the graph (Belief in the efficacy of vote is placed above the calculus of utility) are:

• "Democracy stands much superior to any other form of government in promoting dignity and freedom of the individual."
• "The passion for respect and freedom are the basis of democracy."
• "Democracies throughout the world have recognised this, at least in principle."
• "Long struggles by women have created some sensitivity today that respect to and equal treatment of women are necessary ingredients of a democratic society."
• "Democracy in India has strengthened the claims of the disadvantaged and discriminated castes for equal status and equal opportunity."
• "The fact that people are complaining is itself a testimony to the success of democracy: it shows that people have developed awareness and the ability to expect and to look critically at power holders and the high and the mighty."
• "A public expression of dissatisfaction with democracy shows the success of the democratic project: it transforms people from the status of a subject into that of a citizen."
• "Most individuals today believe that their vote makes a difference to the way the government is run and to their own self-interest."

Q10. I am anxious about my board exams. But democracy has so many exams. And millions of examiners!

Answer:

This humorous comment compares the continuous scrutiny and evaluation that democracy undergoes to the board exams that students face. In a democracy, the government is constantly examined by the people—through elections, public debate, media scrutiny, civil society activism and public opinion. The 'millions of examiners' are the citizens who evaluate the performance of the government and hold it accountable. Unlike a board exam that happens once, democracy's exams never get over. As democracy passes one test, it produces another test. This is what makes democracy distinctive—it is a system that is always being evaluated and improved by its citizens.

Exercises

Q1. How does democracy produce an accountable, responsive and legitimate government?

Answer:

Democracy produces an accountable, responsive and legitimate government in the following ways:

• Accountable government: In a democracy, people have the right to choose their rulers and control them. Citizens can participate in decision-making that affects them. The government is accountable to the citizens through regular, free and fair elections. If the government does not perform well, people can vote it out of power.
• Responsive government: Democracy ensures that decision-making is based on norms and procedures. Citizens have the right and the means to examine the process of decision-making, which is known as transparency. The government has to be attentive to the needs and demands of the people. Democratic governments develop mechanisms for citizens to hold the government accountable and to participate in decision-making.
• Legitimate government: Democratic government is people's own government. It may be slow, less efficient, not always very responsive or clean, but it is legitimate because it is elected by the people. There is overwhelming support for the idea of democracy all over the world, and people wish to be ruled by representatives elected by them. Democracy's ability to generate its own support is itself an outcome that cannot be ignored.

Q2. What are the conditions under which democracies accommodate social diversities?

Answer:

Democracies accommodate social diversities under the following conditions:

• Democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion: The majority always needs to work with the minority so that governments function to represent the general view. Majority and minority opinions are not permanent.
• Rule by majority does not become rule by majority community: Rule by majority means that in case of every decision or in case of every election, different persons and groups may and can form a majority. Democracy remains democracy only as long as every citizen has a chance of being in majority at some point of time.
• No one is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth: If someone is barred from being in majority on the basis of birth—religion, race or linguistic group—then democratic rule ceases to be accommodative for that person or group.
• Respect for differences: Democracies develop procedures to conduct competition, which reduces the possibility of tensions becoming explosive or violent.
• Mechanisms to negotiate differences: Democracies evolve mechanisms to negotiate differences and accommodate diverse demands.

Q3. Give arguments to support or oppose the following assertions:

• Industrialised countries can afford democracy but the poor need dictatorship to become rich.
• Democracy can't reduce inequality of incomes between different citizens.
• Government in poor countries should spend less on poverty reduction, health, education and spend more on industries and infrastructure.
• In democracy all citizens have one vote, which means that there is absence of any domination and conflict.

Answer:

1. Industrialised countries can afford democracy but the poor need dictatorship to become rich.

Oppose: This assertion is not supported by evidence. The table on rates of economic growth (1950–2000) shows that poor countries under dictatorship had a growth rate of 4.34 per cent, while poor countries under democracy had a growth rate of 4.28 per cent—virtually no difference. Democracy is not a hindrance to economic development. Moreover, democracy has other positive outcomes such as accountability, dignity and freedom. Examples like India, which has lifted millions out of poverty through democratic means, show that democracy and development can go together.

2. Democracy can't reduce inequality of incomes between different citizens.

Support: Evidence shows that democracies have not been very successful in reducing economic inequalities. In countries like South Africa and Brazil, the top 20 per cent take away more than 60 per cent of national income, leaving less than 3 per cent for the bottom 20 per cent. In India too, economic inequality has been growing. However, oppose: Democracies like Denmark and Hungary have been more successful in reducing inequality, with the top 20 per cent taking away only about 34 per cent of national income and the bottom 20 per cent getting about 10 per cent. So, democracy can reduce inequality if there is political will and appropriate policies.

3. Government in poor countries should spend less on poverty reduction, health, education and spend more on industries and infrastructure.

Oppose: This assertion is not correct. Spending on poverty reduction, health and education is essential for human development and for building the capabilities of the poor. Without healthy and educated citizens, industries and infrastructure cannot be productive. Moreover, spending on health and education is an investment in human capital, which is crucial for long-term economic growth. Poor countries should instead focus on balanced development, with spending on both social sectors and infrastructure, and ensure that the benefits of growth reach the poor.

4. In democracy all citizens have one vote, which means that there is absence of any domination and conflict.

Oppose: While it is true that in a democracy all citizens have one vote and political equality is a fundamental principle, this does not mean that there is an absence of domination and conflict. Economic and social inequalities persist, and the rich and powerful may have greater influence on politics. Conflicts among different social groups—based on caste, religion, language, region—continue to exist. Democracy provides a peaceful mechanism to negotiate these conflicts, but it does not eliminate them. In fact, the presence of conflict and competition is a feature of democracy, and democracy's strength lies in its ability to manage them peacefully.

Q4. Identify the challenges to democracy in the following descriptions. Also suggest policy/institutional mechanism to deepen democracy in the given situations:

• Following a High Court directive, a temple in Orissa that had separate entry doors for dalits and non-dalits allowed entry for all from the same door.
• A large number of farmers are committing suicide in different states of India.
• Following an allegation of killing of three civilians in Gandwara in a fake encounter by Jammu and Kashmir police, an enquiry has been ordered.

Answer:

1. Temple in Orissa with separate entry doors for dalits and non-dalits:

• Challenge: Caste-based discrimination and untouchability, which violate the constitutional principle of equality and dignity.
• Policy/institutional mechanism: Strict enforcement of laws prohibiting untouchability and caste discrimination; awareness campaigns to change social attitudes; strengthening of the judiciary and human rights commissions to take action against discrimination; promotion of inter-caste dialogue and social reform movements.

2. Large number of farmers committing suicide:

• Challenge: Agrarian distress, economic inequality, lack of social security and inadequate government support to farmers.
• Policy/institutional mechanism: Increased public investment in agriculture; debt relief and crop insurance; minimum support prices; irrigation and infrastructure development; rural employment guarantee schemes; mental health support and counselling for farmers; strengthening of farmer cooperatives and producer organisations.

3. Fake encounter by Jammu and Kashmir police:

• Challenge: Abuse of power by security forces, violation of human rights, lack of accountability and transparency in governance.
• Policy/institutional mechanism: Independent inquiries into allegations of human rights violations; strengthening of human rights commissions and ombudsman institutions; training of security forces in human rights and rule of law; establishment of a robust system of accountability for security personnel; ensuring speedy justice for victims and their families.

Q5. In the context of democracies, which of the following ideas is correct– democracies have successfully eliminated: A. conflicts among people B. economic inequalities among people C. differences of opinion about how marginalised sections are to be treated D. the idea of political inequality

Answer:

The correct answer is D. the idea of political inequality.

Democracies have successfully eliminated the idea of political inequality by establishing the principle of one person, one vote, and equal political rights for all citizens. However, democracies have not fully eliminated conflicts among people (A), economic inequalities among people (B), or differences of opinion about how marginalised sections are to be treated (C). These continue to exist, though democracy provides peaceful mechanisms to address them.

Q6. In the context of assessing democracy, which among the following is the odd one out. Democracies need to ensure: A. free and fair elections B. dignity of the individual C. majority rule D. equal treatment before law

Answer:

The odd one out is C. majority rule.

While majority rule is a feature of democracy, it is not an outcome that democracies need to ensure in the same way as free and fair elections (A), dignity of the individual (B), and equal treatment before law (D). Democracy is not simply rule by majority opinion; the majority always needs to work with the minority. Moreover, rule by majority should not become rule by majority community in terms of religion, race or linguistic group. The other three are fundamental requirements for a healthy democracy.

Q7. Studies on political and social inequalities in democracy show that: A. democracy and development go together. B. inequalities exist in democracies. C. inequalities do not exist under dictatorship. D. dictatorship is better than democracy.

Answer:

The correct answer is B. inequalities exist in democracies.

Studies show that economic and social inequalities persist in democracies. Democracies have not been very successful in reducing economic inequalities, and in some democratic countries, inequality is very high. Option A is not always true as democracy does not guarantee faster development. Option C is incorrect as inequalities exist under dictatorships as well. Option D is incorrect as democracy has many positive outcomes that make it better than dictatorship, despite the existence of inequalities.

Q8. Read the passage below: Nannu is a daily wage earner. He lives in Welcome Mazdoor Colony, a slum habitation in East Delhi. He lost his ration card and applied for a duplicate one in January 2004. He made several rounds to the local Food and Civil Supplies office for the next three months. But the clerks and officials would not even look at him, leave alone do his job or bother to tell him the status of his application. Ultimately, he filed an application under the Right to Information Act asking for the daily progress made on his application, names of the officials, who were supposed to act on his application and what action would be taken against these officials for their inaction. Within a week of filing application under the Right to Information Act, he was visited by an inspector from the Food Department, who informed him that the card had been made and he could collect it from the office. When Nannu went to collect his card next day, he was given a very warm treatment by the Food and Supply Officer (FSO), who is the head of a Circle. The FSO offered him tea and requested him to withdraw his application under the Right to Information, since his work had already been done. What does Nannu's example show? What impact did Nannu's action have on officials? Ask your parents their experiences when they approach government officials to attend to their problems.

Answer:

What does Nannu's example show?

Nannu's example shows the power of the Right to Information (RTI) Act in making government officials accountable and responsive. It demonstrates that ordinary citizens can use democratic tools to demand transparency and hold officials accountable for their inaction. It also shows that without such pressure, government officials may neglect their duties and treat ordinary citizens poorly.

What impact did Nannu's action have on officials?

Nannu's action had a significant impact on the officials:

• Within a week of filing the RTI application, an inspector visited him and informed him that his card was ready.
• When Nannu went to collect the card, the Food and Supply Officer (FSO) gave him a very warm treatment and offered him tea.
• The FSO requested Nannu to withdraw his RTI application, as his work had been done.

This shows that the officials became alert and responsive once they realized that their inaction was being monitored and could be questioned. The RTI application created pressure on them to act and to avoid facing consequences for their negligence.

Ask your parents their experiences when they approach government officials to attend to their problems.

This is a personal response question. Students should ask their parents or guardians about their experiences when they approach government offices for various services such as ration cards, voter ID cards, land records, certificates, pensions, etc. They may find that:

• Some officials are helpful and efficient.
• Many officials are indifferent, corrupt or require repeated visits.
• The use of RTI or other accountability mechanisms often speeds up the work.
• The experience varies depending on the office, the official and the nature of the work.

Students should discuss these experiences and reflect on how democracy can be deepened by making government officials more accountable and responsive.