Democracy is possibly the most popular word in the world today. It is so popular that North Korea has its official name as Democratic Republic of North Korea. Based on my 31 years of residency in various countries I have not yet understood why democracy is failing despite being so popular.
I experienced absolute monarchy in my country of birth until it changed to constitutional monarchy after 240 years, then became what is now Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal with the most corrupted form of communism in power for the past 35 years.
I also lived in other autocratic countries such as Malawi, Vietnam, Maldives, Iraqi Autonomous Region of Kurdistan, Ghana, Yemen and Myanmar. I experienced the transition from autocracy to democracy in Ghana when Captain J.J. Rolling handed power to democratically elected President Kufour in 2001. And there was a short -lived transition to democracy in Myanmar when military General Thein Sein transferred power to Aung San Suky in 2012. In all these countries I heard enough about democracy in the speeches by local leaders and people alike. While in Ghana someone once told me that 'in democracy you can say what you please but you do not have to listen to others unless you want to'. Sounds about right!
Whichever way democracy is defined there are successes and failures everywhere. According to EIU, barring five countries in the world (Iceland, Norway, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland) none of the countries are fully democratic and in fact more than 60 countries are autocratic despite the Head of State and legislatures are elected by the general public (Democracy Index of Economics Intelligence Unit). Candidates, once elected are unable to practice democratic governance but there are sound bites of democracy in speeches of all politicians 24/7. Democracy is a word all politicians use but very few seem to actually mean it.
In democratic governance power resides in the people which they exercise through general election and expects the government to be accountable and transparent in all their decisions where the rule of law is fully honoured while maintaining separation of power to avoid self-interest. This is the textbook version of democracy but the practical application of this principle is miles away. A divine truth we must not forget is that whether it is democracy or not, every government is expected to deliver a secure, peaceful, prosperous economy with equal opportunity for all, otherwise they have no business in being in governance.
Root of failure
The process of election itself appears corrupted with false promises with money playing a hidden (or not so hidden) role, thus beginning the weakening or the failure of democracy from the very start while choosing the elected representatives. The first casualty of such an elected government is usually bending the rule of law favouring an agenda fixed by the rich and the powerful. In countries with no term limit, such elected leaders become autocratic democrats. Even if there are term limits the process continues with the same result in every election cycle.
Nemesis of democracy
The single party system of Socialist Republic of Vietnam did exactly which any democratic country prefaced to do - equal application of rule of law and citizen oriented social policies, egalitarian market-based economy, trade liberalisation, encouraged private enterprises, human capital development, decentralised administrative authority, infrastructure development, alleviation of poverty, strict corruption control and so on (Vietnam lifted capital punishment for corruption on 1 July 2025). With a long-term focus on national development Vietnam achieved political stability. The critiques of Vietnam will jump immediately saying that Vietnamese people have no media freedom. Yes, there are no private media in Vietnam; there is tight censorship on the internet and social media.
Whichever way democracy is defined there are successes and failures everywhere. According to EIU, barring five countries in the world (Iceland, Norway, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland) none of the countries are fully democratic and in fact more than 60 countries are autocratic despite the Head of State and legislatures are elected by the general public (Democracy Index of Economics Intelligence Unit). Candidates, once elected are unable to practice democratic governance but there are sound bites of democracy in speeches of all politicians 24/7. Democracy is a word all politicians use but very few seem to actually mean it.
In democratic governance power resides in the people which they exercise through general election and expects the government to be accountable and transparent in all their decisions where the rule of law is fully honoured while maintaining separation of power to avoid self-interest. This is the textbook version of democracy but the practical application of this principle is miles away. A divine truth we must not forget is that whether it is democracy or not, every government is expected to deliver a secure, peaceful, prosperous economy with equal opportunity for all, otherwise they have no business in being in governance.
Root of failure
The process of election itself appears corrupted with false promises with money playing a hidden (or not so hidden) role, thus beginning the weakening or the failure of democracy from the very start while choosing the elected representatives. The first casualty of such an elected government is usually bending the rule of law favouring an agenda fixed by the rich and the powerful. In countries with no term limit, such elected leaders become autocratic democrats. Even if there are term limits the process continues with the same result in every election cycle.
Nemesis of democracy
The single party system of Socialist Republic of Vietnam did exactly which any democratic country prefaced to do - equal application of rule of law and citizen oriented social policies, egalitarian market-based economy, trade liberalisation, encouraged private enterprises, human capital development, decentralised administrative authority, infrastructure development, alleviation of poverty, strict corruption control and so on (Vietnam lifted capital punishment for corruption on 1 July 2025). With a long-term focus on national development Vietnam achieved political stability. The critiques of Vietnam will jump immediately saying that Vietnamese people have no media freedom. Yes, there are no private media in Vietnam; there is tight censorship on the internet and social media.
We are witnessing how the public is being held hostage by the media with false news, views, messages, addictive video clips, etc. in the name of media freedom in democratic countries. Vietnam may have spared the public from this media mayhem. The situation of democracy and the media is the same in People's Republic China. By the way, while national policies are decided by the politburo, at the administrative level both these countries are run by technocrats not by hardcore communists. The international media is full of news about lack of democracy in China and lack of freedom and atrocities committed against Uighur Muslims in China. Why is there so much love for Chinese Muslim while perpetuating atrocities among Muslims in the Middle East? Similarly, countries support independence of Taiwan from China but mute on the independence of Catalans and Basques from Spain, Scottish and Northern Irland from the United Kingdom, etc. These are the examples of how democracy and freedom is promoted and failed worldwide with different sets of criteria for different countries.
Self-interest in democracy
The biggest problem is the self-interest of the people - elected and the electorates - in influencing national policy for the benefit of the few. It causes the blurring of the separation of power between different branches of the government to achieve their self-interest. Such political corruption undermines and erodes public trust in the government as a whole, not just on selected national institutions. Private sector also controls the media and keeps the general public away from reality. Unbiased application of rule of law is possibly the most important criteria in building bonds between the government and the public but the legal system can be bought or rented with total disregard to the rule of law.
The World Bank and International Monetary Fund have successfully justified the free market economy with deregulation and spread of privatisation within the confines of democratic governance. Is it a coincidence that deregulation of the economy and spread of privatisation also took hold in parallel with the spread of democratic system of governance since the 1990s?
Self-interest in democracy
The biggest problem is the self-interest of the people - elected and the electorates - in influencing national policy for the benefit of the few. It causes the blurring of the separation of power between different branches of the government to achieve their self-interest. Such political corruption undermines and erodes public trust in the government as a whole, not just on selected national institutions. Private sector also controls the media and keeps the general public away from reality. Unbiased application of rule of law is possibly the most important criteria in building bonds between the government and the public but the legal system can be bought or rented with total disregard to the rule of law.
The World Bank and International Monetary Fund have successfully justified the free market economy with deregulation and spread of privatisation within the confines of democratic governance. Is it a coincidence that deregulation of the economy and spread of privatisation also took hold in parallel with the spread of democratic system of governance since the 1990s?
The year 1990 also marks the rise of economic inequality on a linear scale. It is not difficult for people to conclude that the idea of deregulation and privatisation, the theme of which is simply profit, not distribution, is not helping people, democracy or not. It is not performing like the academics envisioned. The deregulation and privatisation gave ideal opportunities to the rich and the powerful. Their 'creative' ideas such as taking control of media to promote narratives based on the views of the elected government wins the loyalty of the elected official while needs of the general public are parked in the backburners. The biggest problem facing today in almost all countries is economic hardships arising not because of democracy but how democracy is practiced. Of course, the top tier of the society such as the private sectors are exempted from the prevailing economic disenfranchise.
Democracy has become a defenceless system monopolised and manipulated by opportunists with the market economy as its centre stage with full support of the populists and oligarchs devoid of any emotions. According to Freedom House, there has been a sharp decline in free & fair election, freedom of press, the rule of law, political rights and civil liberties consecutively in 113 countries since 2006. Yet, all these countries claim to be democratic.
Vietnam is part of the global community sharing all global economic systems but it did not experience this severity of market malfunction and economic disenfranchisement of people. The reason is because the government is able to enforce strict national policies governing the private sector as opposed to the private sector taking advantage of the government. This is in no way promoting communism; the idea is simply to point out where the governments are failing. How the governments must protect from the predatory habits of the private sector is the big question facing all governments worldwide.
Read more articles by Ramesh here.
Labels: Ramesh
Democracy has become a defenceless system monopolised and manipulated by opportunists with the market economy as its centre stage with full support of the populists and oligarchs devoid of any emotions. According to Freedom House, there has been a sharp decline in free & fair election, freedom of press, the rule of law, political rights and civil liberties consecutively in 113 countries since 2006. Yet, all these countries claim to be democratic.
Vietnam is part of the global community sharing all global economic systems but it did not experience this severity of market malfunction and economic disenfranchisement of people. The reason is because the government is able to enforce strict national policies governing the private sector as opposed to the private sector taking advantage of the government. This is in no way promoting communism; the idea is simply to point out where the governments are failing. How the governments must protect from the predatory habits of the private sector is the big question facing all governments worldwide.
Read more articles by Ramesh here.
Labels: Ramesh
Comments
Post a Comment
If you are a member of XUNICEF, you can comment directly on a post. Or, send your comments to us at xunicef.news.views@gmail.com and we will publish them for you.