Skip to content

The Unbearable Heaviness of Being

My quest for the eternal lightness

When William Jefferson Clinton proclaimed in his State of the Union speech that “ultimately, the best strategy to ensure our security and to build a durable peace is to support the advance of democracy elsewhere. Democracies don’t attack each other, they make better trading partners and partners in diplomacy“,  he saw democracy as a political ideal, which is seen to have an inherent goodness. The general consensus seems to be that; and the democratizations observed during the 20th century seem to justify that democracy itself is the political end which conjures freedom, prosperity and peace. 

A case of confusing cause and effect. That presumably, a government, largely represented through majority voices (whether or not a clear majority) or popular votes is essentially a state of the people for the people -inevitably effecting greater freedom and peace. Unsurprisingly then, when a minister insistently maintains that democracy is still the rule of the day, he seems to mean, ‘look, look at us, we are a free country, we allow people to vote – how can we not be democratic? We exercise democracy, that’s why people are happy, and we are not just about to allow you or anyone, at any cost, to portray it otherwise.

Suppose a revaluation of all values – rather, to put before the cart, the ox, that the cause, is an endless commitment to prevent state coercion of the individual; a tireless journey to a greater degree of equality – of individual political value and perhaps, to seeing the dissenting person in fraternity, that in a more fragmented nature of society, the minor voices are part of us and not to be silenced by the majority voices. That this causes democracy, and not the other way round!


%d bloggers like this: