For many years, Indians have suffered under the flawed system of parliamentary democracy in our country. We were plundered by the British, who took our jewels and riches, and now we are being plundered by dynastic politicians. The poor of India are begging for food, pleading for money, and the politicians who rule them are snatching that from their hands.
India has the second largest population with a more successful economic system than communism. It has large amounts of resources and inherent wealth. So I ask, why hasn’t India surpassed the west in terms of economic growth, living conditions, political stability? My answer to this is quite simple: democracy.
Our parliamentary system is the number one reason hindering our growth. It is not diversity, nor is it traditionalism, as the leftists claim. Now the question is: how does democracy limit India as a nation?
First and foremost, democracy enables corruption. With an autocratic system, there would be, statistically, a far less chance of the leadership being corrupt. The riches of the MLAs and MPs would go back to the people, and through our economic system, to our economy. From our economy this would transfer to the government, and further to our infrastructure and social programs.
Second, democracy limits decision-making. The institutionalized partisanship of a parliament creates an environment where decisions are made based on fronts, coalitions, and power politics. With an autocratic system, there would be a single, efficient, head who could make swift decisions to benefit India.
Furthermore, in a democracy only moderate laws can be put into effect. For example, an extremely punitive law against corruption would be struck down officially as being too extreme in a democracy (then again, the politicians would strike it down to protect their black money). However, in an autocracy, laws that make rapid change can be enacted.
Third, democracy is complex and is more susceptible to differences on religion, state, and party lines. Good leaders are never elected into power (and if they are, they are never able to fully carry out their dream) because another leader is elected because of his caste or religion. Let it be clear: I am not for the dissolving of the caste system. But, I take offence when a Member of Parliament is elected to make national decisions affecting 1.3 billion people based on the God they worship.
There are also more benefits, more than can be envisioned by myself or can be encompassed in this short article. An autocratic system is achievable, the masses simply need to look beyond their town or village and to our national borders. They need to support a leader who will balance the industry of the future and our cherished agriculture of the past. They need to support a leader who will back our brave defenders on our borders against Chinese infiltration. They need to support a leader who can turn India into a modern state by retaining our values, while pushing back western influence and neo-imperialism. And most of all, they need to support a leader who will unify India into a great state.