A very 'in' thing now a day is to attack Anna movement by saying that they are dictating terms to parliament and thereby undermining constitutional institutions, this line of defense is very famous particularly among governing elite, the latest condemnation of this kind is from the president Pranab mukherji himself.
This line of thinking can be best expressed by B R Ambedkar's constitution assembly speech quoted below,
This is misconceived, there is an assumption here that constitutional democracy would be representative or efficient, that it would truly represent the aspiration of the masses. As a matter of fact it doesn't, no person would consciously want corruption,hunger,malnutrition, he doesnt choose his leader in order to perpetuate misery. No democracy in the world can be representative enough to be complacent about, government establishment itself creates a class structure with its own survival instinct and self-interests which are many a time in sharp conflict with interests of people it represents. This is particularly so in our case, our governments (be it any) can be easily formed even if they garner 20-30% of available votes, this is hardly a case for representative democracy. We have a constitutional democracy not always representative. So when a governments are irresponsible,rigid, vacillating pressure groups,civil society,social activists play an important role in filling up the lacunae in representation.
Quoting from american declaration of independence where the framers of the declaration adequately realized the importance of revolution..
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
This line of thinking can be best expressed by B R Ambedkar's constitution assembly speech quoted below,
"If we wish to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact, what must we do? The first thing in my judgement we must do is to hold fast to constitutional methods of achieving our social and economic objectives. It means we must abandon the bloody methods of revolution. It means that we must abandon the method of civil disobedience, non-cooperation and satyagraha. When there was no way left for constitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives, there was a great deal of justification for unconstitutional methods. But where constitutional methods are open, there can be no justification for these unconstitutional methods. These methods are nothing but the Grammar of Anarchy and the sooner they are abandoned, the better for us."
This is misconceived, there is an assumption here that constitutional democracy would be representative or efficient, that it would truly represent the aspiration of the masses. As a matter of fact it doesn't, no person would consciously want corruption,hunger,malnutrition, he doesnt choose his leader in order to perpetuate misery. No democracy in the world can be representative enough to be complacent about, government establishment itself creates a class structure with its own survival instinct and self-interests which are many a time in sharp conflict with interests of people it represents. This is particularly so in our case, our governments (be it any) can be easily formed even if they garner 20-30% of available votes, this is hardly a case for representative democracy. We have a constitutional democracy not always representative. So when a governments are irresponsible,rigid, vacillating pressure groups,civil society,social activists play an important role in filling up the lacunae in representation.
Quoting from american declaration of independence where the framers of the declaration adequately realized the importance of revolution..
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
