When the Congress dared team Anna to fight elections, i laughed. Because the Congress knows one thing - no one has the necessary money power to buy voters like they do. Asking a new person (not moneyed) to fight elections is like forcing a boxer to play sumo wrestling.
And that brings one to something that is not mentioned in our vibrant democracy - the corrupt voter. we talk about corrupt politicians, corrupt babus, corrupt army people, but never the corrupt voter. Because they are "poor people" . Somehow, in my mind, being poor does not mean they can sell democracy for a blanket and 150 rs. I cannot think of that as not being a crime.
When we dont vote, or vote for money, we are hitting at the very core of our democracy. Like termites, we gnaw into the very foundation of our State - democracy. Why is that not a crime?
Should people be prosecuted for voting for money? Yes. As much as the babus and the netas should be prosecuted for accepting bribe.
I wonder why the Corrupt voter is not even mentioned, much less publicly censored. THat is where the entire vicious cycle starts. If the voters dont vote for money, they will start looking for real issues and candidates will be forced to work to get votes. If we choose good candidates, and if candidates dont have to spend money on campaigning, their need to be corrupt and moneyed will vanish. Once the netas dont need to be moneyed to be elected, we will be able to contain corruption in the bureaucracy through tight governance. The theory may be oversimplified, but its still valid.
The end of the corrupt voter will mean the end of the corrupt politician. The aware voter chooses the working candidate. About time we shamed the corrupt voter as much as we hate the corrupt politician and the corrupt babu.
And that brings one to something that is not mentioned in our vibrant democracy - the corrupt voter. we talk about corrupt politicians, corrupt babus, corrupt army people, but never the corrupt voter. Because they are "poor people" . Somehow, in my mind, being poor does not mean they can sell democracy for a blanket and 150 rs. I cannot think of that as not being a crime.
When we dont vote, or vote for money, we are hitting at the very core of our democracy. Like termites, we gnaw into the very foundation of our State - democracy. Why is that not a crime?
Should people be prosecuted for voting for money? Yes. As much as the babus and the netas should be prosecuted for accepting bribe.
I wonder why the Corrupt voter is not even mentioned, much less publicly censored. THat is where the entire vicious cycle starts. If the voters dont vote for money, they will start looking for real issues and candidates will be forced to work to get votes. If we choose good candidates, and if candidates dont have to spend money on campaigning, their need to be corrupt and moneyed will vanish. Once the netas dont need to be moneyed to be elected, we will be able to contain corruption in the bureaucracy through tight governance. The theory may be oversimplified, but its still valid.
The end of the corrupt voter will mean the end of the corrupt politician. The aware voter chooses the working candidate. About time we shamed the corrupt voter as much as we hate the corrupt politician and the corrupt babu.
0 comments:
Post a Comment