Many believe that India is a country of multi-national. The Indian heartland which consists of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan etc. are Aryan majority state who follow ottrodox Hinduism. And in democracy votes count. These majority is creating a narrative of victimised majority and for that they want their justice. These mean India is heading towards a Aryan based ethic nationalism paradigm.

Oinam Khumancha nicely put together.. I believe Indian electoral system is democratic. Two simplest definitions for democracy are " government by the people or rule of the majority". However, if this majority belongs to a same ethnic group, the principles of democracy are violated. Which means, we need to redefine the term democracy or we need a better philosophy.

Whms Samarathunga So we have two tasks ahead of us: First we need to redefine the meaning of democracy. Second, we need a better philosophy, but philosophy of what? Philosophy of democracy? This would be covered in thinking about the meaning of democracy. I am confused. Please clarify and explain the two DIFFERENT ideas.

Joseph Tham Thank you for your reply professor. Under the guise of Democracy if only one ethnic group is going to govern a country, and if the minority is again some sizable millions, eventual clashes and more nationalistic movements would be unavoidable, which will unstable a state. So, I believe we need to visit back all the definitions of democracy. It should not only be the majority, but also the representativeness of the votes when it comes to the electoral systems. And, if we fail to expand the definition of democracy, may be we have to have a new philosophy about the power and electoral systems which is not only represented by the majority, but also a representation of all the ethnic groups in the governing party when it come to a country like India.

Whms Samarathunga clearly this rethinking of the definition of democracy is beyond my competency. I look forward to ideas from experts and scholars on how we can expand the definition of democracy. This is a huge and deep theme.

Joseph Tham Thank you very much for your contribution professor. I may be wrong about democracy. But I am also waiting for the expertise opinions about this.

Whms Samarathunga

Democracy is only one of many different paradigms for organizing society. Even within democracy, there are many varieties.

I think we must compare the paradigm of democracy with other possibilities.

In theory, what is immoral (unethical?) about a benevolent and wise central technocrat?

There are many names. Philosopher-King, bureaucrat, central planner, ruler, President, Czar, Prime Minister, Pasha, Amir al-Mu’minin, Amir al-umara, Al-Malik, Shahenshah?

The person would be supported by an educated council (of Guardians?).

The key word here is benevolent.

If that person would do things that you yourself, would have chosen, what is the immorality in that? In other words, the central technocrat is serving you and YOUR interests.

Although I am not a political analyst, I sometime feel that politics is easy a topic for talk, but difficult to practice and shrewdness is the key factor there. Then question comes, for whom the politics is all about? Is it for the politicians themselves as actors or for the public they always bank upon? In countries, where they call theselves democratic appear to play "number games" to temain on the power but they tend do much less good for general public. Whereas as can be seen in China, people find more good things which the so called democratic countries often criticise for being a regime. This then leads to another question as to which political paradigm is better - benevolent regime or democracy which often tend to be chaotic? Perhaps, it is important to strick a balance such the benevolent regimental system would not lead to autocracy, nor democracy lead to absolute chaos! Of course, this might just look naive idealism! Therefore, a long and objective discourse might require. It seems my cotribution to discussion appear more like raising questions than providing solution. I hope asking question is the first step towards solution!

Tek Gurung Nicely explained... I would like to quote Abraham Lincoln (1863) here, "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth". The true meaning of democracy should not be diluted with the number game.