@ Prabhat, I think education is must as it increases sense of accomplishment, helps better and thoughtful communication, enhances critical thinking skills and can be identified the skills of others as well as education helps for greater sense of discipline.But money is not always needed to represent the public better.

@Prabhat Ranjan, Good question. I do not think that education is sufficient for a population to establish Democracy . “select efficient representatives » is a very difficult question. You can buy votes for 100 dollars or even less. If you are hungry you need to eat. If you do not have a job you need to survive. If are ill you need to hope. So the system is using all these parameters to impose the “efficient representatives” who are just employees not of Democracy but of Oligarchy.

So, the question is very concrete. We need to establish a punishment system for any representative plus the Oligarchy. We need to get an independent justice section and we need to impose punishments for the representatives. Example, the “Ostracism (Greek: ὀστρακισμός, ostrakismos) was a procedure under the Athenian democracy in which any citizen could be expelled from the city-state of Athens for ten years.”

Ethics and Integrity will be the major factors for the selection of a representative. Let’s create an island where the majority of the corrupted representatives’ will move. Call it the “destress Island”......

Any seemingly “good” representative of public interests, as soon as he is exposed by the authorities, can “forget” about public interests and start pursuing his own selfish political goals. It all depends on a particular person, his intellect and moral qualities. Society needs Mother Teresa and Mohatma Gandhi. But alas, our nature is not generous with the appearance of such people. So we will continue to have to deal not with politicians, but with schemers. By the way, this is a direct consequence of democracy under conditions of the dominance of the egoistic rather than altruistic genotype.

Yes ,I think the public representative should be educated enough so that he/she can properly represent the public interest and atleast should be able to understand the public issues with deep understanding and accordingly come up with the solutions of the problems .

Barbara Sawicka : I think democracy should balance capital rule. It may also decrease corruptions and earning enormous money disqualify for further candidature of such people. Politics is considered as power game at the place of service to the society.

I appreciate your answer.

Yes, it is a good idea. They take sensible decisions.

I am speaking with respect to Indian context.

For e.g. let us take Indian freedom fighters Gandhi, Nehru, Patel etc. are either foreign-returned most of them are barristers or well educated that might be the reason struggle for independence gone well planned (except one or two unexpected incidences). If we consider the PMs Indira, Rajiv (though not have degrees foreign-returned), Morarji, Charan Singh, VP Singh, PV Narasimha Rao (able to speak 17 languages), Vajpayee, Manmohan (Cambridge degree holder) are educated.

Do you think that there should be minimum educational qualifications and/or wealth limits to represent the public better? I think that minimum educational qualifications and/or wealth limits increase the possibilities of better public representation. Of course, the result is not guaranteed.

Educational qualifications do not lead to good moral behavior and values. It is not the qualification in education we acquire that lead us to good moral behavior but religious and social values in the education system. Education has been hijacked by paper qualifications and wealth. The moral and social values are neglected.

Chung Tin Fah : I also agree with your observations. However, very sensitive issues like issues of environmental degradation are always ignored to show more public works. Environmental studies are now in primary classes, but there is no implementation of knowledge of environmental studies. A leader should be aware about issues of a society, nation and the environment so that he/she may take appropriate decisions. Thank you for answer.

No

Joan Nyika : Kindly illustrate the reasons behind 'no' so that we could know properly about merits of present system without any provisions on education and wealth are more than that with such provisions.

Thank you Vassilis Doucas and J. C. Tarafdar for your remarks. I agree with Vassilis Doucas that only education is not sufficient for a good representation. Present democracy is a from of oligarchy due to blockage of entry of common man without strong wealth background. Wealth is primary for representation and the representation helps in stability and growth of wealth of an individual. You have advised for imposing punishments to the representatives as per requirements which is difficult of a society. Since role of common people ends with casting of votes. Change in mindset of common people and choosing appropriate representative along with provision of punishments to delinquents - is need of democratic culture at present.

Requisites to elect and/or select citizens´ representatives is a matter of an effective operative framework. Above all, there is the need to analyse the role or function to be accomplished. If, as it is in the most crucial cases, is a representative to manage public funds, there is a strong need to rethink the existing rules.

In the basis of not limiting civil rights for everyone, elected representatives are not subjected to any condition, apart from age and a legal/judiciary reason. However, as corruption has been recurrently set and is in an increasing trend around the world, among many changes to be made are:

- Personal experiences registered by trusted work reports and perceptions of independent citizens living in the close place of residence and work, in order to measure agreed, preset standards of human, moral and public ethic values.

- Level of experience and knowledge required for an adequate performance in the role/functions

- Quality of demonstrated attitudes when facing similar situations to those to be encountered in the role/functions (degree of emotional intelligence, and others)

- An agreed signed acceptation of being in close citizen/public control and transparency of his/her duties (apart from regular monitoring and evaluation), to take immediate actions

These are at least some basic prevention rules to secure a due public interest representation.

Angel Madrid : Thank you for your valuable comments. I agree with you that wealth should not be restrictive and one should not be penalized for its wealth. However, it is observable that people without strong economic backgrounds can't win an election in some countries. There are restrictions during expenditures in elections etc, however money gives large chances to win. If present restrictions do not give appropriate results, further thinking is essential. Politics needs people with insights to take appropriate decisions on societal and environmental issues. Technology is not enough; implementation of policies tended to sustainable growth is much essential.

Human society is based on inequality which is against natural rule of equality and unity. Let leaders of the society may be able to see rich and poor both, voiced and unvoiced both.

However I know that it is not possible. People in power does not want leave powers.

I admit that final responsibility rests on the people and each individual should have knowledge of co-existence of all components of a society and the nature also.

I thank Vladimir Valentinovich Egorov , Sonika Kumari , Jetty Ramadevi , Luis Fernando Gallegos-Rodríguez , Joan Nyika for their contributions. Chung Tin Fah has raised good questions on validity of education qualifications.

Aristidis Matsoukis : I agree with you "Of course, the result is not guaranteed."

It depends from the character of individuals really, because high educational qualifications don't ensure a job to be conducted properly although it is supposed that someone who fits the criteria to know what they're doing, but this is not the case always. I don't believe maximum wealth could improve the efficiency of public representatives, if public representatives remain ignorant to public needs and deny that there is something wrong with the way things are evaluating. Because in the end money is just money, people control it, not vice versa. So, perhaps ethical values and code of conduct must be put more into focus rather than a rich educational background as a criteria, since rarely someone has justified in daily life, their educational success or their titles in high rank positions. While wealth is not such an important factor, in my point of view.

Ardita Maçastena : You may be true in your approach that money can't control person. However, in present form of democracy, some limited people are being stronger and stronger. Machines roar and voice of common people is meaningless. Too mechanization may result into increased pollution and destroy humanity and biosphere also.

@Prabhat Ranjan Yes because the power of people is not functioning how it should. But let it be a reminder that no one is fully powerful, if x person is growing stronger and stronger, it is because he/she has great allies, otherwise he or she alone would have zero importance in decision making processes or wouldn't be given the chance to abuse its power. Now why they have great allies, is it because of their wealth or other factors I won't elaborate it further because many reasons could be seen as factors about why someone wins some sort of prestige, and thanks to who. I agree that it doesn't have to be humans versus machines .... but the digital world has the bright and dark side of using it, just like everything else if it is not managed properly.

Role of governments are increasing in modern era where all types of productions and services are being controlled by it. It is very essential to have a good governance and efficient representatives of people to take decisions for the sake of people. If representatives are engaged in saving economic empire of one's and an other's and disobey the concerns of common people and the environment, talking about democracy will be meaningless. Such a system has no long life, therefore the system should be changed to protect rights of common people and the environment also.

Yes, dear Prabhat Ranjan. You are absolutely right. Unfortunately, common people are expendable for the sake of interests of some incapable and insane rulers. Change is a must as pointed out by you.

I feel, yes there should be a criteria of minimum qualification for representative.

I think yes

Thank you Anmar Aldewachi , Amina Sultan , Aristidis Matsoukis and Ardita Maçastena for your valuable comments on the issue mentioned in this question.

Yes, there should be provision for minimum educational level for political appointments. But it may not be wise to place a limit on maximum wealth. What may rather be suggested is that the rich people running for political positions must show evidence of proportionately high percentage of their wealth they have expended as free service to their communities or nations. Gifted people need not be discouraged.

A very good suggestion by Harold Chike on the limit on wealth for eligibility for representing the people. However, it is possible that people show less wealth.Therefire there should be provisions as following:

1.A person has not any hidden property.

2. Excessive properties that are not shown at the time of nominations for a representation, will be seized by the government.

It is my personal opinion and needs verified by other fellow persons on the RG.

I agree with Ardita Maçastena

first and foremost all employees of our governments should swear to the people and their interests, not to corporations and dead pieces of paper. Morals start with the common people not government, so in this case, education and vetting are key to leaders for the rest of us. We plan to set up an education system that grooms individuals for public office. They will receive a certificate for the basic reason why they are taking educational classes that can be used as a foundation to take offices.

Christopher Jamar Summers : You are right that " Morals start with the common people not government " . High morals are necessary for all public offices. However, it is hard to check morality. That was the reason for the present question. Thank you for your contribution.

when governments corporatized themselves they depart from representing the people as prescribed by the constitutional guarantees that make the contractual considerations to keep the peace. additionally if one seeks the definitions of corporation states: they are in business for profits. Our government is out of whack. Money and power are what they are seeking. If they were certified leaders thru education they would have no excuse and can be prosecuted for functioning other than what the job prescribes

In Bihar, the one of state in India, a chief minister was not able to make its signature properly. He/she guided bureaucrats and other efficient officials for five years. Sometimes people have no options to select than NOTA (not of above candidates) button.

Political parties have great responsibilities. But in many countries, they have no internal democracy.

Educational Qualification - Certainly!

The way of Activism or campaign is about human contribution to make a difference in advancement of society and peoples lives. Education attainment or qualification as the yard stick to measure who to represent simply do not hold up valid. Representation should not be exclusion if educ limit is use to set the ball. Centuries available informations has shows Philantropist advocates comes from all works of life both in UK parliament that you have order and prioritise informations sharing from the authority to benefit massess. Representation in public phere can come not with stipulation of education acclaimed limitation rather inclusive of any with a mind of progressive development, effort invested on human capacity and innovative mind on causes to make significant impact in humanity enriching lives.

My enlighten conscious mind shared views above is clear here. Period.

I think so. Not only education but also experience working in the trenches should be taken into account. The criteria to use is documented evidence that the person can empathize with those in distress and in crisis and be in touch with reality

No

Dear Prabhat,

Minimum education qualification to represent the people is required in a Platonic state. Efficiency is not necessarily related with education and wealth to represent public. Therefore, both the education qualification and wealth are not significant in the modern democratic system. However, the literature suggest that there is a relation between the capitalism and democracy. In this sense, wealth not the education may be important to manage a democratic political system. Finally, 'political socialization' is required to represent public. Thanks for sharing this significant question.

The mere fact that most people fail in functioning in secular system is for lack of knowledge, The current systemic problems of politics within our governments follows the same idea of, placing an idiot (uneducated wo/men) in politics roles, it is the same results as what we are experiencing now, in the world of governments. Our current government has its focus on becoming rich and welding power over others, everyone can agree is not so good for us people. A true government represents the people, In order for them to understand their chosen office position, they most certainly need to be educated of proper conducts to serve the people at large in the correct sense of representations. Each wo/man shall be educated as to match the job itself.Otherwise what's the use of having the government offices to begin with if they do not represent the will and interests of the people.

Kazi Mohammad Mahbobor Rahman : Proper education may enhance efficiency, however (less) wealth is not indicator of efficient representative of people. I had asked to eliminate wealth-loving individuals from the representations of the people since wealth is utilized to secure one's wealth empire. At least, property before and after - electing as a representative should be checked properly. No any individual could convert public money into private money. Kindly elucidate how

"wealth not the education may be important to manage a democratic political system.".

Thank you for your participation in the discussion.

Prabhat Ranjan: 'Political socialization' (not wealth or minimum education qualification) is required to represent public in a democratic system.

Education is for improving lives of others

Education is for improving the lives of others

Despite my previous position on this question, I think that the minimum education qualification is significant for legislative representation in some cases. However, it should not be mandatory.

In order to represent the people in a general sense... to be fair and honest... education is necessary... but it should be designed to inform the public-office-taker...why they are taking that office...hence on behalf of all peoples rights, titles and interests, which are not for selected wealthy and powerful people who have their own agendas for profiteering purposes, using that sacred office in selfish manors and failing to represent the peoples general interests. It should also be a caveat warning to all that occupies a sacred public office that, the people can remove these individuals for tort causes and or reasons without governments red tape (self declard immunities), once discovered they are functioning as a real criminal enterprise in a supposed to be sacred public office representing the peoples rights, titles and interests. the people have to own their freedoms and stop relying on others to do as they please in offices. The governments are based on consent of the moral peoples wishes, not a launch pad to crimes. Until people adjust how they fill these offices. they will continue to have the same problems we all face currently.... a run away government.

Elected officials are not likely to be any better than the electorate putting them in office.

If there were to be an educational requirement anywhere, it would probably do more good to have one for the voters.

Today the push is in the opposite direction. The idea seems to be that the act of "voting" itself is somehow sacred and the more voters we run through polling stations, the better off we all will be.

So, now we have children voting, and huge swaths of people who undoubtedly couldn't name their own elected officials. People who would be considered too incompetent to select the night shift manager of the local grocery store are considered fully capable of selecting the next President of the United States.

But the reality of the situation is that "democracy is the political veneer of a commercial society." And that what goes on in government in far less important than what goes on in our business and private enterprises. So, we can lower the voting age to 14 or 12 or 10 and give the franchise and equal voting rights to geniuses along with the people who may believe the world is flat and sits on the back of a turtle -- and we will still be doing fine,

--as long as these same people have jobs, produce, consume, and the market remains free to invent and make our lives better.

Of course, the educated (or uneducated) elected officials will still want to take credit for all the advances in society.

yes, it improve the work

Stephen Martin Fritz : I agree with you "Elected officials are not likely to be any better than the electorate putting them in office." It is necessary to understand the common interests by all the people in a society. Thank you for your contribution.

Thank you Christopher Jamar Summers , Bestoon Faraj , Gopal Shukla , Srini Vasan , Michelle Esezobor , Emmanuel V Murray and Kazi Mohammad Mahbobor Rahman for your contributions

Hi Dr Prabhat Ranjan . The person should be educated, have reasonable academic qualifications, and have experience in community services. But I am disagree with the wealth . The person should not be rich or has a big wealth to represent the public .

Gabriele Scheler : I agree with you that finally people are responsible for badly qualified representatives who suffer for their inefficient decision. However, we have to start some difference and I think how it can be done from root level. thank you for your contribution.