The phonomenon of the MNS Shivsena vote split is very hot one in the discussions. Media has been madly pursuing this point to the level I find it improper. There is one more friend of mine who says that Raj has to come back to Shivsena to make the things better for all.
That is the power of system that restricts the democracy.
To explain my point let me give you a similar point of what one needs to spell Prashant as. There are people who think it should be spelled as 'Prashant' and some think it should be 'Prashanth'. Is there any one single right way? No. I think it can be spelled as प्रशांत which is the only exact representation in many languages.
Now think of this question. Whether there should be one standard FORCED? If you have any other opinion, should you still fall pray to the system ?
There can be different degrees of compromise, one can agree to. Similarly there can be different level of importance one can attach to any concern. When there are differences, the system that is used to reach a consensus is important.
Do we have a system that is capable of doing a fair job?
There was time, when the system was new and when it was designed and implemented, it was as per the needs of that time. Now it is time, we catch up and make the system evolved to meet the needs of the changing times.
Here, I am not going to comment whether any political party is right or not. But I want to explain why it is extremely important to discuss the point that the system needs to change. There is no one looking into such issues, and it's only us the people of India need to call it out and execute the programme. Just following the old systems without questioning would mean no development.
MNS has a stand that they want to have their own political party and run the governments as per their policies. The Shivsena has the problem that due to this new party, they are on the recieving end of the initial blows of this change. Shivsena has also accused that vote to MNS means vote to their main competitors, as the split in the votes would cause Shivsena to lose their strength.
Is it fair for a party to say that they must vote for someone, because otherwise it will benefit their competitor?
Doesn't this look like blackmailing of the individual voters? What would the meaning left to the word democracy then?
By democracy, I would expect more power to the people, having a powerful say of the people in the politics and the representatives of people.
The very first point I can see is that the current system of voting does not give enough power to people.
What do I have as a voter? Just one vote. There are many people who are contesting the elections. I need to analyze them and then just make one verdict that says ok, I am fine having this person as the representative of my constituency.
I have no power over what the elected persons do after the election. I have no mechanism to understand who is financing the election expenses, what the political parties have to do with the candidates, or on which points what the candidate is saying or going to do.
After we understand this, and get this changed, it will really enable good people to participate and phenomenon of misuse of the system by the bad people will gradually cease as the confidence of people gain confidence in the system.
