India Is Not A Democracy

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
The article below discusses how village elders ordered "honour killings". In one case, the husband in this case was killed. Even if the couple married feel they have escaped this vigilante justice for eloping, their families they left behind will be killed unless they return.

The police do a feeble effort stopping this and it continues. These village elders seem kind of Taliban-like. You know the people we're fighting in Afghanistan.

Just because India has elections, and it is not a dictatorship, does it become a democracy. We give away this word too cheaply. Dubbed the world's largest democracy, the good name of democracy is abused here. They have representative government, but then so did communist Russia and so does China. India, and no other Asian country will ever have real Western democracy in our lifetimes. Let's stop calling these backward, traditional, medieval, feudal countries, democracies. They are simply republics or monarchies.

In northern India, village elders order 'honor killings' -- latimes.com

In northern India, village elders order 'honor killings'

The issue is especially of concern in Haryana, where members of the Jat ethnic community bar youth living within small clusters of villages from intermarrying. Defiance is met with threats, and death.

Singhwal village in Haryana, northern India, is home to an ethnic Jat community governed by a small group of male elders known as a khap panchayat. The group is in effect a law unto itself. (Adrian Fisk / For The Times)






By Mark Magnier September 26, 2009 Size



Reporting from Matour, India - Ved Pal Maun, 27, was something of a catch in this small farm community northwest of New Delhi. But his family members rejected several marriage offers; they said he just wasn't ready.

Truth was he was holding out for a particular woman, 18-year-old Sonia Banwal of the neighboring village of Singhwal.

Falling in love with the girl next door would be cause for joy and celebration in many countries. But in parts of rural India, ancient traditions are rooted more deeply than the tall corn and lush green rice plants. It's a land where marital engagements are arranged by families and follow complex rules of caste, clan and community, and where the cost of "dishonoring" one's community can be your life.

In late July, three months after Maun married Banwal, he was lynched by residents of her village. They hacked at his body with scythes and farm tools until he moved no more.

Nobody has been charged in the killing and the police, who accompanied him to the village that day, haven't even questioned the family, his parents said.

Such so-called honor killings occur periodically in several states across India, but Haryana, in the north, is particularly notorious, especially among the ethnic Jat community of Maun and Banwal. To the Jat, marrying someone from an adjacent village ruled by the same small group of male elders known as a khap panchayat is an egregious offense punishable by fines, banishment or worse.

Though there are parallel civil and legal structures, in practice, many police and administrators defer to thekhap panchayat, making the aging patriarchy, in effect, a law unto itself.

The restrictive system has forced families to look further afield for marriage partners, in a culture that relies heavily on word of mouth.

Aware of what they were up against -- people answering to the same khap panchayat are considered siblings -- the couple eloped, married April 22 in a civil ceremony and moved to the town of Dirba, about two hours away.

For a few months the couple escaped their destiny amid the big town's bright lights and busy shops.

But while towns offer anonymity, villages take hostages. If they didn't return home, the couple was warned, the khap panchayat would banish their families.

"They returned with a sense of dread that she was going to be killed," said Mesar Maun, Ved Pal's mother, who lives in a concrete house with no chairs.

"He had no idea his time was up, not hers," she said, her long face framed by graying hair tied back tightly.

Khap panchayats -- a medieval institution designed to resist invaders, keep landownership in the community and prevent incest -- generally don't order killings outright, said K.S. Sangwan, sociology professor at Haryana's Maharishi Dayanand University, nor do they record their decisions.

"But there's an implicit understanding that there should be a murder or else it will bring a bad view of the village," Sangwan said. "If you kill your son or daughter, you've done your job and can stay."

The killing of Maun, who was a traditional medicine practitioner, is hardly an isolated case, though more often both parties are killed. A young couple was found beaten to death under similar circumstances on Aug. 6 in Haryana's Bahalba village.

Three days later, newlyweds under the same khap panchayat in nearby Siwana were found hanged.

And Sunday, a young couple was arrested, accused of killing seven of the woman's relatives by poisoning their dinners, then strangling them, after their khap panchayat refused to let them marry. What's unusual in this latest case is that the lovers, fearful of being killed, are the alleged aggressors, not the victims.

"The vilest crimes are committed in the name of defending the honor of the family or women," Home Minister P. Chidambaram told Parliament shortly after Maun's death, even as he resisted calls for specific laws against such killings. "We should hang our heads in shame when such incidents take place in the 21st century."

Feudal throwbacks such as the khap panchayat exist in an era of slick shopping centers, fast cars and streaming video, experts said, because Indian politicians -- keen to solicit rural votes -- dare not challenge their authority and because villagers appreciate the rapid, rough justice meted out in a country with a creaky, often corrupt, judiciary.

"Who rules Haryana, the law or the khaps?" the local Tribune newspaper asked in a recent editorial.

The couple had stayed a night with Maun's parents -- the first and only time his parents met her -- before learning that the khap panchayat had ordered her to return to her family.

Maun, eager to protect his wife and wary of the elders' motives, agreed on the condition that they free her within 20 days, his parents said.

As the deadline approached, however, he got word that her parents wouldn't release her, didn't recognize their civil marriage and were trying to marry her to someone else.

On July 23, armed with a civil court order for her release and accompanied by a court warrant officer and 14 police officers, he set off for her village three miles away to bring her back. When he arrived, a mob attacked him, authorities said.

Maun's parents suspect that the police were paid off to lure their son into a trap, scheduled the trip after dark to obscure their actions and ran away during the attack.

B. Sateesh Balan, the local police chief, said that his 14 officers were in a separate car behind Maun, didn't know that Maun was ahead of them, didn't see the attack and didn't warn the mob that they were coming.

In a deposition shortly after Maun's death, Banwal said she had been tricked into eloping with him.

Maun's parents, who said they had seen a happy couple, question the veracity of that statement. They believe her family and neighbors forced her to make the statement.

Few residents of her village seemed surprised or sorry about Maun's slaying.

"If I fell in love and married someone like that, I would be killed too," said Kuldeep, 19, a college student. "It's right. It's our culture."

Suresh Kumar, a teacher, said the police are powerful, but khap panchayats are more so. "Nobody in the village thinks we did anything wrong," he said. "Even his village is happy at what happened."

Reached a few days later by telephone, khap panchayat khap panchayat memberAjit Singh said that 100 to 200 Singhwal residents participated or watched it happen. Order has been restored, he said, now that Maun has been killed and Banwal married to someone who doesn't contravene their rules.

"The panchayat decided that whoever is responsible shall not be spared," he said.

A local police chief has been suspended pending the results of an investigation, and 11 Singhwal residents have been detained by police, including Banwal's father and several khap panchayat members.

Meanwhile, Maun's parents said they've seen little evidence of a homicide investigation.

"The poor never get justice," his mother said, as a cow entered the courtyard, licking saucepans cooling beside a dung fire.

mark.magnier@latimes.com

Anshul Rana of The Times' New Delhi Bureau contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times
 
  • Like
Reactions: gopher

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
The process of developing a true democracy is a long one and quite possibly never-ending. India has only been independent since 1947, and while that might seem like a long time to some it is not long enough to cast aside all of its ancient and frequently undemocratic traditions. In 1947 India was a nation that was backward both economically and socially. It has come a long way since that time and many of its less progressive customs have all but disappeared; however it is important to remember that the country is still about 70% rural which really makes it a nation of villages; and villages tend to retain outmoded and undemocratic customs.

One useful exercise would be to compare India after sixty four years of independence with the US at a similar stage in its development. In 1840 no women in the US could vote, millions of people were still slaves, and most people of native heritage were not allowed to vote. In addition, most women required the permission of their parents to marry and were excluded from most meaningful areas of US society. Similarly newly arrived Americans from places like Ireland and Germany, and most Jewish immigrants were marginalized by members of the American establishment who did their best to insure that these new arrivals were denied political and economic rights.

Given that fact that India is one of the few ex-colonies to have regularly held elections and has allowed changes of government throughout most of its recent history; and is now emerging as an economic power I think the country has done alright for itself.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
We are probably more free and more democratic than most. I fear the latter is becoming less so.

True. But we are not truly either. It requires constant attention by all of us.
Witness the home invasions in Mission B.C. by city bylaw inspectors looking for grow ops. They slapped a $5200 bill on an old guy for growing cucumbers.
 

Trotz

Electoral Member
May 20, 2010
893
1
18
Alberta
And what do you propose we do? Invade India? We had clamped down on these honour killings but the world (mainly influential communists) labelled us as evil bourgeois British colonizers.

I'm glad that White Man's Burden has died out to a large degree because otherwise we'll be knee-deep in mud trying to fix the problems in the uncivilized world.
 

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
The process of developing a true democracy is a long one and quite possibly never-ending. India has only been independent since 1947, and while that might seem like a long time to some it is not long enough to cast aside all of its ancient and frequently undemocratic traditions. In 1947 India was a nation that was backward both economically and socially. It has come a long way since that time and many of its less progressive customs have all but disappeared; however it is important to remember that the country is still about 70% rural which really makes it a nation of villages; and villages tend to retain outmoded and undemocratic customs.

One useful exercise would be to compare India after sixty four years of independence with the US at a similar stage in its development. In 1840 no women in the US could vote, millions of people were still slaves, and most people of native heritage were not allowed to vote. In addition, most women required the permission of their parents to marry and were excluded from most meaningful areas of US society. Similarly newly arrived Americans from places like Ireland and Germany, and most Jewish immigrants were marginalized by members of the American establishment who did their best to insure that these new arrivals were denied political and economic rights.

Given that fact that India is one of the few ex-colonies to have regularly held elections and has allowed changes of government throughout most of its recent history; and is now emerging as an economic power I think the country has done alright for itself.

Looking back in fifty or one hundred year increments is one way to compare countries and democracy. Two hundred years ago Britain had those famous "rotten boroughs" with sometimes only a few voters. The lesser classes were expected to be led by their betters. Britain has come a long way too.

What I dislike is the media calling India, "the world's largest democracy." So we get clumped in with them. This exuberance of the media is simply over the top here. It is very lazy reporting. India has representative govt, their democracy is improving but are not democratic like Canada, US, Australia or western Europe. The media is so eager to be inclusive but they are not at our level yet.

But it seems like a downer to call them the largest democracy in Asia and Africa. In a "global" world, this lacks oomph. The media might say that saying downer facts could hurt trade, we don't trade that much with India anyway. And it's not positive. Speaking of negative facts about India, while watching a Maude Barlow documentary about water in the world, an Indian man said the rich take care of themselves and forget about the poor. That's not democracy as we understand in the West.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Looking back in fifty or one hundred year increments is one way to compare countries and democracy. Two hundred years ago Britain had those famous "rotten boroughs" with sometimes only a few voters. The lesser classes were expected to be led by their betters. Britain has come a long way too.

What I dislike is the media calling India, "the world's largest democracy." So we get clumped in with them. This exuberance of the media is simply over the top here. It is very lazy reporting. India has representative govt, their democracy is improving but are not democratic like Canada, US, Australia or western Europe. The media is so eager to be inclusive but they are not at our level yet.

But it seems like a downer to call them the largest democracy in Asia and Africa. In a "global" world, this lacks oomph. The media might say that saying downer facts could hurt trade, we don't trade that much with India anyway. And it's not positive. Speaking of negative facts about India, while watching a Maude Barlow documentary about water in the world, an Indian man said the rich take care of themselves and forget about the poor. That's not democracy as we understand in the West.


Referring to India as the world's largest democracy is a way of putting things in perspective; especially as right wing ignoramuses like Glenn Beck continually refer to the USA as the world's largest democracy. I suppose some country has to be the world's largest. It might as well be India. India has a few things going for it that the United States does not. One is a much larger voter turn-out; and another is parties that actually differ from one another in a significant manner. Still a third is a government that actually has a long range plan for the development of the nation rather than one that simply jerks along from one crisis to the next.
 

Trotz

Electoral Member
May 20, 2010
893
1
18
Alberta

Feudalism is better than the dystopia we're aiming towards.

The Lord just wanted 1/3 of our produce (productivity) and a couple days per week during the Harvest Season, then we also had numerous rights like picking up grain which felled onto the ground and the Lord was obliged to protect us from criminality. Sure morality was a reason for the birth increase but it appeared that most Serf, then, were able to raise 3-5 children on the means of subsistence.
Life was miserable in some ways due to less technology, food was largely grain based (though that meantt a lot of beer and liquor) as there hadn't been selective breeding nor mass production of meats (but even then it wasn't uncommon a hundred year ago for people to only eat meat once a week or once a month)


As opposed to today,.

where we certainty pay more than 1/3 of our productivity in income taxes, housing taxes, value added tax; in addition, most of us are working for somebody else for 8 hours a day for 5 days a week for 48 weeks of the year (as opposed to just the harvest season longer) and people in Canada can barely afford the 2.1 kids.

Fuedalism was a permanent contract; in capitalism there are no permanent contracts (as opposed to the corporate loyalities of the 1950s - this is now gone thanks to globalism).


In a truly globalized workforce, we'll be competing with tribesmen in Papua New Guinea who think a pot of rice in return for 8 hour's of labour is a godsend................
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
My definition of a society is where a country has laws and a constitution that holds true to
the rights of the people. The law is applied equally in a democracy. The true measure in a
democracy, is how the citizens treat one another in tough time and when times are plenty.
A democratic society ensures that men and women are both entitled to equal protection
under the law. Of course elections are part of it but elections alone do not make for a real
democracy. India is also a nation that has other corruption besides criminal honour killings.
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
1
36
Spoon in underwear saving youths from forced marriage



As Britain puts airport staff on alert to spot potential victims of forced marriage, one campaigning group says the trick of putting a spoon in their underwear has saved some youngsters from a forced union in their South Asian ancestral homelands.

The concealed spoon sets off the metal detector at the airport in Britain and the teenagers can be taken away from their parents to be searched — a last chance to escape a largely hidden practice wrecking the lives of unknown thousands of British youths.

The British school summer holidays, now well under way, mark a peak in reports of young people — typically girls aged 15 and 16 — being taken abroad on “holiday”, for a marriage without consent, the government says.

The bleep at airport security may be the last chance they get to escape a marriage to someone they have never met in a country they have never seen.

The spoon trick is the brainchild of the Karma Nirvana charity, which supports victims and survivors of forced marriage and honour-based abuse.

One woman, whose identity was protected by Essex Police in southeast England, was forced to get married in India.

She said she was threatened by her father “because he said if I thought about running away he would find me and kill me”.


more

Spoon in underwear saving youths from forced marriage | The Raw Story
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,762
14,592
113
Low Earth Orbit
My native friends don't let their wives sleep or even be in the house when they are menstruating. Is that undemocratic?
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,995
1,915
113
India is the world's largest democracy and Britain is the world's oldest.