Democracy 2.0

I recently finished reading Stephen Hawking's new book, The Grand Design. The book is a bit underwhelming, I was expecting more clarity of the fundamental questions the authors (Caltech professor Leonard Mlodinow is a co-author) have been posing. Apart from the profligate universe Mr. Hawking writes about (his theory claims that our universe is just one of infinite number of universes), I was struck by two other implicit themes:

1. The ability of scientists to constantly re-assess their theories and modify them in light of new evidence or advances in other fields of science. Mr. Hawking himself modifies many of his theories from his previous blockbuster book A Brief History of Time (still an endearing read), including a single big bang event as the point of origin of space, time and our universe
   
   
2. The lessening impact of the advances in fields such as cosmology and particle physics on the intellectual life of today. Galileo, Newton and Einstein's theories (let alone landmark advances in other branches of science such as Freud and Jung's theories of our mind and consciousness and Darwin and Wallace's theory of evolution) had a much deeper, far-reaching impact on the intellectual, religious and political life of the previous centuries. By comparison, the work of Richard Feynman, Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose doesn't seem to set the coffee houses, university campuses and airport lounges abuzz. (Even though Feynman, Hawking and Penrose are excellent
   popular science writers). Is cosmology and particle physics becoming too advanced for modern intellectuals to fathom? (Hawking's latest book contains no single equation, and is interspersed with several lame jokes).

I hope to return to theme b) some time later. For today, I'd like to briefly discuss the first theme.



Do social institutions upside the fundamentals on which they were built, in light of the constant shifts in reality? Take democracy, for instance. Democracy today seems to be in rude health as more and more countries embrace some form of democratic arrangements. But what about the founding principles of democracy? Don't we need to re-assess some of the shifts taking place over the past hundred years?
A new theory for democracy must therefore emerge, considering the following changes:

1. A new significant institution has taken center-stage: the market. People in the market, the government regulates and determines access to the market. The market's leading entity, corporations, influence the public and the government. People participate in market activities (e.g. being employed, participating in transactions, etc.) much more than they do in government. The market also bestows multiple roles to people: I could be a shareholder in a company, be employed in that company's rival, and be governed by a government that is run by the agents/lobbyists of that company (as is common in India). My roles are therefore in conflict. A new theory for democracy must therefore factor in the market and its institutions.
   
   
2. The world economy is much more tightly integrated. Ripples in one sector threaten to break down the edifices of a (seemingly unrelated) different sector, in a different country. The State cannot insulate itself and its people from the events from other States, and is often helpless on the onslaught of failed policies/institutions of other States. The power of a government is therefore limited and shrinking.
   
   
3. The nation-state is in decline. A tighter integration of the world economy, aided by significant changes in information and communication technologies, now lend different identities to an individual, with different granularities of association. National identities seem to matter less - the individual can choose from a menu card of differing, often non-compatible identities.
   
   
4. The business of government has become much more complex. There are newer avenues that the state wishes to govern. The population has exploded. Individuals are stake-holders in multiple institutions. The bond between an individual and his/her representative has quantitatively declined.
   

This new theory of democracy, Democracy 2.0, must

1. Limit the distortions a global market brings in governance, while not restricting the sovereignty, liberty and freedom of People
   
2. Restore power to People
   
3. Engage People more in the democratic processes
   
4. Prevent the abuse of power
   

In short, do everything the original (and increasingly under-threat) version of democracy was supposed to do.

In the coming months, we at Search for Solutions, will explore the above themes.