The Blues of Democracy and the Inadequacy of Pinks in Them.
By: Sakshi Kharbanda
Tags: Elections, Equality, Women, Government, Democracy

Politics

The Blues of Democracy and the Inadequacy of Pinks in Them.

The Chances of Having A Truly Democratic Society Are Bleak If It Doesn’t Have Gender Inclusivity.

We are still discussing gender inequality in the digital age of artificial intelligence, robotics and missions to Mars. This shows the complacency about the way we have been governed so far, especially in the social sphere.

A Finnish Woman at the Ballot, 1907. Finland granted full voting and participation rights to women in 1906. Source:Bettmann/Contributor/Getty Images.

Democracy defines people as fundamentally and essentially equal for all practical purposes. It determines the role of state and institutions to ensure people get the freedoms and rights as defined by the constitution.[1] The quality of democracies needs to be measured as the ability of the democratic process to establish effective governance and maximum inclusion, not just politically but also in terms of the socio-economic reach of its citizens.

Democracy is not only philosophically speculated to have free elections and free press (which rarely is the real scenario even in the most acclaimed democracies). It’s designed to make sure those relatively less developed — socially, economically, and intellectually — sail through smoothly by trusting the majority’s sanity. It shall have the power to make them feel in the best of hands. However, when, on the contrary, it makes the majority feel less powerful, it shall be challenged and confronted by the citizens before it becomes impossible to rescue it.

Women are considered “Democracy’s biggest deficit,” and their lack of equal participation in almost all domains is observed worldwide, from developed to developing societies. The quality analysis of democracy is incomplete without assessing the progress made in the level of inclusivity, in a sense, whether both men and women are equally included in the decision-making process that affects their day to day lives. The women world over are not represented equally either in any form of government or elsewhere.

These deficits don’t bother politicians as much as the authenticity of their governments is not legitimized by assuring economic and social justice in society. But on the contrary, by making tatty and shoddy populist moves based on religion, class, color, or whatever else there is to use as political tool just before elections.

From Athens in Greece to republics in Rome, medieval France, and Britain in Europe, the democratic journey of women voting rights has not been an easy one. Women were quite literally absent not only from being considered as an equal voter but also in some cases an equal citizen. It took many campaigns, strikes, and revolutions (including the French revolution and London Dock strike, to name a few) before their situation began to change. Ultimately, women were granted voting rights in 1918 in Germany, Poland, Austria, Netherlands, and Belgium. In Britain, the rights remained limited till 1918, and full participation was granted only in 1928. Despite all of this, societies made little progress democratically since people from the elite class and those from higher echelons of society continued to dominate the political scene of the era.

Here is a graphical representation of women voting rights of different countries around the world.

Timeline of Women Suffrage Rights Worldwide

20th Century indeed was the era of political democracy as women around the world gained suffrage. Yes, humans have a prolonged history of civilization. American women, too, got the constitutional right to vote in 1920, whereas France gave out suffrage to women as late as 1944, even later than a few African countries. American women, from the first time they voted in 1920 to now when they hold 23.7% of Congress in 2020, have come miles away. However, there’s a long way to go. Given below is a graph that shows how they have been invariably exercising their rights more than men since the 1980s.

Barring the initial years after women started to vote, their voting turnout was consistently higher than their male counterparts.

Given the above trend coupled with their(both white and women of color) resonance with democrats more than with republicans, women are going to have a herculean impact on the coming elections of 2020, observes Elizabeth U. Cascio, an economist at Dartmouth. Kamala Harris entry’s as the Vice-Presidential candidate has only upped their game.

Gender inequality is disadvantageous not only for women against whom it’s aimed at but also for the efficient functioning of evolving democracies. Multiple generations have been fighting for the same cause; it’s time we extend the horizon of democracy and normalize equality and move towards greater inclusion.

The “Demo” part of democracy is not complete if we have not included a large part of the value-creating population in the same. It is not only underutilization of the resource at hand but also undermining their worth, which will have an impact, in leaps and bounds, on all of us. The whole purpose of modern-day democracy gets defeated if the hands and brains of such a massive chunk of potential labor are missing from industries all across the spectrum. It’s like choosing to be half as free as potentially possible when their role in economy and politics could, in fact, have a transformative effect. All of this can change as early as we stop resembling democracy only to voting at elections. Elections don’t complete democracy, and they are neither conducted most ethically nor are their results, in terms of participation, very satisfying.

Here is the graph to show the number of women in the highest positions of state around the world. The picture is grim and thus brings with it a dark air of disappointment to remind us that the problem may not get resolved just by state intervention and instead need tangible action from the citizenry. It cannot be how any genuine democracy looks.