Outcomes of Democracy: Class 10 Civics Chapter 5 Hinglish mein

Saal ke end mein tumhara report card tumhe achha student hone ke liye sirf ek mark nahi deta. Woh har subject ko alag grade karta hai, aur ek subject ka top score doosre subject ke kamzor score ko chhupa nahi deta. Is chapter mein hum democracy ka report card bhi isi tarah likhte hain.

Is book ke pehle chaar chapters ne democracy ke alag-alag hisson ko dekha: power sharing, federalism, social divisions aur political parties. Ab hum thoda peeche hat kar bade sawaal poochte hain. Hum democracy se kya deliver karne ki ummeed kar sakte hain? Kya woh deliver karti hai? Pehle hum tay karte hain ki democracy ko judge kaise karein, aur phir use paanch subjects mein grade karte hain:

1. Government ki quality: kya woh accountable, responsive aur legitimate hai?
2. Economic growth aur development
3. Inequality aur poverty kam karna
4. Social differences ke saath mil kar rehna
5. Citizens ki dignity aur freedom

5.1 Democracy ke outcomes ko hum kaise assess karein?

Class 9 (What is Democracy? Why Democracy?) mein tumne democracy ki tulna desh chalane ke doosre tareekon se ki thi aur use pasand karne ki achhi wajahein paayi thi. Short mein, democracy:

• har citizen ko barabar maanti hai;
• har insaan ki self-respect aur worth ki izzat karti hai;
• behtar decisions leti hai, kyunki un par kai log discuss karte hain;
• disagreements suljhaane ka ek peaceful tareeka deti hai; aur
• galtiyan pakadne aur unhe theek karne ki jagah chhodti hai.

Yeh wajahein democracy ko uske best roop mein dikhati hain. Ab ghar ya class mein ek quick survey karo. Shayad hi koi monarch, army ya religious leaders ke rule ke liye elections chhodna chahega. Lekin unhi logon se poocho ki unke aas-paas democracy jaise asal mein chal rahi hai, usse woh kitne satisfied hain, aur complaints ki jhadi lag jaati hai. Ek idea ke roop mein democracy ko aasaani se approval milta hai, lekin practice mein mixed reviews.

Yeh gap humein poochne par majboor karta hai ki hum democracy ko value kyun karte hain. Kya wajah sirf moral hai, kyunki logon ko khud par rule karna chahiye? Ya kuch prudential (practical) wajahein bhi hain, kyunki democracy asal mein behtar results deti hai? Jawab ke liye humein dekhna hoga ki democracies kya achieve karti hain.

Do democracies socho: ek chhota, ameer desh jiske institutions sadiyon purane hain, aur ek bahut bada, naya republic jahan kai log gareeb hain. Dono ke paas constitution hai, dono elections karate hain, parties ko allow karte hain aur rights ka promise karte hain, jaise aaj sau se zyada desh karte hain. Phir bhi koi unse same results ki ummeed nahi karega. Sahi test isse chhota hai: kaun se outcomes khud democracy se aane chahiye, chahe desh ka size, wealth ya culture kuch bhi ho?

Ek achhe facilities wale school ke baare mein socho. Classrooms, library aur trained teachers seekhne ki conditions banate hain, lekin jo student kabhi book nahi kholta, woh nahi seekhega. Democracy bhi kuch aise hi kaam karti hai. Yeh ek form of government hai, rulers chunne aur decisions lene ka ek method. Yeh free elections, rights aur open debate jaisi conditions deti hai, aur citizens ko apne goals tak pahunchne ke liye inka use karna padta hai (Fig. 5.1). Democracy se unemployment se le kar potholes tak sab kuch theek karne ki ummeed karna, aur phir use blame karna, ya yeh shak karna ki hum democracy mein rehte bhi hain ya nahi, yeh galat samajhna hai ki ek form of government kya kar sakti hai.

5.2 Accountable, responsive aur legitimate government

Shuruaat us outcome se karo jo sabse zyada matter karta hai. Democracy mein log apne rulers chunte hain, un par nazar rakhte hain aur jahan ho sake, decisions mein hissa lete hain. Badle mein, unhe sabse pehle aisi government milni chahiye jo unhe jawab de aur unki zarooraton par dhyaan de. Do words isse sum up karte hain: accountable (जवाबदेह) aur responsive.

5.2.1 Dheemi, lekin accepted

Accountability test karne se pehle ek common objection dekhte hain: democracy slow hai. Dictatorship mein ruler kisi elected assembly, opposition ya public opinion ko jawab nahi deta, isliye woh subah decision announce karke shaam tak use lagu kar sakta hai. Democracy ko pehle discuss, bargain aur vote karna padta hai. Deliberation ki is process mein time lagta hai. Kya isse democracy inefficient ho jaati hai?

Lekin speed hi akela measure nahi hai. Raaton-raat diya gaya order aisa ho sakta hai jise log na samjhein, na maanein. Woh uska virodh karte hain, use ignore karte hain ya court mein challenge karte hain, aur ruler ko ya to use zabardasti lagu karna padta hai ya chupchaap chhodna padta hai. Jo proposal debate se guzra hai, usne objections pehle hi sun liye hain aur unmein se kuch ke hisaab se badla gaya hai. Isliye log use accept karne aur lagu karne ke liye zyada tayyar hote hain (Fig. 5.2). Procedure par democracy jo time lagati hai woh ek asli cost hai, lekin aksar chukaane layak.

Ek doosra fayda bhi hai, jo example se sabse achhe se dikhta hai. Maan lo ek town council ek company ko school building ka contract deti hai. Democracy mein aise decisions likhe hue rules ke hisaab se hone chahiye. Isliye koi bhi resident bids aur meeting ke minutes dekhne ki maang kar sakta hai, aur check kar sakta hai ki deal kisne propose ki aur kisne sign-off kiya. Is openness ko transparency (पारदर्शिता) kehte hain. Jo governments kisi ko jawab nahi deti, woh aksar aise papers secret rakhti hain.

5.2.2 Kya dekhna hai

Tum kaise check karoge ki koi khaas democracy yeh deliver karti hai ya nahi? Un channels ko dekho jinse log power mein baithe logon par nazar rakhte hain, unse sawaal karte hain aur unhe influence karte hain. Teen zaroori hain:

• time par, free aur fair tareeke se hone wale elections;
• badi policies aur naye laws par decide hone se pehle public discussion;
• citizens ka legal right ki woh government ke kaam ki information dekh sakein.

Yeh teeno mil kar accountability ka ek loop banate hain (Fig. 5.3). India mein teesri practice ke peeche law hai. Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, jo 12 October 2005 se lagu hai, kisi bhi citizen ko kisi public office se uske paas rakhi information maangne deta hai.

5.2.3 Democracies kaise score karti hain

Asli democracies in tests par kaise score karti hain? Jawab ek mixed report card hai (Government par democracy ka record). Elections aur debate unke strong subjects hain. Har candidate ke liye fairness, har bade decision par discussion aur information ke saath openness kamzor subjects hain. Phir bhi, in sabhi tests par ek democracy us government se zyada score karti hai jo free elections karati hi nahi.

Procedures sirf aadhi kahani hain; hum government ko is baat se bhi judge karte hain ki woh kya deliver karti hai. Ideally ek democratic government dekhegi ki logon ko kya chahiye aur public money ka galat use nahi karegi. Practice mein, kai democracies mein log basic services ke liye saalon intezaar karte hain, aur har democracy mein corruption ke cases news banate hain. Phir bhi tulna matter karti hai. Kuch bhi yeh nahi dikhata ki bina elections wali governments zyada saaf ya zyada caring hain; bas unse sawaal karna zyada mushkil hai.

5.2.4 Legitimate government

Ab achhi khabar. Socho ki tumhara candidate election haar jaata hai. Tum disappointed ho sakte ho, lekin phir bhi maante ho ki jeetne wale ko govern karne ka haq hai, kyunki result us process se aaya jis par sab sehmat the. Is tarah accept ki gayi government legitimate (वैध) hoti hai, aur yahan democracy har alternative se pakka aage hai. Ek democratic government slow, clumsy, kuch complaints ke liye behri aur corrupt tak ho sakti hai, phir bhi log use apni maante hain. Isiliye duniya bhar mein log democracy ke idea ka saath dete hain, tab bhi jab woh uske kaam karne ke tareeke par shikayat karte hain. Democracy apne logon ka support jeet kar rakh sakti hai, yeh khud ek important outcome hai.

5.3 Economic growth aur development

Achhi government ek baat hai; prosperity doosri. Kai log maan lete hain ki free elections wala desh jaldi ameer bhi hoga. Kya evidence is ummeed ko support karta hai? Sirf thoda sa.

Sabse jaana-maana evidence chaar political scientists se aata hai, Adam Przeworski, Michael Alvarez, José Antonio Cheibub aur Fernando Limongi, jinhone Democracy and Development (2000) mein 1950 se 1990 tak 135 deshon ki tulna ki. Average par, dictatorship mein desh ki total income thodi tez badhi, lagbhag 4.4% saalana, jabki democracy mein lagbhag 4.0% (Fig. 5.4). Tumhari textbook ki table is finding ko economic growth rates ke roop mein dikhati hai aur period ko 1950–2000 label karti hai.

Isi study mein do aur findings hain jo picture badal dete hain. Dictatorships mein population tez badhi, isliye per person income asal mein democracies mein tez badhi. Aur jab sirf gareeb deshon ki tulna ki jaati hai, to dono tarah ke regimes ke growth rates lagbhag same hain. Jo gap pehle hi chhota tha, woh wahan lagbhag gayab ho jaata hai jahan woh sabse zyada matter karta.

Kya dheemi total growth ki wajah se hum democracy ko chhod dein? Is evidence ke hisaab se nahi. Jaise tum Economics mein seekhte ho, koi desh kitni tezi se develop hota hai, yeh uski form of government ke alawa kai cheezon par depend karta hai. Uski population, world economy ki halat, doosre deshon se trade aur madad, aur woh kaun si economic priorities chunta hai, sabka role hai (Fig. 5.5).

Sab milakar: democracy economic development ka promise nahi karti, lekin hum fairly ummeed kar sakte hain ki woh dictatorships ke saath kadam mila kar chalegi. Kyunki growth ka farak itna chhota hai, democracy ke baaki fayde balance ko saaf taur par uske favour mein jhuka dete hain.

5.4 Inequality aur poverty mein kami

Growth batati hai ki national cake kitna bada hota hai. Democracy ke liye ek zyada tez test yeh ho sakta hai ki cake kaise baanta jaata hai. Jab democracy ameer hoti hai, to kya sabko fayda hota hai, ya sirf kuch ko? Kya gareebon ko income, jobs aur schooling mein fair hissa milta hai?

Fig. 5.6 dekho. Polling day par Brazil ke sabse gareeb fifth logon aur sabse ameer fifth logon ki bilkul same awaaz hai: ek adult, ek vote, chahe factory owner ho ya farm worker. Yeh political equality hai, aur har democracy isi par tiki hai. Payday par picture ulat jaati hai. Sabse ameer fifth desh ki aadhi se zyada income ghar le jaata hai, sabse gareeb fifth 4% se bhi kam. Aise gaps, jinhe economic inequality (आर्थिक असमानता) kehte hain, kai deshon mein badhe hain, aur sabse upar ki ek patli layer ko sabse zyada fayda mila hai. Neeche ki families ke liye khana, kapde, ghar, schooling aur health care jaisi basic needs poori karna roz ki ladaai ho sakti hai.

Ek democracy kitni unequal hai, yeh desh-desh mein bahut alag hota hai (Fig. 5.7). South Africa aur Brazil mein population ke sabse ameer fifth ko kul income ka aadhe se zyada milta hai, jabki sabse gareeb fifth ko 4% se kam. Norway aur Slovenia mein gap kaafi kam hai. Tumhari textbook ki purani table pehle ke figures ke saath yahi baat kehti hai, jab South Africa aur Brazil mein sabse ameer fifth ko 60% se zyada milta tha. Chhahon desh free elections karate hain, isliye akele democracy yeh tay nahi karti ki society kitni equal banegi.

To is subject mein democracy ka grade kam hai: kul milakar, democracies economic gaps kam karne mein achha nahi kar paayi hain. Yahan ek paheli hai, jo Class 9 Economics ke Poverty as a Challenge se judti hai. India mein gareeb log voters ka bahut bada hissa hain, aur har party unke votes chahti hai. Phir bhi critics kehte hain ki elected governments ne aksar poverty ko utna urgent nahi maana jitna ye numbers batate hain. Kahin aur picture aur bhi kharab ho sakti hai: kuch sabse gareeb desh khane tak ke liye ameer deshon par depend karte hain.

5.5 Social diversity ko accommodate karna

India ke Constitution mein 22 languages listed hain, yahan duniya ke sabhi bade religions ko maanne wale hain, aur kai castes aur tribes hain. Kya ek democracy itne mel-jol ko shaanti se saath rakh sakti hai? Chapter 1 (Power-sharing) ne ek success dikhayi: Belgium apne Dutch- aur French-speakers ke beech power share karke ek bana raha. Chapter 3 ne dikhaya ki social differences politics mein kaise aate hain. Asli baat yeh hai ki democracies group rivalry ko rules wale contest (elections, courts, negotiation) mein badal deti hain, isliye tensions ke violent hone ki sambhavna kam hoti hai.

Kisi bhi system se yeh ummeed mat karo ki woh group conflicts ko hamesha ke liye khatam kar dega; koi bhi society aisa nahi kar paayi. Realistic ummeed ek aisi society hai jiske groups ek doosre ke differences ki izzat karein aur un par bargain karne ke tay tareeke hon, aur democracy isi tarah ki bargaining ke liye bani hai. Bina elections wale regimes aksar yeh maante hi nahi ki unke divisions hain, ya virodh karne wale kisi bhi group ko kuchal dete hain. Isse kuch time ke liye shaanti mil sakti hai jabki andar hi andar gussa badhta rehta hai. Isliye social diversity ko peacefully handle karna democracy ke report card par ek saaf plus hai.

Sri Lanka ki kahani, jo tumne Chapter 1 mein bhi padhi, dikhati hai ki yeh outcome apne aap nahi aata. Ek democracy diversity ko tabhi accommodate karti hai jab woh do conditions poori kare:

1. Vote jeetna baat ka end nahi hai. Majority walon ko minority walon ke saath kaam karna padta hai, taaki government poore desh ki awaaz bane. Ek issue par minority mein hone ka matlab yeh nahi ki agle issue par bhi minority mein ho.
2. Majorities badalti rehni chahiye. Majority rule kabhi bhi ek religion, race ya language group ka permanent rule nahi banna chahiye. Har election aur har decision mein logon aur groups ka alag combination majority ban sake, aisa hona chahiye.

Isse ek simple test nikalta hai (Fig. 5.8): kya har citizen yeh ummeed kar sakta hai ki woh kabhi-kabhi jeetne wali side mein hoga? Agar kisi group ke liye jawab hai ‘kabhi nahi, us community ki wajah se jismein woh paida hue’, to us group ke liye democracy ek accommodating system ki tarah kaam karna band kar chuki hai.

5.6 Citizens ki dignity aur freedom

Woh waqt yaad karo jab kisi ne counter par tumse rudely baat ki, ya tumhe chhota samajh kar ignore kar diya. Izzat na milna dukh deta hai, aur kai jhagde aise hi shuru hote hain. Democracy iske ulte idea par bani hai: har insaan sirf insaan hone ki wajah se respect aur freedom ka haqdaar hai. Yeh woh outcome hai jismein democracy har doosri form of government se sabse zyada aage hai. Sabhi democracies dignity (गरिमा) ke principle ko maanti hain, haalanki practice mein kuch doosron se kahin aage nikal gayi hain.

Purani aadatein ise mushkil banati hain: jahan sadiyon tak kuch groups doosron se upar maane gaye, wahan sabko barabar maanna apne aap nahi hota. Do examples progress aur abhi baaki doori, dono dikhate hain (Fig. 5.9).

5.6.1 Women ki dignity

Ek aisi woman ke baare mein socho jise same kaam ke liye man se kam paisa milta hai. Democracy mein woh court ja sakti hai, aur law uske saath hai; woh public mein yeh bhi keh sakti hai ki yeh practice galat hai, aur kai log sehmat honge. Hamesha aisa nahi tha. Sadiyon tak zyadatar societies mard chalate the, aur women ko barabar treatment lambe sangharsh ke baad hi mila; kai democracies mein vote bhi der se mila (timeline dekho). Women ko aaj bhi disrespect aur discrimination jhelna padta hai. Farak yeh hai ki ab yeh illegal hai aur zyadatar log ise galat maante hain, isliye isse ladna aasaan hai. Aisi government mein jo individual dignity ko nahi maanti, uske paas khade hone ke liye aisi koi legal zameen nahi hoti.

5.6.2 Caste aur barabar status

Caste mein bhi yahi pattern dikhta hai. Sadiyon tak kuch castes ko temples, kuon aur schools se door rakha gaya. Aaj Constitution untouchability ko khatam karta hai (Article 17). Do laws, Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 aur Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, caste discrimination aur violence ko crime banate hain. Discrimination aur atrocities ab bhi hote hain, jaisa Chapter 3 ne dikhaya. Lekin jo insaan inhe jhelta hai, woh ab law aur public morality ki taraf ishara kar sakta hai, jo dono uske saath hain. Yeh jaanna ki barabar ka darja unka haq hai, ek wajah hai ki aam log, khaas kar woh groups jinhe kabhi daba kar rakha gaya tha, democracy ko itna value karte hain.

5.6.3 Ek examination jo kabhi khatam nahi hota

Is chapter ka har outcome ek paimana bhi hai: tum kisi bhi democracy ko uske saamne rakh kar naap sakte ho. Aur tumhare exams ke ulat, democracy ke tests kabhi khatam nahi hote. Ek hurdle paar karo aur log agla rakh dete hain: gaon ko sadak mil jaaye, to woh bus maangte hain; bachche school mein aa jaayein, to parents behtar teachers maangte hain. Tum board exams ek baar dete ho, jo kuch examiners set karte hain. Democracy har saal exams deti hai, aur uske examiners karodon citizens hain.

Government ke baare mein chai ki dukaan par koi bhi baatcheet suno, aur tumhe sadkon, daamon, deri aur corruption ki complaints sunai dengi. Yeh shor achhi khabar hai. Log isliye shikayat karte hain kyunki woh apne rights jaante hain, power walon se ummeed rakhte hain aur yeh kehne se darte nahi. Ek subject, jo sirf hukm maanta hai, rulers ki shikayat nahi karta; ek citizen (नागरिक) karta hai (Fig. 5.10). Surveys yeh bhi batate hain ki zyadatar log maante hain ki unka vote is baat par asar daalta hai ki un par kaise rule kiya jaata hai (neeche ki activity dekho).