Jayaprakash Narayan and Democracy

Submitted By-
Shambhavi Vatsa
2nd semester, 1st year
Uid- SF0120074

FACULTY-IN-CHARGE: Dr. Mayengbam Nandakishwor Singh

DATE OF SUBMISSION: 5-05-2021

Jayaprakash Narayan:
Jayaprakash Narayan popularly known as JP or lok nayak, i.e., people’s
leader, was an activist of Indian Independence who contributed in
shaping India's future during independence struggle as well as post-
independence. He was also a theorist, socialist and a political leader.
After completing his studies from US, he returned to India with a
Marxists ideology but later changed to socialist view and participated
in the civil disobedience movement against Britishers.
After the implementation of the constitution in 1950, a fundamental
flaw that was discovered by JP in the structure prevailing in India was
increasing concentration of powers at the higher levels of government.
However, being a true democrat, he was quite distressed by this as he
wished for the powers to be vested in the hands of the people and only
that much power to be transferred to the higher levels of authority
structure which would have been unavoidably necessary.1 Thus, in
1959, he published a book named ‘A Plea for the Reconstruction of
Indian Polity’, to give concrete form to his ideas, on details,
reconceptualising the essence and composition of the Indian political
system.2
Later on he realized that the nation though free from Britishers, yet
struggles with poverty, unemployment, oppression of the politically
elected individuals and this brought about his ‘mid-1970s’ opposition
against Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, for whose overthrow he called
for a "total revolution".3 He stated that his idea of total revolution is a
combination of seven revolutions, viz., political, social, economic,
cultural, ideological or intellectual, educational and spiritual. 4 Hence,

1
RK Mishra, Jayaprakash Narayan’s Concept of Total Revolution,
https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/essay/jayaprakash-narayans-concept-of-total-revolution/40314 (last
visited - 30 April,2021)
2
Bidyut Chakrabarty and Rajendra Kumar Pandey, Modern Indian Political Thought, pg-109

3
Gowda Chandan, The Idea of ‘Total Revolution’ Bangalore Mirror, oct 16, 2015,
https://bangaloremirror.indiatimes.com/opinion/views/the-idea-of-total-
revolution/articleshow/49422574.cms
4
RK Mishra, Jayaprakash Narayan’s Concept of Total Revolution,
https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/essay/jayaprakash-narayans-concept-of-total-revolution/40314 (last
visited - 30 April.2021)
to bring about the political revolution, JP began to organize youth to
save the democracy from degeneration.
JP’s stand on Democracy-
In a literal meaning democracy is the form of government where the
people have the authority to choose their governing leaders and hence
it is the rule ‘by the people’. However, JP pointed out that the basic
problem of democracy is the moral problem and the Constitution,
parties and elections which are the basic aspects of a democracy are
meaningless until there is development of moral values and spiritual
qualities in the public. According to him some of the moral qualities
and mental attitudes needed for true democracy are: (I) concern for
truth; (ii) aversion to violence; (iii) love of liberty; (iv) spirit of
cooperation; (v) preparedness to adjust self-interest to the larger
interest; (vi) respect for others' opinion and tolerance; (vii) readiness to
take responsibility; (viii) belief in the fundamental equality of man; and
(ix) faith in the educability of human nature.5
He gave the concept of a ‘party less-democracy’ which was based on
the ideas of the two-great thinkers of the modern times, i.e., Karl Marx
and Mahatma Gandhi. Both of them had either predicted the withering
away of the state as a stage of man’s political and economic evolution
or total dispersal of power as a means of saving the people from
violence (ahimsa), abuse and exploitation.6 JP subscribed to the ideas
of Mahatma Gandhi who was in the support of democracy as a people’s
power without any room for concentration of power in one hand.
Reason given is that he believed it led to polarization of the castes and
of the rich and poor and this was threatening to the existence of
democracy itself through corruptions at the hands of rural rich and
criminalisation.

5
Jay Prakash Narayan, Socialism Sarvodaya and Democracy, pg.- 196
6
Shree Shankar Sharan, Party less Democracy: Remembering Mahatma Gandhi and JP,
https://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article2354.html , (last visited- 30 April,2021)
JP was against the idea of parliamentary form of democracy for various
reasons. Some of them are:
1. Based on vote of an individual- The nation, community or the
people can never be equated with the sum of individual votes as
the individual voter’s caste vote as an atom of society and not as
a living cell in an organic relationship with another organic cell.7
2. Multiparty -He said that intense competition among political
parties to seek power and gain dominance in the political system
is the true essence of parliamentary form of democracy. It is more
power centred and thus materialistic in nature.
3. Centralism - The local self-governing bodies have very little
powers and no direct or indirect control on the national state.
Thus, it often slips toward centralism and hence is not the
appropriate form of democracy according to JP.
4. Represent minority of voters – Parliamentary form of democracy
is supposed to represent the majority of the voters, i.e., the party
to head is the one who receives maximum votes, it does not
matter how minimum is that majority. Many-a-times due to the
existence of multiple parties it does not become clear as to which
party receives maximum votes. Therefore, a party who gets a bit
extra vote is selected as a leading party, thereby not representing
a clear-cut majority.
He believed that democracy is not merely about political rights but
about more social and economic justice and equal opportunity. He said
that “democracy does not consist merely in its formal institution but it
lives really and truly in the life of people; it is a way of life” 8. He
therefore advocated the case for ‘Sarvodaya democracy’ based on non-
violence which would negate centralization of power, the majority
principle, the existing party system and also all prevailing method of
direct elections.9 His notion for ‘communitarian democracy’ or ‘party-

7
Jay Prakash Narayan, Socialism Sarvodaya and Democracy, Pg.- 214
8
Jay Prakash Narayan, Socialism Sarvodaya and Democracy, pg.- 198
9
Lok Sabha Secretariat, Lok Nayak Jay Prakash Narayan, July 2002, New Delhi, pg.- 9
less democracy’ was the way to regenerate the ethical cooperation, co-
sharing and morals in the democracy by service, sacrifice and love.10
The idea of party less democracy by JP was based on decentralised,
participatory, and grass-roots oriented approach. He described it
though a pyramid model with village at the base and thereby with most
of the powers and then came the block, above it was district, then
province and then the centre. However, his idea of the working of the
communitarian democracy was not very clear and had been termed by
various critics as a mirage. Though some of them agreed with JP’s
analysis of the existing system, they strongly rejected his remedy of a
"Communitarian society".
Problem with communitarian democracy –
1. Party less democracy is a mirage and any attempt to transform
it into reality will endanger human’s freedom because the party
campaign and electoral activity, as said by David Cushman Cole
is simply “the way people behave when they are free”.11
2. JP’s idea of participatory democracy was not clear to many. Few
professors said that it was both impossible and undesirable for
all citizens to participate in government as it is a technical matter
and cannot be handled by uneducated masses. Howsoever, the
very purpose of election is to give the masses the power to throw
the government which they don’t like.
3. JP’s question on the individual as an atom and not a living cell
was also challenged by pointing out that the problem in India
was not to return to a new organism but to liberate the individual
from the existing organism.12 The advancement of democracy in
a country is dependent on the realisation of a sense of
individuality rather than the quest for a sense of culture as

10
Bidyut Chakrabarty and Rajendra Kumar Pandey, Modern Indian Political Thought, pg.- 110
11
John A. Vieg, THE MIRAGE OF "PARTY-LESS" DEMOCRACY, The Indian Journal of Political Science
Vol. 23, No. 1/4 (January—December, 1962), pg. 39-47 (9 pages)
12
Rajni Kothari, Jayaprakash Narayan's Thesis - Report of a Discussion, http://www.cusb.ac.in/images/cusb-
files/2020/el/psc/3_JP%20Communitarian%20Democracy.pdf (last visited- 1 may,2021)
 individual liberty is the best way to create a genuine sense of
community.
JP was upset to see that few had read and misunderstood his message.
However, he said that he would rely on the “deeds, not words”. He was
a man ahead of his time and it is no surprise that his ideas are important
in addressing the shortcomings of government even today. Thus, it can
be said that Jayaprakash Narayan was a True Democrat which can be
confirmed by his effort and deep concern for democracy. Even though
his solutions may not have the power to totally eradicate the problem
of the existing form of democracy, it still has the power to alleviate
them.