CULTURE OF FREEBIES A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY: LALIT GARG

CULTURE OF FREEBIES A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY: LALIT GARG

28-FEB-ENG 6

RAJIV NAYAN AGRAWAL

ARA-----------------------------The irony of Indian democracy is that as elections approach, public service transforms into populist politics. Political parties have turned freebies into a shortcut to electoral success. The tendency to secure votes by offering immediate financial benefits to voters is steadily strengthening. Assembly elections are scheduled for the next three to four months, and as political activity intensified in states like Assam, West Bengal, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu, the impact of this culture became even more apparent. Against this backdrop, the Supreme Court, the country's highest court, issued a serious comment on the uncontrolled expansion of freebies. This comment is not only a legal matter but also a warning about the very essence of democracy.

The fundamental objective of democracy is public welfare. The state has a responsibility to support the poor, the deprived, and the vulnerable. Social security schemes, education and health facilities, and a guarantee of a minimum standard of living—these are all hallmarks of a welfare state. But when the line between public interest and electoral gain becomes blurred, problems arise. There's a difference between targeted support and excessive generosity. On the one hand, there are schemes that empower individuals to become self-reliant, while on the other, there are announcements that only provide immediate relief to voters and instill dependency. When states struggling with revenue deficits announce free electricity, free travel, or cash distributions, the question arises: where will these resources come from, and who will pay for them? Fiscal discipline is the foundation of any state's economic health. If states empty their coffers for short-term political gain, long-term development is hampered. Funds that should be invested in building infrastructure, strengthening hospitals, improving the quality of schools, and creating jobs are instead spent harvesting votes. This trend is worrying not only from an economic perspective but also from a moral perspective. In a democracy, voter freedom is considered paramount. If voters are indirectly influenced by financial inducements, it undermines the spirit of independent judgment.

The Supreme Court raised the logical question: why don't states focus more on job creation and skill development? In fact, employment is the only means of lasting empowerment. When individuals earn income through their labor and skills, they develop both self-respect and self-confidence. In contrast, constant freebies make individuals dependent. Gradually, the culture of hard work weakens, and a mindset of indolence begins to flourish in society. This situation is dangerous for the strength of democracy, because democracy is not merely a process of voting, but of active and responsible citizenship. The fairness of pre-election schemes is also questionable. When large-scale economic distribution occurs while the code of conduct is in effect, opposition parties perceive it as unequal competition. In such cases, the Election Commission of India is responsible for impartial oversight. The Election Commission must ensure that no party gains electoral advantage by indirectly bribing voters. Violation of the code of conduct is not merely a technical error but a violation of democratic norms. If strict action is not taken, this trend could become more deeply entrenched in the future. Undoubtedly, it is the primary duty of states to provide special care to vulnerable groups. However, when revenue-deficit states spend large sums on free schemes, the pressure on the public treasury increases further. Ironically, funds that should be used to improve infrastructure, strengthen healthcare, and enhance educational facilities are diverted for short-term political gains. What is needed is to empower people through skill development in a way that provides long-term and sustainable benefits.

It must also be understood that not every form of free schemes is wrong. Providing relief in emergencies, providing assistance during epidemics or natural disasters, and providing opportunities to underprivileged groups under social justice—all of these are the state's responsibilities. However, a flurry of announcements during election season and ignoring long-term financial consequences is not a sign of democratic maturity. It reflects the ideological bankruptcy of political parties, where immediate gains are prioritized over vision. The strength of democracy comes not only from institutions but also from the vigilance of citizens. If voters cast their ballots solely for immediate benefits, they unwittingly encourage a culture that ultimately impacts their own future. A mature voter is one who understands the intentions and economic viability behind announcements. They should ask what the state's economic situation will be in five years, what direction development will take, and how much employment opportunities will increase. In a democracy, voting is not just a right but also a responsibility.

Today, India seeks to establish itself as a strong democracy on the global stage. We pledge to become a world leader, but if our politics remains entangled in the web of populism, this pledge will prove hollow. The pride of being the world's largest democracy is meaningful only when our policies are visionary, balanced, and Sustainable. Breaking away from the culture of freebies and promoting productivity, innovation, and entrepreneurship is the path to real progress. This is a time for introspection. Political parties must understand that empowering the public is not possible simply by distributing money. Education, skills, health, and employment—these four pillars determine the strength of any nation. If investment in these areas increases, citizens will become self-reliant, reducing the burden on the state. At the same time, citizens must resolve to prioritize long-term development over immediate temptations. The strength of democracy will be ensured only when both the government and the public discharge their respective responsibilities honestly.

Undoubtedly, electoral fairness requires a thorough scrutiny of populist policies and schemes announced or implemented before elections. Opposition parties accused the Bihar government of disbursing ₹15,600 crore to female beneficiaries under the Chief Minister's Women's Employment Scheme last October, while the model code of conduct was in effect. This was a move against healthy democratic processes. In this context, it is imperative that the Election Commission of India closely monitor attempts by political parties to indirectly bribe voters. Furthermore, action should be taken against such attempts, which constitute a violation of the Election Code of Conduct. Undoubtedly, any biased approach to the electoral process is detrimental to our vibrant democracy. The tendency to distribute freebies weakens the very foundations of democracy. It hinders the mindset of action and fosters a culture of government dependence and inaction in society. If this trend is not curbed in time, both economic imbalance and political distrust will increase. Therefore, it is essential that policy transparency, financial discipline, and electoral fairness be given the highest priority. This is the true safeguard of democracy, the foundation of a bright future for the nation.