Democracy

Beloved Osho, most people, rightly or wrongly, equate democracy with the freedom to choose their politicians, yet you seem to envisage a country which is both democratic and pollution-free, because you see politicians as pollution. How is this possible?

Television has changed almost the whole political phenomenon. Before television, you were coming in contact with the real person. Now when you come in contact with a person, experts have decided his hairstyle, make-up, the color of his clothes. They have taught him how to walk, how to stand, how to look exactly into the eyes of the people; what to say, how to say it, when to make a gesture with his hand; when to almost shout, and when to almost whisper. Now it is in the hands of the experts to program him. Nixon was not ready for it, and I think any man who has any sense of integrity will not agree to all this nonsense. He is not an actor. But Kennedy followed the advice of the advisors. He came on the television very strong, very clear, standing the way a strong person stands, speaking the…

Osho, Shri Morarji Desai talks a lot about doing this and that in the national interest—then why doesn’t he do anything?

I know a gentleman. All his life he has contested elections, and all his life he has lost them. Contesting and losing—that is his entire story. Wherever an election is happening, of whatever kind—if he just hears of it, he stands. And every time he forfeits his deposit. I got to wondering what the matter was. And he’s a decent man—truthful, honest. I looked into it and discovered that it is precisely because of his decency, truthfulness, and honesty that he forfeits his deposit. In one election people asked him, “Why are you standing—To serve the people?” He said, “No, I want to taste the perks of office.” Now who will vote for such a man? Though what he said was true: “I have nothing to do with serving the people. I want to enjoy the sweetmeats of office. To hell with the people!” He spoke with perfect honesty—but such…

Beloved master, in what way do you envisage democracy playing a part in your communes?

The question is a little complex. Democracy is not the highest goal. It is better than dictatorial regimes, it is better than monarchies, but it is not the end of the journey -- because democracy basically means government by the people, of the people, for the people, but the people are retarded. So let us say: government by the retarded, for the retarded, of the retarded. Democracy cannot be the highest possibility man can attain. It is good in comparison to other forms of government that have preceded it, but not something that can succeed it. I call that meritocracy. I want a government by the people of merit. And merit is a very rare quality. As the situation is, all the geniuses of the world are outside governments. It is hilarious: those geniuses are needed in the government because they can give the best world to humanity, but they…

The next day I answered in the public lecture, that why she is not feeling excitement anymore, because she has no more any power. She may be the president, but she cannot dominate and exploit the commune. And why she is feeling happy in Europe, because we have many communes in Europe where she is still my representative because I am not going there. But if she wants to know the exact reason, I can come to Europe, or to Singapore, or to Japan, or to Australia, anywhere she wants and immediately she will see there her excitement disappearing.