In a functional democracy the government is accountable to the people. In the UK, we have the power to vote, protest, engage in civic discourse, and influence policy through various democratic mechanisms. This means that, collectively, we do share responsibility for the government’s actions, especially when they support or tolerate harmful policies or leaders. If citizens do nothing while their government commits harmful acts, they share in the responsibility for enabling those actions.
I can see why you’ve brought up examples like the French burka ban and Indian strikes in Kashmir, but these actually illustrate why citizens do share some responsibility in a democracy!
The French burka ban for example, wasn’t just a random government decision- it reflects broader public attitudes and political will. If the majority of French citizens supported or stayed silent about laws restricting religious freedom, they collectively enable that policy. Democracy means governments act based on the society’s values and priorities. So while not every individual is directly responsible, citizens share democratic responsibility by either supporting or opposing such laws.
Similarly, in India, the government’s actions in Kashmir are shaped by elected officials, who are accountable to voters across the country. Even if people in Kerala didn’t vote or directly support those strikes, they are still part of the democratic system that empowers those leaders. Choosing not to engage, protest, or demand accountability contributes to the status quo.
The point is, democratic responsibility isn’t about blaming every person for every decision, but about recognising that government actions happen with public consent (whether active or passive). Citizens have power and influence through their votes, voices, and actions. Ignoring or detaching yourself from what your government does doesn’t erase your role in shaping its policies.
So accountability in a democracy is complex and collective, not simplistic or individually punitive.