The Youth Councils: Democracy in Apprenticeship
As years passed, Pradyumna and Aniruddha came to an age where they could no longer simply observe—they needed to act, to test their ideas, to fail and learn in ways that theory could not teach. Krishna, understanding this, created youth councils: bodies where young people from different quarters could bring grievances, propose solutions, and implement decisions under gentle oversight.
The councils were given a budget from the city treasury and real power to allocate it. Small infrastructures were their proving ground: repairing wells, planting trees, organizing work-sharing groups. Pradyumna gravitated toward efficiency and long-term planning; Aniruddha toward experimentation and innovation. The councils became laboratories where different approaches could coexist and compete.
Some initiatives failed spectacularly. A group of young men invested heavily in a method of water conservation that proved ineffective and wasted resources. Rather than punish them, Krishna asked them to present their failure publicly and explain what they would do differently. They did, and their second attempt, informed by failure, succeeded. The city learned that failure, if examined honestly, is education.
Younger members of the councils—teenagers as young as fourteen—were taught to listen, to disagree respectfully, to count votes fairly, and to accept decisions they did not prefer. It was rough democracy, often inefficient, sometimes chaotic, but it created a generation that understood governance not as something done to them but as something they had a hand in creating.
By the time Pradyumna and Aniruddha came of age for full roles in the assembly, they brought with them a cadre of young people trained in deliberation, accountability, and the hard work of turning ideas into reality. Krishna observed them and smiled—not because they were perfect, but because they had learned what no manual could teach: that power without participation breeds resentment, but participation without power breeds cynicism. True governance required both to be present together.
The youth councils became a permanent institution—each generation training the next not in obedience but in the arts of shared decision-making. Dvaraka was learning, slowly and imperfectly, that succession was less about finding a better ruler and more about building a populace capable of participation.