| Username |
Post |
| poonte |
Posted
on 16-Jun-04 03:36 PM
Having been confined to a complete bed rest for the past few weeks due to ýkoryakkiyeko dhaadý, I have had ample time at hand to catch up on some extremely valuable readings on Nepali cultural/political anthropology. The book that I am currently reading is: ýResistance and the State: Nepalese Experiences.ý by David N. Gellner (ed). The very first essay/report in the book: ýA Heterotopia of Resistance: Health, Community Forestry, and Challenges to State Centralization in Nepal.ý by Ian Harper and Christopher Tarnowski, both of whom have spent many years in Nepal doing works in anthropology and public health respectively, evoked some profound questions in my mind about democracy vis-ý-vis Nepal ý the questions that I always firmly believed were answered by my very strong belief in the democratic process.
Every now and then, it sure is a pleasant feeling to be challenged by ideas that contradict beliefs that have been an inseparable part of my own being ý they not only open doors to new avenues in my own conscience, but create wonderful opportunities for me to challenge and sharpen my own beliefs. Allow me first to lay the context of the relevant part of the aforementioned article before posing to you all -- particularly the political heavy weights of Sajha -- the questions that deeply shook my set of what I thought were eternal beliefs in the virtues of democracy.
*****************************************
Throughout the 1970ýs, 80ýs and the 90ýs, the Nepali government(s) -- Panchayat and post-Panchayat (I still hold firm to my self restraint in calling the post-1990 period as genuinely democratic, hence the term ýpost-Panchayatý to describe that period) -- had introduced truly progressive policies in Forest preservation. They were policy guidelines that guaranteed the local control of the forests -- ideas on how to preserve, protect, and eventually, at an appropriate time, provide for the limited use of firewood, etc., were to be decided by the user groups composed of elected locals, so that they would be carefully balancing the preservation of the forests with the local needs of firewood. Needless to say, if applied correctly, and were successful, these policies would have set the stage for greater decentralization, and obviously would have sown the seeds of democracy at the village level.
However, a careful study done in 1999 -- mind you, long after the authoritarian Panchayat regime was demolished -- of the results of the supposedly genuinely democratic policies only proved that instead of empowering the poor villagers, they had only served to further empower the ýelitesý who seemed to control almost every aspect of village life. Not only the VDC (Village Development Committee, formerly Gaon Panchayat) chairMEN and his deputies were ýelectedý by a show of hands of the few close friends and families, they also happened to be the members of the Forest Conservation User Groups, and were the leaders of every other ýcommitteesý of various developmental projects in the villages. The poor and the destitute, of course, having lived entirely disempowered lives, were unable to protest.
For instance, in a case study of progressive forest policies, a helpless poor member of a particular village, ýKumariý (a pseudonym used by the authors) not only had absolutely NO say in how the Community Forests should be preserved and/or used, she now had to resort to resistance in the form of ýstealingý firewood from the protected forest(s) in order to fulfill her needs to cook daily meals for her family. On the other hand, the ýelitesý who already had total control of almost everything about Kumariýs life, were now further empowered not only to use the community forests to their own selfish advantages, but were arresting and fining the likes of Kumari who were only trying hard to survive, the first and foremost inalienable right of an individual. Furthermore, by assigning (or, ýelectingý) the same individual for the memberships in various committees, the ýelitesý would also benefit from the bhatta(s) that they would collect from attending training programs and other workshops.
When asked why she would steal from the forest, Kumari simply would say that she needed the firewood for daily survival, and that the annual ýquotaý of firewood that were decided by the ýelitesý for her were far from enough to fulfill her basic needs. Then asked why she wouldnýt raise such concerns to the committee so that perhaps the committee would be more aware of the needs of the people that it is supposed to serve, she would answer, in a sense of utter hopelessness, that there is absolutely no way that they [the ýelitesý] would listen to the poor and the most needy like her.
************************************************
Other than the staunch absolute monarchists, I am sure many of us who are relatively well-educated believe in democracy in some degree or the other ý be it constitutional monarchy, or guided democracy, or republicanism.
So, as a firm believer in democracy and a supporter of genuinely constitutional monarchy myself, I am today wondering:
1. If policies based on democracy and decentralization, albeit started with best of intentions, serves only to empower the ýelitesý and further disempower the poor and the needy, is it worth advocating full-blown democracy for a country like Nepal?
2. If the people whose mindsets are deeply tainted with a system of hierarchy, a culture of hegemonic relationships, and being submissive is the ONLY way they know, cannot make the best use of ýdemocratic reforms,ý is it even worth wasting our time and energy in something that is doomed to fail right from the beginning?
3. I do not underestimate peopleýs desire to be free and heard ý itýs not that the likes of Kumari do not know what they want. (She knew the rules imposed by the ýelitesý were unfair to her, and she chose to be free, at least at some moments, by resorting to ýstealing.ý) Therefore, whether or not Kumari-s (and Kumar-s, of course) yearn to be/need to be empowered is not a question to be pondered upon; rather, the real question to all those who advocate democracy in Nepal, albeit in varying degrees, is: How?
|
| poonte |
Posted
on 16-Jun-04 03:43 PM
How? How do we ensure that the concepts of democracy and decentralization find fertile grounds in thousands of VDCs in Nepal? Monitoring each and every VDC for a possible violation of democratic norms is not only impossible, but, with a centralized monitoring, it would also reverse the process of decentralization.
4. Finally, considering the fact that any progress, be it political, economic, or social, is always more viable if it starts at the grass roots level, how can we imagine a prosperous democracy on a national level if we can't make it happen on a VDC level?
I have yet to write off my allegiance to democracy for Nepal; however, the more I seem to learn about Nepal and the Nepalis, particularly of the vast majority who are from the hinterlands, the poor and the illiterate, the more I find myself dumbfounded on how to democratize Nepal.
Would ýguided democracy,ý instead of a full-blown democracy, be more effective and relevant in the Nepali context? I wonder.
|
| Deep |
Posted
on 17-Jun-04 06:59 AM
Poonte bro,
huna ta maile poora lekh padya chhaina tara sirsak le nai ali tarsayo ke ""Prajatantra Ko Mul Futaon..." Usai ta prajatantra futaune dherai bhayera chhyal byal huna lai sakyo aba jogaunu ta kata kata jhan mul nai futaidine ra bhanya? ugra dang dung hudaina ta prabho?
:)
|
| Marich |
Posted
on 17-Jun-04 07:34 AM
Hehe !! deep daile , tapainko chaine jo, hasauncha.. Chahine jo, tyo dhobi kholama macha marda hilole bandh bandheko yaad cha.. tapaiko ...ani macha sacha hat nalage pachi Yek lat diyera badha bhatkayeko..
tehi ho , tapainko chahine jo mul phutayeko bhanya deep daile..hehe
tapain ko chaine jo, tya mathi Poonte ko kya serious gai ra cha..ani , Cahine jo, ke bhayera Bed- ridden bha ni Poonte dai. Dimag bhitra tapiako yestai serious- serious.. Chaine jo ,kurako Mul phutya ta hoina..ho bhane ta barbad bho ni ta, tapaiko chahine jo.
tapainko chahine , jiskya matrai hai poonte Dai ..narishanush..Afno ,chaine jo,dimagma tyo mathiko jasto khatara- khatarra ..chahine jo , kura ghusdaina kya..
Aafu ta chaine jo,
" life is short,
enjoy the snort
mari lanu ke cha ra
bhatakaide dui -dine gharbara"
type ko manche kya Poonte Dai ..tapaiko chaine jo , Phatya petticoat ko kasam..:P
Dhago bangayeko ma maaaf, tapaiko chahine jo..
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 17-Jun-04 08:48 AM
ye poonte bro,
great questions there. i actually waited all of last night for this one.. anyways, i want to answer your questions so that I myself learn from your reply tomorrow. Tomorrow because its now time for England Vs Switzerland match. besides, books, politics and beer, football provides me my mental morphine.. but definately, i will get back on this tomorrow.
on full blown, all out democracy check out, Kaplan and Chua's books.
bholi hai bro..thanks for starting an interesting thread here.
your's truly,
IF
|
| Poonte |
Posted
on 17-Jun-04 11:39 AM
IF,
It sure was really nice discussing with you this subject the other day. I couldn't post my thoughts earlir as promised because my computer had some problems which didn't allow me to create a new thread. (BTW, any advice on this problem from Sahja IT experts would be truly appreciated!) Finally, I had to resort to a favor from another Sajhaite friend who volunteered to do the job for me!
Enjoy the beer and football...tara, be careful hai...balla balla jaal ma faseki machheli umkeli! Alcohol ra sports ko deadly combination le ta te(n)dai dinchha re hoi taruni harulai! ;)
Mariche!!!!!!!! Chaainjo...kati bak bak garna sakeko hola ni? Chaainjo tyo mukhaan singai Helambu ko syau kochidinchhu...chaainjo aankhai baldengrine gari...ani thaa paaulaau! :p
Kasari chaainjo bed rest hunu ni, gaanthe...chaainjo...dhaad koryakkai bho...gaai khane bhaasha ma HERNIATED DISK bhanchhan kyara...chaainjo saat juni dekhi ko shattru lai ni yesto aai nalaagos...chaainjo tei dhobini ko chyaatyaa petticoat ko kassam! chaainjo...na uthnu, na basnu...sutyaa sutai maa thyasni...aba tyo chaainjo TV kati herum, ani dui-chaar akchhar herdya ni...khopadi ma chaainjo...kehi buddhi ghusos bhanera.
Ani aafu chaainjo achel kata hun ni? Naati-natina laai chaainjo...aaramai chha? Kaanchhi natini ta chaainjo...12-rai barsha ma poila gai re? Suneko, chaainjo...kahile sohra pugli ra ma bhagaamla bhanera baseko chaainjo...khwaidyo kun chaai chaainjo kodi laa moordar le loppa! ;)
Deep!
Prajatantra jogaam re? Khai prajatantra? Kata gayo prajatantra? Kasto Prajatantra? Aako bhaye po jogaunu ni...tesaile po futaaidim tyo mul bhaneko ni!
|
| Deep |
Posted
on 17-Jun-04 11:59 AM
Prajatantra bhaye pani nabhaye pani jogamne kura garna parchha--Poonte bro, natra feri yessima aatankakaari bhanera lakhetlan prajatantrakariharule.
sachi yo prajantantra bhanya ke re bro?
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 18-Jun-04 08:00 AM
It is not even one of = it is not
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 18-Jun-04 08:00 AM
Poonte bro,
Very intersting points and challenging questions there. Here's my take on the issue(s) you raised:
If you have followed my postings on Sajha, I've always said that, in a country like Nepal, we shouldn't advocate/support a full blown, all-out democracy. Don't get me wrong: I am not being a staunch-absolute-monarchist here when I say it. Like many of you, I too believe in democracy. It is not even one of the best systems in the world, IT IS THE ONLY BEST SYSTEM IN THE WORLD. However, for this best system to work, there needs to be certain preconditions and those pre-conditions can only be achieved if we democratize in a phase-wise manner. We need to plan out the phases. In the first phase, reform the bureaucracy, development policy etc. Then in the second phase, have legal reforms, introduce the concept of FREEDOM of SPEECH guaranted by the laws. The third phase should include polices on eliminating or at least reducing the ethnic imbalances and finally an "integrated-all encompassing/incorpoating" full blown democracy.
The paragraph you quoted actually makes a lot of sense, and if you actually think about it, its a landmine waiting to explode. When we talk about democracy, we do not think about these "social-economical" problems, we only focus on "freedom" and the "party-politics". So, our idea of democracy is just limited to having the rights to say anything you want to anyone, and seeing your "neta" in Singha durbar. As long as these two things are there, then Nepal's doing good democracy wise, if one or both of these are absent, then Nepal's democracy is in trouble, blame the King. I don't buy this view. I tend to focus more on the problems of what's happening socially and economically and in nepal's context, the surge in ethnic nationalism movements and how it will lead to a long-lasting ethnic/civil war.
Back to Kumari: What do you see? A small minority, which Amy Chua likes to call, "market-dominant minority" dominating the majority. Sooner or later, the majority rebels against the "dominant minority" and what do you have there: an ever lasting civil war, similar to what happened and still happens in the Philippines, Indonesia, Kenya, Rwanda and Zimbabwe, and many other places. Why do wealthy Chinese get killed in the Phillipines and Indonesia? Why is there so much hatred against the Indian minority in Kenya? Why the Hutus and the Tutsis started killing each other in Rwanda? What brings people like Mugabe to power in Zimbabwe?
The problem in Nepal is even serious than in those afore-mentioned countries because of the ethnic diversity. First, democracy fails to deliver to the people like Kumari. It only empowers the people who were empowered by the previous regime(s). This unequal distribution of wealth/resources gives rise to jealousy. Which leads to this strong urge to rebel (for example stealing) and a majority-leader would capitalize on this feeling of disgust and rebellion, and who would, instead of coming up with the policies/plans to say, redistribute the wealth and passify the majority, would actually incite it to go to extremes against the minority. This means, today Kumarti stole, tomorrow she will kill. And why? Because in democracy, many leaders come to power by capitalizing on the popular sentiment, and believe me, those popular sentiments are not always freedom of speech and Pratinidhi Sabha. So you'll see a frustrated, angry majority electing undemocratic people to the house. This instead of solving the majority's problems, actually creates more problems. This is only the beginning. The second phase of this problem would be even more serious: Ethnic conflicts.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 18-Jun-04 08:22 AM
Ok, back from my smoke break:
Ethnic Conflicts: If things continue the way they are, then soon we will be seeing the Lebanon, Rwanda style ethnic conflicts in Nepal. Why? Becase the idiots who come to power capitalizing on the popular sentiments of hatred, jealousy and rebellion, do not know how to solve the "economic" problems. So what do they do? They put the blame on "ethnic" groups, just as Hitler put the blame on the Jews, Indonesians on Chinese, Rwandans on Tutsis, Zimbabwen's on the Whites.. the list is long. And in Nepal's case, the blame will be put on everyone because of the diversity: blame the bahuns; kshetris, newars, magars, rais, limbus, tamans and soon you will see everyone blaming his eighbor for his poverty or lack of oppurtunity. So, how do we deal with this? This is a very serious question, and I am in no way able or capable to answer this, but here's my own naiive views.
First, decentralize. Like you said, have an ethnically balances governmnet, and have 5 DPMs (Deputy PMs) in Singha Durbar, and make them responsible for their regions development. Call them DPMS or Special Ministers or whatever they like themselves to be called. The name is not that important here, the gesture is. When you have people belonging to the ethnic-majority of any given area taking care of that area, then it will be more effective. For example, have a Tharu/Taraibasi take care of the eastern Nepal or Tarai Nepal's problems. For inner/hilly regions, have a Limu/ai take care of the problems. This will in the first phase, give the ethnic majority (or minority) a sense of security: they have one of them in the central power structure. In the long run, the ethnic "reps" can execute development or any other policies that will focus on eliminating/reducing the problems of their regions, and this will lead to a faster development.
In the grass-root level, the governmnet has to follow the Thai model to elimiate the ethnic divisions. This is a must. How? Encourage inter-cultural/inter racial or exogamous marriages. The first generation will be half-half, the second generation will be confused but the third generation will be NEPALI. There will be no Bahun, Kshetri, Newar, Magar, Gurung, Rai, Limbu, Tharu, Satar etc. This will help proect Nepal's terretorial integrity, independence and our Rato ra Chandra Surya will stand proud, undfeateted.
IF..
Lamo po bhayecha..
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 18-Jun-04 08:26 AM
So, instead of an all out, full blown democracy at this point, I would like to see a guided or democracy with reservations in Nepal. Unless and until, the socio-economic problems are solved, wasting money on pratinidhi sabha and screaming for FREEDOM do not make sense, at least to me.
la ta poonte bro..
tapaiko bichar pani padhu aaba..
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 18-Jun-04 09:10 AM
Comparative Politics is fun.. It teaches us the pattern that almost every country go through in the "nation" building phase, hoina?
Anyways, some more ideas on Democracy:
Now the question is: Which model should we follow? Instead of looking at the American, British, Scandinavian models, we should follow the Chinese, Pakistani or Singaporean model. They all are guided democracies. And they are developing. For a country like Nepal, we need to have a strong and smart ruler like Deng Xiao Ping, Gen. Musharraf and Lee Kuan Yew.
Our democracy gives unlimited rights to the political parties to declare strikes, shut-downs etc. but does our model guaranty our kids' rights to strees-free, strike-free and politics-free education? Does it guaranty our rights to travel whenever we want? So, whose democracy is it anyways? Is it our- commoner's- democracy or the leaders', parties' democracy? It gives us Hritik Roshan kanda, and gives us non-Taraibasis rights to beat up the sojho-sajho Taraibasis in Ktm and elsewhere, but where does it guaranty the rights of these Tarai basis to feel safe in Kathmandu and elsewhere? Our haphazardly imposed democracy has lots and lots of problems. Why? because we keep on electing the idiots. Is it serving the nation right? Are we mowving forward? No. We are actually moving backwards.
|
| SITARA |
Posted
on 18-Jun-04 10:31 AM
Poonte hajur,
Was your conclusion (as I understand....):
Therefore, Nepal/Nepalis will benefit from a controlled/directed democracy under a Constitutional Monarchy?!
*****
How is your back doing? Wish you a speedy recovery!
|
| pushkar samarthak |
Posted
on 18-Jun-04 04:26 PM
Uhmmmm HOw's your back re???
Ani How's your back Sitara?
|
| Pushkar Samarthak |
Posted
on 18-Jun-04 09:10 PM
I mean after nite work
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 19-Jun-04 10:02 AM
Yo Poonte bro,
Dhaad dukheko kasto cha? I hope you are feeling better. Here's some on "phase-wise" democracy for your thinking pleasure.
From Thomas Friedman's piece on The New York Times, August 21, 2002, reprinted in his new book, Logitudes and Attitudes: The World in the Age of Terrorism (p. 209).
Here's what Larry Diamond, a democracy expert at the Hoover institution thinks regarding democratization*:
"... Encouraging these [undemocratic] regimes to gradually introduce authentic political parties, competetive and fair elections, even if they are initially only at the municipal level, more freedom of the press and greater judicial independence- as a way of laying the groundwork for democracy."
" For a period of years the current ruling families could retain key powers- over the army and the security servcies- as a check to make sure elected governments act responsibly. (The army in Turkey and the King in Thailand have played that kind of guardian role, as their societies gradually built the habits of democracy.) Constrained by powerful over-sight institutions, competing parties could learn the limits and obligations of power. Then, gradually, more power could be transferred to them."
This is what happens in the absence of over-riding and constraining power.
" Today, 118 of the world's 193 countries are democratic, encompassing a majority of its people (54.8 percent, to be exact), a vast increase from even a decade ago. In this season of victory, one might have expected Western statesmen and intellectuals to go one further than E. M. Forster and give a rousing three cheers for democracy. Instead there is a growing unease at the rapid spread of multiparty elections across south-central Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America, perhaps because of what happens after the elections. Popular leaders like Russia's Boris Yeltsin and Argentina's Carlos Menem bypass their parliaments and rule by presidential decree, eroding basic constitutional
practices. The Iranian parliament -- elected more freely than most in the Middle East -- imposes harsh restrictions on speech, assembly, and even dress, diminishing that country's already meager supply of liberty. Ethiopia's elected government turns its security forces on journalists and political opponents, doing permanent damage to human rights (as well as human beings)." [Zakaria, " The Rise of Illiberal Democracy, Nov. 1997, Foreign Affairs]
And what do you get when this "situation" continues and the elected leaders continue to act on their whims?
"As an unemployed Tunisian student once told me, "In Tunisia we have a twenty-five percent unemployment rate. If you hold elections in such circumstances, the result will be a fundamentalist government and violence like in Algeria. First create an economy, then worry about elections." There are many differences between Tunisia and its neighbor Algeria, including the fact that Tunisia has been peaceful without democracy and Algeria erupted in violence in 1992 after its first election went awry and the military canceled the second. In Kurdistan and Afghanistan, two fragile tribal societies in which the United States encouraged versions of democracy in the 1990s, the security vacuums that followed the failed attempts at institutionalizing pluralism were filled by Saddam Hussein for a time in Kurdistan and by Islamic tyranny in much of Afghanistan. In Bosnia democracy legitimized the worst war crimes in Europe since the Nazi era. In sub-Saharan Africa democracy has weakened institutions and services in some states, and elections have been manipulated to restore dictatorship in others. In Sierra Leone and Congo-Brazzaville elections have led to chaos. In Mali, which Africa-watchers have christened a democratic success story, recent elections were boycotted by the opposition and were marred by killings and riots. Voter turnout was less than 20 percent. Even in Latin America, the Third World's most successful venue for democracy, the record is murky. Venezuela has enjoyed elected civilian governments since 1959, whereas for most of the 1970s and 1980s Chile was effectively under military rule. But Venezuela is a society in turmoil, with periodic coup attempts, rampant crime, and an elite that invests most of its savings outside the country; as a credit risk Venezuela ranks behind only Russia and Mexico. Chile has become a stable middle-class society whose economic growth rate compares to those of the Pacific Rim. Democratic Colombia is a pageant of bloodletting, and many members of the middle class are attempting to leave the country. Then there is Peru, where, all the faults of the present regime notwithstanding, a measure of stability has been achieved by a retreat from democracy into quasi-authoritarianism" [Kaplan, Was Democracy Just A Moment, The Atlantic Monthly, 1997].
So bro, which mdoel should we follow? The Thai model or the messed-up models?
* Friedman focuses on the Middle East, and he asked Diamond regarding democracy in Arab States. However, Diamond's answer applies to every third world country, including Nepal.
|
| Poonte |
Posted
on 19-Jun-04 10:41 AM
IF and Sitara,
I will surely post my thoughts at a later time -- dui-chaar din helchekryain gareko...the back problem took a turn for the worse, so I really can't spend much time at the computer. :(
IF: Thanks for the lengthy yet very thoughtful response. I still have a lot of reservations in severing my utmost faith in democracy, but due to what I have been reading recently, some of your points regarding democracy vis-a-vis Nepal are begining to make some sense to me, although, I must admit, I still have many more unanswered questions about them. As I said above, I will get back to you later. :)
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 19-Jun-04 10:45 AM
Now Poonte bro,
The left-wing intellectuals in US and elsewhere discredit Zakaria, Kaplan and everyone else by saying that they are just theorizing or justifying the US support to Marcos, Suharto, Pinochet and the Saudis. So they are "right-wingers". I actually came across this view a few weeks ago, when a class-mate from a middle of nowhere small town forwarded me his yet to be published essay. I had never thought along that line, and it did make me think for a while: Who knows, maybe all I am reading and taking as Brahmabakya is a right wing conspiracy?. I am yet to reach to any conclusion. As of today, I stand by my views that these authors are quite trustworthy and they are not trying to justify anything. But you are mature enough, educated enough and experienced enough to come up with your own ideas- and share those with us, when you can.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 19-Jun-04 10:54 AM
Poonte bro,
Come on, I am not trying to persuade you. I am just expressing what I think is correct. And many people don't think what I think is correct. That's why I chose this nick ni bro!
:-).
Get well soon. Will love to read your views. Like the Chinese say, Hu Xiang Bang Zhu... help each other.. So, help me learn, that's all I can ask. And we can have difference in opinions, but then, I will learn how to come up with better arguments without having to use adjectives. :-).
K ho bro.. yesto kal-kalaudo jawani mai dhaad fuskaune? K ho? Chala mala thik chaina jasto cha ni? Tyo chyattya peticoat laune habsini ko dai, bhau, bau, logne, BF sabaile milera dhobi-ko dhungama luga pitya jastai dyam dyam pitya ho ki k ho?
|
