| Username |
Post |
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 16-Sep-02 02:29 PM
(Seems like a waste of time trying to post a thread in this forum. Who can spend half a day trying to post one lausy thread?)
First, it is a wrong conclusion to draw that I am opting for a monarchical control of the state. I doubt if any system will work in Nepal, to tell you the truth. More anarchy seems inevitable.
I know democracy has been trendy because of the "demonstration effect". But we also have to consider the quality of democracy. Democracy in name is no democracy. Mere elections to parliament is no democracy as we are well aware. Political freedom is still questionable; civil liberties are just in the book. I doubt there is even a half-way democracy in Nepal. Democracy has meant no more than freedom to create parties, and fight for leadership--inter and intra party tussles. The center has failed to hold, that is the reality. In no time in Nepal's history has there been a crisis of legitimacy that we have today. The situation is indeed grave; let's not kid about it. Between the India supported Maoist movement, and failure of national leadership, I would rather opt for giving power back to the people. This means intrusting people at the local level to be responsible for their own neighborhood and districts. I would not see there arising principle agent problem. The main point of my thrust for district level devolution was to reduce concentration of power at the center, which has led to total corruption. Besides, if you believe in democracy, you have to try to empower people as much as possible. I am willing to put my bet on local officials rather than national leadership. The center can regulate the fiscal, monetary, judiciary, security, foreign relation etc. It is a mischaracterization if you think I am naive enough to argue monetary policy alone constitutes a central policy.
I do not know how much of real Nepal you have seen, but I will argue that in rural Nepal, even if you can administer good public service, that would be a huge victory for gaining confidence of people. For building basic infrastructure of democracy, people at the grass root level have to be involved and targeted. Grand designs are good, but they have to be within the possibility of practical policies. Democracy is not synonymous to having promotional representatives at the national level parliament. You seem to place a bet on that, I place my bet on local level officials. Yes, I even desire to go back and be active at my district level and forego national role. My bet is to train leadership at the local level and make them responsible for producing public goods for their own area. This is just a difference of philosophy. I do not see it likely that any national leadership will be able to gain trust of the people. Neither monarchy, nor Maoist is the solution, I repeat.
The problem facing democracy might very well be related to cultural norms that is so engrained in the society. The values, symbols, norms and identity that are produced and reproduced might not be conducive to democracy--at least that is the thrust of my forthcoming proposal. I view it with great alarm that now there is Shiva Sena Nepal active within our borders. That is a chilling development to me.
The debate can go on without an end. Ultimately we have to decide where to place our trust. In my opinion, the national leadership has failed. Give local leadership a chance. Democracy starts with the people, return it to the grass roots!
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 16-Sep-02 02:30 PM
I can't believe I had to waste half a day to post the above thread.... Brings out the question: Is it worth the time?
|
| SITARA |
Posted
on 16-Sep-02 08:20 PM
Siwalik ji:
Very valid points.... I agree with you entirely! Empower the people, educate them, make them accountable...at grass-root level. Very well put!
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 16-Sep-02 09:16 PM
As much as I love to talk about hating the politicians and the system, that's all we have to work with. There is no turnign back neither towards the Maoists nor to the King. The neighborhood love will have to come eventually when we find a middle ground so that we can have stability, educational reforms, growth in trade, FDI, resources mobilization, tourists etc.
|
| AP |
Posted
on 16-Sep-02 09:50 PM
I hate to say this that one has to accept the reality. Nepal is consists of about 80% agro
based population and out of that 80 % are under poverty lavel. Late Mahan Leader B.P
realized that and in the final fase of the 2036 Referendum he instructed his followers to cast their votes in yellow sign instead of blue sign. Which lenthen the life of Pnachayat era of about 7 years. Nepali congress could not realize the reality of leftist parties existense even after the emergence of the present Multy Party System and rather tried to listen to RPP which helped to bring down the Govt of Girija . Nepali congress and the followers enjoyed when Supreme court rejected the Late ManMohan's decision to desolve the Govt. in 1995 which was not the appropriate roles of the Supreme court and which made King Birendra as a Supreme power. In Nepali term Nepali congress could not chhutyanu the gu (RPP) and the Gobar Leftist parties. Now what you want from DEuba ?
First time he came in the power with the help of RPP and marrying the Royal family person.
Worst come worst Mao badi could make Presnt King as a life long king and Paras as a life long president and after that they will just get the salary and the Narayan Hiti palace will be made a Museum.
|
| czar |
Posted
on 16-Sep-02 10:06 PM
Allow me to take a side trip into what Siwalik said about Shiv Sena.
Bal Thackeray and the Shiva Sena ravaged both the people and politics of Maharasthra in the past two decades.
Just what Nepal needs: Shiv Sena's message of religious strife. This is not a surprising development given that the situation in Nepal just begs for exploitation by forces within and without. After all, why let peace have a chance when war pays higher dividends?
When religious intolerance is mixed in and stirred to the already seething pot, we are likely to witness an explosion whose fury is as yet unseen in Nepal. Given that the Muslim population is a small fraction, rioting on the scale and ferocity of of Bombay may not as yet materialize in Nepal. Or so I hope. I have watched first hand the savagery of Hindu-Muslim riots. Rest assured its not a pretty sight.
The waters have been muddied considerably with the entry of religious bigotry. What remains to be seen is how much of a hold it will take. It may be an alien concept for Nepalese, but then, so was killing each other. Look how well that took root.
We haven’t seen the worst of it yet, not by a long shot.
|
| czar |
Posted
on 16-Sep-02 10:35 PM
A central and all powerful Nepal is clearly a dysfunctional model. What remains to be see is the alternative.
Devolution of power to the district/village development committee is an idea that was examined in Nepal. What may not be apparent to all is the vigor with which it was being pursued for close to a decade.
It even has its customary foreing partner isn it, DANIDA, with an initial 10 year MOU.
With slightly over 4000 Village Development Committees (henceforth referred to as VDC’s), it’s impossible to overlook them for both their political and development potential. It’s the VDC’s that can make or break most district level politicians fortunes. As well as implementation, or lack thereof, of development projects. Or anything else for that matter, be it tax and revenue collection to health and education policy implementation.
It had been thought that the approach to encouraging village level participation in policy formulation, not just execution, would eventually strongly shape the national debate. Thus giving democracy a firmer footing.
This, or some such, may be the only viable and equitable model for the future. That is, IF tomorrow comes.
|
| smr |
Posted
on 18-Sep-02 03:31 AM
Siwalik,
To say democracy is trendy and then turn to culture and tradition and suggest that they be our guiding principle in forming our mode for vision and prosperity has completely thrown me off.
I even don’t know where to begin on this cultural and tradition stuff: a select ethnic elitism (Brahmi/Chettri), male domination, horrible status of women and Dalits, untouchability, relaxed attitude towards child labor, hierarchical feudalism, hundreds of superstitious practices, a deep-rooted caste system, dowry system, a religion full of rituals, boys’ status over girls’, bakshis system, hajur-hajur system, power-puja tradition, culturally sanctioned numerous holidays, and corrupt mentality and so on.
Plus, the national leaders are feudalistically engrained into our local soils, tradition, and cultura. It is hard to break.
So, are you suggesting a constiutional convention to see exactly what the people want?
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 18-Sep-02 10:19 AM
I am not sure how strong local bodies are better than one mighty central body in Nepal. People are influenced more by basic necessities than political awareness. Empowering citizens is an excellent idea but are citizens ready to be empowered? Do citizens even know what is empowerment? Can they maintain or enhance what they have (empowerment)? Also, there are poeple in Nepal who would rather sit closer with India than with Nepal. How would a powerful local bodies where these type of people call themselves leaders would contribute to a better democratic Nepal?
No nation has perfect system (socio-economic-political) but some are obviously better than many others. As long as Nepalis are not aware what to expect in Democracy and how to expect their expectations, just forming a constitutional convention/assembly won't do much good. Citizen awareness is the key for the success of people oriented system. However, starving and unsecure citizens care less about the political awareness.
Nevertheless, we need to start from somewhere with something. So, I think we should start with socio-economic support system from the bottom up.
On personal note, Siwalik.....I was in Tenn. and AL not too long ago. I met a former apartmentmate of yours. Went to Gadsden, also. Felt a pinch in heart while passing forest river. good memories. How is your study going? I felt so good to know that you're pursuing a doctorate degree in international business(?). Didn't go to Boaz, though. A dude in Boaz once called Binaya "Taco Bell" thinking pasa is from Mexico. ....Goodluck..Siwalik [range overlooking your hometown (?)].
|
| smr |
Posted
on 18-Sep-02 11:07 AM
(Follow-up to my earlier posting.)
The debate about culture vs democracy will not take us anywhere. Let us take a look at it differently.
I feel that if we were to seek any adjustment in our democratic mechanism to make it suitable for our "situation," we should do so by seeking the consent of those who will be governed.
Should we or should we not?
How do we do it?
Can the constitutional assembly provide the answer? That is what the East Timoreans did just recently. Letting the people decide. What are we afraid of?
Are we willing to put everything on the table: secularism, republicanism, and the nature of the devolutionary structures.
Is this the right process that will accomodate a forum to raise concerns that people like you, me, and many thousands of others have?
I raise this issue because if the system is fine and the leaders are the culprits, we need to go after the leaders with reforms dealing with transparency, crime, and punishment. Leave the system alone. If the system is bad and the leaders are the by-product of the bad system, then we need to take it to the masses for their guidance, debate, and approval on a new structure. Either way, we may need people's feedback.
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 18-Sep-02 11:34 AM
....If the system is bad and the leaders are the by-product of the bad system,.....
Can you see the system you are talking about? I can't. The by-products (your word) are so widely spread that I can't even see the system anymore. These by-products have grown up so much that now they appear to be independent of the system itself. We got to clean these "jhyaus" to get to the system. If you think the system is dead then we've got to get rid of the parasites before we can bury/cremate the dead system. If we leave these parasites alive they certainly will infect the new one. If we bury them with the system they will find a way to creep out and get in the business they are expert at.
We shouldn't do something just because somebody else did. We have to know (this is a very tedious and challanging thing to do as we all know) if we are ready for that "something". Just my thought. I am not trying to prove anybody wrong here.
Bhoko ra asurkhsit janata lai na prajatantra chahiyeko chha na maobad. mero bicharma.
|
| mantra |
Posted
on 18-Sep-02 02:19 PM
Sparsha,
Your posting reminds me of a statement that I read a couple of weeks ago by some Mantri: In Nepal, it is the poverty that is getting in the way of development.
|
| sparsha |
Posted
on 18-Sep-02 02:49 PM
mantra, so what is your take?
In Nepal, it is the poverty that is getting in the way of development or it is the development that is getting in the way of poverty? or what would you have said if you're to comment on the current state of Nepal ? How, in your opinion, should the problems of Nepal be addressed?
|
| mantra |
Posted
on 18-Sep-02 03:54 PM
Sparsha,
"In Nepal, it is the poverty that is getting in the way of development or it is the development that is getting in the way of poverty? or what would you have said if you're to comment on the current state of Nepal ? How, in your opinion, should the problems of Nepal be addressed? "
My opinion does not matter. We are just chat liners having some conversation. The ostrich has to get his head out of the sand and read the following options, and judge for itself:
(1) Either the country has to go after the maobadis big time to wipe them out with the help of some international effort. It will not happen on our own.
Or
(2) If you can't do that then sit down and negotiate.
Or
(3) Bring back 2017 much more massively.
The current dangerous foot dragging is a non-option. I am not saying there are no other problems. I am just putting the priorities down.
You are an intelligent person, go figure which one is the most practical one for Nepal. Remember, we are (I am assuming) in some cozy nice country doing this write-up drinking coffee or beer and working on our dissertations or living our lives as professionals.
Don't ignore the short-term and long-term consequences of each action. You will have your answer.
|
