| Username |
Post |
| Biruwa |
Posted
on 06-Oct-02 12:11 PM
In our World today, 1 billion people will go hungry, 1 billion people won’t get good drinking water and 1 billion people are still illiterate and 1 billion won’t get health care. In Nepal, many of the forms of deprivation mentioned above are true. Electricity is limited mostly to the Capital and Human Rights record has been very poor. Corruption is rampant and the check-and-balance system put in place seems not to be working :-(
There is no effective opposition party, with the near assimilation of interests of the people in power i.e. self-help. Instability is never good to the economic health of a country. The world has been reaching every-greater heights in science-&-technology and the corresponding dominance in market place. Many Countries have formed Bilateral and multi-lateral trading partners for stable market.
Unfortunately, the 12 years of multi-party democracy has reduced Nepal into an even greater dal-dal. We were unable to get a leader with a clear vision and the ability to make a difference in the past decade. The political have effectively discouraged the high hopes of Nepalis in the changed system after 1990.
The question to ask now is: Is the existing system of multi-party democracy to be blamed for our present situation? Our present situation is the result of the lack of awareness and moral value system. When the country lacks integrity no system will work. Its like “iron”, with poles facing random direction, until all the poles of the iron bar faces a singular direction and thus become an effective power. Only when all the people see a common goal and begin to cooperate will we move in any direction. We Nepalis need to share a common vibe. Dissonant voices need to be heard and respected but those who go against the good the country should be firmly dealt with.
Is autocratic system the solution then? When ever there is oligarchy, the oligarchs tend to abuse their power.
At the same time, lack of a good leader had been causing our country to disintegrate. Remember, the most efficient system of management is the Military system where there is a distinct hierarchy and respect of command. Besides, our poor country can ill-afford to hold elections every year (when the irresponsible opposition can't wait to get to power). The political parties spend billions on every political election. That money can be better utilized for the land-slide victims and the under-fed.
We need to set our priorities right.
Please vote on the question of IS MULTI-PARTY DEMOCRACY SUITED TO NEPAL?
Remember :-) your vote counts.
|
| Aludai |
Posted
on 06-Oct-02 12:32 PM
I agree, dictatorial system is efficient. But that does not mean that it is good also.
Human being are inherently greedy and selfish except a few mahatmas.
Initially the dictator will try to show good things- in the stage of consolidation of power.Once he gets the feeling of invincibility, he will have to be a real mahatma to keep on doing good things.Remember- mahatmas are rare species.
In democracy, the leaders have to convince people to a certain programme.If they cannot deliver, they will be ousted next time.You can see- it is time consuming and expensive also. But then ordinary people are involved in the decision making process.
For democracy to be successful, people have to be aware of their basic rights.The other aspect is debating the issue and once the majority accepts a view, the minority will have to accept it and not resort to violence (like our maoists). You have to be patient here and if you can convince the mass, you will get your chance neat time. Hope maobadis learn it soon.
This is the principle of peaceful co-existence which is good in democracy.You may not like your neighbour, but you have to learn to live with it- as a matter of fact.
|
| Biruwa |
Posted
on 06-Oct-02 01:00 PM
You are correct, Aludai.
I too dislike dictatorship (anyway who likes? except the beneficiary/ies). Again the true concept of democracy is indeed that people can choose to dipose their leaders through peaceful means. Undortunately, that doesn't seem to be happening in Nepal's context.
The minority does not accept the majority decision and seeks to intimidate and challenge through "Street Politics". Politicians cling to power not for the good of the people but to fill their gargantuan pockets. We have seen the lackluster performance of the governments of all parties including "mili-juli sarkar".
We need to strive for the common vibe and leave behind the violence. At present the only solution is to encourage the present power holder to discharge his duties corretly. We cannot remain in deadlock and argue over what should have been and what didn't happen. King is now in power and We must let him act. Only after his action can we judge him. He has said that "he will uphold the spirit of the constitution and believes in multi-party democracy".
We can only hope that when the election is held the next time, Nepalis will elect politicians with enough talent and integrity to engineer the country out of the crisis and into the bright future awaiting us.
|
| Biruwa |
Posted
on 06-Oct-02 09:40 PM
I take this opportunity to all those sajhites who have already voiced their opinion on the question of WHETHER MULTI-PARTY DEMOCRACY IS SUITED TO NEPAL. According to the latest results Nops are 18, yas are 19. Thirteen percent of the voters want this issue discussed. These voters generally tend to be the mild "nops".While 2 sajhites have chosen the "may be" alternative.
Looking at this result there seems to be a deep (no relation to a particular sajhite ;)division among the educated class about the need of multi-party democracy in Nepal.
The outcome of the other current ballot question namely (WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THE KING'S MOVE?) gave similar indications.
The silent majority of the saja visitors seem to be giving out a different message to what a minority but frequent sajha posters are saying. The prominent members of sajha need to sit up and take note of this.
Below are some of the secrets of why people vote:
1. People choose.
2. People's choices involve costs.
3. People respond to incentives in predictable ways.
4. People create economic systems that influence individual choices and incentives.
5. People gain when they trade voluntarily.
6. People's choices have consequences that lie in the future.
|
| Biruwa |
Posted
on 06-Oct-02 09:42 PM
correction :
First line
I take this opportunity to thank all those sajhites........
|
