|
|
When we find that some political entities describe themselves as being democratic, our idea about what democracy is becomes diffuse. Because the basic nature of a language is such as allows any word to be defined arbitrarily, it is logically impossible to claim that the original and usual definition of democracy is the only definition of democracy. Therefore it is logically impossible to say with certainty those describing themselves democratic are not democratic. Both the original and usual definition and the definition that some political entities use as a basis for describing themselves democratic stand on an arbitrarily created basis of definition.
When some political entities call themselves democratic entities in such a way as to be inconsistent with what is usually understood as democracy, I see nothing to be surprised at and to be angry with. Nothing to be surprised at because it is not inconsistent with the inherent nature of a language and nothing to be worried about because the motive behind their use of the term 'democratic' is not to indicate that they meet all requirements that must be met by any political entity for being democratic in accordance with the usual and original definition of democracy. The motive is to indicate that they have certain characteristics that seem undemocratic to those believing in the original definition but democratic to them. There is nothing to be worried about because their notion of democracy is not the same as that of democracy based on original definition. One might think that there is something to be angry with on the ground that the term 'democracy' can not be defined in a way different from the way in which it was originally defined and is usually defined. This is no more than an irrational thinking in that it is inconsistent with what a language inherently suggests about the definition of a word.
This essay deals with how democracy can be developed and strengthened in Nepal with the usual and original definition in mind as what democracy is and with the definition inconsistent with the usual one in mind as what democracy in the usual sense is not (but not as what democracy is not). This essay does not deal with this question with the definition inconsistent with the usual one in mind as what democracy is not because, as has been stated above, saying that this definition is not what democracy is cannot be made stand on a logical basis.
The first thing that the attempt to develop and strengthen democracy should probably begin with would be to identify problems facing various demographic groups whom democracy in its original sense is meant for. In Nepal, these groups include ethnic groups, Dalits, people of Terrai origin, and people belonging to so-called higher caste (Chhetri and Brahaman). All of these groups except group of people belonging to Chhetri and Brahman have lagged far behind in almost all areas of national life as compared to Chhetris and Brahamans.
This has basically two reasons First, Brahamans and Chhetris who were and fare always involved in the mainstream of the nation lacked (probably still lack) a feeling of incorporating them into the mainstream of the nation. Second, they have not organized themselves against this tendency strongly as to bring about the system that requires them to involve in the mainstream of the nation. These two reasons constitute the hint for how to ensue that they become an important part of the national life. More directly, the analysis of these reasons would suggest that those who have been taking advantage from the whole mechanism of the state for a long time must not be allowed to make the inequitable state machinery exist to suit their interest. This is a fact. But, it is not easy to translate this fact into action. It requires different sectors of the nation to work together. I/NGOs can become an important part of the joint attempt to realize this fact.
In Nepal, a vast majority of people are beset by poverty. It tends to serve as an obstacle to the strengthening of democracy. Democracy in its usual sense is really a favourite thing for at least a vast majority of people in any community. But when poverty exists in its severe form presence of democratic structure might be wrongly though of as an obstacle to development. When democracy is thought as an obstacle to development, poverty is more likely to act as an impediment to democracy because poverty alleviation wrongly is thought to be a product of end of democracy. When democracy is thought of as a hindrance to development, the way to bring about development or to alleviate poverty becomes to avoid democracy. Therefore, poverty alleviation should be the central focus of democracy.
In fact, this is what is happening in Nepal. The armed effort to end democracy in its original and usual sense being carried out by CPN (Maoists) in Nepal can be described to be attributable to the fact that extreme poverty fooled most Maoists at any level of party into thinking that wiping out democracy (in its usual sense) is the only best possible way to do away with extreme poverty. The above analysis of the causal association between extreme poverty and democracy also applies to other social evils. For example, lack of involvement in decision making process at any governing level of the nation also correlates to development and strengthening of democracy. When this usually undesirable situation exists, it works as a stumbling block to the strengthening of democracy in two ways. Firstly, it results in the emergence of new groups of people seeing end of democracy as the solution to this problem. Second, it results in the emergence of groups seeing violence as the way to strengthen democracy. When these analyses are linked to the question of strengthening and developing democracy, it can be said that the concerted effort must be made to end all of forms of social political and economic problems.
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Ajit Rai
I take a deep interest in development and underdevelopment as well as in politics, especially in its relation to economics. Currently, I am undertaking systematic research, and intend to theorize about Nepalese development and underdevelopment from a socio-philosophical approach.
|
Comments
Thank you Bishnu Bahadur Khatri | Jul 19th, 2004
Dear Ajit,
Thank you for your article on Democracy in Nepal.It is most informative and detail.It helps to know about democracy and Nepal
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
