Failure spectacular

JUN 28 -

Whenever politics fails, violence proves to be a prime instrument of thrusting transition on Nepal. The Kot and Palace massacres of 1846 and 2001, respectively, and the 10-year Maoist Insurgency from 1996 to 2006 are the most prominent examples of how violence provoked a shift in power from one group or regime to the next. Even the revolution of 1950 and the people’s movements of 1990 and 2006 involved some violence. The dissolution of CA sans a constitution, however, has been the most spectacular failure of politics in Nepali history because of the scale of people’s participation in the CA. 

If politics is what Thucydides meant by it—interaction, dialogue, communication and negotiation with other people at multiple levels, from the family to the neighborhood to the broader community to the state, in order to negotiate and share power—then CA’s failure was a failure of the Nepali political class to enable the sharing of power between various communities.

In the previous instances when politics failed within the narrow confines of the courts, entire families were wiped out by violence. Even if the common people weren’t directly affected by it, the power equation drastically changed and shifted from one group to another. The Maoist insurgency, too, resulted from the failure of the multiparty-era political class to practice fast and grounded

politics. They could not catch up with the times to resolve the anomalies

and absurdities in Nepali feudal society while the world reached its globalised, finance capitalist phase at breakneck speed. 

The failure of the CA to produce a viable constitution marks a paradigm shift in more ways than one. The CA was not only the most representative institution in the country’s history, but also the broadest democratic space to practice people’s power. But because political culture had its roots in the court culture of not too long ago—and its vestiges palpably lingered among politicians and the parties, and the class in power has deep roots in a clan and caste society—the CA failed to practice politics suitable to its size and representation in the era of unprecedented power-sharing around the world. Politics couldn’t get out of its lowest denominator of politicking carried out in the backrooms of resorts, hotels and offices.

As a result, the chasm between the ruling class and the ruled class that had lain more or less invisible and unarticulated, until now, has suddenly become obvious and loud. While the skirmishes, damage control, spinning and even splits continue, the consequences of the paradigm shift in politics of the new may take a while to come to the surface as a result of this sudden visibility of the dichotomy between the ruler and the ruled. If politics is still able to regroup the contending forces and successfully negotiate among various stakeholders, we may see meaningful change without much trauma. But if politics and discourse fail the second time around to produce a win-win constitution, then the future is sure to be much more unpleasant than the past. 

In order for politics to correct the mistakes, pick up the pieces and show the way once again, the political parties, especially Congress, UML and Prachanda-led Maoists, have to work overtime to review their individual and collective pasts critically and begin anew. Most of all, they have to conduct politics in a way that produces a constitution and communicate in a way that persuades people to accept the constitution. 

Since an important component of political failure is the disintegration of public discourse and inability of the means of communication to produce an informed public opinion, did the vibrant public sphere created by free media since 1990 contribute to the failure of the CA? If the answer is yes, then how much was the media to blame for this failure?  Should the media conduct itself in a different way, in a more dialogic, multi-sided way, to produce a more complex perspective on issues rather than propagandising one-sided views? The Nepali media is the most important source of people’s education about their world, after all.

In a June 2001 piece on the Royal Massacre, I had argued that the massacre occurred because the palace culture couldn’t catch up with the transformation in people’s, especially young people’s, consciousness produced by a decade-old vibrant public sphere, which was itself a creation largely of free media. 

Has something similar occurred this time around, as well?  The media culture, no matter how skewed and lop-sided, has nonetheless produced a new consciousness in the marginalised that the leaders of the political parties, many of whom operate in the mindset of the past, failed to adjust to.  Or, alternatively, they have retrenched themselves in their class and group interests frightened by new aspirations and demands.

If politics succeeds, there is room for those who have been left behind to catch up and transform themselves and their outfits; but if it fails, then we should expect more public trauma. Even as the constitution-making process has stalled, and there is no clear way forward as political parties bitterly disagree over how to proceed, the sun hasn’t stopped shining on people’s bodies and minds. This year’s SLC results alone has marked out about half a million (495,998) young men and women for the future. Out of these, only 208,235 could pass the Iron Gate of life. 

What are the implications of this rite of passage of about half a million young men and women for the country’s future political and economic health?  Since successful politics is the engine for opportunity creation for the new generation, should the failure of politics be construed as a failure to creatively engage half a million young men and women every year?  If it doesn’t happen, will that produce social unrest, turmoil and extremism of all kinds for everyone, especially the privileged and the entitled? 

So, those who think they have won the battle in CA’s failure to produce an acceptable constitution should consider that winning the battle can also mean losing the war in the long term.  In this sense, politics must not fail and public discourse must not only clarify issues, but also help politics succeed by presenting multiple views and perspectives on complex issues in order to educate people. Will the ethnically-skewed media and the political leaders be capable or willing to make politics succeed?

 

 


Source: http://www.ekantipur.com/2012/06/28/oped/failure-spectacular/356263/