Pursuing a democracy friendly political culture
Dr. Md. Shairul Mashreque :
The essence of democracy is governance by consultation. It proclaims resolving any crisis through dialogue, share and care. In other words, participation is the dynamic aspect of democratic political culture. Democracy does not stand for violence and confrontational politics. For extra-constitutional agitation politics vitiates political environment very much contraindicated in democratic practice. For the present political crisis to be mitigated the best way out is democratic practice.
Democracy has been cherished by all as the best way of governing the country with the components of popular participation through representation. The voters repose faith in parliamentary democracy for a change. The true meaning of democracy is anchored in the voice of the people as the voice of God. A real meaning of democracy as’ a rule by the majority with the consent of minority’ echoes people’s say in the public policy and decision making that concern public interests-public participation in other words.
In democracy ‘the political party that wins a majority of seats in the legislature, form the government and rules the country till the end of its tenure. There is nothing wrong in rule by majority as long as the party in power fulfils its constitutional obligations.’
The irony is that parliamentary democracy becomes tyrannical as has been the case with Bangladesh where the ruling party with absolute majority in the parliament wrecks havoc all to popular frustration.. Majority rule degenerates into tyranny of the majority if a party wins landslide victory in a parliamentary election with two-third or three-fourth parliamentary seats. In that case power tends to become absolute and ‘absolute power corrupts absolutely’. The party in power dictates terms and conditions being unchallenged in the parliamentary. The treasury bench happens to ride roughshod over the numerically weak opposition making the house a docile one. For this reason the critics of democracy lambaste it as a system that in the ultimate analysis establishes ‘tyranny of the majority.’
The parliament is thought to be a house for national debate on the vital national and global issues. The participants in the debate as people’s representatives are supposed to have oratory skills for expressing views cogently and argumentatively. The conscious citizens appreciate the art of parliamentary debate and normal practice in the deliberation process. Our law makers perhaps know parliamentary culture and traditions with pre-existing norms and courtesy that developed overtime in western democracies.
The contemporary politics in a seemingly hazy political landscape like Bangladesh suffers from the process of depersonalization as intolerance among the politicians has reaching a dizzying height Distressingly democratic institutions in Bangladesh have been somewhat affected by distortion-ridden political culture. Parliamentary participation has been going through the process of depersonalization with damaging effects on society and economy. The very recent showdown with bickering and squabbling hit the news headlines and became the talk of the town for a couple of days. The destructive politics now-a day has become a sad overtone frustrating the masses. The people do not expect any erratic behaviour from the politicians that may tarnish the image of the country.
Bangladesh syndrome of destructive politics has been well reflected in the way the politicians conducted themselves under the whirlpool of emotional predisposition far away from sense and sensibility, reason and rationality. With zero tolerance polics is sliding into anarchy with some members showing strength without any qualm of decency and decorum. The unmitigated confrontational politics centering vandalism and killings adds to the current level of political intolerance that makes urban and peri-urban areas a rumpus with rolling noise and warring gesture of party cadre comparable to terrifying dances of ghosts. They have been bogged down to ever increasingly rowdiness and rusticism. Deeply involved in blame game some quarrelsome leaders , as we have seen TV channels, made a terrible show with slang in local dialect.
From opposition’s prolonged blockade and hard lines adopted by the ruling party as clear from its unpalatable reactions with indiscreet remarks of some its front line activists it seems that the country is returning to the sinister days of confrontation. But the ruling party needs to react carefully to retain its image. Harboring politics of intolerance will create distance between the government and the opposition. Only democratic practice can minimize it.
The country is heading towards political impasse . The opposition has already taken a serious view of ruling party’s highhandedness resorting to violent means like vandalism and torching vehicles.
In whatever way the government colours the events the matter of the fact is that the bone of contention is caretaker issuse. The ruling party perhaps in an attempt to retain power militates against election under caretaker government using bitter experiences of one eleven chageover. It strongly advocated election under care taker government when it was in opposition.
Democratic institutions have been functioning since 1990 amid conflict and confrontation with major political parties as the key actors. BNP after forming government in 1991 had to go through thorny days facing agitational street politics with Awami League (AL) playing a vital role. Politics of confrontation became reinforced following the mockery of Magura2 by-election in 1994 that embroiled the country in deep political crisis. Violent political programmes on the street one after another and repressive measures to tame them with political hawks of ruling parties taking upper hand created a stalemate.
Both ruling party and the oppositional forces should put their heads together to think to shun politics of confrontation resolving outstanding political issues. The alarming situation stemming from confrontation has concerned the civil societies, diplomats and donors. They termed it as a sign of volatile political situation helping our leaders find possible way of imbroglio. Unless there is political stability there is no possibility of implementing development prgrammes contained various sectors of public policy.
People are gripped in panic because of looming risk of politics of confrontation. The peace loving citizens became worried about opposition’s show down and ruling party’s intolerance with party hawks taking the lead. The government seems to be much bothered about opposition’s politics of destruction and killing. In fact, confrontation and violence plunge the ruling party in deep embarrassment as BNP-led 20 party alliances has hardened its stance on incendiary political issues.
Distressingly public security has been in jeopardy amid political violence characterised by massive destruction, torching vehicles and other manifestation of vandalism. Protests against state terrorism or any government decisions have been reacted with violent opposition action creating panic and the situation of lawlessness. Death or serious injury may happen on way back home. The picketers set buses on fire killing innocent bus driver. Thousands of vehicles , some carrying goods and vegetables were torched , some drivers and assistants driver were burnt to death. In several incidents. Many among those burnt suffer a lot in hospital fighting against death.
Now the MPs sitting in the present session of the JSS should ponder over the matter seriously talking ias real parliamentarians resisting any temptation to rebuke the aggrieved using slang. Parliamentary committee may meet to take judicious decisions to overcome any eventualities that make death taking a heavy toll. Only present session of the parliament may take initiatives to bring the present crisis to an end. Address continuing violence not through force but through parliamentary tactics.
(Dr. Md. Shairul Mashreque, Professor of Public Administration, Chittagong University)
The essence of democracy is governance by consultation. It proclaims resolving any crisis through dialogue, share and care. In other words, participation is the dynamic aspect of democratic political culture. Democracy does not stand for violence and confrontational politics. For extra-constitutional agitation politics vitiates political environment very much contraindicated in democratic practice. For the present political crisis to be mitigated the best way out is democratic practice.
Democracy has been cherished by all as the best way of governing the country with the components of popular participation through representation. The voters repose faith in parliamentary democracy for a change. The true meaning of democracy is anchored in the voice of the people as the voice of God. A real meaning of democracy as’ a rule by the majority with the consent of minority’ echoes people’s say in the public policy and decision making that concern public interests-public participation in other words.
In democracy ‘the political party that wins a majority of seats in the legislature, form the government and rules the country till the end of its tenure. There is nothing wrong in rule by majority as long as the party in power fulfils its constitutional obligations.’
The irony is that parliamentary democracy becomes tyrannical as has been the case with Bangladesh where the ruling party with absolute majority in the parliament wrecks havoc all to popular frustration.. Majority rule degenerates into tyranny of the majority if a party wins landslide victory in a parliamentary election with two-third or three-fourth parliamentary seats. In that case power tends to become absolute and ‘absolute power corrupts absolutely’. The party in power dictates terms and conditions being unchallenged in the parliamentary. The treasury bench happens to ride roughshod over the numerically weak opposition making the house a docile one. For this reason the critics of democracy lambaste it as a system that in the ultimate analysis establishes ‘tyranny of the majority.’
The parliament is thought to be a house for national debate on the vital national and global issues. The participants in the debate as people’s representatives are supposed to have oratory skills for expressing views cogently and argumentatively. The conscious citizens appreciate the art of parliamentary debate and normal practice in the deliberation process. Our law makers perhaps know parliamentary culture and traditions with pre-existing norms and courtesy that developed overtime in western democracies.
The contemporary politics in a seemingly hazy political landscape like Bangladesh suffers from the process of depersonalization as intolerance among the politicians has reaching a dizzying height Distressingly democratic institutions in Bangladesh have been somewhat affected by distortion-ridden political culture. Parliamentary participation has been going through the process of depersonalization with damaging effects on society and economy. The very recent showdown with bickering and squabbling hit the news headlines and became the talk of the town for a couple of days. The destructive politics now-a day has become a sad overtone frustrating the masses. The people do not expect any erratic behaviour from the politicians that may tarnish the image of the country.
Bangladesh syndrome of destructive politics has been well reflected in the way the politicians conducted themselves under the whirlpool of emotional predisposition far away from sense and sensibility, reason and rationality. With zero tolerance polics is sliding into anarchy with some members showing strength without any qualm of decency and decorum. The unmitigated confrontational politics centering vandalism and killings adds to the current level of political intolerance that makes urban and peri-urban areas a rumpus with rolling noise and warring gesture of party cadre comparable to terrifying dances of ghosts. They have been bogged down to ever increasingly rowdiness and rusticism. Deeply involved in blame game some quarrelsome leaders , as we have seen TV channels, made a terrible show with slang in local dialect.
From opposition’s prolonged blockade and hard lines adopted by the ruling party as clear from its unpalatable reactions with indiscreet remarks of some its front line activists it seems that the country is returning to the sinister days of confrontation. But the ruling party needs to react carefully to retain its image. Harboring politics of intolerance will create distance between the government and the opposition. Only democratic practice can minimize it.
The country is heading towards political impasse . The opposition has already taken a serious view of ruling party’s highhandedness resorting to violent means like vandalism and torching vehicles.
In whatever way the government colours the events the matter of the fact is that the bone of contention is caretaker issuse. The ruling party perhaps in an attempt to retain power militates against election under caretaker government using bitter experiences of one eleven chageover. It strongly advocated election under care taker government when it was in opposition.
Democratic institutions have been functioning since 1990 amid conflict and confrontation with major political parties as the key actors. BNP after forming government in 1991 had to go through thorny days facing agitational street politics with Awami League (AL) playing a vital role. Politics of confrontation became reinforced following the mockery of Magura2 by-election in 1994 that embroiled the country in deep political crisis. Violent political programmes on the street one after another and repressive measures to tame them with political hawks of ruling parties taking upper hand created a stalemate.
Both ruling party and the oppositional forces should put their heads together to think to shun politics of confrontation resolving outstanding political issues. The alarming situation stemming from confrontation has concerned the civil societies, diplomats and donors. They termed it as a sign of volatile political situation helping our leaders find possible way of imbroglio. Unless there is political stability there is no possibility of implementing development prgrammes contained various sectors of public policy.
People are gripped in panic because of looming risk of politics of confrontation. The peace loving citizens became worried about opposition’s show down and ruling party’s intolerance with party hawks taking the lead. The government seems to be much bothered about opposition’s politics of destruction and killing. In fact, confrontation and violence plunge the ruling party in deep embarrassment as BNP-led 20 party alliances has hardened its stance on incendiary political issues.
Distressingly public security has been in jeopardy amid political violence characterised by massive destruction, torching vehicles and other manifestation of vandalism. Protests against state terrorism or any government decisions have been reacted with violent opposition action creating panic and the situation of lawlessness. Death or serious injury may happen on way back home. The picketers set buses on fire killing innocent bus driver. Thousands of vehicles , some carrying goods and vegetables were torched , some drivers and assistants driver were burnt to death. In several incidents. Many among those burnt suffer a lot in hospital fighting against death.
Now the MPs sitting in the present session of the JSS should ponder over the matter seriously talking ias real parliamentarians resisting any temptation to rebuke the aggrieved using slang. Parliamentary committee may meet to take judicious decisions to overcome any eventualities that make death taking a heavy toll. Only present session of the parliament may take initiatives to bring the present crisis to an end. Address continuing violence not through force but through parliamentary tactics.
(Dr. Md. Shairul Mashreque, Professor of Public Administration, Chittagong University)
