A brief lesson in classical Feudalism, neo-Feudalism, and whats required for a modern democratic state. This comes from a reading of Francis Fukuyama, through the lenses of Walskis friend Art Harun. Feudalism was the voluntary submission of one individual or a group of individuals to another individual, based on a perceived (or real) exchange of protection for service. Everywhere the weak man felt the need to be sheltered by someone more powerful. The powerful man, in his turn, could not maintain his prestige or his fortune or even ensure his own safety except by securing for himself, by persuasion or coercion, the support of subordinates bound to his service. (Bloch, Feudal Society, as quoted by Francis Fukuyama in The Origins of Political Order). I have always maintained that the contemporary Malaysian society is a neo-feudal society. It centres upon a person, or a group of persons to whom the citizenry of an area submit, in exchange of some perceived, or real, protection. That process is replicated in many areas, establishing micro polities that culminate, at macro level, in a giant political umbrella consisting of a single power point. Granted, there are oppositions within the macro polity. However, the power gap between the oppositions and the power centre is not conducive to stimulate any kind of meaningful check and balance that is necessary for the establishment of accountability. Making it worse is the fact that the oppositions are but an incohesive motley crue of political polities with sub-polities within each of them pursuing their own micro-agenda which more often than not run in opposition of each other. The oppositions not only run in opposition of the ruling polity but also in opposition of each other rendering any meaningful check on the ruling polity almost impossible and non-concerted. Tocqueville in Democracy in America posits that the relationship between lordship and bondage (in a master-slave situation) could not be upended without a change in the consciousness of the slave and the slaves demand for recognition. (quoting from Fukuyama). There lies the answer. Consciousness and the demand for recognition. At a political level, the demand for recognition manifested itself as the demand for political rights. In France for example, those demands led to the mobilisation of groups like the bourgeoisie, the peasantry and the urban crowds of the French Revolution. Fukuyama states that every advance in material well-being and technology implies, in the hands of an unchecked state, a greater ability to control society and to use it for the states own purpose. Now, isnt that frightening? It sends shivers down my spine reading it. The only way out from this conundrum is the establishment of a true modern liberal democracy in which a state, no matter how strong it is, can be checked by law and by legislatures as well as by established and independent institutions, such as the Judiciary, Audit, public watchdogs etc. Now that can only happen if a state has within it a rough balance of power among the different political actors within the society. If none of them was dominant, then they would need to compromise. What we understand as modern constitutional government arose as a result of this UNWANTED AND UNPLANNED COMPROMISE. (quoting Fukuyama at pg 325).
Posted on: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 05:10:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015