A reputed and credible political analyst’s comment on a recent TV program was quite thought-provoking for me, and for a large number of people in this country. Referring to some research done by a university, he said: “We the common people don’t want democracy, we want peace.” When posted on a social media site, the statement invited quite a lot of controversy. Many people opposed the views of this commentator, saying: “Without democracy, there can be no peace.” It’s quite understandable that democracy certainly is the cornerstone of peace in the present-day global scenario. There may be many definitions and justifications for democracy and the process of establishing democracy in a country. However, when the people, the common people, are pushed to the fringe, perhaps the only thing they can ask for is “peace”. The process of establishing democracy has become so costly for the people that one cannot blame the lot if they say that they don’t want democracy anymore. They simply want to earn their livelihoods, their children to be educated so that they can also earn their livelihoods when they grow up, to spend time with their families, and go to bed at night in order to wake up the next morning and start working again. Their dream may not be of a democratic country; they might be more interested in living in an environment conducive to their daily needs. The very foundation of Bangladesh’s independence was freedom and economic emancipation. The people of Bangladesh hoped for it and made this country free from those who were not looking after them. However, since then, democracy has hardly existed in this country. Either the bulk of the time was spent in the fight for establishing democracy, or the dictatorial rulers intervened when they saw the upholders of democracy deviate from the spirit of democracy. That’s how the non-democratic rulers have governed the country. The people haven’t seen democracy in the last 43 years. What they saw was indeed the rule of a few, which political scientists define as a plutocracy. We have seen how democracy warriors, in the name of the people’s interest, have always worked for themselves without thinking of the people. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be so much violence, bloodshed, death, etc, for establishing democracy. For us, democracy means honesty, integrity, patience, tolerance, resilience, and encouragement. The sad aspect is that we haven’t had any of these elements in our pursuit of democracy. Yes, as HL Mencken said, under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule – and both commonly succeed, and are right. But that doesn’t mean it has to come at the cost of people’s lives and their property. If you talk to the average voter in this country, you’d certainly find the best argument against democracy. If the process of upholding democracy itself becomes tyrannical, the end-users (the people) of democracy have no other option but to find solace in discarding democracy. It’s not that they want non-democratic powers to govern them; when democracy practitioners aren’t delivering, negating the process of democracy is the people’s way of saying: “Give us a break, we want peace.” Now, the questions may arise: How would you establish good governance if there’s no democracy? What method of running the state is likely to ensure the desired peace? Well, we have seen many: Democracy, autocracy, social democracy, socialism, sharia rule, etc. Democracy as a method so far has proven to be the most effective one across the world. It’s the best example of a people-centric system, where the commoners get a say about their leaders’ actions. And democracy is likely to survive in the future. However, in a country where corruption becomes the prime object during our pursuit for democracy, greed is more visible than the serving of the masses. Leaders lack remorse even when common people are dying for their actions, a strange sense of bitterness about democracy is likely to set in their minds. It is then the people who would care less; they would become nonchalant about any form of government. They would only care if and when the violence has stopped, whether their children are safely going to schools, whether they have the cash to buy their food, and whether they can see a future for themselves. Some analysts would say: “Things will be alright when there’s good governance in the country.” But again the questions may arise: When will the governance be good? After we become democratic? Till then, no peace? by @ekram kabir
Posted on: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 09:40:51 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015