Deepen Democracy To Curate It

Nepal is in the state of political ferment. Political forces of different hues and hinges are engaged in proving their rationale and meaning in the evolving context. While the Bhutanese refugee scam in which high profile politicians and functionaries have been charged has shocked the nation, the incidences of corruption and abuse of power in high places have been widely talked about among wider populace and media. New forces have come to establish themselves as the harbinger of corruption-free clean politics in Nepal. A surge of full flown popular discontent has swept across the political landscape of the country. 

The interesting spectacle of the Nepali democracy is that the former King Gyanendra who was edged out of the throne has used the available democratic space to mobilise support and ventilate his grievances. The way democracy has malfunctioned, and political leaders have failed to deliver to fulfil the needs of the people can be criticised beyond any compunction but the values and ethos of plural democracy cannot be faulted on any excuses. Any intent and actions to reverse and roll back the basics of plural democracy cannot be justified on the pretence of the present anomalies besetting the country. 

Accommodative ambience

Within the larger and accommodative ambience and arena of democracy and political plurality, different views, interests and groups can co-exist and they can use the space to articulate, organise and mobilise support for their own sake. However, reversal of democratic values and ideals cannot curate the system. The remedies need to be pursued through deepening and widening of democracy itself. In this regard, Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen’s expositions on democracy are relevant which are excerpted in this article in a copious manner. 

According to Amartya Sen, democracy is a demanding system, and not just a mechanical condition like majority rule taken in isolation. The merits of democracy and its claim as a universal value can be related to certain distinct virtues that go with its practice. Indeed, three different ways can make democracy relevant to enrich the lives of the citizens. First, political freedom is a part of human freedom in general, and exercising civil and political rights is a crucial part of lives of individuals as social beings. Political and social participation has intrinsic value for human life and well-being. 

Second, democracy has an important instrumental value in getting the hearing of the claims to political attention including claims of economic needs. The practice of democracy gives citizens an opportunity to learn from one another, and helps society to form its values and priorities. Even the idea of needs, including the understanding of “economic needs,” requires public discussion and exchange of information, views, and analyses. In this sense, democracy has constructive importance, in addition to its intrinsic value for the lives of the citizens and its instrumental importance in political decisions. A proper understanding of what economic needs are – their content and their force – requires discussion and exchange. Political and civil rights, especially those related to the guaranteeing of open discussion, debate, criticism, and dissent, are central to the process of generating informed and considered choices.

These processes are crucial to the formation of values and priorities. It is difficult, in general, to take preferences as given independently of public discussion. Some who dispute the status of democracy as a universal value base their argument not on the presence of regional contrasts. These alleged contrasts, according to Amartya Sen, are sometimes related to the poverty of some nations. As per this argument, poor people are interested, and have reason to be interested, in bread, not in democracy. This oft-repeated argument is fallacious, Nobel Laureate Sen contends.

The protective role of democracy is particularly important for the poor. This obviously applies to potential famine victims who face starvation. It also applies to the destitute thrown off the economic ladder in a financial crisis. People in economic need also need a political voice. Democracy is not a luxury that can await the arrival of general prosperity. There is very little evidence that poor people, given the choice, prefer to reject democracy. There are arguments marshalled on behalf of the government of South East Asian nations like Singapore and Malaysia contending that so called Asian values contrast with alleged Western ones. Likewise, some Western intellectuals make an attempt and characterise similar contrasts and contradictions from the other side including what is said as the oriental values. But even though every Asian pull may be matched by a Western push, the two together do not really manage to dent and deride democracy’s claim to almost a universal value, argues the Nobel laureate Amartya Sen.

Universal value

A number of issues discussed above make it clear that democracy is an inalienably universal value. Needless to repeat, the value of democracy includes its intrinsic importance in human life, its instrumental role in generating political incentives, and its constructive function in the formation of values. These merits are not regional in character. Nor is the advocacy of discipline or order. Heterogeneity of values seems to characterise most, perhaps all, major cultures. The cultural argument does not foreclose, nor indeed deeply constrain, the choices we can make for democracy. 

Nobel Laureate Dr. Amarty Sen emphasises that the choices for democracy have to be made taking note of the functional its roles and values. The force of the claim that democracy is a universal value lies, ultimately, in that strength. Democracy, therefore, cannot be disposed of by imagined cultural taboos or assumed civilisation predispositions imposed by our various pasts. Any debate regarding the pros and cons of pluralism and democracy in Nepal should therefore take cognizance of the values and perspectives endowed with it. Flimsy arguments against democracy do not hold any sense and logic.

(The author is presently associated with Policy Research Institute (PRI) as a senior research fellow.  rijalmukti@gmail.com)