Violent Expression Of Frustration

During his just concluded nationwide awareness campaign, CPN-UML chair KP Sharma Oli made a whirlwind tour to the mid-hill regions, where he met with people and spoken at rallies.  A two-time kidney recipient and 72-year old Oli has drawn praises for leading an almost month long awareness trip. The UML held its campaign for 18 days during which Oli travelled 2,000-km. Despite his campaign aimed at reviving the party’s fate in the next general elections, a Dhankuta youth attempted to assault him at one of such rallies. The main opposition party, however, avoided delving deep into the incident, dismissing it as an act of an inebriated youth.

Although any type of physical assault on a leader or others should be condemned and the perpetrators punished appropriately, many individuals, including political observers and common people, feel that acts of violence or attempts to physically injure popular political figures can be driven by a range of factors. Such behaviours, however, are uncommon and do not reflect the mindset of the majority of individuals.

Reasons 

Several reasons may be cited whenever such incidents occur. There may be widespread dissatisfaction with political parties and their senior leaders because the frustrated people often believe the leaders and their parties have failed to deliver on promises made to communities. In general, the role played by media in both in harming or building leaders’ image is crucial when it comes to such attacks. This is true if the media, particularly social media platforms, begins to write negatively about leaders; it impacts people, and the latter begin to rebel against the leaders. And, in some situations, they resort to violence.

Our top-ranking leaders have experienced the wrath of some individuals who have not shied away from physically assaulting leaders. From UML chair Oli to late Sushil Koirala, Jhalnath Khanal, Ram Sharan Mahat, Bam Dev Gautam, Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda, Maoist leader Jhakku Subedi, and Ram Chandra Paudel, they have all been physically attacked. In the meantime, attacks of various types on leaders have also occurred in international forums. Years ago, an enraged Iraqi journalist tossed shoes at US President George W. Bush during a press conference in Iraq. A disgruntled voter attempted to hit French President Emmanuel Macron during an electoral rally. Many such occurrences have taken place around the world in which leaders, ministers, and government heads have been attacked or irate citizens have attempted to slap, beat or push them out of anger. 

In several other incidents, disgruntled people's violence has turned into assassination bids. Individuals with radical ideals assassinated five US presidents, including Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy. Closer to home, two Indian prime leaders, Indira Gandhi and her son Rajeev, were assassinated by people who held extreme views on their ideas. During a decade-long insurgency in Nepal, several leaders of political parties suffered physical threats, and numerous district leaders, party workers and well-wishers were killed by insurgents. However, no key figures were killed in the deadly conflict. Despite infrequent incidences of physical assaults, it is gratifying to learn that no politicians have received deadly threats in recent decades.

There is no denying that those who are dissatisfied with the political system or government policies may resort to violence to vent their frustration or disapproval. Some individuals may hold specific political leaders accountable for perceived injustices, corruption, or abuses of power. They may regard violence as a means of exacting vengeance that will "satisfy their souls." Individuals with radical political convictions may turn to violence in order to advance their ideals or causes. In certain circumstances, people choose to use violence against leaders in order to gain instant fame.

This may also explain why the dissatisfied lots have utilised severe measures — violence —against leaders. Poverty, injustice, and a lack of opportunity can all lead to dissatisfaction and pessimism. In many circumstances, people may roundly blame political leaders for these problems and resort to violence to vent their dissatisfaction. Individuals might be swayed by group dynamics or social movements that condone or advocate violent actions against ‘erring’ political leaders. Also true is the fact that individuals who engage in violent activities may have underlying mental health concerns that contribute to their behaviour in some situations. Although this does not justify the violence, but this may be a factor in contributing violence against leaders.

The latest developments in Nepal demonstrate that our leaders do face unthinkable consequences at many occasions. They may be physically attacked during rallies, meetings, and engagement sessions, as these areas are also frequented by disgruntled people looking to vent their rage against the parties and its leaders in whatever way they can. They may haggle, harass, or attack leaders in retaliation for 'perceived injustice, blunders, and biases' of parties.

Citizens’ concerns 

It is critical to address the core causes of these problems, promote open dialogue, and establish inclusive political systems or mechanisms that answer citizens' concerns. Political leaders, in turn, should attempt to communicate with their voters, address issues, and work to create trust within the community. In Nepal, there is a widespread belief that the country has succumbed to political parties and their leaders, who have failed to help people achieve prosperity and growth. Leaders and political parties have repeatedly promised to provide services to the people. But, in reality, no discernible changes have occurred in the lives of poor Nepalis.

Meanwhile, the leaders have swiftly become wealthy during the last two decades. Accusations are rife that corruption, inactivity, and nepotism have taken root in the country, where public departments have been turned into a bastion of corruption and red-tapism, further frustrating a big chunk of citizens. Few of these folks have the audacity to go the extreme route after accusing authorities of doing "nothing" to improve their standard of living. No one should prioritise violence to get things done in his/her favour. But our leaders must understand that if they continue to ignore the pressing needs of the people, many of them may become the victims of physical assaults from the dissatisfied individuals every now and then.

(Upadhyay is former managing editor of this daily.)