Promoting Public Sphere Of Politics

The homo politicus, the sphere of politics, is the first sector of political society manned by the state, political system, political parties and many public organisations that influence this sphere. What makes a condition political is the contest of various actors over identity, interests and ideology where they bring resources, skills and strategy at their disposal to win political games. Politics fails to become political if its rules of the game do not serve public good.  Politics is ingrained in the rights of people and steers the state and its decision making agencies affecting the entire Nepali population. It also sets a broad frame of the constitution for order, justice and governance. The emerging participatory and pedagogical notion of Nepali politics driven by information revolution is rooted in the robust nature of the public that deliberates, consults and influences public policy, laws and decision-making spheres. 

The democratic politics ideally keeps separation, balance and checks of power, decentralises the functions of authorities to local self-governance and makes the sovereign Nepalis its equal stakeholders.  Obviously, Nepal’s constitution has internalised many ideals of enlightenment allowing people to organise, express and live their self-chosen lives. Yet, the animation of these ideals linger without filling the vacuum. So long as coalition politics of the nation remains maladapted to law, political bickering, backstabbing and zero-sum mentality of leadership spoils the integrity of the homo politicus thus leaving its pathway to baffling ineptitude and human rights struggle of Nepalis largely unfinished. 

Rules of the game

The homo economicus, forms the second sector of economic society, which converts nature into an economy to fulfill basic human needs of Nepalis and engages them in production, consumption, exchange and distribution of public goods in the entire society. It utilises the market incentives to alleviate the scarcity and realises the objective of the Nepali state underlined in the directive principles and policies set in the constitution.  The rules of the game for politics and economy are well-defined. Both are obliged to maintain a balance between inputs and outputs of polity, comply with the rule of law and enable the economic actors to pay taxes to subsidise the poor in their social sector progress. This sector is critical to the requirement of human existence based on prosperity and dignified life of liberty and choice.

However, the syndicate nature of politics and economy has scurried the choice of people in political economy. Three things are important: protection of property rights of people to easily set the wheels of social justice underlined in constitution in motion, enforcement of business ethics and national integrity system and responsibilise both to civic-minded mandate away from the monopoly. The infusion of lobbying of special interests and their active involvement in the polity has, however, blurred the division of public sphere of politics and private sphere of economy. The fulfillment of the demand of Nepali people for subsidiarity and participation and entrepreneurs for a business-friendly environment in the nation can inspire hope of the people for a fair system of economic governance.

The homo cogitans, is the third sector of society, a critical public embedded in the sphere of knowledge, inner vigilance and self-awakening. But it is no less salient in soft power but in Nepal it is overstepped by other two sectors inverting its classical sovereignty. Its sphere of enlightenment hunts for what Immanuel Kant calls self-will, maturity, audacity and liberation from all tutelage thus enabling Nepalis to take decisions by self without the direction, incentive and intimidation by others. This sector of civil society shifts people from the state of nature to civility, grows with liberal values of tolerance of diversity and looks after those left out by the utilitarian tendency of political class and economic actors. 

As an intermediary sphere, civil society’s works are geared to the mediation of extremes of power, wealth, monopoly, hierarchy and arbitrary action through nonstop social modernisation, rationalisation and humanisation of society.  The transformative power of homo cogitans loses its grit if its ideas are not compatible with the needs, rights and aspirations of Nepalis for sustainable community and connections. Genuine civil society aims to transform people from their pre-rational heritage to rational citizens capable of feeling, thinking, deliberation and cooperation for the general good of society with the conscious hope of a better future. 

In this sense, it seeks to achieve the goal of emancipation of people from fatalism, necessity, economic determinism and constraints of institutions, political culture of negation and prejudiced traditions so that public good is publicly shared by all. It differs from projectised NGOs in basic value pattern, mandate, interest and organisation, scale of operation, legal status and financing. The former is expected to make the state and market more transparent and accountable to the needs, rights and aspirations of Nepalis and even becomes the locus of legitimacy. Sometimes the functions of both overlap especially in advocacy, activism, charity and relief services to the needy. Like NGOs a number of civil societies in Nepal are, however, projectised, absorbed by political parties, state and donors thus lacking any interest for emancipatory temper and superiority of universality.

Continuing exhaustion of labour, brain, youth and business represents the anti-liberation side of modernity. Still, the leadership of civil society can be more inspiring and effective if it is autonomous of special interest groups and works in the public spirit to make democracy work for the people in an accountable and transparent manner. The public is constituted by the nation's critical mass of civil society. It dwells outside the institutional sphere of homo politicus, applies critical scrutiny about the ethical ground of politics and transforms the state of nature to cultural construction untrammeled by the capitalisation tendency of homo economicus. Nepali civil society’s works during democratic innovation remained worthy of gratitude but they were far less triumphant in channeling the social energy of people for its institutionalisation, expansion and deepening. 

During the earthquake and pandemic while elite civil society remained confined in the sidelines of politics and their project works, the new ones have bubbled up from rural and urban areas of Nepal to respond to the public’s diverse needs. They had demonstrated commitment to volunteerism marking a sense of optimism. One obvious reason for the sterility of elite civil society is their cohabitation in partisan activities, business, media and income-generating pursuits and turned them cold to the stirs of the victim of loan shark, cooperatives, banks, economic offense and social violence. They were mostly confined to issuing public statements, not engaging in the resolution of problems through cohesive social action. How can civil society keep the confidence of ordinary Nepalis in their democratic progress?

Nepal has certain problems in institutionalising the modern third sector social action: First, an uneasy bond exists among business, public authorities, political leadership, press and the public opinion owing to their partisan makeup and messy policy frame. As a result of this, the synergy of the diverse scale of civil society in bridging and bonding social capital across the empirical division of the nation is slanted. Meanwhile, in democratic diffusion, consolidation, durable progress and positive peace their functions are flimsy. Their ability to coordinate the rival interests of political parties and business and the government seem weak to offer meaningful opportunities to Nepalis.  

Human rights bodies particularly face a dilemma as to whether they report the action of the state only, political parties or influential sections of society or work to improve the condition of life of people essential for the realization of their rights and duties, increase trust in society for social coordination and ideally help resolve various layers of conflicts. The capacity of the third sector in trust building, not instrumental politics of social engineering of this post-conflict nation, can become a short hand of progress and national integration.

Second, the bulk of Nepali civil society groups do not have their own resource base. They garner resources from others and face the undesirable consequences of dependency and accountability deficits. The dependent civil society lacks an awareness of the native values of nirvana rooted in the light of  wisdom, courage and compassion  and do not come together to shape the nation’s shared vision at this time of multi-faced crises.  It has disabled them to reflect interests of Nepalis and suitably work to enrich their fulfilling lives. Their sovereign role beyond the dominant classes and alien interests can alone acquit them from external agency defining their agenda and embed them in the frame of national culture, history and values that can be the sources of their civility and agility.

Personal gain

Third, the organic Nepali civil society groups are largely funded by local resources like Guthi and Paropakar. Therefore, they can extend support to the needy without patronage. But if they are part of welfare paternalism of the state or international charity they have to bear certain obligations. A number of civil society organisations that sprouted after the democracy and peace movements died natural death for a lack of support. Others are suffocated by sustainability questions. Those working on sectoral small projects of relief and change survive. Many others are not able to escape from siloed politics where leaders from various political parties engage in a struggle for personal gain without caring for the common ground so essential for resolving national problems and creating an egalitarian and just society Nepali constitution has visualized.

Fourth, the policy environment for third sector social action is positive in Nepal granted by the constitution, social welfare act and local bodies act. But they are required to align their activities to national priorities. In a heterogeneous social and cultural landscape of Nepal, the rise of pluralistic nature of civil society is natural to spur matching array of worthy initiatives that constitute the overall wellbeing. But what is required is their role in citizenship and nation-building, not play with subsidiary identity politics that weakens their advocacy, campaigning, social movement, mutual aid, etc. to have positive effects on the operation of business and the state and can make positive dent on the democratisation of their own inner life so that they can fertilise the imagination of Nepalis in their own sovereignty and acquire ability to change the condition of living where homo cogitans can make a vital contribution.

(Former Reader at the Department of Political Science, TU, Dahal writes on political and social issues.)