Ideological Politics Loses Appeal To People

The political orientation of everyday life of Nepalis is shaped by their social interactions on the condition of their living, their experiences and understanding of public affairs. It infuses in them social responsibility to participate in policy making, a key domain of politics to acquire a good life. Now social media instantly informs them of what is happening around them and enables them to analyse the positive or negative effects. Ordinary Nepalis have a particular interest in political phenomena because they influence their cognition, attitude, feelings, sentiments, beliefs and conduct. Political life differs from other life in the sense that it involves legitimate contestation, competition and conflict over the scarce resources, power and identity. 

In the ritualised everyday work of family and economy, individuals are engaged in pursuing their personal needs without outside influence though the state of laws and the structure of power matters. Old style politics is largely an elite game of puffed up promises and speeches where ordinary Nepalis face tremendous influence on their life whether they are mere spectators or engage in certain sides with definite stake. The information revolution has made modern politics assume a participatory turn where people require the realisation of what is being promised by their leaders. It has expanded the domain of knowledge and freedom, a domain where individual choice is better realised.

Unwritten laws

Nepal’s social, economic and political life is chiefly informal where unwritten rules, not the formal laws, prevail. In the latter, people perceive, think and act as a member of larger society seeking the equality of law. Political area is a subset of social system yet it is an area of opinion making, will formation, representation and decision making bearing larger impact on public life. Therefore, people’s general cognition, beliefs, emotion, feelings, values and orientations are shaped and reshaped on the basis of the quality of politics of everyday life. They find reason to ask questions to their leaders and play roles in deciding the political outcome for their wellbeing.

Nepalis engage in political activism when alternative institutional means of political parties and civil society are less amenable to realise their needs, rights and aspirations.  Political activism is a voluntary affair. The activation of politics in society politicises the everyday life of people and democratises the public sphere where each Nepali can participate in matters of their concern. The activism of people crowns them as “public intellectuals” beyond the narrow interest, identity or ideological orientations. Leaders of political parties may have rival ideological predispositions to assert group identity and group competition for power which may not be generalisable to ordinary Nepalis as their ideologies have proved deceptive and utopian.

In Nepal, ideological politics has increasingly lost its appeal as leaders increasingly find it difficult to indigenise to make suitable choices, preferences and priorities. The existential condition of people may not be of interest to elite politicians living in comfort zones of privileges but they are the sources of legitimacy and authority as sovereignty is embedded in them. For literary figures, historians and media, they are the stuff of politics and, therefore, often communicate the plight of Nepalis both at home and the labour market abroad to conceptualise their thinking for the reforms required for improving the politics of everyday life.

The ideological dimension of political activities, like advertisement of commercial media, has artificial tone to lure voters and consumers and enrich one’s own power and wealth.  The everyday life of democratic politics is, however, value-

laden deeply reflective of human essence, their troubles and grief. In this sense, ideologically or media-saturated everyday life can hardly find a deeper meaning of human nature, their passion, impulse and motive which by no means is entirely non-political. Both are close to consumer culture and do not capture the essential humanity of higher order sanatan dharma aim to animate. 

Still both influence intellectual fads, fashions, styles and articulation exposing Nepalis to crisis socialisation. One key goal of politics is to improve the general conditions of Nepalis lives. The underlying logic of party and constitutional promises is to affirm this by means of proper policies, institutions, laws and practices.  Everyday political life of Nepalis is not essentially anti-historical, anti-spiritual or anti-cultural as they are deeply rooted in them in terms of socialisation, communication, love of language and culture which is destined to hit the imagination of the social world, a reflection about the ordinary life of people. Even religious dramas use modern technological means to project rituals and festivals to produce dramatic effects in the minds of people and glamorise religion, culture and history as a source of political community-Nepali state. 

Nepalis link the politics of private life as individual narratives, the style of living and construction of national identities corresponding to duties.  Politics for ordinary Nepalis is a sort of conversation among themselves and with their leaders, a cultural practice to know each other better and discern the context of their everyday living. Politics separates itself from the private sphere of hierarchy and patriarchy and institutionalised social division of labour. It frees Nepalis from intellectual and social barriers. Modern time reflects a phase where they are growing their historical political consciousness of their position in society and acquiring the ability to steer desirable social change in the future so as to avoid any risk of their and the nation’s political life. 

They are facing a new responsibility to protect the nation besieged from various interest groups, a responsibility to protect democracy, human rights and the way of political life they have self-chosen. They feel that excessive party-minded political culture has personalised public politics and infected all vital public institutions, thus enfeebling their ability to retain integrity and mandate to perform. Democratic life intrinsically provides space for legitimate opposition and, therefore, cannot flourish in intense polarisation and winner-takes-all mentality. It is not a game of lies, deception and manipulation of people which creates distrust in leadership, irrational play where a culture of impunity to the powerful elites is tolerated, not even only a gift of the gab divorced from the availability of public goods.

The keystone of robust politics of everyday life is rooted in a state where Nepalis can engage in their pursuit of wellbeing with the polity providing an overarching framework of security, rules, incentives, voice and opportunities. The provision of constitutional rights granted to them offers them adequate opportunity to exercise both positive and negative liberties including human rights. Human rights improves the prospect of self-representation in political life while democracy provides them a group basis of politics expressed through political agencies of parties, civil society, legislature and a myriad of civic associations.

Now politics of everyday life is haunted by the shadow of predecessors’ legacy. They shape the political culture- the ends and means -- which is difficult to disentangle from each other. The leadership style of extra-constitutional change and remain above the laws indicate patrimonial character of Nepali politics. The penumbra of past politics is based on the effects it has produced on the present state of everyday life.  A hiatus persists between the old generation which relied on command, control and direction politics and the new one who defends more freedom and opportunity and opposes its dynastic evolution contrary to democratic practice. The former seeks to provide social mobility to underclass through policy and institutional measures.

The exposure of the young generation to digital media made them critical of tribal conformity. It has set the boundary between the public and the private sphere and expunged a chasm between constitutional vision of egalitarian society and the sordid reality of growing inequality. Political life consists of an arena of rights where Nepalis struggle to bridge the power and wealth differential among them under constitutional structure. They deem democracy a means to realise their dream of a good life. The preconditions for this good life are: inner vigilance, civic maturity and ability of Nepalis to defy constraints — traditional, attitudinal and political culture and maximise the civic space of freedom.  Civic maturity can come when Nepalis know about their rights and duties, functioning of constitution, institutions and actors and other forces of governance. 

One must see whether the constitution has provided a peaceful coexistence and unity of diverse Nepali people or created an essence of differentiation, disunity and separate identity which are obstacles to satisfying life, political stability and nation-building. The relentless curiosity of Nepalis in the politics of everyday life, their imaginative engagements in its welter of activities and processes, enriching associations of its dense life and prospect attached to it spur their sustained interest in what unfolds in the life-world. 

Collective action 

So long as Nepalis think that politics is not a problem but solutions of a myriad of problems, their basic hope and trust in it continue to motivate them to engage in its dynamics. It also hones civic competence that their behaviour affects the course of politics. In this sense, Nepalis believe that their engagement in the everyday life of politics is goal-oriented to resolve their problems and ensure a good life. Goal-satisfaction increases their pleasure and stake while dissatisfaction breeds frustration entailing additional efforts, mobilization of institutions and resources and better coordination, communication and collective action. 

Deadlock, by contrast, is a lack of political art of negotiation, compromise and reconciliation for shared benefits. Without managing problems and resolving disputes at an optimal level, the aspiration to make politics of everyday life hopeful and peaceful becomes an uphill task. This turns governance remote from the life possibilities of Nepalis. Only the mindfulness to people-centric politics can be uplifting and tuneful to their lofty desire to live together in a peaceful nation with justice operating at the order of politics, laws, institutions and authority.

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