Why have Communists of Nepal to go against the Parliamentary System?
Prakash Bom
September 22, 2008
First of all, communists of Nepal, mainly the Maoist and UML political parties have to understand clearly that communism or socialism or liberalism or conservatism or feudalism is not the political system but the ideology similar to the doctrines of religion.
Unlike the ideology or doctrine or dogma Democracy is a natural process in the evolution of human developments of the socio-political and economic behavior for discovering the ways to live together with the fair means of rule of law.
The democracy has evolved and has become the human existence to this point in the 21st century since its dawn from the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle of ancient Greek to John Locke as classical republican thinker to the modern philosophers David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Immanuel Kant.
The paradigm of evolution of Democracy is the discovery of common human laws that the majority has no disagreement in the 21st century with their best of human rationality. For example, the constitutional provision for guaranteeing civil liberty and right - freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of religion and freedom of speech, right to fair trail, right to own property and right to privacy and respect for United Nation´s universal human rights declaration.
Those who lose his or her human rationality to go against these paradigms of evolution of Democracy for his or her personal or political power in the name of political ideology, in the name of nation or people or religion is the dictator who is incapable of living his or her own life by the common human rule of laws that the majority of humans have evolved with their best human rationality.
The failure of perception of a society to live by the fair means of rule of law is not the failure of the evolution of Democracy as the natural process of human developments but it is the failure of willful human irrationality that is vested with the interest of ideology or dogma or doctrine or status quo of feudal establishment.
The traditional Parliamentary system that immerged from the Anglo-Saxon Aristocratic feudal establishments of England has ample of anti-democratic elements, which might have been eradicated from the British Parliament but not from elsewhere. One of the major anti-democratic elements of Parliamentary system is the absence of full elected representatives of people in the government. Instead it encourages the tradition of nomination for the political appointments without the electoral scrutiny.
That´s why the feudal elites of South Asian nations chose the Parliamentary political system after the British Empire to easily perpetuate their feudalism in the political system. Indian feudal elites have even succeeded with the federal government system eliminating constitutional provision for the local governments in the federal states for people to govern their own community with their elected representatives.
The government tradition of arbitrary political appointments and appointments of government employees by the central and state governments has undermined the right of people in the South Asian Parliament government system with the overwhelming bureaucracy of the certain dominant socio-economic group of feudal elites.
Similarly, if one scrutinizes the 20th century´s one-party dominated communist presidential government system based on the Marxist principle of economic class struggle the proletariats as common people had no representation, but the party leaders and cadres who claimed to represent the proletariats ruled ruthlessly. Therefore, the system is called totalitarian in which power of one-party hierarchy overrules the rights of proletariats.
As a matter of fact, the communist totalitarian government system is the worst for the well-being of common people. The movements of socialism and communism as socio-political and economic doctrines have done a greater deal of good for humanity within the paradigms of evolution of Democracy than in the most ex-totalitarian nations. As a result, 20th century´s democratic nations have succeeded to eradicate their feudal establishments and laissez-faire economic policies for the well-being of common people.
It has to be clear to all communist political parties of Nepal that one-party by organization or ideology dominated presidential government system will be devoid of people´s representatives. Therefore, modernization of the current Parliamentary system with the complete people´s elected representatives in all levels of government under the federal government restructuring of the nation is the best choice for the evolution of democracy in our society.
This means the end of the practice of political party and government nomination for the political appointments; end of the hierarchical government employee appointments to administer the people in all levels of the government. It is only the elected representatives of people can form the bodies of government – legislative, executive and judiciary in all levels of the government – central, state and local governments.
Nation´s every public corporation, industry and business must be formed with the same principle and norms of democratic evolution to establish fair way of living together with the rule of law in the interest of common people and their well-being.
There must be balance of power in the government and the system. The political system that fails to establish the balance of power in the government is anti-democratic. That means in any circumstance people´s civil liberty and right should not be suspended in order to dictate the nation for law and order. Such a tyrannical move of an elected head of the government is considered undemocratic therefore such a leader is unqualified to rule the democratic nation.
It would be the best for Nepal to modernize the current Parliamentary system with the direct election of the Prime Minister in order to have a stable government that a popularly elected Prime Minister can form government with the maximum political consensus of the political parties in the Parliament. Such a Prime Minister can be independent of his own party domination. The status of President as a national symbol for unity and integrity should remain the same to be elected by the people´s representatives of the Parliament as the Constituent Assembly has already made the history with such a practice.
Such a change is only possible if all the Democratic parties such as Nepali Congress as the mentor of democratic movements of Nepal transform their intra-party hierarchical feudal tradition of nepotism and favoritism with the fair electoral representations for the intra-party organizations to go through the evolution of democracy. It is a question of rewriting their intra-party bylaw to regulate principle and norms of Democracy particularly for leaders to observe strictly. It is a time for every one to think over the things for change in changing time of Nepal´s democratic evolution.
Unlike the ideology or doctrine or dogma Democracy is a natural process in the evolution of human developments of the socio-political and economic behavior for discovering the ways to live together with the fair means of rule of law.
The democracy has evolved and has become the human existence to this point in the 21st century since its dawn from the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle of ancient Greek to John Locke as classical republican thinker to the modern philosophers David Hume, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Immanuel Kant.
The paradigm of evolution of Democracy is the discovery of common human laws that the majority has no disagreement in the 21st century with their best of human rationality. For example, the constitutional provision for guaranteeing civil liberty and right - freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of religion and freedom of speech, right to fair trail, right to own property and right to privacy and respect for United Nation´s universal human rights declaration.
Those who lose his or her human rationality to go against these paradigms of evolution of Democracy for his or her personal or political power in the name of political ideology, in the name of nation or people or religion is the dictator who is incapable of living his or her own life by the common human rule of laws that the majority of humans have evolved with their best human rationality.
The failure of perception of a society to live by the fair means of rule of law is not the failure of the evolution of Democracy as the natural process of human developments but it is the failure of willful human irrationality that is vested with the interest of ideology or dogma or doctrine or status quo of feudal establishment.
The traditional Parliamentary system that immerged from the Anglo-Saxon Aristocratic feudal establishments of England has ample of anti-democratic elements, which might have been eradicated from the British Parliament but not from elsewhere. One of the major anti-democratic elements of Parliamentary system is the absence of full elected representatives of people in the government. Instead it encourages the tradition of nomination for the political appointments without the electoral scrutiny.
That´s why the feudal elites of South Asian nations chose the Parliamentary political system after the British Empire to easily perpetuate their feudalism in the political system. Indian feudal elites have even succeeded with the federal government system eliminating constitutional provision for the local governments in the federal states for people to govern their own community with their elected representatives.
The government tradition of arbitrary political appointments and appointments of government employees by the central and state governments has undermined the right of people in the South Asian Parliament government system with the overwhelming bureaucracy of the certain dominant socio-economic group of feudal elites.
Similarly, if one scrutinizes the 20th century´s one-party dominated communist presidential government system based on the Marxist principle of economic class struggle the proletariats as common people had no representation, but the party leaders and cadres who claimed to represent the proletariats ruled ruthlessly. Therefore, the system is called totalitarian in which power of one-party hierarchy overrules the rights of proletariats.
As a matter of fact, the communist totalitarian government system is the worst for the well-being of common people. The movements of socialism and communism as socio-political and economic doctrines have done a greater deal of good for humanity within the paradigms of evolution of Democracy than in the most ex-totalitarian nations. As a result, 20th century´s democratic nations have succeeded to eradicate their feudal establishments and laissez-faire economic policies for the well-being of common people.
It has to be clear to all communist political parties of Nepal that one-party by organization or ideology dominated presidential government system will be devoid of people´s representatives. Therefore, modernization of the current Parliamentary system with the complete people´s elected representatives in all levels of government under the federal government restructuring of the nation is the best choice for the evolution of democracy in our society.
This means the end of the practice of political party and government nomination for the political appointments; end of the hierarchical government employee appointments to administer the people in all levels of the government. It is only the elected representatives of people can form the bodies of government – legislative, executive and judiciary in all levels of the government – central, state and local governments.
Nation´s every public corporation, industry and business must be formed with the same principle and norms of democratic evolution to establish fair way of living together with the rule of law in the interest of common people and their well-being.
There must be balance of power in the government and the system. The political system that fails to establish the balance of power in the government is anti-democratic. That means in any circumstance people´s civil liberty and right should not be suspended in order to dictate the nation for law and order. Such a tyrannical move of an elected head of the government is considered undemocratic therefore such a leader is unqualified to rule the democratic nation.
It would be the best for Nepal to modernize the current Parliamentary system with the direct election of the Prime Minister in order to have a stable government that a popularly elected Prime Minister can form government with the maximum political consensus of the political parties in the Parliament. Such a Prime Minister can be independent of his own party domination. The status of President as a national symbol for unity and integrity should remain the same to be elected by the people´s representatives of the Parliament as the Constituent Assembly has already made the history with such a practice.
Such a change is only possible if all the Democratic parties such as Nepali Congress as the mentor of democratic movements of Nepal transform their intra-party hierarchical feudal tradition of nepotism and favoritism with the fair electoral representations for the intra-party organizations to go through the evolution of democracy. It is a question of rewriting their intra-party bylaw to regulate principle and norms of Democracy particularly for leaders to observe strictly. It is a time for every one to think over the things for change in changing time of Nepal´s democratic evolution.
Print
Email
