ages of deception

8/14/2019 Ages of Deception

1/21

THE MINDSET

To be human is to engage in relationships with other and with the

world. It is to experience the world as an objective reality,

independent of oneself capable of being known. Animalssubmerged in reality, can not relate to it, they are creatures of mere

contacts. Human relate to the world in a critical way. They

apprehend the objective data of their reality through reflection, not

by reflex as do animals. Human are not limited to natural sphere,

but can participate in the creative dimension as well, they can

intervene in reality in order to change it. Human engage in

distinctively human activities of integrating with their context and

have the critical capacity to make choices and to transform realityaccording to the choice. When human are incapable of changing

reality he adjusts himself instead, though it is the characteristics ofthe animal sphere and is symptomatic of his dehumanization.

Human think and act and use their creative power to overcome the

obstacles which are either naturo physical or instrumental. The

history of human being is a struggle to overcome the factors,

which make them accommodate or adjust. This struggle to attain

to their full humanity is constantly threatened by oppression. Only

by developing a permanently critical attitude can human overcome

a posture of adjustment. Yet what in fact happens so often is that

the ordinary people is crushed, diminished, converted into

spectator, maneuvered by myths created by the powerful social

form. In such a state, peoples creative power is impaired andcannot apprehend problems situated outside their sphere of

biological necessity. Their interests centre almost totally around

survival. Thus they do not fulfill their vocation of becoming

human of moving forward into humanity, into a less incomplete

state of being. Development is thus development of people as

human beings, it is about human growth, and this is something

which cannot be done to a person or people, nor can even

be done for them, but must be done by them.

Humanity is an integrated system of beliefs, of values, of

customs and of institutions which express those belief,values and customs which binds a society together and

gives it a sense of identity, dignity, security and continuity.Identity is the expression of the being of a person or a

group. Humanity is what human beings add to the world as

it is by changing it through their free action. It refers to the

accepted ways of living, how society is governed and how

relations between people are carried on. The world view of

any group or individual is the way in which the world, as

experienced by them is understood. It deals with major

concerns of existence, stages of life, promotion and use of

wealth, the physical and natural world and the powers

which affect the lives the people. The rites of passage(birth, initiation, marriage and death) and the rules that

govern relationships between individuals and groups are all

expressive of the world view of the people. As identity is an

expression of the being of a person or a group, one must

understand his culture and world view. Identity sums up the

main characteristic which one would expect to find in

members of that group. But the consciousness of a

population is rarely consistent and of one piece.

Being poor is not just a question of income, diet, shelter,

health and security but it also includes consideration of

opportunity for personal fulfillment. It is common to thinkof development as being synonymous with economic

growth or the growth of new social institutions. But these

economic inputs into society are in fact aspects of the

concept of development that centers upon the

transformation of the identity of the people. Economic


2/21

inputs into the community may become a catalyst for development

or become part of the fulfillment of the aspiration identified by the

people themselves. Thus development implies human

development- a process by which the identity of people is

transformed by themselves towards ideals and goals which they

seek for themselves. It is a holistic concept and not limited tosocio-economic advancement. External resources can be delivered

to the people, human development can not.

The vocation of people to become human beings is constantly

negated and thwarted by injustice, exploitation, oppression and

violence by the oppressors. It is affirmed by the yearning of the

oppressed for freedom and justice and by their struggle to recover

their humanity. Violence and oppression, in common parlance

conjure up extreme situations such as physical abuse and cruel

exploitation. Any situation in which one person hinders another's

pursuit of self affirmation as responsible person is oppression andit constitute violence. Violence and oppression are structural

elements is society, or dehumanizing attitude towards other

people. Indeed, violence dehumanizes people, as violence and

oppressive acts negate the true vocation of people towards being

human. The great humanistic and historical task of the oppressed

is to liberate themselves and their oppressors as well. Every

relationship of domination, of exploitation, of oppression, is by

definition violent, whether or not the violence is expressed by

drastic means. In such a relationship, dominator and dominated

alike are reduced to animals. The former dehumanized by an

excess of power and the latter by lack of power. When theoppressed legitimately rise up against their oppressor, it is theywho are usually labeled violent, barbaric, inhuman terrorists.

Among the innumerable rights claimed by the dominating

consciousness is the right to define violence and to locate it.

Oppressors never see themselves as violent.

Violence characterizes all the relationships imposed by

oppression upon the oppressed, even when the relationship

is supposedly one designed to help the oppressed. Wherever

a program brings to the people something which reflects the

bringers vision of the world, imposing it on those who

passively receives it, that is a moral invasion. The bringershave wrought violence upon the people because they have

neither invited nor allowed the people to participate in the

decision making on the basis of true understanding of

reality whether or not they want it. Thus the people are

tormented as animals or things by the very people who

claim to be working for the development of the oppressed.

A truly liberating way of working for human growth among

the oppressed is one which places the entire process in the

hands of the people themselves. No pedagogy which is

truly liberating can remain distant from the oppressed bytreating them as unfortunates and by presenting for their

emancipation "modules" from among the oppressors.

Liberation from oppression can not be given to the

oppressed, it can only be claimed and achieved by their

own action and thus can not take place until they are

conscious of the reality in which they live. However, the

habits of thoughts and practices of accepting fate, which

have evolved over thousands of years, cannot be easily or

quickly transformed in an environment where poverty,

powerlessness, natural calamity and personal life crises are

so common. It is experience which transform belief andbehaviors. Beliefs supported and encouraged by knowledgeand until knowledge and power are experienced by people,

the people in the world view are unlikely to become

humans. Profoundly religious though, being a Muslim is

being a human. In Islam there is no scope to

compartmentalize world view. This is why the oppressors,


3/21

both internal and external are highly concern with what Islam says

and so the oppressors leave no stone unturned even to use force to

wipe out any real work towards Islamic resurgence that determine

behavior of humans in society. Occupation and articulation of

alternative explanation of oppression and injustice are ordained to

be overthrown and replaced by human well being and justice. The paralyzing belief in fate is a mechanism evolved over the

millennium by the oppressors making the oppressed cope with

deprivation, a response to the continuing realities of poverty and

powerlessness. According to patron-client relationship a man is

entitled to subsistence from the rich he is dependent upon. In daily

intercourse a person with higher rank is accorded the right to

extract labor, service and respect of lower rank. He in turn

assumes obligation of patronage. This culture derived from the

Vedic Hindu caste system implies indulgent occupation of wealth,

abstract goodness and personal aura that stands totally against

humane teachings. This system has ancient Vedic Hindu culturalroots that presuppose the acceptance of rank as the basis forordering society- a social value prescribed by the invader Aryans

upon the Dravidians with an ill motivated design to enslave them.

In a class society the system of authority and domination corrupts

the minds of the people. Those who have authority exert power

over those who are below in the class or caste hierarchy and this

makes the former feel important. The person dominated feels

humiliated and powerless and to compensate for this he exerts

power and authority over those lower to him. As patronage is the

main hope of preferment access to credit or protection, it inhibits

the development of oppression consciousness and class solidarity,the dialogue between the rich and the powerful and the poor and

weak is impeded. Nature, as manifested urges people to throwaway the myth of power and orders the fostering of solidarity and

brotherhood among the people and provocates them to have faith

on their united power to achieve what belong to them as human

beings. The different elements of physical poverty-patron-

client and gender relationship have to be defined afresh.

Present structure of the society consist built-in domination

of the rich and undervaluing the women. Beneath the quiet

rural beauty of Bangladesh lies a web of conflict and pain

contributed to general scarcity of resources, resourcesunutilized due to lack of education and knowledge and

unequal distribution of wealth. Hence the identity of the

people is that they are people but identity of human being is

not expressed collectively or corporately in any social

group. If the people are to achieve an improvement in their

physical condition of life they will have to undergo a

process of changing their false identity of people to he real

identity of human beings and thus change the social

structure. Such personal and social upheaval will require

creativity. There are so called reactionary intellectuals,

when asked about the oppressive social structure, says thatyet people survive. These negators and enemies ofhumanity made 'survival' objective of life and prescribed

channeling human creativity and energy to people's

survival-and thus killing the human spirit that might rise for

humanization some day.

The experience of sufferings is the outcome of fear, fear of

starvation fear of the violent and the powerful and it affects

the self human image of the people and their belief in what

they can achieve. The aspiration of the people consist both

of material things- food, shelter, security and a host of non-material things- social status, economic justice, equality ofopportunity, to participate in civil political and cultural

affairs. The sufferings entailed by the non fulfillment of

their aspirations are very great and people should be

conscientised as to how these suffering comes about. The

process under which the people-identity can be transformed


4/21

to human identity is inextricably tied up both with the world view

and with the Bengali and Islamic culture as humans. As for

humans the world view is not just a material world and many

aspects of behavior and the way in which they experience that

world are influenced spiritually. People know what it means to be

rejected, powerless, cheated, tortured and they experience it both physically and spiritually. Therefore, to transform to human

identity and to be able to transform and fulfill their aspiration in a

process of true human growth both material and spiritual elements

have to be involved. Materials i.e. external resources will have to

become available to the people, and the existing internal resources

will have to be redistributed in a way that is consistent with full

humanity, which is equal to that of the rich. This cannot be done

by outsiders on behalf of the people, but must be achieved primary

by their own efforts. Liberation occurs when the reality of

oppression is transformed for both the oppressors and the

oppressed into a process of becoming human. This transformationto real is a process of action and reflection, i.e. dialogue. Thisdialogue process contrasts with 'assistencialism of non government

social organizations which is that form of social assistance that

attracts the symptoms but not the causes of social ills, and

therefore vitiates popular participation in the historical process of

change. Dialogue is the only way, not only in the vital questions of

the political order, but in all expression of human beings. Only by

virtue of faith, does a dialogue have power and meaning, by faith

in human beings and their possibilities. In the process of dialogue

human beings are engaged in allowing relationship, based upon

humanity, trust, hope and a critical awareness of reality. Antidialogue is the basis of loveless, arrogant, helpless, mistrustful and

critical people relations. Dialogue is the basis for relation betweentwo or more subjects, anti-dialogue in the basis of relation

between the subjects and objects. One very important element in

dialogue is trust, which leads to cooperation and solidarity. In true

dialogue all are subjects and no one is dominated, where it

is possible for the people to trust each other and their

initiators who are seen as leaders of social revolution. Thus

they are able to move from consciousness of themselves as

people and oppressed to a consciousness of themselves as

human beings forced to oppressive system and this open upthe way to unity and cooperation.

In the initial stage of the struggle for liberation people have

to learn and acquire knowledge about their human potential.

Self depreciation is the characteristics of the oppressed,

which they derive from their internalization of the opinion

of the oppressors hold of them. So often they are told by

the oppressors that they are good for nothing, know

nothings and are incapable of learning anything, that they

are sick, lazy and unproductive that in the end they become

convinced of their own unfitness. Almost never do theyrealized that they, too know and have learned in their

relations with the natural world and with other human

beings and that they should not lost confidence in

themselves. Having internalized the oppressive behavior

taught by the oppressors they are dehumanized and need to

liberate themselves. When liberation is achieved by

acquiring knowledge he becomes a human, neither an

oppressed nor an oppressor, instead a human in the process

of achieving freedom, i.e. liberty, equality and fraternity.

This process of freedom cannot start while the people's

understanding of the social structure and the world view isclouded. Reality cannot be transformed and people cannot

participate in that transformation in any authentic way

unless they develop an authentically critical position. This a

person can only do by his own intervention in and

integration with his own context. The more accurately


5/21

people grasp true causality the more critical his understanding will

be. In order to surmount the situations of oppression, the

oppressed must first critically recognize its causes. People has to

be taught the distinction between the world of nature and the

world of culture, the active role of human beings in and with

reality, culture as defined in nature and what purification theyshould bring about as crown of creation to a world they did not

make; develop human culture by human labor, and make ceaseless

efforts to create and recreate. Knowing is the job of human beings.

In the learning process he not only really learns, but also

appropriates what is learned, apprehends and thereby reinvests the

learning and is able to apply the appropriated learning to concrete

existential situations. Knowledge requires transforming thought

into action and action into reality. Because a liberating education

consists of acts of cognition and not transferals of information, the

education adopts a different approach- the dialogue. He presents to

the people problematic social political cultural and economicrealities, in which people find themselves, for their consideration.Through reflection and action, action and reflection people come

to know of humanity and how far they are from it. Dialogue works

against hopelessness and fatalism because it challenges the

distorted view of reality on which they feed. As critical perception

is embodied in action, a climate of hope and confidence develops

which leads people to attempt to overcome the limiting situation in

which they find themselves.

At this point some members of the lower oppressor class

finding time is running out develops a strong sense of socialresponsibility and of engagement in the task of transformingsociety and start organising the people for struggle of the

oppressed to be more human. Society comes to be seen as a

challenge rather than as a hopeless limitation. It is a profound

rebirth. These members though act as initiators play a fundamental

role, yet it is not proper for them to think of themselves as agents

of change. For the task is a two fold one-educational and

liberating, those who join them and those whom they are

trying to educate and liberate are subjects and not the

objects of his action. It is not invasion, manipulating or

conquering. It need faith, faith on the vision and on the

people that they will hold fast and will not disintegrate. Thevision is a revolutionary framework urging the process of

transforming society and creating a world in which it is

easier to love, to care to establish justice and is seen as both

necessitating and working a total change.

Leaders from the class of oppressors who have the

characteristics of creating temptation to manipulate the

people, keeps alienated from the people instead of acting in

communion with the people, tend to prescribe to them and

to dehumanize them with slogans and obscene cultural

activities, to seek to create sycophants and conquer them bydividing into classes and ruling and promoting a section

with a view that it were the parts 'that promote the whole

and not the whole which, in being promoted, promotes all

the parts' - is but a leader who ultimately becomes

oppressor himself. The manipulation by the leadership is

sometimes carried out directly by him or indirectly by a

group of elites. The populist leader who rises from this

process is an ambiguous being, an amphibian who lives in

two elements, shuttling back and forth between the people

and the oppressive dominant rulers, he bears the marks of

both.With enormous problems faced by the people, the day when

they can create a truly new society in which human rights,

peace and justice reign is a very long way off, and those

who lead the work of conscientisation must be content with

seeing an identity or regaining the old liberal identity of


6/21

Islam and liberalism and Bangali slowly develop among the

people, that is human identity. This requires two things: (i) a very

high degree of personal dedication and a deep change in their own

attitudes and (ii) a new vision of human development based upon

faith in God, the creator and judge who emphasises on human

equality of basic necessities and supremacy of leadership in meritonly. An oppressive leadership hold a distorted view of good and

propagates a completely deterministric view of good which

implies of events as 'all being the will of God,' but does not go on

to elaborate what a true view of God is, yet in the process of

humanising the dehumanised people it is required to have faith on

humanity rather than faith in God, who himself do not do

anything, but do so through people turned human beings. The

dominating oppressors, who have a tendency to sell God are not to

be feared or allowed to inhibit the fulfillment of the aspirations of

the people to be human. Distinction must be made between the

world beyond sight and the natural world that manifests Godswill. The oppressors strictly materialistic concept of existence aredominated by desire to possess and dominate property, means and

output of production process and people, reduces all including

humans to the state of objects at their disposal. It is the vocation of

human beings turned people to become human, yet if the idea to

become human is limited to an essentially materialistic concept of

humanity, it lacks spiritual dimension causing confusion and

unreliability that they may too turn into oppressors being

materialistic monsters. A very materialistic attitude to life, in that

the individual pursuit of resources, very often overrides the

dictates of what is known to be right or good behaviour and notharming to others i.e. individualism. Violence dehumanises human

being into people and so the eradication of violence and theemergence of the oppressed into their true vocation to become

human beings, who know things and can control the nature, is

what humanity is all about. The idea of humanity must have in it

the idea of forming union with human beings and the

animals and the rest of creation, that we call environment.

The determinants that turn human beings into people are (i)

a view of life in which all the ills are the fault of the

oppressor alone, and that only by eradicating the oppressor

oppression can be cured and (ii) oppressed are moreconscious of themselves as individuals rather a class and

contributing to the root cause of their problem.

The people lack solidarity as a class. They degrade

and exploit each other by treating their women folk as

things, by quarreling over scarce resources, by joining

factions, by discriminating against each other on the basis

of birth and caste thinking, and by simply non co-ordination

with each other almost all of which, in Islam, against the

dictates of humanity, because these prevent the people form

growing in brotherhood and solidarity, which is the mainneed if the structural violence in the society is to be

challenged to pave way for liberalism. Identifying the

oppressors as the only cause of all social problem, tends to

reinforce a feeling of lack of personal responsibility which

is a major constituent in the belief in fate and the apathy

which can engender dependency attitude and can work

against will to work for winning back the norm i.e. the

liberalism. Strong emphasis should be given to make people

think themselves as subjects and start dialogue. There can

be no doubt at all about the truly liberating power of

dialogue through which people discover that they canchange the world, can participate in their own improvementby taking action, can achieve a measure of justice by acting

together, can improve their self esteem, self image and self

confidence immeasurably. They can move form a

completely hopeless outlook towards one of hope,

tomorrow begins to hold out prospects of which many of


7/21

them could not even dream or imagine. People cease to be

submerged into subjugation by the present and they start to

participate in building the solidarity for liberalism and start to

form strategy.

The leaders followers has to be filled by absolutely

dedicated, skillful people, prepared to reject all the oppressivetendencies in their education and culture be themselves a true

being with the people, rather than being "for them" or a being

"over them", that they subscribe to the vision and show it in the

way they do their work, so for most of their attitude has be learned

and assiduously developed on the job. It is made all the more

difficult by the constant need to be affirming, encouraging and

questioning people whose behaviour and self image tempt the

educated and the skillful to believe in their own superiority. The

vision therefore, to develop, calls for a quality of person as human

being who really exists, in fact, in this respect it fails to take

adequate account of human nature as it really is. These are greatvocation of the people as human beings to liberate themselves and

the oppressors. Liberation can not be bestowed as a gift, it has to

be an act of cognition, a positive achievement of the persons

liberated. The vision looks forward in the achievement of a

complete liberal resurgence in society where, justice, human

rights, individualism, reason replace oppression and violence;

where it is easier to love and all people participate in the creation

of human culture. Looking towards the inspiring vision of

liberalism, liberating the oppressor from the dehumanising effects

upon themselves of oppressing the oppressed is seen as an act ofbeing declassed. Yet there is no worked out theory or hold faststrategy of just violence, organised non violence, passive

resistance or self defense. This is a major omission left out to

situation.

One of the most common reaction to the situation of

the people is despair. The more a person thinks about the

depth to which the violence is entrenched in society, and

the more he experiences the weakness and division of

people in the face of such violence, the more he inclines to

despair. It is sheer a shameful failure of faith in his power.

This present oppressive world view of the people

needs to be presented to them as a problem, as inhibitions to

the meeting of their aspirations and to their becoming closer

to their destiny as human beings. A theistic understanding

of humanity affirm the concept of human responsibility.

Problem of lack of trust and mutual solidarity gives rise to

mutual exploitation and cheating among the people

themselves. This is attributed to corruption in all levels of

society-which is so endemic and so deep that its presence is

felt by the people in almost all activities. Favour is

dispensed to the clients by executive against theprescription of impartiality, justice for the people or the

activities of the law enforcing agencies is not available as

there is corrupt practices, business is completely riddled

with corruption, marriage is happy where the bridegroom

has additional income, loan taken from financial institutions

are granted with mutual agreement between the borrower

and the lending institutions and much more. There is a

strong desire on the part of the people to follow some one,

and they will follow a person, not a vision. So leadership is

connected with a concept of personal aura, built in charismaand therefore a strong and deeply felt cultural norm that aleader is a part of a wider set of relationships carrying its

own rights and obligations. In the dialogue agenda to

abandon the idea of accommodating local leaders as a

means of promoting the people would be to abandon one of

the most powerful forces for unity in society. A local


8/21

leadership can be encouraged which sees itself as leading not by

patronage but by communion with the people, an attack will be

made on patronage as a system, while at the same time prescribing

and utilizing the social norm which the people want to follow. The

attack on patronage must have three processes (i) the emergence of

the new local leadership motivated by the desire to serve thepeople (ii) the self denial and self subordination of the leader and

(iii) the presentation of class thinking to the people as a problem

which inhibits the fulfillment of their aspirations. The non-

government organisation are not the ones whose programs aim at a

transformation of the structures in the society, which bind the

people and keep them down, it does not address the structural

causes of poverty.

The road to a new society based on liberalism, in which all

people are able to participate irrespective of religion, caste, creed

and sex and grow as human beings is very long and hard. The

prospect for any large-scale success in the near future is not thatmuch bright. But it is the most fertile ground where seeds

germinates very swift and easily. Concentrating on the vision of

liberalism and work with the people to transform their identity,

casting aside centuries of dependence, fear and self doubt and

discover that people themselves can grow closer to each other and

bring in a better way to live, and it is possible for them if only they

take the road together, something infinitely beautiful must happen.

It would be worthy of external funding to let the steps of the

liberals here in Bangladesh move faster, learn on the way,

continue to critically examine the success and amend in the lightof study, knowledge and experience and interaction betweenliberals, in Bangladesh and liberals world over.

When a social trend develops into a conscious state in

certain individual it assumes a thousand fold intensity. The nation

evolving in a gradual manner, suddenly undergoes an

instantaneous and intensive transformation. It drives

forward with a historical jump and puts an end to what

Nietzche called 'social rumination.' They are movements for

resurgence of political, social, economic and cultural

nature. The leader of social consciousness and moral

conscience move by visionary inspiration that enhance hissocial effectiveness and that constitute the creative

imagination of the nation. Their inspiration, derived from

collective consciousness, appear only at the inspired

moments of ingenious nations. He makes his own soul a

reflecting surface to the ingenious power concealed in a

nation. Social condition thoroughly examined by an

analytical and critical mind is expressed in a leader. Genius

is the spontaneous realization of the changes taking place in

society unconsciously. Leader is not to impose and

institute, but to discover the elements of national

conscience in the unconscious level and to bring them up tothe conscious level. A leader should have clearunderstanding of the laws governing the order and progress

of societies and try to ameliorate the pathological factors

that have arrested the growth of the nation. The complex of

rules of religion, politics, morality, law, economics and

even aesthetics exist on an unconscious level in the life of a

nation. Life is a creative evolution, a moving vision that

takes shape on the way and amends itself to accommodate

diversity and changes for development perpetually, keeping

the superstructure, intact. Tradition means creativity and

progress. Because, it has a past which knits the discretemoments to one another and a movement which pushes

forward as a motivating force. Thus traditions always createnew developments and new orientations, i.e. something

growing and creating by itself giving life to borrowed

innovations grafted on itself. Tradition constitute the spirit


9/21

of ambition, the social norms that rule its body. The traditionalist

nation lives in the freedom of history, the formalist in the bondage

of geography. Tradition not only establishes continuity and

harmony between the forces that an institution assumes at various

times, but it also shows how all of them are derived from the same

origin, thus serving to cement them together. Institution likepolitics, law, economics, culture, logic, aesthetics are all derived

from religion. They gain a living force and a dynamic life only by

deriving their roots from a religious origin. The history of

civilization shows that, the philosopher is not a man who merely

puts together and organise the discrete truth which others have

discovered. The real philosopher is one who know the methods of

seeking the truth and actually applies them. They were fought not

for their idealism but for their realism. Their success rests not one

what they taught but on how they faced and fought the evil.

Properties originate from physical nature and values are natural

products of social reality. The effectiveness of man over societydepends on value derived from social beliefs and laws of natureand place of human being in natural domain.

The leaders in a developing country always try to seek

political support from the people through intensive political

campaigns by making a lot of realistic and unrealistic promises

that arouse peoples emotion rather than judgement. They build up

powerful militant organisation like youth front, student front,

women front and labour front who do not hesitate to use force to

hush up any opposition that dare to term their policies anti people

or try to organise pockets of realistic politics. In Bangladeshcharisma is achieve by continuous political propaganda bydemagogue politician and their workers in different levels who

tirelessly profess the greatness of the leader. Even then, the leader

may not be always successful in mastering the peoples minds. So,

he needs a strong power base and builds up that by money,

muscle, manipulation and mastermind to ensure that his power is

not actively challenged by opposing forces sooner or later.

Remaining popular for a long time, depends on the

political consciousness of the people and their willingness

to take active part in politics and their intellectual ability to

counter the leader demagogue and the large group of

sycophant powerful forces. People all over the earth haveshown considerable urge to be free from political

suppression, economic exploitation, social seclusion and

cultural aggression. But to be free they need to participate

actively in the political decision making process. 99%

percent of people are too poor to afford that, they have

immediate business to take care of such as working for

food, clothing and shelter, medical attendance in ill health,

and direct oppression from government officials, village

headman, non-government organisations money lending

business with high interest rate, education of their children

etc. Citizens might is unknown to them, democracy meansonly voting right in elections. Poverty and illiteracycontribute much to the unabated exploitation that they

suffer in every day life.

This forcible unconsciousness of the people pushes

the leader to loose political active support from the people

and the power base that he has build up gradually and that

weakens because of corruption, rent seeking and

overzealous organisation. When a new political group

surfaces, the continuation of their role is threatened and the

much needed people's support is nowhere in sight. Peoplecan not be aroused without coercion. no spontaneousstrikes, demonstration can be organised. The new group of

political interests with support form urban and middle class

gradually gains strength. This vicious cycle makes it

impossible to build up a reliable and strong lasting power

base in the people. This is elitist politics that takes with it


10/21

politicians, bureaucrats, unscrupulous business men and

industrialists and a tiny group of self seeking reactionary

intellectuals, none of whom can command & master support. The

opposition political parties are also constituted thus. So, it is a

quarrel of two or more vested interests to gain the authority and

power to exploit and subjugate the people and rule over them toget rich to richer and turn to demi gods.

Thus a class of people should emerge from the middle

class, well educated and politically trained to overrule traditional

tendencies, economically sound and possess genuine interest in

individual liberty, equality in political participation, equality of

opportunity with the assurance that they will be supported by the

state to be provided with means to avail that opportunity, gender

indiscrimination in every sphere of life, tolerance of diverse

opinion, acknowledge unity in cultural diversity, guarantee of

education as right regardless of opportunity and means, and

provision of economic opportunity and means only can ensurepersonal freedom and democracy and vice versa.

A people oriented party serves the cause of development,

motivate the masses, develop leadership and politically organise

and mobilise illiterate and ignorant masses. It can be a tool for

developing democratic institutions, of leadership and of

motivating popular participation at the grassroot levels. A party

should be an oranisation crystallising the political views of large

portions of the population and also as instrument, dedicated emit

to organize and activate the masses towards liberal democracy.

It is a natural tendency of all rulers or ruling elits to

perpetuate their reign. Strong internal objection to hand over

political power is there, because to rule also means to retain

power, status and ever increasing wealth. Besides, there lie in the

core of the heart of the rulers fear that the new regime may be

inclined to victimize them to avenge the repressive measures that

the former have adopted against the latter. While in power

the ruler made himself the sole authority to determine what

the national interest is and anybody suggesting otherwise is

termed as agents of foreign hatched conspiracy. The

oppositions also behave in such an irresponsible way and

adopts foul playing that the rulers find no other alternativebut to strengthening their belief that rigid and ruthless

suppression of the opposition will ensure their survival.

In most developing countries stability and

legitimacy is too fragile. Everything depends on the

farsightedness and the ability of the leader in balancing the

difficult real actors who are contending for power. Only

then, inherent instability, one of the characteristics of

developing countries can be tackled. Bangladesh has

witnessed in pre 20th century, liberal rule where the ruler

changed but not the system' but after that it had a

succession of new leaders bringing his own principles andideas as well as his personal style of government. Even the

most people oriented leader can hardly avoid taking care of

the paramount interests of the ruling elits or the groups on

whose support his own survival depends, the bureaucracy

and the unscrupulous businessmen, the reactionary civil

society and cultural forces. Any reform measure that

contravene the interest of the upper class are withheld or

delayed and the general masses are totally ignored. Any

ruler, seriously attempting to redress the plight of the

people may be compelled to face rebellion form among thebureaucracy and the intermediary power bases and even theforeign funded self seeker civil society. Being in power

there grows all around a group of sycophants. The ruler

loses connection with the underprivileged rural and even

urban people and have very little knowledge about the real

needs and aspirations of the people. Facts are


11/21

misrepresented to him or not at all presented leading to gradual

wane of popularity.

Before independence, most of the political leaders of this

part of South Asia firmly believed in the ideals of freedom,equality and popular participation in Government, as well as in

democratic institutions such as party system, parliament, a freepress, a neutral judiciary and civil service. They believed then,

once independence is achieved, shared views and democratic

institutions could be taken over and maintained. Liberty and

equality become the cry against the colonial powers and

democratic means were successfully practised in gaining

independence from the alien regimes. By forming nationalist

political parties and by using freedom of speech and right to

organise and demonstrate they effectively raised agitation and

ultimately were given independence.

After gaining independence, the original euphoria fordemocracy fade away very soon. New realities became evident in

its vicious shape (i) that democracy can not be easily established

when there is illiteracy and ignorance in the grassroots level and

poverty preventing people from realising democratic virtues (ii)

that the game of politics is confined to a very small group of real

actors and even then there are factions (iii) that a democratic

constitution is helpless against easy procedure to amend and thus

depriving a firm legal basis for democratic stability (iv) that

politics is a dangerous game and that no politicians can afford

being replaced and (v) that in the political arena survival of the

strongest, most ruthless is the order of the day.

All these mean that the basic premises for sustaining

democracy and its institutions are absent in Bangladesh. Formal

democracy i.e. multiparty system and regular election and orderly

constitutional transfer of power from one rival political group to

another is there, but functional democracy that guarantees life and

living in total absent.. Although to the superficial observer

it would appear that total chaos has dominated the political

scene in Bangladesh in the past decades, the truth is that a

new political pattern based on liberalism professed by a

small group of intellectuals, politicians and professionals

has evolved with its own logic and dynamics and suited tothe present particular stage of socio-economic development.

The fact is that almost nowhere has the call for greater

democratic Freedom and popular participation in

Government died down altogether. It is being increasingly

heard among the large middle class. Eventual reappearance

of liberal democracy is almost inevitable.

The demands of the developed countries that the

developing nations prove their legitimacy and that the same

time follow there prescription for economic development

without caring for the recipient countries moral, choice,

culture and the choice of the people are but oppressive.They should understand the realities in the power structure

in developing countries like Bangladesh. Popularity and

legitimacy are the result of good governance.

The new elite have already adopted, apparently

without much hesitation, the materialistic culture and the

value system of the west. Once a beginning has been made

in introducing western administration, education,

institution, the new ideas began to question old beliefs and

tradition of service for others. It has also found expression

in official policies. But a deliberate attempt to censure oldtraditions or a particular national life style or to introduce a

new one considered more appropriate to a particular stage

of development is unlikely to succeed. Democracy can only

be ensured where old civilization be incorporated into the

modern development and political process. There is always


12/21

a provision for renaissance, re-discovery of old tradition and

values at a later date.

There seems to be a host of factors, some superficial, others more

profound, that constitute a peoples national character. But most ofthem tend to share liberalism based on human values which form

an integral part of all major religion and philosophies thatembodies most important of all our common cultural and critical

values which development and modernization could not altogether

destroy till to-day. What people should endeavor to achieve is the

ability to enjoy the benefits of modern age and yet remain the

human beings that they are with all their human rights intact. The

mindset has to go back to norm for the resurgence of humanity

with all its mighty forces for standing erect in the commune of the

world of nations.

AGES OF DECEPTION

CURRENTY there is a debate about the suitability of

formal democracy in a country like Bangladesh. It is a

fierce one, but many among the political elite seem to be pondering about the systems efficacy, its future and

whether or not Bangladesh should opt for some other form

of democracy that would be able to meet the hopes and

aspirations of the people. However, one does become

exasperated while dealing with such assumption. After all

we all fought for functional democratic form of government

over and over again. That struggle even stretch back not

only since the independence of the country in 1971 but also

goes back into Pakistan period (1947-1971) when Bengali

intelligentsia resisted relentlessly the autocracy in guise of

democracy of the ruling coterie of Punjabi and also Bangalielite in order to establish democracy that people haveearned after a protracted struggle and through a national

consensus. Why are people then such despair to be thinking

of replacing it? The answer to the query is quite

straightforward, the answer simply is that the system is not

working and people are finding it increasingly difficult to

identify with a system whose beneficial effects were

supposed to have improved their quality of life. On the

contrary, erosion of democratic institutions, pervasive

corruption institutionalized and then practiced by

consecutive governments, break down of law and orderculmination into state sponsored terrorism that terrorize the

ordinary citizens, violation of human rights, rampantviolence against women, and even children and low level

economic development have heightened the sense of

desperation among the people. Our much vaunted


13/21

democracy is still tied with foreign aid and still characterized by

patron-client relationship and our ruling elites behaviors

demonstrate a mindset of British institutionalized serfdom, which

reinforces sense of servitude before power on one hand, and fury

of arrogance towards the general mass on the other hand. Hence

the debate ensued. The questions thus arise: why is it not workingand what do we need to do in order to salvage the situation?

Answers to those queries, however, pose a formidable challenge to

analysts.

The history of formal democracy is almost as old the British rule

in India. And at the end of the colonial rule those South Asian

states who opted for parliamentary form of government were not

fully aware that this was one form of government that needed,

which all form democracies do, a frame of mind that understood

its operation, rules, guidelines, and the conventions and traditions

that shape and structure its functioning. They vaguely knew that

the system was based, besides the institutional framework, on trustand delicate rules of game, a system that needed a nation, whetherit is multi-cultural or multi-racial, with an abiding faith in its

intrinsic values. But there was no such understanding among the

political elite about the necessity of these two equally important

components, their interdependence and inter linkages and that the

components needed to be inter woven. One could not do without

the other.

South Asian states, thus, opted for a system whose operation did

not solely depend on the democratic institutions left behind by the

British but on the societal values as well. They adopted a system

whose value system was somewhat alien to the people, for obviousreasons of course. If history is any guide then one would discern

that the newly independent South Asian countries had no otheroptions but to adopt it because this was the only form of

democracy and its functioning they had been familiar with since

two hundred years .We all know the British introduced the system

in progressive phases, a fragmented institutional structure

and its operation mechanism at a time, in small doses, to

make the British Indian elite acclimatize with the system

and its modus operendi. Time and again they postponed

granting full-fledged self government on the plea that the

British Indians were neither ready nor capable of handingsuch democratic governance that called for delicate

balancing among various religious, ethnic, linguistic

groups. Notwithstanding the leaders of South Asian states,

who adopted the mode, without having the commitment to

its ideals like humanism, rule of law, justice, equal

economic opportunities, greater intellectual and religious

freedom and its inherent values needed to translate those

ideals into reality. The result is a dismal failure in making

the system operational in most South Asian countries, gave

up and opted for disguised authoritarian model on the

pretax that it was not the kind of government that was tousher in a new era of development fulfilling theexpectations of the people.

Bangladesh, as part of erstwhile Pakistan, had already been

exposed to all those arguments and counter arguments for

and against parliamentary form of government. Those

arguments seemed to have been put to rest once Bangladesh

broke the shackles of Pakistani rule and achieved

independence in 1971 after a nine months of bloody war.

The constitution adopted in 1972 prescribed a

parliamentary democracy in undiluted form withoutstatutory provisions restraining the powers of any

executive, the kind found in the developed democracies ofthe west. As the constitution was adopted it looked like that

the country stood at and extraordinary moment of her

history after having come to the end of history` and finding


14/21

ideal model that would solve a war torn countrys socio-economic

problems and establish an exploitation free society. Such apogee,

however, came crashing down with the declaration of a one-party

state. Since then people have experimented with pure martial law,

semi martial law regimes as well as semi authoritarian presidential

regime before making history one more time in 1991 by revertingback to parliamentary form of government. Now it has been

almost a decade that we have been trying to make our nascent

parliamentary democracy work. We have had two peaceful

transfers of power and anxiously waiting to see its success. All

seem well but underneath like a lurking shadow, deep in out

hearts, we know that the system has floundered and has become

somewhat dysfunctional. Hence the revival of the nagging

questions about the form of democracy that is suitable for

Bangladesh. Though exasperated the question does have some

inherent value in the context of what has been happening in

Bangladesh since the reintroduction of parliamentary democracy.

Something then has gone wrong in Bangladesh that we are

confronted with such gloomy and bleak propositions. An analysis

of last one decade would probably help us throw some light in this

direction. 1991 was the beginning of a political democracy in the

country. We got the form as well as institutional framework like

parliament, political parties, western education elite, election

commission and civil military bureaucracy who were ready to

accept the supremacy of political leadership though much of it

were mere structures rather than substantive, but the framework

was in place. As a matter of fact in order to make institutionalframework stable and functioning a number of wrong conciliatory

approaches were adopted.

The quest for a stable democratic order has been evidenced in the

provision of 1972 constitution (Article.70) but it curtailed the

independence of the MPs and prevented the use of crucial

parliamentary mechanism like a motion of no confidence

and floor crossing. It was further reinforced in the 12th

amendment (Article70. sub clauses A.B.C) of the

constitution in 1991 for the same reasons. It was hoped that

with the functioning of the nascent democratic norms likedemocratization of the political parties would evolve and

the system would stabilize with consolidation of democratic

institutions. Strengthening of the national democratic

institutions were also recommended by the USAID

sponsored democracy team of 1992 through the

democratization process i.e. regimes willingness to be

inclusive and bringing various groups into the system,

especially the peripheral groups like women and the poor.

But tragically both elected regimes paid lip service to the

ideals of democracy rather than putting spirit in its

functioning. As a result, though the stability of the regimewas ensured even at the cost Prime Ministerial dictatorship,the institutional framework remained hollow. The

inevitability happened. The system degenerated and became

a naked struggle for power and the apparently stable order

soon i.e. within these years of its reintroduction, came

under severe pressure over the issue of holding the free and

fair election.

The issue of free and fair election is of utmost importance

in any democracy as it is through this mechanism that the

twin principles of the systems popular base and source of

legitimacy are ensured. Indeed it was of great concern whenthat crucial mechanism was tinkered with. An innovative

institution like caretaker government, which was to oversee parliamentary election in order to prevent election

fraudulence, was again adopted through the 13 th amendment

of the constitution though it was clearly an abridgment of


15/21

parliamentary spirit that is based on mutual trust. However, time

proved that is was not an end in itself. The 1996 election was

conducted under this novel institution but was unable to instill any

trust in the political environment and it was alleged that the ruling

party manipulated the electoral process in an unabating manner,

and the issue again and again reached its climax. Countrystumultuous politics, thus, is under severe strain with the main

stream opposition boycotting the parliament while demanding to

adopt a number of mechanisms like holding elections-by-elections

as well as local self government ones under the neutral caretaker

government. All these are indicative of a degenerative election

process of the country that in itself possess the greatest threat to

any democracy. Simultaneously lack of institutionalization has

given rise to unprecedented agitational and confrontational

politics, and rampant corruption eroding not only peoples faith in

the system but also underlining the institution like judiciary. The

societal fabrics are falling apart due to the deteriorating law andorder and the near absence of rule of law is creating havoc inviolating human rights to such an extent that Bangladesh has been

termed as the torture house by many.

The onus for the malfunctioning of the formal democracy lies

squarely on the shoulders of the political parties. The role of

political parties in the democratization process can hardly be

overemphasized. They have been termed as the lifeblood of

democracy. The efficacious role of political elite in

institutionalizing the democratic norms constitutes a vital element

in laying the foundation of democracy. They are viable agents of

democratization and play the mediating role between the citizenryand the state. In this context the truth is: the political parties in

Bangladesh did not live up to those expectations.These have been evidenced in a recent study exposing the political

parties in Bangladesh through the interviews of political leaders of

parties in Bangladesh that they have failed as visible agents in

sustaining a stable democratic order. The nature of party

politics in the country with its lack of internal democracy,

practice of personality cult, factionalism and internecine

conflicts is such that the windows of opportunities created

since 1990 were not utilized because parties failed to bring

about a national solidarity and consensus through the art ofnegotiation, compromise and accommodation. This has

been mainly due to the political atmosphere between the

political parties that is characterized by mutual distrust,

intolerance and antagonism.

The question arises as to why these mainstream parties all

of whom have a centrist position, and have more or less

similar manifestoes with regards to countrys social,

economic, and foreign policy issues are so far apart that

they do not hesitate to call each other anti-state. The answer

to that is though much of the animosity and mutual mistrust

are due to personal disliking of the leaders, but deep downthere remains the question of national identity and otherhistorical baggage that keep them poles apart. These images

have been intensified by a partys perception of itself as

being the sole inheritor of the liberation of 1971, and thus

having a false moral claim on the state power. Its attempts

to set the history, which was falsely alleged of being

distorted by previous regimes and their strange perceptions

that those mainstream oppositions are not proper political

parties have made them acrimonious towards each other.

Their behavior and rivalry have adversely affected the

political culture of the country. Its manifestations are beingfelt in the political climate as well that already is full of

hatred and violence. The statements given by the leaders arepersonal, low, and obscene and have no relationship with

the politics. The results have been incitement of the masses


16/21

and increasing lawlessness. No democracy can functions in such

environment.

The onus also lies with the politicians because it was their

responsibilities, through their behavior, to create, at least lay the

foundation of a democratic political culture of distinctive set of

political values, and orientations from its citizens: moderation,toleration, civility, efficacy, knowledge and participation. One

could not agree more about the imperative of such culture in order

to make democracy functional. However, it is also acknowledged

that such phenomenon is not likely to happen overnight in a

country like Bangladesh whose political culture is historically for

two hundred years characterized by atomism, patron-clienteles and

neo patrimonial. But the least the parties could do is to consciously

try to practice those norms that could form the foundation of

democratic culture and political education for the masses. The

failure of the political parties in this respect has been horrendous.

Instead of imparting political education to the masses the leadershave provided causes, through their constant bickering and rivalry,to their followers and activists to settle issues by means of

intimidation and violence.

The non-democratic mind-set of the political parties not only

vitiated the political atmosphere but also undermined and eroded

the foundation of nascent political institutions like bureaucracy

and judiciary. No serious attempts were made to resolve the

transitional problem like establishing a people oriented

constitutional and electoral system, rule of law by repealing anti-

democratic laws and possible security of the people separating

judiciary from the clutches of the executives. On the contrary, blatant and pervasive politicization of bureaucracy and other

institutions have brought the governmental apparatus to a virtualhalt. And finally the most glaring failure of our political parties

has been their inability to create democratic oppositions whose

importance in a democracy has been constantly argued by

democratic theorists and emphasized on a fairly open

political environment for its evolution. That kind of

political environment calls for an inclusive regime that has

low barriers allowing the opposition opportunities for

expression, organization and representation of political

preferences. However, in Bangladeshs entire history therehas only once been such an inclusive regime during general

Zias rule. But the opposition failed to grasp the

opportunity and employed all their trickery in vilifying him.

The fact of the matter is that the later governments have

been mostly hegemonic. The opposition was not simply

allowed to evolve.

As a result, Bangladesh parliament, where the vital national

issues were supposed to be discussed and resolved, stands

hollow and totally dysfunctional. The mainstream

opposition, like the opposition during the previous regime,

had been boycotting the parliament or walking out of itwithout much reason. There is no existence of thedemocratic opposition in the parliament, which is paid by

the exchequer, to bring to the fore the activities of the

executive by scrutinizing and censoring, and providing the

people an alternative government. Again, the political

parties, instead of nurturing a democratic opposition the

party which captures power with a authoritarian within

tendency has treated the opposition not on equal terms but

as an arch-enemy and has been all out to put the opposition

in disarray and thereby minimizing its capacity. The

throttling of oppositions voice is easily discernible fromthe parliamentary proceeding. Almost non existent hours

devoted to Private Members bills, and Speaker plays apartisan role in not allowing opposition to participate in

meaningful debates. And unfortunately, there is valid

suspicion that the tendency may be continued as evidenced


17/21

by the ruling party learning mechanism of opposition repression

though filing of numerous alleged criminal cases against the

opposition MPs. At present the political scenario is characterized

by oppositions retreat into backwardness while the party in

power sees itself in fulfilling some kind of destiny.

In the context of the above scenario it is then logical (though

exasperated) to be apprehensive of the future of democracy inBangladesh. And it is also discernible that the roles of the political

parties are the main reason for such a sorry state of affairs. We

have great hope that change would come to make much of a

difference. Until and unless there is a qualitative changes in the

mindset of our political leadership, democracy in whatever form

would have a rough sailing in the country. On the contrary, the

liberal democracy with the intricate scrutinizing mechanism has

greater chances of replacing present corrupt and authoritarian one.

Moreover, this is only form of government that people of

Bangladesh are now eagerly waiting to give a warm welcome.

So, given the chance it may flourish, especially in the context thatall are not negative, the Institute of Liberal Democracy, the think

tank for the people, for example, though not above criticism, has

contributed in political education and helped raise both social and

political awareness among the people. There are no threats of

military interventions into Bangladesh politics, but peoples

sentiment must be taken into account.

So the development of liberal democratic politics must be

encouraged to work out. In this context it is of utmost importance

for the nation that the results of the general elections be acceptable

to the people and the legitimacy of the winning party is not inquestion. The main task now lay with a new civil society group

imbubed by the sprit of Liberal Democracy. They must comeforward on non-partisan basis and create awareness among the

people and build enough pressure so that the power contenders are

compelled to abide by the rules of the game and demonstrate their

commitment towards democracy and pave the way for

liberal democratic culture. For Bangladesh, it is essentially

a challenge to develop new institutions as well as processes

of governance. We have to find local solutions to complex

problems which are, global, regional and national in nature.

We need to redefine the role of the conventional democracy

which no longer can deliver the services required by peopleliving in rural and urban communities. Managing

simultaneously many interrelated problems, which are of

global, regional and national character represent the most

formidable challenge for our development in the coming

years. It is now apparent that government is not able to do

many things which we thought the democratic government

would be able to do back in the 70s. Government for

example, is not very good at running a business; it is not

good at operating banks or managing industries. We know

very well how much of a burden the public sectorenterprises have become---- they are now a big drain on theeconomy. Ironically, the government has done poorly in

terms of traditional functions that every one expects the

government to perform. It has not been able to ensure

people oriented law and order; the judicial processes have

decayed; rule of law is yet to be established. In sum,

government is over regulating and stifling small scale

private initiatives in sectors where private enterprise can

grow and flourish. Whereas large scale initiatives are given

all assistance and the financial institutions providing

excessive loans that never comes back. Government is notable on the other hand, taking measures to frame and

enforce regulations that protect and promote small scalelocal based industries.

The development financing was never made available and

the funding needs have since increased many fold.


18/21

Bangladesh, one of the poor third world countries will never ber

able to raise a huge amount of capital. At the same time there is

growing evidence that mobilization of local resources and the

participation of those affected by those problems can go a long

way towards alleviating the burden of poverty and meeting basic

needs. Greater local responsibility for problem solving suggests a

new facilitating role for the government, and elements of theemerging civil society. But the people have already seen

successful new ventures by the reactionary civic society

represented by interest groups, local communities, non-

government organizations, social development entrepreneurs and

private enterprises. These have aimed to tackle many of their big

problems to bring the poor unconscious people into their fold

through local initiatives. Bangladesh in sense has been a world

leader in creating new interface between civic society and the

rather inefficient, wasteful and corrupt government. Some NGOs

have provided a lead in developing new delivery systems forsocial and financial services reaching the bottom poor wheregovernment programs had bypassed them in the past. But steps

must be taken to stop immediately the activities of those NGOs

which carry on lending business with high interest rate and also

are engaged in implanting obscene, dehumanizing, free for all

Vedic and Western culture that speaks for submission. Their

trickle down policy kills peoples urge for self-realization as well

as actualization.

The key to meeting our development needs in the short term seems

to be the participation of people directly concerned, in solving the

big problems locally keeping national tradition and heritage intact.Liberal Democracy is on the move to provide incentives to

facilitate creation of new institutions outside the government.Local level solutions involve firstly setting up new institutions and

new enterprises for delivering resources and also for receiving

them. There could be various categories of new enterprises that

need to be encouraged to do the things, which the

government has not been able to do. There should be more

target oriented delivery systems to provide social services

like political education, health care, housing and rural

infrastructure. A micro-finance institution under Institute of

Liberal Democracy is much needed to provide phisical

services targeted at the rural poor. The urban sectorhowever, still remains untouched in spite of the very rapid

rate of urbanization in Bangladesh. One can also visualize

the immediate need for a new generation of financial

institutions to provide venture finance to small

entrepreneurs both in the rural and urban sectors. Evidence

form regional countries clearly show the importance of

small and medium enterprises which generates rural non-

farm employment and income opportunities for surplus

population released from the agriculture sector.

It would involve new participatory processes for decisionmaking at the local levels. We need democratic institutionsat the grass roots so that concerned people can participate in

local governance. The primary task is to allow accountable

and democratic local government system to emerge as close

to the people as possible--preferably at the village level.

Strengthening local governments and setting up a genuinely

decentralized political system would need downsizing the

national government, scaling down its operations and

disinvestment of public enterprises. To accomplish these

tasks we would require a firm political commitment and a

strong civil society with devotion to the cause of the peopleas human beings and the nation as a whole.

Undoubtedly Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was most powerfulperson since 1969 till his gruesome death. Posing such an

outward expression of democratic instinct it was difficult to

believe that he had embarked on such a course of stamping


19/21

out dissent and opposition by throwing his political opponents in

prison and gagging the Four Estate- the printed and electronic

media by clamping down pre-censorship and letter closing down

all of those expect government controlled four. It was indeed

tragic that leader like him could stoop to such a level only to

ensure the power does not slip out of his grip. A consummate

politician and a most wielders of power he was endowed withtenacity to doggedly fight back and succeed in the face of

stupendous adversity with a rare capacity to endear himself to the

public at large by his ability to strike instant rapport with the

masses and an extra ordinary charisma lay at the source of his

outstanding popularity. The toiling multitude in the lowest rungs

of the socio-economic ladder was mesmerized by his stirring call

to banish poverty and he recorded decisive victory through

effective exploitation of oppression consciousness that he aroused

in the public. He made not even any effort to make the preliminary

moves to translate into reality the catchy slogan of socialism, leaveaside trying to implement it in the right earnest. And for that verypurpose he had no compunction in destroying institution starting

from his own organization, which was, sought to be emasculated

by draining out inner party democracy so as to develop the culture

of sycophancy shorn of any commitment to values. His cynical

attitude to politics, reveal best in his approach to the problems

resulted is not only his gruesome end but also the shocking rise of

a devastating anti Awami League sentiment in the public. It is

people could realize at last that they were betrayed by him and that

he furthered his personal interest essentially to establish and there

after reinforce his stranglehold on power. Reaching out to people, particularly the dispossessed and underprivileged, he persecuted

the underdog.As everywhere also the result of such repression have with rare

exception-been bad-for the country, for the people and even for

the Armed forces, particularly their readiness and the capacity to

shoulder the responsibility of defending the country against

internal fifth columnists and external hege monists-threat.

Political and other long cherished values have gradually

been eroded and the slow death of various national

institutions has been witnessed. These institutions are much

easy to destroy but their restructuring takes time and great

effort. The attempt to prolong undemocratic repressive rulehas most of time caused a cataclysm. During this painful

process of aggrandizing the leadership, with eager goading

of opportunists and sycophants, has developed a philosophy

of some sort, which justified the betrayal of oaths solemnly

sworn on the Holy Book, and the violations of the

fundamental law of the land. Sk. Mujib also justified the

introduction of a harsh regime to impose the regimes cruel

control of the people, the use of the sheer force, the

dungeon and the fetter in order to break the will of the

downtrodden people who wanted to resist the new order.The pliant bureaucracy invariably falls in happily withevery dictatorship, helps gleefully to prepare schemes to

hood wink the people, and contentedly translates

preemptory orders into drafts that can be given the from of

laws. The judiciary and also be suborned, and with a formal

expression of mild disapproval judges sit down to invent

rules convenient for the ruler. All these are done with

smugness and self righteousness that are beyond the

comprehension of ordinary mortals. These self satisfied

people persist with their rationalizations until a day comes

when they are retired or forced to vacate their chairs and aredenied the higher offices they had coveted or had been

promised. Then they sink into their holes and mutter bitterly about wrongs, betrayals and false promises and

some even muster the temerity to deny personal culpability


20/21

for acts of perfidy-acts that helped to deprive many peoples of

their peace, their liberty and some even their lives.

These persons have entered the portals with no mandate; no

authority to represent the people, and the only advance they work

for is self-advancement. During the long years of political

stagnation, many things turn upside down, inside out outside in.

Once there were rigid rules governing military aid to civil power,now the situation can be best described civil aid to non-civil

power, although political parties are in function, the basic model is

that of apolitical elements which allow anyone with huge funds

and unauthorized arms power and manipulation to intimidate the

people and win a seat in the legislature. The system introduced in

the 1970s more or less remained intact. Now the abnormal is

treated as normal. Seemingly it is expected that the present system

will survive through the years with strangely balanced diarchy.

And this long-term plan seems to imply that people will never be

given the right freely to choose their rulers and to determine thecourse of events. Instead the present regimes leadership has takenupon itself the responsibilities of defining the countrys

ideological frontiers that were never known to its people.

Apart from the physical force of the politicians and its inherent

organized strength furnished and paid by the unscrupulous

businessmen and industrialists and the foreign hegemonies, two

main groups act as willing chief collaborator and supporters of

every regime. The quickest to answer the self-aggrandizing

politicians call are the tribe of senior bureaucrats who under the

umbrella of anti people rule come to their own are able to exercise

authority that can no longer be questioned. With unsubtle flatterythey manage to convince the rules that everything they wish to do

in feasible and also that bureaucratic cooperation is vital for theadministrative structure. The second category are the feudal type

of professional politicians who seem unable to breath in comfort

without access to corridors of power at some level. Most of them

are not burdened with a conscience or gifted with political

consciousness and can offer their services to who ever in

power without feeling any qualm or shame. They can

always think of a plausible excuse for breaking with apart

when it is no longer in power if there seems to be little hope

to return to office. Politicians of this class are the most

potent source of political corruption and are alsoresponsible for spreading corruptions in the administration

from the level of an office assistant upwards to the highest

bureaucrats. Those can be described as political

mercenaries, many urbanites imbibe similar ambitions and

ape the conduct and even dress of the main beneficiaries. It

is not easy to determine which group has done greater

harm, the weasel faced bureaucrats or the luxury loving

uplifted anti people one man party politicians. It is certain

any how that between them they have succeeded in

blocking the countrys political advance and hindering itssocio-economic progress. They have used all their influenceand power to keep dependant on the west and neighboring

big brother. If they have any loyality, it is to their class

interest and to their foreign masters. It can be seen that their

likes and dislikes, their love and hates, what they cherish

and wish to preserve have all been inherited from their

benefactors, even to the extent of retaining an ill concealed

contempt for the mass people. They find themselves totally

alienated from the ordinary people the peasants and the

worker, the clerks and the shopkeepers, those who have to

work with their hands and their brains, all the poor nativeswithout the veneer acquired through elitist education or

foreign travel.It seems plain that if Bangladesh is to grow and develop

certain basic changes are absolutely essential. For too long,

political power has been usurped by party nominated self


21/21

seeker politicians who upheld of class interest bureaucrats with

unpleasant, some times catastrophic consequences. The worse is to

come unless peoples prolonged ouster can be ended and their full

rights as free citizens of an independent nation restored of them.

ages of deception

Documents