[This
was published in the African Herald Express on 29 December 2013, South Africa.
Some parts of this were published on 18 November in the leading weekly Dhaka Courier and on 21 December 2011
in the leading daily Financial Express
in Bangladesh].
Politics,
one of the catchy, juicy and mystifying words of the day, is frequently heard
or discussed more or less everywhere that encompasses, inter alia, residences,
offices, institutions, corporations, factories, industries, private or public,
buses, trains, planes, ships, boats, gardens, parks, prayer places such as
mosques, temples, pagodas and churches. Its ambit, functional or territorial,
ranges from local to district to division to national to regional to international
domains. Directly or indirectly, consciously or unconsciously, willingly or
unwillingly, almost every citizen or national irrespective of sex, color,
caste, creed, and religion is said to be/have been tuned to it. Even in our
daily parlors we hear that people are used to say ‘Don’t play politics with
me’, ‘He has been in politics for a long’, ‘The matter is political’, ‘Politics
has polluted the academic atmosphere’, ‘Political leadership should be honest,
committed and altruistic’, ‘There is a political crisis in the country’,
‘Defense forces should be away from politics’ ‘Government is in a trap of
regional or international politics’ etc. More importantly it is held that a
country with a democratic order cannot run well without political leadership
and thus more height and space are added to it.
Furthermore,
nationalism, driving force of a nation-state, is also a resultant upshot of
politics. Hence, politics is more popular, appealing and magnetic to the
peoples in the developing countries than those of developed ones. Today it is
an impossibility to think of a state without politics on hand, whatever its
nature and dimension might be. Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC) even before nearly
2400 years ago , wrote his epoch-making book under the title ’Ta Politika, translated
into ‘Affairs of the State/politics’. Laski’s ‘Grammar of politics’, ‘An
Introduction of Politics’, Harold D. Lasswell’s ‘Politics: Who gets, What, When
and How!’ Stuart Rice’s ‘Quantitative Methods in Politics’, Appadorai’s ‘The
Substance of Politics’, Andrew Hacker’s ‘The Study of Politics’, Almond and
Coleman’s ‘The Politics of Developing Areas: Introduction’ etc. provided
interest and attention further. Various academic institutions universities in
particular in the developed and developing countries today run departments and
faculties also using the word ‘politics’ such as ‘Department of Politics’,
‘Department of Politics and Government’ or ‘Department of Political Science’.
If all these come as reflections of reality then the asking crops up in a
second ‘What is politics?’
Sequence-1
Over
the centuries political philosophers, thinkers, scientists, theorists,
analysts, researchers, even politicians and statesmen invested their labors and
acumen to define ‘politics’ in various modes, contents, contexts, fashions and
currents and trends are on till the date. Scientific studies, researches and
forecasts keep us informed that everything in the universe is in motion and
rotating on its orbit around the larger one starting from satellite to planet to
star to galaxy to the infinite largest. Likewise, the planet called
earth---readily goes by the name world---since the beginning and march of human
race met and experienced a number of civilizations over the millions of years.
For familial, social, cultural and religious interactions, associations and
assemblies depending on time (duration), space (place) and dimension (contents)
in accordance with the blueprint of the Lord of universe, visible and/or
invisible, many orders and systems were devised and put into operations. Some
of them survived and lasted for centuries while others lapsed into the times of
yore.
Truth
is that because of natural transformation and change of the geographical
footing of the territories of earth it was neither possible in the past nor is
viable at present nor shall be feasible in future to preserve and continue with
the records sine die. We are at present more or less acquainted with the
history and records of five to ten thousand years ago. It is a further lesson
of history that concepts, models and theories related to the affairs of rule or
administration devised and applied during and in course of such interactions
and association of people in different parts of the world in essence originated
principally from the overall landscapes of the population, religion, culture,
economies, type of rule, education and so on in the territory in issue, which
otherwise implies the activation of time, space and dimension in the given
situation as the seminal factors. If any of such concepts survives and
continues for centuries after centuries, it then must be, of course, for the
sake of acceptability, efficacy, adaptability, applicability and
sustainability, be subject to redefinition with necessary additions,
modifications and amendments retaining the basic spirit unvarnished. Politics,
speaking in the superlative, is one of such words or concepts that have been
put on record in history since the days of Greek city-state.
In
fact, taking all its literal, theoretical and practical objects, subjects,
definitions, explanations, interpretations, applications and implications with
limitations therein into account and on hold together at the outset,
Organically linked to the matters of state, politics may precisely be earmarked
as ‘an atomic concept being unfolded constantly either in a process of
evolution or revolution or the both in the context of time space and
dimension’.
The
word politics comes from the Greek word Πολιτικά (politika), modeled on Aristotle’s
"affairs of the city", the name of his book on governing and
governments, which was rendered in English mid-15 century as Latinized
"Polettiques". Thus it became "politics" in
Middle English c. 1520s (see the Concise Oxford Dictionary). The singular
politic first attested in English 1430 and comes from Middle French politique,
in turn from Latin politicus, which is the latinisation of the Greek
πολιτικός (politikos), meaning amongst others "of, for, or relating to
citizens", "civil", "civic", "belonging to the
state", in turn from πολίτης (polites), "citizen"
and that from πόλις (polis)"city. It is a process by which groups of
people make collective decisions. The term is generally applied to the art or
science of running governmental or state affairs, including behavior within
civil governments, but also applies to institutions, fields, and special
interest groups such as the corporate, academic, and religious segments of
society. It consists of "social relations involving authority or power and
refers to the regulation of public affairs within a political unit, and
to the methods and tactics used to formulate and apply policy. In fact, the
history of politics is reflected in the origin and development, and economics
of the institutions of government (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)".
In
his etymology-searching write-up ‘Word Power: Politics’ Gregory Rineberg noted
‘the word politics has its origins in Ancient Greece. A. All of the cities in
Ancient Greece, such as Athens, Sparta, and Corinth, were referred to as
city-states and the Greek word for a city-state was polis (πολις).Â
The word acropolis is not just a clever name, the Greeks named all of the
highest points in their city-states that because it literally made sense.. Our
culture is not so different for we still see the word polis used today when
cities, like Los Angeles and New York, are referred to as a megalopolis or
metropolis (https:lunatickfringe.wordpress.com/2009/07).
Therefore, Politics for its etymological derivation owes
to the Greek words ‘polis’, which denotes the activities related to the affairs
of or in and around a city-state in ancient Greece more than 3000 years ago and
when the Romans took over Western Civilization after the fading away of Greece,
‘polis’ was translated into ’politicus’ of the Latin language of the Romans.
Later, for technical reasons, with the dropping of the suffix-us, the words
‘politic’ was chosen and thus ‘politics’ was born. All citizens in the
city-states were referred to as polities and the system of
government/administration by many aimed at the well-being of the citizens and
the state was called polity.
It
does not mean and conclude that ‘polis’ meaning matters related to the rule of
a territory (city-state in Greece’s perspective) had its maiden march from the
soil of ancient Greece for the reason that the very theme in other‘s
perspective had grown and developed with various kinds of words in various
types of languages in a variety of systems and administrations in different
places of the planet from the time immemorial. Such growth and development,
similar or opposite or mixed even, from the angle of time, space and dimension,
might be simultaneous in some territories, coincident in some others and
non-simultaneous in rest of the spaces. Possibility of linkages, bi-lateral or
multi-lateral, in most of the cases might not be doable largely due to
contemporary constraints and limitations of modes and means of communications.
It
is now well apparent and understood that polis being the activities related to
the affairs of or in and around a city-state signifies and implies firstly,
what a city-state in its perspective did (objects of polis) i. e. its goals,
targets, strategies, plans and programs, civil and military, to run it and
secondly, for the welfare and security of its people (subjects of polis). Here
city-state’s roles were as a whole very much in the nature and form of an
initiator and implementer. Further findings show that city-state was considered
as an ends in itself and accordingly because of the established/customary
philosophies, ideas and beliefs people used to consider city-state as an
attainment of life in full. To obey the commands, laws, rules and regulations
of city-state is to begin a journey to reach at the pinnacle of life. This
unfolds pointedly the philosophical and moral foundation of city-state. Plato’s
‘Republic’ is a living document of an ideal state based on such ethical and
moral standard and foundation of the time. Therefore, ‘polis’ in its perception
meant matters related to a city state and those matters were basically taken
into accounts and decided in the light of the ethical foundation of the
city-state in issue. It can, in fact, be deemed as an ‘atomic concept’ since
there cannot be a state without the fundamentals of polis (minus its ethical
utility that varies from state to state indeed).That’s its unique excellence
for the present, and all the ages to come.
In
fact, in those days there was no idea, or perhaps no necessity, of a political
party in today’s perception and that might be largely, inter alia, due to a its
small size of population and territory. Nevertheless, it is also learnt from
history that the concept and method of direct elections were there to a large
extent, which show and substantiate strong existence and prevalence of
difference of opinions, organized or not, at least in/electing and being
elected to different bodies of public importance. Aristotle’s monumental study
of Ta Politika’, which, it is said, he wrote having studied and analyzed a
large number of constitutions, contained, inter alia, a classification of government
into dictatorship (rule by one), aristocracy (rule by few) and polity (rule by
many) with their perversion/ degeneration into tyranny, plutocracy and
democracy provide strong supports of the prevalence of those systems during or
before his time.
It
further strengthened the proposition that there might be associations, guilds,
clubs and groups, organized or segmented, to practice aristocracy or polity in
their own modes and fashions. Because fundamental aspects of human nature are
knitted in such a fashion that where the number of person is one, question of
difference of opinion does not arise; where the numbers are two, possibility of
difference of opinions exists, whether exposed or not all the time and where
the numbers are more than two or many, possibility of difference of opinions
exists and continues as virtual certainty. Further dictate of human nature is
that men differ in their opinions, but, at the same time, they are gregarious
by nature. If they are to live in a society they must adjust their differences
with others and agree on certain fundamental opinions and the other is that
they come together with persons holding similar views in order to put forward
those views in the form of policy or decision or the both in an organized
manner.
Polis
in a city-state, after the death of Aristotle, began to slide from
Socratic-Platonic-Aristotelian epoch to new basis, color and contents due to
coming of the contemporary slowly growing or sidetracked schools of thoughts to
the forefront mostly Epicureanism and Stoicism broadly aimed at placing before
men the ideals of personal character and private happiness in place of devotion
to the city-state and rise of various kinds of philosophical currents and flows
along with its gradual fading into the emerging folds of empire, church state,
kingdom and so on. To speak the truth, the sway of these two schools of
thoughts brought about a radical transformation in the thinking of city-state
both from structural and philosophical standpoints. Politics, religion and
ethics so long considered as a single whole under the polis (city-state), after
the emergence of such new light and focus on universalism, law of nature, human
equality and world citizenship, met with a big challenge and got virtually
alienated with eclipse of the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle. City-state
no longer remained an ends in itself and it began swelling from territorial
point of view.
Stoicism,
established by Zeno in 300 BC, spoke of universalism, law of nature and
equality of all human beings more scientifically and comprehensively and it
lasted for five hundred centuries, from 300 BC to 200AD. Zeno is said to have
been a student of Crates who was the leader of the Cynic school. Stoicism may
there be regarded as a development of Cynicism. It starts with the fundamental
ideas of Cynicism--- perfect self-control, independence of circumstances,
complete self-contentedness and self-sufficiency, and life according to
Nature—but interprets them in a positive and constructive way. This implies that
the guiding and controlling force in life is ethics not politics. A good man is
something different from a good citizen. Therefore, state no longer remains
indispensible medium of good life for an individual. The result was that
Stoicism, in place of the wholly negative and nihilistic doctrines of Cynicism,
plants positive and constructive ideas. The succeeding heads of the school came
from Asia Minor where co-mingling of Greeks and Asiatics was taking place. It
was less intimately confined to Greece proper than the other schools which
flourished in Greece after the passing away of Aristotle. It happened to
continue to influence the minds of men for several centuries, initially in
Greece and finally in Rome, where quick-witted persons like the Emperor Marcus
Aurelius, Cicero, Seneca, Polybius, and Epictetus (0nce a slave) made their
formidable appearance among its adherents. It is further held and understood
that the ideas persisted through centuries and molded the political thought of
Europe from Cicero down to the eighteenth centuries.
Epicureanism,
founded by Epicurus in 306 BC, spoke of the same but with less scientific and
comprehensive focus for which it was overshadowed by Stoicism and thus could
not proceed furthermore. During this time many things happened including
conquer of Greece by the Romans, rise and fall of Roman Empire, invasion and
ascendance of the Teutonic (Germans), attacks and plundering of Rome by the
Barbarians and march of Christianity with the Holy Bible on hand at first as a
spiritual power and then as a political power. Thus, theoretical shift from
city-state-based moral and ethical disposition to non-city-state-based standing
pregnant with stoicism in particular became acute while operational mode
continued more or less on the same wave.
Sequence-2
After
the arrival of Christianity with the Holy Bible as a code of life, spiritual
and mundane, a new sense of wave commenced to flow into the pulse of Europe in
meticulous that challenged ultimately the utility of the prevailing modes and
definitions of universalism, law of nature and egalitarianism. During the
initial phase roughly from its march to the sixth century, dispute or debate on
the demarcation of jurisdiction of powers between the church and state was at
low ebb since it was almost a foregone conclusion that the church should look
into the spiritual aspect while the temporal side should be dealt by the
king/emperor. The balance between secular and spiritual jurisdictions was more
or less maintained by the both sides keeping in mind the great saying of Jesus
‘Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that
are God’s’. This principle, in fact, rests upon the conception that man has a
dual nature and is therefore subject to dual authorities. As body which is
mortal he belongs to the civil society; his material or temporal interests are
bound up with his membership of the secular state; obedience to it, therefore,
becomes a mundane necessity. As spirit which is immortal has different
interests and a different destiny; he becomes a member of the Kingdom of Ends
which is within him; his spiritual interests are in the keeping of the Church
and not the concern of the civic society. Since spiritual interests are more
important than worldly interests, in case of conflict between loyalty to the
State and loyalty to God, the latter should always take precedence over the
former. St. Ambrose, St. Augustine and Pope Gregory the great played a vital
role here and, truly speaking, St. Augustine’s ‘doctrine of two swords’
depicted in his book ‘City of God’ was a revolution in this regard.
But
at a latter phase notably from the sixth century it became acute, sharp and
contentious in full with the weakening of the empire and rise of the power of
the pope which resulted in the birth of papacy leading to the second Roman
Empire known as Holy Roman Empire with leadership of emperors like Charlemagne
and Otto 1 in particular. Problem of making clear-cut demarcation between the
two i.e. spiritual world and temporal world was indeed a very difficult task
for which controversy emerged largely not only on the point of transparent
separation but also on the question and logic of such differentiation because
the very thesis of Christianity was resting on the proposition that ‘the life
of a human being is a blend of the two things, one is spiritual and the other
is temporal; there is no scope to separate the temporal from the spiritual one
as he cannot be a half human being under any circumstances’; this hunted and
engulfed the periods from the eleventh to the sixteenth centuries. Theology
grew and developed as one of the five sources of the origin of state. From the
secular and intellectual angles, Dunning, a leading political philosopher and
thinker, dubbed the middle age ranging from sixth to sixteenth centuries as
un-political and going one step forward political thinkers of various folds and
faiths even did not hesitate to call it a ‘Dark age’.
In
fact, Ancient Ages (conveniently divided into pre-and post Aristotelian periods
up to the sixth century) came to an end with the start of Middle Age in the
sixth century and it continued up to the sixteenth century until the arrival of
Modern Age with the appearance of Machiavelli. From the point of view of
politics, political speculation and administration related to empire/kingdom.
Middle Ages can be split into three distinct periods.
The
first period may be said to extend from the conquest of the Roman Empire by the
barbarians to the eleventh century. This period was intellectually barren;
there was hardly any attempt to independent thinking.
The
second period may be said to last from the beginning of Gregorian movement to
the regime of Pope Boniface V111 I i.e. from the latter part of the eleventh to
the end of the thirteenth century. Barker described this period as the age
‘enthroned Papacy and the Church triumphant’. It witnessed the great revival of
intellectual activity in the realms of philosophy and law in which political
philosophy also shared. St. Thomas Aquinas, Egidius, Romanus, Dante Alighieri
and John of Paris belong to this period. Though the mass of political
literature produced in these two and a half quarter centuries is greater than
all that was written on the subject between the death of Aristotle and the
installation of Gregory V11 as pope, political philosophy did not attain to the
status of an independent study; it was overshadowed by theology and
metaphysics. Speculation on political subject was incidental to the controversy
between the papacy and the empire; it was dominated by the theological
considerations.
It
is in the third period, which may be said to last from the fourteenth to the
sixteenth century that regular treaties on political philosophy began to be
written. Marsillio of Padua and William of Occam belong to this period. Barker
described it as the silver and turbulent age ‘in which Papacy is menaced by
Kings, by sects and by councils; in which villains revolt in the country and
artisans are insurgents in towns; in which theory becomes radical, lay and revolutionary’
(Barker in Hearnshaw: Social and Political Ideas of the Middle Ages, Page12).
Under
any circumstances, one should not be forgetful of the reality that where there
is a rule or administration, there is a politics depending on its
understanding, modes and definitions thereto. Hence, branding Middle ages as
un-political or non-political or dark age may have some weights otherwise but
from the point of view of politics, whatever might be the quality, depth and
gravity, right answer is that Middle ages was not devoid of politics rather it
bore politics in its own contexts and contents. How can we deny the Roman
contributions to law and constitutionalism, human rights and egalitarianism?
How can we disown the contributions of feudalism, political or economic, to the
emergence of nation-states? How can we avoid the contributions of conciliar
movement, Renaissance and Reformation? How can we set aside the concept of
representative government developed during the latter part of the middle ages?
Are not all covertly or overtly part and parcel to the politics of the Middle
Ages? If civilization denotes the totality of ‘what we have’ and if culture
implies the totality of’ ‘what we are’, then a deserving space should
necessarily be provided to note that politics goes as an inalienable element of
them with its own mode, color, taste, adoptability and sustainability.
Thus
the philosophical standing of the matters related to state, government and the
contents therein moved further mostly from realism to religion, which
furthermore met with the political philosophy of separation of power between
the church and state with the emergence of nation-states stepping into Modern
Ages. There remains no dearth of suspicion that politics being an atomic
concept swelled, developed and became varied more again both conceptually and
structurally.
Sequence-3
It
is widely claimed that the Modern Age dawned and the Middle Ages came to an end
with the appearance of Machiavelli (1369-1427) who because of his thoughts in
particular in the Prince and Discourses is regarded as the initiator/father of
modern political thought (in academic sense and nomenclature, political
science) in a sense of his making attempt to draw a clear line of demarcation
between the end of middle ages and beginning of modern era. Philosophers,
theorists, thinkers, writers of various faiths, ideologies, shades and colors
since then started sounding their voices high in line with the call of ‘Freedom
of thoughts, conscience, expression giving priority to the overall flowering of
individual in a secular atmosphere with the dominance of state (government) at
the initial phase and then with less interference by the state (government) at
a later date’.
Special
features of this period, among others, entail separation of the church from the
state(king)or to say more pointedly subordination of the church to the
state(king), rise of nationalism giving birth to nation-state either with
constitutional monarchy or with republic in place of monarchy based on
feudalism(also called feudal state), political or economic, discoveries of new
territories, invention of printing and faster expansion in this domain,
revolution in the field of science and technology and their effects on
agriculture, trade and commerce, and industries, rise of new merchant class
with a visible trans-national focus and proliferation. A new wave of thoughts
began to develop centering the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge in England.
The glorious revolution of 1688 through the defeat and escape of James , then
Monarch of UK, (while fleeing he was first captured by Kent fishermen near
Sheerness but on 23 December, with the prince’s connivance, James successfully
fled the country), French revolution, birth and development of House of Lords,
House of Commons and Parliamentary system of Government in UK, French
revolution, genesis of USA with a Presidential form of government, French model
of government, World war I and II, birth of League of Nations and its demise
followed by the establishment of UN0 later named UN etc resultantly contributed
a lot in shaping the next course of politics and its contents.
But
the most striking development in the field of politics was that in the
succeeding phases of political history and developments in the Modern Age it
became evident on all accounts that the theme/fundamentals of polis being an
abstract entity dealing with matters of a state in segmented or disorganized
ways ---which was almost wholly confined to the philosophical world of
non-material foundation--- could not be put into practice at large in the new
set-ups without a material foundation. Meanwhile, move to the words and concept
of ‘politics’ taking the fundaments of polis minus its ethical entity to
welcome its atomic nature of expansion is almost complete. It happened
successfully supported and encouraged by various schools of thoughts,
philosophies and ideas and their resultant effects on the peoples and states
and, obviously, politics took the lead to move ahead of. And there in a
possible sequence of the call and necessity of a material foundation of
politics was given birth to an organization in the shape and name of ‘political
party’ (in the terminology of politics, government or political science). In
other words, ‘polis’ began to swell up adding a material foundation and
acquired the characteristics of both the material and non-material foundations
which, must be treated as one step forward since in reality it now found its
growth and continuance with people in due course from different walks of life
as players, actors and beneficiaries. Therefore, if today it is asked ‘What
does the words political party mean? Quick and plain answer is that an
organization which carries in essence politics as its loads, stocks and barrels
is called political party or else readily goes by the name ‘party’.
Truly
speaking, so long Parliament beginning from the day of the signing of the Magna
Carta on 15 June 1215 at Runnymede in England remained as an advisory body of
the King the question of political parties did not arise. Emergence of
political parties took place in 1679 centering the Exclusion Bill crisis of
1678-1681 followed by the dissolution of Parliament by Charles 11.Supporters in
favor of the Bill got united and petitioned for a new parliament came to be
known as ‘Petitioners’ while those who expressed their abhorrence of the
attempt to force the king to summon parliament were consequently named
‘Abhorrers’. Later ‘petitioners’ became known as ‘Whigs’ leading to the
formation of Liberal party and the ‘Abhorrers’ came to be identified as
‘Tories’ leading to the creation of Conservative party. Influence of political
parties over the people began to increase gradually and people virtually became
dependent on political parties for their concerns and matters in a state which
can be well understood from political landscapes of United Kingdom, motherland
of politics, political parties and democracy. W.S. Gilbert in 1882,
understanding the Influence and gravity of political parties over the people of
UK, wrote:
‘How
nature does always contrive
That
every boy and gal
That’s
born into this world alive
Is
either a little liberal
or
else a little conservative.
An
environment of freedom of thoughts, opinions, and expressions is a
pre-condition for the uninterrupted growth, development and continuance of
political parties and a viable party system there from. This is possible in a
democracy where so many political parties are supposed to work together, vying
each other and one another on the basis of the respective programs, manifestos
etc. Here the question of multi-party democracy as opposed to single party
democracy of communist world is very important. Politics is inherently
interlinked to overall landscapes of the country where it is nursed and
practiced, which shape and dominate the contents and nature of the political
culture there and, accordingly, this political culture plays a vital role in
determining the contents and nature of politics there.
Political
culture is as well tied and tuned to the geographical location and standing of
the land concerned. Geography for contents and nature of politics is very
important since, under any circumstances, people’s overall temperaments cannot
be detached or separated from it. As it is well-settled and accepted that In
Earth Sciences / Physical Geography) (often capital) Geography one of the
divisions of the earth's surface, especially according to temperature(heat from
the star Sun) divided into latitudinal belts of Equator, Torrid Zone Frigid
Zone and Temperate Zone.
Equator
is a line going around Earth and is halfway between the North and South Poles;
it is given latitude of 0°. Values increase north of the equator and are
considered positive and values south of the equator decrease and are sometimes
considered negative or have south attached to them. For example, if latitude of
30°N was given, this would mean that it was north of the equator. The latitude
-30° or 30°S is a location south of the equator. On a map, these are the lines
running horizontally from east-west.
Three
of the most significant imaginary lines running across the surface of the Earth
are the equator, the Tropic of Cancer, and the Tropic of Capricorn. While the
equator is the longest line of latitude on the Earth (the line where the Earth
is widest in an east-west direction), the tropics are based on the sun's
position in relation to the Earth at two points of the year. All three lines of
latitude are significant in their relationship between the Earth and the sun.
The
equator is located at zero degrees latitude. The equator runs through
Indonesia, Ecuador, northern Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and
Kenya, among other countries. It is 24,901.55 miles (40,075.16 kilometers)
long. On the equator, the sun is directly overhead at noon on the two equinoxes
- near March and September 21. The equator divides the planet into the Northern
and Southern Hemispheres. On the equator, the length of day and night is equal
every day of the year - day is always twelve hours long and night is always
twelve hours long.
It
is determined that the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn each lie at
23.5 degrees latitude. The Tropic of Cancer is located at 23.5° North of the
equator and runs through Mexico, the Bahamas, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, India, and
southern China. The Tropic of Capricorn lies at 23.5° South of the equator and
runs through Australia, Chile, southern Brazil (Brazil is the only country that
passes through both the equator and a tropic), and northern South Africa.
The
tropics are the two lines where the sun is directly overhead at noon on the two
solstices - near June and December 21. The sun is directly overhead at noon on
the Tropic of Cancer on June 21 (the beginning of summer in the Northern
Hemisphere and the beginning of winter in the Southern Hemisphere) and the sun
is directly overhead at noon on the Tropic of Capricorn on December 21 (the
beginning of winter in the Northern Hemisphere and the beginning of summer in
the Southern Hemisphere).
The
reason for the location of the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn at
23.5° north and south respectively is due to the axial tilt of the Earth. The
Earth is titled 23.5 degrees from the plane of the Earth's revolution around
the sun each year.
The
area bounded by the Tropic of Cancer on the north and Tropic of Capricorn on
the south is known as the "tropics." This area does not experience
seasons because the sun is always high in the sky. Only higher latitudes, north
of the Tropic of Cancer and south of the Tropic of Capricorn, experience
significant seasonal variation in climate.
While
the equator divides the Earth into Northern and Southern Hemispheres, it is the
Prime Meridian at zero degrees longitude and the line of longitude opposite the
Prime Meridian (near the International Date Line) at 180 degrees longitude that
divides the Earth into the Eastern and Western Hemispheres. The Eastern
Hemisphere consists of Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia while the Western
Hemisphere includes North and South America. Some geographers place the
boundaries between the hemispheres at 20° West and 160° East so as to not run
through Europe and Africa. All the lines are used symbolically to understand
the overall position of temperature and determination of time and location.
Torrid
Zone constituting the part of the Earth's surface between the Tropic of Cancer
and the Tropic of Capricorn characterized by a hot climate;
Frigid
Zone consisting of either of two extreme latitude zones of the earth, the North
Frigid Zone, between the North Pole and the Arctic Circle, or the South Frigid
Zone, between the South Pole and the Antarctic Circle; and
Temperate
Zone comprising either of two intermediate latitude zones of the earth, the
North Temperate Zone, between the Arctic Circle and the Tropic of Cancer, or
the South Temperate Zone, between the Antarctic Circle and the Tropic of
Capricorn. Human temperaments of the inhabitants within the respective zone,
thus, mostly grow and develop following peculiarities therein.
That’s
why a democratic rule cannot get its root overnight in a land, which has for a
long been fastened and directed to non-democratic administration as a whole and
vice versa. People in a hilly or mountainous area cannot be possessed of same
tastes and temperaments of those of plain land or island land or archipelago. A
nation-state may also be composed of hilly, mountainous area, plain land,
island land and archipelago or may be a combination of few of them and, thus,
temperaments grow and develop in the almost same mode and direction
necessarily. There must be differences of tastes, habits, attitudes etc between
or among the peoples of Torrid, Frigid and Temperate zones. Even variations are
also sharp and acute between or among the peoples of the same zone depending on
its distance from or proximity to the equator.
Bangladesh
( i/ˈbɑːŋɡlədɛʃ/ or i/bæŋɡləˈdɛʃ/; Bengali:
বাংলাদেশ), officially the
People's Republic of Bangladesh (Bangla:
গণপ্রজাতন্ত্রী
বাংলাদেশ
Gônoprojatontri Bangladesh), a sovereign state of 155000 square kilometers
located within 24° 00' N latitude in the Tropic of Cancer and 90° 00' E
longitude in South Asia may be an illustrative here..Bangladeshi climate is
tropical with a mild winter from October to March, a hot, humid summer from
March to June. A warm and humid monsoon season lasts from June to October and
supplies most of the country's rainfall. Natural calamities, such as floods,
tropical cyclones, tornadoes, and tidal bores, occur almost every year, combined
with the effects of deforestation, soil degradation and erosion. The cyclones
of 1970 and 1991 were particularly devastating. A cyclone that struck
Bangladesh in 1991 killed some 140,000 people. It is now with 160 million
populations, 150 US dollar GNP, 6.7% GDP, 12% inflation with a fledging but
weaker parliamentary system of multi-party democracy.
Interestingly
enough, it is sometimes also viewed as a land of ‘Three Ps’(PPP)’ meaning
‘Poetic’ because of geographical location from 23 to 27 degree latitude in the
temperate zone having six seasons a year, which bring about from gradual to
u-turn changes in the mind of the people mostly in a continuous process and
thus causes laxity to a great extent in the texture of making and sticking to
decision(s), determination and implementation, ‘Poor’ because of the weak
economic standing, overpopulation leading to serious fall and short of
employment opportunities, civic privileges and rise of resultant complexities
in particular and ‘Political’ since the people are poetic and poor, they have a
penchant for making everything political in their demand(s) and realization(For
more, visit ‘Three-phase national consensus: Bangladesh perspective’ in www.sinhaearthblog.blogspot.com).
Today
it is further held that geography as a discipline can be split rightly and
broadly into two main subsidiary fields: Human Geography and Physical
Geography. The former largely focuses on the built environment and how humans
create, view, manage, and influence space. The latter examines the natural
environment and how organisms, climate, soil, water and landforms produce and
interact. The difference between these approaches led to a third field,
Environmental Geography, which combines physical and human geography and looks
at the interactions between the environment and humans.
Furthermore,
on the basis of aims, objectives, ideologies and strategies politics, nay as
its carrier political parties may be of various forms, dimensions and natures
such as right, left, centre, extreme-right, extreme-left, centre-right,
centre-left. Further labels include conservative, liberal, reactionary and
radical and so on. Accordingly giving due attention to all the prevailing
definitions dealing with natures, compositions and elements of a political
party as a whole, it is better, safer, more logical and practicable to conclude
that for becoming a political party four elements are essential i.e. ideology,
organization, program, activists and leaderships. Speaking realistically, more
a party is in a position to consolidate and strengthen its overall standing
putting these four pillars into reality, more it acquires support, credibility
and popularity of the people from various walks of life and then, stands and
continues as a party of national stature crossing the boundary of local or
regional entity. Further reality is that politics becomes or turns out to
partisan when it is conceived and carried by a political party
With
the increase of population and technicalities plus complexities therein and the
resultant effects of development of science and technology, political parties
correspondingly began to expand sector-wise in line with say, labor, youth,
women, student etc as front or associate wings bringing more and more
activists, active or passive, and supporters under their respective fold and
thus entered the texture of being called ‘Parent organization’. Further
enlargement(s) took place with the recognition to and opening of various kinds
of professional groups, associations and bodies as associate wings. Party to
party contacts between or among the political parties of different
nation-states in the mode and manner of track- diplomacy and also setting up
overseas units in some cases added auxiliary ingredients to its ride. And so,
like a developed tree with full of branches, twigs and leaves starting from the
budding position, today a political party stands and continues with the
foundation well-built and stretched as much as necessary, vertically and
horizontally, with a number of front and associate wings.
Growth
of political parties in a multi-party democratic order is extra-constitutional
from the legal point of view but at the same time they are subject to laws,
rules and regulations on question of elections to local and/or national bodies
and thereby came into being electoral laws and Election Commission as
regulatory body constitutionally to hold elections in a free and fair
atmosphere independent of the interference of the party/coalition/junta-in
power. Later, provisions related to the compulsory registration of political
parties were added as pre-conditions to participate in the elections to
legislative bodies, provincial or central, which virtually put the political
parties under the heads of ‘Registered’ and ‘Unregistered’(political parties).
It is also true that there many countries, for example, almost all the states
in the Middle East, where politics through political party(s) is not allowed as
of 15 November 2011 and if such ban is withdrawn ever at present or in future
that has to be done through a constitutional means indeed. Similarly, in a
single-party democratic order say China, North Korea, emergence of multi-party
democracy shall have to take place through constitutional procedures.
There
are cliques, groups, factions under the cover of ‘inner politics’ in a
political party and hence, a party is called a combination of groups into a
single whole with a unity in diversity. Elections decide and determine which
party or coalition shall be voted to power and which party(s) or coalition
shall sit in the opposition in Parliament. Hence, Parliament is said to be
composed of the Head of State (constitutional
Monarch/King/Queen/Emperor/President), Majority Party and Opposition (called
Minority Party in US Congress). Here role of the opposition as critic,
alternative proposer to the ruling party’s drives and initiatives and helping
hands to turn the ruling party’s development and welfare-oriented programs into
practice in a democratic order came to be viewed and considered as part and
parcel and for these the Opposition (Major Opposition) in Parliament) is also
known as ‘Shadow Government’ To attach more and significant weight to it, the
office of the Leader of the Opposition has been recognized formally with a
rank, status and privileges of a Cabinet Minister of the Government. Thus,
politics denoting the ‘affairs of state’ came out of the exclusive ruling
temperament and embraced both ruling and non-ruling (opposition) character as
its time-bound required disposition.
How
and why politics and political parties run side by side for the overall
development of a country may be well understood from the two examples here one
from USA and other from Pakistan. Founding fathers of USA conceived of a state
without the existence of any political party considering it as the root of
disunity, chaos and threat to developments but they soon realized the
experiment was just an unsuccessful exercise. Because in the Presidential
election of 1796 on questions of, inter alia, the determination of powers between
the federal government and state governments serious cleavage cropped up one
faction supporting Thomas Jefferson and other supporting John Adams. Thus,
eventually in the long run came into being Republican and Democratic parties,
even to the extent of necessitating the addition of the Twelfth Amendment so as
to infuse vitality into the Electoral College method to put it on a more solid
foundation. More interesting is that in the recent past we have seen in
Pakistan that military ruler general Ziaul Haque ruled the country without
allowing the activities of political parties (party less) for nearly a decade
from 1977 to 1988 onward, which in the end generated tones of problems,
political or otherwise, in the overall affairs of Pakistan, domestically and
outwardly. It also proved to be a wasted exercise. Today, unlike Greek
city-state, there can be no nation-state without political parties and
leaderships there from.
One
may refer to the systems in the states of Middle East but one should at the
same time not be forgetful of taking note pragmatically that those countries
say, Saudi Arabia in particular is not devoid of politics because of its
resting on the ideological base of Islam as non-material foundation of
politics. How long Saudi Arabia and others in the line should be away from the
call of political party(s) as its material foundation? Yes, process has already
started in their modes and styles. Speaking in the superlative, no state is
today secured and strong without people’s participation as the historical
lesson is that the people of a state are the ultimate source of power and this
realization is dawning in the Middle East promisingly. The days of prolonged
state of emergency suppressing and strangulating the voice of the people,
holder of popular sovereignty are no more viable and durable. Events, called
‘Arab spring’, in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syria etc spreading as Tsunami for
those who still like to cling to power against the will of the people.
Needless
to utter it twice that political leadership stands on top of all types of
leaderships in a state because of its unique qualities to unite and integrate
all possible issues &problems while deciding a matter in issue. It is
called the brain and wheel of a political party. More a leader proves his
excellence in directing, guiding and showing ways and avenues to organize and
set the party on track to the people, more a party gets strengthened
organizationally. A party may fail and fall with all its sound programs simply
because of the failure of leadership to stimulate and organize the people or
the target group befittingly around or under the umbrella of its message. From
this point of view, leadership is also called ‘charisma’ wherefrom develops
‘charismatic leadership’. Leadership is by nature textured with dynamism,
change and continuity and a good leader is he who does not cling to power or
chair or the both disregarding party-based or party-line growth and development
of leadership and the pulse and sentiment of the party he leads.
Leadership
is not a sort of private property, which can be handed over to one by a ‘will’,
or which can be claimed by virtue of birth or relation in succession, although
the trend is very much sharp and strong in the politics and political parties
of the developing countries as it is, for cases in point, vivid from Nehru
dynasty in India, Sheikh dynasty in Bangladesh and Bhutto dynasty in Pakistan.
It is rather marked with trust and responsibility wherefrom arise the question
of strict adherence to honesty, transparency, commitment, dedication and
altruism. For emergence, growth and development of new leadership roads and
avenues must be made open by the leadership in chair or power. Those who could
not do that they in due course of time became an object of criticism by both
the party and the nation because of the negative feedback it left behind
accordingly. In the recent past South African leader Nelsen Mandela has been
able to print his name in history by leaving the chair to the new leadership.
To
keep a balance between charisma and trust and responsibility is a real
challenge for a leader. On all accounts leadership is one of the highest forms
of music, arts, science, literature and technology (For more visit the author’s
piece, ‘Understanding the music of leadership: Bangladesh perspective’ in O
United Nations Sinha blog Articles). It is also found that sometimes a party
goes by the name of its leader as it happened, for example, in cases of
Gandhi’s Congress in India, Jinnah’s Muslim League in Pakistan, Bangabandhu
Sheikh Mujib’s Awami League and Zia’s Bangladesh Nationalist Party in
Bangladesh, Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy in Myanmar, Mao’s
Communist Party in China, Jefferson’s Democratic Party and Adam’s Republican
Party in USA and so on. Least of all, Political leadership is for the most part
regarded as a dependable road to statesmanship as well.
There
also remains a vital question to be answered in ambiguous terms and the
question is who is to be called a ‘politician’? A politician has been defined
and viewed in many ways and angles from time to time. In the city-state
perspective, ‘a politician is usually referred to as somebody that holds an
office for the government. A. Since we already know what the true definition of
politics is, the only difference between politician and politics is the suffix -ian. The suffix
-ian means related to or from. A. So, although you may hear of
politicians, like Barack Obama, John McCain ete just remembers that all
citizens are considered to be politi’ (https:lunatickfringe.wordpress.com/2009/07).
In
modern perspective focuses, definitions and interpretations are many depending
on the canvass and angle in particular. American Heritage Dictionary of English
Language (Fourth Edition, updated in 2009, published by Houghton Mifflin
Company).put forward the views that 1. (a) A politician is a person who is
actively involved in politics, especially in party politics and (b) One who
seeks personal or partisan gain, often by scheming and maneuvering: "Mothers may still holds or seeks a political
office 2. One who want their favorite sons to grow up
to be President, but . . . they do not want them to become politicians in the
process" (John F. Kennedy); and 3.
One who is skilled or experienced in the science or administration of
government.
According
to Urban Dictionary politician refers to 1. A person who tries to please
everybody when speaking, and tries to steal everything when acting. 2. A
pathological liar. 3. When in electoral campaign: a prostitute.
Politician
A: It was a good movie.
Politician
B: Yes it was.
More
generalized, accommodative and acceptable mode of understanding a politician
tells us to look at the reality that a person who, from the institutional point
of view, earns a degree in a discipline, say medicine, physics, engineering or
agriculture is academically entitled to introduce himself as doctor, physicist,
engineer or agriculturalist. A person with a LLB background becomes a lawyer after
his joining the Bar and a person who teaches in a school, college or university
is called ‘teacher, lecturer or professor. Even a professor with a political
science background is known as ‘political scientist’. It is true that a
political party is not an academic institution but there is no denying the fact
that it is a political institution based on certain norms, rules and principles
with a team of policy and decision-makers, office-bearers, secretariat, annual
budget and office stretching from centre to the local unit. Its day to day
routine works from its central to the local offices is maintained by an
administrative network as well. Furthermore, by taking part in elections to
local and national bodies which involve nominations of deserving candidates and
budgetary matters put a party definitely on a better footing of institutional
character. As told earlier in this sequence that a political party is mainly
composed of four elements and now it is further asserted that all the elements
together elevate its position and standing accordingly to the rank or grade of
an institution with the characteristics of being called a political
institution.
But
there lies distinct differences between political and academic institutions
because political institutions neither do give certificate in the manner and
mode of academic institutions nor is politics considered as a profession.
Unlike a profession, politics is a kind of services and, perhaps, it is the
highest form of services, which requires unflinching commitments, dedication
and altruism involving time, energy and money. It is founded on the concept of
‘giving-up’ not of ‘taking-away’. The term politician, unlike a politician in a
city-state, implies a person’s onward association with a political party with
risks and responsibilities, dedications, sacrifices and commitments for a
particular period of time. It may be at local, regional or national stature.
All the workers, leaders at various stages cannot be called politicians since
the term carries some special and more qualifications.
Therefore,
logical deduction is that a person, who has been in politics with a membership
in a political party for a certain period of time, thus gathers knowledge and
experience through a process of political actions and responses and holds
leadership portfolio at any stage or various stages of his party is said to be
a politician. Leadership may be imposed or foisted upon and a person may become
a leader overnight without being a politician whereas a politician cannot be a
politician without at the same time being a leader at any stage of
organizational set-up i.e. local, regional or national. So, politician
presupposes both politics and leadership.
Sequence-4
Mostly
unlike Greek city state, politics of a nation-state is for all intents and
purposes responsive and conscientious to bi-lateral, regional and international
calls, needs, assistance and co-operations and so the words bi-lateral regional
and international relations and politics are convincing and compelling
accompaniments and proliferations of the time. Truly speaking, as it is
mentioned also in sequence-1, that the creations and categorizations of mankind
into different kinds of races, nations, tribes, clans with a variety of colors,
languages and dialects in different parts of the planet are the exclusive
blueprint and jurisdiction of the Creator of universe. Hence, it was neither
possible in the past nor possible at present nor even possible in future for a
nation or state or empire or kingdom to rule and run the world as one whole
under its single command as a result of which mutual contacts and
understanding, bi-lateral or multi-lateral, between or among them crossing the
territorial boundaries of each and all came as a reality. Geographically,
resources under the earth, over the earth and in the space are also spread and
dotted unevenly in such fashions and modes that no single piece of territory
was or is in a position to meet with its requirements using its own dividends
for the overall well-being and development of the fate of the people.
Out
of this practicability, crossing of territorial boundaries occurred necessarily
in the shape and form of bi-lateral, regional and international structures and
compacts. Concepts such as agreement, pact, memorandum of understanding and
treaty, bi-lateral or multi-lateral, based on pacta sunt servanda (meaning that
the agreements entered into by the states must be followed by them in good
faith) supported by series of international laws, rules and regulations from
time to time and emissary, emperor’s or king’s agent or representative, state’s
consulate, ambassador/high commissioner, nuncio with required diplomatic
manners and protocols etc grew and developed. Thus, the areas and dimensions of
politics remained dormant in its atomic fold because of lack of discovery and
application began to flourish geographically with all functional inputs
further. Developments in the fields of science and technology made them so
nearest in almost all respects that today world is called a ‘global village’ of
nation-states with the United Nations along with its wings and affiliated
bodies as a unique centre for all.. This has as well been summed up in a lucid
mode in a prosaic poetic expression in the Author’s book O United Nations as
follows:
O
United Nations------------------------------
You
are a unique centre for a get-together
Of
all the member states in the world
Ranging
from North to South to
East
to West;/
Embracing
all------------
Asians,
Africans,
Australians,
Europeans/
South
Americans, North Americans
And
Antracticans
Irrespective
of caste, creed, color and religion
Relaying
the voices of/The Black, the Whites and the Mixed to/
Everywhere
in the world
(Page
18 at www.sinha-ounitednations.com)
Politics
in regional and international dimensions has become so dominating and encompassing
that in these days state or also a
government can hardly think to survive and continue without being formally
recognized (de facto and/or de jure) by other states followed by her membership
essentially in various regional and international bodies. Concept of balance
power, bi-lateral, regional or international, and then accumulation of arms and
ammunitions, conventional or most sophisticated, in the name of safeguarding
and upholding of territorial integrity and national sovereignty made nation
states more venerable to such politics. To the utter disappointment of all, the
planet has meanwhile witnessed two world wars one in 1914 and other in 1939,
which on an average lasted more than five years onward. Once the world faced
the cold war and wars in limited scales on different fronts between or among
the nation states with the patronization, supports and inputs of two super
powers, USA and USSR, of the bi-polar socialistic and capitalist world from
1917 to 1990 and it continued till the fall and dismantle of USSR into a number
of free and sovereign states with a shift to mixed or almost near-capitalistic
model and now we are having the taste of the uni-polar world under the sole
dominance and command of hyper state USA. All these happened or happen due to
play and counter play of the players in the fields of international politics.
Thus the lexis such as US politics, EU politics, Chinese politics, and Indian
politics and so on are made available in this sphere.
There
are bundle of references that predominantly because of such regional or
international politics toppling or fall of a party/coalition-in-power elected
democratically by popular mandate or junta through martial law or mass upsurge
may take place in a free and sovereign nation-state. Idealistic supports under
the cap of doctrine of necessity or doctrine of efficacy or the both cannot
sustain at all if such toppling or fall is not backed by regional or international
politics or by the both. Martial laws in Pakistan in 1958 by General Ayub Khan,
in 1977 by General Ziaul Haq, in 1999 by General Pervaz Mossaraf, in Bangladesh
in 1975 by Major General Ziaur Rahman and in 1982 by Lit. General HM Ershad and
Mass upsurge in the then East Pakistan in 1969-70 that led to the birth of
Bangladesh through a nine month long war of liberation in 1971, fall of
Pilipino dictator F. Marcos, Shah of Iran and, above all, rise and flare-up of
‘Arab spring’ in the Middle East are its burning illustrations. Further to
point out is that there is no better option for an emerging power, regional or
sub-regional, to get and ensure supports and assistance from a superior
power(s) to exist, sustain and continue. For instance, when US officially
affirms and declares that India is a sub-continental power she actually
endorses and passes a message in clear terms that the sub-continent falls more
or less within the domain of Indian politics. Espionage network is another
dimension that takes the stronger or big states to an advantageous position to
poke their noses into the matters of weak or small states. Today the names such
as CIA, KGB, MI-6, MOSAD, RAW, ISI etc are very much sounded and heard
regionally and internationally. It is also alleged that CIA played strongly
behind the curtain to give birth to the ‘Arab spring’. To suit the purposes
‘political assassination(s)’ may even be justified as was seen in case of
Allendale of Chile, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and Ziaur Rahman of
Bangladesh, Z.A. Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan and so on.
Human
rights under the various caps entailing Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
1948, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms, 1950, American Convention on Human Rights, 1969, African Charter on
Human and People’s Rights (Banjul Charter), 1981, Istanbul Declaration on Human
Rights following the spirit of OIC etc are not weighed and looked into in all
such contexts. To speak the truth, declaration and protection of Human Rights
at universal, regional and national levels appear to be sleeping mostly in the
pages of the documents and charters at the dire disregard to those for whom they
are meant and made. Sense of phobia, security or economic or otherwise, may
also bring forth alignment and counter-alignment such as Allied and Axis powers
during world war 11, NATO, WARSO, ANJUS, OAU, Arab League, APEC, ASEAN, SAARC
etc in the post world war 11. Chapter V111 of the United Nations recognizes
formation of regional alliance after the spirit of UN to strengthen and
consolidate the bases of multi-lateral cooperation among the nation-states
functionally and territorially. There is no dearth of reservation that politics
remains as the prime driving force behind all these.
There
are two basic frames in the international order one is formal and other is
informal. Formal frame begins and moves from bi-lateral to regional to
international contexts and contents which may rightly be called ‘International
Relations’ between or among the nation states while Informal frame may
deservingly be treated as ‘International politics’ in the same contexts and
contents. One grows out of necessity and inter-dependence (largely on social,
economic and cultural considerations and perspectives) for survival and
continuance of the nation-states but the other comes and develops out of
perception of security and dominance, hegemonic or chauvinistic, mostly. More
interesting to see is that in the final analyses and experiments it comes to
light that informal relations in practice shape and mould the course of formal
relations and, therefore, the upper hand is accordingly achieved by the state
or states which can play more using her/their power, resources, opportunities,
possibilities and diplomacy and on the top of all these there remains a wheel
or whip called ‘International politics’. Internationally, today, this wheel or
whip is in the hand of USA, leader of the uni-polar world, regionally it is
handled by the regional power(s) and bi-laterally it goes to the state that
enjoys balance of power tilted in her favor. In most of the cases the vital
point is ‘national interest’ that has appeared as the most powerful but
perplexing concept and terminology in international relations and politics.
In
fact, in the context of time, space and dimension politics also began to
develop as a field of study and disciplinary focus and consequently acquired
distinct and separate entity and characteristics and came to be recognized as
‘science’. Politics thus with the addition of the words science became
’political science’ ‘having its dynamic presence in the domain of social
sciences. Hardly there is a university, public or private, which does not
provide education in political science under the department of political
science/government and politics under the faculty of social sciences.
Correlations and discovery of its linkages, overt or covert, latent or active
or near or remote with other branches of knowledge such as arts, literature;
music, mathematics, science and technologies are its additional glamour. Once
non-institutional scholars, thinkers and philosophers dominated the field but
today the field is demonstratively in the grip of institutional think-tanks and
political scientists.
Politics
as a concept in motion is free and open to its users and beneficiaries so that
they can dig, exploit more and more undiscovered areas in its atomic womb and
broaden, increase its ambits and involvements. Its power of acceptance, power
of digestion, power of bearing the loads and stocks and power of accommodation
are so unique that today it can concertedly carry and continue ethical,
non-ethical, religious or non-religious contents together or separate or mixed
in the context of needs and priorities of a state in issue.
Sequence-5
Over
the period, dozens of definitions of politics came from different angles and
perspectives and more are likely to come and thus it is better and wiser to
treat these as merely touching and digging dormant areas of the atomic nature
of development/swelling of politics to meet with the needs and demands of time
in tune with the ongoing rapid development of science and technologies. Its
approach(s) and application(s) may be micro or macro and positive or negative.
It is sometimes called a possible and dependable means to integrate so many
things together with a view to reaching at an amicable solution, and at times
termed as application of multiple tricks to achieve the goals. Somebody make
attempts to elevate it to a height with a wrap that it has the inherent
potentiality to make a thing out of nothing while others do not like to lag
behind and thus put forward more dignified swathe that it is both arts and
science. Concept of political economy is another focus on politics taking
politics and economics as one entity. Considering power as the moot point of
politics some also labeled politics as a ‘game for power’. Definitions are also
available in line with its application to the matters related to families,
clubs, offices etc even to bi-lateral exchanges and dealings. Taken all such
viewpoints together, it is said that politics is everywhere from toilet to
kitchen to bad room to drawing room to courtyard to family to local to national
to regional to international compacts and concerns.
Therefore,
with due care and respects to all the perspectives and dimensions, politics is
a concept, which is atomic by nature. It develops and swells in the context of
time, space and dimension in tune with the needs of the people and the sate
concerned. It, in fact, may be viewed and anatomized as consisting of two
essential elements, one is Object and the other is Subject. Object(s) aims at
the well-being of the people and upholding the sovereignty and security of the
state in issue and to suit these steps to be taken are, firstly, to transform
the objects into practice through determination of vision & mission
matching with time. Here comes predominantly the questions of democracy,
election, parliament, forms of government, domestic resources and their utilizations,
science and technology, foreign policy, regional and international compacts and
concerns since the world is today considered as a ‘global village’ indeed and
so on paving the ways for necessary reforms.
Focus
on the areas of object(s) is an unending process. Some are dogged and explored
while others are yet to be dogged and explored and in progression of this water
and space emerged as recent inputs to politics. Making of laws related to Sea
under the cover of UNCLOS, 1982 and Space, starting from Air Law of Paris
Convention of Arial Navigation, 1919 to Chicago Convention, 1944 to the Outer
Space Treaty 1966 to UNISPACE-82 have consolidated the areas more formidably
from political standpoint also. Concept of ‘sustainable development’ has its
immediate effects on politics. It goes on telling the world over and over again
that ‘sustainable politics’ is now a Hobson’s choice as well. In fact, science
and technology have stood by politics as torch and tool to dig, explore and use
its unexplored possibilities and opportunities as vibrant inputs. There is
nothing wrong to think of an ‘’era of digital politics’ within the timeframe of
21st century.
To
put all these into reality there must be a means/mechanism and accordingly
‘political party’ was given birth to as necessary carrier and implementer.
Consequently, political parties started infusing all these into their program
and agenda in line with importance and necessity. Political parties further
made it clear that politics is not at all confined to the affairs of state to
be dealt exclusively by the government/party or coalition-in power rather the
parties within or outside parliament, broadly called opposition political
parties, which are also generally known as ‘opposition’ with or without seat in
parliament, are also entitled to play a role related to the matters of state.
No government can ignore the inevitability of the working of political parties
in running the state. Reality carries records pointedly that in a democratic
set-up, multi-party or single party, a government itself is the product of a
political party or coalition, called ruling party or coalition. Again,
initiation of track –diplomacy, a call for diversification of the modes of
diplomacy from the single hold of government played mainly by the foreign
ministry to more modes i.e. diplomacy track 11, 111, 1V, V, V1 etc, has broadly
explored more ambits of politics in the field of bi-lateral, regional and
international affairs, which was not possible to think in the days of polis in
Ancient Greece.
Like
other areas say dictatorship, aristocracy and plutocracy, politics may also be
perverted. It was not within the consideration of Aristotle since the concept
was then used synonymously with the polis (city-state).Time is now matured
enough to look into the matter with due care, focus and analysis. Yes, I feel
and understand that the perversion of politics may rightly be called
‘politease’, which here in our context means to tease (taunt, mock or misuse)
politics instead of practicing it in proper mode and technique. Further
elaboration states that when a person, group or party does not practice
politics proper rather does try to apply it to achieve vested gains or
interests, it is then a deviation from the path of politics and a beginning to
get immersed in politease. Therefore, from the practical point of view,
politics because of lack of politesse (correctness involving aims and objects
broadly called contents) may be transformed into ‘politease’. Hardly there may
be a debate about the proposition that ‘today we are passing through a juncture
of politease in the name of politics’.
Attention
as well is needed to be paid to the facts that media, print or electronic, also
known as the ‘fourth estate’, and civil societies of various kinds and folds
emerged as the ‘fifth estate’, have demonstratively made their presence to
voice the issues and problems of the people in a state in their own modes and
fashions.’ There is a strong view that the ambit and influence of political
parties have been quaked to a degree by these two fronts, together or
separately. But the truth is that they, instead, started playing role, positive
or negative, to provide and supply further inputs to politics and secondly,
subject of politics is the people and the state in issue in particular and the
world in general. That’s why when the object(s) of politics aimed at the
well-being being of the people of a state is decided it, from the viewpoint of
reality, it needs also to take stocks from bi-lateral, regional and international
compacts and concerns in the light of state’s standing as a free, sovereign
whole and its ongoing relations & concerns thereto have to be infused in a
proper and cautious manner into the party’s approaches in its own fashions and
modes.
Sequence-6
Today
it is claimed that democracy is the best practicable model to run a country and
thus the countries which are away from this are bridging the chasm through
various initiatives, programs and constitutional measures. But reality is
reality’ It does not believe in the game of hide and seek and ultimately stands
by the truth like a solid rock and thus unfurls to the world that in the name
of democracy a kind of mockery, fraudulent practices are on in a full swing.
Democracy is safe neither to so-called capitalism of corporate kingdom nor to
the so-called socialism of managerial dictatorship. Wilson’s vision ‘world must
be made free for democracy’ remains a myth even in his own land. Noam Chomsky
in his book ‘Failed States: The Abuse of power and the Assault on Democracy’
identified America as one of the leading failed states in the world because of
her failures to provide and ensure necessary opportunities and privileges to
the citizens.
The
very objects of politics nay, the ‘democracy of the people, by the people and
for the people’ have been seized and snatched away by the syndicates and their
lobbyists. A reign of inequalities has overshadowed good sense and spirit
allowing rapid rise and escalation of ‘animal spirit’ as a result of which the
words ‘peace’ has been passed to a remote cold storage. In a sequence of such
proliferations ‘Nobel Peace Award’ has become an object of severe criticism as
politics made its distinct presence even in choosing and selecting such Nobel
laureate(s) starting from 1901 to 2011. ‘Nobel peace prize1973’ was jointly
accorded to Dr. Henry A. Kissinger, then US Secretary of State, and Le Duc Tho
, who served as special adviser to the North Vietnamese delegation to the Paris
Peace Conferences in 1968–73, in reorganization of their outstanding
performance for negotiating and concluding the ‘Paris Peace Accord of 1973’.
World experienced with much wonder and discomfiture when Dr. Henry Kissinger
accepted and received the prestigious award, although the other co-recipient Le
Duc Tho rejected it on grounds that ‘his country was not still at peace’.
Awarding
Nobel peace prize1994’ jointly to Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the
Executive Committee of the PLO, President of the Palestinian National
Authority, Shimon Peres, Foreign Minister of Israel. and Yitzhak
Robin, Prime Minister of Israel, for their efforts to create peace in the
Middle East and Nobel peace prize 1978 jointly to Mohamed Anwar Al-Sadat,
then President of the Arab Republic of Egypt and Menachem Begin, Prime
Minister of Israel, for jointly negotiating peace between Egypt and Israel,
were considered by many during that time as ‘carrying no significance from the
point of view of the end product of the agreement in reality’ and today the
world knows very well what the truth is. A slight focus on the Camp David
Accords may be helpful to understand the politics of Nobel Peace Prize.
The
Camp David Accords
were, in effect, two accords that provided the basis for the continuation of
the peace negotiations: a 'Framework for Peace in the Middle East' and a
'Framework for the Conclusion of a Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel.'
In
the long history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Camp David Accords set the
framework for future peace in the Middle East. Following twelve days of secret
talks and negotiations between Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, Egyptian
President Anwar El Sadat and US President Jimmy Carter, the Camp David Accords
were signed on September 17, 1978 at the presidential retreat in Camp David,
Maryland. Although initially the accords led to the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty
on March 26, 1979, they were unsuccessful in bringing long-term peace between
Israel and other Arab countries in the region.
Egypt
and Israel maintained a state of war since 1948 when Israel had declared its
independence and the founding of the State of Israel, which did not bring any
benefit to Egypt. Later on, in 1967 during the Six Day War, although initially
Egypt embargoed Israeli shipping by closing the Straits of Tiran and unifying
forces with Jordan, Syria and Iraq to establish a large armed force in the
Israeli border, Israel attacked back capturing the Gaza strip and the Sinai
Peninsula from Egypt, the Golan Heights from Syria and the West Bank and East
Jerusalem from Jordan. In 1973, during the Yom Kippur War, Egypt lost again to
Israel realizing there was no way to eliminate the opponent through outright
war. It was then that Egyptian President Anwar El Sadat preferred the road of
diplomacy to solve the problem, unlike other Arab countries that continued
being at a state of war with Israel.
On
January 20, 1977, US President Carter proceeded with a comprehensive, bilateral
approach to revitalize the peace process in the Middle East. Carter's new
approach appealed to the reconvening of the 1973 Geneva Conference that had
initially failed to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict in the absence of
representation of the Palestinians by the Palestine Liberation Organization
(PLO). This time, President Carter hoped that the Conference would be held with
a Palestinian delegation in the hope of negotiating a final settlement.
However, this remained a pure aspiration.
President
Carter visited the Arab leaders on whom he would have to lay his hopes for
peace settlements in the Middle East. Although his meetings with Egyptian
President Anwar El Sadat, King Hussein of Jordan, Syrian President Hafez
al-Assad and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin were successful, President
Carter feared reactions. Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Czechoslovakia that had
allied with Egypt and Syria as well as other Arab nations such as Libya and
Lebanon would possibly react to the US efforts of getting Egypt to make peace
with Israel. Under the threat of terrorist attacks against Egypt, NATO armies
were prepared fro war. Israel had to withdraw its military forces from all
fronts, including the West Bank. Besides, the political situation in Israel
changed abruptly with the long-ruling labor Alignment losing the elections to
Menachem Begin's center-right Likud in May 1977.
On
November 19-21, 1977, Egyptian President Anwar El Sadat paid a first-time visit
to Jerusalem to address the Israeli Knesset (the legislative branch of the
Israeli government) and initiate peace talks between Egypt and Israel. That was
the first visit of an Arab leader to Israel and for his effort Sadat was named
'Man of the Year' by Time Magazine in 1977.
The
Camp David Accords were, in effect, two accords that provided the basis for the
continuation of the peace negotiations: a 'Framework for Peace in the Middle
East' and a 'Framework for the Conclusion of a Peace Treaty between Egypt and
Israel.'
The
'Framework for Peace in the Middle East' summarized principles for a
comprehensive peace settlement with a focus on the Gaza Strip and the West
Bank. Apart from specified areas where Israel was allowed to maintain forces to
ensure its security, it had to withdraw its military government from the Gaza
Strip and the West Bank so that the residents of these areas could elect
autonomous authorities within a five-year period. Besides, Egypt and Israel,
along with Jordan and 'representatives of the Palestinian people' should
participate in negotiations to reach a firm solution to the issues of the Gaza
Strip and the West Bank, Israel-Jordan relations and Israel's right to exist
within secure and acknowledged borders.
The
'Framework for the Conclusion of a Peace Treaty between Egypt and Israel' dealt
with Israel's withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula and the institution of
peaceful relations between Israel and Egypt within a period of three months.
Israel agreed on withdrawing from the Sinai Peninsula within three years and
dismantling its air bases in the Gulf of Aqaba and the town of Yamit. Egypt
agreed on having full diplomatic relations with Israel and allowing Israel
passage through the Suez Canal, the Straits of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba.
The
Egyptian side approved the frameworks on September 19. For Egypt the relation
between the two accords was crucial because it feared that other Arab countries
might view an Egypt-Israel peace agreement as a betrayal of the Palestinians.
The Israeli side approved the accords on September 28.
Apart
from the two main frameworks, the agreement also led to the United States
subsidizing several billion dollars to both governments in the form of grants
and aid packages committed to purchasing US supplies in military and commercial
supply chain management. According to the US Department of State, it is
estimated that in the period between 1979 and 1997, Egypt has received $1.3billion
per year as military aid, beyond any sort of economic or humanitarian aid that
totals more than $25 billion. Similarly, Israel has received $3 billion per
year since 1985 as military aid and grants.
The
Camp David Accords had major implications on the politics of Middle East. First
of all, the perception of Egypt within the Arab world changed dramatically
leading to its suspension from the Arab league in the period 1979-1989.
Secondly, the accords, in essence split up the united Arab front. The Palestinian
issue became the central issue in the Arab-Israeli conflict, yet Egypt did not
push Israel enough for a firm solution.
For
their efforts to solve the problem of the long-lasting conflict between Egypt
and Israel, Anwar El Sadat and Menachem Begin received the Nobel Peace Prize in
1978.
Consequences
of the accords are also reflected in the mode and manner that hold that ‘the
time that has elapsed since the Camp David Accords has left no doubt as to
their enormous ramifications on Middle Eastern politics. Most notably, the
perception of Egypt within the Arab world changed. With the most powerful of
the Arab militaries and a history of leadership in the Arab world under Nasser,
Egypt had more leverage than any of the other Arab states to advance Arab interests.
Egypt was subsequently suspended from the Arab League from 1979 until 1989.
When
the Camp David accords were signed, Jordan's King Hussein saw it as a slap to
the face. When Sadat volunteered Jordan's participation in deciding how
functional autonomy would work and, more specifically, effectively said that
Jordan would have a role in how the West Bank would be administered. Like the
Rabat Summit Resolution, the Camp David Accords circumscribed Jordan's
objective to reassert its control over the West Bank. Focusing as it did on
Egypt, the Carter administration accepted Sadat’s claim that he could deliver
Hussein, however, with a number of Arab world opposition building against
Sadat, Jordan could not risk accepting the Accords, without the support from
powerful Arab neighbors, like Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. Hussein
consequently felt diplomatically snubbed. One of Carter's regrets was allowing
Sadat to claim that he could speak for Hussein if Jordan refused to join the
talks. But by then the damage was done with the Jordanians.
The
Camp David Accords also prompted the disintegration of a united Arab front in
opposition to Israel. Egypt's realignment created a power vacuum that Saddam
Hussein of Iraq, at one time only a secondary power, hoped to fill. Because of
the vague language concerning the implementation of Resolution 242, the
Palestinian problem became the primary issue in the Arab-Israeli conflict
immediately following the Camp David Accords (and arguably, until today). Many
of the Arab nations blamed Egypt for not putting enough pressure on Israel to
deal with the Palestinian problem in a way that would be satisfactory to them.
Syria also informed Egypt that it would not reconcile with the nation unless it
abandoned the peace agreement with Israel’ (Camp David Accords, Wikipedia).
What
is very interesting to note is that it is widely held by the western powers
that possibly the biggest of all implications is the psychology of all parties
involved in the Camp David Accords. Sadat, Begin and Carter managed to show to
the rest of the world, but mostly to the other Arab nations that negotiations
with Israel were possible and that solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict would
be feasible only through continued efforts of communication and cooperation.
Reasons
for awarding ‘Nobel peace prize 2009’ to US President Barak Obama in
expectation of his grand successes in the desired fields, which is a gross
deviation from the very intent and spirit of Alfred Nobel and the Nobel peace
award itself still remains shrouded in mystery.
But
the other side of the coin carries the load of facts and documents that Mahatma
Gandhi, pioneer of non-violent movement in British-ruled India, in spite of his
having been nominated for Nobel peace prize for five times onward from 1943 to
1947 was not finally chosen by the Norwegian Nobel Committee at Oslo simply
because of the politics of the age , which was largely played and dominated by
the British with a Kingdom where the Sun never set due to her territorial
boundaries.(for more visit page 47 in the web publication of the author’s book
‘O United Nations’ at www.sinha-ounitednations.com).
Plaintive expressions of subsequent Nobel Committees for such mistakes and
follies pointedly since 1989 when 14th Dali Lama (Tenzin Gyatso),
Tibet Religious and political leader of the Tibetan people, was awarded Noble
peace prize 1989 and UN’s Declaration of Gandhi’s birthday as the
‘International day of non-violence’ may rightly be viewed also, among others,
as a by-product of ongoing regional and international politics in the context
of India’s visible appearance there.
Politics
has by and large turned into business and the businesses turned into politics
and consequently, political parties, parliaments and fight for democracy all
are, directly or indirectly, within the fists of vested groups. Sustainable
development and monopolistic corporate expansion, drive for reduction and
destruction of arms and race for creating more and more markets for sales of
arms including uranium and accessories, raw materials for manufacturing
destructive weapons for the purposes other than peaceful use for generating
energy and power, cannot move together. This duality is not only unfair but it
also pushes the world towards a great catastrophe leading to recession to
depression and it, as the latest studies and approaches predict, may skate even
to the extent of stagnation. ‘Occupy Wall Street’ is just a beginning of such
flare-up. That's why, with WTO and unbridled move of G-20(in the last summit in
Paris in 2011 strong commitments, among others, to reduce the ongoing imbalance
between the developed and developing countries have been pledged and
reiterated), Millennium Development Goals, a highly ambitious drive and thrust
by United Nations can hardly be achieved and poverty alleviation shall continue
as a soothing but befooling slogan accordingly.
World
is awaiting something solid and perfect aimed at the welfare of the deprived
who are the majority but who are groaning under the wheels of suppression and
oppression of the microscopic minority who monopolistically hold the ninety
percent resources of the planet. This is definitely not the objects of politics
and democracy therein. How to get rid of these all negative proliferations? I
recall and salute Plato for his book ‘Republic’ not for his depiction of a
model of ideal state therein to face the then challenges of politics in Greece
but for the spirit and message it carries for all the ages to come that ‘the
matters of politics should be handled by those who are above selfishness,
greediness, luster i.e. above the influence of animalism’. It signifies two
things one is that politicians should be away from getting involved in the
business of profits and the other is that they should not practice cronyism of
any nature and kind as they are committed to the service of the people
irrespective of caste, creed, color and sex. Let us here also remember the
sayings of Leo Tolstoy, a Russian novelist of universal appeal and standard. In
one of his pieces ‘Three Questions’ he concluded that’ there are three
important things in life which are (a) the most important time in life is
‘now’, (b) the most important man or men is or are the person or persons who is
or are with you now and (c) the most important business is to do good to him or
them. All the questions and answers in unequivocal terms uphold the true spirit
of politics also otherwise. Roseau’s theme of ‘General Will’, Locke’s juice of
‘Popular Sovereignty’, Lord Bryce’s strong sounding of people’s supremacy
through democracy swallow, digest and bear the spirit furthermore.
Had
Aristotle been alive today he would have indeed been taken aback to see how his
concept of polity, rule by many aimed at the well-being of the people and the
state, is being misused under the fedora of democracy, rule by many aimed at
the well-being of few in the name of the well-being of the people and the
state. Former is originality and the latter is its perversion/degeneration.
Interestingly enough, democracy, perversion or degeneration of polity, has been
recognized and accepted by the modern civilization as a model of the rule by
many. This may also signify otherwise that polity is an ideal, which can hardly
be reflected into practice and democracy is a reality, which as a frame works
and continues readily. Therefore, to deal with the people of a variety of
natures, folds, backgrounds and beliefs, realism is safer, more reliable and
comfortable than idealism. If such is the logic then there is at least a kind
of consolation that reality, thy name is compromise. In his historic
‘Gettysburg Address’ of 9 November 1863 at Pennsylvania, Abraham Lincoln, then
President of USA, asserted and ranked democracy as the best form of ‘Government
by the people, of the people and for the people’. Therefore, the auto-question
crop up in a second is, ‘what is the terminology to be used if democracy
degenerates further? Is it demagogy? If the degeneration is called so, then
there is no denying the fact that we are passing through the era of demagogy
with a sticker and envelop of democracy taken as polity interchangeably or
justifiably; and
Sequence-7
More
important to note is that there is no denying the fact that there is a missing
link for which all the visions and missions of politics in various models of
democracy are faced with acute crisis of not getting implemented smoothly in
spite of the Himalayan efforts and drives. Political parties of various faiths
and ideologies, ruling or opposition, are confused and bewildered since the
overall landscapes entailing social, economic, cultural, religious and
political are degrading day by day putting serious challenges to peace,
stability and continuity. Corruptions, philistinism, cronyism, degradation of
moral values, private or public, greediness, lessening ties of fellow-feelings,
brotherhood and so forth have appeared as Leviathan’ before the nation-states
in particular and the world in general as if we are almost in the Hobbes’
‘state of nature’. Widely-quoted fundamentalism, terrorism and trafficking of
many faces are on rampant increase. Therefore, the question is what is the
missing link?
Answer
is clean, clear and thought-provoking since there is emerging a new line of
thoughts in new-fangled modes and contents from the latent areas of politics to
voice and reiterate, and I believe also, that careful attention to the real
teachings and practice of religions of various faiths and folds should be taken
as the possible missing link. Today it is being felt, realized to a greater
extent than ever before that the objects of politics are manifested all the way
through its contents and for overhauling and rejuvenating the contents,
carriers and implementers from within and without requires supports from
religions as religion as only religion can touch the body and soul together.
Ethical standing and standard of politics are condition precedents for its
survival, development, continuity and longevity. Man-made theories, doctrines,
laws, rules and regulations all are subject to flaws and short-sightedness, and
contain adequate roads, avenues, lanes and by-lanes for escapes and exits.
Greediness, lusts, ugliness, negative competitions etc can hardly be uprooted
from the very minds of those who prefer philistinism and opportunism anyhow and
at any cost to altruism, sacrifice, dedication and commitments which are the
basis of politics. Therefore, keeping the appeals and efficacy of religions at
a long distance in the name of so-called standards of politics and civilization
may not continue as a measuring rod in the coming days. Growth of extreme
secularism i.e. separation of religion both from life and state means in the
final end inevitable rise and application of proper teachings and lessons of
religions in life not as a segmented piece but as a whole at every possible
stage of life from self to family to society to state to international
compacts. Let there be no ambiguity about the conclusion that ‘whole is truer
than a part and all the parts together constitute the whole’.
Time
has come to reassess and recast everything in a new perspective and focus that
neither Muslims nor Christians nor Jews not Hindus nor Sikhs nor Buddhists nor
others in the currents are in a position to say in most of the cases, to be
sure, that they are very much aware of the proper teachings and lessons of
their respective religion while dealing with other(s) in a community, society,
state in particular and the world in general. No religion in true sense of the
term encourages a person to be dogmatic, hostile, terrorist, regressive and
static. Humanity, humanitarian outlook, dedication and sacrifices are said to
be ornaments of a religion. This is also true that, like other areas, religions
have also become prey of negative interpretations, uses and escalations. We
have to bear in mind carefully the difference between a religious person and a
religion-loving person. One is exactness leading to conclusion being the
minority of a religion and the other is vagueness keeping distance from
conclusion forming the majority. Today it is really difficult to find and rank
a community based on proper foundation of a religion. Let the leaders in the
domains of religions take the crisis as challenge without delay anymore.
Take
it guaranteed that I am neither talking of anything in line with politics based
on religion, nor asking for revival of Din-i-Ilahi ((Persian:
دین الهی "Divine Faith") of the Mughal Emperor Akbar the Great who
reigned the Indian sub-continent from 27January 1556 to 27 October 1605( 49 years, 273 days).
Akbar, for the purpose of perpetuating his rule, devised this syncretic model
accommodating and merging the best elements of the religions of his empire, and
thereby made attempts to command and enjoy the confidence of all. One of the
major targets of it was to reconcile the differences that divided his subjects
causing serious disorder and threat to the smooth and peaceful running of
administration and atmosphere thereto. My proposition rather goes on saying
that no canvass or model of politics aimed at the well-being of the people and
development thereto can succeed or thrive in full or even achieve an optimum level
of satisfaction if the people engaged in the process of leadership,
distribution and implementation are not committed and dedicated from within
with a considerable degree of sanctity and purification. And so, the concept of
‘social business’ based on seven principles of business objectives with a
perceptible focus ‘traditional business operating in capitalist economy,
teaches how to maximize profit, which means how to be selfish. On the other
hand, social business teaches how to solve social problems in a business way
with a very minimum profits, which means how to be selfless’ about which
Bangladeshi Nobel Laureate Professor Dr. Mohammad Yunus is moving from heaven
to earth may not be put into practice in line with the vision and mission due
to its lacking of the ‘inner drive’ in soul. His extreme emphasis on the use of
technological devices including internet and mobile phones to transform the
world into a world without poverty, as depicted in his thought-provoking book
’Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism
(2008)’ model of which was shown in detail in his another book ‘Building Social
Business; The New Kind of Capitalism That Serves Humanity’s Most Pressing Needs
(2010)’, is not so sound indeed since he allegorically considers the devices as
the ghost of Aladin’s Lamp, a tale in the Arabian Nights’, in the hands of the
users and so, he could not come out of the frame of the concept of business
based on profits.
We
know from the tale that the Lamp’s ghost remained loyal, committed and blind to
his master without caring anybody else. The ghost was like a robot under the
command of his welder. So, there lies a big gap between Dr.Yunus’ vision and
mission. Producing a microscopic number of people with knowledge of the use of
scientific and technological devices cannot be a move for real and true
solutions to the fight against poverty, which is on a rise alarmingly. Concerns
of the day are not only the inputs of civilization but also the inputs that
keep the soul of the masses safe and unpolluted from the evils of various forms
and natures including cronyism, corruption, terrorism, trafficking and in
particular, it as a whole relates to those who matter in deciding as to what to
do, how and when. He pointedly and unambiguously made it clear to the world
that the root point of the crisis of the day is to determine a line of
demarcation between ‘selfless’ and ‘selfishness’ and now the civilization needs
social business with ‘selfless’ as the driving force. Is it possible without
fortifying the souls of those masses and carriers who are actors and players in
putting his vision into reality? So, here comes the question of application of
teachings and lessons of religion to make a person ready from ‘within’ for a
sacrifice. Dr. Yunus’ vision merits a lot and it definitely be weighed on a
balance of plus and minus in the light of its magnetism, dynamism, limitations,
applicability and feedbacks. He rose to an unexpected height with his ’Grameen
Bank-based micro-credit concept that brought him Nobel Peace Prize 2006. Other
side of the coin is that he could not stand by the down-trodden because of the
actual feedbacks of the operation of it. Publicity and popularity, mostly fluid
by nature, cannot be the measuring rod of the success and sustainability of a
noble vision because, truly speaking, ‘Real is more ideal than ideal itself’.
In
fact, business means risks, predictable or unpredictable, which otherwise
passes a clear message ‘either you gain or lose or remain at par’. But ill luck
would have it, our forerunner Dr. Yunus does not believe in loss or even in at
par and therefore, profits, anyhow profits shall continue as the moot point in
his vision and mission, but, ironically enough, service to humanity being
manifested, voiced and carried through his ends and means asks for sacrifices
and dedications from the ‘self’ that turn the self into ‘selfless’ in the true
sense of the term.
In
the context of Grameen Bank micro-credit scheme unfolding truth is more
attention-grabbing and ill-digesting. In this micro-credit lending a loan is
approved under certain water-tight terms and conditions and one of them is to
repay it plus interest at the rate of almost 40% on average and installments
shall continue on weekly basis. Repayment, also the central theme of such loan,
has to be made anyhow; no excuse even on humanitarian ground is tolerable.
System of recovery is very tough, rigid and unsound. How is it really
practicable to ensure the targeted profits and repay the weekly installment?
How many creditors are in a position to meet with the requirements? More
thrills are that a borrower is free to take loans from other or more than one
lending NGOs. When he finds that he is not in a position to repay an
installment(s) timely or is likely to become a defaulter, he then takes loan
(s) from other lending NGO(s) and repays the old installment first without
paying much attention to the proper use of the newly borrowed capital for which
it has been taken and so practicing and exhausting all the possible avenues, he
in the long run gets caught in a vicious circle of loan defaulter and thus a
sense of frustration, insecurity and phobia, instead of optimism and security,
start hunting him all the time. Such practices, which, are, in fact, encouraged
by the former lender(s) for its own interest, make him idle also since by
getting cash he does not fell to work hard until the cash minus repayment(s) is
exhausted. What a wonderful device to alleviate poverty! Let me sound here
again on a high volume that ‘Real is more ideal than ideal itself’.
I
am not against micro-credit drives because I also believe that it is one of the
best initiatives to alleviate poverty and to put it on track as real tool or
weapon there is no better alternative but to revisit the whole from within with
a view to upholding the spirit and mission in true perspective going, of
course, beyond so-called reports, documents, publications and advertisements
most of which are bureaucratic or ordered focusing only one side of the coin i.e.
stories of successes.
Opening
the door at the call of time does not mean closing the eyes to ‘in and around’.
Look at India, the largest multi-party democratic country in the world, and see
how NGOS, in particular, NGOs, international or supported by foreign fund, have
to work under strict laws and rules and then have a glimpse of Bangladesh where
NGOs, local or international or supported by foreign fund, and see how they
play a vital role even in shaping and molding the contents of politics and the
government. Roles of NGOs are both blessings for and challenging to the very
purposes of politics aimed at the well-being of the people and safeguarding the
interests and sovereignty of a nation-state. There should be more studies and
researches in these sectors so that truth and reality are well-reflected, which
will help a lot to the policy-makers and decision-makers to understand, realize
the defects and feedbacks. Otherwise, ongoing drives against poverty or drives
for poverty alleviation shall suffer more. Focus on NGOs from the same angle as
another landmark content of politics that requires to be revisited duly.
Relevantly
enough, it is notable here that Dr. Yunus once presented a pen-picture of an
ideal state and society while delivering speeches as the Chief Guest at the
opening ceremony of a political party ‘Samridah Bangladesh’, translated into
‘Flourished Bangladesh’ floated by one of the leading but highly hot business
tycoons Salman F; Rahman, then President of Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of
Commerce and Industry (FBCCI) possibly before or shortly after 2000 at Dhaka.
He made an open call to the party to work and move as possible carrier of the
goals and objectives to build a happy and prosperous Bangladesh. His possible
means to ends was nipped in the bud with the immediate demise of the party. It
was, if viewed otherwise, also a kind of failure for choosing the very means as
a road to his ends (vision) because he could not realize and foresee that the
persons with and around the party were not committed and promising to do and
materialize what he was longing for.
In
2007, he himself took a very drastic initiative to float a political party at
the backdrop of the failures of the political parties in Bangladesh to uphold
the continuity of the parliamentary democratic process through people at his
call; he left the field with a sense of frustration and desperateness and
decided to continue wholly with Grammeen Bank. Again, for the second time he
failed miserably for the reason of non-response of the people. All these carry
a message that either he failed to understand the pulse of the people and music
of politics in Bangladesh’s perspective or he is not in position to mix and
continue with the people as a man of politics, which he never tried in life.
Now he is surrounded by flocks of admirers, supporters and sponsors. Is it
really possible for him to achieve the goals with the means he has chosen
deliberately? It is sensitive and stimulus as a slogan and presupposes supports
of politics (there was a call to devise a political frame at the three-day
Third International Conference in Vienna in November, 2011) but nothing new at
all and, to speak the truth, I am startled, frightened to think whether he is
being used by any vested quarter(s) to make it stand as a pressing but
dependable alternative to capitalism at the same time being or having been
within the fold of capitalism! If his drive succeeds at all, even then there is
every possibility of its being marked and branded as a SOS for the salvation of
new liberalism, extreme financialisation and leverages (in the name of
capitalism proper, which, to speak the truth, has never been allowed to grow
and move in accordance with its natural course of development) in the face of
the extreme crises and challenges it has ever experienced.
Fundamentals
of Inductive logic tell us that (a) nothing comes out of nothing. Every
event/occurrence is a result of multiple causes, immediate or distant. For
example, if a bomb explodes then it needs to be noted carefully that it does
not explode only for the immediate reason of its switching on but also for the
reasons of its planting in that very mode and direction and, above all, the
human brain behind all the plans and technicalities must be taken into account
and (b) nature behaves in the same way under the similar circumstances, which
implies that if there is a rain today, there shall be rain tomorrow provided
the same weather takes place again. That’s why, instead of going for any kind
of SOS services to face the crises in the fold of capitalism, let the leaders
of G-20 and EU face the challenging question emanating from the reality is that
‘Has capitalism as a model really failed? Or ‘Has it been strangulated by the
political leaderships of ‘Oligarchy’ in the name of so-called multi-party
‘Democracy’ allowing unchecked monopolistic corporate Dinosaurs to grab the
very concept and purposes of welfare state paving further, to our utter
surprise, the way for consolidating and cementing the standing and march of
corporationist state?
Definitely,
capitalism as an ideological content and model of politics has been made
subservient to those forces that are matured, clever and cunning enough to turn
it into their self-targeted ideological content and model of sweet-heaven squeezing
ambits of the powers and functions of state. Hence, the concept of ‘less
interference by the state means more development’ is another ill-motivated
weapon being made and used by them and their think-tanks, researchers,
propagandists and advertisements in a very planned, concerted and convincing
manners, modes and fashions.
Capitalism,
in fact, does speak of a welfare state based on multi-party democracy, human
rights and economic development with due respects to culture and religion of
various folds and beliefs. All these ingredients assert, affirm, confirm and
conform a society and state where there must have a balance, befitting,
qualified or unqualified, so that the range and extent of inequalities,
opportunities and privileges in almost all sectors cannot under any
circumstances emerge and continue as threats to each other and one another;
where resources are not to be concentrated in the hands of few; where powers
are not to be vested in the hands of opportunists and demagogues; where science
and technology shall be used for the benefits and development of the people,
not for the satisfaction of a few and ,above all, where due care must be
ensured so that the stages of the development of capitalism with a responsible
and responsive role of ‘national bourgeois (as opposed to the rise and
expansion of modern monopolistic corporate Dinosaurs) might not be disturbed or
foiled. And to tie and integrate all these, state shall play and continue her
role as a friend, philosopher and guide ensuring territorial integrity,
security and sovereignty internally and externally to the best of its
capabilities, capacities and strengths. Therefore, the very question of her
(state) becoming a ‘post-office or a mere ‘director of orchestra’ is just a
negation to the very basis and aims of the birth of state since a welfare state
cannot sit and remain idle leaving all the keys of welfare vulnerable to others
considering the area as ‘discretionary zone’ of those who can afford and like
to do so. Sovereignty lies inherently in the hand of state and it should be
there undeniably based on monism. But while applying such power a state must
have to be careful enough so that question or chance of misuse may not
jeopardize or frustrate its sanctity and purpose(s). Pluralistic approach to
sovereignty is very soothing to hear but in reality it weakens or makes
inoperative of the sovereignty of state as a whole.
But
as ill luck would have it, the world of today’s capitalism is just a U-turn
from the very vision and mission of capitalism proper and that’s why it’s truly
a misnomer to entitle the ‘perversion’ as ‘proper’. Had there been proper
treatments and preventive measures of the causes of the ‘Great Depression of
1930’ and ‘Black Tuesday’ there possibly took place no further ‘Crisis’ that
has recently started plaguing the domain of capitalist world. Communist
Manifesto of 1848 followed by Das Kapital of 1867, translated into Capital:
Critique of Political Economy, came into being not because of the momentary
outbursts of the emotions and protests of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels rather
it was also a clear message to the welders of politics of capitalism of those
days as to what ought to be done in the face of new challenges. Adam Smith’s
‘Wealth of Nations’ does not contain a single sentence in favor of exploitation
by a few over the majority. Economists, researchers, think-tanks, media etc
supporting the negative escalation of capitalism in line with the expansion of
corporationist state either failed to realize what they are exactly doing or
they have taken the course deliberately to suit their vested purposes.
In
this regard two examples, inter alia, may largely be illustrative. One is the
repealing part of Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and enactment of
Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services
Modernization Act of 1999, USA and the other is genesis of off-shore banks.
Today
it is well-understood that in the name of de-regulation, repealing part of the
Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and passage of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB),
also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, during Clinton
administration (1993-2001) removing barriers in the market among banking
companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one
institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank a commercial
bank, and an insurance company caused a havoc in the financial and banking
sectors in USA with its blasts in UK because of Blaire’s following the same
pursuits in line with the thoughts of his mentor Professor Anthony Giddens.
With the passage of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, commercial banks, investment
banks, securities firms, and insurance companies were allowed to consolidate.
Many
believe that the Act directly helped cause the 2007 subprime mortgage financial
crisis. President Barack Obama has stated that GLB led to deregulation that,
among other things, allowed for the creation of giant financial supermarkets
that could own investment banks, commercial banks and insurance firms,
something banned since the Great Depression. Its passage, critics also say,
cleared the way for companies that were too big and intertwined to fail.
Economists Robert Ekelund and Mark Thornton have also criticized the Act as
contributing to the crisis. They state that "in a world regulated by a
gold standard, 100% reserve banking, and no FDIC deposit insurance" the
Financial Services Modernization Act would have made "perfect sense"
as a legitimate act of deregulation, but under the present fiat monetary system
it "amounts to corporate welfare for financial institutions and a moral
hazard that will make taxpayers pay dearly. Joseph Stiglitz, 2001 Nobel
laureate for economics and former World Bank Chief Economist also argued that
the Act helped to create the crisis (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Wikipedia, the
free encyclopedia).
The
process began in the very face of the continuation of Glass-Steagall Act of
1933 even a year before the new law was passed. Citicorp, a commercial bank
holding company, merged with the insurance company Travelers Group in 1998 to
form the conglomerate Citigroup, a corporation combining banking, securities
and insurance services under a house of brands that included Citibank, Smith
Barney, Primerica, and Travelers. Because this merger was a violation of the
Glass–Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, the Federal
Reserve gave Citigroup a temporary waiver in September 1998. Less than a year
later, GLB was passed to legalize these types of mergers on a permanent basis. Yes,
be sure, it happened due to indomitable rise and walk of monopolistic corporate
empire in the fold of capitalism.
Creation
of Off-Shore banks (while the term originates from the Channel Islands being
"offshore" from the United Kingdom, and most offshore banks are
located in island nations to this day, the term is used figuratively to refer
to such banks regardless of location, including Swiss banks and those of other
landlocked nations such as Luxembourg and Andorra ) within the fold of
capitalist empire is another landmark addition to the protection of the
deposits of those who earn a lot through various sources, legal or illegal,
open or underground, crime or plunder, taking resorts to tax evasion, money
laundering, or non-declaration of the income by the tax-payer to the
authorities concerned in the nation-states and jurisdictions. Interestingly
enough, such protections include greater privacy in the name of bank secrecy, a
principle born with the 1934 Swiss Banking Act, low or no taxation called tax heavens,
easy access to deposits at least in terms of regulation and protection against
local political or financial instability.
Feedbacks
and impacts of such off-shore banking on the nation-states are well understood
today. In their efforts to stamp down on cross border interest payments EU
governments agreed to the introduction of the Savings Tax Directive in the form
of the European Union withholding tax in July 2005. A complex measure, it
forced EU resident savers depositing money in any country other than the one
they are resident in to choose between forfeiting tax at the point of payment,
or allowing notification by the offshore banks to tax authorities in their
country of residence. This tax affects any cross border interest payment to an
individual resident in the EU. Following September 11, 2001, offshore banks and
tax havens, along with clearing houses, have been accused of helping various
organized crime gangs, terrorist groups, and other state or non-state actors.
Since then there have been many calls for more regulation on international
finance, in particular concerning offshore banks, tax havens, and clearing
houses such as Clearstream, based in Luxembourg, being possible crossroads for
major illegal money flows. However, offshore banking is a legitimate financial
exercise undertaken by many expatriate and international workers.
In
the 21st century, regulation of offshore banking is allegedly increasing,
although critics maintain it remains largely insufficient. The quality of the
regulation is monitored by supra-national bodies such as the International
Monetary Fund (IMF). Banks are generally required to maintain capital adequacy
in accordance with international standards. They must report at least quarterly
to the regulator on the current state of the business.
Since
the late 1990s, especially following September 11, 2001, there have been a
number of initiatives to increase the transparency of offshore banking,
although critics such as the Association for the Taxation of Financial
Transactions for the Aid of Citizens (ATTAC), non-governmental organization
(NGO) maintain that they have been insufficient. A few examples of these are:
*The
tightening of anti-money laundering regulations in many countries including
most popular offshore banking locations means that bankers are required, by
good faith, to report suspicion of money laundering to the local police
authority, regardless of banking secrecy rules. There is more international
co-operation between police authorities.
*In
the US the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) introduced Qualifying Intermediary
requirements, which mean that the names of the recipients of US-source
investment income are passed to the IRS.
*Following
9/11 the US introduced the USA PATRIOT Act, which authorizes the US authorities
to seize the assets of a bank, where it is believed that the bank holds assets
for a suspected criminal. Similar measures have been introduced in some other
countries.
*The
European Union has introduced sharing of information between certain jurisdictions,
and enforced this in respect of certain controlled centers, such as the UK
Offshore Islands, so that tax information is able to be shared in respect of
interest (Off-shore bank, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
Therefore,
the question is, how long shall this very unethical standing of off-shore bank
continue? Is it not a curse for capitalism proper and civilization? Voicing of
the same is much more reflected truly in a prose-poetry mode as follows:
O
United Nations----------------------------------
Behold,
behold, behold
In
the name of privacy, secrecy and safety of
Money,
bonds and securities going on what a
Wonderful
legally protected guarantee under the canopy of
Off-shore
and Swiss banks
Certainly,
certainly within the wrinkle of
Capitalism!!!
Bearing
on the other side of coin c as a
Corollary
to all such capitalistic boundaries a
Merciless,
crude and brute hidden truth
Full
of suspense, sensation and thrills leading, leading to
Tragic
culmination while so-called invulnerable diamond-fenced
Privacy,
secrecy and safety wither away in moments
As
soon as whistling starts followed by
Ringing
of the bells of fall of such account-holder(s);
Dazzling
recent examples are---
Former
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak
Tunisian
President Zine al-Abidine
Pilipino
Dictator Marcos and so on.
Therefore,
O United Nations, tax heavens are not safe
Not
safe even for the Dinosaur account-holder(s) in time of
Distress
and necessity
So
the logical asking crops up-----------------
Are
not forts remaining unsafe finally?
Is
not it a shame for mankind and civilization?
How
long, O United Nations, how long such tax havens
Even
in refined, redirected form shall continue to be justifiable?
Cannot,
cannot we get rid of it
Paving,
paving a right way out?
(Page
36 in the Author’s book O United Nations at www.sinha-onitednations.com
Needless
to reiterate that there needs a great overhauling in capitalism with clear
focuses on wherefrom it started, wherefrom it got derailed and how such
derailments can be compensated, stitched, tailored and tuned to move with time,
space and dimension. Let all perceptions and senses of frustrations centering
in and around capitalism as a viable contents of politics be revisited, recast
and refueled. Let us not utter nostalgically and conclusively that ‘the ‘days
of capitalism are over’ rather let us sound on a high volume that ‘Let the days
of corporationist state foisted as a heavy weight upon the natural course of
development of capitalism be over’.
Similarly,
there should be no hide and seek in affirming that socialism as a content of
politics has not failed rather it was mishandled by the managerial management
after the spirit of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Almost all the condition
precedents were ignored or set aside. Neither Marks nor Engels nor any book on
socialism including the Communist Manifesto ever made a pen-picture of a
socialist state, which emerged and continued under the leadership of
pre-disintegrated USSR, then a leader of bi-polar world.
Further,
between the two systems basic differences mostly come from that capitalism
sticks to a multi-party democracy with propensity towards both state(where
essential or unavoidable) and private ownerships while socialism believes in
single party democracy and state ownership with les or no interest in religion
even as a faith. To be noted here is that capitalism is more dynamic,
accommodative while socialism is more stereotyped and non-accommodative.
Capitalism has every avenues, lane and by-lane to continue with state ownership
and private ownership, which for socialism implies deviation from the root.
From this point of view, the concept of mixed economy is very much inherent to
capitalism or rather says that mixed economy is a phase or variety of
capitalism. When China adopts and continues with ‘two economy’ it indicates the
worthiness and sustainability of capitalism and limitations of socialism. So,
capitalism can never wither away or die since it is organically tied to the
fundamentals of human race, spirit and development.
Therefore,
when it is heard that neither capitalism nor socialism is in a position to meet
with the needs of time, in both cases the outright reply is, although
comparatively capitalism is viable, accommodative an sustainable truth is that
neither capitalism nor socialism was allowed to flower, develop and,
accordingly, stand by the people because of poverty of leaderships with
firmness, determination, courage, honesty and commitments predominantly. We must
not forget even for a second that any content of politics may meet with failure
or extinction also because of those who for a particular period of time take
the helms to lead, guide and direct. Hence, more focuses should be made on the
men behind the machines such as Stalin, Brezhnev, Gorbachev, Regan, Bush,
Clinton and Obama and so forth.
Nevertheless,
I praise Dr. Yunus for his unflinching commitments, sincerity and relentless
endeavors. Therefore, with the profoundest regards and love for him I do make a
fervent call to him to pay due attention to this very domain of religion as one
of the fundamental tools of development since his ends (vision) for the third
time has been set in motion taking apparently less profit-seekers called
‘social businessmen/investors/entrepreneurs’ as means (medium) to play and
materialize.
Once
founding father of India Mahatma Karamchand Gandhi, widely acclaimed as pioneer
of non-violent movement in India, remarked, ‘there is no politics devoid of
religion’ and his concept of religion consisted in truth and love. Gandhi, in
brief, desired to moralize man and society with an emphasis that moral means
must be adopted to achieve desired results because where there exists and
continues moral values and standard there is a way to even mindedness which is
full of a kind o spiritual power to spray and spread one’s sense of dedication
and sacrifices Today my realization is, ‘there cannot be politics proper short
of touch of religion in building and cementing the base of dedication, honesty
and sacrifices’.
Looking
at the recent development in France, a land where laïcité (secularism) grew and developed,
further attention deserves to be paid to the book ‘La République, les
religions, l'espérance (The Republic, Religions, and Hope)
co-authored by Surkozy, sitting President of French, in 2004. He argued in the
book that the young should not be brought up solely on secular or republican
values and advocated reducing the separation of church and state, arguing for
the government subsidy of mosques in order to encourage Islamic integration
into French society. About the philosophical or ethical standing of France he
stated on many occasions that ‘the roots of France are essentially Christian’.
It’s a clear indication to the possible missing link of politics.
When
a US President-elect routinely touches the holy Bible while taking oath it at
the same time conveys a message that even the President who remains under the
obligations arising from the Constitution of USA requires further to tie himself
with the religious lessons so that both divine and temporal laws may his guide,
friend and inspiration. In its currency it wrote,’ ‘In God we trust’ and recent
trends also cover a convention of political party with a prayer. If such is the
necessity in the statecraft at the peak then should not the same be reflected
and practiced in other areas of the administration and politics in the country?
In
Germany political parties exist and continue and even voted to power in the
name of Christian religion. In so-called secular India religion of various
folds and faiths are deeply rooted in politics and statecraft with Hinduism at
the peak.
In
Russia religion is reviving, which has started even before the fall of
socialism, more acutely than ever before. Fabrics of Chinese societies are much
tuned to religion predominantly with Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism and
Islam and Christianity are developing there gradually. All these were also
encouraged more vividly through a constitutional amendment in 1982.Above all,
in Japan there the ‘Emperor’ is regarded as the direct descendent to the Sun.
Article
33(2) of the Constitution of Greece reads:
‘Before
assuming the exercise of his duties, the President of the Republic shall take
the following oath before Parliament:
"I do swear in the name of the Holy and consubstantial and Indivisible Trinity to safeguard the Constitution and the laws, to care for the faithful observance thereof, to defend the national independence and territorial integrity of the Country, to protect the rights and liberties of the Greeks and to serve the general interest and the progress of the Greek People".
"I do swear in the name of the Holy and consubstantial and Indivisible Trinity to safeguard the Constitution and the laws, to care for the faithful observance thereof, to defend the national independence and territorial integrity of the Country, to protect the rights and liberties of the Greeks and to serve the general interest and the progress of the Greek People".
In
fact, The Greek Orthodox Church is under the protection of the State, which
pays the clergy's salaries, and Orthodox Christianity is the "'prevailing" religion of
Greece according to the Constitution. The Greek Orthodox Church is
self-governing but under the spiritual guidance of the Ecumenical Patriarch in
Constantinople. Freedom of religious beliefs is guaranteed by the
Constitution, but ‘proselytism’ is officially illegal. According to the most
recent Euro stat "Euro barometer" poll, in 2005, 81% of Greek
citizens responded that "they believe there is a God", whereas 16%
answered that "they believe there is some sort of spirit or life
force" and only 3% that "they do not believe there is a God, spirit,
nor life force". This would make Greece one of the most religious
countries in the European Union of 25 members, after Malta and Cyprus.
The Muslim minority, concentrated in
Thrace, was
given legal status by provisions of the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923
and is Greece's only officially recognized religious minority. The recent
influx of (mostly illegal) immigrants from Eastern Europe and the Third World
has an expectedly varied multi-religious profile (Roman Catholic, Muslim, Hindu
etc.).
During the 2001 constitutional
amendment, complete separation of church and state was proposed, but the two
major parties, ND and PASOK, decided not to open this controversial matter,
which clashes with both the population and the clergy. For example, numerous
protests occurred over the removal of the Religious Denomination entry from the
National ID card in 2000.
In
United Kingdom it is laid down in documents that’ the Head of kingdom shall be
a protestant by faith at the same time being the ex-officio Head of the Church
of England. More interesting is that the necessity of religion has desperately
further been echoed in the voice of David Cameron, sitting Prime Minister of
UK, on 16 December 2011, which Daily Star, Bangladesh quoting AFP noted as
follows on 18 December 2011:
Britain
is a Christian nation and should not be afraid of standing up for Christian
values to help counter the country's "moral collapse", Prime Minister
David Cameron said Friday.
In
a rare foray into religion by a British premier, Cameron said "live and
let live" had too often become "do what you please" in Britain.
The
"passive tolerance" of immoral behaviour had helped fuel the August
riots, excess in the banking industry and home-grown Islamist terror, he said.
"We
are a Christian country. And we should not be afraid to say so," Cameron
said at an event in Oxford to mark the 400th anniversary of the King James
Bible.
"The
Bible has helped to give Britain a set of values and morals which make Britain
what it is today. Values and morals we should actively stand up and defend.
The
alternative of moral neutrality should not be an option."
Cameron
described himself as a committed but only "vaguely practicing" member
of the Church of England, who was "full of doubts" about big
theological issues.
"We've
got stand up for our values if we are to confront the slow-motion moral
collapse that has taken place in parts of our country these past few
generations," he said.
"Moral
neutrality or passive tolerance just isn't going to cut it anymore.
Cameron
said that along with the works of William Shakespeare, the King James Bible was
a "high point of the English language".
"The
Bible has helped to shape the values which define our country," he said.
"Responsibility,
hard work, charity, compassion, humility, self-sacrifice, love, pride in
working for the common good and honoring the social obligations we have to one
another, to our families and our communities -- these are the values we
treasure.
"Yes,
they are Christian values. And we should not be afraid to acknowledge that.”
"But
they are also values that speak to us all -- to people of every faith and none.
And I believe we should all stand up and defend them."
All
these testify on records that religion in its many manifestations are
inherently tied to life, society, politics and state but the real teachings and
lessons are not properly reflected in life, society, politics and state. Why
the half-done initiative and performance? Isn’t it true that a half truth is
more dangerous and negative than a lie?
Therefore,
and unlike Gandhi’s, my stress is on the use and application of the proper
teachings and lessons of religion (religion in the true of religion, not in
Gandhi’s line) in one’s life so that a human being fell and realize all the
time that he a creation of the Sovereign of universe, visible or not visible,
and he has no choice but to go back to Him any time upon His call and
satisfaction. It is well perceived and digested that living in the world for a
period of time is just one of the billions of fractions of ultimate time. No
religion asks its followers to be bad, wicked, greedy, dishonest, corrupt,
immoral, unethical, inconsiderate, ruthless, and inhuman and so forth. A human
being is a blend of animalism and rationalism so fight for supremacy of one
over the other is on all the time. When a human being acquires the ascendency
of rationalism in life, he becomes a valuable asset for himself and others
around him. Unfortunate to note it is that the numbers of such people are on
decline everywhere in the world (Ibid, pages 37 and 39).
Moreover,
today it is tested and crystal clear in all respects that neither socialism nor
capitalism can stand and sustain suitably as a possible response to gear the
wheels of politics for development because of the inherent flaws, constraints
and limitations. All the so-called sweetest words contained in the documents,
theses, theories, books and publications have come to a critical standstill,
nay, collapse because of their failures to cope with needs of the politics and
development overshadowed by mismanagements, laxity in determination of
priorities and corruptions in particular (for more visit Sustainable
Development: Needs more pillars for its sustainability’ in the author’s Sinha
Earth Blog).
At the end of everything the very sayings and
realization of Albert Einstein may logically be recurring focus for due
importance and attention pointedly. It is he who candidly noted that ‘Science without religion is lame. Religion without
science is blind’; ‘Intelligence makes clear to us the interrelationship of
means and ends. But mere thinking cannot give us a sense of the ultimate and
fundamental ends. To make clear these fundamental ends and valuations and to
set them fast in the emotional life of the individual, seems to me precisely
the most important function which religion has to form in the social life of
man’; ‘Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge
is shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods’; ‘True religion is real living;
living with all one’s soul, with all one’s goodness and righteousness’; ‘The
real problem is in the hearts and minds of men. It is easier to denature
plutonium than to denature the evil spirit of man’.
So,
to understand and realize the state of politics in a country and thus, assess
and determine the rank or status one needs to take both the object covering
almost all within it and its effects on the people and the state entailing
almost all within it. Focuses on a particular aspect or area say, political
parties, democracy, parliament, economic development and so on may be useful to
understand its standing in general but to have a grasp of the real standing
there is no alternative to focus on the two fundaments of politics. Let there
be more and more researches, studies and publications in this line and frame.
Let United Nations, Departments of Politics/Government/Political Science in
different universities, public or private, International Political Science
Association, National Political Science Associations in the nation-states and
Global Research Think-tanks dealing with such operations come forward to get
involved in the pursuits keenly. Let the same be followed in our perspective in
Bangladesh.
No comments:
Post a Comment