On the 12th of March this year I like so many hundreds of my fellow country men and women retired to my room bitter , angry and sad at the proceedings of the day. One could clearly see the two major political parties had failed at being potential alternatives to each other , as they had each proved themselves to be made of the same rotten substance as the other. It is of course pathetic after 40 year of independence , where more than half of the time democracy was prevailing. After a series of episodes from the contagiously hilarious Modern Family I fell into that abyss that Morpheus calls his realm.
Next morning I woke up with a sort of an epiphany. The alternative had shown itself to me (hah). I have to confess this country is NOT all I think about all day and all night and I regularly dream of Sheldon Cooper, Rabindranath Tagore and the like. Anyway,simply put , it is obvious as the sun that as a whole the governments were/are failing due to party allegiance and such inspiring factors that will not let an individual work on his own accord. What I propose to be done is individuals run for different ministries/sections of the government . But they run as individuals to work as the minister of Finance for example. But as a precondition for running they must submit three major work plans that they intend to finish in a year’s time. Each person elected will be legally bound to finish these propositions otherwise face legal charges and consequences. There will be no head of country per se. They may have political beliefs , ideologies, religious inclinations, business partners and those will no doubt influence their propositions but they must themselves bear the responsibility on their shoulders for any failure. Parties need to be abolished and each individual may have their own understanding of socialist democracy, liberal conservatism and what-nots but that has to be for himself only. They will of course appoint the rest of the staff in their ministry or do everything by themselves.. Blaming other ministries for their misdoings may not be allowed. This is more like a general simplified framework of what I believe may work for Bangladesh. Of course the more complex specifics may be discussed over a cup of coco and I am always up for that whenever you are.
Why I think this will work probably lies n the fact that I do not believe in democracy as preached today to be the only way of life. It may work for USA and it may work for India but this is a country-specific case. Brilliant professors seemed to have overlooked this fact ( or were they ill-motivated?) so making this mistake of ethnocentrism may be granted.
But at the same time some form of leadership is vital to avert absolute chaos in the society ( which ironically may be the case of Bangladesh , despite the resence of leadership). I watched a brilliant little film titled The rise and rise of Michael Rimmer recently, written by the genius that was Peter Cook and I cannot talk highly enough of the movie. In one important segment he highlighted how people do not want to be given to make all the choices for themselves. When the head of the country asks the people to vote in there choices for every dainty little decision he wants to make , the people take to the streets, in protest. One of the protesters ask why they have to take all the decisions when there is an elected government. The bottom line is in today’s progressed social structure people tend to depend upon an unitary authority to dictate their lives and may be this is a way to maintain social cohesion as well. However a strict form of accountability may make it perform better and in my opinion taking individuals as responsible parties for their deeds would be more efficient than pointing finger at a large institute.
There. I have jotted it all down.
Next morning I woke up with a sort of an epiphany. The alternative had shown itself to me (hah). I have to confess this country is NOT all I think about all day and all night and I regularly dream of Sheldon Cooper, Rabindranath Tagore and the like. Anyway,simply put , it is obvious as the sun that as a whole the governments were/are failing due to party allegiance and such inspiring factors that will not let an individual work on his own accord. What I propose to be done is individuals run for different ministries/sections of the government . But they run as individuals to work as the minister of Finance for example. But as a precondition for running they must submit three major work plans that they intend to finish in a year’s time. Each person elected will be legally bound to finish these propositions otherwise face legal charges and consequences. There will be no head of country per se. They may have political beliefs , ideologies, religious inclinations, business partners and those will no doubt influence their propositions but they must themselves bear the responsibility on their shoulders for any failure. Parties need to be abolished and each individual may have their own understanding of socialist democracy, liberal conservatism and what-nots but that has to be for himself only. They will of course appoint the rest of the staff in their ministry or do everything by themselves.. Blaming other ministries for their misdoings may not be allowed. This is more like a general simplified framework of what I believe may work for Bangladesh. Of course the more complex specifics may be discussed over a cup of coco and I am always up for that whenever you are.
Why I think this will work probably lies n the fact that I do not believe in democracy as preached today to be the only way of life. It may work for USA and it may work for India but this is a country-specific case. Brilliant professors seemed to have overlooked this fact ( or were they ill-motivated?) so making this mistake of ethnocentrism may be granted.
But at the same time some form of leadership is vital to avert absolute chaos in the society ( which ironically may be the case of Bangladesh , despite the resence of leadership). I watched a brilliant little film titled The rise and rise of Michael Rimmer recently, written by the genius that was Peter Cook and I cannot talk highly enough of the movie. In one important segment he highlighted how people do not want to be given to make all the choices for themselves. When the head of the country asks the people to vote in there choices for every dainty little decision he wants to make , the people take to the streets, in protest. One of the protesters ask why they have to take all the decisions when there is an elected government. The bottom line is in today’s progressed social structure people tend to depend upon an unitary authority to dictate their lives and may be this is a way to maintain social cohesion as well. However a strict form of accountability may make it perform better and in my opinion taking individuals as responsible parties for their deeds would be more efficient than pointing finger at a large institute.
There. I have jotted it all down.
