My conversation with a friend stumbled on the
topic of governance which ultimately is about the relationship of the governed
with the governor. There are only just two ways to make a person
submit to the will of another -- by force or by persuasion. The choice of which
approach to take is with the decision makers and the consequence of their
action is also theirs; there is no getting away from consequences. Which action
is better for the governed depends on the spiritual make-up of the perpetrator
of the decision. The doer’s compassion, patience, perseverance and the status
of the ego all play their part.
While democracies have their power base
planted in the will of its people, its practice however often falls into the
foibles of our primeval attitudes. More than often times when we have power
over others there is the sense of urgency that pushes us to get things done as
we wish. And human nature being the bigger part selfishness, its manifestations
such as arrogance and hubris wants things done inflexibly and with urgency.
This aspect of urgency appears to give the perpetrator power over another. It confirms
this edict of power we have over the other by not being bothered to take the
time to hear another point of view. This urgency thus makes us force issues and
dictate their outcome with scant regard to the fact that by doing so we put the
subordinate in bondage and that is just the opposite of freedom.
But then, when the role of the governor gets
reversed to being one of the governed, the remorse and the agony of such a
situation is quickly realized. I guess this is what is meant by “power blinds”,
for when we possess this moment of authority, impermanence of the moment is
never the resident thought. It is as if the moment will extend forever. This is
sometime called delusion also -- a mental condition that removes one from the reality
of a situation. When we were children many of us read the story of the emperor
and his new clothes.
It is thus incumbent on us to realize that the
table will turn always in a democracy. And the balance of nature is such that
nothing is permanent. Today gives way to tomorrow, our bodies age, our clothes
and our toys go out of fashion, everything has a determined life – a time to
depart, and so on. Our governance of a nation is also subject to such vagaries
of this life of form.
The more sustainable way to govern would be
through consultation and persuasion; respecting other points of view and coming
to compromises that don’t bank of winner taking all. This is what our good Book
teaches us about governance too and is, by the way, the guiding tenet of our
People’s Majlis in Maldives .
How it lives this is the test of its capability to uphold the noble trust we
have given it to be our –the people’s -- truthful representative in crafting
the laws that we as a nation would live by. That is the compact we make when we
drop our vote in the box. So, the better path to govern is that path of persuasion
and guidance such that change is invoked from within each of us by realizing
the folly of our dream in a world of impermanence and the artificial nature of
change when governance is enforced. Sustained harmony and wellbeing will be our
second nature when we choose that noble path of “shura”. A true sense of
brotherhood will prevail. But sadly, separation, selfishness, greed and envy seem
to be the visible flares that illuminate our chosen path of competitiveness, pleasure
and urgent gratification demands. Can we break out of this mould that keeps us
trapped?
1 comment:
The title seems to leave us with no choice?Acceptance, I think is different from knowing the status,which is important to change things for better. I think what is important even for democracy is rule of law and discipline with moral values.It does not matter if you believe in the wisdom of Oak Tree or Reed.There is wisdom in both.They all add up to wisdom of the Nature.
Post a Comment