Monday, December 17, 2012

 

Pushpa’s CNN Hero win: What does it tell us about ourselves?


The following article was published in Republica on December 16, 2012 with the title "An engaged bunch". The unedited original version is below.



Our current political struggle to unite over how the country should be run, who should run it, and how long they should run it belie the otherwise rarely accepted fact that, as a people, Nepalis are pretty solidly united. Besides the purpose with which such unity occurs, there are often unintended consequences, the likes of which we saw during the anti-Hrithik Roshan incident years ago when a handful of Nepalis died in Nepal over something that the actor said which has yet to be proven to this day. However, in recent years, the unity that we have showcased as people have mostly been for the purpose of good, except in our political sphere where we don’t seem to agree on anything.

One of the first clear strength of Nepali unity was seen when Prashant Tamang participated in Indian Idol. Not only the Nepalis in Nepal were united to make sure that Prashant won that contest, but Nepalis of Jackson Heights in New York City had installed money collection booths, the collections of which would be sent to Nepal to support the SMS voting for Prashant from Nepal. Last year, Nepalis in droves voted for Soumya Rai and Om Chhetri—two kids of Nepali origin—in the Dance India Dance competition. As a result, Soumya came fourth, and Om came second in the competition. This solidarity and unity in supporting these candidates was seen not only in Nepalis in Nepal but also in people of Nepali origin in India.

And, now, twice in the past three years, two Nepalis have won the CNN Hero contest—Anuradha Koirala in 2010 and Pushpa Basnet in 2012. So, what do these wins of Nepalis in cyberspace and TVspace tell us about ourselves? Did Nepali support for Prashant have anything to do with us wanting to shed our “bahadur” tag in India? Did our support to Om and Soumya have anything to do with trying to prove to the billion plus Indians that Nepali kids were as good as, if not better than, the other Indian kids? Was our support for Anuradha and Pushpa, and their eventual wins, our way of telling the world that we matter?

There is no doubt that the people that nominated and campaigned for the likes of Anuradha and Pushpa are young and tech savvy. In addition, this crowd is idealistic and holds dear the democratic value of participation. There is also an understanding among these “voters” that online and SMS voting are democratic and fair. So, they invest significant efforts due to the belief of existence of these notions of fairness and democracy in those competitions.

The same cannot be said of the ground level election process in Nepal which, in a way, is also a competition between different participants. Constituents from two different constituencies voted against Madhav Kumar Nepal because they decided he wasn’t fit to be a member of the parliament. Mr Nepal lost from both of those constituencies. He ended up becoming the prime minister. It has to be noted that he did so through a legitimate process and no rules of the land were broken. However, making him a PM despite losing from two different places was a slap in the faces and logic of those constituents who thought he wasn’t fit to become an MP, let alone the PM.

We should not be expected to keep supporting a democratic process that gives us a PM out of a two-time loser. We cannot be expected to keep believing in democracy when the version practiced here is different from the other western versions of democracy that we grow up watching, reading and idolizing. We are interested and invested in online voting because we feel they more aptly reflect our ideology of a fair democratic process.

I keep hearing and reading about people and politicians complaining about apathy of our youths towards politics and the political process. They are apathetic because they see the reality where constituents and their wishes are made fun of afterwards. We participate in online polls and voting in support of candidates like Anuradha and Pushpa because they are “apolitical”, and because the online voting processes and results are more democratic than our “real” elections.

We are not apathetic. More than anything, the wins of people like Anuradha and Pushpa through a fair and democratic online voting represents our yearning for democratic participation that we, as a people, have always cherished. While a bare majority of eligible voters in the US (the light bearer of “democracy”) vote, over 70 percent of Nepalis eligible to vote in the last election voted. We have successfully overthrown one oppressive regime after another through popular uprisings. That does not reflect apathy. We cherish having democracy and our voting rights, be it online or offline. Since “real” elections in this country are difficult to come by, we participate in virtual elections to satisfy our yearnings. I know I did, and I like to think that others did for the same reason.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,


Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]