Bigger democracies more starkly supply evidences of how much the ordinary masses, i.e., the gullible voters suffer due to personalized politics that is not replaced by collectivized democratic politics. America and India are two of the bigger democracies, which have more personalized culture of thinking and behaving. Out of personalized culture result the privatized crime industries with crime-politics nexus like in Mexico, Columbia, India and Nepal (however, it's a global problem).
Misperceptions of democracy get culturally transmitted through media replications on a global scale with the possibility of betrayal against people by their glamorous leaders, too ambitious to heed public interests and grassroots democracy. This is more likely to repeat in Libya. While the Libyan National Transition Council (NTC), internationally recognized and legitimized, has recently replaced the Gaddaffi regimes, there is much uncertainty regarding the libyans' future path. Founded on NATO forces' military aid marked by the 3-M characteristics (money, media and muscle), the Libyan rebels, whom the BBC has termed as the anti-Gaddafi forces'. Will doubtlessly promise to follow the universal principles of democracy and free market economy. Will it be enough for the Libyans to find a definite track? Nepal's experiences since the 1950s teach us a bitter truth that the Libyans must originally define themselves if they want to stable peace through justice. The Nepalis have suffered a lot because they have been betrayed time and again by their leaders.
Libya, Nepal and the whole world require progressive peace (a political atmosphere where collective conscience and social justice prevail). Genuine political stability comprises an ever-going process of change in every sector in every way logical as well as the process of de-elitizing democracy and dismantling oligarchic supremacism. The ruling classes of the world have so far misperceived political stability as majority silence marked by non-criticism and absence of protests. This deep-rooted conservatism is a psychological barrier to progressive peace. As soon as establishments, whatever ideologies they belong to, see a threat to their oligarchic supremacism, they demand silence, which they believe is peace. After the Libyans get the first post-Gaddaffi government, the new regime will demand for peace. Paper changes, like in Nepal, will be declared voluminously there, with no implementation at grassroots level--a situation acutely experienced in Nepal. As trends in one country often get transmitted to other countries, precautionary thoughts and actions are important while replacing a totalitarian regime. Since the 1950s, the Nepali political forces have always lacked homework and consensus; they have blatantly betrayed the masses that made them bigwigs through historical sacrifices. After political achievements in the form of signed documents, they have always remained extremely divided over their petty interests, mostly affected by their own regressive psychology. The information warfare among them has always kept the people in a confused state; the people, pre-occupied with their urgent mission of food hunting, get tired to think of what the political forces would do. If this situation is repeated in Libya, it should be considered very unfortunate. But Nepal will have to learn from the Libyans if they are well-guided by their political and socio-economic visions and homework for adopting democratic changes. However, they may have to cling to status quo and regressive circumlocutions, like in Nepal, if they fail to prepare sufficiently right now. The most important thing is to thwart strategic manipulations from external forces that influence the transition or the process of change.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
1
