Sunday, 7 October 2012
Saturday, 1 September 2012
Fatalistic Chakari
Dor Bahadur Bista, also known as the ‘father of Nepalese
anthropology’, unravels some critical socio-cultural aspects of Nepal’s endeavor
to modernization and development in his groundbreaking book ‘Fatalism and
Development: Nepal’s Struggle for Modernization’ (1991). Although
controversial, his views that bifurcate why Nepal’s efforts to development fail
are worth contemplating.
His view on how chakari, as a fatal culture,
obstructs Nepal’s development endeavor still carries a huge currency in the
country’s transitional political context. Bista argues that chakari (literally
‘sycophancy’) ‘as a social activity, is simply being close to or in the
presence of the person whose favor is desired.’ During my informal discussions with the people
from all walks of life after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly (CA)
in May, a common issue that I found was their frustration toward the
accountability of political parties, increasing corruption and abuse of power
and authority. I had also got an
opportunity to talk to some young cadres of three big political parties,
Maoists, NC and UML. They were very anxious about their political future because,
as they have argued, the leadership in their respective parties seems to be more
undemocratic in their ways of functioning. They strongly criticized that the
political parties, mostly led by old leaders, have to be more transparent on what,
why and how they are making every decision for the benefit of the country at
large. Most interestingly, they also shared that the CA was dissolved because
the discussions on the issues of national restructuring was limited to the top
leaders of major political parties.
I also had a series
of profound discussions with villagers on the relevance of education for their children’s
upward social mobility and development. Crucially, most of them contemplated that
education their children are receiving may not contribute to their personal and
social development. They said that even if their children are qualified they do
not get job opportunities. For them, a job refers to sarkari jagir (jobs
in the government offices). They have
developed such a belief because they have seen that many qualified people (even
with Masters Degree) are not employed yet and youth have been flying to the gulf
countries for jobs. It is unfortunate
that youth population in villages is disappearing rapidly. Due to this, it is
becoming tougher for the elderly people to cultivate farm lands, which are left
barren in many places.
The villagers also said that they did not have a close
relationship with any people (especially political leaders) with certain kind
of power. They strongly believe that without having afno manche (relatives),
as argued my Bista, there is a little chance of being employed in Nepal. General
people accept as true that one’s merit is judged on the basis of whether or not
he or she is close to the people with power especially to the top party leaders.
A middle-aged farmer from Ilam contended that although his son is qualified and
experienced he was denied a job in an NGO in which another person who was less
qualified was offered the job because the NGO was run by the friend of latter’s
brother.
These voices indicate that Nepalese society is guided by the
chakari system in which meritocracy is considered less important than personal relationship.
One of the most crucial manifestations of the system is the
‘taken-for-granted-culture’ that is seen in almost all institutions (e.g.
politics, NGOs, schools and universities). We see that most of the present
political leaders from the big parties are not ideologically indoctrinated with
their respective political camps rather they have sympathy from the top
leaderships. There are very few leaders who have developed themselves by
raising critical issues against their party leaderships. As the cadres are always afraid of being penalized
by the leadership they do not elevate their voices although they know that the
leadership is doing right things.
Another form of chakari
is chukli, the way one plays a double role. Generally, Nepalese spend their most of times
talking about others. They do not really discuss a particular agenda or issue rather
gossip on other’s personal matter for hours. In order to please the leadership
of any institution, an employee or cadre reports him what other people (from
the same institution or outside) was talking (or not even talking) about him. Such
chukli system not only weakens the leadership skill but also ruins the
integrity of any institution. There are many cases of increased enmity among
people including family break-ups due to chukli.
This is applicable to the political parties as well. Those
leaders who do not have a vision and leadership skill spend most of their times
criticizing each other. Rather than talking about the issues of national
development, our leaders have confined themselves in grumbling each other. This
tradition has not only promoted the chakari system but also weakened their
political spirit. Rather than promoting fair
and free democratic system, our leaders are engaging themselves in fostering
nepotism promoted by chakari and chukli. For them the best person is one who
can be around them every moment than the one who is critical to them.
The chakari-produced leaders have very little idea of
leadership and negotiation skills. They cannot contribute to strengthen
democracy and do not even think of national development. Chakari not only makes
a leader resistant to diverse ideas and workforces but also increases dependency.
The lack of our leaders’ productivity at critical moments is the result of
their mind-set grounded on the chakari. What is urgent for our political leaders, at
this moment, is to put chakari and
chukli (can be external and internal) aside and discuss agendas for the
national development. They must promote critical dialogues in their own parties
that lead us to build a free, fair and harmonious Nepalese society.
Monday, 6 August 2012
Country without people
The centrality of ‘people’ in a democratic polity is undeniable. People’s voices are the most significant aspect of any democratic country. People are an invisible yet powerful center for the sustainability of democracy. However, how and to what extent are their voices heard by the political parties that tend to represent them? Why do political parties often forget people’s mandates? These are some critical issues to be discussed in the changed political context of the country.
Just before and after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly (CA), I am having a series of informal discussions with people from different walks of life. I went to my birthplace to meet my parents earlier this month. During my informal discussions, the villagers expressed their strong discontent with ‘Rajnitikaran’ (politicalisation) in all sectors, especially in schools. One of my seniors said there was likely a fight among Maoists, CPN-UML, Nepali Congress and Limbuwan cadres regarding a controversial recruitment of a new ‘Rahat’ (relief) quota teacher in a local school where I finished my primary education. He criticised that, in the name of consensus, political parties are recruiting their cadres in different committees and activities related to development in the village. Jokingly, he said that he was offered some opportunities by different political parties if he would join their parties. During another talk, a teacher from a neighbouring village said, “I was challenged by the cadres of political parties when I raised questions regarding the decision of the ‘sarbadaliya samyantra’ [all party mechanism] to allocate the budget haphazardly in the village.” He further shared that his query about the sovereignty of people is simply ignored by the ‘samyantra’. He said the members of the ‘samyantra’ turned a deaf ear when he asked them whose voices—the people’s or party leaders’—should receive attention in democracy.
These two anecdotes are examples only. The contentions shown by the common people during my visit to eastern Nepal reflect two issues. First, there are many cases of abuse of authority and misuse of the budget allocated for the village development committees (VDC). Although political parties fight each other over agendas, they make consensus on sharing budgets equally. It is apparent that almost all developmental budgets are handled by the cadres of different parties, as they have their hold in the consumers’ committee. Second, in the guise of development, political parties are free to impose their worldviews through the ‘samyantra’. Surely, this is not good for democracy. But there are two fundamental reasons behind the emergence of this situation. First, all political parties know—even in each ward of a VDC—the number of party cadres. They not only distribute memberships to the people, but also appease them financially (not ideologically). Through unions, political parties also know the number of teachers, professors, doctors, students, engineers, pilots and so on who are affiliated with their parties. It seems that through politicalisation of all sectors, Nepali society is fragmented in accordance with the number of political parties. This fragmentation has already weakened the integrity of civil society. Due to this, political parties are not really worried about their accountability to the people. They often break their promises for nation building, as they are confident that their cadres must vote for them again. If party cadres do not vote for their leaders, they are penalized. They cannot be critical about their leaders and the agendas of parties. This leads to the imposition of central and top leaders’ ideology to the cadres at the bottom.
Second, indirectly, people are forced to become a member of a political party. For example, all teachers should be affiliated with a political party for their professional security. Without being affiliated with a party, it seems that people are not able to get jobs, because being a member of a political party is the first criterion to be qualified for employment. This may be good for the political parties to win elections, but due to lack of neutral and critical mass, political parties not only become weaker, but also tend to be less accountable to the people.
Present political chaos results from a lack of a critical population. We have developed a unique culture where people are not ready to accept the mistakes of the parties they are affiliated with. Everything that is accomplished by their party is right, and whatever is accomplished by others’ parties is wrong. Why are our political parties not able to forge consensus even if they sit for a series of talks? It is because they are part of a political culture where whatever other parties say is always wrong. This indicates that our parties need to revamp the way they are functioning.
First, they have to develop a culture of listening to others, critically assessing their own agendas and seeing how they can develop a common ground to forge consensus with other parties. Second, they have to rethink their organisational structures. Rather than forcing people to take membership, political parties have to take their agendas to the grassroots level and educate people about their vision for national development. They have to let people decide which parties’ agendas are better. This will ultimately foster a culture of political harmony and respect for other people’s sovereignty. Last but not least, political parties, as a key agency to foster democracy, should think of increasing the critical mass of people who can closely assess their ideologies and activities. In the absence of ‘people’, as it is happening currently, political parties cannot develop their ability to govern the nation and contribute to social transformation and nation-building.
Just before and after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly (CA), I am having a series of informal discussions with people from different walks of life. I went to my birthplace to meet my parents earlier this month. During my informal discussions, the villagers expressed their strong discontent with ‘Rajnitikaran’ (politicalisation) in all sectors, especially in schools. One of my seniors said there was likely a fight among Maoists, CPN-UML, Nepali Congress and Limbuwan cadres regarding a controversial recruitment of a new ‘Rahat’ (relief) quota teacher in a local school where I finished my primary education. He criticised that, in the name of consensus, political parties are recruiting their cadres in different committees and activities related to development in the village. Jokingly, he said that he was offered some opportunities by different political parties if he would join their parties. During another talk, a teacher from a neighbouring village said, “I was challenged by the cadres of political parties when I raised questions regarding the decision of the ‘sarbadaliya samyantra’ [all party mechanism] to allocate the budget haphazardly in the village.” He further shared that his query about the sovereignty of people is simply ignored by the ‘samyantra’. He said the members of the ‘samyantra’ turned a deaf ear when he asked them whose voices—the people’s or party leaders’—should receive attention in democracy.
These two anecdotes are examples only. The contentions shown by the common people during my visit to eastern Nepal reflect two issues. First, there are many cases of abuse of authority and misuse of the budget allocated for the village development committees (VDC). Although political parties fight each other over agendas, they make consensus on sharing budgets equally. It is apparent that almost all developmental budgets are handled by the cadres of different parties, as they have their hold in the consumers’ committee. Second, in the guise of development, political parties are free to impose their worldviews through the ‘samyantra’. Surely, this is not good for democracy. But there are two fundamental reasons behind the emergence of this situation. First, all political parties know—even in each ward of a VDC—the number of party cadres. They not only distribute memberships to the people, but also appease them financially (not ideologically). Through unions, political parties also know the number of teachers, professors, doctors, students, engineers, pilots and so on who are affiliated with their parties. It seems that through politicalisation of all sectors, Nepali society is fragmented in accordance with the number of political parties. This fragmentation has already weakened the integrity of civil society. Due to this, political parties are not really worried about their accountability to the people. They often break their promises for nation building, as they are confident that their cadres must vote for them again. If party cadres do not vote for their leaders, they are penalized. They cannot be critical about their leaders and the agendas of parties. This leads to the imposition of central and top leaders’ ideology to the cadres at the bottom.
Second, indirectly, people are forced to become a member of a political party. For example, all teachers should be affiliated with a political party for their professional security. Without being affiliated with a party, it seems that people are not able to get jobs, because being a member of a political party is the first criterion to be qualified for employment. This may be good for the political parties to win elections, but due to lack of neutral and critical mass, political parties not only become weaker, but also tend to be less accountable to the people.
Present political chaos results from a lack of a critical population. We have developed a unique culture where people are not ready to accept the mistakes of the parties they are affiliated with. Everything that is accomplished by their party is right, and whatever is accomplished by others’ parties is wrong. Why are our political parties not able to forge consensus even if they sit for a series of talks? It is because they are part of a political culture where whatever other parties say is always wrong. This indicates that our parties need to revamp the way they are functioning.
First, they have to develop a culture of listening to others, critically assessing their own agendas and seeing how they can develop a common ground to forge consensus with other parties. Second, they have to rethink their organisational structures. Rather than forcing people to take membership, political parties have to take their agendas to the grassroots level and educate people about their vision for national development. They have to let people decide which parties’ agendas are better. This will ultimately foster a culture of political harmony and respect for other people’s sovereignty. Last but not least, political parties, as a key agency to foster democracy, should think of increasing the critical mass of people who can closely assess their ideologies and activities. In the absence of ‘people’, as it is happening currently, political parties cannot develop their ability to govern the nation and contribute to social transformation and nation-building.
Monday, 9 July 2012
Globalization, neoliberalism and commodification of English in Nepal
Globalization
Nepal never had an English colonial history nor has it recognised English as an official language in its constitutions until now. Yet, the English language has already become a principal component of the Nepali education system. Two key forces—globalisation and neoliberalism—have contributed in this regard. When Nepal opened its door to foreigners after the end of the Rana regime in 1950, the flow of foreigners for tourism, business, research, development, religion and education increased briskly in Nepal. The number of multinational companies and international non-governmental organisations is increasing these days due to Nepal's membership in various international organisations such as the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, and the United Nations. With their arrival, foreign languages (like English) and cultures have also made their visible space in the country, especially in big cities like Kathmandu and Pokhara. Cinemas, cafes and English medium schools now proliferate these cities.
With the tourist industry booming, English has reached rural places like Jomsom, Muktinath and Dhorpatan. We see illiterate people who sell flowers, Nepali arts, clothes and other gift items in various tourist spots like Dakshin Kali, Thamel, Pashupati, and Pokhara speaking survival English to communicate with
foreign tourists. Realising the importance of English in tourist areas, public schools are gradually shifting their medium of instruction from Nepali to English, as has been the case in Ilam district as reported by The Post (25/01/2009). Quoting a fifth grader, Sandhya Rai, The Post reported, “Hundreds of children in this tourist destination are unable to realise their dream of speaking fluent English. Taking into account the need of English medium education in this remote village of Meghma, Saraswoti Primary School has begun teaching English from the very beginning'. English speaking tourists who visit this area mainly for trekking respond to their use of English and encourage them by providing books and stationery.
With the arrival of foreign tourists, major cities like Kathmandu and Pokhara have already become global cities marked by hybrid languages and cultures. Places like Thamel and Lake Side (Pokhara) are full of restaurants, cafes, hotels, bars,
and recreation centres. Even a rickshaw-puller communicates in broken English with foreigners in these places. Major cities are full of shopping malls where foreign goods are sold.
Technology is also contributing significantly to the expansion of English in Nepal. Although we have only had mobile technology in this country for the past 12 years, according to Nepal Telecom (NTC), the total number of mobile phone users in Nepal reached 14,104,011 in January 2011. Recent statistics from the Nepal Telecom Authority (NTA) shows that 4.78 million mobile subscribers use Ncell whereas 4.71 million use NTC mobile services. The International Telecom Union (ITU) estimates that more than 811,780 (2.8 percent) Nepalis use the Internet (March 2011). Facebook and Twitter are already famous social networking tools. The ITU estimates that 685,280 Nepalis use Facebook (December 2010), which is significantly less than the number 1,221,040 (4.22 percent of the total population), as reported by Socialbakers, one of the biggest Facebook statistics portals in the world. Whatever the exact number of users may be, Facebook now isn’t merely a popular tool for communication in English but equally important for various social and political campaigns.
Neoliberalism and commodification
Since its democratic journey began in 1990, Nepal has adopted a neoliberal economic policy—an unregulated free market in which the private sector and donor agencies have received a notable space in the nation building process. Owing to the state's mantra of private-public partnership, private investment has become a key source of the national economy.
Neoliberalism has not only legitimised the role of English as a global language but also projected it as a 'commodity' to be sold especially in education. It has paved the way for the opening of private schools (English medium), many of which are exploiting parents by using English as a key selling point. Generally, as private schools are primarily opened with a business purpose first; they are concerned with earning money in the guise of quality education.
Many private schools are successful in propagating this ideology: namely, learning English means receiving quality education. Innocent parents uphold the view that children will get better job opportunities if they are educated in private schools. The School Leaving Certificate Examinations (SLC) results seem to support this ideology in that, every year, the top ten students are mostly from
private schools. For example, the SLC results (2010/2011), which were published on 20 June, 2011, show enormous disparity between public and private schools in terms of pass percentage, a 90 percent pass rate in private schools and only 46 percent in public ones.
But how many students who graduate from private English medium schools get better jobs? Are they really competent for jobs available within the country and beyond? Do better SLC results equal a better education? These questions require further research and more discussion.
Phyak is pursuing a doctorate at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He is also Secretary of the Nepal English Language Teachers’ Association (NELTA)
Nepal never had an English colonial history nor has it recognised English as an official language in its constitutions until now. Yet, the English language has already become a principal component of the Nepali education system. Two key forces—globalisation and neoliberalism—have contributed in this regard. When Nepal opened its door to foreigners after the end of the Rana regime in 1950, the flow of foreigners for tourism, business, research, development, religion and education increased briskly in Nepal. The number of multinational companies and international non-governmental organisations is increasing these days due to Nepal's membership in various international organisations such as the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, and the United Nations. With their arrival, foreign languages (like English) and cultures have also made their visible space in the country, especially in big cities like Kathmandu and Pokhara. Cinemas, cafes and English medium schools now proliferate these cities.
With the tourist industry booming, English has reached rural places like Jomsom, Muktinath and Dhorpatan. We see illiterate people who sell flowers, Nepali arts, clothes and other gift items in various tourist spots like Dakshin Kali, Thamel, Pashupati, and Pokhara speaking survival English to communicate with
foreign tourists. Realising the importance of English in tourist areas, public schools are gradually shifting their medium of instruction from Nepali to English, as has been the case in Ilam district as reported by The Post (25/01/2009). Quoting a fifth grader, Sandhya Rai, The Post reported, “Hundreds of children in this tourist destination are unable to realise their dream of speaking fluent English. Taking into account the need of English medium education in this remote village of Meghma, Saraswoti Primary School has begun teaching English from the very beginning'. English speaking tourists who visit this area mainly for trekking respond to their use of English and encourage them by providing books and stationery.
With the arrival of foreign tourists, major cities like Kathmandu and Pokhara have already become global cities marked by hybrid languages and cultures. Places like Thamel and Lake Side (Pokhara) are full of restaurants, cafes, hotels, bars,
and recreation centres. Even a rickshaw-puller communicates in broken English with foreigners in these places. Major cities are full of shopping malls where foreign goods are sold.
Technology is also contributing significantly to the expansion of English in Nepal. Although we have only had mobile technology in this country for the past 12 years, according to Nepal Telecom (NTC), the total number of mobile phone users in Nepal reached 14,104,011 in January 2011. Recent statistics from the Nepal Telecom Authority (NTA) shows that 4.78 million mobile subscribers use Ncell whereas 4.71 million use NTC mobile services. The International Telecom Union (ITU) estimates that more than 811,780 (2.8 percent) Nepalis use the Internet (March 2011). Facebook and Twitter are already famous social networking tools. The ITU estimates that 685,280 Nepalis use Facebook (December 2010), which is significantly less than the number 1,221,040 (4.22 percent of the total population), as reported by Socialbakers, one of the biggest Facebook statistics portals in the world. Whatever the exact number of users may be, Facebook now isn’t merely a popular tool for communication in English but equally important for various social and political campaigns.
Neoliberalism and commodification
Since its democratic journey began in 1990, Nepal has adopted a neoliberal economic policy—an unregulated free market in which the private sector and donor agencies have received a notable space in the nation building process. Owing to the state's mantra of private-public partnership, private investment has become a key source of the national economy.
Neoliberalism has not only legitimised the role of English as a global language but also projected it as a 'commodity' to be sold especially in education. It has paved the way for the opening of private schools (English medium), many of which are exploiting parents by using English as a key selling point. Generally, as private schools are primarily opened with a business purpose first; they are concerned with earning money in the guise of quality education.
Many private schools are successful in propagating this ideology: namely, learning English means receiving quality education. Innocent parents uphold the view that children will get better job opportunities if they are educated in private schools. The School Leaving Certificate Examinations (SLC) results seem to support this ideology in that, every year, the top ten students are mostly from
private schools. For example, the SLC results (2010/2011), which were published on 20 June, 2011, show enormous disparity between public and private schools in terms of pass percentage, a 90 percent pass rate in private schools and only 46 percent in public ones.
But how many students who graduate from private English medium schools get better jobs? Are they really competent for jobs available within the country and beyond? Do better SLC results equal a better education? These questions require further research and more discussion.
Phyak is pursuing a doctorate at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He is also Secretary of the Nepal English Language Teachers’ Association (NELTA)
Monday, 7 May 2012
Towards multilingual education
I am one of the panelists in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-rLgRauaas&feature=relmfu. This program was Nepal Television's (NTV) telecast 'Samabeshi Bahas' (meaning Inclusive Advocay). I and my senior Professors from Central Department of Education, Tribhuvan University were invited as panelists for the program. I enjoyed the discussion though a bit hesitant as it was my first appearance on TV screen. We have discussed various issues of inclusive education. My focus was on how language issues are critical in education of minority groups especially of those whose first languages are rarely used in schools. Please watch the video and leave your comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)