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.
