Beneath the tranquil façade, the conflict in the Naga situation has reached such a sophisticated level that ‘the powers that be’ would even dare say that conflict no longer exists. This fallacy is revealed by the presence of asymmetrical power relations and a State system that is based on and perpetuates domination. Such a domineering system not only creates an unhealthy dependency, but makes the assumption that the people no longer have the capacity to decide what is best for them. In such a context, the process of electioneering becomes only a tool to manufacture consent, rather than a means for empowering people to chart their own destiny.
It is not surprising that elections in Nagaland State is primarily a ‘top-down’ affair that revolves around politicians and political parties, rather than on people and the issues essential for their existence. When elections are reduced to a ‘top-down’ constitutional obligation that lack content and substance, and do not engage in issues, they become inherently disempowering. In other words, when elections revolve around who has power, it reinforces the idea of power-over the people, and, thereby, removes peoples, their aspirations, interests and needs out of what should essentially be a process which is people-driven. Democracy has been reduced to manufacturing consent.
Today, Nagaland State has roads that do not look or feel like roads; access to electricity and a consistent flow of safe potable water cannot be supplied; and a large majority of the people is without quality health care. What the State calls education is literacy; not quality education which is required for development. Unfortunately, this has only increased unemployment with the vast number of people looking for work. The list of issues is unending and involves fundamental questions related to the well-being of every individual and every community in Nagaland. Yet, in critical moments such as this when the elections are upon us, none of these issues are raised or discussed in the public arena.
It is ironic that neither the media, or educational institutions, public interest groups nor the intelligentsia has taken any initiative to give public expressions to these issues which are needed to hold politicians and political parties accountable. Public dialogue is one effective approach to discussing the roots of corruption and its consequences across the spectrum of government institutions. Politicians need to muster the political will to confront corruption. Naga people need to understand that no amount of promises, no number of manifestos; no political color can actually bring about genuine change under these existing conditions. For transformation, Nagas need to initiate a process based on a power sharing model that is inclusive and relational.
A free and fair election simply cannot be reduced to the act of casting a vote under the right conditions. It also means supporting an educated electorate where the people have access to information about the issues, the candidates, the political parties and the electoral process in order to make responsible choices. This is one space where the journalists and media organizations need to contribute to the people’s effective participation by ensuring that salient issues remain the focus of the electoral process. It is not enough to provide commentaries on what the candidates and the political parties are saying, rather, it is the social responsibility of the media organizations to raise issues of public interest. Ultimately, it should ensure that the election process is not reduced to manufacturing consent for the ‘powers that be.’
