Rampisinang Pipi Newme
The state of opposition-less government in Nagaland raises profound questions that echo through the corridors of budding leaders. Is the 'Naga People' (politicians’ favourite term) a testament to a harmonious society where consensus is the melody that soothes the soul, or is it a euphemism for a muted voice, stifled by the weight of conformity? Does the absence of dissent signify a zenith of governance where the needs of all are perfectly aligned, or does it betray a deeper malaise, one that conceals the faultlines of a society that has traded critique for consensus?
The Irony of Opposition-less Government
Democratic ethos is rooted in the dialectics of debate, dissent, and discussion. Yet, the State Government's fixation on the Naga Issue as 'top priority’ seems to be sacrificing the very foundations of democratic governance. The paradox of prioritization is stark: while the key stakeholders of the issue remain fragmented, each with their own interpretation, the government presents a united front, diluting the diversity of voices and opinions in the governance of the state. In simple words, compromising good governance.
The unchecked juggernaut of power in the State, fueled by the absence of opposition, has unleashed a trail of neglect and apathy. Laws like the NLTP Act and ILP are enforced without scrutiny, while state infrastructures crumble, justice is delayed, and education falters. As ministers remain unaccountable for lapses and injustices, frequent strikes and protests both from the public and its own employees become the only expression of dissent. In this dystopian reality, unity becomes just a term masking the suppression of dissent, and democracy is reduced to a mere facade, highlighting the timeless adage that ‘absolute power corrupts absolutely’.
The posture of unity in Nagaland belies a disquieting truth: despite ranking 25th in the SDG Index, the state’s potential for progress is stifled by an alliance that prioritizes self-preservation over accountability and governance. In this shadow of manufactured consensus, the urgent pursuit of progress takes a backseat. The real tragedy lies not in the ranking itself, but in the missed opportunities to transform the state into a beacon of stewardship, all for the sake of maintaining a fragile political stability.
The lifeblood of democracy lies in the interplay of governance and critique, where the robustness of the system is tested by the strength of its dissenting voice. By eschewing critical voices, the government not only undermines the democratic fabric but also immolates the basic tenet of democracy at the altar of Unity.
The Naga Issue: Good Politics, Bad Governance
The recent merger of NDPP with NPF is a stark reminder that politics often prioritizes opportunism over principle. Rather than celebrating this union, we should lament the fact that the Naga Issue has become a mere pawn in the game of political expediency. The NDPP's return to the NPF, after having splintered from it over the very same issue, is a glaring example of hypocrisy.
This transactional approach to politics reveals a profound decay. When politicians cloak their self-interest in the language of inclusivity, it reeks of insincerity. The perpetual invocation of the Naga Solution as an electoral promise has become a cynical exercise in manipulation. Tacitus astutely observed, "They make war and call it peace." Today, we witness similar duplicity, they peddle hollow rhetoric about inclusivity and unity, shrouding their true intentions.
The Naga Issue deserves better than to be reduced to a mere political football. It transcends petty politics, beckoning our leaders to honor the sacred trust of our forebears. It is time to distinguish between politics as usual and the pursuit of a just and equitable solution, one that prioritizes the dignity and well-being of the people over the fleeting interests of power. Democracy requires more than just unity; it demands a governance framework that is SMART: Simple, Moral, Accountable, Responsible and Transparent.
Is this Unity a Hero Worship in Disguise?
Hero-worship in politics is a perilous phenomenon that weakens democracy and empowers authoritarianism. When loyalty shifts from ideas to personalities, the very foundation of democratic governance is undermined. Devotion in religion can be a path to spiritual salvation, but in politics, it is a recipe for degradation and dictatorship.
History has shown us time and again how leaders exploited cults of personality to consolidate power, suppress dissent, and stall accountability and governance. The cult of personality breeds intolerance, and diminishes citizens, reducing them to passive spectators rather than active participants in democracy. Policy-making becomes distorted, prioritizing personal prestige over collective needs.
The antidote to hero-worship lies not in cynicism but in maturity- the ability to distinguish admiration from adulation, respect from surrender. Leaders should be valued for their vision and service, not idolized. We must recognize that true strength lies not in blind devotion but in dissent, debate, and accountability, and that true empowerment lies not in personalities, but in principles.
Whether in religion or politics, the temptation to worship heroes is perennial as it offers the comfort of certainty and belonging. But the price of hero-worship in politics is steep: it deteriorates critical thinking, erodes democratic institutions, and concentrates power, ultimately sacrificing the greater good at the adoration of a personality.
A Call to the Youth
Given the current state of affairs, it's imperative that the youth rise to the challenge. Nagaland needs a generation that embodies critical thinking, not blind allegiance. The reluctance of young, educated individuals to engage in politics is rather a pressing concern that must be addressed. Perhaps, as some might argue, Nagaland needs a Charlie Kirk - a figure who can galvanize and mobilize the youth towards active political participation. By cultivating a culture of enlightened discourse, we can foster a sizable population of informed voters, conscious electorates, and vigilant conscience-keepers. The recent fervor of Nepalese youth is also a testament to the power of engaged citizenship.
As we strive for a better future, let us heed the wisdom of John Stuart Mill: “Do not lay your liberty even at the feet of a great man.” Let us champion the values of critical inquiry and independent thought, for it is in the relentless pursuit of truth that we truly find freedom. Nagaland, our beloved homeland, needs leaders who exemplify intellectual honesty and principled governance- leaders who inspire and uplift, not those who undermine the foundations of democratic governance.
In conclusion, the idea of a utopian society where everything is perfect and just and opposition dissolves into harmony is a tantalizing one. However, that is far from being achieved and hence, we might as well arise from our unattainable dream and instead, accept and confront the reality. Ergo, it is precisely in the spaces of dissent and debate that we may find the seeds of genuine progress and meaningful change. The 'Naga People' deserve a government that listens and that is accountable to their needs and aspirations. Anything less would be a betrayal of the democratic principles that are supposed to guide us.
The writer is a student of Political Science. Comments can be sent to pipinewme@gmail.com
