Witoubou Newmai
It may not be proper to accuse a government for being an "Opposition-less" one. Freedom of affiliation and allegiance is a key feature of democracy.
But the unfortunate truth is that, "an Opposition-less government" is the other connotation for "a Speed-breaker free government." The general concern is that the absence of pick-holes-exercise among the law makers pertaining to the sorry situation of a society can generate an atmosphere of despotism.
Perhaps, such a situation is one to retrospect, "What exactly is democracy?"
A situation such as this might have prompted two political theorists, Ian Shapiro and Casiano Hacker-Cordon, to term democracy as a "flawed hegemon". According to the two political scientists from Yale University, democracy's flexibility, its in-built commitment to equality of representation, and its recognition of the legitimacy of opposition politics are all features of political institutions that should not be discounted. "But democracy has many deficiencies. It is easily held hostage by powerful interests; it often fails to protect the vulnerable or otherwise to advance social justice; and it does not cope well with a number of features of the political landscape," Ian Shapiro and Casiano Hacker-Cordon opined in their 300 paged book, "Democracy's Edges" published in 1999.
This writer had dwelt on similar topic for a newspaper sometime ago that, in the absence of the Opposition parties, any action or decision of the government will masquerade as the truth. This is nothing but the devastation of democracy. This is also to say that no one is there for the policing job in such a time when the government becomes despotic. This is to say that the "Opposition-less government" is to give the legislators too much freedom to cause too much of damage to the society.
To mention again the obvious, democratic principles and values are also drained when a government has no Opposition front, a situation to fail the democratic mechanism. In other words, room for rejection of the injected democratic temper is created. In such a scenario, a government will start behaving like a despot.
When a government starts indulging in despotism, there will be lack of genuineness in its approach to the needs and problems of the people. There will also be bankruptcy of ideas and senses will also be numbed, leaving the society in the realms of danger.
Pertaining to Nagaland situation, it is high time to find out the state of mind of the government. Definitely, the state government is hobbling to generate attractive articulations to address the issues. It appears that resources and mechanisms to address issues beyond the ambit of making routine public appeals by the government are exhausted.
As we know, making public appeals will work if there are logical mechanisms to support them. Making an appeal is also relevant to some extent in a situation where the capacity to repose faith on the other is large enough.
