Congratulation to Jeremy Corbyn

Dambar khatiwoda  

Jeremy Corbyn- MP of Islington constituency since 1982, a bicycle rider, an old trade unionist of 66 years, left-wing member in the Party, anti-war activist was elected new leader of Labour Party of UK. When Ed Milliband- a young and energetic leader, resigned after defeat of Party in last general election of House of Commons, the party was waiting a new leader. There were too much concerns and curiosities with this election even it was a regular democratic process within party.  

There were 5, 40,272 eligible voters. These all were the Party Members over the country. Some 4, 22,664 voters cast votes. Jeremy Corbyn won by  251,417 - 59.5% of votes . Other candidates Andy Burnham got 80,462 - 19% votes, Yvette Cooper got 71,928 - 17% and Liz Kendall got  18,857 - 4.5%. It is most interesting to us, all party members can cast their vote for party leader. When will the Nepalese political parties do it? Our inner party democracies are very limited than European parties. We don't believe in sovereignty of party members. By the reason,  our parties seem to coterie of some leaders. They cannot be vitally democratic.  

I have been interesting about the Labours and Workers parties in the world. In my childhood, I had been interesting about Communists parties. When I felt that 'Social democracy' is 'more democracy' than 'Communist democracy' my interest was tilted from Communist toward Labours and Workers although I am not an adherent of an old form of 'Social Democracy'. I think philosophical prejudices of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are inadequate to the twenty-first century. In these both conditions I have been remaining a socialist. Marxist slogan of socialism ' Work according to ability, Pay according to work' always attract me. I have not any hesitation to say that I want to be a socialist always. But which type of socialism that is next thing. 

One of the Basic distinctions between Labours and Communists was the form of democracy. Parties had been affiliated by Second International were labours and affiliated with Comintern were Communists. Before the Organization of Comintern was made by V.I. Lenin, all were affiliated with Second International they called them Social-Democratic- Labour Party. I was read a simple booklet 'What is socialism, what is not' by Ramsey McDonald,   an outstanding founder member of Labour party of UK, had been written. In this booklet we can see the clear differences of the Labours and the Communists.

The first- The Communists believed in the Commune and Soviet form of democracy and the Labours believed in multiparty democracy with the universal adult suffrage.  

The second- The Communist believed in the abolition of Private property and the Labours believed in nationalization of major production means.  

The third- The communists believed in the dictatorship of proletariat and the labours believed in the leaning of working class rules.  

The fourth- The communists believed in the Marxism- Leninism as guiding thoughts. The Labours did not believed in Leninism. Even Marxism wasn't the guiding thought to them. They only used to it as reference of knowledge.  

The Fifth- The communists believed in 'State-economy' a form of economy without market. The Labours believed in fundamentals of market economy with social justice.  

The sixth- The communists believed in certain type of democratic practice in party and on state was called 'Democratic-centralism' basically tilted toward oligarchy of leaders group as Presidium and Politbureauo. The Labours believed on broad sense of democratic practices within party.  

But the whim in 1990 changed the all scenarios of political debate for a while. Dismiss of USSR was an unexpected event for socialists all over the world, not only for Communists even for Labours and Workers. Francis Fukuyama wrote 'The end of history and Last man'. Everywhere the obituaries of declining Communism and the songs of the last Liberal revolution. There is no any alternative of free market economy and Liberal form of democracy. No social securities. No funding for poor and marginalized. Free commercialization of education and health care.  Reduction of pension funds. It was the great victory for the Tories but the Labours also lost their confidence for socialism.   

Same thing was happening in Nepal. Communists were changing their programs as Social democrats and Social democrats were changing their programs as Liberal democrats. NC and UML in Nepal are the examples of this paradigm shift. Same thing was happened in UK labours on the leadership of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. Ed Milliband tried to shift the party program as socialist than Blairian thoughts. But the surprising wave of SNP in Scotland, Milliband couldn't be success. Now the era of Corbyn has been started.  

Jerremy Corbyn says socialist own self.  He supports free health cares to working class. He wants to restructure public education system. Various resources of information say that he is reborn of leftist in UK. Congratulations to Jerremy corbyn for his success and happiness of UK working class, UK people. He will be succeeding onto the role of leader of oppositions.    

 

What a politics now

Dambar khatiwoda

 Now a days I have a question always storming in the mind that is 'What is politics indeed?'  Is it loyalty to certain philosophy? Is it faithfulness to the choice Ideology? Is it struggle for certain Agendas? Is it involvement into various Movements for social and political correction? Is it process of socialization for every individual within party-organizations? Is it common duty of citizen to their country? Or is it the power struggle for position or life career?  

When I was in the primary stage of my political interest, the time was of fading cold war. People always wanted to talk about USA and USSR. Supporters of the USA were called democrats and USSR were Communists. Very simple icon they had. Lincoln and Lenin. Definition of democracy by Lincoln ' by the people for the people to the people' was famous.  

But Leninist definition was just opposite. In the Leninist viewpoint that was a farce only. Multiparty democracy couldn't be the democracy of working class. Parliamentary system was system of upper class elites to exploit proletariats exchanging their role as ruling and opposition party. For the actual democracy of working class might have different types of political system called 'Commune' or 'Soviet'.  I think that was the period of vast philosophical, ideological and methodological differences. After the ending of cold war nobody wants to talk about these differences.  

Another philosophical context of political debate was 'class conflict' and 'class reconciliation'. Democrats were claimed that 'class reconciliation' is more significant than class 'class conflict' and just opposite by the Communists. There were armed struggles all over the world . The whole Maoist insurgency was for 'Class'. But we can see easily the opposite scenario. All the paramount Communist leaders are becoming new bourgeois. All the paramount family members of bourgeois are legislators of Communist parties' even Golchha, Dugad, Chaudhary and khetan groups. What are the differences between 'class conflict' and 'class reconciliation' in the practical politics? No one dares to answer. 

The collapse of eastern European form of Communism and dismiss of USSR weren't simple turning of history. It was very permanent U-Turn . After the incidents of 1990, no one wants to talk about differences of 'State-economy' and 'Market-economy'. The issue of Revolutionary land reform is dying. Identity is becoming more significant issue than class. All the political leaders and cadres are competing the race of post and power as a career. No differences in the philosophies. No differences in the party programs. No differences in the organizational pattern and political culture. How are they different? Is it necessary to believe?  

I deeply accept the importance of politics. We can not envisage the human society without state and politics even in any time and space. But the politics cannot be a farce race to position and power. The politics always be the creative rivalry of thoughts, programs and better practices to the country and the people. After the death of philosophy-based politics of twentieth- century we have opportunities to revive it by the rivalry of creative programs. In the last century, political opponents had treated as enemies. We cannot do it now. The political opponents in the twenty-first century are not enemies but adversaries. Enemies fought each other but adversaries compete. Antagonistic thought of politics coverts in the agonistic thoughts. 

To make agonistic politics we have democratic culture of tolerance, patience and creativeness. Basically we know about natural characters of human being holistically. Every individual has some common interference elements. In my opinion these are 'Power', 'Class', 'Identity', 'Ego', 'Sexuality', 'Knowledge' 'self-actualization'. Some intellectual wants to justified that the major problem of Nepalese politics is low concern to economic issues. Development, growth and prosperity. No doubt, off course they are important. But they have a miss conception of 'Economics'. Only 'Economics' is not enough to satisfy human being but we need 'Happynomics'.  

 'Happynomics' is the new conception of balanced human life. Every individual does not want to be rich and prosperous only but everyone wants to be happy and pleasure. Wealth cannot create pleasure always. Let us take the example of Osama bin Laden. He was the wealthiest. But he felt as broken heart by clash of civilization. It means 'Identity' factor became the major interference element in his life. He became notorious terrorist. To be happy and pleasure we need balanced life by are 'Power', 'Class', 'Identity', 'Ego', 'Sexuality', 'Knowledge' 'self-actualization'. 

'Power' factor is related with the organizational structures of society and state. It is the relationships and the contradictions of individual with organizations. Every individual wants to live in the power balance not in the conditions of power over and power less. Only democracy and transparent power competency to position can be addressed the 'Power' element. 

'Class' factor is related with the economic conditions of the people.  The most questions in this factor is not absolute equality in wealth but justice able distribution of national incomes. We cannot disturb the right to be a rich but in the same time we cannot ignore the minimum life standard of every individuals. 

'Identity' factor is related with the socio- cultural relationships of communities with another communities and state. Various ethnic-linguistic-cultural -religious groups want to be recognized. In every societies and nations we can see two types of cultural groups. Hegemonies and suppresses. Hegemonies do not repress  the minorities.  

'Ego' is the psychological state of human being related with feelings of respect. Every individual wants respectful behavior in every public places even by public service providers. Basically human being has three types ego-status. Superiority Complexes, Inferiority Complexes and Creative Complexes. We have been tried to avoid Superiorities and Inferiorities and shape the behavior of masses according to Creative Complexes. To create the peaceful environment in the society, Psychological state of masses is always outstanding.  

'Sexuality' has vast and vital role in the human life. It is not a simple physical proposition like hunger, thirst and sleep. It has mental and spiritual power. We can include all mental and physical health propositions in it with social intercourse of sexualities. Love, affection, recognizing of marriages by law, parents and society, birth rate,  abortion right,  legal and illegal  status of prostitution, tendencies  of inter caste, inter cultural-religious marriages, population composition of the societies are the fundamentals of political importance related with sexuality.  

'Knowledge' is the factor of education, information, skill and abilities. In the era of knowledge-based economy needless to describe it's significant. 

And the last point 'self-actualization' is the relationship of human being with the supreme power of nature. It is the spiritual need of human being feel as complete existence own self. When we feel actual position of life in the whole system of nature, we can actually establish the meaning of life in this living. For this purpose we can promote certain type of spiritual education, such as Yoga, Meditation, Sakshi,( Practices of mental balance, neutrality), Creative works for hobbies such as art, literature, painting, music, sports etc.  

Politics now must be the maximization of human happiness. We want society of delighted people. And the politics can be mean of the end. I think this is the alternative way of politics now.