The multifaceted adverse effects of the Corona-Disaster have fallen on countries and societies. We are not out of it either. The economy, the various spheres of social life, the workplace, business, trade, the field of production; It has also cast a shadow over politics. The politics of blame does not stop in the midst of this rhythmless political film. Of course, in the meantime, the wind of by-elections is blowing in our country with zero parliamentary seats. This election though is due to a constitutional obligation; However, the question remains, how much will it actually reflect public opinion. According to a report published on September 13, the BNP is participating in the by-elections with a single decision, not an alliance. However, before taking part in the election, the alliance decision was taken for policy reasons. So what happened now that the BNP took such a decision without any discussion with others in the BNP-led alliance? Have they adopted the strategy of walking alone? This decision of the BNP High Command, the party leading the National Unity Front or the 20-party alliance, has raised questions in this politics of Karona-disaster.
This is perhaps the first time after the Eleventh Parliamentary Election that the BNP has decided to take part in the elections under this government and the Election Commission in a single decision. Many must remember that the National Unity Front or the 20-party alliance emerged as an electoral alliance. The 20-party alliance boycotted the January 5, 2014 elections because of the coalition decision. If you want to stand as an example, many more things can be brought forward. In many cases it will be like chewing fat. In democratic politics, the example of participating in elections in coalition or running a government can be found elsewhere in the world.
In today's world, almost everyone talks about democracy, it seems that most of them sincerely want it. But it is not untrue that the path to democracy in our country is not smooth. There are some other countries like us in the world. But there is a difference between the democracy sought by the ruling class and the democracy sought by the common man. As a result, there is a conflict between the two sides and we have many such examples in front of us. This is also a great episode of politics.
In many cases we have the experience that the democracy that the ruling class speaks of is the seizure of state power through voting. Controversy has already erupted in our country over this voting system. Bleeding has occurred. There were also casualties. On the other hand, democracy is the path of liberation for the common man. Although not clear, they understand the equality of rights and opportunities required for democracy. In fact, their coveted system is the real democracy.
It is not easy to refute the allegation that the goal of the ruling class is to perpetuate the capitalist system. The allegation is also old that they want to keep the path of democracy uneven through various forms of resistance and confusion. And ordinary people try to move forward by overcoming obstacles.
There are many ways to say democracy. Some people think that democracy is an elected government. On the other hand, people on the other side say that it is not at all, democracy is a big issue. This is a perfect culture. No matter how much there is disagreement over the definition, there is no disagreement that democracy is the best of the known systems of governance. However, no matter how much our democratic political parties shout that democracy is democracy, the question remains as to how democratic they themselves are.
An example can be given - although there are many more such examples. For example, if they were truly committed to the practice of democracy, the BNP would have made the final decision on its participation in the by-elections in consultation with its allies. One of the conditions of democracy is to give dignity to the individual. Not just dignity; The rights of the individual, his interests, development are all at the center of consideration. This does not happen in other regimes. There dictatorship, fascism etc. are effective in various names. Some enjoy freedom while others are deprived of it. Is our current democratic picture the same in many cases? Some people raise such questions. No doubt - an endless question.
We are not unaware that there is a problem with the relationship of the collective with the individual. Where there is a state, there is also this question. The problem also exists in society. In fact, where the society is, the state is there. People do not live without society. This relationship is not like fish and water, but it is very close. So the collective conflict with the individual is also very normal. And this is where democracy has a special utility.
Democracy wants to see the interests of all. Wants to match the interests of the individual with the interests of the community. In other words, he wants a system where power will not be confined to any particular center, it will be spread all over the society and the people's representatives will rule the state. Here comes the matter of elections. This election is so important, many hold that where there is an elected government, there is democracy. This idea is not entirely true. We have this example in front of us. Elections are certainly the ornament of democracy. Transparent, free, fair, neutral, question-free elections are one of the beauties of democracy. But sad but true, this beauty has been lost many times in independent Bangladesh. While the promise of institutionalizing democracy is not new, we have had many bitter experiences. Through this, the gap between the democracy of the ruling class and the democracy of liberation has been seen many times.
Democracy can be identified with a few elements. The ingredients are very familiar to us. But they must be remembered again and again. The first of these is equality of rights and opportunities. In this regard, the images that have been seen in various fields in our elections are not pleasant. Then comes the decentralization of power. It is undeniable that democracy requires the rule of elected representatives at all levels. So there is no conflict between socialism and proper democracy. Rather, the real difference is in the name, not anything else. The path to democracy will never be smooth without the abandonment of vested interests. There is also a worldwide form of vested interests. Its name is capitalism. Capitalism will see and will see the interests of capital. His dictatorship cannot be established without trampling on the interests of the working people. Capitalism speaks loudly about democracy. I keep saying, don't stop. There are many mysteries behind this. Not to mention the other obstacles, most of them are very deep and insurmountable. The issue of free and acceptable elections cannot be questioned. What's missing? Straight talk, goodwill.
There is an example in independent Bangladesh that organizing a vote can be justified if there is goodwill. Why and under what circumstances the caretaker government system was introduced in our country, there is no point in drawing old knowledge. I want a lot for democracy. But everything else is limbs. Democracy has its share in this one place, and that is equality. The lower the equality, the more uneven the path to democracy. What I mean by democratic culture, it is essential to have many and varied elements. But that is the backbone. Without it, everything else is bound to disintegrate, no matter how they are assembled and arranged. And this equality will not be limited, it will have to spread everywhere. In the state, in society, in the party, even in the family.
Democracy cannot be torn to pieces, democracy is one and indivisible. Many of us may think of these fantasies. No, it's not. True democracy is an ideal and in order to implement it, inequality among people must be reduced. The less inequality there is, the more democracy will come forward. If you do the opposite, the opposite will happen. First we have to increase the practice of democracy in parties and alliances. We have to respect each other's opinions. One should not leave the other and run after the interests of the other. Since elections are an ornament of democracy, this system must be made as flawless as possible, if there is an alliance at the same time, it is necessary to take part in the elections on the basis of everyone's opinion. Boycotting elections is not fair in a democracy; However, the election must be free and fair. It is the responsibility of the Election Commission to do this first. Then the government and other democratic political parties as allies are no less responsible.
In a democracy, collective opinion or decision must prevail. Otherwise, how will the development of democratic political culture happen. We have repeatedly promised to institutionalize democracy, but for many reasons we have not been able to succeed. Since the disease is not unrecognizable to us, it is not difficult to cure the disease. In this case also comes the matter of goodwill. In the democratic system of governance, the issue of level elections will come up. It is imperative that these elections reflect the views of the people (the so-called good voters) in a proper manner, which the responsible quarters need to ensure. In this case, transparency-accountability-accountability is very important. Otherwise, the democracy of liberation will remain elusive.