In the modern socio-political scenario of the world, the role of political parties is a very significant one
KNOWLEDGE has always been the driving force behind any kind of innovation. This holds true at least in the present economic scenario.
It is estimated that the gross human knowledge in 1900AD had doubled from the time it was first recorded. The next 30 years saw the doubling of the gross human knowledge. And since then, it is assessed that every decade, it is going to increase as much.
This great advancement in knowledge brings corresponding changes into economic, civil, social, cultural and political institutions. Limited human knowledge of the early days gave our ancestors a pastoral society; an economic formation which had its own civil, cultural, moral, faith and political institutions. After some centuries, the agrarian social order took over the world. This order changed the economic, social, cultural, moral and all other value systems which were then in vogue for the next many a century.
Printing press and steam engine ushered in the industrial age. The age brought its own value assessment and the rule of law, protecting everyone’s property rights; and democracy gave the belief that everyone participated in the management of affairs of the state.
The present phase is marked with ever-improved technology, making production easier and massive. The most important and distinctive phenomenon of the present economic phase is the predominance of the services sector. Regional economic grouping and globalization are distinct features of the present era. Apart from that, mergers, cooperation, coordination, explosion of information and knowledge, and specialization and outsourcing for cheaper labour are some other features.
Correspondingly, the new phase has brought about new forms of institutions. The role of the United Nations is on the ascendancy. Feet-dragging of the old is still there and there are some sore-points in the world like Palestine and Kashmir; but the new problems to cope with are concerns for liberalized trade without barriers, better environment-conscious production, adhering to ISO standardizations, subsidization of some sectors of economy in developed states detrimental to the poor countries, eradication of poverty to enhance end-consumers, and development of the underdeveloped regions of Africa, the Middle East, South Asia and even East Asia.
New problems bring into prominence new institutions. The United Nations is getting more weightage in settling international disputes. The WTO is the hallmark of new trade agreements and tariffs. More and open trade is slowly replacing different aids and grants. Thus new economic, political, social and cultural institutions are taking control. The institution of political parties is one institution within nation states that plays a greater role of regulation and interaction with the emerging forms of international institutions.
The institution of political parties came into prominence during the agrarian economic formation. The institution continued to play a pivotal role in spreading people’s sovereignty and representative elected governance. Political parties played a pivotal role in spreading awareness, organizing and leading the oppressed masses of the colonial era to a liberated world. They are now the organized collective will expressed with a certain vision of the future, claiming a certain political heritage.
Political parties also play a major role in forming public opinion on fundamental principles of governance and give direction to collectively move civil society to achieve goals of common good. Their main objective is to translate the collective will of the people through elections, seek power and model society according to the aspirations of the people, thereby bringing socio-economic and legislative changes, protecting civil liberties, fundamental rights, regulate trade, amend tariffs, maintain and enhance defence capability, negotiate and enter into regional and international treaties, protect industries from unfair competition from abroad and protect and enhance the collective cultural and moral values. The parties who are in opposition are supposed to further their own vision and bring awareness to the people of their vision of governance.
Conservative and Labour in Britain and Republicans and Democrats in the US are two models of viable and organic political parties which have continued to sustain and even flourish with the passage of time, and are still playing a dominant role in their civic societies. Congress in India is another example, which not only fought for liberation in the past, but had the agility to change its socialist-oriented vision and direction of public ownership of means of production after the collapse of socialist world.
Political parties have acquired a new outlook and agenda. These days, they are not merely means to acquire power, but are instruments of nation-building. Parliament are not the only custodians of the will of the general public; it is more of a national consensus which enhances the momentum in a democratic environment.
Political parties are there to involve and activate the people at various levels of community building organizations (CBOs), which can be termed as think-tanks at the constituency level for the future development. These CBOs, which can rightly be called the nucleus of political parties of the present era, not only interact with the people at the constituency level but can involve the people in remoulding community institutions at the grass-roots level.
Provincial level think-tanks or organization get feedback and interact with the masses through these CBOs and translate the national vision into the provincial level. Democratic forums of the party at the national level thus democratically evolves national vision by interacting with CBOs and provincial think-tanks, and with international political organizations having the same vision.
In this regard, one has to distinguish the tactical from the democratic. It does not take democracy to win the elections; but it does take democracy to win public mandate on its national vision for a long time. If the people feel that they are not being treated democratically, they choose power, even if it’s against their interests. It’s not about developing a direct relationship with the people whose opinions the leadership cares about, its about having people believe that your framing of the issues capture what is most important to them.
Because of the funding of elections and the media, the privilege of wealth is considered so great that there is always a need to inject popular force to shift it. And the popular force comes in with the involvement of the CBOs and the think-tanks. There is always a danger of a drift to right, as incumbency tends to do that. The normal trend, the default tendency, is to drift to the right and be driven to “reaction”. This trend can be fought through famous comments of Roosevelt: “Without concerted citizen action, there can be no sustained progress to human rights.”
The danger of these structures being usurped by the influence of money and the media is great, but it can be fought by creating popular openings. Attention to the poor and working people’s issues can be injected to keep the trend afloat. National and the provincial leadership have to invest in the local leadership to keep the corrupting influence of money and the media away.
Being in progressive politics, there has to be an enduring identity of opposition in defeat. There is a definitive role for those who do not win in community building at all levels, even in opposition. If you close down after a defeat, how are the people who voted for you be represented?
There are issues of free trade, the WTO, labour welfare, water management, availability of proper seeds and fertilizers, health care, gender discrimination, environmental issues and scores of issues to which, even if defeated, the candidates can and must identify; and one can get oneself identified with millions of others who want a better world.
For a consistent democratic political party, we need to democratize the message-building system, not the turn-out-vote system. Not just what you think about public issues and public policy, but what legitimate political issues are. This discussion needs to take place at the community building organization level and political professionals need to listen to what and how people experience and consider their conditions.
Here, it needs to be mentioned that democratizing means:
a) Conversation on the ground
b) Structures where people can have their voices heard
c) The message is getting remade at the ground level
d) There is participation in local elections
e) National leaders realize that their responsibility is to have a relationship with the general public and see how they lead their civic life.
