Feedback politics
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 20th Aug. 2014
The politics of public feedback seems to be rising. While seeking public feedback about government is good and we are told that this was even practiced during height of monarchy by 'great' kings. However, in the current democratic set up, it has taken the form of 'competitor' bashing and feedback are sought from public about political structures with which ordinary public has no direct interaction with but has only limited ideas about their functioning. Needless to say that the feedback received on public electronic platforms are likely to be either negative or irrelevant with a few smart brains likely to dominate and attempt to tilt public opinion. The 'data' then will be used to demolish old structure and built upon it something new to create a mystic aura of the new powers that be on and this will be done in the name of 'public' opinion and feedback. Politics of this kind is avoidable since this can result in potentially upsetting results as some parties may try to seek public opinion of 'politco-social' organization's existence in some states and use it to ban these organizations on the back of public opinion and feedback and again the culprit will be the same i.e. lack of knowledge of the members of public. There can be several hundred such structures both within government as well as in public service domain which can be susceptible to such politicking.
While it cannot be denied that the current government carries a mandate for 'change', it must be used with appropriate caution. It should be understood that politicking about 'change' is not the mandate for the current regime and was not part of stated manifesto of any political party or leadership. Demolishing old structures should be on the back of deeper study about the structure and functioning of such political structures as well as a deep understanding of 'interactions' of such structures with other wings of government at different level as well as with 'public'. The flaws and shortcomings should be identified and used to create new structures. The government should be able to justify how 'new' structure will be definitely better than old in 'learned debates' and communicate the same to public. Simple demolishing of old structures or seeking broad populist mandate on the utility of such structure from public is at best, avoidable. The current regime must give credit to such old structure that they have kept the 'people' engaged with them and their ideas/policy set and procedures have helped in binding people, other institutions in states and center and private as well as international bodies, to cohabit together even during times of chronic poverty; when in other countries violence and lack of democracy (in relative terms) have prevailed in such situations (including withering of states in some cases). We need to improve upon the positive outcomes from such old structures. Instead of opinions on replacement of old with new; comments should be sought from various quarters on shortcoming (narrative form) of current structure and then correct the flaw basis 'acceptable' criticism (free of bias or flaws). This will bring only learned opinion and avoid the ignorant or not so learned opinions. This can thus be used to modify the old structures, suitably as per mandate of change of the government. Likewise the creation of proposed new structure should also be open to public scrutiny and suggestions/questions and leadership should act statesman-like in such situations. Politicking can only lead to ephemeral political structures which are unlikely to be any good for larger public in the long run. Robust new/modified structures which are in line with 'new' demands and meet acceptance of major political parties and people are the requirement of the day and procedures adopted for the same must also be in line that is acceptable to people. Likewise, politicking by the way of planting suggestions by opposition for bogus debates and delay be rejected by 'officials' while scrutiny of suggestions being acceptable.
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 20th Aug. 2014
The politics of public feedback seems to be rising. While seeking public feedback about government is good and we are told that this was even practiced during height of monarchy by 'great' kings. However, in the current democratic set up, it has taken the form of 'competitor' bashing and feedback are sought from public about political structures with which ordinary public has no direct interaction with but has only limited ideas about their functioning. Needless to say that the feedback received on public electronic platforms are likely to be either negative or irrelevant with a few smart brains likely to dominate and attempt to tilt public opinion. The 'data' then will be used to demolish old structure and built upon it something new to create a mystic aura of the new powers that be on and this will be done in the name of 'public' opinion and feedback. Politics of this kind is avoidable since this can result in potentially upsetting results as some parties may try to seek public opinion of 'politco-social' organization's existence in some states and use it to ban these organizations on the back of public opinion and feedback and again the culprit will be the same i.e. lack of knowledge of the members of public. There can be several hundred such structures both within government as well as in public service domain which can be susceptible to such politicking.
While it cannot be denied that the current government carries a mandate for 'change', it must be used with appropriate caution. It should be understood that politicking about 'change' is not the mandate for the current regime and was not part of stated manifesto of any political party or leadership. Demolishing old structures should be on the back of deeper study about the structure and functioning of such political structures as well as a deep understanding of 'interactions' of such structures with other wings of government at different level as well as with 'public'. The flaws and shortcomings should be identified and used to create new structures. The government should be able to justify how 'new' structure will be definitely better than old in 'learned debates' and communicate the same to public. Simple demolishing of old structures or seeking broad populist mandate on the utility of such structure from public is at best, avoidable. The current regime must give credit to such old structure that they have kept the 'people' engaged with them and their ideas/policy set and procedures have helped in binding people, other institutions in states and center and private as well as international bodies, to cohabit together even during times of chronic poverty; when in other countries violence and lack of democracy (in relative terms) have prevailed in such situations (including withering of states in some cases). We need to improve upon the positive outcomes from such old structures. Instead of opinions on replacement of old with new; comments should be sought from various quarters on shortcoming (narrative form) of current structure and then correct the flaw basis 'acceptable' criticism (free of bias or flaws). This will bring only learned opinion and avoid the ignorant or not so learned opinions. This can thus be used to modify the old structures, suitably as per mandate of change of the government. Likewise the creation of proposed new structure should also be open to public scrutiny and suggestions/questions and leadership should act statesman-like in such situations. Politicking can only lead to ephemeral political structures which are unlikely to be any good for larger public in the long run. Robust new/modified structures which are in line with 'new' demands and meet acceptance of major political parties and people are the requirement of the day and procedures adopted for the same must also be in line that is acceptable to people. Likewise, politicking by the way of planting suggestions by opposition for bogus debates and delay be rejected by 'officials' while scrutiny of suggestions being acceptable.