 |
| |
VOL. 03, NO. 18, Feb 05 2010 (Magh 22, 2066)
|
|
Social Change and Nepal's Socio-Economic Development
By: Mohan D. Manandhar and Rojan Bajracharya
Social change is a core of positive socio-economic development and growth as it influences development and growth of new social movements, by both pushing the pace of change and checking the excesses of the state. Civil society, in the form of NGOs and other private institutions, which advocate for good governance, equity, poverty alleviation and recognition of human rights represent some of these forces. Sometime, these social changes are defended as secularism for developed society so faces challenges of revivalism of existing social norms and/or state institutions with the assurance of demands of people being met.
In this regard, the contemporary Nepal which is in course of state transformation and constitution making, the issues of social tchange and its impact on socio-economic development is the major discourse.
The 15th to 18th centaury Europe had experienced dramatic social, economic and political changes in course of colonization process resulting international movements of people and goods; the slave trade and trade in minerals and precious spices, Further, late 19 centaury socio-economic changes. were the results of technological advancements, education, conquests, trade and colonization. The population of Europe grew with improved living standards and other developments relating to human wellbeing. This guided Europe from religion socio cultural to individualistic culture and conservative to secular. However the niches of conservatism still observe in Europe in 20 century as in Yugoslavia and Northern Ireland.
Most social movements for positive changes have been led by people whose ideals actually appealed the masses, often there have been times when such movements have been hijacked by radicals with extreme aims. The crisis of secularism in contemporary India – Hindu fundamentalist vis-à-vis Muslims radicals – is one of good example for such affair. The genuine social, political, religious and cultural movements are in tussle with extremist strands. Some such short term movements have fizzled out while others have grown to become legitimate institutions of state while others continue their opposition to state. Some examples of destructive movements are that led by Afghanistan’s Taliban, The Communist Party of North Korea, Naga movement of Northern Indian and the uprising of Nepal’s own Maoists.
In this regard, Nepal is at the crux of social change guided by movement's determination t and conservative state structure. The result has been staggered instability which has begun to affect the economy. Specifically, decade long Maoists revolution have attacked development infrastructure hitting both the State and the people where it hurts most. The losses to the exchequer have also been massive and the number of deaths since November 2001 has exceeded the numbers killed in the last six years. Overall the insurgency and counter-insurgency has already cost over 4,000 lives.
To understand the chronology of social change and the impacts on the economy, let us look back at history. Before unification of Nepal by King Prithvi Narayan Shah in 1769, Nepal was divided into various small kingdoms and fiefdoms, which went through their own change processes. During King Prithvi Narayan Shah’s rule, he unified these diverse kingdoms and fiefdoms and sketched the shape of modern Nepal. The Ranas ruled for another 104 years. This period was characterized by increased militarization, centralization of power in the hands of the elite and the exclusion of people from the political processes. However, social movements opposing Rana rule did begin to take shape, especially in urban areas. These early movements were part of political process initiated by elite and educated classes who had been excluded from the existing political process and were also influenced by the democratic movement in India.
The Rana rule ended in the 1950s, replaced temporarily by a democratic government in 1951. There was visible social change during the short democratic rule. But this was short-lived because absolute rule Saha was re-established in 1960 with one party Panchayat was instituted in Nepal.
The one-party Panchayat regime lasted for 30 years. It had created systems of surveillance and reporting by regional administrators who were responsible for prediction and prevention of movements that would threaten State power. The State also created a number of class-based organizations and also directed and implemented development programs, including the creation of public enterprises. The regime was able to generate employment of youth and tried to-albeit artificially-re-organize the composition of the largely elite-controlled bureaucracy to include people from different ethnic and caste backgrounds. The regime also initiated social mobilization of rural people all aimed to “integrate” the process of creating national identity through promotion of national language, culture, and religion. Political parties were banned, an attempt to de-politicize the citizenry to prevent any challenge to the power and legitimacy of the regime. There was, however, no independent mechanism to check the excesses of State. Meanwhile, underground political parties’ activities of student unions, teachers, literally societies and cultural associations flourished despite the ban on forming organizations and social movements. The movements came into being to fill the vacuum created by the absence of independent entities to check and balance government.
Social movements help to empower civil society, especially to establish social checks and balances. They also help to lead the change process. It was the underground political movements that forced the establishment of democracy in Nepal in 1990. The demand for change came from the urban areas and gradually spread nationwide. The social dynamics took a major leaf after 1990, which included manifestations of the aspirations that had been subdued during the Panchayat period and reflected in the rise of a new class of people into leadership positions. It is a different matter that the new elite soon developed their own alliances within which the benefits of state were shared, isolating again, the “others” and leading to new social movements to challenge the status quo.
Nepal continues to experience rapid socio-economic and political changes. The aspirations for change rose with the restoration of democracy but succeeding governments have continually failed to deliver on promises of accelerated and equitable development resulting better life for all. The failure of the political class and the bureaucracy to deliver has created a sense of resignation and disappointment and has alienated majority of people. The hope that democracy will lead to opportunities including access to jobs and economic resources for all, remains a distant dream. The politicization of State apparatus by political parties for partisan interests has resulted in the fragmentation of government systems which consequentially reflected in poor delivery of services.
Social change has to be understood from a different perspective. Genuine grievances of deprivation, exploitation, discrimination and injustice deserve sympathy and support. Perhaps, there is a need for radical socio-economic transformation that can provide the poor and disadvantaged groups the access to public services. Not enabling this access can trigger another movement of the poor, sick, illiterate and the marginalized which was also the Maoists’ main political agenda.
