The tone and tenor of a civilised political culture

Gopal Sengupta Over the last few months, Bangladesh has been subjected to an unedifying spectacle of the two major parties-making below-the-belt remarks about each other's leader. Unless good sense prevails, this mudslinging match can get out of hand. A political party is defined by others, and defines itself, as much by its ideology as by the leadership it decides to have. It is rather self-serving for any party to insist that its rivals and detractors should not discuss its leader. A debate about leaders, their flaws and their assets is at the heart of democratic give and take. Leaders do bring value-additions to their parties. In fact, most of our political parties are increasingly becoming leader-centric. It is therefore natural that rivals should want to question the other political parties' leaders. This is the everyday stuff of electoral exchange. A political party is entitled to place greater emphasis on its programme and achievements than on its leaders; but the rivals, too, are entitled to try to reverse the order in their sales pitch to the electorate. All that the country can insist on is that political parties remain mindful of good taste and refrain from words, suggestions and insinuations that coarsen the public discourse. As the two largest formations, the Awami League and the BNP have a special responsibility for preserving the tone and tenor of a civilised political culture. There is a great need to preserve the tone and tenor of a civilised political culture. There is a caustic reminder that we need to take a fresh look at our old saying - not only to say the right thing at the right time, but to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment. You are right when you say, "A political party is entitled to put greater emphasis on its programme and achievement than on its leaders" but in our 'yes madam', 'yes apa' culture, who bothers about the country and the party's achievement? The tone and tenor of the present day political leaders are entirely different from those of the past. The present day leaders throw mud on each other in public, perhaps to attract media attention. It is in the political wisdom of both the parties to settle and carry on with creative action in the interest of the nation. It certainly seeks to fulfill the media's role of leading, enlightening and educating the polity. The thinking but silent citizen, concerned with norms in public life, is sick of hearing political leaders trading personal attacks against each other. One is reminded of the decency and decorum observed by leaders in the distant past. Today, instead of parties being based on ideologies, they are built around personalities. As the two largest formations, the major political parties have a special responsibility for preserving the tone and tenor of a civilised political culture. The exercise of power is determined by thousands of interactions between the world of the powerful and that of the powerless, all the more so because these worlds are never divided by a sharp line: everyone has a small part of himherself in both. How we think shows through in how we act. Attitudes are mirrors of the mind. They reflect thinking. Hold yourself responsible for a higher standard than anybody expects of you. Never excuse yourself. The task of the leader is to get his people from where they are to where they have not been. You have to think anyway, so why not think big? Gopal Sengupta writes from Canada. He can be reached at email: gopalsengupta@aol.com