Submit your Article

Even as the political party cadres and general public scramble to make sense of the ongoing permutation and combination following the formation of the Pushpa Kamal Dahal government, it is interesting to pay attention to an important dimension of the party system—the permanent establishment. The practice of the political party system in the last three decades and especially after the change of 2006 has made it all clear that just like the state, even political parties have developed permanent establishments. These are a group of individuals and institutions that have established a firm control over the entire party life. The permanent establishment also promotes a particular value. Those that are parts of the permanent establishment may or may not belong to the same cultural grouping. Three characteristics of the permanent establishment are worth pondering over. The first is the idea of popularity vs legitimacy. Second is the notion that the entire party process revolves around certain personalities. The third being the oppositional mindset. It appears that those that wish to remain relevant in party politics need to be part of this establishment. Popularity vs legitimacy We have often noticed that popularity is the hallmark of legitimacy in party politics. If one pays close attention to the idea of popularity in party politics of Nepal, then one realizes that the leader concerned is popular because s/he engages in multiple forms of protectionism and clientele. These forms of patronage form the bedrock of the legitimacy for the leader. Therefore, it is apt to borrow two forms of classification that German Sociologist Max Weber suggests as the basis of legitimacy for authority—tradition and charisma. Of course, he has a third one too, legal-rational basis. But this option appears weak in case of legitimacy in the party system in Nepal. Nepali leaders have often resorted to either tradition or charisma to secure their legitimacy. A section of the leaders have built a vast network and basis for legitimizing themselves by quite often resorting to their “contributions in the past” referring to their struggle in the underground period. The leaders of this genre use this not only as their electoral USP, but also as a basis to claim seniority and control the party mechanisms. There is another set of leaders who have used charisma as a basis for legitimacy. They are those individuals who use the charisma of their personalities to stake a claim for legitimacy and shore up their popularity. This group of leaders in today’s age of social media has an additional arsenal to boost their legitimacy by directly reaching out to their supporters. However, popularity alone is not enough. The party systems have their own logic which demands certain workings from the leaders to maintain legitimacy—some form of protection and patronage. Personality as process The arguments of the preceding section bring us to an important dimension of how permanent establishment comes into effect. Nepali political parties have long relied on personalities rather than formal institutions to give them a shape. This is partly to do with the socialization of the political parties. The current leadership of the major Nepali political parties has come of age by sharpening their political skills as underground outfits. Therefore, whatever shape these leaders provided based on either tradition or charisma, the parties took their shapes accordingly. Further, the practice of the same leader leading both the party and the government at the same time meant that s/he would remain powerful throughout and the party machinery would be subservient to the interest of that leader. Owing to these practices, the leader comes to acquire a larger-than-life image as s/he is the most resourceful person/s. Given the very informal nature of Nepali politics and society, it becomes incumbent upon the party cadre to develop close connections with such leaders in order to further his/her career. Therefore, the Nepali political parties have developed an institutional mechanism that revolves around certain personalities. War-like mindset The other characteristic that shapes the idea of permanent establishment is war-like mentality. Given the vertical and horizontal differences in the structure for gaining power, leaders demonstrate a war-like mentality to survive in the party. The vocabulary of the leadership that forms the permanent establishment often reeks of revenge and negation. They often resort to the idea of total or absolute control over party mechanisms. In recent years we have witnessed that the party conventions have often been converted into a mechanism to capture power. Very little or no deliberations have been occurring with regard to ideologies or policy directions for the party. A document presented by the incumbent is approved without any meaningful deliberation. This has to do with the way convention representatives are chosen. Oftentimes the powerful leaders within the party are able to buy their way with the monopolized resources at their disposal. Therefore, making sure that their loyalists get in as convention representatives. Hence, even the so-called democratic exercise is all but a sham. The war-like mentality is all pervasive. It is not only the senior crop of leadership who engage in such exercise, but also the so-called new generation. In fact, the latter group seeks to amplify the process of being part of the permanent establishment by resorting to the very means they once criticized. These groups of leaders if and when they make it to the leadership position are found blocking entry of the new cadre to that very process.

As the country heads towards the elections on Nov 20, one could ponder about the emergence of leadership from these electoral contests. A general understanding is that the same crop of old leaders will make it in the fray. But if one is to look at the source from which a new breed of leadership is to emerge, then an interesting picture comes into play. Unlike in the past when the party affiliated youth or student bodies produced future leaders, this time around (possibly starting a decade or so) a different bunch of leaders are making it to the leadership lineup. One of the segments of these leaders is those that are now in the leadership position of the local bodies. The other segment constitutes those that may be termed as technocrats. The likelihood of the emergence of these two segments as possible leaders of party politics in near future is a telling story of the changing political, economic and cultural dynamics of party politics in Nepal. In the recent past, including during the partyless Panchayat period, both youth, student and other sister organizations of the political parties played a strong role to propagate the ideology of their respective parties. In fact, during the Panchayat period these allied institutions served as the front organizations for the then banned parties. The present day second tier leadership of these parties actually comes from these very fraternal organizations. The story of these organizations in the last decade or so is, however, one of sorry state. Ever since the political parties were seated firmly in the control of the state affairs following the declaration of republic, the mother parties started treating their fraternal organization with contempt. The senior party leadership increasingly sought to erode inner- party democracy and their first casualties were these allied organizations. The once vibrant fraternal organization slowly fell into decay to the extent that the leadership for these organizations is no longer elected rather than nominated by the senior leadership of the party.   Leader/businessperson In the preceding section, the article demonstrated how the traditional route for the party leadership has weakened. As a result we see a new set of leaders emerging for future leadership. These are people who have won the local elections. These leaders may have come from the aforementioned fraternal organizations of their respective parties. But that is not a very important marker. What really counts is the fact that the person concerned not only enjoys a popular base (not necessarily in the positive sense of the term) but is also financially independent. The elected member of the local body may be a local businessperson or a contractor. Therefore, a new crop of leaders are in the making who are themselves patrons and don’t rely on the business community for resources. This marks an important departure in the leadership race. The present crop of leadership of parties’ fraternal organizations doesn’t necessarily have the same leverage as their compatriots leading the local bodies. Additionally, those elected to local bodies also act as an important life line for the parties when it comes to securing resources. Hence, they generate their own network, which when scaled up can be used at national level as well. Further, it is these elected members in the local bodies with whom the public will identify the parties as they encounter these leaders on an everyday basis. Technocrat as policy leader The other segment of the potential leadership comes from people with technocratic/bureaucratic expertise. These individuals necessarily don’t have to come from the rank and file of the parties, unlike in the past. The history of the political parties suggest that a section of the party leaders themselves acquired training as technocrats and then served as policy experts to their parties. The picture is somewhat different this time around. You now have a group of experts who have not risen in the party as cadre, but have made it to the top by showing their credentials as experts with considerable experience in international/intergovernmental organizations. These individuals have very little ownership in the party concerned as they have no or minuscule experience with the party governance and its working systems. Also, these leaders ‘parachute’ to the center and influence various tiers of the government. In fact, they become the sought after pundits as they also receive the backing of international institutions/centers running both political and financial global systems. In the end The preceding sections have shown how a new leadership is likely to emerge in the Nepali party system. If these are any indications to go by, then a segment of the aspiring leaders who are patronized by the top party leadership will find it difficult to compete with the aforementioned two sections of potential leaders. The former is neither financially autonomous nor has enough technical expertise to prove their mettle. The days after the elections could point to interesting directions from the perspective of future leadership.

As the country prepares for the second federal and provincial elections, the categories of youth and independent have attracted national politics. There has been a steady rise of ‘independent’ candidacy either as rebels from the existing political parties or as candidates from other political formations. Similarly, the cry for youthful candidates is also making rounds in the political circles. However, it is altogether a different matter when it comes to defining who is a youth. With senior leaders setting a high age bar, the leadership of the Nepali politics could well be termed as ‘gerontocratic’. Therefore, even those leaders that may well be beyond fifty years of age come to acquire the title of a ‘youth’ leader. But there is another set of young leaders who are young by age. This article, however, will focus on two sets of young leaders that are vying for electoral success in this election. One of them belongs to the existing mainstream political parties. They have either risen up the ranks or are in the process of doing so. They may well be considered the future of that respective party. The other set is represented by a group of young contestants who are in the fray either as independent candidates or belong to the new political parties. These candidates aspire to challenge and contest the leaders from the dominant political parties. However, some interesting questions that should be answered are how are the two sets of young contestants different or similar to each other? Do they represent different political worldviews? Break from the patron-client relation The emergence of a new set of contestants especially in select urban areas indicates a breakdown of the traditional patron-client relationship that has been an important characteristic of Nepali political culture. Given the rise of a new class of professionals who believe that they do not require patronage from the political parties/leaders, this group is refusing to be a fence sitter on the political front. They believe that given their technical and professional expertise, these new crops of political aspirants have it in them to solve the problem, which they attribute to the working of the political parties. A look at their approach and ideas however, gives one an impression that they are highly programmatic in their approach. They may be one-issue or some-issue oriented parties lacking a comprehensive approach to myriads of issues, especially one that define macro politics of Nepal. The other feature of these new sets of actors is their attempt to give politics a brand. As one independent candidate vying in this election from Bagmati province said to this scribe “we are attempting to make politics a new lifestyle”.  He and many like him rue the fact that politics has limited space for urban upwardly mobile youth. They want to change that by intervening in the process. And they believe that not having a party (meaning traditional political party) baggage is a great advantage for them as there is no need to keep a patron happy as is the case with mainstream political parties. Reactions of the youth in the dominant political parties Given the contest from a different set of young political actors, the youth brigade of the mainstream political parties may feel some pressure. This pressure may not always be related to ballot success but will definitely question their political working and culture. It is an established fact that young leaders (especially those young by age) are finding it difficult to find their feet in the political parties that are increasingly being centralized by the old brigade. As a result, the traditional patron-client relation in the form of factionalism feeds through these young turks in the political parties. I don’t intend to suggest that there are no oppositions to these tendencies in political parties. However, these protests are sporadic or muted. The fact that there exists a strong political economy of the party system (including the patronage network) that seeks to benefit the respective members makes it difficult for the young members of that dispensation to break ranks. Neoliberalism rules the roost The preceding sections have shown the difference between young contestants from either the dominant political parties or the new ones. There is, however, a striking similarity between the two sets of actors. Both sets of actors, for all practical purposes, operate within the framework of neoliberalism. And it is not just with market fundamentalism that accompanies the neoliberal thinking, but the whole gamut of ideology or worldview is shaped by the latter. The very fact that these new actors claiming to be ‘independent’ have a programmatic worldview is reflective of the right-based approach advocated by powerful capitalist global centers. This approach has ‘projectized’ the way we deal with society and its problems. Therefore, global centers of capitalism remain the patrons of these ‘independent’ candidates whose ideas are captive to those institutions meant to serve the former. It is not just these new actors, but even the young leaders from traditional political parties are increasingly seeking to be part of the structures created by powerful centers of capitalism. These young leaders too champion, though privately (or at times even openly), the neoliberal ideology which at times may contrast the stated position of their political parties. In fact, both groups of young actors may be competing with each other to become part of what may be termed as globally mobile elites. By the way Even as the aforementioned group of young contestants compete with each other in the electoral fray, it is important to remember that they may be operating in spheres which may at times overlap with each other. But at the same time may create a distinct field. What is certain however is that we may witness different ways of doing organized politics—either by the way of traditional political parties or ‘independent’ lot. It nonetheless is important to consider that the upcoming elections may hold cues to understanding the Nepali politics for the foreseeable future. The author is a sociologist affiliated with Martin Chautari. Twitter: @pranabkharel