Darjeeling Unlimited

Politics of Sheep and Denial

Sheep Farm Sikkim

Sikkim lacks a democratic tradition of political debate.

To end a remarkably unfruitful year, the most enduring Chief Minister of the Indian Union has been pleased to indulge in symbolism, celebrating Tamu Lochar with the Gurung community of Dentam, at an estate aptly named Sheep Farm. Over the tenures bygone, the state party ran Sikkim like a sheep farm, indeed, with the sole authority to determine who's shorn and at what lags, who deserves some extra mash, and who's a black sheep and needs to be sorted out.

Sharing the Dais with a bodyguard - machine gun levelled - reminding the flocking audience of the ultimate fate of every sheep, the CM acted the Good Shepherd summing up the blessings he and his party had showered Sikkim with during the last two decades. And he did not miss to caution his wards against the butchers trying to lure them away straight to the slaughterhouse of the team without captain, the one of the Kaila party, or, worst of all, that of the Goonda party ...

The literal name-calling of competitors blending poorly with the intended image of elder statesman raised with considerable facework stands for a general plight not at all limited to the Sikkim Democratic Front: Sikkim has no tradition of political debate. The presently active outfits are readily available for - usually disparaging - remarks ON their rivals, but they hardly ever have a word WITH any of them on matters pertaining to the common good, face to face.

Leaving aside the official and unofficial mouthpieces, the press acts as messenger carrying statements back and forth, beefing up facts with an extra pinch of salt, once in a while. That work must keep editorial boards occupied to capacity, likely the reason papers can't afford to take a stand, anymore, giving rise to the impression that media carrying investigations, evaluations and opinions, went missing when Jigme N. Kazi retired to inner exile.

In principle, the Sikkim Legislative Assembly was devised as a forum of deliberation. However, if any of the three Honourable Members not belonging to the ruling party attempts to launch a debate, his vote is being suffered impatiently with the majority keen to return to the dead rituals of prearranged consent. Constructive discussion is being denied carrying accross the mute message:

We are the good guys! No need to listen, no need to argue, because we're always right!

Psychology defines denialism as an essentially irrational action to the effect of avoiding acceptance of uncomfortable truths and realities. Denialism affects the whole political range, from the partisans of established parties down to the ugly chief of the bluntly fascist splinter group. And denialism is a sign of weakness of old men's rule. Shying away from democratic discourse, political leaders suggest they do not dare to stand up to a challenge placing eloquence over seniority, wits over guts. Putting on a stony face, they try to sell inability as dignity: No need to listen, no need to argue, we're always right!

Besides, there are the youths outnumbering the older generation, well educated but lacking experience in seeing through falsehood of man. For the whole of their life, they have witnessed nothing but SDF rule and they may be tempted to accept the norms established by the state party as God-given. Will they claim their prerogative to break with precedents, to think offbeat? It's no rocket science, after all!

Tired of renegades? Don't vote for them!
Fed up with delayed Limbu Tamang reservation? Do elect LT candidates all the more!
Annoyed with the range of candidates contesting? Press the NOTA button!
And, above all, leave out mere party hacks to support credible personalities, instead!

Political parties are such wonderful institutions! Shouldn't we opt for having more of them in the assembly? At least four or five? With no camp holding absolute power, they were forced to discuss matters in open contest, forging alliances, finding mutual solutions, while all those not part of the final deal would secure checks and balances.

For, quite frankly, both of us, we are good fellows too! But, are you always right? Well, I'm not ...

Chopel Serkhangpa, 3rd January 2019