Wed 23 Apr 2008
Calling Generation Bangladesh: Is there an Obama in the house?
Posted by Asif under Generation New , Politics
Barack Obama, with his compelling life story, is inspiring America like nobody has since John F. Kennedy. The child of a black father from Kenya and a white mother from Kansas, and raised by his grandparents, Obama started his political life at the bottom of the food chain as a community organiser in Chicago, and is now reaching for the US presidency.
As a curious outsider, I have watched Obama with polarised emotions over the last couple of months. I have alternated between inspiration and depression; inspired by his magnetic promise for the American youth and saddened by the lack of such leaders at home.
What does Obama mean in the Bangladeshi context? He represents a breed of bottom-up politicians who can inspire and unite the younger generation to dream of tomorrow — and then deliver.
Faisal Salahuddin’s piece here
April 24th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Yes. There is are Obamas in Bangladesh, and they speak good English, but sadly some of them are driving Navana taxis in Dhaka…they never get a look in. I have met some fantastic human beings caught up in the daily grind. As always, I’ll miss them more. If we bother or care to listen, we can learn a great deal from a mere rickshaw pedlar.
April 25th, 2008 at 12:46 am
Mr. Muhamad,
May Allah give you guidance. There is a limit of audacity. Please, stop making fun with the prophet of whom billions of people have, love
respect and faith. Your parenthesis [pbum]is an extreme form of fun and denotes your soiled soul.
You’re in public forum. You should have minimum
sense of responsibility while you pen something. Freedom and liberty is desired and also divine gift to us. But abusing it in the name of unlimited dimension is no way beneficial to individuals and the society. The more you want to expand your liberty and freedom after certain limit the more you harm yourself and the society.
Please be mindful, hurting anybody without any reason is offense and hurting may be phyisical and psychological. Many a times we do ignore mental or psychological assault; and we do
forget psychological trauma can be of far greater degree than physical ones. Dear fellow bloggers, bear with me and don’t me take as vulgar. Here I’m giving an example of how seriously one can be afflicted with psychological trauma as compared to physical ones. Suppose, an individual name A has had some physical assault on his friend on B. This physical trauma and abuse may have a breakup of friendship btwn A and B. But as the time is the best healer, their friendship maybe restituted after sometime. But if the person A curses
his friend B and says I have raped your mother or sister. I believe, the friendship btwn A and B will never be repaired again, rather it will create an permanent enemity between them.
So, please don’t try to hurt the faithful muslims through mocking at the prophets or anybody of that stature. You can get abtruse ephimeral enjoyment and be celebrity so having cheap shots but that doesn’t led to the path of
peace and tranquility of your mind, heart and soul. Look at the example of TASLIMA NASRIN and the likes.
Thanks.
April 25th, 2008 at 5:49 am
Aha. Bitterboy, what exactly is the problem here if one prays for peace on himself/herself? Why do you find it irresponsible? That A vs B story is not enough dude. — Ali [SA]
April 25th, 2008 at 6:46 am
I was very excited when I first saw the piece. You see, like the writer, I too am trained as a macroeconomist. And any macroeconomist worth his salt will get excited by charts. But after close reading, I have to say, I was fairly underwhelmed. Why? A number of reasons. Simple things first.
Look at Chart 1. Th red column - Generation B - overwhelms the older generations. Generation B is defined as people under 40. But does it make sense to lump someone who is 10 today with someone who is 39? We’re talking about the impact of generational change on politics. For this, the appropriate measure of Generation B would be people between 20 and 40. Or people born in the 1970s and 1980s. Of these, people under 25 are not old enough to run for office. Measured this way, Gen B won’t look quite as overwhelming as it does in the chart. A minor point? Perhaps.
How homogenous is the Gen B defined as people between 20 and 40 years of age in their political views? I’d say there is one fundamental distinction between those who attained adulthood before early 1990s and those who came of age afterwards. The older cohort was the one that had political experience in their student days. And by political experience I don’t mean only being JCD or BCL cadres. Anyone who participated in any broad extracurricular activities on a sustained basis - be it organising Pohela Boishakh or Shaheed Minar cultural programmes, publishing a student magazine, or organising relief efforts for flood victims - it gives you political experience. I contend that the older Gen Bs have much wider political experience than the younger ones.
How much of that political experience has transferred through to party politics? The evidence is, very little, except for those who happen to have family connections.
And here is the fundamental problem I have with the piece. It sets up a false dichotomy between dynasty scions and Gen B. Then it asserts, Gen B’s time is coming. Now, it is a truism that Gen B’s time is coming - older people will die, someone who is 40 today will be 50 or 60 tomorrow, and be in the position of authority. But unless there is a mechanism through which that girl who publishes a student magazine in Chittagong University, or that guy who runs the AIDS clinic in Mohakhali, can join national politics, the Gen B that will take power will be some dynasty scion, not an Obama. This is something the article completely misses.
Oh, there is another brand of political leadership that the younger cohort of Gen B is likely to witness. Does anyone know the guy who led the Shonir Akhra uprising? Or the one in Sheorapara? There is a generation of people under 30 out there who has nothing to lose. The thing is, the brand of politics they are likely to practise is not one of Obama, it is more likely to be that of Osama.
April 25th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Jyoti,
There is no doudt that there is widespread political apathy. But at the same time, people are waiting to be inspired. There is a huge vaccum of a Obama like figure. But should we be waiting for that Godot? I think not. We pinned our hope on Yunus once but it was pretty clear how out of touch he was from the mainstream Bangladesh. But what is the qualification of bangladeshi obama should there be one. Let’s face it. Our Bangladesh is a rural country still. Someone who wants to capture the imagination of the country can not speak the language of elite but will need to smoothly transcend between different groups and classes of people. Last time someone captured such imagination was President Zia. He spoke a no nonsense, positive language and he effectively marketed himself as a leader of the rural people by his relentless visits to the rural areas. Top it off with his personal honesty and you have got a winning candidate. However, Zia’s rise was from the cantonment and not out of a political process. A new bangladeshi obama will not rise out of a daily star roundtable or the cantonment but more from the very grassroots. At the same time, he/she has to have a national presence and be able to be media savvy. As much as we hate it, Bangladesh’s media now holds considerable sway in making a hero or villain out of someone. Imran khan of Pakistan is an interesting case study to observe why a person with such an immense charisma and name recognition failed to capture the imagination of the mass in Pakistan.
Is it possible for a local leader to get the national spotlight? Let’s take an effective example — Rabbani of Kansat who came out of no where to take the national spotlight by fighting against the establishment from a non partisan front. When he wanted to run for parliament from Moha jote, his nomination was stalled in preference to a richer candidate. So there seems to be a glass ceiling for the grassroots leaders to make it to the big league.
As for the generation B in the urban society, it has become the me generation obsessively focused on themselves. Nothing short of a huge mobilization effort or a massively inspiring figure like an Obama can reignite their passion for the country and make them self aware of their importance.
April 25th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Bitterboy
You slipped away from the topic.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
If Zia is the last Obama of Bangladesh then no wonder that Bangladeshis are not interested on Obamas.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Raihan, I did not say Zia was the last Obama. But rather I said, coming out of no where, he was the last popular leader who captured the imagination of the people through clever marketing. He also understood how to win the pulse of the country. He won over the younger generation fairly quickly as well using his mode of Bangladeshi nationalism. Love him or hate him, you have got to recognize that fact. Okay, let’s not turn it into a debate over Zia now.
April 25th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
I disgree with your “Zia” analysis but you are right. We should not turn the debate over Zia now.
April 25th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
You’re missing one important point. Barak’s phenomena is all the more remarkable because he is from a very disadvantaged minority where people who believed in him even doubt whether he can overcome the wider prejudices in his society.
So, for the analogy for Bangladesh to hold true, is Bangladesh ready for a Hindu / Chakma / Ahmadiya running as Prime Minister? Will such a person be able to overcome suspicion of DGFI, army, jatiyatabadi groups, not to mention Islamist right wing?
April 26th, 2008 at 12:24 am
Arindam #10,
Obama has already achieved success, against prejudice, when he excelled in his talent to become an US Senator.
When somebody presents exceptional leadership and unique talent, they get accepted as a leader, despite their minority lines - whether in USA or in Bangladesh.
Example - there are already many “Hindu / Chakma / Ahmadiya” members in Bangladesh cabinet, ministries, govt and business.
If a minority person displays exceptional talent to lead Bangladesh to success - people and DGFI will worship their leadership.
The problem that I see is not minority lines, but the problem is South Asian culture is so devoted to DYNASTY, that a new Obama’s TALENT will have hard time being recognized, unless he has family-ties with Mujib or Zia.
April 26th, 2008 at 12:42 am
or islamist left wingers…!
April 26th, 2008 at 4:37 am
Not sure this was supposed to be a post about the minority issue in BD, but #11, I don’t think merely stating wishful thinking as fact makes it true. Please educate us - of the public face of the current government -ie, the CTG, the advisers - can you please tell us how many Hindus/Chakmas/Ahmadiyas you can identify?
April 26th, 2008 at 5:17 am
Having said that Dynasty-following is a problem in S.Asia, a new Obama will eventually rise from nowhere, (and perhaps create his own dynasty), just as Mujib and Zia did.
April 26th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Udayan, #13
To answer your ques, if minority percentage in BD is 20%, then IN THEORY, out of 100 CTG and advisers there will be 20 Hindus/Chakmas/Ahmadiyas, assuming talent/charisma/personality are not factors.
But, out of 10 CTG & advisers what is the probablity that 2 (20%) will be Hindus/Chakmas/Ahmadiyas PLUS have the talent/charisma/personality to get in?
But in reality, if you saw the 100’s of ministers in last AL-BNP, there were a number of minority members.
Also, does US SENATE have the same percentage of Black Senators as the population? No. There are Blacks in US govt also, but not same percentage as pop.
Does that mean US govt is “not ready” for Black politicians, (per your question), or does it mean Blacks havent enjoyed the game of politics as much as the Whites?
Or, why is there so few Blacks in Golf (like Tiger Woods) and so many in Basketball?
Special Talent?
April 26th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
#14 KGazi - I don’t think Mujib and Zia created dynasties. The people that came aftr them (their family members included) created it. Did Zia annoint his son Tareq? Did Mujib parade Hasina as his successor? The circumstances of their deaths (illegal, violent and divisive movements to remove them from elected office) arose such emotion in the people that there was actual welcoming of their bloodline. Whose is the fault - of the leaders or of the simple and naive (I am trying to say “shorol” in Bangla) people?
#13 Udayan and #10 Arnidam Please do not try and divide us with asking such question. No one in Bangladesh cares if one is Hindu or Chakma or Muslim. We are united unlike any other of the countries in subcontinent. Issue isn’t how many of one type of person there is or isn’t (no one in Bangladesh counts such things - we are blind to this) but is there anything to prevent it. If there is dynasty, then as we rarely have intermarriage, it is obvious taht the follow on leadesr will be the same in terms of religion - it does not mean there is discrimination. In fact, I think the situation in Bangladesh is much better than India or America in this regard. 95% of our people is Muslim, so it is obvious that if there are 10 advisers, 10 will probably be Muslim. If there is an exceptional candiate who is not Muslim, who will stop this?
In USA, Obama is called a Muslim as if it is a bad thing, to bring down his credentials. Rather than say, “it is irrelvent to my candidacy” he has to say “No, I am not Muslim” as if it is saying “No, I am not a thief”. In India, Sonia Gandhi couldn’t become Prime Minister because she was Italian. We all know the despicable position of Muslims and untouchables in India. In Bangaldesh has there ever been instance of leader who was popular among people, but the establishment didn’t allow it because of their race or religion?
April 26th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
To make my point clear earlier what I said, I know military has prevented popular leaders from remaining / coming to power (Hasina, Khaleda, Mujib, etc). The point is, they never removed someone or prevented them because they were Hindu, Chakma etc. This has never happened in Bangladesh.
April 27th, 2008 at 7:56 am
Bulbul,
Where did you find that 95 percent of our population is Muslim? And when he had any important cabinet member/member of the parliament/Chief Justice/heads of armed or civilian forces/speaker of the parliament from minority groups?
Only in India it is possible for minority groups to run the country. Sonia, a born Chrisitian is the head of the UPA alliane, Singh, a Sikh is the Prime Minister. They had two Muslim Presidents, one Sikh President, One President from lower caste. So, Please before compare Bangladesh with any of these countries please do your research.
April 27th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
#18 Thanks Raihan for the examples. Saves the biased Indian guy from having to do it (though the tally is now up to 3 Muslim presidents and one prime minister from “low caste”
#16 Bulbul: re the 5% non-Muslim popultion, perhaps you are skipping forward a few decades. According to the census, the figure is just under 10% though this is down from around 18% in 1971. Given the trends and drivers behind them, it may well go down to 5% or so within the next couple of decades, but perhaps hold off on wishful thinking for just now.
Back to the issue of the post - Obama in Bangladesh (or wherever) - I think the point here isn’t that the Bangladeshi Obama would or wouldn’t be Muslim or Bengali or Chakma or whatever, but that he/she would demolish the status quo and established political way of doing and saying things. THAT is the main magic behind the Obama phenomenon - millions who were cynical about politics and felt the process was an automatic treadmill for the eites and insiders now feel they can contribute to making a huge and positive change. In the context of how this thread has evolved, that means smashing the rote and uninformed hypocrisy bleated out by KGazi (#11) or Bulbul (#16) and so much of the existing ruling elites with attitudes like them, and looking at issues as they really are so that solutions can be found, and energizing people along the way. And yes, the issues could include minority discrimination/under-representation in Bangladesh (or anywhere else in the world, includig India) but also poverty, education, womens rights etc.
April 27th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Udayan #15 “hypocrisy bleated out by KGazi”
—————-
Udayan, the direction of this thread was very predictable, at #10.
Please decide what is your point in #15, without making personal attacks, to carry a meaningful and respectable discussion.
April 27th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Most of K Gazi’s comments are actually not based on any reality in Bangladesh unfortunately. So, let’s not ruin the thread on the uninformed utopia described by him. I am just surprised how someone with so little exposure on recent Bangladesh can actually go on to thump his chest and comment so forcefully.
April 27th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
Asif S,
I would appreciate if Udayan or yourself would specify WHICH comment I made in #15 that was either false or not real, instead of attacking me for “ruining the thread”.
Lets not dismiss any comments in this blog based on a person’s location, afterall we are mostly all NRB’s living outside BD. My comments may not come out of the same box as most Bangalis, it hardly means I am “out of touch”, or “not based on any reality”.
If we keep feeding the same misconceptions to the mass, then the country will continue to keep going in the wrong direction, like our “democracy”, for instance.
If the purpose of this blog is to “debate” then we must be open to alternate arguments - whether its me or anyone else.
Just because someone’s comment is “forceful” and different from us, doesnt mean he should be ignored or discouraged. Or else this does not become a debate, but just a yes-yes club meeting.
April 28th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Thanks Asif for posting the article.
I finished the article with the following words.
“Generation B is coming to the forefront of politics with the inevitability of an avalanche. The very demand from them will encourage the supply of our future Obamas, most likely from Generation B, as long as we can ensure sufficient political competition and transparency.
Let’s all think and debate how.”
It would be wonderful if the energy of the bloggers could focus on how we can mobilize the energy of the next generation in joining politics.
Faisal Salahuddin
April 28th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Faisal Salahuddin:
I have read your article with interest. Otherwise an intriguing piece, I am somewhat at a loss on some of the points. I would only discuss three of them:
1.
You wrote about Generation-B enthusiastically but you never told us about the values they actually stand for, or the kind of principles they actually adhere to. You see, “ideologies” or their “baggages” are not necessarily a bad thing. Nations moved, nations shaked, nations aspired–not always with mobile phones or laptops. For examples do please look at the emerging economies of the last few decades or you may want to go a bit further back in the history. On the contrary, just because someone carries a mobile phone and a laptop does not mean that you have a world leader in the making. I am really wary of people these days who are quick to suggest–often on over-simplified premises—how shiny buildings, flashy cars, plush restaurants, shopping malls, mobile phones, laptops and micro-credits have become the greatest gifts of our time ! You see Obamas of our time were not made out of mobile phones or internet connections or micro-credits or social businesses. The promise of greatness we see in leaders like Obama (or Martin Luther King or Bangabandhu) are just manifestations of their ideologies or values or commitments. Without a great ideology you cannot have a great leader. Please could you elaborate–what you think is going to be the defining ideology or value of “your” future Obamas of Generation B? At least give us a wish list. Because I think the readers like me would be more interested in the specifics rather than in some wide and vague rhetoric. And please stop bashing everything that is ideological, because I am particularly concerned to see the way you have described our father’s generation as “ideological baggage” carrying generation. For the record, I am grateful that they had some ideologies, which I hardly can say about most of my generation. I am grateful that they bothered to “carry” those ideologies when they were young, when they took up arms to free the country and sacrificed their lives. They did that happily to ensure that we do not have to. They did that so that the legacy can be passed to our generation. They did that for us, Faisal, for you and me. Let’s not forget that.
Please do not get me wrong. I do not underestimate the role communication technologies can play in development discourses. But we must not lose sight that these technologies can only assist and catalyse changes. At most they could be the tools/gadgets in the hands of the movers. I sincerely doubt they can achieve anything more than that. At the end of the day, it is what goes on inside our minds and hearts (our values, ideologies and principles) that define us, which hopefully one day would be embodied in the figure of a great leader.
2.
These days I often come across articles such as this where authors try to apply some kind of business models to address and explain larger issues of politics or statehood, often using theories and terminologies from the fields of marketing or management studies. This is fundamentally flawed and I find this tendency problematic. Business and politics (or statesmanship) are two different worlds and their premises and mandates are totally different. Where one is profit driven, the other is public interest driven; where one is all about money, the other is about people (by, for and of the people), egalitarian goals, sovereignty and twenty other different things. [Do I really need to go on to explain this?] Yes, one may argue that in Bangladesh, the distinctions are now blurred–with businessmen holding political offices and politicians becoming profit-seeking businessmen. One may further argue that the boundaries between these two worlds are now collapsing. One may even argue that the nexus between power and money is not uncommon even in the most advanced of the democracies. I guess my point is, that does not make it right. If that happens, then universities all over the world would have placed their departments of politics, economics, international relations and all other social science departments under the umbrella of one big Commerce Faculty, as part of a BBA or MBA programme perhaps. If that happens, then Bangladesh would be run by all the CEOs or Chairmans of the Group of Companies. Hey, why not bring the CEO’s of multinationals (eg, IBM, Coca Cola, Microsoft) and lease the country out in their business-efficient hands?
Sorry for the crude analogy, but I hope things will not come to that.
3.
If I were you I would refrain from using terms such as “shining India” or “rising China” as something positive. These are just buzz words, and their premises are not as clean as the leaders (including their business leaders) of these two countries are trying to make their people believe. For God’s sake, are we not following the news on China, Tibet, Darfur, Nandigram etc? There can in fact be a whole new debate on this “shining-rising” countries which can be the subject of a separate thread. Perhaps another day …
April 30th, 2008 at 4:14 am
Ancient Greeks had a plot device to untangle complicated storylines in their dramas. When things looked very bleak, they’d have some angel or something similarly unexpected happen to set things right. They called this device ‘Deus ex machina’. A literal translation would be ‘god outside of the machine’. In modern days, we can see deus ex machina in James Bond movies where the right kind of gadget is always available to save 007 from the diabolical villain, or in masala Bollywood flicks, where it always rains when the heroin is wearing a white sari.
Asif mentioned Zia. One interpretation of history is that Zia was a deus ex machina. I think this interpretation is correct. But many disagree. Let’s not argue about Zia, except to note that asking for an Obama to come from the first set of Generation B is like asking for another deus ex machina. As I’ve said in 4, unless nothing changes, the Gen B leader will be from some dynasty.
But asking for a fundamental change in current situation is also asking for a deus ex machina. Only the hopelessly clueless believe that the army top brass and their enablers are interested in fundamental reforms and have no ulterior motives.
It was always naive to believe that the coupmakers had no ulterior motives. The relevant question here is, whether any action taken by the regime - for its own reason - can facilitate the rise of an Obama from the Gen B+ (people who are under 25 today, and will be 40 in the 2020s).
The regime is taking one action - for its own reasons - that can someday help our Obama to rise. This action is the proposed local government election. Make no mistake why the regime is doing it. It wants to use the local government elections to create a set of king’s men who’ll faciilitate a king’s party win in the general election. But even then, if there are 500 elected upazilla chairmen, 150 or so municipalty chairmen, 5 mayors and 64 district council heads, they’ll provide scopes for a Rabbani to consolidate themselves in national politics 10 years down the track.
Faisal, this gives one mechanism for our Obama to arise. Another avenue is student politics. And again, by politics I don’t mean JCD/BCL cadre. As late as the early 1990s, our colleges and universities had elected student councils that served the students through various activities. And those councils provided invaluable organisational and motivational skills that one needs to become an Obama. If we want the Gen B+ to produce an Obama, we’ll need to bring them into politics.
I’d like to end with a grassroot politician - not a deus ex machina, but a product of the student politics and provincial elections and organisation - who overshadowed mighty leaders of the previous generation to become the most influential leader this country ever produced. I’m of course talking about Mujib. Like Obama, he too had a gift for oratory. Like Obama, his beginning was in the grassroots - east Bengali Muslim students in 1940s Calcutta. He overshadowed titans like Fazlul Huq, Suhrawardy and Bhasani, to change the course of politics, the way Obama promises to. We should ask ourselves, what allowed a Mujib to rise through the ranks?
May 1st, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Incidental Blogger,
You have raised a good question regarding the political ideology of generation bangladesh. You can explore it here at this write up titled ‘Broader Horizon but smaller view’ by Irum which gets much deeper.
http://phiriye-ano.blogspot.com/2007/02/broader-horizon-but-smaller-view.html
Choice quote:
When you ask any of the group in question what they ‘believe’ in, most of them will be at a loss for words. This is a generation of cynics, not idealists. Their grandparents dreamt of a free India, their parents dreamt of a free Bangladesh, their older siblings dreamt of a government free from dictatorship. What do the current generation dream of? A better life, for sure, but a better life that concerns only them. This is not to accuse them of selfishness, but merely to highlight the absence of any guiding socio-political philosophy that would tether them to their society. The radical leftist and/or pro-independence political leanings of their parents’ generation seem a distant dream to a group of youth who are wary of politics. They see politics as destructive, and ultimately pointless. Look at their Dhaka University brethren, they say — caught in the mire of endless session jams due to the whims of the all powerful student wings of the major political parties. Nothing will change, and one party is as bad as the other, so why get involved? They see no marked ideological difference in the manifestoes of the reigning parties, and see elections as a merry-go-round where one party steps off to let the other on while the music and background remain the same. One party in practice is as bad as the other, so what’s the point in being engaged in the political process at all?
Asking them about the possibility of social change through activism unallied to politics brings forth an equally indifferent response. What’s the use, they shrug? All the aid money gets pocketed or squandered, NGOs are a rip-roaring business, the poor will get poorer and according to the news and we will remain the most corrupt country in the world. All around them, they see the failure of civil institutions to serve the needs of the people. Many of the young do not demonstrate an iota of faith in the power of advocacy to change society. They exhibit a feeling of helplessness that eventually morphs into apathy and a desire to do what they can for themselves, rather than fight a losing battle for a lost cause. They do not see the power of small changes, of small steps forward. They see the process of degeneration as too far gone to halt. If people truly do define themselves through a sense of place, draw their identities from the cultures they live in, then the culture has failed our young — it might have given them material advantages, but it has failed to give them faith in their own abilities to make a difference.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:27 am
[...] not rise out of a daily star roundtable or the cantonment but more from the very grassroots (see here). But, without local government, what kind of local leadership will arise? Asif talks about Rabbani [...]