Thursday, June 18, 2009

The party maslahathu

Today you often here on TV, the politicians frequently say something along the lines of
"Parliament members should work in the interest of the public rather than the party"
Or in dhivehi
"Party ge maslahathu kurinaaruvaa rayyithun ge maslahathaaigen masakkai kurun"
You will see politicians congratulating themselves for promoting citizens' interests rather than party interests. This begs the question--If their party interest is not the same as the citizens' interest, isnt there something wrong with their parties? Are they not admitting themselves that their party has an interest different from the citizens?

This brings us to the question, what do these parties stand for? What are their philosophical, ideological or pragmatic approach to addressing the economic, social, cultural and host of other issues that need to be addressed. Everyone agrees what the problems are (drugs, child abuse, etc.), but the differences comes in HOW to tackle those issues. It is not sufficient for the parliamentarians to say they will work in the interest of the public. They have to explain HOW.

The answer to the question of how is not that clear cut. It depends on the party's or person's political, religious, economic and social orientations. It depends on what they really stand for. Is party X the defenders of democracy at all cost? Or do they firmly believe in establishing Sharia Law? Or do they stand for liberty and freedom?

I stand for liberty and freedom. What do you stand for?

6 comments:

Hilath said...

Since all Maldivian parties are right wing conservative parties, I guess party philosophy will contradict civil laws and a civil code of life that is fair to everyone, regardless of his/her personal beliefs.

I strongly disagree with everyone who thinks the Social Liberal Party is a liberal party. It is only liberal to the extent that our constitution is liberal. That is, even the SLP has to operate "within the confines of Islamic Sharia" which directly contradicts with the concept of democracy which is about a civil code of life that is fair to everyone regardless of their religious beliefs.

Secularism is the only viable, democratic and liberal solution to all Maldives' problems.

meekaaku said...

Are all of them right wing conservatives? By their names some of them apparently are not (Social Democratic Party). Maybe some even don't have an orientation.

As for SLP, I think any party, for the time being atleast, will have to stay within the current constitution. Actively advocating something against the constitution will get them labeled as 'gairu gaanoonee' and will be political suicide.

I have to disagree with you, democracy is not about civil code. It is the institutionalised form of tyranny-by-majority. It is quite contrary to the concept of liberty. The minority will have to stay until the majority decides them to give them rights.

Unless there is a constitution based on the concept of liberty and inalienable rights, we have to wait until the majority decides to give the minority theirs.

One good example is the US constitution and Bill of Rights

Anonymous said...

hilath and his big mouth blogs are the solution to everythin in this earth...it can stop a missile from launching...

Hilath said...

Meekaaku: I think democracy's earlier definition was majority rule. Over time things have changed and now people have realised that it is about individual freedoms -- which means minority rights. Of course most countries still stick to the traditional meaning of democracy which is majority rule which is really causing minorities to remain enslaved.

On another note, somebody seems to be extremely jealous of me here on the blogsophere. If that somebody gets rid of his/her cowardice and decide to openly identify him/herself and make comments around the blogosphere, and also run a blog with his/her open identity, I think that somebody has an equal and maybe better chance of becoming more famous than me on the blogosphere. So rather than being jealous about it, why don't you actually do something about becoming a bigger mouth than me, Anonymous? Whose stopping you? Your big-time cowardice? I pity your kind. You have only yourself to blame for your inadequacies. Hope this is an adequate answer to all you anonymous cowardly no-life "stalkers" around the blogosphere.

moyameehaa said...

i also wonder wat the heck these parties stand for. they dont have any ideologies....theirpolitics revolve around few people and incidents and rarely issues.except for adaalat ofcourse. they are afraid to clearly define their ideologies (islamic emirate/caliphate/world domination before akhira?) for strategic reasons.

so now there is drp the maumoon party... mdp the maumoon aa dhekolhu party...idp umarunaseeru party...then there is yameen party,red wave party...ibra party...etc etc.

i think meekaaku is right about democracy...till they give us our rights...minorities will not have rights....but we will get it only by fighting for it. minorities in maldives are not just liberals or anything....but everyone except the ruling class elites..the businessmen, the people with all the money and resorts. they are a very few families and individuals..but they are the majority in terms of power and control and consumption of national wealth. they are denying to give us our rights...but we dont see dat. we only see the issues they raise and point at... like how to arrest and ex dictator.

but hilath also have a point.... democracy is no longer jut majority rule...atleast i believe so. for example...if u introduce democracy to some savages/cannibals in the jungle... they may get the basic idea...and decide the majority tribe will feed on the rest. it is a package. it comes with freedom and justice.

meekaaku said...

moyameeha:

I don't think any of these parties stand for anything. maybe mdp is a typical conservative party. And i dont think the majority of the mdp members realise what being a conservative means even.