The second-term MP election is just a few weeks away, and by now, people must have mastered the fine arts of political cunning, shrewdness, and tactfulness—or at least pretended to. Voters should already have a clear idea of what makes the right candidate. Fortunately, people had excellent choices: four parties in their hands. Let's hope they picked the best two in the preliminary round.
Back in 2008, with powerful and influential candidates in the fray, people's minds were completely hijacked—sorry, "taken over"—by DPT. And that was good. People's choice was right. DPT ruled the country with much peace and happiness, bringing development to many rural areas. On the flip side, DPT also taught Bhutanese people the value of money—and that is genuinely good. Bhutanese by nature are spendthrifts who never cared much about balances or savings. Then came the financial crunch. It was a blessing in disguise, like a strict parent who finally teaches you to save your pocket money.
Now, the two political parties' promises look lofty and sometimes downright wobbly. If their manifestos were to come true, every Bhutanese could just sit back, relax, and be spoon-fed. Government budget to each gewog, a health centre in every chiwog, community-based services, blacktopping of farm roads, 100% jobs—and etc., etc., etc. (I'm waiting for the one that promises a free pony for every household.)
But if lessons are to be learned, there are scores of very bad examples of elected members who joined politics for the love of power and money. A few turned out to be worse than statues—at least statues don't secretly fill their stomachs. Some even bought three or more bulldozers and excavators and are now running businesses on projects like Punatsangchhu. A few others relied on lip service and fake promises to grab votes. People noticed. These kinds of malfunctions—especially from the ruling party—will shrink our small nation faster than a cold shower.
Bhutan didn't know much about these pitfalls during the first election. Now people know. There are tensions lurking between the horse and the bird. Blame games are being played. Differences exist, though everyone tries to reach a common conclusion. There are talks in every small gathering about choosing a leader with a good heart, responsibility, capability, understanding—basically a superhero without a corrupt practice.
Meanwhile, the group that is supposed to remain apolitical—civil servants—are apolitical in name only. In reality, they are the most politically active bunch in society, influencing voters left and right. The majority of voters believe that educated people's choice must be right, often ignoring grassroots needs. The same goes for the religious body. In the name of religion, anti-political religious people become very political indeed. For example, some might hint that if you vote for Mr. X, he will bring good luck, good power, and good things to your village—maybe even that pony.
Politicization is important. Therefore, voters shouldn't be moved by any shaft of false hope. By now, people must also know that an individual shouldn't decide the candidate alone. Rather, it is the responsibility of people coming together and choosing their representative. Democracy is sometimes described as communities gathering together, imagining many voices pouring into a unified whole. Democracy should permeate the world beyond politics, making itself felt in the way people think, speak, work, fight, and even make mistakes. No nepotism, no relations, no bribery, nothing—but electing through collective decision is the true principle of democracy. Because it's for the greater goodness and well-being of the whole, not just one individual.
And that, is no laughing matter—even if the journey to get there often is.
