Our ‘Yellow Dog’ jingoism

Published : 20 April 2011, 04:50 PM
Updated : 20 April 2011, 04:50 PM

Years ago, as a student in the US, I came across a table in a convention…they were called 'Yellow Dog Democrats'. Some elderly patrons even had pins with yellow dogs on it. Somewhat baffled, I finally asked what it was all about. They said they were the most ardent followers of the Democratic Party in Texas. Didn't sound very exciting and I guess it showed on my face. 'Well, son', the gentleman explained…. 'If the Texas Democratic Party even puts up a yellah dawg as a candidate for any post….we are gonna vote the dawg in….'

Such dedication, 'Gawd'!

At that time, it did provide a bit of comic relief, and the Democratic Party there of course relied on these dedicated fringe groups as a reliable vote bank — tolerated from a distance but not actively pursued for any serious campaigns.

Now back home, I find myself surrounded by a large number of people who would have found themselves very comfortable, even thrive in the fringe belonging of Yellow Dogs. In the evolution of our history since 1971, we are gradually forgetting that the right to disagree is also a part of democracy. Somewhere the idea of a debate of any sort has taken a sideline and either we tow the party line, whatever it is, or you must be sympathetic to the 'other' party.

I am supposed to be a supporter of either the Awami League or the BNP. Well, I'm afraid I am a Bangladeshi first, I don't belong to either, whatever sympathy I may have for the philosophies and policies of either party I stubbornly and decisively keep it to myself because in this entirely polarised atmosphere, I refuse to be branded as either.

More than 200 years ago, the American constitution came up with the idea of an upper house and Electoral College for a reason they termed 'tyranny of the masses'. Are we there yet?

Our news media, every single one of them, will start the news, with the exception of a few catastrophes or winning news aside, about the political mudslinging between the two parties, the exchange of rhetoric between the permanent committee of this and the opposition committee of that. Has anyone tried listening to the parliamentary proceedings over the last couple of decades? It is more about political mudslinging and putting our leaders on a pedestal than actual debate about any practical issue.

It is a glorified question and answer session, and a system one has to tow the party line, and with the absence of opposition for decades, it is more like a glorified rubber-stamp parliament, a rowdy version of those in North Korea, Egypt or that of the Soviet Union.

Diversity of opinion is and should be as democratic as going by the majority opinion. There would be, in this diversity, opinion that goes against the majority. So, dissent should also be part of democracy, not only from the opposition but from within the party. Dissent is the recognition that every decision can be revised, but I also wonder how democratic it is to dissent just for the sake of dissent.

I am sure if we dig into the archives, instances could be found where a decision taken while in power became an issue of dissent while in opposition. Is that democracy for the party's sake or for the sake of the representative politics? Dissent by absence from parliament is the other extreme, where the absent representative is theoretically failing to represent the constituent that has sent him there to begin with. After election, the party replaces the constituent who technically forms the basis of democracy.

How many of you, by the way, are aware of the fact that in the US, the bastion of self-declared exporter of democracy and a practitioner of that concept for more than 200 continuous years has a constitution that does not mention the role of any political party? In fact, that idea of a majority 'party' forming government as expounded in the British system is totally absent. And yet, there are the Democrats and the Republicans and the inevitable Yellow Dogs…

———————————-

MK Aaref is an architect. He studied architecture and urban planning at the University of Houston. Later, he specialised in privatisation during his MBA from Aston University, UK. He currently resides and practices in Dhaka.