|
Threshold of happiness
Niraj Aryal
Traditions are broken. Traditional centers are scrapped off their inherent powers. As a result, traditional portraits are removed and traditional jingles are erased from public places or from the government offices. This has been the hallmark of all modern age revolutions, which may have carried out peacefully or violently any where in the world. Nepal can't be exception to the universal rule.
Nepal could not remain aloof of this tradition, it may have happened in lesser magnitude with fewer casualties thus looking more peaceful, which is not bad though. But the tradition was kept alive for centuries even in this remote kingdom.
Last week, as the Maoist cadres attacked and almost demolished the Nepal Army controlled open theater just behind the public theatre in Kathmandu, the men leading the group looked more than happy with their acts as they returned after accomplishing their mission. Later the men in uniform were applauded for showing their calm; else the environment could have turned nasty. Here what I mean is that the satisfaction among the traditional losers as yet has come from destruction of lesser magnitude rather than any thing constructive. Take it easy.
Here, I may have to clarify why in a lesser magnitude?
My answer would be because the threshold of happiness or satisfaction may have dramatically gone down among the mass in the past decade mainly because of violence, corruption, and awful politics, finally the thirst for power, which finally gave rise to disbelief among the power holders. But the removal of traditional portraits and erasing the jingles have also played significant role in bringing happiness back among the traditional losers in the society. This has certainly given them a sense of liberation and also a sense of equity.
Take for example, as the parliament was restored, human rights activists, journalists, representative of organizations belonging to various ethnic groups or women activists accumulated in front of Singhadurbar asking the government to act upon their demands. The process is slowing down considerably. Now these very groups look content over the government’s recent decisions. Thus there is a sense of satisfaction which is obviously correlated to the low threshold for happiness the society has set during the past torrid times.
Now, one example from the region. Bangladesh, which is among the world's poorest country was liberated in 1947 along with India from the British occupation. In 1971, after a civil war with West Pakistan, Bangladesh was freed again to form a separate nation. After more than thirty years of liberation, sadly Bangladesh is categorized as the worlds poorest. India, the known naughty big brother politically speaking, also shares a similar story among the surrounding countries in the region. Recently, India may have been developing with a brisk pace but still not able to narrow the gap between the poor and the rich in the country. But another fact important that both the countries share between themselves is the sense of happiness among the people living in the world’s poorest countries. Few years old data reveal that Bengali people are the world’s happiest and India followed Bangladesh in the fifth position. Rather recent data indicate that Nigerians in the world are the happiest followed by Mexicans, Venezuelans, El Salvadorans, and the Puerto Ricans.
This is indeed puzzling that not a single country in the line-up belongs to a developed country. But the analysis suggests that in all these countries the so-called threshold for happiness may be extremely low among the mass that even a minute change in the societal setup may make them happy. On the other hand, in developed countries, the threshold of happiness may be high or even saturated. As a result minor changes in the society may not make people happy.
In Nepal, the questions are rather simple, replacing the traditional portraits or traditional jingles by new ones; aren’t we creating new power centers that may act no differently than the recently abolished centers? Take it easy but ponder over.
Is the society ready for yet another revolution within few years of time by keeping the level of happiness constant so to be happy with the same level of achievement?
Or, from now on break the tradition of power centers to avoid any further revolution and also set a new threshold of happiness?
How Prachanda decides or takes up my case will henceforth determine the fate of the nation. Much now depends on those who have had terrible times in the jungles for years. One has to admire their courage and valor.
|
