Political intolerance stifling our democracy

The notion of intolerance was toxic, having the potential to fuel conflict. And even if it did not directly induce violence, failure to accept freedom and opportunity for all could perilously stifle consolidation of a peaceful, embryonic democratic society.

Current societal attitudes and behaviours leave profound doubt about our continued commitment to the challenge we adopted then “… to translate the ideal of our national anthem into a code of everyday behaviour, and to make our nation one in which every creed and race find an equal place”.

The hallmark of democracy is that the majority rules. But as a political system, democracy thrives where respect for the rights of minorities exists and is institutionalised.

They must be free to try to convince others of their views. Denial of the right of all to participate in politics inhibits contestation of ideas; impairs access of citizens to alternative views.

Democratic governance promotes robust processes which foster deliberation, allowing superior ideas to emerge and the flaws of bad ones to be exposed. Ideas therefore succeed on the basis of support freely given. Sadly, this is of trifling concern where political engagement is confined to wallowing in the cult of the personality.

We are no strangers to situations where governments, under the guise of regulations, apply political muscle to restrict potential rivals or debar legitimate opposition from participating in the political process and advancing their ideas. It is not uncommon, too, to find those, intoxicated by political power, trying to muzzle the media.

Such intolerance denies people access to all relevant information, ensures failure of the market for ideas and engenders distrust in politics and the political system.

Democracies flourish when there is free and open debate of political differences.

Tolerance prevails where all political ideas (and the groups holding them) have equal access to the marketplace of ideas. In this context, citizens ought to know who influences governments; who owns and controls the media; the relationships between media owners and contending political groups; the laws governing freedom of expression and how they are applied.

Political tolerance also extends to how we define and plan our future.

In plural societies like ours, governments must accept that meaningful national development is rooted in medium to long-term commitment, underpinned by active cross-party/interest group involvement and support.

Accordingly, they must formalise arrangements to guarantee genuine participation across multiple divides in decision-making and implementation. At the very least, they ought not to obstruct people’s movements dedicated to the purpose of democratic governance.

Today, there is popular disaffection in the country, linked to a growing disconnect between leaders and their followership. We need an infusion of mindfulness and respect in our political affairs in order to nurture tolerance and restore the yearned-for hope in a society, now seemingly in complete disarray.

WINSTON R RUDDER Petit Valley