Replacement Of Political-Governing With Political-Management

By Rehan Derrick Fernando –JUNE 14, 2021

Rehan Derrick Fernando

The whole political world is in chaos with many political ideologies, which have in a way turned upside down the ordinary systems of people or rather obstructed people-building capacities. As I have discussed in one article published in a journal called Colombo Telegraph, it is the dominant world system that has harmed the conscientization of people in which peoples’ genuine socio-political capacities have been destroyed[1]. The etymological meaning of the word ‘governing’ is to have the right and the authority to control something such as a country or an institution [Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary]. It indicates that the power is either given or taken to control something or a group of people. The definition of the word ‘management’ on the other hand explicates it as an act or skill of dealing with people or institutions successfully. In other words, it implies and creates more space for people to exercise their conscientization more freely, because it is a skill that one has got but not a given or taken controlling power or authority. Wherefore, in this article, my research is to introduce the term political-management as a tool that could be the best paradigm to replace the term political-governing. 

Problem-posing governing structure

The primary harm in the system of political governing is dehumanization. When the power and authority are either given or taken through mere election campaigns, the phenomenon and philosophy of humanization are absolutely disrespected and harmed. The final outcome, therefore, is demonization, which is none other than stolen humanity[2]. Such a methodology can be considered as the distortion of the vocation of becoming more fully human. Within this so-called process of dehumanization, the oppressors create sub-oppressors. These sub-oppressors are the persons who create a reliable mechanism for their primary oppressors to continue to be in power. In countries such as Sri Lanka, Myanmar, India, China, Russia, and especially in North & South American countries; the ‘sub-oppressors’ structure for ‘false-generosity,’ in which they tend to do charitable works to get the attention of the public. Since people are more emotional due to poverty, it is quite unchallenging and undemanding for sub-oppressors to pave the way for their main oppressors.

One of the major crises of political governing is creating fear of freedom. Generally, freedom requires autonomy and responsibility. Freedom can never be situated outside of a person; it must first exist within; then exercising freedom outside happens automatically. However, a political governing structure is so selfish that it creates a ‘mythical freedom’ both internally and externally among people and forces people to follow the agenda of oppressors. Such a process does not allow people to struggle to transform human society, whereas, it primarily creates a prison-cave. Within the premises of the mythical freedom that any political governing makes does not allow people to work at critical discovery level. For instance, this is what precisely happened in the Vatican from 1978. After the death of Pope John Paul I, two conservative popes, both John Paul II [1978-2005] and Benedict XVI [2005-2013] maintained a rigorous dominant system, in which there was no freedom of thoughts in the church. What existed in the dealings of the church is none other than ‘fear of freedom.’

Solidarity is one essential component and aspect of any society. As Freire asserts “solidarity requires that one enter into the situation of those with whom one is solidarity; it is a radical gesture.”[3] Solidarity in other words is nothing but ‘being for other.’ Any corrupted political governing system will never allow people to work in solidarity. That is why some genuine revolutions in history were squashed and trampled down. It has in a way blocked the space reserved for a real confrontation of the realities both critically and analytically[4].

A power-oriented political governing is only concerned with the mere transition of authority and hierarchy, which sometimes comes as a result of forcefully-taken-wealth. It is quite clear when we consider the wealth of North America. Such a political governing setup lacks the praxis of commitment. Therefore, unveiling the forms of oppression is a mere process for such authorities. When there is the absence of the praxis of commitment, then there begins violence. Violence is initiated by those who oppress, exploit, and who fail to recognize other men and women as persons[5]. This is precisely the negation of humanity. Often people think that violence in history has been initiated by the oppressed, but a careful rereading about history reveals how the oppressors have made the first step in an option for the violence. African slavery in North America and the violation of their rights are classic instances.

Political governing methods, which come from the hands of oppressors will never allow a revolution to happen. A revolution is nothing but the conscientization of the oppressed. It also rejects mere dependence on the oppressors. To understand the essence of a revolution, any political system needs to recognize and realize the meaning of a true pedagogical action, which leads toward revolution. For an instance, during the white supremacy of Donald Triumph, he failed to understand the revolution began with the death of George Floyd. Floyd was killed though he continued to murmur for nine minutes saying “I can’t breathe.” Revolution began with those three words because it was a conscious murmur for life, but a president like Triumph whose head was swollen from power and wealth and with political governing supremacy did not pay single attention. That revolution continued until the penalty was given to the white policeman who killed Floyd and Joe Biden confirmed “no one above law.”

The political governing methodology also indicates a banking system. This is a clear fact in Asia’s party politics. The governing system deposits what the authorities want. It does not allow the public to transform and creatively apply their lives. Such a dominant system was obvious during the feudal era too. The church during the medieval period dominantly maintained a system in which the church took the upper hand deposited what the church wanted. Nobody was allowed to question the church’s procedure. It is precisely a banking structure, where we see many systematic errors. Such a governing body is nothing but a dictatorship. Concepts such as militarization and colonization are the results of any dictatorship.

Read More