Civic Education for the Youth

Seminar organized by Nepal Foundation for Advanced Studies

31 May 2005, Butwal

During the floor discussions participants appeared to hesitate initially as to the purpose of the discussions as the presentations were focused on how to prepare the youth to strengthen democracy in the country. This gave an impression to some of the participants that the seminar was being held to suit particular political forces. But once, they understood that it was just a part of a long series of discussions on strengthening democracy in the country, which in fact, began in the nineties they openly began contributing their part to the discussions. The seminar was chaired by Dilli Raj Acharya, Registrar at the Butwal Appellate Court.

Welcoming the participants during the brief introductory remarks Prof. Ananda Shrestha said: Our objective is not concerned with linking the youth to partisan politics, it is their own choice that they have to make. However, we would like them to be politically conscious. "This is the main goal of the seminar", he said. Prof. Gunanidhi Sharma provided the economic background of the Nepalese society pushing the Nepalese youth away from working to meet national needs. From the state's point of view this is a huge waste of resources, he said. The problems can be resolved by orientating the youth in that direction with proper policy so that the resource can be harnessed for the benefit of the country.

The professor was followed by the main presentation of the seminar by Shiv Raj Dahal

POINTS FROM COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR

• The sentences in the writing are long making it difficult to be comprehensible at times. It also appears to be critical of the political leadership. There is no difference among the youths of the various sectors generalizing the problems and issues rather than treating them separately. Also, the reason for out-migration appears to be generalized in one sweep rather than differentiating between reasons for doing so.
• The role of the youth needs to be defined in the paper more clearly.
• Page 3 talks about corruption as a historical development. Please delete such assertions. If we impart such negative points while educating them, it could have a negative impact.
• On Page 9, there is talk of brain drain. We stay in the country as long as we do not get jobs in another country waiting for that to happen. We leave as soon as we get jobs. This appears to be pushing us towards being a country of labourers. We need to stop this trend.
• Page 10 talks about causes of depoliticization of the youth. Please also add a point you have already made elsewhere-- i.e. the qualification to be a politician. Education qualification for electoral candidates could force the youth to join politics as it would bring in quality personalities.
• The paper is biased towards sociological aspects. Please add the educational component as well. The curriculum must be clear on how civic education is taught. Other countries generally have eight components among which we may need to choose according to our needs. Also talk about the implemention aspect.
• The paper talks about the negative aspects of the past 12 years. If this is going to be part of the curriculum, it should also include the positive aspects.
• If 54 per cent of the population are youth in the productive age group, what is the percentage of the productive population that is actually being used?
• You talk of nationalism and ultranationalism. Would you further elaborate the concept of ultranationalism regarding Nepal. Change the ultranationalism terminology as the conclusion itself ends with nationalistic objectives. It is hard toi subscribe to the ultra view as not even nationalism has been practiced by the citizens. Ultra may come at a later stage.
• You should also talk about the topic of civic education itself.
• Please refrain from comments like "youthfulness is a state of mind". You need to spell out the actual age-group that belong to the group rather than trying to make the older generation happy by including within the youth bracket as well.
• Your contention or purport that it is the intellectual youth that have taken up arms is arguable.
• If our morals are proper, the nation will not have to suffer.
• You seek perfection in the freedom of expression, but we still hesitate to express. Why? What are the causes?
• You say that it is the youth who should take the initiative for a better tomorrow. Are you suggesting that they organize themselves in some other country?
• You talk of the civil society. What kind of civil society are you talking of- those that praise the King or the Maoists?
• The paper deals with more political issues than cultural or economic. But there too you have the problem of participation by youth. You are also talking of press solidarity. What kind?
• The youth is living through difficult times. You talk of the youth facing away from politics which is robbing the parties of capable manpower leading to the rule of the parties and the country by incapable people. This is a political issue. It is understandable. In fact, everything about character building begins at home, the family. This too needs to be stressed.

Reply by author
The objective of the seminar is to strengthen democracy. We need a well practiced democracy. Most of the sectoral queries you made have been included as separate chapters in the final book that is going to come out.

I will have to talk about how to prevent the country being one of labourers. I will do that as soon as possible.

Regarding the negative aspects of leadership, how will we correct them if we do not discuss them?

Ultranationalism is that which only talks of nationalism but does nothing to act to improve the situation. That is my view.

Freedom of expression is possible in a democracy. For that we need to develop the democratic culture.

Gunanidhi Sharma's reply
If we can utilize the youth manpower as a resource, there is no doubt that we can come out as a prominent nation in the world map. We have the resources, the manpower and everything else needed for that. It is only the governance part that we have not been able to execute properly.

The 50 per cent of the active population are semi-employed-- ie 6.2 million youth. If these semi-employed are also considered employed, 400,000 are left unemployed. Add the 6.2 million to that and you get 6.7 million that we can still employ productively. Only 5 per cent of the workers are included by the industrial sector. We should do better. But the government policy has been to create a market for foreigners. We import about 80 billion rupee worth of goods. Such is the size of the market. Of that about 40 billion rupees goes to fill in the resulting trade deficit.

Our saving is only 12 per cent of the GDP of which the 40 billion is spent on the deficit arising out of the imports. About 70 billion goes to repay foreign loans. Now where do we have the resources for investment? This leads us to seek foreign aid allowing foreigners to impose conditions like creating a market for their goods. This does not help us compete in the world market.

When our traditional technology got outdated the manpower had to be replaced. This has led to the out-migration for employment. Naturally, this will increase poverty. The poverty alleviation figures of today are based on consumption patterns, not on productivity increment. Hence, the poverty data are hardly of any help. Productivity growth can happen only in a growing economy. The net growth per capita GNP is only 1 per cent [if we subtract the population growth rate with economic growth rate]. Please understand the data in a proper perspective. It is also known that the sampling that took place for the poverty alleviation data, was not done from among the poor population. This is not fair.

Ananda Srestha: We plan to publish the book and how it is used is beyond our means. Our limitations are that we are an academic group and we can do only so much. The implementers are elsewhere.

Chairperson's remarks
Professor Gunanidhi Sharma brought out the bitter truth about census taking. This shows that the sectors that people are involved in are all being managed improperly and corrections are needed everywhere.

The paper should have been titled 'The political role of the youth in civic education" as it initially confused us in the discussions. It appears that other aspects are being discussed everywhere.

Please replace the 'jungli' term with 'underground'. Also add the positive aspects as well to give a good balance to the paper.