Seminar on The Role of Youth in Civic Education

Organized by Nepal Foundation for Advanced Studies (NEFAS)

19 March 2007, Manthali

The year 2007 was therefore an opportune time for the Foundation to reach such areas. Not just because NEFAS has yet to make it to many parts of the country where civic education is being taught as part of the school curriculum, but, even more importantly, there was a compulsion from the uneasy situation in the Tarai plains as regular transport strikes were making it difficult hold any kind of function in the Foundation's customary seminar venues. Hence, the first site chosen by NEFAS for 2007 was Manthali, the district headquarters of Ramechchap. Participation was healthy and participants contributed their part in making the discussion lively. The only setback was the thinly distributed female participation prompting the few women who were there to comment on the unhealthy gender mix in a loud voice.

The seminar was chaired by Gunja B. Shrestha, a teacher at Mahendrodaya HSS, Manthali.

The discussion kicked off with NEFAS Executive Director Ananda Srestha introducing the organization and the theme of the discussion to the audience. He requested the participants to be forthcoming in their comments as they would form an important component in the publication that was being planned at a later date.

Shiva Raj Dahal made his presentation on The Role of Youth in Civic Education in the country where he tried to comparing the existing bleak scenario in the public sphere with the ideal Nepalese youth should be striving for. His thesis was this: Lack of political guidance was robbing the country of its vital youthful resources as many were either engaged in rebellion or going abroad seeking work. The muscle and brain drains could be reversed and their activities utilized for the nation if the youth can be inculcated with civic sense.

Dahal's presentation was followed by Prof Gunanidhi Sharma's comments which tended to look into the economic aspects of frustration among Nepalese youth and the need for political will to tackle the problem. The theme of his presentation was that only right policies can straighten out things and that until leaders realize that it is their public duty to accommodate all sections of the society within the state's gambit, change cannot be perceptible for all. Only civic education can bring this about, he said.

During the floor discussion, participants were obsessively involved in raising the issue of inclusiveness. Only several participants were aware of the specialized discussion that NEFAS was organizing, in spite of the introductory remarks by Ananda Srestha, the executive director of NEFAS. In fact, Director Srestha had to intervene in the discussions to bring it on track, but without much success. Nonetheless, they seemed to be quite aware about the need to employ the youth manpower for an overall development of the remote areas. Their suggestion was to have the older generation in public life give more room for the younger one to make their presence felt in every sector of life.

After the replies by the presenters, Chairperson of the seminar Gunja B. Shrestha remarked that such fruitful discussions were rarely ever organized in the town. He said that ways must be found out to bring the youth to the mainstream of development.

Chair: Gunja B. Shrestha, Coordinator, Mahendrodaya HSS, Manthali

Ananda Srestha's welcome address: Nepal Foundation for Advanced Studies is an academic organization set up in 1990 to initiate studies in various aspects of development studies and carry out research. Our seminars and research are mostly geared towards publication. Among the publications, 15 or 16 of them have been adopted by schools and colleges in their curricula.

We have already organized this discussion on civic education to over 40 different places. We had come to a conclusion, after a seminar in the 1990s, that without civic education democracy would be difficult to sustain. That is the rationale for these discussions. We have prepared a publication on this subject. A paper will be presented by Shiv Raj Dahal, which solicits comments from discussants which is expected act as feedback to the publication we have prepared on civic education. The feedback will be used for updating the book in its later editions.

Shivaraj Dahal's presentation

Gunanidhi Sharma's presentation
I have always felt that Ramechchap was a remote and backward district. The people emigrating to India for work from east Nepal have been mostly from Ramechchap, meaning that there is a lack of economic opportunities of this part of the country. Similar districts in the west are Baglung, Rukum and Pyuthan. My interaction with friends from this part have given me ideas about the absence of proper utilization of the available resources here. My being here has given me time to compare my ideas about the district and its reality.

In the past, we have revolted violently or otherwise. The rebellions prompted us to think about orienting state policies to make them poor-friendly. If this were not to happen, government structures would lose their stable foundation. This could lead to crisis. And, that is what we are facing right now.

Governance and policies have been biased towards the affluent sectors. We have colleagues who have been promoting market-friendly policies. In other words, they want to have the government limit its activities in the already-have sector. This has kept us entangled in our traditional mind-set rather than looking for social justice. Even the 1991 constitution talks about a welfare state as the objective of government policies. But instead of sticking to those constitutional provisions, we became stuck with World Bank and IMF agendas. This created a conflict in our country pushing us to the pits of the crisis we are in today.

The challenge is for us to come out of this with proper policies. We have the human resources, the natural resources. We can take the country to prosperity. But today's challenge is to manage the transition to that prosperity. The irony is that we are still stuck with a traditional mindset regarding government structures and a corrupt mindset among the people who we must depend on.

This means that we need to restructure the government institutions. There must be inclusiveness. Discrimination between regions must end. Discrimination between resources, whether human or natural, must end. Here, too, we face hurdles as the mindset is still traditional, especially regarding the government structures. The centralization of the development process must end. Inclusiveness, participation and justice in everything we do must be the cross-cutting guideline.

This means that we need to rely on the young, ones who have the capability of economic contribution. In that sense, the amount of young human resources we have is so huge that it shares 54 % of the total population. In spite of that, we have not been able to translate it into prosperity. Many of them have been emigrating for economic opportunities, and many of them took to rebellion.

The discriminating government policies have led many of us to believe that we need independence from state policies, even to the extent of seeking right to self determination. All this, in spite of the fact that we are all for national unity and one Nepal to move towards peace and prosperity, the ultimate goal.

But for economic prosperity, policies must be right, which makes politics the paramount factor in all this. This is where the role of the youth becomes important, as I already said before.

We need to be more geared towards coexistence and interdependence as that has been our nature as defined by Buddha.

FLOOR

Bichar Singh Tamang: The participation and inclusiveness that you talk of has not been translated into practice in this seminar. We have several local ethnic organizations but none of them has been invited here. It is not only government structures, but organizations like these have been exclusive. This is why we have discontent and dissension with the objective of right to self-determination. Over 70 per cent people are of ethnic origin. That is not reflected in the participation we are practicing.

Kailash Dhungel: I was involved in inviting people for NEFAS. I support Bicharji.

The role of the youth in a democracy has been defined by the paper but the reality it sees is terrible because of the disorientation of youth. You do not appear to have defined youth in spite of the fact that the UN has already done so. It could be because our politics has not been defined properly.

You show the problems prevalent among youths, we appear to be directionless today, thus pushing people towards various directions. Hence, I think you should add a page dedicated to provide a self-reliant economic role to promote and protect democracy in the country. For example, we do not know how to mobilize the youth in Ramechchap to make them more economically active. We do not have the requisite economic programmes in a democratic framework. I do not know what that entails, but that has become a necessity.

Look, we are involved in teaching, but my whole life we have been running on these hills, mountains and villages and my generation was lost shouting political slogans. We do not know what the economic programme should be like. That needs to be defined by the paper.

Thirdly, you talk of education in a democracy. But let me tell you that without economic programmes, none of this matters. The rebellion was the result of this anomaly- that we did not give them economic means for self reliance. No matter which party or whoever talks about political education, only economic means can give it meaning.

Please do not let this seminar be just a function to serve your record, but please make it meaningful. Also, the paper is too long. It should have been shorter. You should have distributed the paper beforehand for us to be able to make meaningful comments.

China Karki: You talk of women's representation and vouch for equal participation. But your list of invitees has not reflected that. If you had contacted us we could have helped you to have 50 per cent women's participation. Please do not repeat the mistake.

Devi Khadka: Indeed, women in Ramechchap have been facing difficulties. I do not know why you face the difficulty of achieving that participation level. See, 33 per cent participation has already become a policy norm. Or, may be you are not serious enough until you hear sloganeering.

Sitaram Acharya: You talk of providing skills to the youth. Please define more skills, not just for economic opportunity, but for making the ideal youth that you want.

Laxman Ghimire: I think all citizens must be able to experience justice, no matter where. Only then people seek peace. Economic security, equal access to government structures and services and democracy give them peace. Peace is not just abandoning guns. The politics of the day appears to be forgetting those seeking justice even today.

The minority groups seeking representation may not achieve their goals through today's demands for separate ethnic right to self determination. Because their population share and the statistics do not show that they will be the majority in their own regions, in the so-called autonomous provinces. This make me suspect that these illiterate people are being exploited with these slogans for selfish ends.

Tanka Prasad Dahal: What are the areas of self-employment available to our youth? Please list them. This, because we appear to be preparing them only for government bureaucracy with the current education that we have.

The problem today is that we are following the same discriminating political parties to move ahead with regional and ethnic protests. We see that the agitating forces have in them people from political parties. On the one hand you rule in the name of parties and on then other protest in the name of ethnic groups. This is pushing the nation towards disintegration.

Shiva Karki: I think the shape of the various political streams that we see today will all be finalized after the constituent assembly elections.

I hear in this discussion slogans regarding the right to self-determination. But we also heard arguments about self governance. It is only women who are not talking of autonomous governance. Otherwise, all the groups and sub-groups have been calling for self-rule in some form or the other. I have said that only the constituent assembly election will finalize these issues. But the irony is that our leadership still depends on directives and orders in spite of our slogans for democracy.

Please find a way to advise the leadership on shunning the traditional mindset. The economists must be making suggestions until the ideas can be incorporated in state documents like the constitution.

Dev Shanker Poudel: Our older generation has a lot of energy and they keep working until they are 90. We do have a lot of youth. They have not been able to contribute much. Yes, we do have corrupt people, but not to that extent.

We hardly produce enough to become self-reliant. We are involved in killing people and buying guns. We have Buddhists talking of killing people for justice. This is rebellion because of economic frustration. The irony is that people in some developed countries who do not produce anything are enjoying a life of prosperity. We live in the poor Third World and live in poverty, even if we are engaged in economic production.

Pawan Raj Dahal: Today's need is to educate the youth. But the older generation leading the country has not been working in that direction. They have been forced to carry bags or guns and fight for their older generation. They have not been given the opportunity to produce. May be, we should be educating the older generation about civic education before focusing on the youth.

Khim Singh Dhami: We rarely have specialized discussions in this part of the country where everyone talks about everyone else. But this appears to be a different organization. I think people here do not know what NEFAS is doing. We are habituated with short papers and are not acquainted with NEFAS' publication. Or, maybe, you do not publish much in Nepali.

I think you must define social inclusiveness while arguing for it. We see the society moving towards racial conflict. Why is this happening? I think we need to enlighten them with examples from elsewhere. We know that social diversity has produced a lot of good results, but we appear to be moving towards the wrong direction.

If you could mention ideas and programmes to reduce racial discrimination and increase justice, it would be good.

The government has been allocating government resources the wrong way. Such bias does create conflict. We talk of a new Nepal, but the homework is missing. What NEFAS can do is to chart out such guidelines where we can find answers to these questions. Such publications would be wonderful.

Kesav Devkota: I think these programmes should be taken to the villages, rather than in urban hubs where people are already fed up of seminars.

Shivaraj Dahal's reply

Many of the comments have been complementary to what I have been trying to say. I will include the suggestions in the paper later on.

Many of the issues that you raised will be included in the paper.

The discussion is related with seeking feedback for our book. Ramechchap appears to have just abandoned the subject in their schools. But the book is still being updated for others to use. These interactions have taken the book to its third edition. We would like all the political parties and policy makers to come out with their education policies and find the common grounds for us to be able to teach the young generation.

I agree that we are making our youths more militant. We want them to be taught to be tolerant of others' views.

Civic education is a socialization process. Youth it takes place in the family, the school, the society and the media .

I agree that for patriotism we need to have a strong economic foundation. But none of the political parties appear concerned with issues of nationalism. Borders are being encroached upon and none of the parties raise their voice at the parliament.

We know that nothing is stable in Nepal. Look at the interim constitution. Who did it satisfy? The main issue is to have proper political leadership. Otherwise, economic programmes will not help. Even the existing production facilities are sold away if we do not have proper politics.

Gunanidhi Sharma: These programmes and interactions embolden us further as it enforces our beliefs and the ideas that we project. We have faced opposition to our ideas as well. Our theories about economic programmes were opposed by some quarters citing globalization and global trends. We were telling them to remain aloof from foreign influence in matters relating to self reliance. Instead of creating the hunger of development in people, we became reliant on outside resources for development, as if that was the only problem. We do have a lot of unexploited resources, and still not able to carry out the development we need. The hunger for development does not exist and that is the main problem.

Ananda Srestha: Ours is an academic organization. We are therefore bound by our own objectives and not able to make it as widely participatory as possible. We are seeking feedback mainly from teachers. The limitations are real. Still, the feedback we received today has been fruitful for us.

Chairperson's remarks

Today's presentation has been fruitful for us as such programmes are rarely organized in Ramechchap Our discussions have not been very effective in the past.

Our education must be able to engage our youths after they graduate. The trend is just the opposite today as the youth become idle after their education.
Let me end the discussion here.

Shivaraj's vote of thanks.