Have Your Say

Is the simultaneous spread of democracy and rise in identity-based violent conflicts a historical accident? Or are they causally interconnected? Some may see democratization as a major cause or at the very least precipitant of political violence, holding that the opening of democratic space throws up many groups pulling in different directions, that it causes demand overload, systematic break down and even violent conflict. By helping politicize non negotiable identity terms, democracy can contribute to political polarization and ultimately violence. Governments may not respond to the demands of excluded groups, or may fail to protect citizens from violence, because they have pledges to special interests groups. Political processes in democratic governance should provide tools as well as wisdom and space for different groups to change the thinking of people in the governments at senior policy making levels. Nonetheless, to complain you are marginalized is one thing, but come up with proposals of how you want to help yourself and flourish your identity is something else.

Think tanks, universities, research and creative institutions have a job to educate power players and ultimately change and create different roles for wide range of players in the society. Epistemic communities essentially shaping how decision makers think about what is natural or normal and consequently highlighting these traces in social behavior. Lobbying, persuasion and enthusiasm have become effective ways to win the minds of decision makers. Lobbying has been used as a strategic process of convincing those in the corridors of power to make decisions or to exert their influence in favour of an advocacy cause. It is a rational process of making a convincing argument, using information and knowledge. It is about initiatives to lobby power, particularly where there is lack of real strong alternatives with the capacity to lobby meticulously. Therefore both in terms of ideas and decisions it is much more contested than it was five years ago due to all sorts of movements and organizations getting better tooled up. An unprecedented interconnected global system comprising of so many global institutions with unclear accountabilities, ethos, agendas have prepared the ground for such democratic tools to function so powerfully.

The real bargaining power of lobbyist comes from people, the public as well as the process of networking. The ideas exist that lobbyists should be grounded in real life experience and have an organic relationship with grassroots movements and the credibility and legitimacy that comes from that relationship. However, the balance of decision making power lies with political or managerial creatures. It is crucial to identify all those who have power and influence to make change happen. Politicians, and parties (elected, appointed, etc.) in formal government businesses and business associations, faith groups, workers groups and trade union, consumer groups, media, NGOs and other civil groups including think tanks, and anyone else.

Increasingly, the very mechanisms by which motions or counter motions can be triggered are cumbersome and slow since authorities are far too busy to get involved at any greater frequency. To achieve necessary influences, it is wise not to send something into the minister who has hundred things to worry about. The art of influencing government is often recognizing the multiple levels at which power is held. And often quite a junior official may be the key person to influence, the key person who will be eternally grateful if you make his or her job easier by giving them insights and ideas. And the standard flaw, as it is shared by businesses, which spend huge amounts of money lobbying government, but academics do the same –is always to approach to high up the hierarchy and actually power is not all concentrated at the top of many hierarchies, as anyone who knows organizations, knows the importance of informal power structures. So directing things at many different levels, and then in some ways it is practical to respond to where, there turns out to be necessary enthusiasm and energy and go with that, even if it is at quite surprising places. People and public outside of government might not have a feel for the sheer pressure of business and time. This is why summary, brief and efficient request and clarity is so important. So if there are any ways that one can cultivate brief and to the point remarks that would be very valuable for an idea to win its way through the mind of decision makers.

In addition, it is important to ensure that visions of development, relationships and techniques are all governed by essential principles, compatible with increase of democratic space, that is to give more human dimension to wants and needs.