Sanjay Prasad Paudel
In my recent post I have coined first time the term ‘ Black Hole Structure of Social Gravity’. The Black Hole Social Gravity always plays a vital role in the development of model of society and power exercise. To elaborate it more comprehensively, I withdraw the reference from Darwinian terminology ‘ the survival of the fittest’.
In On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection the origin of the species Darwin mentions that there are struggles among the species to survive themselves. Similarly, in the jungle of social theory and power only fittest power survives in any model of society. This is coincidently happens. Or, we can tell this social function the language of society. In other words ‘ rule of not to be exact rule ‘ fixes the way. To explain it more, in my opinion, Marx is true that there are conflict in society. But while describing the source of power, I draw the reference from Max Webber. According to him, there are three types of social power.
They are: a) Traditional b) Charismatic and c) rational legal power. In my opinion, there is always conflict among them. And sometimes, unimaginably, there is a little bit practice to rule a society with mixture of them. For example, in India people find Modi a constitutional based model of power. In contrast, he practices the both the combination of traditional Hindu and charismatic power. In United States, the Widen government practiced the rational legal source of power. K P Oli practiced the both two third majority of legitimate and charismatic power. Later, he wanted traditional model of power to impress the government and society. Weber did not imagine the practice of any two and all source of power at a time. In the political and social structure of gravity, I think, that no one can declare the other source of power, described by Weber, will not emerge out in Nepalese context. This is the very critical question. In Nepalese politics, there are still reactionaries waiting for charismatic and traditional power.
Now I am going to describe about restraint. In the world system model of society, there is hierarchy of semi-periphery, periphery and core country. And, we find conflict among them. For example, in the Nepalese model of federalism, there is conflict among centre, province and local level government. Similarly, there is conflict too in the socialist model of government. We can also find these elements of world system model in the model of socialist structure either in government body or in bureaucracy. In other words, there are social gravity of functional black hole that not only swallows down the principal power but the black hole unwillingly vomits the socially unwanted power model. In Hawking’s black hole theory,the gravity of blackhole not only swallows down the stars but also vomits out them. Therefore, I coin the terminology the social gravity of the black hole social structure.
The Socio Political And Socio Economic Enlightenment Of A Country
Like in every individual there is hierarchy of enlightenment of a country. Every country can enjoy and feel the enlightenment of some kind. Some can enjoy a little, other can much and the another more. The European countries enjoy the such kind of socio political and socio economic enlightenment in abundance. Similarly, the United states enjoy the eco-political enlightenment. The constitution of Nepal, 2015 declares the and so called socio political and socio economic enlightenment. Like a Buddhist monk who takes a long time by practicing meditation and eight-fold path to get enlightenment, such countries takes time to get their socio political and socio economic enlightenment. But in the crisis of legitimate power no country can head toward the socio political and socio economic enlightenment. Nepal is heading to the crisis of ruling power and there is much chance to be emerging out charismatic and traditional source of power. Athough charismatic and traditional source of power do not stay permanent and thus stay unstable. In the short span of time the power holder will die. Or, possibly he or she may change his or her mind in response to the people. (In Nepalese context King Mahendra and in Indian context Indira Gandhi were supposed to be the charismatic source of power when Mahendra kidnapped democracy and Gandhi imposed over insurgency in India around 70s.)
What will happen next when Oli dissolves the parliament of two third majority. What will be the two third of rational – legal power of majority for the benefit of people?
