In a liberal democracy, the focus is more on freedom than equality. Social democracy, on the other hand, seeks to create a level playing field by eliminating all forms of exclusions and inequalities through extensive participation at all levels of decision-making. Its ideas and norms have been debated for hundreds of years in line with human aspiration for justice and realistic economic policies.

Democracy is not just an institution to hold regular free elections but a process of collective reasoning that brings diverse viewpoints, social perspectives and voices into policy debates. Regulation of the economy for the interest of society as a whole rather than individuals is at the heart of social democracy. There are two reasons why social democracy is the best route towards gender equality. First, without compromising freedom it enables citizens to exercise their social, economic and cultural rights. Secondly, many liberal conceptions of democracy that restrict government interests in the supposedly private areas—domestic violence, suicide, child abuse, witchcraft, stigma of widowhood—are open to state laws.

The basic values of social democracy are freedom, social justice and solidarity where women and men can think, act and perform equally.

Solution of social question

“We have to draw up a programme which is not exclusively socialist but also democratic. Otherwise, we cannot claim the name of Social Democrats and think about a solution of the Social question,” says August Bebel, cofounder of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) of Germany and its active leader for over 40 years.

In line with the above saying, Nepali Congress has recently revitalised its manifesto and has adopted social democratic approach. Now Nepal needs to do the same. The country’s unique political and socio-economic scenario demands a political ideology based on social justice. When it comes to gender issues, the focus of social democracy on positive discrimination for women in societies like ours where women generally live harder lives as compared to men makes it uniquely suitable for Nepal. It takes into account the fact that women working in such societies have to balance work and family. Family and work are both important institutions of democracy and social democracy rightly gives them due attention. Above all, social democracy believes on the need to take family and work together. These social issues need to be considered seriously.

Another key aspect of social democracy is women’s freedom, which, it argues, should be comparable to men’s. It seeks to create an atmosphere where both men and women have an opportunity to enjoy their rights and freedoms. If more women are involved in the decision making positions, it speculates, stronger roots for nationalism can be laid. In Nepal, the division of labour according to gender is the main reason why Nepali women have been reduced to living their lives inside the confines of their homes rather than participating in the great tasks of nation building.  To level the playing field, it is important that gender rights be linked with constitutional and human rights.

The idea is that when women’s responsibilities begin to shift outside the home, men will have to cooperate with them in the private affairs in order to create a balanced society.  They have to remove conservative biases regarding strict gender roles.

Conclusion

As examples in other developing countries show, capitalism produces injustice in the society; while the effects of totalitarianism are also negative. Therefore the concept of social democracy, which posits that political power is essential to remove inequality, fits our society perfectly.

In a democracy, citizens are real sovereigns. Each individual has the right to decide what polices they consider the best to maintain their liberty, dignity and identity. They have an interest in being active citizens, because they have the power to shape the policy decisions that affect them.

What is becoming increasingly clear is that the majority of Nepalis want to live in a welfare state. The advocacy of a welfare state is clear sign that inequality can only be bridged through policy arguments in which the entire society takes an active part. This means, in the current context, social democracy is the best way to give Nepali citizens, especially women, equal rights to decide what they consider their best interests.

Samira Paudel
The author is associated with Friedrich Ebert Foundation, which works in areas of democracy, trade union, media and gender

by Ivan A Hadar

According to government official data, the Jakarta groundwater condition now is very severe. It is estimated, that in the next 15 years, Jakarta will have a water crisis if there is no breakthrough to handle the issue.

The industrial area in West Jakarta has already entered a very critical point today. It is recommended the central government immediately conserve the ground water areas in Jakarta, West Java, and Banten in order to improve the ground water basin areas of Jakarta. (Tempo.interaktif , Feb. 3, 2010)
This June, on Jakarta’s 483rd anniversary, the clean water issue remains an unsolved problem.

Although it has been privatized by allowing the foreign partner of the Regional Water Company (PDAM Jaya), a clean water supply to residents is often clogged, and sometimes completely freezes.

Ironically, Jakarta is a very rich water resource area. There are many large rivers here. As a low land area, groundwater can be obtained without the need to dig too deep.

Beside, Java’s water reserves, in fact, are not greatly used by residences. However, the rivers are heavily polluted.

Water needed for Jakarta mainly comes from two sources, namely rivers and wells. Although the total population is numbered “fantastic”, from a quantitative aspect, water availability in Jakarta should not be a problem.

But exploitation of ground water by large buildings induced severe consequences with a serious  decline in ground water levels. Additionally, there is a 15 kilometer distance to infiltrate seawater to downtown.

According to some studies, the number of city dwellers who have access to clean water, is only about 6-15 percent.

Unless the city government makes drastic policies, pollution from industrial waste will increase fivefold by 2020. A large amount of pollution is also caused by the wastewater tertiary sector, particularly household waste.

Every day, tons of garbage washed into the river makes it a “paradise” for many kinds of bacteria. The collie bacterial content is a thousand times beyond the level prescribed by the World Health Organization (WHO).

Moreover, this content also breaks into ground water and is ready to become a time bomb.

Of all Jakarta residents, only less than 15 percent have access to water taps in their homes.

Meanwhile, a quarter of the people in Jakarta purchase bottled water or from sellers of channel water in residential areas.

The rest obtain it by using artesian well water. Because of weak law enforcement, many factories and industries do not comply with regulations on the use of filters and clarification plants to clean up toxic waste. It is usually dumped into rivers and the sea in the Greater Jakarta area.

Waste water cleaning technology, in fact, has been developed from domestic or foreign countries at a relatively affordable price.

Inevitably, water as a public good, should be provided by the government for the population, including through subsidies for people living in poverty.

Therefore, the tendency to make water a commodity of the free market as applied in Indonesia today, should be scrutinized, because usually only minority will benefit.

The demands of  the People’s Coalition for the Right to Water to allow the government to take control of water management in Jakarta, no longer leaving it to the private sector, is worthy of consideratio (www.kruha.org). Hopefully.

(Source of photo above: The Internet)

The writer is the city planner and executive director of the Indonesian Institute for Democracy in Education, and co-chief editor of the Journal of Social Democracy.

In her visit to Indonesia, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Indonesia was not only the most populous Muslim country in the world, but also had been able to prove that democracy, Islam and modernity could exist in parallel. At a news conference after a bilateral meeting, Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayudha strengthened Clinton’s statement when he said that, because of the country’s active role in pushing intercivilization, religious and cultural dialogue, Indonesia would be a good partner for the United States in reaching out to the Muslim world.

Despite terrorists bombings, the basic landscape in the country is viewed as moderate and democratic. Truthfully, the view that civilian sovereignty is incompatible with Islam and that democracy is somehow un-Islamic is neither popular nor accepted in Indonesia.

Indeed, the idea that democracy is un-Islamic is unpopular in the Muslim world in general. European expansion to the Middle East, as “the center of the Islamic world,” in the early 19th century was welcomed enthusiastically, mainly because it also carried hope of release from the “grasp” of Osmanian rule. Many laid hope in the principles of freedom, equality and kinship in deciding the formation of the nation state. But hopes quickly faded, because the basic principles of the French Revolution were not carried over to the colonies.

To legitimize discrimination and conquest, Western colonial governments needed ideological justification. Edward Said brilliantly expressed this matter in his book, “Orientalism,” saying the West uses assumptions about the Oriental economy and culture as a tool for discrimination and political control.

To read more, click here.

Invited guests were able to view the 32 panels which chronicle the history of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) of Germany, from its inception in mid-19th century, until the formulation of its most recent programme in Hamburg in 2007. The launch was even made special with the presence of two distinguished guests, Mr. Wolf Preuss and Prof. RAndy David, who gave their reflections on the realities and potentials of membership-based and program–based political parties both in Germany and the Philippines. An open discussion followed, which was moderated by renowned columnist and TV host Manuel Quezon III.

To learn more about the exhibit visit

http://freedomsocialjustice.wordpress.com/