Religion in Politics (for Drukpa Magazine Dec issue)

Religion in Politics

For a country where everything is steeped in religion – radio airwaves blessed by monks, conferences opened with chipdrel ceremonies, office buildings consecrated et al, Bhutan may be the only country in the world today, that has taken the separation of religion and politics very seriously.

This wisdom to have a secular government (separation of Church and State) is nothing new for us but something that existed from the time Monarchy was born in 1907.  Come to think of it, it was not only a bold and assertive move but one of the smartest and most forward thinking decisions ever made given how “behind” people consider Bhutan in terms of opening up to the world. It only goes to show that Bhutan is/was in fact many ways ahead than even some of the most advanced countries in the world.

And today, while we see many governments struggling and regressing because of religious influence, it is amazing that Bhutan has taken a very strict stance by not allowing monks and people registered with religious organizations from voting, when we became a Democracy.

While this issue can be debated – after all it is a fundamental right for people, even if they are monks, to vote – there appears to be more pros than cons, from such a decision.

This issue of religion in politics is intriguing because even though we are in the 21^st Century, religious interference and influence has the ability to stall and restrict progress based on “beliefs”. And this is evident given how countries even as advanced as the U.S still struggle with political decisions influenced by religion and religious institutions not only within their boundaries but overseas as well.

Khuru unintentionally giving rise to Bhutan's first Feminist Movement?

• About 
• Get Involved
 
• Press
 
• Contact
 
• Donate
 
• Subscribe

Global Voices is an international community of bloggers who report on blogs and citizen media from around the world. Learn why »

• Search
• Countries
• Topics
• Contributors

Bhutan: Khuru And The Rise Of Feminist Movements

Posted 20 November 2010 Edit

Written bySonam Ongmo

Countries	Bhutan
Topics	Arts & Culture, Gender, Sport
Languages	English

Khuru, Bhutanese dart game. Image By Flickr user Michael Foley Photography. CC BY-NC-ND

Bhutanese women may have, unintentionally, created the stirrings of their first feminist movement of sorts when they recently started to encroach upon a traditionally male dominated sport Khuru (game of darts).

In a matriarchal society like Bhutan's women have, generally speaking, had it pretty good. They live the way they want, dress as they please, and do the things they want, meeting little resistance from society. They have equal opportunity in education and employment, and work side by side with men in the fields, as well as in offices. After all there has always been a cultural perception that girls/daughters are the better caretakers of aging parents and families, hence a preference for girls over boys right from birth. That may be why traditional inheritance laws too were in favor of women.

But the question of how much freedom and the limitations to what women can and cannot do; what is appropriate and inappropriate, because of Khuru is now being debated widely over the internet as well as in living rooms.

What is interesting is that this need to test boundaries was not a deliberate movement by educated women. Instead it started off with village/semi-literate women who were simply interested in playing the sport, but with media attention soon became something more.

Women in Bhutan practice Olympic style archery, play basketball, soccer, cricket, billiards (while hanging out at bars) and other games. But traditional sports has, until now, remained restricted to men. When women encroached on it recently, it seemed to unleash the chauvinism not unfamiliar to women all over the world.

On the Kuzu-Bhutan weblog “Simpleton” started the thread titled “Of women and the game of Khuru”

Khuru is unbecoming for ladies. Their dress, referring to kira, is restrictive of free movements…..Tradition has to be respected, not on the basis of the notion that men have fears of losing this out to women but its sanctity must be preserved…

Bhutanese women in colorful Kira line up for tsechu festival. Image by Flickr user Andreakw. CC BY-NC-ND

“wow” responded :

I am a man, but I have no problem with women playing khuru. It is up to them. If they like to play it, let them play. Who would have thought 15 yrs ago that we would have women taxi drivers now? The same with khuru….soon we would have women playing archery too at the archery range in Changlingmi thang archery range… Everything changes, the old gives way to the new…

To which “Pangtsi Dorma” said:

its really disgusting to see women play khuru. i immediately turn off the tv if the game is telecasted.

and “Twitter” added:

In many ways I am a staunch supporter of women's empowerment and rights. But this khuru thing totally turns me off — I don't know why, but I can't stand it. They look like women in WWF!

On another forum some like “kjel” called it a bad omen for women to be playing Khuru.

[playing Khuru] is a very bad omen. That is why we have so many earthquakes, storms, landslides, fire, heavy rain, alcholism, druggism and rappisium.

And on Bhutantimes.com “ravin” said referring to the dance by players after a hit:

It is quite embarrassing to see women in Kira playing Khuru and dancing Dacham like men.

And WangDugaY thinking he was being funny, rather than insulting said:

Hope our female monkeys will hold their skirts down properly in future while dancing WaHa WaHa, raising one of their legs high up in the sky.

on the Kuenselonline forum aZaRia countered this view:

Women playing khuru is just an excuse for the men to go on a tirade, belittling and accusing them of destroying the tradition and culture of our country….One of the pillars of GNH is the preservation and promotion of culture. However, I do not recall it being…at the exclusion of WOMEN! Women are equal citizens of this country (but I believe it is not so in practice as it is quite obvious on this forum that men think themselves superior to women)…Bhutan is a Buddhist country but at the rate the men on this forum are going on, you are mutating the form of Buddhist philosophy…. Please do not become a bigoted and sexist lot!…We live in the 21st century… Why let superstitions rule our lives? You men are using superstition to continue subjugating women.

But Kinden cautioned blaming men only:

hi aZaRIA,… If you interview, 90 percent of women will be against women playing khuru. I bet.

And he could nearly be right given that women like “Kuenza” had this to say on her blog:

While I am a woman who wants to see women come up, I think sometime, there are also things that we must understand are under men's domain…We do not have to prove our might or capability by attempting to do everything that they do.

To which “NoonaChoni” a 23 year old woman said:

I study away from home and I tell people that my National sports is archery. I am proud of Bhutan and everything I say about Bhutan brings me pride. However, when people ask me if I have played archery is when I drop my head. I am ASHAMED of the fact that I, as a Bhutanese woman, have not received the opportunity to play archery.

Meanwhile Cho, reflected on being a woman in Bhutan on the Writers Association of Bhutan blog

I have always thought that the place I grew up in was never sexist. I loved where my society placed me as a woman until recently….Today, women have risen up from the ground they have been pinned. This movement of finding the rightful place of women in our society is what I define as feminism.

I know there are respectable men out there who share similar ideas with me, which is why feminism is not just a woman’s problem.

And respectable men there might just be.

Rikku Dhan Subba, a male civil servant said blog :

… the author too superstitious?… A misogynistic view, I must say.

And Tshering Tobgay said this on his blog:

But they [Khuru players] are challenging convention … something we pride in our women.

By Sonam Ongmo · Posted 20 November 2010

Happy Birthday K4!

Last year I accompanied my 9-year-old son's grade on a field trip to Frances Tavern – a drinking house and Inn from the 1700's located at the tip of Manhattan. No, we weren’t going drinking – the Tavern is now a museum, having been a favorite haunt of George Washington and the “sons of the revolution.” 

It was through his leadership role at the Tavern, where much of the secret meetings for the American revolution took place, that George Washington went on to become America's first democratically elected President. 

At one point the guide stopped in the hallway to tell the fourth-graders about George Washington. “He was the greatest leader of the revolution, but after they won, people wanted him to become the president of America, but he said ‘No’.  He said that he had done his share for the cause and that he now wanted to step back and retire,” said the guide. 

“Do you know any other leader in the world who would say this?”  He asked this rhetorical question of the kids, who looked at him rather solemnly (they wouldn’t know).

I was the only adult apart from the teacher and coincidentally I did happen to know someone, so my hand immediately went up. I wanted to shout Me, Me, Me! But my son looked rather embarrassed as the guide ignored me, so my hand came down. I was hoping the guide would give me a chance to answer (seriously), but he wasn’t interested because if he did, I would ruin the point he was making, so he went on about the Tavern and Washington.

I may have lost the opportunity then, but I have my blog now to tell whosoever is interested in what I wanted to say at that time – and more.

HH Dalai Lama one of the leading Buddhist figures talks on death and proselytizing

I thought since we are on the topic of Religion I would share this video/talk by HH Dalai Lama, one of the leading international Buddhist figures. He talks about various Buddhist approaches to life and dying but also emphasizes secular ethics - given how skeptical people have become over religion - and touches briefly towards the end on importance of religious missionary groups and his disapproval of their methods to convert different cultures/religious backgrounds through monetary rewards. This is what is happening in Bhutan and it cannot be denied.

I wonder if paying someone to convert does classify as coercion (because in the constitution that is not allowed). I support that it should be grounds for penalization if they are found to be doing that.

Making Muslim Democracies: How Religious Ideas Enter Politics - Boston Review

This article from the Boston Review gives good background of religion and politics. It also goes to show that throughout history how religion influenced politics and governments - although it doesn't shed much light on present day influences. It rambles on a little too much but it should give you a sense. The article also points out how over time Christian principles were incorporated into the Democracy and these ideas became accepted over time.


Here is an excerpt:
And as with Muslims today, Catholic citizens were suspected of maintaining transnational ties and ultimate loyalties to spiritual institutions elsewhere—a suspicion that still mattered in John F. Kennedy’s election campaigns.

Yet during the second half of the twentieth century, Christian—which mainly meant Catholic—Democratic parties emerged and flourished in Western Europe and, to a lesser extent, Latin America. These were—and in some degree remain—moderately religious parties. They advance political programs infused with select doctrinal values while firmly upholding democratic structures and respecting the separation of state and church.

Should monks/religious people in Bhutan be allowed to vote or not?

Huffington Post ran this story and Bhutan Observer had this to say indicating that the Opposition Leader wants some answers because the Prime Minister of Bhutan is now President of the Mahabodhi society, a powerful religious/Buddhist organization. I am curious as to what our people think.

I think that while the number of voters from the religious/monk body may amount to 10 percent or 2,277, as reported by BO, it is a wise decision that Bhutan has, till now, kept religion and politics as 2 separate issues. 

Before I begin to justify why it would be dangerous to mix the two, lets take a look at what the big deal is with the Prime Minister becoming president of the Mahabodhi society. The Bhutanese election commission's decision not to allow civilian members registered to religious organizations to vote in fact ensures that whether its the Prime Minister or any other running for PM - irrespective of their religious inclinations or becoming President of Mahabodhi etc - they cannot influence voters from that sector. I think, therefore, the Opposition Leader arguing that the PM is religious and becoming President but not allowing religious people to vote is not right (?) and therefore should allow them to (?) does not make sense.

Arundhati Roy stirs the hornets nest

So you may/may not have heard Arundhati Roy's comment - "Kashmir has never been an integral part of India. It is a historical fact,"- has stirred some s*#t in India. As Global Voices colleague Rezwan from Bangladesh points out, Arundhati Roy has become more infamous for her role as an activist than as author of prize winning novel "God of Small Things."

I loved the book, it is truly a masterpiece in modern Indian literature, but since then I have not paid much attention to her, followed her, nor read anything else she has written (essays etc). I do not know anything much about her activities either, other than that she became an activist and a very controversial figure.

 Following the comments The Guardian reported that she faced the threat of arrest and imprisonment making these seditious remarks.  Under section 124A of the Indian penal code, those convicted of sedition face punishment ranging from a fine to life imprisonment. Meanwhile, The Hindu reported that an angry mob had also descended on her home and protested her remarks.

Global Voices writer from Bangladesh, Rezwan, pointed out that the Indian blogosphere has exploded with reactions for and against the writer.

For those of us in South Asia, this is a very interesting case study - a test so to speak - for India's Democracy as well as for all of us in the region. For many of us Freedom of Speech, it seems, can only take one so far. There is always that catch - embedded in the Penal Code. India as one of the largest Democracies in the world and one of the oldest in South Asia is in many respects a great country. It is a country whose Democracy, although infested with many problems like corruption, poverty, cultural baggage, religious baggage etc, has always managed to remain. It is a country that fascinates me and one  I love because you cannot describe with enough words what it is. It is a country where all the imaginable realms that could exist in this world - exist. But it is cases like this one that puts India to the test.

I don't want to take a stand on whether what Arundhati Roy said was right or wrong, because I admit I do not know enough about the Kashmiri issue, but I think that because she cares about bringing an end to the violence and the bloodshed ~ again, whether it be from Pakistani insurgents, the Kashmiri themselves, or from Indian armed forces ~ and the desire to see social justice, she attempts to bring attention to her cause.This is what activists and writers want - to bring attention to their cause.

How she went about it - by saying what she said - and whether we approve or disapprove of the contents is not the point. Also just because she is a famous writer who won the Booker Prize, does not mean that she is right about everything - she could be wrong.

But in my opinion, if she was going about her activism peacefully through words instead of violence, what need is there for arrest and imprisonment?

Isn't that what Freedom of Speech is all about or are they mere decorative words enshrined in a constitution; fine words to uphold - as long as they please some ears?

Listen to what led to the stirring of the Hornet's Nest and tell me what you think. I am curious for the Bhutanese opinion other than my own (of which I seem to have many)