In this age of hyper-information, at least we don't have a shortage of geo-political experts and public intellectuals unleashing their outrageous opinions, controversial claims, and far-fetched evaluations on emerging socio-political and economic issues in Nepal.
From current affairs programs on television and YouTube channels to social media platforms, our political experts and social commentators are always ready with their spicy intellectual thoughts for their information consumers so that they can speculate and chatter over the ever-evolving socio-political and economic drama in Nepal.
Interestingly, based on the realities of the Nepali information market, our public intellectuals and political experts have mastered the art of building their analysis, narratives, and explanations in a way that appeals to and entices the mass information consumers. It works well indeed—an information package mixed with a bit of controversy, cynicism, humor, potential gossip, conspiracy theories, blame games, and cheap sensationalism. The kind of information the Nepali audiences like to comment on, share, and subscribe to.
Consumers of intellectual analysis and expert opinions in Nepal take pleasure in and prefer those perspectives that criticize, condemn, put the blame on, and ridicule our politicians, business elites, and people involved in the governance system. However, the main concern there is that, just to keep their target segment hooked, so often public intellectuals and experts don’t restrain from making controversial and provocative statements. In most cases, for the purpose of fashioning a popular opinion, so-called public intellectuals and political experts in Nepal also indulge in disseminating half-baked truths, fake conspiracy theory propaganda, or a simple misattribution to incite their audience.
As a result, we must exercise critical thinking across media channels to critically analyze and explore the limitations of expert opinions and armchair evaluations. Additionally, it is also necessary to investigate their area of expertise and experience to determine whether these so-called public intellectuals and political experts have the necessary credibility to make such assertions and conclusions. As seen in Nepal, a virologist can quickly transition into a foreign relations expert. Besides, in this age of social networking sites, with few subscribers and followers and little knowledge on just about everything, we are all experts.
Put the blame on politicians, not their information consumers
Moreover, it is easy to find structural thought consistency among intellectual opinion makers in Nepal. They always put the blame on political leaders, the elite business class, the government system, the judiciary, and the bureaucracy for the different socio-economic problems present in our society. Interestingly, most of our political opinion makers never consider their target audience as the root cause of the socio-political problems prevalent in Nepal. Nepalis can continue to operate in a reactionary manner and harbor their herd mentalities, confirmation bias, and superficial political thinking. We are here to point out all the flaws and shortcoming.
Moreover, popular intellectual thinking in Nepal frames the common people of Nepal as helpless spectators and bystanders, condemned to endure this corrupt, unfair, and uncaring socio-political system with no way out of this mess. As a result, the majority of public intellectuals' and political experts' tweets, updates, comments, discussions, and opinion pieces are purposefully written to incite anger and generate negative feelings toward politicians and corporate elites.
Differences between thoughts and actions
Information audiences have to recognize that intellectual analysis can only provide references for additional remarks, conversations, speculations, arguments, and critiques. Although these ideas and views can be entertaining, controversial, and divisive, they rarely produce anything significant, transformative, or revolutionary in the real context.
For instance, Nepal faces numerous unsolved problems, including incomplete construction projects, joblessness, a lack of industrial growth, political instability, a languid bureaucratic system, callous, indifferent, and corrupt public institutions, exploitative private businesses, gullible public opinion, and a perpetually failing educational system. According to cognitive scientist Steven Pinker, public intellectuals can therefore become instantly well-known by characterizing these unresolved problems as a sign of the failure of politicians, government mechanism, and both public and private institutions.
However, intellectual conversations are disconnected from the risks, repercussions, difficulties, and accountability that come with taking real-world action. Since expert analysis on socio-political and economic problems takes place in decontextualized settings, there is very little practical usefulness of these ideas and assessments.
Undoubtedly, the majority of the choices and acts that our public officials, bureaucrats, and other public and private organizations—as well as the informed and involved public—have made thus far have been feeble, insufficient, a bit hasty, phony, unduly self-serving, corrupt, and careless. But they are Nepal's change agents for political, social, and economic transformations.
Furthermore, actions take place within the confines of contextual limitations, strategic games, ongoing competition among numerous groups, self-interests, and power conflicts, whereas ideas naturally tend toward idealistic norms, visions, and expectations. In addition, individuals or agencies that initiate actions must accept accountability and cope with the fallout from their choices. However, an expert analysis can be expressed without taking ownership of or responsibility for the information. An expert can always correct his mistakes without much consequence in order to produce a better analysis the next time.
As a result, coming up with an opinion is much easier than acting on it.
(The author is a faculty of communication, critical thinking, management, and research at different educational institutions inside the Kathmandu Valley)
