What went wrong with Party Presidents' Debate?

The nation saw the first glimpse of party presidents’ debate last night telecast LIVE. Although the party presence on the stage offered good choice for 2013, yet the credibility of parties was a grim show.

It was a diplomatic debate after all. New parties trying to offer stronger stance on prevailing issues and the old parties trying to stay put against them.

But what did not come as expected was party presidents’ emphasis on their party ideology. All of them simply mumbled on issues. Some offered statistics. Some were overly ambiguous on pressing the incumbent government and the opposition. The incumbents, however, put a diplomatic bout on stage of their differences in the last five years.

Diplomatic jest offered some respite for audience. The audience in the front rows was mostly staunch members of the parties. Some even expressed the gesture of ‘if I were on the stage I could have hit back nicely’.

At homes, people watched passionately. Some were enthralled by the male presidents while others sympathized with the females.

Language offered competitive edge for presidents. People intending to participate in politics in future must start revisiting the national language. At least for the sake of making good impression on voters!

So, what was missing in Party Presidents’ Debate last night? Focus on ideology! Everybody spoke randomly on issues without any focus.

Now, what’s the way forward? Capitalize on the second debate. Emphasize party ideology while addressing the issues globally, nationally, and locally.

My first thought for the Blog

Whenever I sit down to write something, quite creatively, a lot of things rush in my mind. I keep wondering 'what to write on?' I look for a good reason to write though. Not backbiting someone or belittling something that didn't work on me. I want to write because I want to know if I can write actually. But again, whatever you write doesn't say anything precise about you. People might take it for beating around the bush. Ok i'll stop beating around the bush and write something serious.

I tell people I meet that I do "business". The word changes their attitude instantly. Some take time to examine my whole person to digest the word. Most of them say, "so you're a Malik now, eh?" Some inquisitively ask what kind of business I do and what it takes to get into such thing. Malik! Well, that's the term too lavish to be comforted with. But "what it takes to get into such thing?" makes you little nervous to answer. So I say, "courage". But again there's a danger to use this single word answer. As if to say the other person is not courageous. So I reframe my answer to say, "business is all about taking risks."

Anyways, I took the risk.

Now, it's been like more than a year doing business. Before that I was a young and aspiring man wanting to do business. I got this thought when I was doing my post-graduation. The academics really taught me something new and inspirational. I studied Communication Arts. Technically, it's called "applied communication". The word "applied" gives you the professional freedom and ability to apply the art of communication in any field.

Okay, yeah, back to business. Only after a year of doing business I realized that ground realities are little tougher than I thought. Practically, there's no ample market opportunities in Bhutan to start a business. That's based on business analysis of the market. Culturally, doing business in Bhutan is also about knowing people and accepting the norms. No matter if you're a student of Oxford or Cambridge, you're nobody if you don't know somebody. That said, I stood by my principle--taking risks.

TO BE CONTINUED...