Of governance by consent

I would like to offer a statement made by Abraham Lincoln, a statement which I believe to be so profound and can be applied universally: “No man is good enough to govern another, without that other’s consent.”

As I ponder the depth of Mr. Lincoln’s statement, I cannot help but be reminded of the predicament that befallen Kampuchea.

I am wondering whether or not the population of Kampuchea, or the majority of, consenting to the government that is governing them? From the result of the last election it appears that indeed Khmers gave their consent, or authorized the present regime to govern them via their elected “representatives.”

An obvious question that follows is thus: Since those who are in power were chosen by us and for us why is there so much dissenting opinion about the government’s inept? And why are there so much displays of disgruntlement throughout the country? Did we not choose the right people? Did we not know how to choose? Perhaps yes and yes.

Let it be known that the present government did not come to power by force. Though some may dispute this statement and would allege that there were some irregularities of this and that sort prior to the election. May be there is some validity in their allegation, but the fact remains that Khmers did choose their representatives with (or without) their conscience. And by the end of the day, the government came into being by the decree of the ballots – ballots that were cast freely by the people.

Or was it free?

If we take the approach that Mr. Lincoln took that “no man is good enough to govern another man, without that other’s consent”, then only two possible arguments can be made here. First, if the Khmer people were forced to choose or were coerced to consent, then we can say that the current regime is not a legitimate one in that it did not possess the “trust” of the people and that the people were forced into accepting them. Hence the government was born not out of free will, but out of oppression. Mr. Mahatma Gandhi (or the Great Soul) put it more eloquently, “The institution that fails to win public support has no right to exist.”

Second, if it can be unequivocally established that indeed the government was born out of free will of the people yet dissatisfactions is mounting from within, then we can conclude that the Khmer people did not know how to choose when they were offered a chance to choose. If this is this the case, then we are faced with a much bigger dilemma: that we, as a nation, lack the education and the knowledge of being a free man. Ignorance is the worse form of evil and through ignorance tyrants rule.

Kampuchea is a house under construction. No one mighty person can build it alone. As is customary in building a house, there need to be a team of builders, craftsmen, technicians, and, yes, inspectors. All would have to work together harmoniously if the joints are to fit perfectly. The dwellers, too, must take part in the building process unless they do not mind living in a house with a leaked roof. The people of Kampuchea are the dwellers of the house. They must be vigilant in their efforts in overseeing the construction of the house. Idleness invites incompetence on the part of the builders. Arrogance will result in a faulty frame. We are our worse enemy and we have but ourselves to blame if the house is henceforth crumbled.