First choose an alternative and then laugh . Otherwise too much laugh is not healthy . I do not care who is in power . I just care about some basic needs and now peoples are getting .
Alternative to what? AL cannot be an alternative to BNP and BNP cannot be an alternative to AL. The only way to keep these two evils in check is democracy.
How would you define basic needs and again, how did you come to this conclusion that people are now receiving all the basic needs? Then why are we seeing mass protests one after another? What's your opinion on the destroyed judiciary of the country and the culture of impunity? And what would you say about the growing unemployment among educated youth of the country? Or the rising inequality?
I am not saying that AL is firishta . It's your assumption because you can not see anything beyond BNP and AL . So perhaps the discussion will lose it's track if we starts.
I just chose the lesser evil for now . However during Fakhruddin regime , both BNP and AL mobs were punished by military. However fakhruddin govt was the best govt IMHO.
I will speak for democracy , but let them make a better democratic atmosphere . I hope you can use your wisdom to know who are they .
In reality there were never any pure democracy in Bangladesh . All election were rigged in a certain degree . Perhaps 1996 election was only one that was free from rigging .
Better ask the military . No civilian can answer it correctly . How many army matters are open in Bangladesh ? most are secrete.
This question was already answered .
Indeed , but the real democracy from west . Not such thing that was in Bangladesh .
Without democracy China is doing Much better . With democracy the life of Bangladeshi common folks were less than dog . Atleast extreme poverty had reduced And only hungry peoples know that democracy ( Bangladeshi version ) is not going to digest in their belly . And also 16/16 hours loadshedding is not very healthy . Besides the time of BNP there was also no freedom of speech , neither it is now . So freedom of speech concept is not relevant in Bangladesh . So all logic related to previous democracy actually never existed in Bangladesh , so by default such logic is cancelled .
I have no problem with AL until other parties can be stronger who will not act like BNP . If we desire democracy before we are ready , it will only bring back the past days of horror!
And present days BCL dogs are already tamed in a certain degree. Dogs of BCL are already fired , and the dogs who murdered Abrar are already detained . I can not remember such thing during BNP regime , where they are taking action against their own folks .
AL is doing so . That's all .
There are several discrepancies in your argument.
You have accepted that AL has its own faults yet you support an authoritarian govt. (which only provides the govt. with even more power) under AL, how is it within the national interests of the country? Now, hypothetically, suppose AL signs a treaty of accession to India, what would be your proposed measures to prevent such an action?
I get the feeling that you have a misconception that this govt. is backed by military, hence, military will keep it in check. This is clearly a false hope and the generals are all handpicked by Hasina herself. I would write about military in details later on.
Second, you have brought the example of China to support authoritarianism in Bangladesh yet you have completely ignored the differences between CCP and AL in terms of their organization, discipline, culture and even party constitution. Xi Jinping's rise to power is not based on his family background rather his own merit.
The relation between BNP and AL is that all these ideas of curbing freedom of speech, extra-judicial killing were sowed by BNP and AL not only carried on these ideas but even stepped up their game. Now this is why I said these two cannot be an alternative to each other. Even if you want a third option, you need to provide sufficient space to let that third option to emerge. You think an authoritarian govt. would provide that?
Overall, your logic is that since we had a flawed democracy, it's better to abandon it but you are not inclined to let it evolve itself or to try for making it better. So whenever there is a headache you would just cut the head?