9/12/2014: The Pickwickian Evil that Ails the Honorable Minister

Despite his inane and some kind-of insane doings, Syed Mohsin Ali, the honorable minister of Bangladesh government who claims to have shared smoke and/or smoked alongside the father of our all-powerful sitting Prime Minister, deserves some credit to bring the not-so-peculiar Pickwickian issue to the fore; this issue, indeed, is a public health scourge, yet not a single newsman has written anything about up to this time. May be we lack the astute sense of Dickensian observation or we are too busy vilifying the ministers distasteful testiness.

Dickens’s “The Pickwick Paper” described a young Joe who was generous in build, had a love for gastronomical delights and had an uncanny ability to fell asleep anywhere. One hundred twenty years later in 1956, Dr. Burwell and his colleagues described this medical entity in a medical case report titled “Extreme Obesity Associated With Hypoventilation: A PICKWICKIAN SYNDROME”. This was case of a 51-year-old obese business executive weighing over 260 pounds and standing only five foot 5. He was suffering from obesity, fatigue and daytime somnolence. Somnolence was quite disabling that during a poker game he failed to take the opportunity when dealt with a hand of three aces and two kings! Such was the peril … however, Syed Mohsin Ali, I bet, given his very busy and successful life is doing quite well …

We have new name for this condition. We call it OBSTRUCTICVE SLEEP APNEA, a disorder, usually occurring in obese persons, in which, during sleep, lax tissue crowds the access to the breathing tube leading to frequent micro-awakenings and a state of chronic sleep deprivation leading daytime somnolence to catch up. Loud snoring is a very common associated feature. There is another kind of less common sleep apnea that can happen in non-obese persons too; it is called CENTRAL SLEEP APNEA, because, here the brain is at fault. In this article, we will focus on the more prevalent obstructive type.

What causes sleep apnea is a query that defies a clear or precise answer. During the wakeful hours the active tone of the throat muscles keeps the airway wide open. During sleep the absence of wakeful tone causes the muscles to relax with subsequent throat narrowing. Normally this is not a problem; however, in persons with obstructive sleep apnea there is partial or complete obstruction. Enough air does not flow in the lung, oxygen level in blood drops, that in turn wakes the brain up which help tighten the upper airway muscles and open the wind pipe. Normal breathing starts again, often with a loud snort or choking sound.

This oft repeated drop on blood oxygen level and reduced quality of sleep can trigger the release of stress hormones which, in turn, increases the risk of other nefarious maladies like high blood pressure, heart attack, stroke and irregular heart rhythm. When untreated, sleep apnea also alters the normal energy utilization leasing further worsening obesity and the risk of diabetes.

Yes, it is a nasty disease and commonly it comes with a loud bell – snoring, which can prove sore in relationship too. However, its symptoms are not as stealthy as early hypertension or diabetes or cancer. Excessive day time sleepiness, fatigue, poor concentration, morning headache etc. should prompt a doctor’s visit and subsequent diagnostic work up including a possible polysomnogram (PSG) that does simultaneous measurement of brain activity, eye movements and, hear rate and blood pressure.

Once diagnosed, treatment, cumbersome though, is very effective. However, losing weight, avoiding alcohol and stopping tobacco smoking can be an intial thumbs up ...And this brings us back to our honorable minister Syed Mohsin Ali, who happened to an avid smoker too. Sir, it’s time to stop smoking and see a doctor …

06/13/2014: Divas and Kings: They, too, do Defecate

Shashanka was the first to bring the whole Bengal (Banga, Samatata and Gaud) together under one rule. Shashanka's death in 625 AD left Bengal into the hands of feeble rulers.Harshavardana and Vashkarvarma came hounding. There was total entropy of the polity. According to Tara Natha – every single Brahmin, every single Kshatriyo, and every Elite became too powerful within their own small fiefdom. He described the condition as Matsyanyaya (big fish eating small fish) until the people got fed up and elected Gopala as king in 750 AD. Gopala was nothing more than a garden variety Khastriyo. His Pedigree was not of  high kind; definitely not the kingly kind, that our current Prime Minister or her perpetual nemesis Begum Khaleda Zia do aptly delude of. Yes, the first popularly elected leader of Bengal, Gopala made a great king. My be, he is the greatest Bangalee of all time! Anyway, genetic make up, indeed, is not needed for the make of a good king and/or leader.

***

It is a fact that, like our honorable PM is an accomplished artist; so was Hitler. But I shall talk about a different kind of artist now – Magadha'a Bimbisara was a true musician. He was no fan of the Licchavi republic at his northern border. But the knights of the Licchavi had Ambrapali – whose beauty was exquisite and her skills outstanding. She was a courtesan of the highest order – kind of a institution by herself and a pride of the Licchavi knights. Bimbisara was smitten and when, in disguise, he met Ambrapali, he was doubly smitten. His musical talent was a boon – Ambrapali too was smitten. But his days of dalliance with Ambrapli enraged the Licchavi knights of Vaisali. And the subsequent stories were rather incarnadine.

Affair of heart, yes, is not very compatible with affair of state. Thus, when the supposed servant of the people, the PM pours her heart for a N'Ganj family of ugly repute, not knowing how her heartfelt affair shall influence the rule of law, I cringe ... Ambrapali, eventually saw the light and dedicated her life to the alter of the Sakya prince – the Buddha. And let's hope for something of this sort to befall on the PM's beloved family of N'Ganj ...

***

And the prince of the vacuous house of air or Hawa Vobon is on a tirade. I guess ­ a smart tirade! The lesser Rahman (his father) was being vilified right and left with very unkind words by the PM and her lackey ministers and her Awami minstrels.

So, the evil prince came swinging. He knew it well that Awami League (and also his own party) are glued together by apparitions of its slain leader. So, he is trying to bring the aristocratic image of the Father of the Nation down to the dirty and dinghy earth. Questions are being raised. But the people are smart, they have seen a lot and they don't care much.

But the Awami leaders seems to be more gullible and they are snarling right and left, oblivious of the fact that they, too, are not immune of Achilles heel.

***

The turbulent 9-­month caesura that gave birth to a politically independent Bangladesh had no kings or queens. Dedicated leaders of like Tajuddin Ahmed handled the most critical period of our national life just right. With out the benefit of the wisdom of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, things went very well. Now, when the country is immersed in another crisis, reminiscent of post-Shashanka Matsyanyaya - may be we need another commoner like Gopola or Tajuddin.

***

Michelle de Montaigne was an aristocrat who after a brilliant carrier in public service, retired at age 38 to write and reflect. He wrote numerous essays, often loosely bound – full of quotations, anecdotes and stories; essays long and short – some as long as a short book. 

Despite his earthly riches and a lofty mind, he was refreshingly humble. “­­­ ... so the opinion I give of this is to declare the measure of my sight, not the measure of things” - he said; and from this tangent of ignorance he was able to question all the inequities of our lives. And as such, he was refreshingly down to the earth – a simple fallible man, a true humanist. 

He worked as a courtier and lived in a castle; he was a philosopher influencing the likes of Shakespeare and Nietzsche – and yet he attacked his own pedigree by saying, “Kings and philosophers defecate, and so do ladies.” 

***

When shall our leaders shall realize that they are just fallible human and they, too, do defecate ...

05/03/2014: MONTRI: ?A New Curse Word

The very long and aristocratic appellation of Suja-ul-Mulk Hasim-ud-Daula Mir Mohammad Ja'afar Ali Khan Bahadur Mahabat Jung, through the passage of time, has reduced to a rather short “Mir Ja'afor” with a even shorter connotation – “the traitor”. He was a man of power, a general, who could have clipped the wings of British East India Company in 1957; if he did, the history of India, if not better, could have been different.

Yes, history has its funny way of taking revenge on its bad actors! Vidkun Abraham Lauritz Jonsson Quisling of Norway did not fare better, for he too abetted a foreign invader – Nazi Germany to be precise. At the fag end of Pakistani regime of General Muhammad Yahya Khan, a significant number of Bangalee joined different para-military outfits to help perpetuate the continuation of status quo; notwithstanding their rationale; they were on the wrong side of history and history took its revenge - “Razakar” is now synonymous with traitor or Mir Ja'afor or Quisling … Like Mir Ja'afor, this again can claim its origin in Bengal!

Undertone of words evolves with time; at time sophomoric banality gives way to unpropitious connotations. Razakar and Mir Ja'afor are words that lost innocence and morphed into a curse words very rapidly; however, it also possible that certain words, because of long association with nefarious people, can acquire nefarious connotations and eventually become curse words.

In his article “montri” meaning minister, Professor Jafor Iqbal alluded to the fact, that word “Montri” is now in danger of such sad metamorphosis. He wrote,

“The word Montri does not remind of anything honorable. I can't tell of an exact reason, but it must be the way, our history has unfolded over time. While growing up, I saw the Pakistani ministers roaming around clad in some unnatural garb (achkan). I can't think high of those “achkan-wearing' guys; of course excepting the occasion when a groom weras the same … After 1971, we noticed a new set of ministers with a new kind of ritualitic raiment – the Mijib Coat.

After liberation, we dreamt of a dream only to be undone by the hideous governing ny Awami League. By then, ours was a “shaheed poribar (family of a martyr)”. My mother and I paid visit to a number of ministers to realize our rightful rights; and in the process, they lost my respect … However, things worsened during Ershad regime, when ministerial portfolio were distributed to a coterie of kowtwowing imbeciles; even some thugs, I carefully evoided during by university days, were ministers. Akin to the words “potni and upo-potni (wife and concubine)” we began to internalize new terms – montri an upo-montri (minister and deputy minister!”

The word “minister”, any way, does not boast a very flattering pedigree. It has evolved from its Latin root meaning “servant”. In the utopian (at least in BD perspective) sense of democracy, ministers serve at the will of the Prime Minister, who in turn serves at the will of THE PEOPLE – the real master. And hence, ministers are nothing more than a bunch of servants, picked by the Prime Minister to help her discharge the service properly.

However, in my God forsaken home, ministers abound in dozens, and many of them seem to have no veritable function other than, like a troupe of minstrels, dancing around and singing one or two pangyric for their dear leader; and that's not all, we even had had minister with no portfolio for days and months. In addition, we had ministers, who remained a minister even after resignation and being AWOL for years …

Ministers are no minstrels who shall dance and sing and exalt the Prime Minister; they are given a portfolio of people's business that needs careful attention. They also have the solemn duty to provide thoughtful advice to the Prime Minister; in Bengali the very word “montri” means a person who provides “montrona (advice)” - are they doing it? Probably not …

It is said the during the regime last BNP-JI regime, some of the ministerial portfolios were sold for a price. I am not sure what transpired during the last 5+ years of Awami League, but the way Padma Bridge was held hostage by one single rich man, hearsay abounds. Aside from that, the number of cabinet positions seems too much for a country like ours; compare with that of the US, where there is only fifteen cabinet posts and five cabinet level administrators; or with that of the biggest democracy in the world where it has only twenty eight cabinet positions including the Prime Minister. Yet, the most important cabinet positions including defense, home and foreign affairs remains in the very busy hands of the Prime Minister. And, very often, we see the full ministers are incapable of making any decision on their own. No wonder, plethoric number is no panacea for anemic performance!

Performance aside, a large number of ministers, as per published and electronic news media are involved in careless uttering, illicit amassing of wealth, and wanton waste of public funds. It seems unreal that such thing can happen in a country like ours that can boast of international repute like BRAC and Grameen!

If my daily read of the newspapers is right, I bet, some day, the following fearful pronunciation of Dr. Jafor Iqbal can prove to be prophetic,

“I believe, if the ministers, do not change their way, some day, the word “montri” shall be used as a curse word, just the way “razakar” is being used for the lowly betrayers.”

   

05/03/2014: NARAYANGANJ-7: Unveiling of the 'Veil of Ignorance' & Collapse of 'Social Contract'

Thomas Hobbs (1851–1679) was not an misanthrope, but he harbored a deep cynicism as to the construct of human nature; and posited that, man, if left in the 'state of nature' (i,e., prior the formation law abiding society), “... the life of man (would be), solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” So, he constructed his Leviathan arguing that society to be successful and cohesive, there must be a social contract where a all-powerful but just ruler and/or government shall establish a commonwealth protect the populace from each other by enforcing laws of the land. Hobbs imagined the commonwealth as a giant human body (named Leviathan after the name of a Biblical sea monster) made out of its citizens and the head being the omnipotent sovereign; the absence of which shall culminate into anarchy – a war of every man against other man.

John Locke (1932-1704), in addition to be a giant of empiricist philosophy who famously considered mind a tabula rasa, also was an extremely influential political philosopher. Unlike Hobbs, Locke had faith in innate goodness and rationality of human nature, that, however, shows a selfish tendency especially in the matters of wealth and property. He also argued for the same call for a social contract, where government shall uphold the law, protect citizens; and in return civil obedience shall supervene. Unlike Hobbs, Locke also felt that religion does not cause strife; it is the intolerance that is the root cause of social unrest. Locke sanctified three natural rights: firstly, right to life; secondly, right to liberty or freedom of action (so long it does not imperil any one's right to life); and thirdly, right to property (so long it does not infringe on any one's life to life or liberty).

Locke's improved version of social contract inspired French Revolution and US constitution, and as of now forms the basis democracy all over the world – ours included! And this brings forth the most important facet of this social contract; and that is execution of law by the government – 'JUSTICE'.

In his seminal work on politics and philosophy– Theory of Justice, John Rawls (1921-2002) looked at the social contract from different tangent. He argued that principles of justice are those principles that any fair minded, logical person person shall agree upon when viewed from an impartial perspective. “Principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance” - Rawls argued; and this he termed the original position. Gareth Southwell explains the position as following:

“ … the only way to ensure the fairness of the social contract would be if it is formulated behind a veil of ignorance. In other words, principles of justice and fairness should be arrived at in complete ignorance of the type of individuals they might apply to. For instance, if I am the strongest or smartest, or possess certain advantages in terms of property or wealth, then (assuming I am a selfish person as assumed by Locke) I would want those principles to benefit me. However, from behind a 'veil of ignorance', I do not know I am strongest or smartest, so to protect myself – since I do not know what advantages others possess – I would favor principles which fostered equality. Furthermore, since there is every chance in this unseen society that I may suffer at the hands of fate, then I would also want to safeguard poverty or similar disadvantage.” This is very much like maximin strategy that plays out in game theory, whereby one chooses a principle that 'maximize the minimum'; for example, when freak of fate happens, one will be afforded with the best possible alternative.

Rawls' Theory of Justice of Rawls decouples morality from justice, critiques can rightly argue; however, it has become central to the modern notion of justice and equality. And as long as the 'veil of ignorance' is intact, it provides enforceable principles that can keep the society wholesome and happy.

II.

'' ... government is best which governs not all'' – yes, Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) was consummate individualist to the point of being an anarchist. MK Gandhi and Martin Luther King, both were proponents of civil disobedience, however, their method was non-violence absolute pacifism; its root goes back to millennia, as underlined Plato's assertion that it's better to suffer wrong than to do wrong, for the wrongdoers are both ignorant and sick.

John Rawls was in agreement with Thoreau, Gandhi and King that civil disobedience is acceptable when the head of Hobbs' Leviathan deviates from its obligations of social contract, and unveils the 'veil of ignorance', thus setting forth events leading to its own dissolution. He however, proposed that civil disobedience, to be acceptable must meet certain criteria.

Firstly, act of disobedience must be public; the purpose of act is to highlight the injustice. There is no scope of secret act or sabotage. Laws must be respected, and imprisonment, if comes, should be accepted. Secondly, disobedience has to be conscientious with a political aim and seek remedy of the injustice; thus ruling out the possibility of using the tool for enhancing personal gain. Thirdly, it must be non-violent that distinguishes civil disobedience from criminality. Protesting Rowlatt Act of 1919, Gandhi called for a nationwide hartal, but when the protest gave rise to sporadic violence in Punjab, he immediately suspended hartal, for violence has no place in civil disobedience! And fourthly, it must appeal to the social sense of justice.

In essence civil disobedience is the last resort of defying legal authority of the sovereign when all legal avenues are exhausted and Leviathan's head is out of sink with its original obligation.

III.

For many years, relentlessly Bangladesh is tiptoeing towards an unfortunate undoing of rule of law. There were despots both unelected and elected type. The current regime of Sheikh Hasina Wajed continues to hold on to power following sham election thus undermining its moral legitimacy. The recent stint of governmental abuse of power during the Upo-Zila elections and government's unwillingness to hold election in the capital city where oversight of the process could be rigorous, are signs of a morally bankrupt regime. Its inability and/or unwillingness to reign on the rouge elements including law enforcement outfits and its own rancorous affiliates just add to its difficult moral standing.

A cacophony of bad news emanating from Bangladesh points towards a societal entropy where the rich and the powerful are increasingly confident of their standing without the fear that there may be a day reckoning! This is especially true in the port city of Narayanganj. Although mystery of Twaki murder is no mystery in people's mind, the government continues to dither. Even after unearthing significant evidence implicating a certain family (if the newsfeed is correct), politically allied with the the ruling party, process of justice conspicuously stymied with no clear reason whatsoever. A publicly understood rough element was selected to be the powerful MP despite miserable performance in the mayoral election of Narayanganj just a year ago. Then came the abduction of AB Siddique - an incidence that was about to unleash a tsunami of civil unrest. AB Siddique's initial description of the abductors as a group of stout men with short hair is curious! Even more curious is his release after the appeal from the high seat. On the hilt of that, came the sad abduction of seven people in broad daylight; their eventual murder and recovery of their mutilated body. Junior home minister was privy to such possibility. Family filed complaint mentioning of a suspect. And yet, the police took six days to search the house of the suspect.

Narayanganj, hence, seems to be slithering to the hole, where, government is unwilling to abide by its end of social contract by letting some of its allied people defy the rule of law. These people, by virtue of their wealth and connection, has broken through the 'veil of ignorance'!

IV.

Just today, an eminent jurist Shahdin Malik and a group of civil society members were not allowed to demonstrate peacefully in front of Sangsod Vabon – the supposed sanctuary for law and order and for people's power. This is a telltale sign that the nation demands a Gandhi or a Martin Luther!

05/03/2014: An Open Letter to the Prime Minister

Dear Ms. Prime Minister,

Your ascendancy to power was on the wings of democracy. I want to believe you when you talk high of democratic ideals and principles. I do not condone the calls (from different quarters) for your resignation. I despise the calls to topple your government. Your failure shall be a failure not of yours only. Your failure shall be a failure for the nation as a whole. I want you to succeed. I want you to serve your people until your term ends. But I want you to serve well. Government is nothing but an institutional tool to serve. As the head of the government, you must listen to voices of the people who graciously have given you the opportunity. In democracy, will of people's will eventually prevails, for they are the REAL MASTERS!

As you know, once-almighty Hawa Bhavan is in disarray; its chief patron, having a waylaid sore back, supposedly recuperating on the distant Albinos Land and it’s all powerful point-man Babar is on perpetual remand. But those, who wields the same double edged sword of power, for the sake of their own tomorrows, don’t you think, should slow down and think a little before sliding on onto their wayward galumph?

And here, Dear Prime Minister, I must say something about a few issues that makes crouch in angst as the nation lumber towards an uncertain trimester.

15th Amendment:
Constitution is neither a gospel nor an mathematical axion. It is a document, albeit a very important document, that broadly dictates the governing principles, the people, are willing to be subjected. In democratic nations,

“It is a practice of our justice to condemn some as a warning to others. To condemn them because they have done wrong would be stupidity, as Plato says; for what is done cannot be undone. But they are condemned so that they may not do the same wrong again, or so that others may avoid the example of their wrongdoing.” (Montaigne)

Thus one may justify that the ‘extra-judicial killing’ in ‘crossfire’ serves the same end-point of condemnation plus warning as Montaigne maintained. But this simplification misses the very important point of "practice of our justice". Built-in checks and balances are intrinsic to the justice system. Arguments are made pro and cons. The accused has his/her time to present his/her own stories in presence of fellow citizens (juries or assessors). A judgment is rendered and the common people know the ins and outs.


Yes, justice system at its crux, at times to the chagrin of many, is an elaborate process lest we condemn our innocent. Yet when I talk to my friends at home, the paradox is confounding. They also despise the idea of killing by crossfire but still are happy with the proximate outcome. Criminals, after long, are really afraid! Such ambivalence of my friends at home sprouts directly from a feeling of helplessness, that nothing can be done and that the lesser pain is better than the greater!

But the government, that you run, with its enormous machineries of power is no helpless fawn like a commoner. It just is callus and moribund. Or it just doesn’t care about the inherent rights of its citizens. Hence, to do one ‘small good’, it embarks on one ‘terrible bad’.


Once upon a time, during the reign of your predecessor, it was ‘Operation Clean Heart’ that eventually morphed into the then-infamous ‘Operation Heart Attack’. Those pathetic operators were not sufficiently abreast of the physiology of heart attack otherwise they also could have divined the new meaning of now-infamous but much more palatable ‘Operation Crossfire’. Ah! What a morbid inflection of a rather mundane word ‘CROSSFIRE’!


Yes, extreme situation, indeed, needs extreme measure. Situation arising from stupidity and apathy, however, often ends up with stupendously stupid measure! Crime and violence is not a quantity and/or entity in itself. It rather is a form of a more sinister societal ill that can aptly be described in a single sad word "LAWLESSNESS". Unlawful extra-judicial measure, not only adds further to the abysmal entropy but also acts as a catalyst for its accelerated perpetuation, especially when it is sanctioned by a legitimate government — the prime function of which, as John Locke would have argued, is to preserve and protect the rights of its citizens.


Living in my safe sanctuary in North America, I am not subject to the abject lawlessness as experienced by my friends living in Dhaka. I, thus, am in no position to utter a single word opposing their position of staying mum.


But, as a person who cares for dignity and sanctity of human life I do have harsh opinion as to the often-stated subliminal policy of your elected (not necessarily democratic) government.


And lastly I would like to say a few words about the mal-treatment of the most famous living Bangladeshi – an icon of integrity, magnanimity and of true grit. You know, I am talking about Professor Yunus! Believe me - he has done more for the image of Bangladesh than anyone else I know. Please, for the sake of your Father’s beloved Bangladesh, reign on your minions and let Prof Yunus do what he does better…


Dear Ms. Prime Minister,

I do not want to cram your head with stories from history. You must have seen and heard a lot. Here are a few thoughts from a very ancient epic where a king despite being indisputably brave and incontestably strong was described as aloof and out of touch with his people’s welfare and thus deserving of the ultimate punishment:

His vanity swelled him so vile and rank
That he could hear no voices but his own. He deserved
To suffer and die … (Beowulf)


And remember, fugacious glory, like the bashful cherry, is never for ever!

01/15/2014: Fascist Entropy of an once-Democratic Politics in Bangladesh

"Fascism denies, in democracy, the absurd conventional untruth of political equality dressed out in the garb of collective responsibility ...." Benito Mussolini.

Even after a decade of Mussolini's pronouncement as to the basic reactionary tenets of fascism, the word rapidly suffered a massive interpretative inflection, that George Orwell in his 1944-essay "What is Fascism" could not come up with a good definition of what fascism is and wrote in desperation: "all one can do for the moment is to use the word with a certain amount of circumspection and not, as is usually done, degrade it to a level of a swearword.” 

In the today's miasma of Bangladeshi Politics, in addition to the swearword "razakar", the word "fascist" is also being thrown around in random both by BNP and its perpetual nemesis BAL. 

It may not have poignancy right at this point, but it certainly is very important to examine the issue further for the future politics of our country. In this write up I would like expound the situation a little further.

What is Fascism?

"Fascis" (an Italian word) means bundle or unit, while "fasces" (a Latin word) is a symbol of bound sticks used as a totem of power in ancient Rome. These two roots aptly describes the basic tenets of fascism: unity and power. However, the nature of fascism espoused by Hitler in Germany, Mussolini in Italy or Franco in Spain is not exactly the same, still there are some basic features than characterizes any fascist movement:

Authoritarian leadership: A fascist state requires a single leader with absolute authority who is all-powerful and lords over the totality of the state affairs with no limits whatsoever. There also can be a cult of personality around the leader.

Absolute power of state: "the fascist state organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question can not be the individual, but the state alone" - thus goes Mussolini to encapsulate the fact that there is no law or other power that can limit the authority of the state. This is an antithesis of liberal doctrines of individual autonomy and rights, political pluralism and representative government as espoused by the likes of Rousseau – yet it envisions broad popular support.

Strict social order: To eliminate the possibility of chaos than can undermine state authority, fascism maintains a social order in which every individual has a specific place that can not be altered. This “new order” often is in clash with traditional institution and hierarchies

Nationalism and super-patriotism: Fascism digs into the past with unreal romanticism and espouses an historic mission and national rebirth.

Jingoism: Aggression is felt to be a virtue while pacifism a cowardice. This is how Mussolini writes - "fascism ..... believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace..... war alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the people who have the courage to meet it."

Dehumanization and scapegoating of the enemy: Typically every fascist regime seek out certain group or groups of people – ethnic or religious or ideological as enemy.

Is the Current Bangladesh Regime Fascist?

With the above features of fascism in mind, let's see how our current regime in Bangladesh fares:

Leadership: In democratic states, power of state is kept in check by constitutional provisions whereby the stately business is run, usually, by three co-equal branches of government, namely, executive, legislative and judicial. In Bangladesh, the legislative wing is clipped by article 70 for many years. Its integrity also is jeopardized by a lack of intra-mural democracy in most of the political parties including the ruling Awami League. Coupled with the prevailing trickle-down politics, where leadership is bestowed upon as a blessing from the party chief for nonpolitical reasons that at times can be plainly nefarious, has brewed a miasma where the party chief enjoys a demi-God status.  Judiciary independence, in addition, is a total sham as evidenced by open executive intervention in judicial matters. In fact, the current regime abetted by its myriad of political outfits, has shown a keen interest in using judiciary for the sole purpose of harassment, intimidation and silencing of opposing voices. Thus all the three branches of government has now morphed into a single behemoth bent to serve the wish one single person who is none but the all-powerful Prime Minister – Sheikh Hasina Wajed.

She wields extraordinary power beyond her constitutional ambit. Borrowing a certain amount of mana from her slain father, she also has cultivated a cult where, even her ministers kisses her feet with no shame whatsoever. It is widely reported that even the Awami League leadership was not in favor of the 15th. amendment, and it was not part of her election pledges in 2008, yet it happened only because of the singular wish of Sheikh Hasina. The eventual entropy that has befallen on today's Bangladesh thus falls squarely on her shoulder. Now after a flawed election on 01/2014, even though her electoral popularity is at nadir, she continues to remain the only person whose opinion matters. With over 3/4th majority in the 10th. parliament, and with Article 70 in place, she still has the capacity to rule by further amendment in constitution, if she chooses.

Although the Prime Minister continues to chant the popular democratic slogans, actually she has become a hindrance by disenfranchising more than 50% of voting population by cunning political games.

State Power: Power of state is on the rise for more than a decade in Bangladesh. Although there is no declared state of emergency at over the past years, the case Limon vs Government is not only a forme fruste, but a routine daily fact of national life. State outfits like Rapid Action Battalian, Police etc. can trample individual rights with impunity. Slapping of a national pride – Shohag Gazi is a daily happenstance. State can now put political leaders behind bar even without prima facie evidence of any wrongdoing. Given the prevailing politicization of Judiciary, individual rights almost to the point of forfeiture. Benito Mussolini conceptualized the process as “all within the state, nothing outside the sate, nothing against the sate.”

Social Order: By introducing three hundred fiefdoms, each headed by a member of the parliament; by nominating non-politician businessmen and thugs for member of parliament; by decapitating the law-making power of the MPs; and by clipping the wings of the elected local governing bodies - the government has instituted a social order where the cadres of government-affiliated outfits ("leagues" and "porishods" of variegate Awami shades and colors) rule over the commoners with impunity. On top on that, there are governmental outfits like police, RAB etc. also continue to be used as enforcers of governmental whims. At the same time, traditional non-political institutions and hierarchies are being decapitated by rampant politicization (both by the ruling Awami League and by its perpetual nemesis Bangladesh Nationalist Party).

Nationalism and Superpatriotism and dehumanization and/or scapegoating of enemies: The government, instead of promoting quiet inclusive nationalism, is bent on promoting a super-patriotism at the expense of non-Bengali Bangladesh nationals. Denial of existence of indigenous ethnic population by our ex-foreign minister is just a naked example. It also is curious, how blatantly the ruling party labels every opposing voice as “rajakar-sympathizer”. It has divided the nation two camps; pro-Liberation and anti-Liberation. Even valiant and decorated heroes of liberation war are not being spared.

Jingoism: Well, militarily, Bangladesh is not powerful enough to consider military expansion, yet it's portrayal of simple wining of a legal battle as "somudra-bijoy" talks of its mental makeup. But, yes, they are in a permanent war against those whose voice are not in sync with the ideas and ideals of the ruling Awami League.

Conclusion:

Yes, definition of fascism fluid, but is definitely not democracy as its biggest proponent Mussolini once said, "democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy”. And it will not be an untrue statement if one posits that the state of democracy in Bangladesh, currently in a state of total shamble. Election occurred where voter participation was an all-time low and where more than fifty percent voters were disenfranchised to begin with. As per an eminent Bangladeshi jurist – Shahdin Malik, it was more negotiated and predetermined than was competitive.

Given the reasons and the facts in ground, one ca label a regime with characteristics of the current Awami League regime as fascist. 

Addendum:

How about BNP?

Authoritarian leadership is a staple in BNP-politics since its inception. This has now morphed into a family-owned enterprise of the “lesser Rahman” - I mean General Ziaur Rahman. Their intolerance to opposing (or even neutral) view is amply exemplified by the way the treated one of their founder member – Dr. B. Chowdhury. Despite a disastrous leadership during “2006 to 2008-debacle” Khaleda Zia continues to rule over the party with an authority that is unheard of in any any democracy sans Bangladesh. Her heir apparent, Tareq Zia, despite his reprehensible Hawa-Vobon activities during the last BNP-regime, still welds more power than the any senior party leaders. It is a widely reported story that Khaleda once forfeited all the cellular devices from her senior leadership during a meeting, is just an example of her crude power that overwhelms the collective power of the party leaders. Just like in Awami League, they also a slain leader who has become more like a cult-leader in BNP-culture.

The consolidation of the state power to the verge of tyranny, in fact, began during the previous BNP-regime by introducing the now-infamous Operation Clean Heart that rapidly degenerated into an Operation Heart Attack! And the origin of RAB and the the concept of extra-judicial execution by “cross-fire” is of BNP-origin.

Just like AL, BNP also is guilty of promoting the gradual degeneration of traditional social order by empowering parliament members at the expense of local government. Pan-politicization of every sphere of national life is also a staple of BNP.

However, BNP did not had a jingoistic attitude, however, their favorite scapegoat, under the leadership of Khaleda Zia, remained India.