Bangladesh reached a historic milestone in 2024 with a mass uprising that uprooted a deeply entrenched authoritarian regime. This movement was not just a protest against decades of oppression but a collective demand for dignity, justice, and a new social contract between the state and its citizens. The sacrifices made by students, youth, and ordinary citizens -- who paid the ultimate price for freedom with their lives -- serve as a stark reminder of the stakes involved.
For years, the people of Bangladesh endured the stranglehold of a political settlement designed to benefit a corrupt and exploitative past regime and their elites. This system thrived on patron-client relationships, unchecked power, and the suppression of dissent, all under the guise of nationalistic rhetoric and liberation ideals.
The task ahead is monumental. However, hatred cannot sustain the unity required to build a just and inclusive society. If this historic moment is to result in lasting transformation, we must go beyond dismantling the old settlement and proactively construct a new political framework that upholds the values of justice, accountability, and collective empowerment.
The manifestations of the old political settlement
To craft a new political settlement, we must first dissect the nature of the old one and understand its core characteristics. The old political settlement is deeply rooted in a system of arrogance, hierarchical patron-client relationships, and an entrenched preference for rhetoric over substantive governance. These traits are not abstract; they manifest vividly in everyday political activities, shaping how power is exercised and perceived in our society.
For instance, an undue emphasis on protocol for leaders -- where the leader’s presence or convenience takes precedence over the public interest -- exemplifies how personal ego often trumps collective well-being. Similarly, the widespread practice of excessive postering and aggressive political showdowns, often designed to intimidate rivals rather than engage constructively, reveals a politics driven by spectacle rather than substance.
Another critical issue is the absence of self-criticism within political groups, where introspection is often seen as a weakness rather than a strength. This creates an environment where mistakes are either swept under the rug or deliberately ignored, leaving no room for accountability or learning from past errors.
Moreover, when faced with undeniable mistakes, political parties typically follow a predictable pattern: They attempt to disown the mistake, prove it false, or, if neither of these options is viable, offer an alternative narrative to justify why the mistake was made.
This refusal to acknowledge faults or express regret reveals a troubling lack of integrity in our political culture. The inability to admit errors not only erodes public trust but also perpetuates a cycle of blame-shifting and justification that stifles progress.
Compounding this is the tendency to project partisan narratives as if they were synonymous with public demand, sidelining the genuine voices and needs of the broader population. This lack of humility and accountability undermines the credibility of political institutions and highlights a pervasive culture of arrogance and self-preservation.
At its core, these behaviours stem from a deeper malaise within our political culture -- a tendency to dominate rather than collaborate and to label rather than engage with dissenting voices. A clear example of this is the pervasive “tagging” culture, where anyone who challenges the status quo or offers constructive criticism is swiftly labeled as an enemy or traitor. This culture of equating disagreement with disloyalty not only stifles healthy debate but also fosters a divisive atmosphere, where ideological conformity is prized over the diversity of thought.
These practices and attitudes form the foundation of the old political settlement, a structure designed to suppress rather than empower, to control rather than serve. As we move forward, dismantling these toxic elements is essential for building a political culture that values accountability, inclusivity, and genuine dialogue.
Gramsci and the hegemony of narratives
Antonio Gramsci’s theory of hegemony provides a valuable framework to analyze how the old political settlement managed to sustain its grip on power. According to Gramsci, hegemony refers to the dominance of one group over others, not just through coercion but by securing consent through ideology. This concept helps us understand how the ruling elites in Bangladesh over the past 15 years manipulated key narratives to maintain control.
Two central narratives -- "Bengali nationalism" and "the spirit of the Liberation war" -- were systematically co-opted by those in power to achieve ideological dominance. Instead of being tools for unity and collective progress, these narratives were reduced to slogans that served the narrow interests of the ruling class.
By framing their actions as the defense of these ideals, the ruling elites transformed their own agenda into what appeared to be the collective will of the people. This ideological manipulation created an illusion of legitimacy, enabling them to maintain control while silencing opposition.
For example, dissent was often framed as being "anti-nationalist" or "against the spirit of the Liberation war," effectively delegitimizing alternative voices and consolidating power. In this way, what should have been universal and inclusive ideals became exclusionary tools, reinforcing a system of social control while masquerading as the public's voice.
Understanding this dynamic is essential for dismantling the old political settlement. If we fail to recognize how these hegemonic tools have been used to manufacture consent, any effort to challenge the status quo risks inadvertently reproducing the same structures of domination. Only by exposing and critiquing the ways in which these narratives have been weaponized can we move toward a political settlement rooted in genuine representation and shared values.
The role of patron-client relationships in reinforcing the old political settlement
At the grassroots level, the old political settlement entrenched itself through a network of patron-client relationships that not only kept local power structures intact but also helped solidify the ideological control described in Antonio Gramsci’s concept of hegemony. In this framework, political leaders at both the local and national levels operated as gatekeepers, dispensing favours and resources to their loyalists in exchange for unquestioning support. These patron-client dynamics weren’t just about distributing material benefits; they were a vital mechanism for securing ideological consent.
Local leaders, closely aligned with the national ruling class, would intervene in land disputes, offer protection to loyalists, and suppress dissent through intimidation. This created a dependency that went beyond mere political loyalty -- it was a tool for cultivating passive consent. The ruling elites knew that by controlling local resources, they could not only secure votes but also shape the political culture, framing their authority as a natural and inevitable consequence of the social order. As such, the hegemonic control they exercised extended into the hearts and minds of the people, making dissent more difficult by co-opting local leaders into the larger project of preserving the status quo.
This system of patronage reinforced the arrogance and inequality that characterized the old settlement. By keeping people dependent on the whims of local elites, the ruling class ensured that the broader population remained disempowered. Moreover, it turned local political engagement into a transactional exchange -- support for privileges -- rather than a participatory act of democratic expression.
Just as Gramsci described the ruling class using ideological manipulation to maintain control, the patron-client relationships in Bangladesh served to further entrench the old regime’s dominance. These relationships ensured that the political settlement wasn't just a matter of coercive power; it was, as Gramsci would put it, "consent" manufactured through economic and social dependence.
Recent incidents of communal violence and localized power struggles further illustrate how this toxic political environment perpetuated injustice, serving as a reminder of how patron-client relationships not only sustain local hierarchies but also maintain broader political dominance. The interplay of coercion and consent underpinned the hegemonic narrative of "the nation" and "the people," casting the ruling elite as the rightful defenders of national interests and using the language of the Liberation war to justify their monopolistic control.
To dismantle the remnants of the old political settlement, we must first address these patronage networks. Reforming this dynamic requires breaking the cycle of dependency and exploitation and empowering local communities to act independently of these power brokers. True progress demands a new culture of accountability -- one that prioritizes justice over loyalty, and service to the people over loyalty to those who hold power.
Moving beyond the old settlement
The path to a new political settlement begins with self-reflection and collective action. We must:
The journey from the old political settlement to a new one is not merely a shift in governance structures; it is a reimagining of what it means to be a citizen in Bangladesh. The uprising of 2024 illuminated the collective power of the people when they refuse to accept injustice and demand dignity, accountability, and fairness. However, dismantling an entrenched system requires more than courage; it demands vision, perseverance, and an unwavering commitment to justice.
To move forward, we must embrace humility, foster dialogue, and reject the toxic practices that have defined our political culture for far too long. It is not enough to topple an oppressive regime; we must ensure that the values of the uprising -- justice, inclusivity, and accountability -- become the foundation of a new social contract. This requires a deep commitment to empowering the grassroots, cultivating political literacy, and breaking the chains of patron-client dependencies that have long stifled our potential as a nation.
The sacrifices made by countless individuals have given us an unprecedented opportunity to build a Bangladesh where power serves the people, not the other way around. By learning from our past, refusing to repeat its mistakes, and daring to imagine a better future, we can transform this moment of upheaval into a lasting legacy of progress.
Md Zarif Rahman is a researcher and development practitioner. Currently he is working as a member and the student representative at the Police Reform Commission.
