IF we look at our history since 1971, people have either got the government they didn't want or wanted the government they didn't get. Right away we can discount the military regimes, which were the governments people didn't want. At other times, they elected government with expectations, which weren't met.
This time it has been a roughly fifty-fifty split. In the first half people thought they had got the government of their choice. In the second half, they aren't sure if this is the government they had in mind.
Where is the gap? Are people chasing an imaginary government, or is government chasing an imaginary people? Let me explain. One of the complaints against the African states is that the governments don't harmonise with the aspirations of their people. In other words, governments are imposed on people instead of people imposing themselves on governments. Democracy is all about that spark. Government must connect with people.
Does that connection exist in our land? Does government know what people want, or do people know what type of government they would like? In most cases, the connection comes at the time of election. Then two sides are dislodged from each other. The government goes its way and people go theirs, until they meet again at the next election. Then the disgruntled people retaliate, and another party comes to power.
In this merry-go-round, the relationship between government and people is somewhat like conjugal life. If it must work, one side shouldn't take the other for granted. David Brook has shed light on this subject. He analysed the people-government relationship in one of the most effective democracies in the world.
In The Happiness Gap, which appeared in The New York Times last October, he wrote that the upcoming US election was going to be shaped by a gap. This gap exists within the individual voters themselves -- between "their private optimism and their public gloom."
Of course, David has illustrated his point. Franklin Roosevelt was able to launch the New Deal in 1933 because the American people wanted to change the country and their own lives. But that isn't true anymore. Now people want the government to change so their lives can stay the same. The current American voters don't want to be transformed; they want to be defended.
Here comes the happiness part. A Pew Research Center survey shows that 65% Americans are satisfied with their own lives, which is one of the highest rates of personal satisfaction in today's world. On the other hand, Americans are overwhelmingly pessimistic about their public institutions. Only 25% of them are satisfied with the state of their nation. The 40-point gap in private and public happiness is the fourth-largest gap in the world, trailing behind only Israel, Mexico and Brazil.
There are more surprises. How often do we think that our government isn't on the right track? A whopping 67% Americans feel that way about their government. If we believe that our government is wasteful and inefficient, about 62% Americans share the same dim view about their government.
We aren't alone to have doubts about the future of our next generation. Sixty percent Americans think their next generation will be worse off than the current one. Americans today are more pessimistic about government's ability to solve problems. Eighty percent of them believe this Congress has accomplished nothing.
Do these figures ring a bell? In the highest democratic nation in the world, higher satisfaction in personal life leads to lower satisfaction with government. In a less democratic country like Mexico, 76% people are personally satisfied. What does this tell us? Probably government doesn't play a big role in people's life. People are happy regardless of whether the government stays on the same page with their expectations.
The Pew survey puts Bangladesh with Pakistan, Indonesia and most of the African countries, because the relationship between rising income and increasing happiness is not very strongly evident. When compared with a country like Nigeria, Bangladesh has twice the per capita income but half the chance to be happy with their lives as the Nigerians.
What does it tell about our attitude towards the government? Do we want the government to transform us, or do we want it to defend us? Do we really care if we have a democratic government, or do we want a government that controls prices and provides security? Do we want a government that fights corruption, or do we want a government that creates more opportunities for more corruption?
One answer is that this nation is divided. A large majority wants the government to transform their lives. They want incomes to grow, savings to rise, and lives to improve. They want the government to create more jobs, build more roads, provide more sanitation, and maintain law and order.
There is also a small minority, one that likes to be defended. They like the government to change so that their lives continue to remain the same. They control the government and make it do their pleasure, giving them opportunity to increase and protect their wealth.
This is the gap. One group is unhappy because the government pays no attention to their wretched condition. Another group is unhappy because it can't make sure of a system, which will unchangingly change the government of their choice.
Lately, there has been a thought of rapprochement. Two leaders fighting in the name of the larger group might sit for talks. The initiative is coming from a member of the smaller group, a questionable indication leading to more questions. Whose leaders are these leaders elected by people? In the end, will people's government belong to people?
The country is seething with discontent. It's floating on rage. Democracy is an empty word, ringing hollow. The critical balance is that government belongs to people no more than people belong to government. Hope runs like a river between two unhappy banks. Who is going to build the bridge to close this unhappiness gap?

Mohammad Badrul Ahsan is a columnist for The Daily Star.