A Message Comes From Pokhara

As SPA leaders are trying to save monarchy in Kathmandu, a strong message comes from Pokhara this afternoon.

What happened in Pokhara is surely an indication of the days ahead. Pro-republican students attacked a meeting of pro-royalists this afternoon. These students were not from one party as many would like to believe: they were from Nepali Congress, CPN UML and CPN Maoist. Rastriya Prajantra Party Nepal, breakaway ultra-royalist faction of RPP, was formed by people like Kamal Thapa, at the height of autocracy, when they were in power and in the royal cabinet headed by Gyanendra Shah. After the April Revolution, the leadership of the faction was handed over to Rabindranath Sharma who recently said that continuity of monarchy was necessary in Nepal. Sharma also appealed Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala to lead a Democratic Alliance against the possible Republic Front by the communists. Sharma was in the process of brining together royalists under his party’s banner and was holding a regional meeting of his group in Pokhara. Furious students spontaneously intervened the meeting, attacked the participants of the meeting as helpless police watched. Royalists, including Sharma, fled the venue. The incident can not be welcomed as such because in democracy even its enemy has the right to conspire against it. BUT the event is a clear signal that the popular uprising that was started in April hasn’t quite yet finished. The main slogan of the uprising (in April and other previous protests) was this: “Gyane Chor Desh Chod” (Thief Gyanendra, leave the country) followed by “Down with monarchy”. The reality is that Gyanendra is still enjoying inside the high walls of Narayanhitty with OUR money.

The timing of the Pokhara incident is worth noting. This has come exactly on the day when the government and Maoist negotiator failed to agree on the status of monarchy: government is struggling to provide some sort of space to the same Gyanendra Shah against whom people fought and died in April. Maoists want to declare Prime Minister or the Speaker of the House as the head of state but the government wants to keep quite on the issue (that is to say, continue accepting Gyanendra head of the state.) That is clearly against the spirit of popular uprising and its mandate. That is also against the basic principles of law and order. Gyanendra has been found guilty in suppressing the popular movement and to continue him as the head of the state would mean this government wants to give prize to a guilty instead of punishing him. To continue Gyanendra, a guilty, as the head of state is no different than releasing all the convicted killers from jail.

We must keep in mind that the situation in Nepal is still volatile, people can hit the streets any time against anyone who is trying to save monarchy and a final struggle against the feudal institution can be launched any time if the leadership in the government fails to act as per the mandate of the April revolution. It’s not just about Girija Prasad Koirala who is in favor of continuing monarchy but the stand of CPN UML leadership is also dubious. If they really want to do what they are promising to people publicly (they are for republican), this is high time that they left the government and exert pressure on Koirala and other forces that be. Take another example of what the public wants. Just today, influential young leaders of Nepali Congress, the party of Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala who seems to be trying to save monarchy, came together to say that the nation was now heading for republic. They include Gururaj Ghimire, Dhanaraj Gurung and Gagan Thapa, all former leaders of Nepal Student Union. The youth voice is clear, Nepal should not be made the hostage in the name of providing job to one person called Gyanendra Shah. -By Wagle

Advertisements

80 thoughts on “A Message Comes From Pokhara”

  1. Alrite, let’s play your game eh!

    -Who’s to say all of those who extort are Maoists? It could be easily a criminal, pretending to be a Maoist. The average person being looted wouldn’t ask, ‘hey, show me proof that you are a Maoist.’

    How are the Maoists then supporting themselves with over 50000 troops? The money doesn’t come from ‘Care the Maoists’ – Canada! Thus it is all extortion to the wazoo.

    -On the contrary, the caste based hierarchy is very much similar to Nazim.

    Perhaps you’d like to support your thesis with proofs of concentration/labor camps and extermination of 6 million whoever it is. Stretched out analogy! On the contrary, Maoists are the replica of Nazi party. They are ulta-nationalists. They promise Nepal’s prominance as an ideal in communist experiment. They snatch youths and put them in labor camps. They believe in violence in form of changing power and getting hold of that power.

    -Actually, democracy was achieved through experimentation. Not all politicians are corrupt and not all commies are homicidal maniacs.

    So SOME are. So the top man in charge is corrupt. So Prachanda and Baburam admit to killing people as justification for getting in power. Ok then. Let’s persecute: GPK, Madhav Nepal, Prachanda, Baburam, Mahara, Dev Gurung and all those whe were in power between 1995-2005. We can let go the Maoist kids and Nepal Army infantry. They were simply following orders. Agreed?!

    -The anger displayed by the Maoists is a symptom of society. The royal family, if they cared about the Nepalese people, would have taken steps to resolve this anger when it first started. This is a bit analogous to the French revolution, perhaps you can read that.

    No thank you. There is NO semblence to French revolution. It is a romantic ethos evoked by Maoists to appeal to Westerners. Again, IF is a conditional clause. IF the kings weren’t around, you, oh my bad, WE wouldn’t have Nepal to speak of. So let’s just say the cost of having an independent and sovereign nation is high.

    – I don’t buy the ‘X’ killed less than ‘Y’ therefore, I’m going to go with ‘X’ logic.

    I am simply matching your ‘time phenomenon’ with ‘quantity phenonemon’. Again, you say that you don’t go by such logic but you cannot help to point out biased reports on deaths of Maoists (disguised as Maos nonetheless) are in fact greater than otherwise.

    -The royals being anyone who wants to hand over any degree of political power to someone born into the ruling Shah dynasty. My mistake, I thought it was quite clear.

    Ok so how about if the ‘royals’ decide to hand over degree of political power to a Rana or a Basnyat or even a Shrestha who believes in a countervailing force to check the runaway corruption and governance of fear? I knew you would come around eventually. Good, so we see eye to eye on this one.

    -Actually, when Birendra handed over the ocuntry, it was still one of the poorest in the world. He, of course, comparitively very rich. It’s gone down since.

    Of course, we have no shame in calling ourselves one of the poorest. And yes, comparatively, we were well off. There remained a lot of social and economic reforms that required new approach but we were optimist. We were happier. We were safer. We were sovereign. All that you are currently enjoying in YOUR country.

    Like

  2. Mind you. We are still independent country. Tomorrow the King and His family will go into exile NEPAL and Nepalese will still be independen. Gone are the days when the King used be the unifying force in Nepal. The King and the Royalist are divider not the Uniter. My grandfather worked for the King Tribhuwan and Mahendra. My grandather passed away in 1967 but I still have a pass to go into the Narayanhiti Royal Palace. I understand very well why we treat the King as the incarnation of the god Bishnu. Time is different now. The people are smarter. We want to be the part of the modern world not the past. As long as we hang into the monarchy we will not be able to go forward.
    And yes, I am not fan of Maoists either. Realistically they are bunch of loosers. But the people followed them because the King and the politicians ignored the ordinary Nepalese. Now I see the signs that the politicians are learning from their mistakes. It takes time.
    But I am not ready to give any chance to the King and Royalist. Their time is up.

    Like

  3. I don’t know how we are ‘independent’ in practical terms when our internal problems get hatched in foreign land; the originators of Nepali crisis control their force from the foreign land; the resources come unchecked and unhindered through foreign borders; the political parties belonging to foreign governments openly come into our country and lay out policies – not in the interest of Nepal but their own. In all this, how are we preserving our sovereignity? Nepal has been reduced from a country that once used to evoke mysticism and romance to simply a puppet state of India.

    Your personal experience of being a palace insider says nothing about how Monarchy has ‘divided’ the country. If it is any who have divided the country it is the parties and Maoists. Parties betrayed the people’s trust – fighting amongst theselves for power while country’s development agenda got thrown in the back burner; people became disillusioned and cynical towards state. Maoists propaganda machine equated state – by default – with Monarchy. And the gullible people bought into their lies and damn lies – one after another. That is the real progression of unsurmountable lies Nepali people have been buying into.

    Forget king or monarchy. Forget crap about king being Vishnu. Symbolisms are not to be taken literally. For you to say the image of unity – in whatever form in may come in – an unnecessary element – is like denying gravity while temporarily intoxicated by hallucinegins.

    Like

  4. Nazim started by the philosophy that certain people are born superior to others. That’s what the caste system demonstrates.

    Extreme communism established itself in nepal because of societal conditions. If, like you believe, people were ‘happier and safer’ during Birendra’s rule, why did Maoism arise? It was because aside from the priviledged few, people were not happy with the way things were going.

    There was absolutely no social motility. If you had ancestoral wealth, you were rich. Otherwise, even if you were an engineer/doctor (but without ancestoral wealth) you would remain lower middle class. You might work hard, but your life would just be sustained–you couldn’t take vacations, buy a new car, etc.

    BTW, I’m not a ‘westerner’ as my parents came from Nepal. According to my dad (worked as an engineer in a gov’t factory)–his manager was a highschool pass person who had no degree in engineering. He was only made manager because of his ancestoral wealth/influence. Luckily, my dad had the oppertunity to get the heck away from there and work as an engineer US/Canada. I do enjoy it here quite a lot, I get free health care (for anything), a good education, and the promise of a well paying job after I graduate from university.

    There was no exaggerated violence before because people were less educated (thanks to the Ranas decision to ban education for the general public) and more docile. I think society should make necessary changes and reforms before communism is established, then there won’t be a need for communism.

    Now, people have realized that even though the country is poor, it’s wealth is extremely unevenly distributed (and very unfairly). They have decided that the Royal family does not deserve all the wealth they have accumulated (by robbing the masses) should be redistributed to make everyone’s living standard a little bit better.

    BTW, I have yet to hear of someone wanting to place a new king, as you have proposed to a ‘hand over degree of political power to a Rana or a Basnyat’ etc. Randomly handing power over to any one person is entirely not democratic.

    And actually, I do believe it’s analogous to the French revolution. Justifying the atrocities of the Royal family (accumulating wealth unfairly while the country starves being a huge atrocity) just because their ancestor united Nepal, is not logical.

    Just a note: I don’t support communism at all. I’m a capitalist consumer and I love my Coach bag, iPod, getting a new laptop every few years etc. But who knows, if my parents hadn’t left Nepal and I was one of the ‘have nots’ in Nepal, I would definitely fight social injustice. I could have possibly joined the Maos…

    Like

  5. ‘Nepal has been reduced from a country that once used to evoke mysticism and romance to simply a puppet state of India.’ -give us all a break TGirisenses! every post you make just seems more and more stupid.

    Melissa-good post. This TGirisenses wants to go back to the old panchayat system where the ‘elite’ guide the ‘dumb masses’. A dictatorship of the ‘superior’ group over the ‘inferior people’. He has no empathy for the problems the Nepali people face in their every day lives.

    Like

  6. Parties betrayed the people’s trust – fighting amongst theselves for power while country’s development agenda got thrown in the back burner; people became disillusioned and cynical towards state.
    This is how Maoists came into power. Otherwise they have no representation in the House – they did not win any seats in the last election. Now they are having same number of representation in the interim parliament as Madhab Nepal’s communist Party.Call it the power comes from the barrel of the gun.
    To answer your question we are still independent and we wil be independent for ever. If India wanted to anex Nepal she could have done during Nehru’s and Patel’s administration.

    Like

  7. -Nazim started by the philosophy that certain people are born superior to others. That’s what the caste system demonstrates.

    So does science. It says that if your parents have good ‘debating genes’, you are likely to be born with one too. Thus science = Nazism = Castism = Exclusionism = Superiority = Meritocracy =….Damn everything is connected. I didn’t know that. Good logic! Not!

    -Extreme communism established itself in nepal because of societal conditions. If, like you believe, people were ‘happier and safer’ during Birendra’s rule, why did Maoism arise? It was because aside from the priviledged few, people were not happy with the way things were going.

    Wrong again! Communism – more precisely Maoism started as a result of leaders like Baburam’s and Prachanda’s smaller parties not getting recognized my then parliament which, in your present context, are those exact corrupt leaders who you put so much faith in.
    Thus Maoism started AFTER King Birendra tranferred power to then parties. Remember?? Ask your daddy!

    -There was absolutely no social motility. If you had ancestoral wealth, you were rich. Otherwise, even if you were an engineer/doctor (but without ancestoral wealth) you would remain lower middle class. You might work hard, but your life would just be sustained–you couldn’t take vacations, buy a new car, etc.

    Such is usually the case with Third World countries; nothing NEW or SPECIFIC to Nepal. Please be specific.

    Not a Westerner??? Nice, what’s your number, let me call you sometime.

    -There was no exaggerated violence before because people were less educated

    So education makes one more violent? Hot damn my education!

    -Now, people have realized that even though the country is poor, it’s wealth is extremely unevenly distributed (and very unfairly). They have decided that the Royal family does not deserve all the wealth they have accumulated (by robbing the masses) should be redistributed to make everyone’s living standard a little bit better.

    So this has got nothing to do with feudalism; it is about uneven distribution of wealth which, by every definition the underpinning of consumerist capitalism. Are you saying this is a bigger war against capitalism? Where the hell is feudalism in Nepal. WHO own lands anymore??? I don’t, do you?

    -Randomly handing power over to any one person is entirely not democratic.

    I haven’t proposed anything. The only thing I have proposed is a powerful check against runaway corruption and governance of fear.

    -Justifying the atrocities of the Royal family (accumulating wealth unfairly while the country starves being a huge atrocity) just because their ancestor united Nepal, is not logical.

    No justification necessary for protecting the royal families. Has any member of your family been a victim of ‘royal atrocities’??? How about the victim of Maoists atrocities? Again, accumulating wealth is atypical of capitalism. This happens everywhere in consumer capitalist society.

    Just a note: I don’t support communism at all. I’m a capitalist consumer and I love my Coach bag, iPod, getting a new laptop every few years etc. But who knows, if my parents hadn’t left Nepal and I was one of the ‘have nots’ in Nepal, I would definitely fight social injustice. I could have possibly joined the Maos…

    You are romantic in many ways. You don’t have to be a Mao to fight for a cause – in fact you would dilute the cause by resorting to means that can only take you down the path of destruction. To reconstruct anything, choosinga path of destruction is inherently foolish.

    Like

  8. Why annex when you can keep em as a puppet state. When you annex, you assume the burden of developing that country. Why buy a cow when you can get milk for free kinda logic.

    Like

  9. ‘So does science. It says that if your parents have good ‘debating genes’, you are likely to be born with one too.’

    science does not say certain people are superior to others. (side note, where did you go to school?)

    Hitler’s philosophies about why the Germans are superior to others, on the other hand, is very much like Hindu vedic scriptures’ classification of castes. I can’t give you a phil/hist lesson but take up a class on Hitler in university, you’ll definitely cover the similarities.

    The spread of Maoism started after Birendra, but not even the two commie leaders could stir up what wasn’t already there. People may not have acted on their feelings, but the anger existed and was growing.

    Just because the lack of social motility is not specific to Nepal does not make it OK. People have a right to be angry, in Nepal or anywhere else.

    There’s uneven distribution of wealth in capitalist countries and then there’s uneven distribution of wealth in Nepal. Nepal’s unequality is a lot larger and very static. In western countries, you have much more (exponentially more) oppertunity to climb up the economic ladder.

    BTW, I never supported unchecked political and economic capitalism. Personally, I’m a capitalist consumer, politically I believe in a semi-socialist system (like that of canada). I’ll happily pay a hell of a lot more income tax living in Canada (rather than moving to the US and paying a lot less). Why? because I know that the tax money is used to support universal health care (free to everyone in canada), progressive social assistance programs (food, clothing, housing for underprivilidged folks because they have a right to life and liberty), etc. This isn’t capitalistic in a political sense, but necessary to ensure a good living standard for vulnerable people in society.

    Education didn’t lead to violence. After being educated, people were able to realize the injustice they faced and set out to ammend it. In the ideal situation, those in power would yield and start massive social reforms–then there wouldn’t be a need for violence. Therefore, it’s not education that has created violence, it’s social injustice caused by those in power.

    Like

  10. Dear fellow countrymen I see anotherside of the coin differently. I am talking about the supreme leader of the Maoist Prachanda. In fact I read books on extremely well dissiplined communists. But the Maoist cadres we have are very different. They are not productive but they are all extortionists.

    I feel that due to unemployment, poverty and youngsters turbulance age draged them to join the Maoist.

    First I blame big political parties and the government after 1990. Current situation was created because the government did not think of the country. The great leaders always thought about their well being. No politicians in Nepal planned or came up with any notion for future of our youngsters.

    The politicians were there to convince naive general public and make money. Up to this day our great politicains are following same principle. In fact all political leaders of the country are too old fashioned. To build new Nepal we need complete political overhauling.

    Second I blame the Maoist suprimo Prancha. When he started rebelion in the country in 1996 he did not dissiplined his cadres. In fact he just took anyone came along. I believe Prachanda does not have long vision at all. In addition he lags for good command and control. When the Maoist had nothing to eat the suprimo ordered his cadres to go round the villages to extort food. None of the Maoist top leaders offended that. All Maoists top brass are alike and unable to dissipline their cardes.

    The issue here is that monarch must be out. No Nepalis want the monarch anymore. Nepal needs to be democratic replublic. Because only few people follow the king. They are either mandales or for the money that’s all.

    But, now because of the former democratic government since 1990 did not create any new jobs and Prachanda took any hoolygons in as his Maoist cadres. The problem escalated itself to its peak. Today average youngsters are attracted to guns and extort their daily necessity from general public. That is why in most areas the Maoist cadres are refusing to surender their weapons. Even after signing of peace accord extortion in many places are going on. The Maoist suprimo completely made youngsters idle. Almost all youngsters have forgotten that they have to work. As long as they ahve a gun to threaten general public they are living on it. To correct this problem Nepal has to spent lot of money to rehabilitate those Maoist cadres to be normal. Otherwise present Maoist cadres will tunr to gangsters in Nepal. For this Pranchanda and his top leaders should be responsible. The suprimo and other Maoist leaders should at least had dissiplined the Maois cadres from day one.

    In other hand now there are only approximately 60,000 Maoists cadres. If Prachanda and his fellow Maoist leaders are unable to control the cadres would they be capable of control the country with population of 25 millions? This is another scinario Nepal remains to see in future.

    With all those incidents of the past and present Nepal is at the cross road. In another word Nepal is a failed Nation. Unless we Nepalis unite and try to establish new system the country will go bad to worse. At the end it reaches at the edge to fall off the clif!!!!

    Like

  11. In fact in other countries there are well established infrastructures in place. But in Nepal nothing. The government formed by our great political leaders should establish that.

    Regrettably none of leaders are interested to establish an infrastructure. They are only there to follow old tradition and make lots of money.

    That is why I strong feel Nepal needs complete overhaul of political system and corrupted leaders. All present political leaders are no good they are all corrupted. Nepal has a situation king is no good and so is politicains.

    We can’t throw them at once so first the king. After if politicians don’t change their attitude on malpractices then they also have to go. Nepal needs to filter good ones from junk yard of politics.

    Let us talk about Sher bahadur Deuba. At the time of his Prime Ministership he approved royal spending of 75 crore. He knows Nepal is a poor country. Despite that he wanted to please the king. At the end he was thrown out by the king. Now he is against the monarch more than anyone. This is the type of great leaders we have.

    About Girija, How many times Girija Prasad Koirala been PM? Has he opted to establish any types of infrastructure since 1990 for Nepal? No he is only interested to make lots of money and give to his daughter Sujata and his German son inlaw. In addition he had brought his daughter in politics. Sujata is married to a German may be she holds citizenship of German.

    I urge all Nepalis to be extremely aware at this point of time. We Nepalis are passing through very critical moment now. Nepal is our country and we have to defend at any cost.

    Like

  12. We shouldn’t forget countries like Afghanistan, Iran, Combodia, even China, Iraq etc. also. Abolishing the old house and building the new house is not the bad idea but before abolishing the pld house whether one can built the new house within and outside conscent and support is more important. Everyone knows once the king will abolish, these eight parties (maybe more tomorrow) will fight for chair like in hell without democratic behaviour.

    Like

  13. Show me a civilization that did not believe in its superiority and I’ll give you your damn socialist utopia in Nepal. Show me civilizations, societies and groups that did not get into conflict if not for implementing its version of theory on people. In all this there is inherent and undeniable claim of superiority – whether that may come from heridity or Marx’s bible; fanaticism of religion or extremism of political theories. Get a deeper understanding of issues and events that shape human development rather that taking potshots at analogies.

    -Hitler’s philosophies about why the Germans are superior to others, on the other hand, is very much like Hindu vedic scriptures’ classification of castes. I can’t give you a phil/hist lesson but take up a class on Hitler in university, you’ll definitely cover the similarities.

    How sad. You cannot give me a lesson yet you CLAIM to find ancient practices and contemporary (in relative terms) political miscarriage analogous to each other. Again, scriptures in every religion profess to claim superiority. Jews consider themselves the ‘chosen people’. Muslisms – they can’t stand anybody different. Christians – well they blatantly say you’ll go to hell if you don’t buy into Christ’s body. Tell me now, Missy, which religion doesn’t profess superiority and distinction between/among human population? Go take a crash course in 5000 years of human development – anthropology to be precise.

    -The spread of Maoism started after Birendra, but not even the two commie leaders could stir up what wasn’t already there. People may not have acted on their feelings, but the anger existed and was growing.

    Wrong again! If commies could have stirred up issues then why couldn’t they do much earlier when the wave of socialism and independence was sweeping the post-colonial South Asia? Heck BP Koirala (ask your daddy for reference) was a staunch socialist, yet nothing really took off in Nepal along that line. Again, the anger was genuine, perhaps! But the target of such anger was certainly misdirected. Read this from my previous post in reference to Shree Shrestha:

    “If it is any who have divided the country it is the parties and Maoists. Parties betrayed the people’s trust – fighting amongst theselves for power while country’s development agenda got thrown in the back burner; people became disillusioned and cynical towards state. Maoists propaganda machine equated state – by default – with Monarchy. And the gullible people bought into their lies and damn lies – one after another. That is the real progression of unsurmountable lies Nepali people have been buying into.”

    -Just because the lack of social motility is not specific to Nepal does not make it OK. People have a right to be angry, in Nepal or anywhere else.

    You seem to trivialize everything by starting sentences with JUST BECAUSE a lot. People have right to be angry but such anger should be directed towards appropriate parties. If you get angry at your daddy for not buying you a Coach bag, would you start kicking your neighbor’s dog?

    -There’s uneven distribution of wealth in capitalist countries and then there’s uneven distribution of wealth in Nepal. Nepal’s unequality is a lot larger and very static. In western countries, you have much more (exponentially more) oppertunity to climb up the economic ladder.

    In Western countries, resources are exponentially more than in Nepal. Nepal IS a poor country. Nepal has to manage with whatever resources it has got. There is no feudalism; there is only mercantalistic capitalism in Nepal, as there are in most countries.

    -BTW, I never supported unchecked political and economic capitalism. Personally, I’m a capitalist consumer, politically I believe in a semi-socialist system (like that of canada). I’ll happily pay a hell of a lot more income tax living in Canada (rather than moving to the US and paying a lot less). Why? because I know that the tax money is used to support universal health care (free to everyone in canada), progressive social assistance programs (food, clothing, housing for underprivilidged folks because they have a right to life and liberty), etc. This isn’t capitalistic in a political sense, but necessary to ensure a good living standard for vulnerable people in society.

    That’s your choice. Do as you wish. Enjoy your stay in Canada!

    -Education didn’t lead to violence. After being educated, people were able to realize the injustice they faced and set out to ammend it. In the ideal situation, those in power would yield and start massive social reforms–then there wouldn’t be a need for violence. Therefore, it’s not education that has created violence, it’s social injustice caused by those in power.

    Last I checked, 40% of Nepal’s population was illiterate. All of a sudden Englightenment hits Nepal and people are ‘educated’. Perhaps you mean that people bought into Maoist’s propaganda directed towards state. But rebellions are always against the state. Howver, had it been directed well, it could have correctly identified the culprit – corrupt parties drooling for power all the time. But Maos turned out to be fake revolutionaries also. Instead of taking on the state, they actually took the path of least resistance. They took on the SYMBOL of state – an inactive and powerless entity which had already relinquished its power to the people in 1990.

    Like

  14. Wagle, being a true “democrat” means adhering to all the tenets of a democracy including making room for dissent. You just can’t pick and choose the parts of democracy you like and still call yourself a “democrat”.

    People like you espouse so much hatred for the current king and the monarchy that you can’t seem overcome your prejudice even when the “democratic norms” you so keenly seem to advocate are being chucked out the window, so to speak.

    Like

  15. even a ceremonial president has some reserve powers…

    i don’t think nepal’s democracy will be like india’s. it will be more like bangladesh’s.

    we have a ceremonial president, with limited reserve powers. the past government put one of their stooges in the office (chances are the same will happen in nepal) and now that we are in a period where our ‘neutral’ president should be supporting fair elections, he notes a politcal line. president iajuddin is now refered to as ‘president yesuddin’.

    creating a republic will most likely not improve nepals situation. it will just create another opportunity for political turmoil.

    Like

  16. hey tgirisenses-you’re becoming quite a bore with your nonsensical rantings. why don’t you do us all a favour and crawl back to that dark, damp, smelly hole that you came from? If you think you are so much better than the people go ahead and prove it, instead of jacking off in the anonymity of the blog (like the coward you are). If you have any belief in what you are ranting about try living here in Nepal for a good length of time instead blubbering on from the comfort of distant shores.

    Like

  17. Some one made the point that the royals should be tried first because they have a much longer history of authoritarianism. That’s true, but don’t tell that to the nitwit royalists, who are still convinced that the ‘institution’ is divinely ordained.

    The reason the monarchy should go is because it is the most backward ‘insititution’, if I may call it that, in Nepal. It is the most rusty link, tying us to ancient mores of governance and hindering Nepal’s ability to be a truly modern state. I don’t care for the Maoists, but at least they claim to be for a progressive society. How much their ideals can be realized on the ground is an open question, but nevertheless one that must be asked, and to give our ‘commie’ brethren some credit, they were the first ones to bring those issues up.
    As for the ‘King’, I see that he’s consulted his astrologer again. You see what I mean? That man doesn’t have a mind of his own. He makes his decisions based on the mumbo-jumbo that’s available to him. Now you see why Nepal was this way for so long?

    Like

  18. Let the elected CA decide the fate of the monarchy-if we are to respect democracy that is how it should be. But even if after monarchy has been abolished by the elected CA (a supposition) remember as true democrats we must allow all to have their say without fear, as long as they do it peacefully and within the boundaries of the new constitution/law.

    I for one would be glad to see the end of monarchy in Nepal but I will respect the wishes of the people if it is otherwise.

    Like

  19. Idiot!

    “dark, damp, smelly hole that you came from” or “the comfort of distant shores”??? which one is it? Moron, can’t even finish a sentence without contradicting himself!

    Like

  20. ah! discusion at great lengths, and pepole are almost choking each other, as usual, at UWB.

    no one likes changes, but some are more scared than the others, usually who have to lose more from it.

    same, here, with the prospect of monarchy or republic, and people in between.

    i have no problem with all sides fighting their ideological war, as long as they believe genuinely, with the changes they propose would bring changes to the greater mass, for worse or better, after all there is no silver bullet, you learn it hard way.

    but, if you are fighting tooth and nails, just to save your status quo (all royalists), or to upgrade it (all jungle dwelling maoists or sniveling politicians), ther is not much oomph in your shouting.

    change is inevitable, you like it or not, if it’s so, why whine, let’s just move on.

    we have already seen two centuries of monarchy, let’s try something else, if it doesn’t work out, fine, what’s to lose, we were always miserable, we will still be miserable.

    but, who knows, moving to republic might work, let’s give a shot. WHAT’S THEIR TO LOSE?

    Like

  21. Allu Tarkari,

    Nice point. We’ve been preserving the status quo for 200+ years now. Lets kick the royals out now and our descendants can decide, in the year 2200 AD, whether that was a good decision or not.

    For every 200+ years of monarhcy, its only fair that we have 200 years of non-monarchy. Then only can we decide.

    Like

  22. Manan ji,

    I think I am with you! As you say, its only fair that we have 200 years of non-monarchy. And the non-monarchy year must start rigth from 2063 (2006). 15 or so days remaining! We can do that actually. People are already talking about suspending monarchy…in another blog. I am with them too.

    Like

  23. Allu tarkari,

    If people support current politicians for their vested interest, then this democracy will not be successful like of 1990 and previous one. In substitute of king another force definately takeover the democracy. This is alredy analysed and proved in developing country by the researchers. When democratic wings are stronger, no one can even touch the democracy becuase democracy is to the people and manage by the people with equal opprtunities. But about ours is totally different, the democracy always become for the certain groups only and assured changes never seen by the people.

    You are right, changes is necessary but what changes always become question mark? Just change in the name of change make no sense. Similarly, just speech and written words cannot fulfill the demand of the very poor people of Nepal.

    -Does this change address to 40% illeterate people ?
    -Does this change address to 50% living in poverty?
    -Does this change brings in gender, caste and ethinicity eqality problems?
    -Does this changes address to basic medical and health assurance to the people?
    -Does this change not bring another civil war in anyname or goal?

    Like

  24. ‘How sad. You cannot give me a lesson yet you CLAIM to find ancient practices and contemporary (in relative terms) political miscarriage analogous to each other. Again, scriptures in every religion profess to claim superiority. Jews consider themselves the ‘chosen people’. Muslisms – they can’t stand anybody different. Christians – well they blatantly say you’ll go to hell if you don’t buy into Christ’s body. Tell me now, Missy, which religion doesn’t profess superiority and distinction between/among human population? Go take a crash course in 5000 years of human development – anthropology to be precise.’

    Ignorant a-holes from all religions have the superiority complex–educated people with the ability to reason don’t. BTW, the juedo-christians may say their religion is superior to someone else’s but they don’t have a hierarchal system that’s anywhere near as oppressive as Hindu society. For the most part, they’ve progressed to ignore the feudalistic elements of their religion.

    And there is ‘proof’ but I”m not going to write a history/phil lesson on a blog. There are these things called ‘books’ in your local library–to search for one on Hitler’s philosophies as compared to the Hindu caste system. Also, there’s this thing called ‘google’ or better yet, read scholarly sociology journals. Educate yourself.

    As for the kicking the dog comment: there is justified anger and unjustified anger. Use your reasoning skills to differentiate between the two. Homo sapiens have the ability to use superior reasoning skills when compared to other animals–but somehow, I think evolution is completely lost on certain individuals.

    If the Shah/Rana clan really deserve to keep their wealth and are really as ‘superior’ as you think they are, then why have the ones who are living in North America/Europe not achieved much? They’re not high profile engineers, doctors, CEOs, stock brokers, economists, lawyers–nothing. In fact, the deceased Dipendra was known for urinating on some school officials in Eaton and getting kicked out. (blatant example of evolution not working out for some of the species members)

    I can definitely understand the anger, shown by these students, at those who want to had over power to people from that family. And I don’t think the royalist party would exist if its representatives were getting mucho dinero from Mr. Shah. Strange how someone who doesn’t support corruption would support the Shahs handing out tons of tax money to buy representatives to support their party.

    Oh and btw, I can afford to buy my own coach bags. Something not one of the Shah/Rana people of my age could do had they not had their ancestors’ looted wealth.

    Like

  25. sagarmatha ji,

    you have a point there, we don’t have a tursted/competent leaders to delegate the responsiblities of change.

    but, precisely for these points you have stated, i mean by status quo:


    -Does this change address to 40% illeterate people ?
    -Does this change address to 50% living in poverty?
    -Does this change brings in gender, caste and ethinicity eqality problems?
    -Does this changes address to basic medical and health assurance to the people?
    -Does this change not bring another civil war in anyname or goal?

    exactly, when did it change last, forget for better? when, i said change, i meant constant change, whenever they are needed.

    changes are nothing but social experiments, they may work, they may not, in our case more chances of not working, i concede.

    but, it’s a part of the social evolution, so why, get scared. it’s always the urban and educated ones are always aganist the change, since they have more to lose, if the program doesn’t work.

    but, sagarmatha, you seem to be a very compasionate man, i say so because you have raised very pertinent questions:

    What about illetrate, poor, enthincs and one hoping for basic health care?

    if the republic dosen’t work, what do they have to lose, they are not going to be more poor, less illetrate, or get less medical attention.

    so let’s try it, i am ready to lose my share of whatever for republic, are you?

    for the poor win win situation.

    Like

  26. Tell me this, ‘Melissa’, what is your last name as you definitely seem to have a lot of pent-up anger stored against Ranas/Shahs? That is not the way of ‘evolutionary reasoning’ now is it. How different are you then from Dipendra? If given, YOU might urinate on one of the Rana/Shahs – just because they happen to be a Rana or a Shah. You must be glad as hell that your father decided to slip out the country early enough to get you them damn Coach bags. Didn’t you mention that had it not been for your daddy’s slipping out of Nepal that you might have joined the Maos? So, essentially, you are of the same breed as Rana and Shah kids as your daddy seems to have salvaged your life. You certainly did not go abroad on you own merit now, did you?

    “Ignorant a-holes from all religions have the superiority complex–educated …most part, they’ve progressed to ignore the feudalistic elements of their religion.”

    So anybody who believes in certain tenets of their religion is ‘ignorant a-hole’? Who are these IGNORANT A-HOLES specifically? There are elements in every religion that go against the basic rights of people. Yet people have learned to overlook them and focus on those that bring people together and not drive them apart. Last I checked, about 90% of US population practiced some form of religion. That percentage drops to about 70 in Europe but still significantly great. You say they are all ignorant a-holes? How have you been specifically oppressed by Hindu society-you don’t even live in one? Please fill me in on your/your family experience.

    “And there is ‘proof’ … Educate yourself.”

    There are books on ‘logic for dummies’ too. Perhaps you’d like to take a peak at em when you’re not shopping for Coach bags and ipods. It will certainly teach you how not to reduce and lump disconnected events – speculating on seemingly random set of events and trying to make some cohesive argument. I see where you get your info. Anything’s that prints must be the truth, RIGHT!

    “As for the ….. certain individuals.”

    Dhat! Justified and unjustified anger is relative. You not getting a Coach bag is justified anger on your part. Such is not the case with your daddy because he knows you spend unnecessary money which could be better used to feed few people in Nepal every year. Second, anger persists. Granted. But even if your damn anger is justified, you cannot channel that anger into something that is relatively outside the cause of your anger – making it a punching-bag of your personal pent-up anger and escape goat of hysterical masses.

    “If the Shah/Rana clan …and getting kicked out. (blatant example of
    evolution not working out for some of the species members)”

    How many Shah/Ranas do you personally know in North America? What are you a census bureau to conclude such narrow remark? Stop sounding like an idiot. Provide proofs of instance where I have said that Shah/Ranas are ‘superior’ to others. On the other hand you seem to conclude that they are ALL useless. Who is making claims of superiority now? Condescending Canadian!

    “I can definitely understand the anger… Shahs handing out tons of tax money to buy representatives to support their party.”

    Certainly the language of anger is all you seem to understand. Anything else requires a lot of attention which frankly is outside the limits of you Coach-branded brain, Barbie! You mean if they WEREN’T getting money? Please double-check your post before posting.

    By your reasoning in earlier posts you say that ‘exaggerated’ violence took the form once people got educated. Then you go on to say educated people reason. Let me ask you this: if you consider those students who ransacked the meeting, would you consider them educated or thugs simply angry and looking at ways of venting out their anger? What is It.? Be more consistent with your logic.

    For the last freaking time – read my previous posts. I cannot be such tunnel-vision as you. The only thing I support is a check against these corrupt-to-the core political parties and murderous and homicidal Maoists imposing governance of fear. For that ANYBODY is welcome. It is not a Shah/Rana exclusive club. Heck if a disgruntled Maoist leader comes forward and asks to lead such role, I have happy to support him for the cause. Anybody other than the corrupt leaders and murderous Maoists – anybody!

    Like

  27. ‘That is not the way of ‘evolutionary reasoning’ now is it. How different are you then from Dipendra? ……. You certainly did not go abroad on you own merit now, did you?’

    Your sentences are not cohesive and your arguments are invalid. I could go on and give you an explanation but somehow, I think pressing keys on the board will just be a loss of good ATP on my part because your neocortex will not process it.

    ‘‘exaggerated’ violence took the form once people got educated. Then you go on to say educated people reason. ..would you consider them educated or thugs simply angry and looking at ways of venting out their anger?’

    Educated people do reason. They’re human and get extremely frustrated once in a while. Such was the case of that incident. And of course, the anger’s justified. Unlike Mr. G’s anger during last April when he wanted to keep his power and cash flow. I do hope you see the difference between the two situations on your own (instead of counter arguing with invalid points and asking for ‘proofs’).

    In short, anger caused by an institution that does not respect your human rights = valid. Anger caused by the fact that you cannot rob the country anymore and asking the military to use brutal force = invalid. I’m guessing moral ethics are not exactly your expertise.

    And you didn’t just insinuate that you wanted a corruption police. You revered and cherished Birendra and said that the royal family has a right to their accumulated wealth because one of their ancestors’ ‘united’ the country. I’m going to go ahead and say that you don’t even remotely consider the relation of ‘united’ and ‘conquered.’ Attacking a kingdom during a religious festival was pretty low for one thing. Cutting off the nose and ear of the entire population of a city is incompatible with the actions of a moral ‘uniter.’

    Like

  28. “Your sentences are not cohesive and your arguments are invalid….will not process it.”

    The usual crap and psychobabble once again. Do you always think out loud? What about reading, do you read it out too???

    “Educated people do reason. They’re human and get extremely frustrated once in a while…. difference between the two situations on your own (instead of counter arguing with invalid points and asking for ‘proofs’).”

    ‘They are human and get extremely frustrated’

    An astute observation. Which grade are you in again?

    Extremly frustrated? Like when you cannot get your damn Coach bag? Empathizing with people is one thing; FAKING to understand their experience while sitting on your fat ass with Coach bags and ipods in your hear hardly qualifies you to speak for Nepali people. Go take a trip to the mall – you consumerist capitalist pig! Stop faking to feel the pain of Nepalis. You renounced that right to genuinely d so the moment your daddy slipped you out of the country.

    King G’s anger? What in the hell are you talking about? You have totally lost it now. Anger is the lowest form of human emotion, and when people have bigger things to worry about, they don’t get angry – they startegize and work to achieve their target. Dumb and useless sit there and get angry.

    Again, you say EDUCATED people reason. Who are these educated you talk about? You certainly seem to run away from reasoning. Shall I presume you are dumb and ignorant then? I have just used your own khukri to cut your nose and ear. All I find in your post is bits and pieces of disconnected events you try soo hard to link together and find a pattern. Keep banging you head against the wall. You’ll only bleed yourself to death.

    “In short, anger caused by an institution that does not respect your human rights = valid. Anger caused by the fact that you cannot rob the country anymore and asking the military to use brutal force = invalid. I’m guessing moral ethics are not exactly your expertise.”

    In short, define institution. In short, define ANGER. In short, define human rights. In short, define what comes with human rights – like human duties. In short, define ‘robbing the country’. In short, define brutal force. In short, define validity vs. non validity of all the definitions and relations that you are trying to establish. Don’t just churn up crap and expect people to buy into it.

    “And you didn’t just insinuate that you wanted a corruption police. ….consider the relation of ‘united’ and ‘conquered.’ Attacking a kingdom during a religious festival was pretty low for one thing. Cutting off the nose and ear of the….

    Stop hallucinating. The only time I could have possibly ‘revered and cherished Birendra and said that the royal family has a right to their accumulated wealth because one of their ancestors’ ‘united’ the country’ would be in your dreams. Stop dreaming about me. I got a girl already. Else if you THINK I have remotely alluded to any of those nonsense you are talking about, I challenge you to quote the text. Everything is open and accessible. Otherwise stop putting words in my mouth.

    Absolute idiot. Empires conquer. Principalities get annexed. New states are born. States switch loyalties. Newer alliance are formed. That has been the ritual of civilizations, societies, groups etc. Powerful rule over the inferior. It is Darwinism at its most elementary level. You really need to upgrade your knowledge in world events – historical as well as contemporary.

    ‘Pretty low’??? What do you think it was, some high school prom? It was an expedition to win and annex kingdoms. It was not like those kings simply handed over their kingdoms on a platter either, dudes fought till death to defend their’s. Winner took kingdoms and the spoils that came with it. There is no morality as such involved. Morality is losing man’s ammunition. Consider em the collateral damage of creating a damn nation you even have one to speak of today.

    Like

  29. Allu tarkari,

    If we really need a change, then why not we try complete maoist rule. In ideology (maybe not in practical), their points seems logical to address the above changes. That is why SPA now started to speak their words and sentences. But in between democracy is there which we cannot be bypass in 21st century. If king is to be blamed for the autocracy then even this democratic force as well blamed for not succeeding to make democracy concrete in 55 years. I don’t know which politics are you from, but I am almost sure even after abolishing the king (with expected changes) these SPA will definately surrender democracy to another autocracy or bring another ethnic or civil war just because of their power struggle.

    Like

  30. hey Nepalese people !!!

    don’t forget that Nepalese sh!t only for argument not for working…this is still can be seen above all sh!t comments…. p!ss off

    Like

Post your views

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s