Republic Nepal or Monarchic?

Of course Republic because a hereditary king might not always be patriotic and qualified. A monarch, on the other hand, leads a life that does not resemble a common man’s. But Presidents or prime ministers are ordinary citizens until they get elected to public positions. They have different backgrounds, experiences, struggles and exposure to reality.

Samyam WagleBy Samyam Waglé

The fate of a country is shaped by its group of leaders. It depends upon their vision, competence and beliefs. Iraq might not have been bombed as readily had there been Clinton or Carter instead of George W Bush. The world would probably not have seen the carnage if there were other than Hitler and Stalin. The Indian independence movement would have taken a different turn if Subhas Chandra Bose held sway over Mohandas Gandhi. Britain would have been different without Churchill’s leadership during the Second World War. Seven million innocent Cambodians would not perhaps have perished if there was no Pol Pot. China’s rise today was shaped by the destiny that Mao defeated Chiang Kai-shek, and the way a purged Deng Xiaoping claimed power after Mao. It was on the will of these people that drafted the fate of the country. It might have been something else, worse or good, had there been other. It is thus amazing that the fate of country depends upon the leader and also relies upon its political system.
Depending on how one views the “great man view of history,” the debate on the merits of a presidential system vis-à-vis a monarchical one is steered. A king making policy and thinking for his country is very different from the way an elected figure would. They have different time horizons for implementing their vision – unlike the politician, the king doesn’t have to worry about the next elections, and hence his actions could in theory be in the longer-term interest.

But then confident politicians know they will keep winning if they do the right thing. Take Lee Kuan Yew or Mahathir or even Tony Blair as examples. Clinton might have won the third time if American presidents could serve three terms. Civilian presidents or prime-ministers claim power through a democratic process with the exercise of intellect, personality and vision. They interact with thousands of people, and are scrutinized and judged relentlessly.

On the contrary, a hereditary king might not always be patriotic and qualified. He inherits his position just because of the accident of birth as the congenital status. We may have wise kings at points in time, but there is no guarantee that all royal scions will be thoughtful, visionary and dedicated. The eldest son of a king is crowned king, no matter how able he is, how much managerial skill he has, or whether he can rally people behind his vision?

Presidents or prime ministers are ordinary citizens until they get elected to public positions. They have different backgrounds, experiences, struggles and exposure to reality. They see the world, at least initially, from a commoner’s eye, watching the chaos and pleasures of everyday life, sensing the sufferings of the poor. In other words, politicians are realistic and have their feet rooted to the ground.

A monarch, on the other hand, leads a life that does not resemble a common man’s. The circumstances are such that even if s/he does not like it, s/he is surrounded by rituals, pomp and ceremony. Even though he goes out for a visit to get to know his real land and people, there is too much pretence and orchestration. Roads are constructed just for his brief walk even though there is no proper road in the village. Things are decorated, best kept ahead, poor and dirt removed. Walking on the red carpet and greeting spectators amidst tight security, he might think how popular he is. He might even go on to believe the myth of his own sycophants.

But a president grows up with the people and their hardships. Abraham Lincoln wouldn’t have seen the auctioning of slaves and torture if he was from a royal family. Nehru wouldn’t have experienced the ‘Lathhi Charge’, Gandhi wouldn’t be thrown out from a first class compartment if he were a royal. It was the same determination that made them what they are now.

It can be guaranteed that the best of all and the deserving one reaches up to lead the country from election but may not be in monarchy. A monarch might lack sense of humor or good personality or lack intellectually. He may be in drugs, not interested in politics, may not know how to interact with ministers and be lackluster. He might be briefed by others though, to think, speak and act, but that won’t be much powerful from what he learns himself. So does not that nation stagnate when its supreme leader cannot make any self decision, guide the cabinet, see global issues globally, forecast events and predict future from past?
Moreover, it is the chemistry between the two leaders that builds or destroys a nation. Foreign relations, diplomacy and international affairs are vital. Intellectual equality among the top leaders dealing is very necessary. In such case, how can a 55 years old president have good time talking world politics and national issues to 30 years old king? How can the young impress the old and develop a sound diplomacy and maintain good chemistry.

There was one anecdote of King Birendra keeping his moustache as was thought young and naïve by one leader in their international meeting.

Another instance was of the then crown prince Birendra advising diplomat Yadu Nath Khanal to deal with leaders when his father couldn’t respond properly.

A genius father doesn’t always guarantee a genius son. Since the sons of Presidents or elected figures can not be guaranteed of becoming president, same is the case with monarchs that it doesn’t guarantee a good successor. There is no doubt in a nation turning to total fiasco with such leadership.

Even in the Monarchial history of our country, Prithvi Narayan Shah had tremendous love for his country and broad vision and thus fought to annex the scattered kingdoms into a garland. But his coming generations couldn’t understand the genuine essence of the patriotism that how tough was it to build this nation!

(Samyam Wagle is a student of Liberal Arts and Sciences with Majors in Political and Developmental Studies.)

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Republic Nepal or Monarchic?”

  1. 46 Responses to “Republic Nepal or Monarchic?”

    1. Captain Crash, on November 27th, 2007 at 2:17 am Said:

    It does not really matter if country is Monarchical or republic. It is more on who is running the government how is it run, do you think the kids of all those leader we hold the power are living same life as ordinary citizen…… like me and u….wakeup. They are in safe heaven, where as we ordinary have to worry to leave home.

    Nepal is bound with nepotism and that will happen until all the people are educated about their rights and privilege. Which will never happen in Nepal as the educational institute is a political battle ground for our leader. Whole one generation has been deprived with their education right. People now think education is useless and gun & Bullet is powerful. With education you will have to flee the country for more opportunity where as if you have gun you can rule country.

    In case of Nepal we need a good leader with vision and far sightedness. Who can fight with the idea and patriotic but not carry the gun and kill people who opposes them and day dream of becoming president.

    2. Vashir, on November 27th, 2007 at 3:30 am Said:

    A well written essay for republicans but I’m sure someone will always counter your views! That’s the beauty of debate, which is awfully lacking in our political, social and cultural setup.

    The presidents or prime ministers Mr. Wagle is talking about came to power after debating in public their policies, their mission and vision.

    In Nepal, there is no debate. There are speeches, propaganda, and advertisement campaigns. So, when the population can be misled or inticed, the leader elected will be a scum bag. And we are all witness to that happening in Nepal.

    So, our aim should be to empower our people to differentiate between necessary and unnecessary, good and bad, right and wrong. They should be able to know who’s bluffing and who means whatever they say.

    Democracy is a must for society to progress. Once a stable, just democracy is installed and people are empowered, they will definitely be able to choose what they want, just like Mr. Wagle wants a republican order.

    There may be some who may like monarchy, or extremism for that matter, but if they have the ability like Mr. Wagle does, wisdom will soon bless them and they will hopefully make a good choice.

    3. Independent, on November 27th, 2007 at 10:35 am Said:

    The beauty of democratic republic is that people get the opportunity to choose, mostly, the best leadership available. The power of vote is such that no one dares to ignore people especially when the election is coming near. The concept of leadership based on blood and birth is disgusting. It’s just about the matter of months, I think, for Nepal to go republic. No one can stop it. We have already come this far and I don’t think there will be a backtrack from this path of progress.

    4. Bhudai Pundit, on November 27th, 2007 at 10:53 am Said:

    Mr. Wagle,

    I find your essay overly simplistic, irrelevant and generally a colossal waste of time! I am not sure if you are related to Mr. Dinesh Wagle and the other Wagles of the Kantipur empire but your writing certainly reinforces my suspicions.

    The issue in Nepal has moved way beyond debating the merits of an absolute Monarchy. I am not sure if you are presently living in a cave in the Himalayas or you are just astonishingly ignorant of Nepal’s socio-political circumstances. The great debate is how to decide the future of the Monarchy. To that there is only one answer irrespective of your personal views: through the new CA after holding free and fair elections. Therefore, your ramblings about the demerits of a Monarchy are somewhat redundant and cliché.

    5. observer, on November 27th, 2007 at 11:01 am Said:

    Monarchists also know that the monarchy is coming to its end, very soon. Their last ditch effort seems to be to use the term Absolute (see the comment above) and Constitutional monarchy. They say, okay okay, lets not keep absolute monarchy, but constitutional. That cunning argument isn’t going to work anymore. We have seen it enough: the 90s was the decade of CM but then we saw how the king flaunted the democratic norms. He was still powerful and that was the greatest error in the making of the 90s constitution. The process is not relevant here. The ending of monarchy doesn’t need any process because it didn’t come via any process. We just need to get away with this. Monarchy came from bloodshed and why should we use the vote to oust that? Just declare monarchy from the parliament and see how this monkey fights back.

    6. sagarmatha, on November 27th, 2007 at 11:57 am Said:

    If people choose republic or even maoism, then definately there is no place for constitutional monarchy or even democratic forces. But what people really got after removing the power of constitutional monarchy is the questions of today.

    There are countries, it has been seen, where monarchy and democracy running together, but there is no single country where real maoist with arm groups and democratic forces running together. This is the really matter of today. People don’t want to see replacing constitutional monarchy with communist regime. The whole scenario of today is seen that we are heading toward “Prachanda Path” although there are some barriers in terai for this ideology. The maoist are not being punished for their crimes of even killings, what we call democratic or New Nepal era, because this government afraid with them and where Girija, Sitaula, Paudel are comfortable with their positions and powers. They are spending their retired life but we have to face the real problems if country head toward opposite direction. The maoist are now being barriers to CA election means they don’t believe in peoples mandate. If they find comfortable with their goals and their place in the power sectors then they don’t go for CA. After monarchy, they definately attack NA and NC to topple them with many excuses. Then our thinking about democratic vision can be fade away to 17th century. Similarly, the madhesh arms struggle is another dangerous part of today which may lead to country in two factions.

    Therefore, republic might be the sweet word of today but bitter experiences in future for Nepal.

    7. Agnihotri, on November 27th, 2007 at 4:20 pm Said:

    Wow ! Sagarmatha’s last chapter is absolutely true and cristal clear.

    I agree with this message.

    8. Deadonarrival, on November 27th, 2007 at 6:46 pm Said:

    Ditto Bhudai and Sagarmatha. The so-called neo liberalism ( Wagles seem to have knack to hightlight their credential which does not have leg to stand on)that discards the pages of history in order to make a history are farce and to say it mildly traitor to this land. You know you, pretending to be what you are not and flouting your paid seminars and sojourns that belies the fact you are half baked throwaways.

    9. Yatri, on November 27th, 2007 at 7:06 pm Said:

    Ditto, Bhudai!! The writer must be some close relative of “The Wagle” of this blog.

    Why would he give so much credence to a grossly simplified, inapropos essay that just spews out litany of names from recent history and digresses from one inconsequential point to the next?

    I guess he did get an A for Poli Sci 101.

    Main dilemma facing our people is how to rein in the Maoist who seem to be enjoying unbridled power with impunity.

    It’s against their interest to go for the polls and they’ll do anything to delay the elections including create chaos and mayhem. Just look at the things they’ve been up recently, killing yet another journalist to kidnapping medical school personnel for extortion and beating them up. Then, threatening them to keep shut.

    10. S 1:17, on November 27th, 2007 at 7:07 pm Said:

    republic may be an bitter experience but with time ppl will learn, trials and error. the problem is to remain united and sovereign.

    there is so much propaganda and garbage around nepal that everything stinks.

    i want nepal to be republic. i will be nervous but not offended if the illegal parliament declares nepal republic.

    but Mr. wagle your righteousness makes me want to vomit.

    11. hope, on November 27th, 2007 at 7:12 pm Said:

    Good, logical but irrelevant post. Nepal has already left that issue behind and heading towards the battle between Communist Dictatorship and somewhat democratic System.
    Mr. Wagle like his another clan just posting wrong article in wrong time, I guess may not be the wrong place though!!

    12. samyam wagle, on November 27th, 2007 at 7:50 pm Said:

    Hello critics,

    First reply to Bhudai Pundit that my article is not about the future of monarchy but difference in the governance by elected President or PM and King. You can’t say I am ignorant of current socio-political circumstances for me just not touching on that. Bear in mind that I am writing on different issue.
    Don’t you think the future President of this country, who might be elected from anyone of us has more exposure to reality and experience of poverty, hunger, hours of time waste in traffic jam, getting pushed in bus and so on while crown price has not a single moment resembling the ordinary nepali life??
    PM are ordinary citizens for 40 or 50 years and have common life. Like Kennedy or FDR or Lincoln or Clinton, all were common till being US president and then only had VIP life. Do you think Dipendra saw the real Nepal as you? Or has Paras seen as me or us?? They are just confined in aristocratic walls, whole life since birth in comfort and lavish, surrounded by servants etc.

    I think PM or President are also more talent and better leaders and intellectuals than kings. Kings are hereditary and might be ‘Lwange’ or ‘gojyang’ or dull. It is confirm that best candidate will reach on top through election but any ‘jharpat’ can also be king if born from queen. Well I have simply compared all these differences between elected PM or President and Kings. That is the theme of my article and please focus on that!

    Secondly I feel pity for the mentality of some Nepalese like Bhudai Pundit to link with some other. Should I be related to some famous ‘Wagles’ of this nation to get published in Blog or Kantipur or TKP?? Why can’t we give credit to that individual and not waste brain and time by imagining unnecessary suspicions??

    13. sarki ko choro, on November 27th, 2007 at 8:07 pm Said:

    The sheer unability of modiocre Nepalese writers (e.g. Hari Roka) to see shades of gray in an issues makes them peddle simplistic bullshit talking in terms of either black or white all the time. Lack of rigour in their writing is so heart breaking..

    I feel so sorry every time I read these childish rambling.

    14. Rabi P, on November 27th, 2007 at 10:34 pm Said:

    Free democratic exercise will tame Maoist arrogance in the days to come. Parties and civil society should come against the Maoist excessive. While we deal with Maoist arrogance, we should also do away with monarchy once and for all so that we can focus on real issues like developments and economy. The rightist and ultra leftist extremism are the real problems of this nation. Nepal people are for the middle ground and that middle ground will ultimately prevail.

    15. nepali, on November 27th, 2007 at 11:52 pm Said:

    kaag dherai baatho bhayo bhane aachi khaanchha. Biased ppl. Padhai ra Samjhai pugeko chhaina hai. Ajha ali padhnu, ajha ali bujhnu, ajha ali siknu ani matra lekhnu.

    We love nepal. We love our King. Shree Pashupatinath le haami sabaiko kalyaan garun.

    16. nepali, on November 28th, 2007 at 12:14 am Said:

    HATS OFF TO U -Captain Crash. One should change oneself first to change others. Unless Nepalese ppl are educated and civilized, the real CHANGE is futile. Just running after what is heard. They are forced to an ideology. And they can’t make their own decision. Can you change first??

    17. nepali, on November 28th, 2007 at 12:17 am Said:

    HATS OFF TO U -Captain Crash. One should change oneself first to change others. Unless Nepalese ppl are educated and civilized, the real CHANGE is futile. Just running after what is heard. They are forced to an ideology. And they can’t make their own decision. Can you change first?? It’s not time for republic.

    18. Deadonarrival, on November 28th, 2007 at 12:41 am Said:

    There you go wagle- the way you rebutt proves my point. You ain’t nothing but a parrot that tries to mimic humans but which it can never be. Power to Bhudai. Rub these show offs without the shine black and blue

    19. bhayankar, on November 28th, 2007 at 2:11 am Said:

    what a junk article that was. Who is even proposing to have dictatorship of the king ? The debate is on whether constitutional monarchy is relevant for Nepal. This author seems to be totally out of touch.

    20. Bhudai Pundit, on November 28th, 2007 at 2:58 am Said:

    Thank you Mr. bhayankar. My point excatly.

    But our friend S Wagle doesn’t seem to get it. He still goes on and on and on and on …. eg.

    “Don’t you think the future President of this country, who might be elected from anyone of us has more exposure to reality and experience of poverty, hunger, hours of time waste in traffic jam, getting pushed in bus and so on while crown price has not a single moment resembling the ordinary nepali life??”

    We get IT you moron! Who doesn’t know this fact? You must think the rest of us are thrid graders.

    The question is if the Monarchy is still relevant and how to resolve this issue by some systematic method as opposed to Mr. Dahal’s command.

    Samyam sorry to be so harsh but your article is perhaps best suited to be read and studied by 10 year olds. It’s like saying … “genocide is a terrible thing.” It’s a good article but it’s just really old news.

    21. Kishan, on November 28th, 2007 at 3:10 am Said:

    Well written in good english but I miss the point.

    Why do we always forget that it is the individuals who decide what is right or wrong, and not the thugs, deceivers, unvoted (even using manilpulative formlae) and self proclaimed leaders of the populace.

    It regretful to see that even the so called educated journalists are writing news pieces that say “PM directs the home minster to book the culprits”. Is it not supposed to be obvious job of a home minister? Is it all they can report? Maybe they yielded to the repeated intimidations from different corners loosing whatever they were supposed to be doing at the first place.

    Eye-washing, that is what is ruining Nepal and Nepalese while they (power grabbers – much more sophisticated than the robbers and thieves) keep ruling we naives and honests. It is their bravery, at the same time our stupidity that we buy all the garbage they sell to us and still hope that they will be the saviors.
    We have not paid enough price to deserve the prosperity like the others around the world. We deserve this and better live with the fact that nothing comes that easy.

    Look at the international communities, they even now are committing more funds and aids to support these thugs, instead of freeing the Nepalese from these enslavers.

    22. kaitey, on November 28th, 2007 at 10:39 am Said:

    as somebody said…..this article should have been realistic, practical, thought-provoking……but ends up being dull, plain, and a non-issue…
    ….there are so many critical issues that can be touched…..but of course it is dangerous nowadays..so the topics get boring…..

    23. bridohi, on November 28th, 2007 at 11:13 am Said:

    At most a 2nd yr level term paper for some poli sci course. I would give a B for reasoning & original thinking. However, C- for relevance & logical outcome.

    This is the art of pusedo-intellectuals. Writing for the sake of writing is BS. If Mr Wagle was writing a term paper or even a wht/blk/pink/red whatever papers that INGOs, NGOs, parties write, it would get a nod & be shelved collecting dust.

    Wagle, you have given a broad historical argument for a republican set up. There’s a fallacy in your argument–your are using the world historical context to justify republican set up in Nepal. You cite examples from the US (Lincoln), India (Gandhi, Nehru) etc to establish a democratic republican set up. There’s a great void in your argument.

    Just because A is to B, does not necessarily have to be C. I see no connections between “great men of history” & democratic republicanism in the Nepali context. I see no leader who has the ability to rise up become a statesman, unite the divided country & lead us to the 22nd century. This is where your argument is weak. Your essay relies on great leaders to lead a republican democratic system, but, until now, we are ZERO in that field.
    Again, your basis for a democratic republican set up may not to be the liking to the Maoists. They have a different version. Please read their recent declarations.
    By the way, I am no monarchist. I agree the problem even with a benevolent monarch is that his/her off springs may not be the same.

    24. bridohi, on November 28th, 2007 at 11:22 am Said:

    ahhh,,,,awaiting moderation from UWB blog nazis….

    is it the pot calling the kettle black huh

    so much for freedom of expression. UWB! for a democratic Nepal… jai hind, lal salaam, dollar ma payment (sorry Euros matra ahiley)!
    irony of ironies….

    25. PASCHIM, on November 28th, 2007 at 2:02 pm Said:

    I tend to agree with Mr. Wagle in his article because this article is not about what the current time is demanding but about the universal truth which can be correct anytime guys. It is the argument on who is better between kings and elected figure. Even constitutional monarch might have no significance at all in this poor nation. Why should we feed those expensive monarchs allocating one crore a month. That money can instead be used for the developmental works.
    Monarchy has only one so called importance as ’symbol of unity between various caste and people’. But this is all ridiculous yaar. Will Paras be the symbol of unity for them??

    An elected figure can do better for this country than hereditary figures. So hats off to Republic Nepal. No need of monarchy in Nepal.

    But idiot leaders are bulging in disagreement, talking in private and quarrelling in public. Are Maoists rather increasing the life time of monarchs?

    But good writing by S Wagle. I tend to agree with you that there is no significance of monarchy in this 21st century globalized Nepal. I also agree elected head of nation can govern more efficiently. The writing on international Diplomacy is very true.

    What might our tyape paras (If is king by then) will talk about foreign policy with US President Hillary Clinton in 2015 AD???

    26. sagarmatha, on November 28th, 2007 at 2:25 pm Said:

    WHAT IF “KILO SIERRA-II” FAILS IN TERAI?
    TGWAnalyst

    Kathmandu: Pundits of social science say that conflicts in different form and dimension remain in the society. It is an all time phenomenon. They further argue that if one conflict is managed, other conflict in different nature and dimension erupts. The society thus runs embracing conflicts.
    UWB: Sagarmatha, pls provide the link to the article instead of copying the content.

    27. sagarmatha, on November 28th, 2007 at 2:32 pm Said:

    sorry for copying and pasting long article….
    but it is worth to read before it goes more worst in Nepal.

    28. mahila sahu, on November 28th, 2007 at 2:37 pm Said:

    what is the point of this article ?? Writer says that there are many shades of leader people elect or forced to elect or whatever and son of king can be stupid or evil ? so both system are bad, we can still elect moron and evil ( given the situation in Nepal this case is more stronger) remember Hitler came to power thru ballot and also so many dicators come thru election and later became shameless dictator ( Like Marcos etc). So to be safe side it is better to have Ceromonial Monarchy with no power than to elect stupid moron head of state who will be more ruthless than these stupid G and P. Even then these stupid leaders end up giving power to King.

    So moral of this story is we need capable leader to run the government but it will be much cheaper to have Ceromonial monarchy instead of trying to elect another moron every few years.

    29. sagarmatha, on November 28th, 2007 at 5:33 pm Said:

    First round of rule of Girija brought maoist in this degree and country suffered with the pain of civil war for 12 years.
    Now Second round of rule of Girija with more power, as the head of state, bringing country into the cross road of fraction among the different ethnic groups and more dangerous ethnic war.

    So, defending these three thug leaders will bring nothing good output to us and our innocent families except the pain like in Afghanistan, Somalia, Ethopia, Combodia etc.

    These three thug leaders are already failed now. Even their own collegues started accept it verbally and in written.

    30. Bhudai Pundit, on November 28th, 2007 at 8:25 pm Said:

    “It is the argument on who is better between kings and elected figure”

    Wow more people who think like Wagle. Can’t believe we are going on about this subject.

    Anyway in conclusion we all need to get this: whatever your views are on the Monarchy is your right. But on the subject of how to decide this issue there can be no debate. It must be after the new CA is elected by free and fair elections. Whatever their decesion is will have to be accepted by all because the new CA will have the mandate of the Nepalese people. If they decide to keep the Monarchy than the rest of your little whiny republicans need to shut the fcuk up and stop b*itching and moaning. The same goes for Monarchists!

    31. matribhumi, on November 28th, 2007 at 10:53 pm Said:

    i agree with Ram.

    jaya nepal, jaya nepali

    32. Ram bahadur lama, on November 28th, 2007 at 11:11 pm Said:

    “Rastrabadis” are thinking of “how to create Greater Nepal”. But this seven party allaince and Maoist (SPAM) and their agents like Wagle just want to destroy our Nepal….. all we need today is peace and harmony among Nepalese…. but what’s happening today in Nepal is not because of King but because of SPAM ( India or Dhoti ka dalal) who have distributed around 30 Lakhs citizenship to Indians ( Obviously these new Nepali of so-called New Nepal want to make nepal a part of India)…..So, nagarikata jafat gari Dhoti ra teska dalal harulai India pathauna parcha ani sabai thik huncha…
    jaya Greater Nepal, Nepali Jaati, Nepali Bhasa. vishwo ka Nepali yek haun.

    33. Bhayankar, on November 29th, 2007 at 4:23 am Said:

    Actually the thesis that the one who has experienced pain is most sensitive to it is not always true. There are many rich people from developed countries who are adopting kids from undeveloped countries. Siddhartha Gautam is an example of somebody who was raised with maximum luxury, and then got so intrigued by pain and suffering that he gave up everything in pursuit of the cause of suffering. My point is that just because somebody has experienced hard life, it does not guarantee that he or she has the empathy for poor. I don’t think there can be any general theory on who would be the best administrator. In my opinion, the choice of a ruler should be dynamic and person specific, and there should be check and balance among the existing power centers.
    It would be more interesting to hear arguments on why people think that constituitional monarchy is still or not relevant in Nepal.

    34. dialogue, on November 29th, 2007 at 11:37 am Said:
    yawn

    35. democrazy, on November 29th, 2007 at 11:41 am Said:
    As much as I agree with all of your lovely words. Get to the point of an eligible leadership and where we colectively go to live and not be squeezed forever. God is great and Musharaf is gone.

    The new leaders will come after the first elections became and for this to be implemented I need to see agreements NOW.
    Agreements on how to civilize junglepeople and monarchy animals. A group is as good as its lowest level. Koirala is good. Baburam is good. Prachandra is prachandra.

    You cannot vote for me I am not running for elections, also listen to yourself. We all agree so what was the discussion?

    36. scoop, on November 29th, 2007 at 1:02 pm Said:

    I avoid this site these days but morons like this (another Wagle) – I can’t resist. I think others have said it – this guy is talking about an autocratic monarch versus a President (probably another autocrat if we have one in this nation), when he should be discussing a constitutional monatchy with a presidency (again high chance of an autocratic one, no matter how they get voted in for this nation). Yes monarchs can be duffers, but it hardly matters if they are constituitional with nil political power, but the probability of a dictatorial President like Prachanda is highly likely if we opt for a republic. Nepal is just heading that way at the moment.

    Personally nothing beats the British parliamentary system where you have a monarch as the ceremonial head and we ELECT the govt., who actually hold the political power and knowledge.

    37. deADJOURNO, on November 29th, 2007 at 1:25 pm Said:
    I am confused about the role of media. Are they supposed to talk about finances, business or money again?
    38. hello, on November 29th, 2007 at 2:17 pm Said:
    “a constitutional monatchy with a presidency”
    >> Nepal can never have a constitutional monarchy. We have tested and failed in that. In the 1960, “a constitutional monarch” showed us his demonic side. In 2005, another “constitutional monarch” showed the same. Meanwhile, other other “constitutional monarch” kept playing with democratic norms and values until he was killed by his own dear brother. The term constitutional monarch has been used vigorously by the royalists-on-the-run as their last ditch effort to save the fcking fedual institution in Nepal. You are doomed to fail in that regard. We will soon have a republic system in Nepal where a leader is elected by the people. Start packing up your bags.
    39. sagarmatha, on November 29th, 2007 at 2:45 pm Said:
    Time to pack the bags not only monarchy and royalists but also democratic forces, and even the maoist in the future. India is going to rule tomorrow not directly but by cleansing the pahadi through infiltration of biharis in the name of madhesi. We are going to be one of these;
    1. Sikkim
    2. Fiji
    3. Sri Lanka
    40. B, on November 29th, 2007 at 3:02 pm Said:
    Hello,
    Democratic forces have failed more than the institution of Monarchy, does that mean that there is no place for democratic forces in Nepal anymore?
    41. hope, on November 29th, 2007 at 8:40 pm Said:
    It is appalling that still some people believe the current political set up and ‘leadership’ can give a breakthrough, wake up people!!
    They go to parliament for 10 mins and adjourn for 10 days and start consultation on the nineth day only so that they could continue as ‘interim’ parliamentarians forever and getting allowances and salaries. They are damn sure if not the ‘interim’parlimentarians they are not even worth Rs 1500 a month job. And yet some people think among them we will choose a Churchil, a Deng Xiao Ping, what a joke, if you can find a Marichman from them consider yourself lucky!!
    42. Shreemani, on November 29th, 2007 at 9:23 pm Said:
    Ofcourse, down to monarchy
    and yes,
    not to monarchic
    By the way, what is monarchic
    is it some kinda monar chic?
    some hot chic?
    Administrator: Please do check for spellings in the blog.
    43. sagarmatha, on November 30th, 2007 at 12:31 pm Said:
    It is really demo-crazy run by filthy leaders.
    44. Mahesh, on December 1st, 2007 at 6:54 pm Said:
    Are people still obsessed with the monarchy? The majority of us want security, peace and a little petrol. Whoever can deliver that gets my vote.
    45. sagarmatha, on December 2nd, 2007 at 11:35 am Said:
    Mahesh,
    In addition sovereignity….
    46. noname, on December 2nd, 2007 at 6:00 pm Said:
    Monarchy of course.
    No need to be ruled by fagot politicians and their rascal kids and supporters like the writer.
    In the mean time the tike parliament has been adjourned again. lol.

    Like

  2. I just wonder how will king and family leave palace now….Who will ask them??? Will they leave willingly without blood shed??? What if they won’t leave or no message comes from shut palace????? Will our king loyal army break the door of palace and enter inside ???? Or will Prachanda go and knock the palace door????

    Like

  3. so from your view (mr.wagle) king might be lwange or gojyangre…..u have given examples of the foreign presidents,pms etc…..but while supporting own argument u took such issues and while criticising another’s u say gojayngre and so on….you are an idiot because rule is done through the system….not by the people….and for ur kind information while listing the developed countries you can see how many are with monarchs and how many are without…………..and i think you are likely to be paid by the foreigners to conspire against our king……coz u are saying kings may not be patriotic and qualified………remember that king didn’t bowed indian interest…….these leaders are doing….if there is a country there will be the system…ur corrupted mind( through the education background and/or financial benefits) may vow for the decision to dissolve nepal and make indian flag our…….leaders’ patroism cannot match with king’s cause king cannot survive without kingdom(country) but leaders or citizens can…..u and ur leader’s contribution to the country is nothing as compare to what king gave to the nation…what to say those who go to india to decide on nation’s future…………so don’t bark ur indian sponsored views………….u and ur indian gurus will surely try to curl up these by answering another way…..but there are patriotic nepalese too who are not misleaded by the bastard thoughts of u, ur editor wagle(of palpasa cafe),kantipur publication,another RAW agent hari rokka,Babu Ram Bhattrai, prachanda,girija,and all the bastard leaders who are not son of nepalese blood we have doubt in their birth

    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