| Username |
Post |
| kupamunduk |
Posted
on 18-May-04 12:06 AM
Well well!! after having "grand" abhinandans all over the country, King G gets one in kathmandu as well. And what a way to do it. The "Kathmandu intelligentsia" was all lined up in their Daura Suruwal to meet the King at the Gokarna Resort where they were given about 1-2 minutes for the grand "one-to-one" darshanbhet with the Monarch. Hou, hou hou!!! I think the villagers who "flocked" to see King G at his abhinandans at different parts got more time than that. However, the mode of dialogue seemed pretty similar. In the villages, it were "sarkar, shati chahiyo...', "sarkar, pani chahiyo..", "sarkar, bijuli chahiyo.." etc. Here in the Gokarna Resort also it seemed like (taken from the media) "sarkar, shanti chahiyo..", "sarkar, GoDaBa chahiyo...", etc. What a day it was...
It is a real sad moment when the so called intelligentsia and the "who's who" of your own society falls into line without a whimper when called upon by the one whom they scorn at (at least that's what they want to portray in the public) to meet for a few minutes after wasting half a day in line, when they perfectly know that whatever they would manage to say to him in so short a time would be of no meaning whatsoever.
Don't these "heavyweights" of nepali society have nothing else to do? Shame on them.
It seems the same with the political parties. I mean, they do all these andolans and bring the country to a near standstill and what do they do ? Wait for that mysterious call which never seems to come? C'mon if you think you represent the larger nepali janata and carry out these andolans the least you could do is wait for a call from somebody whom you are condemning on the streets. Be a little proactive. Don't wait for it. There should be a way where you could demand to talk with him. Are you that helpless?
The way things are turning out, I surely won't be surprised, when one fine day Mr. Prachanda himself comes out in the open and says" sarkar....., .....chahiyo......"
What a real irony..
I really would like to believe that I'm being NAIVE in making the above comments. So please help me with my belief.
|
| ulter440 |
Posted
on 18-May-04 12:24 AM
Hello kupu sir,
I think u r gettin jealous that u have not been called by the chief seceratary of Royal Palace. Is it bad to place ones suggestion to HM?. Is it bad to engage in the conversation? This meeting (or abhinadan as quoted by u) is very much different than that you were referring. Doesnot this reflect the real condition or consensous of the Nepali Intellictia.
|
| Shaiva |
Posted
on 18-May-04 09:26 AM
My dear kupmundukjyu, Pancha-Bhaladmi of the subject race paying their respect to their masters is a very old tradition. Maoists will also do the same in not too distant future. Please worry about things that you can change. You better accept the rest. This is the fate of all coward races. Their intellectuals are always the worst of the lot.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 18-May-04 12:59 PM
Similarities:
1. In abhinandan, some people were tempted to go to gaaijaatraa by the offer of saari, free food etc. (according to Kantipur reporting regarding Biratnagar abhinandan). In this luncheon, some people were tempted by the free lunch.( It would cost hundreds of rupees in a similarly nice place).
2. In abhinandan, people were curious to see the new king. The situation is not very different in KTM too. For a lot of people, it is just the chance to see new king. I have heard that sometimes ago, a few Peace Committee people tried to have 'darshanbhet'with the king, but couldn't get. This time, the king rounded everybody up, and asked to have a meeting.Wow. A really civil arrangement.
3. In abhinandan, some people thought the king would listen to their talk. They went to ask for peace, development etc. They thought the king would listen to them. In Kathmandu, people are a bit more megalomaniac. A lot of people think they are really smart, powerful, and they should be heard. So, they went to see the king. It is pity that these smart people somehow really thought that Gyanendra had ears to listen, mind to think and discretionary power to judge what is good for the nation, and would actually listen to them.
commentator's note: If Gyanendra Maharaj were so committed to transparency, all he needed to do in Ashoj 18 was ask Supreme Court Judges for advice on Sher Bahadur's proposal. The strength of Birendra was that he did almost every momentous decisions very transparently, so people couldn't blame him for those decisions. Gyanendra did everything on his own. Now, it is time to pay for that. So, my suggestion to maharaj is : maharaj, don't tremble your legs, don't lose focus, go to the end of what you wanted to do, and be ready for the consequences.
It is obvious to me that Gyanendra doesn't have his own men. Yes. And I had actually thought he had some really good people after him. But, see, he can't even have any new people in the council of ministers. All those rotten panches. Same Sharad Chandra Shah. Maharaj, where are your men? How will you make the country developed even if you are given everything?The king doesn't have any plan for small things either. That's why he can't come up with his council of ministers in these eleven days.
As a wellwisher of the maharaj who lost so many of his relatives only a few years back, I say, he should agree to 18 points, and rest in Nagarjun rest of his life peacefully. He has damaged his position beyond repair by his reckless actions.
|
| An Indun Poet |
Posted
on 18-May-04 04:21 PM
Is Kantipuronline.com down or what?
I wanted to quote Maharaj's reply to Kanak Mani Dixit which should make it clear for us that Maharaj is not at all ready to give in.
Lets see what happens....
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 18-May-04 09:09 PM
The King called the netas "corrupt" who indulged in "bad governance".
That's quite true.
Given a chance, and in the CONTINUING absence of credibly independent systems
of checks and balances, our netas will go back to their corrupt ways and their ways
of misgoverning the country.
BUT, BUT and BUT
It's NOT up to the King -- certainly NOT up to a monarch who says that he is committed
to constitutional monarchy and multi-party democracy -- to say these things in public in
a bare-knuckle manner.
When he says these things in public, he ends up LOWERING the level of debate by inviting easy "aafoo nee aafooo" charges from the political netas who, feeling
cornered, have no option but to throw the mud back at the King.
The resulting low-level discourses merely raise the temperature of all and engage
people in an acerbic blame-game, but do NOT help anyone to come up with solutions that Nepal desperately needs at the moment.
Yes, the party-political institutions are khattam, and the palace's record is also khattam.
But as ordinary Nepali citizens, what the hell are we suposed to do, EXCEPT -- no matter how difficult it is at the moment -- to find ways to work through these institutions to make the best of what's left so that we can at least aim to make tomorrow better than today?
I mean, other than leaving the country altogether or joining Babu Ram & Company,
what choices do we -- ordinary Nepalis -- really have except to ask -- really ask --
these guys to keep their ego aside for the greater good?
[Both sides continue to underestimate the Maoists, and that's my biggest worry.]
At the rate we are going: Even if the King is overthrown, GPK & Company's record remains so uniformly poor that it's unlikely that they will turn themselves into credible democratic forces. And even if the King turns Ratna Park into Tianamen Square and hundreds get killed, who's going to ask him to give up power?
A Nepali's ego -- in its raw, crude, petty and shaking avatar -- is the most destructive force there is. King G's nephew killed his parents and siblings because he could not
bring himself sort out his differences with his parents. GPK's actions led to a split in
his party because he could not accept the younger crowd.
I, for one, yearn for Nepali leaders who display not ego but self-confidence, not mero-goru-ko-barai-takka-type of rigidity but agreements that address most people's
short-run and long-run aspirations.
Maybe such leaders will not emerge in my lifetime, and that's a sad fact.
Meantime, our generation's time in Nepal will be spent on cleaning up the mess left behind by the parties, palace and the Maoists.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| nsshrestha |
Posted
on 18-May-04 11:28 PM
Ashu,
Un-intimidated and given the fair chance, even the Poor can champion their causes. The recent Indian election is an example of nothing but that. Definitely it is a big blow to the proponents of guided democracy all over the world and needless to say to the proponents of Mandale democracy a few here in Sajha.
Had our poor reflected the same capability? Yes. Only 38% of the members of the house were elected for second term in 2051.(It’s the stat I found some where in Sajha). And given the chance they will prove second to none.
You have raised your concern time and again about the inaptness of the political parties, which sounds more like your faith in democracy itself is in question. Do you behead your offspring because there is the chance that he/she might develop dandruff? Definitely not, you would improvise best medical treatment available.
Fear spread by Our Maharaj in the name of Maoist, is a mode to consolidate his own power base. There are very few reasons that exist for everyday Nepali to be fearful. Geo-political reason and failing of communist states all over had badly impaired them. So all the odds are against them. What they want is a respectable end to this rebellion, few good words in the history yet to be written. Leadership simply wants to save their face from the anger of their cadres.
Duryodhan will not give Char Gau (constitutional assembly). It is the prerogatives of the inhabitants of Hastinapur to decide the fate of Duryodhan.
Nepali intelligentsia, there is a name for them too in Maoist dictionary - Ardhasamanta Nokarsahi Pujibadi Dalal barga. Could be longer. Definitely there is a reason for such a long alankar.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 18-May-04 11:46 PM
> You have raised your concern
>time and again about the inaptness
> of the political parties, which sounds
>more like your faith in democracy
> itself is in question.
With all due respect to nsshresthaji, I think I don't agree with this statement.
I too disagree with political parties. They need to mend their way. Given absolute power like Gyanendra's, there is little proof that Girija Koirala would behave in a better way. I distinctly remember he didn't remove Govinda Raj Joshi even after the hints from CIAA and widespread civic opprobrium of Mr Joshi.
It is so important to remind the leadership of current political parties again and again where they are wrong. In these uncertain time, it is important that civil society doesn't get carried away, and be a bystander in every excesses of organized groups. When bandhs are organized, we need to stand up and say it is not good, even if it is organized in the name of reinstating people's right.
Hence, it is perfectly natural to raise question, heckle the politicians, while making sure that democracy is not debilitated in the pretext that these politicians are corrupt.12 years of democracy made us powerful, it is for us, and we should protest when someone tries to take it away because some of our elected politicians were corrupt.
---
I was aghast that the king would make such a public comment about leaders being 'bhrashta'and 'kushaashak'.
I mean, here is a king whose every dealings are opaque, who does things randomly (think about this lack of governance these days), who increased sallary like no one did perhaps in the history of the country, who buys expensive cars when one of his citizens commits suicide after killing her 3 years old kid and another yet unborn kid because she hasn't gotten anything to eat since days, who produced nakkali criminal after his son killed a popular singer, I mean the thing about "aafu ni aafu"is inevitable. He has lost all moral ground to point finger at anyone. Certainly not at people like Rohit or Amik Sherchan or Pari Thapa or Narahari Acharya , to name a few.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 19-May-04 04:07 AM
NSShrestha wrote:
"You have raised your concern time and again about the inaptness of the political parties, which sounds more like your faith in democracy itself is in question."
No.
To me, political parties practicing intra-party democracy make up one SUBSET of the larger universe called Democracy.
Political parties in and of themselves are NOT Democracy.
Political parties are made up of humans like you, me and others, and, accordingly, they have their strengths and weaknesses.
One of their weaknesses is: in the absence of or because of the ineffectiveness of checks and balances (through independent public institutions, the press and other civil society institutions), the temptation is too great for them to abuse power and get
away with it. [I wouldn't even trust myself with too much power, let alone anyone
else :-)]
I criticize Nepali political parties NOT because they are absolutely beyond redemption, but for their failure to live up to their own professed democratic aspirations.
For instance, it does NOT serve their interests to be doing andolan to restore people's rights when they themselves snatch those rights away in the name of two-day Nepal
Bandhs.
The Maoists say that the end justifies the means. If the parties too are to give in to
that kind of thinking, how different are they from the Maoists? And what would the implication of that thinking for their democratic aspirations? That's my question.
As for the King, as a would-be constitutional monrach, he should let the janata decide what they want to do with the political parties, and THEN learn to live with the people's collective decisions REGARDLESS of whether he appreciates those decisions or not.
By all accounts, the King is a debater. One weakness, many debaters share [myself included :-)], is the urge to have the last word, the urge to engage in some one-upmanship.
That urge would have been fine, even amusing, had the stakes for the stability of
Nepal itself been not so high as they are now.
And so, this is NOT the time for the King to show off his debating skills, honed at some school in Darjeeling and Patan Campus. This is the time for him to show his reconciliatory side, put his ego aside, and figure out 'satisficing' solutions to help move the country forward.
We have a great country, with great people who have enormous potentials. Why do we want to let the parties and the King mess it all up so that the Maoists start dancing on our collective graveyard tomorrow?
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| karmapa |
Posted
on 19-May-04 04:16 AM
NSShrestha,
True, geopolitics favors our King, and not the Maoists. But you must also ask
if geopolitics actually favors the peoples of Nepal. And I am afraid the
answer is NO.
The USA, England and India can meddle in Nepal all they want under king's rule.
It is easier for them to get away with things under King's rule than under peoples'
rule. So India will keep buidling dams to drown Nepal, and carry its expansionist
design deeper into Nepal's sovereign territory. The USA can sell weapons,
and its companies can get a first-cut of lucrative water- and hydropower-related
deals. Paradoxically, electricity is most expensive in water-rich Nepal - fleece
the peoples. A U.S. company recently signed a water-related deal with the
govt. England wants its 'piece of the action' too, selling night-vision choppers
and the like. Already Nepal looks like it is beseized from inside and outside.
Frankly, king ( i pity the king) is only an instrument (puppet) through whom the
outside forces want to exploit / meddle in Nepal. Under king, Nepal is a
free-for-all, on sale to whoever backs him up. And they will. What does the king
have to lose? If tomorrow he has to leave the country, he will be welcomed
abroad with his money safe and sound and collecting interest in a Swiss
or Chase Manhattan bank!!!!
It is the peoples who have to live here for a long haul who have most
to lose. Therefore they have an incentive to check foreign meddling and
exploitation. Which is why peoples' rule is preferable to king's rule.
If geopolitics favors our king...it is nothing new. The US has a
record of supporting and propping up dictators across the world. It is
often on the look out for 'their own sons of bitches' who can do their
bidding,and may have found one in our king in Nepal. Saddam Hussain
was taken out partly because he refused to be 'THEIR son of a bitch.'
------------------------
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 19-May-04 07:30 PM
OK, the King -- after having visited Sajha.com -- meets with the reps of the five parties.
Some 'nikash' now?
Let's wait and see.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| ulter440 |
Posted
on 19-May-04 10:28 PM
Again the netas of andolan have proved their eagerness to meet with the king, leaving aside thousands of people amidst the heavy rain. The five netas were dressed in Daura Suruwal since miday whereas the Darshanbhet was scheduled for afternoon 6.30. They were all looking like a bridegrooms going to the girls house whom they inteded to marry but donot know whom the girl will choose.
Where about all the slogans chanted during the movement against regression. Where were all the high level netas with their high vacale slogans in yesterdays rally. Are they feared of rain or is there something else?
|
| Brook |
Posted
on 20-May-04 03:35 AM
At the risk of digressing, NShrestha jyu's thoughts have prompted me ask some questions here.
Regardless of the economic growth the policies you implement may engender, regardless of all the healthy economic and social reform you may put on trace, regardless of the precious feather you may add to the national stature in the international arena through expedient foreign policy, and regardless of all the "feel good" factor you may be deluded into believing your country exudes, one thing the unexpected electoral outcome in India ought to have taught us is that: simple bread and butter issues still hold the strongest prominence in how the majority of the people - who are in the case of India, desperately poor - make their political decisions. While debates on the quality of Indian democracy can drag on, what's clear is that any incumbent who refuses to acknowledge and actu upon the above truism is fated to be punished in the subsequent elections. Wiser minds - including our own NShrestha jyu - have proclaimed this to be a victory of democracy.
But extrapolating northward into Nepal a question that comes to mind is: is that the best the poor can do? Or, more importantly, is that the best liberal politics can do for the poor? Given them the opportunity to vote out incumbents that fail to honor their election promises?
After all, if you take a macro view and perhaps discount the unfortunate Gujrat debacle, BJP's coalition hadn't done too bad? India currently is placed comfortably on a 5-plus percentage annual growth track for a while, its IT and other service hubs are roaring with such ferocity that the stance on outsourcing in general has become a matter of presidential debates in the US, models of reforms to improve governance in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu have become matters of collective envy for the rest of the developing world, and there are evidences that there may even have been a modest decline in poverty! (regarding the latter of course, a nominal statistical decline is hardly anything to bask on)
Why then, is the possibility that maybe India wasn't "shining" all that much after all seem so credible after BJP ouster? Only explanation I can tender is that - for good or for bad - the poor masses, wherever they are in this world vote along populist lines. Unfortunately, however, populism is a luxury only the opposition can enjoy. Once you are thrust into the driver's seat, you suddenly realize that a Jumla-Jajarkot road comes at the cost of a health post in Dadeldhura and the 40-year old state run jute mill of dubious profitability you swore to keep running is going to rob you off the funds to finance a drinking water pipeline to your constituency! In other words, once you get up there, the hard budget constraint forces you to get real. But you are a good man. You keep fighting and keep trying to do your best until you get shown the door the next time around. Another person comes in and the story repeats.
What and when do the real poor get out of this virtuous cycle of electoral politics?
|
| Nsshrestha |
Posted
on 20-May-04 11:20 AM
Brook,
Just a digression? It was a complete U turn :)
May it be too shallow for the brightest mind as your-self searching for deep water to dive into but let me flow?
People have learned survival tricks that were necessitated to better survive from the time immemorial. In hunting and gathering society people learned to hunt that was necessary skill to master to survive better. In agrarian society, people leaned to farm because it was the necessary to survive better. Advent of this education/erudition is very new as compared to the timeline of human history. But what we learn from seeing the progression of human society is that we are capable of learning tricks that are necessitated by the environment that we exist into for better survival. Though the complex ideas of democracy be impalpable to the real poor, but the minor understandings of where/how democracy affect their livelihood is not beyond their grasp. It is no more than learning how to use weapons in hunting and gathering society. Hunters and gatherers improved to metal heads when the wooden arrow was too weak to kill a beast. Halo was better than Kodalo, wisdom of the agrarian society! What works better when will be learned by poor too as it is warranted for their better survival as did by their predecessors all along.
Having heard the verdict of people, India Shinning was just the few words that were shinning. May statistics strongly supports the claims made by BJP, but distribution of the fruits was not equal along the bell curve as expected. This is how democracy neutralizes the Marxist claim that all the resources will be accumulated by a class of capitalists and neutralizes the idea of alienation. What it suggests is that long term goals should not shadow the immediate aspirations of people. People do not always live for future, they have immediate expectations too.
Does populism always favors the opposition? Statistically the chances are fifty, fifty. There may be better statistics some where but since it is not my field. I have not come across one. But what I know is always is too heavy word to be used here.
What you have said is the real poor lack the ability to learn lessons from the past so they are doomed in this vicious cycle of chicanery by political leaders in the name of populism. Have I drawn the conclusion right? As I said before learning/understanding depend on how vital the lesson is to ones life.
A perpetual trickery? This is what necessitates the institutionalization of democracy. This is why we need provide ample time to judge or own democratic process. It takes time to learn how to separate wheat from the chaff, twelve years is not enough. Most of the democratic countries have two major parties, so in the extrapolated north, so your claim that poor are doomed in this power switching doesn’t hold very ground.
Political parties will be tested, their credibility will be scrutinized. One who acts for the majority/poor beyond the campaign promises will be crowned. This is how this perpetual dialectical tree tilts toward the coordinates of the poor and travels diagonally.
|
| Brook |
Posted
on 20-May-04 10:52 PM
Shrestha jyu,
I take your point well and even agree with you in principle.
But I'm having a hard time reconciling this with evidence on the ground. For example, why should people's short term wants and expectations - which often take the form of something as basic as the "roji roti" - have to wait for the "virtuous cycle" to eventually gravitate towards their coordinates? Or, why do justifiable short term needs be held hostage to broader and longer term political reform? Is there no otheer way>?
And we're still in the world of benign political actors!
Anyway, thank you for responding.
kahile kahin biddwaan haru ko sangat le taalu ma alu falihalchha ki bhanne jhino aasha ni.
|
| karmapa |
Posted
on 21-May-04 01:33 AM
Brook wrote:
< - which often take the form of something as basic as the "roji roti" - have
to wait for the "virtuous cycle" to eventually gravitate towards their
coordinates? >>
--------
I am afraid you phrased the above wrong. It is rather ambigous.
"Roji roti" or livelihood can never be a short-term want. First of all, it is
not a want, but a NEED. Secondly, livelihood is not something anybody
engages in for just for 2-3 years and retires on the income. There is nothing
short-term-ish about it. It is not like these people - if they are given to eat
for the first five six years - will not ask for roji roti 10 years from now,
20 years from now, 75 years from now.
Roti, kapada aur makan - because they are basic necessities - can never
be just short- term.
These bread and butter issues, therefore, must figure in anybody's short-
term, medium-term and long-term plan, and probably in after-life. Culturally
this is what 'pitri puja' is all about - people offering ritualistic foods to their
ancestors.
You probably meant to say that the government is not addressing people's
'bread issue' adequately even in the short-term (as per some national plan
somewhere) - which is altogether a different thing.
|
| karmapa |
Posted
on 21-May-04 01:34 AM
Brook wrote:
< which often take the form of something as basic as the "roji roti" have
to wait for the "virtuous cycle" to eventually gravitate towards their
coordinates? >>
--------
I am afraid you phrased the above wrong. It is rather ambigous.
"Roji roti" or livelihood can never be a short-term want. First of all, it is
not a want, but a NEED. Secondly, livelihood is not something anybody
engages in for just for 2-3 years and retires on the income. There is nothing
short-term-ish about it. It is not like these people - if they are given to eat
for the first five six years - will not ask for roji roti 10 years from now,
20 years from now, 75 years from now.
Roti, kapada aur makan - because they are basic necessities - can never
be just short- term.
These bread and butter issues, therefore, must figure in anybody's short-
term, medium-term and long-term plan, and probably in after-life. Culturally
this is what 'pitri puja' is all about - people offering ritualistic foods to their
ancestors.
You probably meant to say that the government is not addressing people's
'bread issue' adequately even in the short-term (as per some national plan
somewhere) - which is altogether a different thing.
|
| karmapa |
Posted
on 21-May-04 01:35 AM
Brook wrote:
"For example, why should people's short term wants and expectations
which often take the form of something as basic as the "roji roti" have
to wait for the "virtuous cycle" to eventually gravitate towards their
coordinates?"
--------
I am afraid you phrased the above wrong. It is rather ambigous.
"Roji roti" or livelihood can never be a short-term want. First of all, it is
not a want, but a NEED. Secondly, livelihood is not something anybody
engages in for just for 2-3 years and retires on the income. There is nothing
short-term-ish about it. It is not like these people - if they are given to eat
for the first five six years - will not ask for roji roti 10 years from now,
20 years from now, 75 years from now.
Roti, kapada aur makan - because they are basic necessities - can never
be just short- term.
These bread and butter issues, therefore, must figure in anybody's short-
term, medium-term and long-term plan, and probably in after-life. Culturally
this is what 'pitri puja' is all about - people offering ritualistic foods to their
ancestors.
You probably meant to say that the government is not addressing people's
'bread issue' adequately even in the short-term (as per some national plan
somewhere) - which is altogether a different thing.
|
