| Username |
Post |
| Digbijaya |
Posted
on 31-Mar-02 10:28 PM
Rabindra Mishra, an established journalist with the BBC World Service in London pens a moving, passionate, and convincing sequel addressed to the Maoists. His communication with Baburam Bhattarai last year on the utility of the Maoist strategy through his column titled "Bhu-madhya Rekha" or "The Equator" in the Nepal Fortnightly was also well received. Here's his latest open "Letter to a Maobadi Bhai".
http://www.kantipuronline.com/Nepal/rekha.htm
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 01-Apr-02 09:41 PM
When crime on a mass scale disguises itself as a justifiable political strategy and starts to tear down a fabric of an already fragile nation-state, we have no choice but to retaliate by using our, i) hands (physical power), ii) minds (arguments) and iii) hearts (sentiments). The first is on-going, and I won't be too harsh this time by repeating its sub-optimal efficacy. But it's the second and the third offensives that we have fared particularly bad in. If anything, the respectable broad-sheets in Kathmandu, for too long, were seen to be giving exaggerated prominence to propaganda pieces by Baburam et al. Yes, the economics made sense - those issues with the incomprehensible communist jargon sold well, but did the ethics and the journalism? Too often, these pieces were junk with zero analysis (by any literate person's standards), that remotely occupy the precious op-ed spaces in respectable newspapers in other democracies. I feel that our media and the intelligentsia has really failed us in the war of hearts and minds against Maoists by not only amplifying propaganda, but also not countering them with effective arguments. What has been coming out has been insufficient and uncoordinated. I'd be thrilled to be informed of notable works by individuals or newspapers that I'm not aware of.
It is in this context that I laud Rabindra Mishra's journalism. Consistently for the past 3 years, through hard-hitting radio interviews on BBC or through his well-crafted columns in "Nepal" he has been a lone warrior on the battlegrounds of hearts and minds against the ideological bastards of Chairman Mao. Just to cite 3 short outputs that have had enormous effects: his thorough two-part open communication with Baburam Bhattarai last year, his devastating interview on BBC of a politburo member, who he reduced to being a mad fool, after the emergency (I criticized Mishra for being carried away and ignoring his journalistic 'dharma', but relished the verbal crushing privately), and this latest plea to a figurative Maobadi bhai, also a tool to sway the hearts. Combining intellect, passion, courage, and professional credentials, it is journalists like Rabindra Mishra and war reporters of Kantipur like Hariharsingh Rathour who I hope will be recognized eventually for the micro-battles that they are waging from their uncomfortable niches, not the timid, lazy editors in Kathmandu who for long made a mockery of the 'freedom of speech' by letting garbage pass as reading material. These battles of Rathour, Mishra et al. are equivalent to the physical offensives of our blue-khaki wearing Tharu hawaldars from Kailali, the Gurung Jawaans of the Sena from Parbat, the weak, loincloth wearing Brahmin teachers in Lamjung, and the Kodaalo wielding Chhetri farmers in Dailekh.
Rabindra is a senior friend of mine. I disagree with him on some issues and he knows it, but as a loyal reader of his informed, passionate writing, I thought I should publicly recognize his consistent battle in the field of hearts and minds against Maoist criminals. This battle is lonely (not many are on board) and dangerous (I hear he's already received death threats), but it's so worth it at the end of the day.
Keep up the good work, Mr. Mishra.
|
| Rabindra Mishra |
Posted
on 02-Apr-02 12:03 PM
Thanks a lot to Digvijaya for posting my Maobadi Bhailai Patra on this forum and I don’t know what to say to Paschim for the lavish praise he has bestowed on me. I am simply flattered and of course encouraged. I have no idea who Digvijaya is but I know Paschim very well and it is people like him and many others on whom I have rested my hope for Nepal’s ‘bhabishy.’
Rabindra
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 02-Apr-02 01:17 PM
While I agree with Rabindraji's article, I have some disagreement with the reply of
Paschimji. For example, while taking potshots at 'some national dailies', he accuses
them of publishing non-standard, devoid of analysis articles in op-ed. Though I
disagree with BRB or Prachanda, I think BRB was long considered an intellectual in
Kathmandu. I used to read his Jhilko almost a decade ago, and I still think that it
was a very good paper. BRB, though always reiterating his threadbare shibboleth
of communism as the panacea of nation's all problems, put one perspective of
thought regarding Nepal's illness, which shouldn't be immediately dismissed.
Though personally BRB is odious, his ideas are coruscating a lot of times, and the
national dalies were right in giving him spaces in op-ed.
Re Rabindra Mishraji and Harihar Singh Rathore, I still think ,despite my great
respect for views and indefatiguable pursuits of Rabindraji, Kantipur journalist
Rathore deserves more respect for his obstinate intrusion into the Maoist lifestyle
and its un-doctored reporting, his refusal to be manipulated by any one party in
the conflict and his courageous 'sthalagat' report. Rabindraji, due to his political
conviction,is propounding consistently politically correct views, which are very
much effective as analytical , ideological tool to counter the Maoist propaganda.
Rabindraji's work is very effective in erudite circle, but Rathore's work
galvanized our common populace against the Maoist atroticities. This is in no way
a belittling of Rabindraji, but assertion that a separate benchyard should
be used to compliment these two warriors armed with pen. Hope Rabindraji
won't mind:-)
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 02-Apr-02 09:24 PM
Biswo, I try and be quite careful with my choice of words. Two things: i) I am not saying the dailies were wrong in giving space to these guys. Of course they deserve to be heard in a democracy. My complain was that they had been given "exaggerated prominence". Now, you can retort by saying, who decides when something becomes exaggerated and all. That would have been a more valid point. But quite often we know it when we see it. One example: if you opened an issue of Kantipur last summer and saw the op-ed page, with 80% of the ENTIRE space on page 4 devoted to BRB's theory about how the massacre was a design of the Indian Research and Analysis Wing, I guarantee you'd have been more aghast than myself. If editors of major newspapers who control so much of prevailing news and views exercise ZERO editorial discretion in determining whether articles possess any journalistic or analytical merit, and simply run after the name, like the Bharuwa carrying teenagers in Rukum, because "Oh, It's a BRB piece after all, and didn't he top the SLC, and wasn't he supposed to be smart and all that?" then, I for one would have to yawn in perverse amusement. I see op-ed spaces as "precious", and when abused, I have to ask, patrakarita ko dharma khoi?
My second point is, I am not belittling BRB's IQ, but it troubles me when people equate educational achievement (like that in the SLC) with wisdom. I have some moral authority to make this statement, because I too have a similar SLC distinction for example, but I tell you, widening one's horizons of knowledge through broad, open-minded reading is fundamentally different from excelling in text-book driven exam techniques. More importantly though, while BRB's earlier pieces, like his Jhilko years, might have been intelligent and readable, my period of observation focused on the past 3 years, when he has been waging a war against the people and state of the Kingdom of Nepal, and his priority has been to pose a propaganda war through his articles, not enter into healthy academic discourses. Having read 5 or 6 of his more cited articles during this period, I have concluded that he is leading the propaganda war effectively with jargon laden junk. He has not been honest with his genuine intellectual past, and has abused his pedigree to not only mislead people, but also people who should know better, like these editors. This is all I'm saying. Whether he has a stellar high-school resume, or produced a mammoth portfolio of thought-provoking articles 10 years ago is NOT an issue of contention here.
I also got an email asking why I called Maoists "ideological bastards of Chairman Mao". I think I should clarify this. I did not use the word 'bastard' to be rude. I used the word 'bastard' literally in order to be accurate. Bastards are father-less offspring that are often created out of wedlock. To quote Mishra's letter to BRB, they are "bichaar ka daas", the ideological slaves, who are mothering a litany of thoughts and propaganda that have no legitimate origin, that have no identifiable anchoring for a troubled nation like Nepal. Just like bastards who grow up in troubled households. The use of the word 'bastard' was thus a *conscious* one. This is my personal view, and people may disagree.
To return to Biswo's point about applying different standards to appreciate Mishra and Rathour, I agree. Their mode of operation is different, but both are making valuable contributions from different avenues towards a common goal. To contrast incomparable tactics would be unfair to both the gentlemen.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 03-Apr-02 07:02 PM
>One example: if you opened an issue of Kantipur last summer and saw the op-ed
>page, with 80% of the ENTIRE space on page 4 devoted to BRB's theory about
>how the massacre was a design of the Indian Research and Analysis Wing, I
>guarantee you'd have been more aghast than myself.
Paschimji: I agree that I didn't see the hardcopy, and in the electronic copy, I
couldn't say how much did the article occupy in op-ed. But, rather than being
'aghast', I would laugh off his theory.
Do I believe BRB is capable of writing some really good coruscating opinion pieces?
I do. But will he write that now? I don't think so.There are two facets of BRB in
general minds: One, as you correctly predicted: his persona made up of his
achievement in SLC and ISc,(as an aside, I definitely think you have authority to
dispel the myth sorrounding his IQ due to his SLC distinction. Did I tell you your
image was indelibly etched in my mind when I too was taking SLC? ) which makes
common people think ,'hey, this dude is genious!', and another BRB is a ruthless
iconoclastic ideologue,who attacked his ideological opponents ruthlessly in columns
of weeklies, and tried to exemplified himself by wearing sandles in cold KTM( a
gimmick I would laugh off!) roads and trying to pass off himself as great
proleterian leader.
Now, in this perspective, BRB was often taken seriously by his opponents and his
readers and publishers of KTM papers alike. Whether we liked him or not, we read
him. He once berated Kim Il Song by saying he was trying to establish Royal
Communism in one of his articles in the early 90s, and he presented some good
arguments in his articles regarding parliaments etc.( I remember reading Aayaa
Ram, Gayaa Ram, Baburam in which he explained his party change. It was a good
one!) He was sometimes quite capable of writing views different from his own
partyline, and that was what I used to appreciate.
Now to go back to our original question: was Kantipur right in giving 'exaggerated
prominence' to BRB? I still think yes. In my opinion, that was time when we were
looking forward to peaceful solution of this problem. Enticing the guy to media was
an important mean to make him responsible towards civic society. Among the
herds of Maoist leaders, this is the most likely to defect to civic society despite his
weird lifestyle and political position. I remember he used to dramatically ask for
forgiveness, talk about Zeneva convention, promise not to repeat his mistakes etc
in the past. No longer. They kill people ruthlessly, and his rebellion has been a
dangerous multifacted organization without any real control of central authority,
besides perhaps macromanaging the supply of arms to the lower level. How many
people understand BRB's article in Nepal? 25% of population. (He writes in
Sanskrit-laden communist jargon that I mostly skip!) , so I think Kantipur Op-ed
peices were his way of interacting with nation's civilian leaders, and that was a
good thing for nation.
And finally, Kantipur's op-ed has been covered by the likes of Bam Dev Gautam,
Ram Chandra Paudel (his old untiring talk about socialism etc.), Bharat Mohan
Adhikari etc, so what's wrong in reading Prachanda and BRB there? I am a
democrat, but I definitely would like to read some extreme dissenting views.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 03-Apr-02 08:14 PM
Biswo ji expected 25% of population to understand BRB's writings.
I think you are overestimating it. I wonder whether 25% really know
who is BRB, except the leader who ask his followers to kill people ruthlessly.
Because the SLC appearance in last 60years history is now 250000
for the first time and majority of them are reappearing after they
failed to pass the exam. In 2036, it was about 10,000 and last year
it was about 30,000, so, total SLC passouts in Nepal are below
5lakhs, thus, its jusst 2 percentage of total population. And,
there are 100,000 copies of Kantipur circulated everyday,
I am not sure whether all will read it. So, lets say readership
of Kantipur is 3 per copy, I mean one copy is read by 3 persons,
and therefore, the statistics is still around 1 percentages. Thus,
peoples mostly listen to others interpretation on BRB's write ups.
Most of the peoples who support Kangress, will not love to
read useless article from top to bottom, when they first hate
communist and the hardline communism is not understandable to
them. Neither to me. I also don't read BRB's article if its more
than 1000 words, I just scan it, because it contains all profanity
in my understanding. So, it is too exaggeration to say that 25%
will read / understand BRB's article. 25% readership is something
like 50% of the males in Nepal understand what BRB writes, because
from my personal understanding, very few housewives in Nepal
will like to read the communist profanity run by BRB. I guess
if we do POT analysis, by excluding the peoples below 25years age,
then, hardly 10,000 persons will read BRB's article with interest
from top to bottom. I bet. Lets run one POLL in sajha.com,
out of 600 uniqe visitors, how many will say "YES, I do read from
top to bottom : all articles written by BRB". Most of them will
prefer, "they read his articles from top to bottom only when
there is too much fuss over his writings, like the one after
Royal Palace killings". I wonder whether everyone tried to
read everything. Only a few ananya bhakta of BRB will love
to read his profanities on communism or anything else.
Thanks.
HG
|
| Paschim |
Posted
on 03-Apr-02 11:32 PM
You are being unfair to me by deliberately missing my point, Biswo! I am NOT calling for bans. I am no censor fanatic (when Kantipur's Yubaraj-ji was locked up, I was incredibly disappointed with Ram Chandra). Of course, I'd give these folks space in the media: it's the only way their mythical images can be shattered, and bad ideas challenged. I am NOT a hypocrite who espouses democratic practices and can't tolerate dissenting views. Believe me, I love reading trash written by educated people, and the only way I have been able to form dim views on BRB is precisely because our democracy has given him the space to expose himself. All I'm saying is, editors need to exercise some discretion, and not blindly endorse things or people to give them "exaggerated prominence". And I too would be all too happy to just laugh off BRB's theories if it wasn't the case that he actually has many customers including those who subscribe to his criminal articulation and justification of violence against unarmed civilians. If I were a responsible editor, I'd just be doing my job of editing well, by at least consulting as a rule with writers on needed editorial changes. If not the substance, just brevity, for god' sake. It's Journalism 101.
Yes, I know all too well how suave some of our comrades' PR stunts are. The sandal story of BRB is interesting. As I wrote under "Prachanda Found Dead", his wife Hisila was busy living off British government (imperialist, capitalist, reactionary...add your adjective of the day) allowance at a subsidized housing estate in the north of England as late as 1994, just 2 years before the "People's War". How do I know? Her room mate was a friend of mine. Like "The Casino" and "The Wedding", I can do a mesmerizing story on "The Room Mate". But allow me to refrain from glorifying criminals. Just a mild wish, excerpted from my FICTIONAL Episode 1 of the Gaunthali series would suffice for now:
"Another Maoist leader, Baburam Bhattarai, a former architect described as an ‘ambitious charlatan’ has not been seen in public since the 2059 ‘Jiri Samjhauta’. His wife, Hisila Yemi, and daughter, Manasi, are believed to have accepted the invitation 'to live for as long as it took to feel safe' with a former nurse and volunteer of the now defunct Revolutionary Worker’s Party, Priscilla Tits, in Newcastle, England, who Ms. Yemi befriended as a British Council funded graduate student a decade earlier."
Some facts are stranger than fiction. And you just wish some fiction turned into facts one day. Enough said. Amen.
|
