| Username |
Post |
| torilaure |
Posted
on 08-Sep-02 01:41 AM
Dear all,
I am starting to have a feeling that it is a crime being called an “Intellectual” in Nepal. From whatever public gatherings or talk programs I have attended, I have experienced a regular tendency among people claiming that they not be called an “Intellectual”. And they go on bashing “the so-called Intellectuals”. “Ma Intellectual haina hai..” is being said by these people in the same tone as saying “Ma chor haina hai..”. Know what I mean.
The point I can’t understand is that these are the same people who regularly voice public opinion as well as fill up the media with their opinion pieces. So either these people are amazingly modest (I doubt it though) or it is really a crime being an “Intellectual” in Nepal.
I would appreciate it if you could elaborate.
Another “Not an Intellectual”
Amar Gurung
|
| Mr.X |
Posted
on 08-Sep-02 09:16 AM
Amar, r u the one from Pokhara??
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 08-Sep-02 10:13 AM
Amar et al,
I don't know whether this essay makes any sense now.
But I had had a lot of fun writing it a few years ago, when I was younger and
more foolish :-)
What follows is a piece, originally published in Kathmandu's SPOTLIGHT weekly
of June 24, 1994.
PhD myth and narrow context
an essay by Ashutosh Tiwari
"Intellectual is the most over-worked words in recent Nepalese
writing." So wrote Kamal Prakash Malla in 1970, in his essay "The
Intellectuals in Nepalese Society", later republished in his book "The
Road To Nowhere". Twenty-five years later, it still is. But with a twist.
Not only is "intellectual" one of Nepal's most over-written, over-
uttered and overwrought English words (its rivals are: "communist",
"congress" and "Coca Cola"), but also one of Nepal's most popular and the
least controversial public honorifics.
Just read various write-ups and essays that appear in both the Nepali
and English medium press in Kathmandu. What soon hums about the nation's
intellectual pulse is this: Today any Nepali with a PhD or a published
from-India book or two, or a few op-eds in the Rising Nepal, or a symbiotic
relationship with an NGO or a research institute can be called an
Intellectual -- with the capital 'I'.
In fact, so widespread is this practice in all circles that on
surveying the current Nepali 'intellectual scene', words Malla wrote
in 1970, still rings true: "Nepal is one of the few countries in Asia where
literate members of the population are greatly flattered when someone
calls them 'intellectuals'."
Now, my purpose here is not to argue who is a Nepali 'intellectual'
or who is not. Nor is to look into what makes an 'intellectual', or how
s/he is different from the ordinary minds. My purpose is to retreat to that
shell marked 'interested private citizen', and make two observations on
the state and the works of Nepal's "intellectuals": PhD myth and narrow
context.
PHD MYTH: In "Fatalism And Development", author Dor Bahadur Bista
remarked that a (high-caste) Nepali studied hard to get a 'jagir'. Once
he got it, then he did no work --- or, at least, certainly not as much as
he did at school. Education, Bista sought to argue, therefore provided
a socially-sanctioned excuse to do no work.
Strangely, a similar process marks the fate of most, not all, Nepali
PhD "intellectuals". He (and it is usually a he) may have worked hard in
graduate school in India or overseas. But on coming back with a doctoral
degree, his initiation into Nepali intellectual-dom is painlessly swift.
The press hails him reverentially. Calling him Daktar So-and-so,
journalists seek his comments and deep thoughts on various issues. Millions
of his literate and illiterate compatriots respect him with a
Daktar-shaheb. His colleagues at TU and elsewhere will refer to each
other as "fellow-Buddhijibis" or "fellow-intellectuals. And impressed
by his own credentials, our thus annoited intellectual begins to throw
weight of his PhD around, even in areas far removed from the groves of
academy.
Amidst all this uncritical applause, one key point gets consistently
lost: A PhD degree in and of itself doe not, and should not, mean anything
'intellectual'. It is, after all, a degree, just like a BA or an MSc, earned
after a few years of serious academic pursuit. At its refined, the degree
signals the end of an appenticeship in an academic discipline under a mentor
at a university. At worst, it is just a piece of paper, certifying that the
apprentice has mastered using the tools of his discipline, and is now
competent to use them professionally (anywhere in the world).
Thus viewed, a new way of judging a Nepali 'intellectual' emerges.
He is an 'intellectual', not because of his PhD from a great western or
eastern university. Not too because of his 300-page dissertation that so
impressed his family and friends. Not too because he insists on appending
the title "Dr." in front of his name even in his social life.
What we in public should bear in mind is that the daktar-shaheb
may qualify as an 'intellectual' (he may prefer the word "scholar" or
'reseracher') if he has, after his PhD, done and published original pieces
of research (to expand the frontiers of his discipline or its cognates).
Judged against this criterion, most Nepali PhDs (in Kathmandu) do not
measure highly. Their serious post-PhD publications and reserach are too
insignificant and too scattered for them to don the cap of an 'intellectual'.
To play on Malla's words: "How many readable and influential books or
articles on history, economics, science or anthropology or geography that
modern-day Nepali "intellectuals" have produced?" The answer, even today,
is: Very few
NARROW CONTEXT: Byond little post-PhD research, most Nepali
"intellectuals" seem to be known as "intellectuals" only inside the char-
bhanjyang. On the basis of their work alone, very few are known even in
India. Narrow location and narrow context help explain this.
The constricting fact of location has been well-described by
Govinda Bhatta, a Marxist writer, who, in an interview with a literary
magazine, observed: "It's easy to be an intellectual (buddhijibi) in
Kathmandu. You write for Kathmandu-based papers. You stay in Kathmandu
for two years, and hang out with the right crowd at al the right places
and right functions. And soon, people will think of you as a national
level thinker." And to be an "intellectual" in Kathmandu is to face few
criticisms and peer evaluations -- both of which elsewhere form the
life-blood of any scholar's better and higher-quality research output.
With regard to narrow contexts, suffice is it to study history
as researche by Nepali academics. As historian Pratyoush Onta has
pointed out in another context (HIMAL magazine, July-August 1993), most
history books published by Nepal's senior historians (and since they
have PhDs, they are also "intellectuals") have made no effort to interpret
the dynamics of Nepali history in relation to the larger context of Indian
or South Asian history.
The result is that much of history one gets to read
is little more than the same old fossilized stories of the ruling political
elites that get passed off as Nepal's only history. The struggles of the
ordinary man against the forces of war, famine, government policies, religion
and neighboring states are conveniently left out.
Today even Nepal's "intellectual-economists" suffer from this sort
of narrow-mindedness. Their public rationale for the current spate of
liberalization programs is glib: "The whole world is doing it, and so should
we." As far as we in the public know, they have no attempt to interpret the
reasons behind Nepal's need to liberalize economy against the imperatives
of the growing Indian economy, and the political economy of the development
process itself.
PHD MYTH and Narrow CONTEXTS are only two of many overlooked
aspects about Nepal's -- often self-declared -- "intellectuals". But it
behooves these intellectuals to get out of their post-PhD lassitude and
constant flirtation with electoral politics (read: power) to get down to do
some serious basic research. That way, they will slowly begin to gain the
respect not only of the public and their students but also by their colleagues
abroad. If Nepali students can be great students, then they can also grow
up to become great scholars and researchers, without hiding behind the
easy label called "intellectual".
THE END.
|
| SITARA |
Posted
on 08-Sep-02 01:14 PM
Amar ji;...please bear with me;
Ashu ji;
With all due respect to your "written in youthful-folly- days- paper" you seem to have over simplified the Phd. equals intellectual myth...in Nepal.
The term "intellectual" in its original meaning, states possessing a high level of understanding and/ or intelligence. Whereas, "intellection" means the process of high level of understanding. Such a formidable term in itself carries a lot of intellectual responsibility as having the capacity to reason (this stemming from the philosophy of knowledge purely derived from pure reason) and logic beyond emotions.
The terms "Intellectual" is as ambiguous if not equal to the term "enlightened" ....varying in difference and degrees by the contextual environment.
Very rarely (almost NOT) have I come across scholars claiming to be "Intellectuals"; be it in the EAST or the WEST. They would rather be hailed as "scholars" not "Intellectuals". Along the same lines I have yet to come across a wise man claiming "enlightenment". Not because these terms have taken to be "derogatory" but because the terms command a certain level of intellectual and spiritual (in the case of the wise man) involvement that is flawless. This, in itself is a massive undertaking.
Along the same reasoning; to be able to give a good argument in one's field in not being an intellectual but rather a sign of having had a good training. The Reviewer, being able to give a sensationalist argument on a point he/she wants to project or stress does not make him/her an "intellectual" reviewer, because he/she is only defending his opinion. Pitta Patrakarita or yellow journalism (slanted too) however highly combustible the arguments does not make the journalist an "Intellectual" journalist if he/she does not have the ability/capacity to look at both sides of the story. Likewise, the educator, however learned is not an "Intellectual" educator if he/she has stopped learning from his/her students....
So...to come to a conclusion; Do, the "Intellectuals" who claim to be so know, understand, and appreciate the very nuance of what it takes to be an "Intellectual"?
Perhaps, it would be wise to look at those "Intellectuals NOT" and appreciate for once why they have declined the very wreath that Caesar took on so reluctantly.
Perhaps there is wisdom in not wanting to be hailed "Caesar"
for every Caesar there is a Brutus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 08-Sep-02 10:06 PM
It reminds me of an incidence told by a friend, which goes something like this: During a big gathering at the Tribhuvan University, a disgruntled faculty from a college lashed out on another one who was a full professor at the central campus. The disgruntled one accused the accomplished one for using the same dissertation to become the Lecturer, then the Reader, and finally the Professor, without adding anything beyond dissertation.
On Intellectuals: There are two types in KTM: (1) those who tirelessly analyze the political situation in Nepal around the coffee table in some café in KTM, (2) those who can put that speculative garbage in writing, preferably in English, with very little or no research. Good English always helps here.
Super intellectual: Same as above but with a dakhal on more than one subject (e.g., philosophy, religion, economics, morality, sociology, and India). The shallower the knowledge, the louder the voice.
Seriously though,to be a scholar, one has to have made important contribution to his or her field of study through peer-reviewed published work. Period.
|
| cool |
Posted
on 09-Sep-02 12:50 PM
i am poor at writing, so i am defiantely not an intellectual.
i am good at screaming loud to make my points understood, so i am more of a gunda than you all wise guys.
but i can get things done rather quickly than people with a cool head
Aint that the definition of a nepali intellectual
|
| Cool_intellect |
Posted
on 09-Sep-02 05:15 PM
Cool:
Interesting posting, Cool.
Some more tips to be a "cool" Nepali intellectual:
(1) Try to get some articles in the Kathmandu Post and Nepali Times, not just The Rising Nepal. Don't mention that you have published in Gorkha Patra or that you have gotten your higher education degree from India.
(2) Be critical of the Western education degrees once in a while, but don't overdo it. It may start to smell that something is fishy, especially if you are trying hard like hell to get visa for yourself or your relatives to get to the US .
(3) You also need to do a lot of chat posting on numerous subjects. The wider the subject, the deeper your depth is.
(4) Helps to enhance your reputation if you can homedeliver some links.
(5) Skill in cutting and pasting some articles and texts is a plus.
(6) Criticize immediately, minute you see someone else's view or news. Then acknowledge the viewpoint after some thoughtful deliberation. Don't hesitate to be bold and blunt in the beginning, then mellow down later. It enhances your intellectual modesty.
(7) Starting a new thread on your own is a bonus, especially if your title of the thread includes words like:, new direction, New Nepal, vision, democracy in danger, empowerment, Bush's foreign policy in South Asia, civil society in nepal, productive discussion, feedback, Deuba's new move. Any Thoughts?, hydropower, Where is Nepal going?
(8) Always keep your cool while answering to those who use foul languages like: F***, go to hell, don't you have anything better to do than waste my time asshole, you f***** intellectual wannabe etc...
(9) Avoid posting on subjects like: girls, I am horny,wanna date, seen a good movie lately, I mean porno, foren aid, help with greencard, who is that girl? who are you? please stop Mao "voilence", I am crazy about Shakira, call nepal?...
(10) Avoid giving credit to anyone else, unless it is absolutely mandatory.
(11) If you have graduated from a well-known school, find a way to mention it frequently.
(12) Always act as if you don't have any time for the chatline, even if you spend hours and hours posting and debating stuff for the benefit of your intellectual community. Praise your buds with frequent chatliner hours. Remember, they are your promoters. Keep them happy.
(13) Having good English still helps, especially if you can throw in some names of the writers and philosophers in your posting preferably with some quotes.
(14) Don't you ever mention that you are posting from Dubei or Malaysia.
So Cool dude, follow these tips, and you don't have to waste your voice. You will be a legend in no time.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 09-Sep-02 08:17 PM
Amar,
If you look at China -- that country of more than a billion people -- it does not have dissidents the way, say, the former Soviet Union produced Sakharov or Solzhenitsyn.
That is because in China, by and large, scholars and thinkers are a part of the state
and their roles consist of legitimizing -- either actively or passively -- the actions of the Communist Party. [This is not to say that there are no dissidents in China, but their profle seems much lower than that of their counterparts' in the former Soviet Union].
Likewise, in Nepal, what our reletively short intellectual history shows is that our intellectuals or scholars have always been pretty much a part of either
the apparatus of the state (read: Durbar) or of the political parties.
The Panchayat, for instance, co-opted the likes of Bhesh Bahadur Thapa, Harka Gurung, Prakash Chandra Lohani and so on.
Since 1990, poitical parties (notably NC and UML) have co-opted scholars and intellectuals into their ranks as (formal and informal) advisors and have, over the
years, turned them into into party ideologues and apologists, into folks who are incapable of tolerating dissent and entertaining different points of view with an
open mind.
This is why, to a large extent, independent academic/ intellectual inquiry -- the
hallmark of any intellectal worth his or her name -- is virtually unknown in Nepal. Of course, the fact that TU is in a mess primarily because of political reasons is of no
help to sustain an indepedence of thoughts n Nepal.
And that is why, we look around and see, at least in the social sciences -- with a few exceptions such as Mahesh Chandra Regmi -- hardly any native intellectual doing independent inquiry into why things are the way they are in Nepal.
I mean, it's easy to be cynical about all this, but I, for one, remain hopeful that with a relatively large number of Nepalis now studying various disciplines and pursuing professional/graduate degrees abroad and thus being equipped with (Western)
analytical tools, things may turn aound in our lifetime in Nepal.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 10-Sep-02 04:06 PM
I am adding to what the earlier posting has said. Our university system
has never emphasized research, so the faulty at the university do not
engage in any critical thinking or analytical research.
Some good ones get picked up by the NGO's or INGO's, but because of the
pressure to produce reports, they rarely have time to retool themselves.
Some good Ph.D.'s become advisors and lose their academic
zeal very quickly. Since the university setting is what it is, they start to look for lucrative appointments on a regular basis.
Virtually there is no peer- reviewing of any research
work. Lately, many have returned to Nepal with soft degrees (PA/
Development Studies etc.) and can be found working as experts on just
about everything. There is nothing wrong with these fields, but what is
dangerous about this is that there is no intellectual honesty in acknowledging one's own limitation. I have had conversations with many of these intellectuals, and sometimes I
wonder about things they do or propose at their work at the policy level.
Early on during the Panchayat Kaal, all one needed was a Dr. degree
preferably from the US to be picked up by the palace to join the technocrat
group. The so-called technocrats had to make policies (or not make one) to
fit the establishment's idea of economic development: more regulations,
controlled market, quotas in licenses to benefit a few select big business
houses: 1 travel agency (YETI), 1 Safari (Tiger Tops), 1 Biscuit factory
(Nebico ?), 1 Bank etc. (Ashu appropriately calls it the co-opting of
our intellectuals into not thinking correctly or compromising own
intellectual principles.)
Some geographers became very lucky to lead the crowd of these intellectual
planners. They spent much time helping the politicians design geographical
boundaries, do de-concentration, administrative decentralization,
transportation linkages. The essence of free market was never on their
agenda. Having almost all the royalties take geography degrees at TU was
helpful in heralding many geographers into key decision making positions.
Generally, the policy making bodies (local, regional, and/or national) look
to the universities and their faculty pool for guidance and innovations.
In Nepal too, the university has to revamp its system to make their faculty
more productive and respectable. Having a solid academic institutions with
activities in research, peer-reviewed journals, and conferences, will then do a good job
of screening good intellectuals from the bad ones. Right now, many engage in part time teaching at private colleges. Some lucky ones are doing "research" for the INGOs. Some have become advisors. Without an academic culture with a built-in process of checks and balances, it is very hard to do any sorting. I have talked to some really bright ones, but then there are some really bad ones too.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 10-Sep-02 09:24 PM
SMR,
Excellent points.
For our discussion, first, let us make this distinction.
There are scholars who work within the confines of a particular discipline and write and publish for their own peers in their professional journals. An example would be, say, Edward Witten, the physicist working on superstring theory.
Then, there are intellectuals who have sort of transcended the limits of the academia and now write for a wider audience oustide of the academy. An example would be: Henry Louis Gates, a scholar of Afro-American studies, whose pieces appear regularly
in Time, The New Yorker, The New York Times Book Review and so on.
[Even then, there seems much dissatifaction with the role fo intellectuals in America.
I refer you to Richard Posner's recently published book on intellectuals.]
Still, in America, for instance, universities protect their scholars by giving them tenure
and all that. This way, say, a Paul Krugman is FREE to criticize, with reasons and in the sharpest of language, the economic policies of the Bush Administration, that too, in the pages of the New York Times, twice every week.
Try as it might, the Bush administration cannot have Krugman fired from Princeton (where he teaches) for publishing views it finds highly disagreeable and even objectionable, nor can it do anything to stop the newspaper from running
Krugman's pieces.
In other words, there are these INDEPENDENT institutions there that work in tandem -- by not necessarily agreeing with one another -- within the framework of democratic pluralism to get multiple, even opposing views out there in the public domain. Krugman can be criticized for his news, of course, but he does NOT have to worry about losing his job or about alienating folks who may be beneficial for his career a few years down the road. I mean, that's freedpm as good as it gets.
In constrast, in Nepal, we have yet to develop such strong and INDEPENDENT institutions -- either at our universities or in societies at large -- that can give sort of a 'tenure', as it were, to scholars/intellectuals to speak up their mind, to even criticise the powers-that-be and to back up their opinions with evidence and reason, WITHOUT having to worry about losing their jobs and alienating people to the detriment of their career prospects.
And so, if we want more from our intellectuals, it's not enough to say that they are jhoor and khattam, and ridicule them for working for INGOs or NGOs and so on, and leave it at that.
It's all the more important for all of us to look for ways to help CREATE, nurture and sustain independent institutions (such as free press, respect for the rule of law, politically independent universities, easier access to foreign journals and to the ideas
of foreign researchers and so on) in Nepal so that our intellectuals/scholars can take
risks with ideas WITHOUT having to worry about losing their job and without having to make too many needless enemies who can destroy their academic/intelectual careers.
On a personal note, this kind of a "if we want that, then we should first work toward this" sort of a challenge, in its own small way, is what that makes living and working in Nepal an exciting venture, despite all the usual problems of you know what.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 10-Sep-02 11:50 PM
Ashu:
Like you, I would like to start with the premise that Nepal does have good talents, and they are allover: TU, NGOs, INGOs, and even the government. I will give you some other time my thoughts on the concept of publish or perish or how to measure scholarly contribution.
The sad part about the Nepali case is that the most, not all, politicians themselves are quite outdated to spot good talents or ideas. Many of them are still trapped in their nostalgic-filled Saatsale krantikari days. I do admire them for their struggle and sacrifice, and also setting a strong democratic trend for a poor country. But, none had any intellectual or strong conviction to take democracy any further in a meaningful way. In the early days of the American history, some leaders were influenced by the ideals of personal liberty, whereas for others the notion of equality and fairness was the calling. Even a lightening rod like Newt Gingrich had ideas that Bill Clinton did not mind borrowing. BP’s writings show flashes of his intelligence and genuine concern for Nepal.
Getting back to Nepal: The party politics in Nepal is so feudal that the good talents rarely get attracted. Even if they did, many would wear out very quickly. With a bunch of less-than talented non-deserving courtiers at the helm of the power circle, the honest and talented intellectuals find themselves outnumbered and outvoted all the time. Undemocratic party constitution and dictatorial leadership help breed frustration. To survive, they have to be one of them. They stop doing homework and start selling their intellectual souls. It reminds me of a movie called, Body Snatchers.
Whether we like it or not, we cannot ignore politicians and their role in our society. They are here to stay and we must try to educate them. How to do is the million dollar question. I will perhaps present some ideas next time.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 02:38 AM
The article has a paragraph:
Amidst all this uncritical applause, one key point gets consistently
lost:
(1) A PhD degree in and of itself doe not, and should not, mean anything
'intellectual'.
(2) It is, after all, a degree, just like a BA or an MSc, earned
after a few years of serious academic pursuit.
(3) At its refined, the degree
signals the end of an appenticeship in an academic discipline under a mentor
at a university.
(4) At worst,
4(a) it is just a piece of paper, certifying that the
apprentice has mastered using the tools of his discipline, and
4(b) is now competent to use them professionally (anywhere in the world).
---------
How blurred your explanations are. It looks this paragraphs appears
as if its a "GRAPES ARE SOUR" type explanations. Kina chahiyo tyo
PH.D. degree, tyo ta ek page ko paper matra ho. What else you can
draw from that particular paragrgraphs. It is life long license conf.rred
on you to practice the knowledge what you have gathered while
at univ. It is a proof that you own knowledge to perform your work,
and you can not dismiss it by saying that its just a piece of paper.
It will be like saying human body is just made of 60kgs water+organic
matter, what you forgot is the core part "knowledge" in PH.D.
and "soul" in human body. Well, there are various peoples who
get PH.D. using the loop holes. E.g. in Japan, there are some peoples
who write 3 journal papers and call it: I am qualified for PH.D.
I want to ask them, 3 journal paper is not = Ph. D. , but, what they
are doing is exploiting the bottom line requirement and misusing
it to get that 1 piece of paper. 3 Journal paper was recommended
to save the time for external reviews, that most overseas univ.
requires and they need years before the review is given and corrections
made. To avoid the wastage of time, the univs. have outlined that
publishing 3 papers (journal) will qualify (because journal papers also
have peer reviews), but, there are several Nepalis who Publish the
works done at Masters as Journal paper and submit PH.D. thesis
in 2nd year and call themselves most deserved candidate. Some of them, I
have met, make propaganda that they finished PH.D. in two years?
My question to them was "Is this what PH.D. degree means? No you
are exploiting the loop holes, without even understanding why that
criteria exists. " Well, when I start talking to them and ask "do you know
this and that in that particualr topics which is root of his research, " His
answer is "NO", he says, and my reply to him is "What did you do?" He
proudly says, "I published 3 journal papers ...". So, here what we find
PH.D. are usually, those exploiters of loop holes, where you are
adviced to publish three fair journal papers with least overlap, and
new idea that is worth to society. But, with growing univ. and ... competition
for research fund, we missed the true definition of PH.D. holder and
therefore, we have writer like Ashu, who does miss chances to
call it a mere piece of paper.
I was very much disappointed to see a
PH.D. Thesis written by a fellow Nepali to whom I sent a copy of my
thesis for reference. He copied (HUBAHU) 28 pages of my thesis,
which I spend at least 3 years to summarize, and the fellow even
submitted in two years ...Got it. I feel very much ashamed to be
in same rank as he stands, that both of us are PH.D. Drs. The expt works
which was part of my PH.D. surely has impact on society,
because it brings 2 million dollars equivalent Yen (net profit) to the sponsor annually.
My former boss (and private friend) was whispering .... I am proud of my work.
My hand written drawing (part of my thesis) appears in their company brochures ...
Well, the other Nepali who copied 28pages HUBAHU of my thesis, is also PH.D.
He is HERO because he finished PH.D. in two years. I hear wah wah ...
in front of me, and I have to keep silence swinging my 5kg head .... just
laugh inside my mind how poor is our society, we have lost the demarkation
between the purpose of study for knowledge or for that A4 size one page paper.
I feel ashamed. ........... Well, some will say, it is univ.'s fault, but, univ.
also has many weakness, and my boss says, its matter of ethics of that particular
students, and partly of his advisor........... Life goes on. Obtaining PH.D. degree
is getting easier and easier, because of pressures to univ. (fund and work force)
.......... Now, those who are deprived of PH.D. (who could be more productive)
are frustrated that "IS PH.D. a mere piece of paper?". It looks so. Under such
circumstances, I ask a question at universities, are we admitting students to
deliver that paper, or to deliver knowledge? When I see the new generatioin
students, I feel they are in univ. for the Degree and less for knowledge....
Ashu, seems to correct in this new circumstances .... Well, its probably
the main reason for unproductive ness, and share price in the share market
is going down and down .... because our new generation want degree
not the knowledge .... Finally, may I ask here, whether we need the conventional
universities? Its called deflation spiraling, in Japan. . . .. . . . Similarly,
do we need PH.D. Drs.?
HG
|
| Nepali. |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 03:35 AM
hHey hg, so you think your're somekind ofa genious or something, talking about knowledge. So what if people are studying in order to take a degree for themselves, they aren't that stupid as long as they earn a degree.
You talking about share prices hiking down and blaming them due to lack of knowledge!!! Do you even have a brain??
And one more thing, you sound like as if you know damn a lot. LOL...
|
| SITARA |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 08:59 AM
Hahooguruji..... Where did you do your Phd (which country...not school)? If you don't mind my asking. I have just joined MA. Phd. Programme (changing my field from Education pedagogy to Education policy making in Non formal education)... And I am apprehensive and intimidated as hell at the thought of actually completing it....or not!
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 09:07 AM
Nepali.
How much frustrated you are ? Pour your all frustrations, so that your
blood pressure cools down. ... Then, you will realize, what I mean.
I don't want to go ahead with you who had bad stomach, and now
vomiting because of his bad apetitie. ...Go ahead, with your venal
vomit.
HG
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 09:31 AM
Sitara,
Well, I am not here to deliver what is my professional ability, neither to
practice my profession. Japanese say "PROFESSIONAL" are those who
make money from their profession. Sajha.com does not have my customers
to buy my professonal practice. Therefore, I serve them with my HahooProfession
i.e. free (after internet access time, reading time, and patience to read it to the
end ). Let me be just HahooGuru. I think what Suna wrote recently citing
how ANKT, NK and HG were verbally "molested" should be prime reason for
being HG, NK and AnKT, without releasing their real identity, all the time.
I would respect you if you could limit knowledge on me just at HahooGuru,
that would be more fun, and enjoyment and lasting. ... So, let us separate
who am I in real world. If drill it, publicize it, I will probably, have to change my
mask. ............... I don't have courage to be like Paramendra or Ashu,
to defend my real identity. Just Hg is good to think that its voltile material
like mercury (whose chemical abbreviation is Hg) in Sajha.com.
Well, its really a great satisfaction to be Hg in this forum, nothing more nothing
less , just Hg i.e. mercury.
HG
|
| Shuvachintak |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 09:56 AM
Hahooguru,
Dr. Mercury Bajey
This name will be more inspirational than your current name. hehehe.
Sorry, I should have posted this to the 'Feedback to Hahhooguru' thread.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 10:00 AM
No, TEE OFF Please.
|
| SITARA |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 10:36 AM
Hahoo guru ji.....
Gome nasai!
That was not the purpose nor the intent of my question...to get personal information about you. Nope! Since you mentioned/posted your Phd. thesis dillema at the hands of the other Phd. acquirer who managed to lift off your thesis...I was curious as to which country you were refering to.
As for the other, it was a remark in passing...not meant as an imposition on your respectful self, to burden such as yourself with knowledge...(?) about such as myself. And very very few know who I am too....here I may partner (..or may I?) with you in saying I am not that brave, either!!!!!!!!
But then again......that was not intended. However, if you do choose to misinterpret my innocent enough query (as a desire for enlightenment about your esteemed self), I suppose entropy does still prevail......in your respectable mind...and at my cost!
At another thread, you did ask "Where I was living...and if I was from Japan, you knew me"..... I don't think, I flattered myself into thinking you were desiring personal information about my insignificant self.
I rest my case!!!!! Hahooooogguru Sama, with a deeeeeeep Japanese bow, "Gome Nasai"!!!!
Do I detect that the Japanese Hierarchical system may have penetrated your holy personality...... IF SO that is Entropy in action on the sacred bodies!!!!!
|
| suna |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 11:12 AM
Sitara and Hahooji
Has nothing to do with being brave when people use their real names. Its a matter of choice. And, I choose to use the pseudonym suna (a shortened one for sunakhari, whose fan I am). Whats in a name? HOINA?
For those of you who don't agree and see themselves as being HEROIC and writing under your names: GOOD FOR YOU!
And now, lets get on with life shall we???
:)
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 11:15 AM
Ashu,Sitara, HG, and others:
My two bits:
There seem to be many intertwined issues here:
(1) The Ph.D. Degree: Trivialize or not to Trivialize?
Getting a Ph.D. degree is not an end to itself, nor is it a piece of paper.
Much thought, hardwork and a lot of learning go into getting a Ph.D., also
known as paying dues and jumping hoops.
Granted that Einstein and Nash published their path breaking undergraduate
work, but they were geniuses, who went on to earn Ph.D.s and the Nobel
Prizes. Mr. Bhaat did have a significant contribution in Stochastic
Process but never had a Ph.D. Closer to home, Mr. Dor B. Bista never
earned a Ph.D. (I think), yet he is a good authority in the field of
anthropology. His books and articles should speak volumes for himself.
That was of course the old English style system, under which you did not
need doctorate to teach and do research at universities (like in Nepal
too.). There were not too many Ph.D's around then. It is changing now,
and they (UK) constantly advertise seeking Ph.D.s.
The US system requires Ph.D.s, and of course it goes without saying that the
research work has to flow continuously. Even the government and private
labs hiring Ph.D.s to do R&D work expect good peer-reviewed pubs from their
research scientists. I have friends in these labs who have published in
Nature and Science. And then I have friends who have not done much after
getting their Ph.D.s. It also depends on where they land. Some workplaces
require research work, and others don't.
The point is not to generalize.
I am sure you too have a lot of examples like these.
Sitara, carry on with your Ph.D.
(2) A 3-paper Dissertation: Good or Bad?
It is also expected that a student who gets a dissertation done should have
something published out of the work in peer-reviewed "good" journals
regardless of whether or not it is a one big dissertation or a 3-essay
dissertation work. The 3-essay dissertation should have a thematic
connection however. You just don't write 3 papers and get a Ph.D. No
advisor would allow this. Even the graduate office knows enough about it.
The popularity of the 3-paper dissertation work emanates from the fact that
there is a severe competition among the graduate students to show that they
have research potential. What better way to demonstrate than to have had
some work already in the pipeline. The 3-essay --or paper if you will-- is
a good vehicle to accomplish it in a rather efficient way. The quality has
to be monitored by all parties involved. That is why there a multi-member
dissertation committee including an external.
But then if someone who can publish three peer-reviewed papers, there
should not be any problem in getting the Ph.D. done. By the way,
publishing in "good" places is not trivial.
Sitara, talk to your advisor and see if you can work on a 3-eassy dissertation work. It gives you a head-start on the job market. Trust me. Make sure that the 3 papers are thematic and inter-connected.
(3) The Bottom line: Be Careful With the Cachet of all Sorts.
The bottom line is that we have to be careful in generalizing the aura of a
Ph.D. degree just as much as the big-name cachet.
For example, a top rated student from a decent university who has already
demonstrated publication potential is (should) likely to get preference
over a bottom feeding Ivy League crop. That is, just being from Columbia,
Yale, Brown, Harvard, Berkley, UCLA, Michigan, Stanford, MIT is not going
to be enough. You are going to have to walk the walk and talk the talk.
In the world of Ph.Ds and research (that is what we are talking about)
"one has to show the money." Of course, the cream of the crop from these
places does extremely well in shaping the research and learning world. (There are other places too.)
Sitara, the publication is the name of the game in town, and don't worry about the school you are at. Get those 3 babies out ASAP.
Back to Nepal: people tend to cash in the rent from the Ph.D. degrees just
as badly as from the names of their well-known alma maters. Thus, back to
the issue of the world of the Nepali Intellectuals and how we can change
it!
We also need to be pragmatic about it and avoid looking at it things through the US
standard.
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 11:20 AM
Ashu: That was then, what is your position now? Why do not the Nepalese Ph.D's do not publish, research and seem to wither away academically after they return to Nepal? And further, do you even have an iota of idea how much work is required to get a Ph.D.?
|
| .. |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 12:27 PM
a test sorry
|
| NepaliIntellectual |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 12:37 PM
Siwalik,
I don't know if Ashu has a Ph.D. or not, but I will settle for a few high quality peer-reviewed analytical work of his and an MA degree.
Regards,
Underpaid, poor, but honest Nepali Intellctual
|
| SITARA |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 12:49 PM
SMR... Thank you! I appreciate that. I will take to heart what you have said...makes more sense than any "Free size" physics theory (I have heard recently) and/or implied quests for personal knowledge I may have projected.....YA!!
Suna: Mine was a tongue in cheek remark in my "premature", "zeal" to find SOME* common grounds with those who consider themselves as the Gurus of the era. Pardon me for trying to cyber hobnob!!!!!!!!!
And yes....can we get on with ...
the "intellectuals, intellectual NOTS, intellectual-wannabes, intellectually-am, intellectually-aloof, intellectually-insignificant, intellectual- theorists, intellectual-bilinguists, intellectually- inspired, intellectually encultured
.....................Intellectually-enlightened!!!!"
|
| NepaliIntellectual |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 01:28 PM
Siwalik,
I did some checking on Ashu's credentials.
He has about 15-17 newspaper pieces, mostly letters and pieces published in local newspapers like Kathmandu Post and Soptlight, and one piece in Nepali Times. He does not have anything in the Rising Nepal.
(I don't know why he keeps belittling us for writing in the Rising Nepal and not doing peer-reviewed analytical research.)
I did some checking on his scholarly record on some well-known citation indices. It returned 0 record. Some other Tiwaris from Nepal have a few nice scholarly pieces.
Did I answer your question, SIWALIK?
By the way, he works as an activist on behalf of some Chautari NGO, I think. They advocate on behalf of Kamaiya and so on.
Regards,
Underpaid, poor, but honest Nepali Intellctual
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 02:01 PM
Siwalik wrote:
"Ashu: That was then, what is your position now? Why do not the Nepalese Ph.D's do not publish, research and seem to wither away academically after they return to Nepal? And further, do you even have an iota of idea how much work is required to get a Ph.D.?"
Siwalik,
I cannot answer your question about others.
If you want to be a first-rate scholar, do NOT come back to Nepal immediately
after your PhD. Stay and teach at a university in the US. Get some pulications.
Earn the tenure, and then visit Nepal from time to time.
***********
As a Nepali trained to ask questions, I respect those with PhDs.
Period.
But as a Nepali trained to ask questions, I do NOT respect those who have PhDs
AND who then try to intimidate/scare others simply by throwing the weight of their degree around, without making any sense and who respond to questions
and comments with nothing but shrill and hostile defensiveness. I see quite
few of these people in Kathmandu, and that's life.
To expand on SMR's words, an intellectual would be one who knows what s/he knows
and more importantly knows what s/he does not know, but is willing to ask questions
and find out more. A questioning attitude, I suppose, is the hallmark of an intellectual.
I, for one, do NOT consider myself an intellectual, though, time-permitting, I do like
to ask questions and discuss ideas in public -- in my own name and thereby taking full responsibilities for the brillance or the stupidity of my ideas to get others thinking
about issues that they have probably not thought about before.
My old professors, for instance, still write letters of recommendation for me
based on the kind of questions they remember I had asked in their graduate
and undergraduate classes or during my one-on-one meetings with them.
Given how I love(d) asking basic yet (fundamental) questions to Martin Chautari speakers, Dr. Mary Des Chene, a good friend, once suggested that I should
look into being a trial lawyer someday :-)
That said, yes, it gives me a great pleasure to say that I have had an intellectual influence on quite a few Nepalis -- in and out of Boston (you know who you are, and may God bless you!) -- and their smiles and quiet gratitude more than make my life
a satisfying one.
As for my own PhD-garnay plans, I have yet to develop the kind of fierce, focussed intellectual craving for research that I have seen and admired in some of my super-successful American friends. Once I catch such fire -- and catching it may only be
a matter of time -- I just know that I will go on to have a fun time doing it to the
best of my ability, and getting my name out there in a major way.
Meantime, I guess I did and do NOT want to be just another dutiful, bored and
unhappy PhD student just muddling through with a so-so dissertation in some library when there is so much learning, so much auto-didactic exploring, on my own initiative,
to do in the real world for some time.
As for peer-reviewed articles, well, I am presently NOT pursuing a career in academia but in business, and I help develop strategies for private-sector Nepali businesses
on how they can save cost, increase revenues and make money.
[Incidenally, some of my smartest America friends do NOT publish papers in peer-reviewed journals but work for top-tier management consulting firms that place
a high premium on intellect.]
To my utter surprise, if my promotion, work-record, client loyalty and the caliber of Nepalis I supervise at work are any indications, I seem damn good at what I do, and
I am very happy to be doing this for now.
Meantime, I say sajha.com jindabaad for the kind of short analytical pieces that
get -- or so I hope -- some of your mental juices flowing when you read Ashutosh Tiwari's postings and thoughts. :-)
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| nepalinepali |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 04:13 PM
somebody deleted my posting.....kina
intelluctuals haru ko maaj ma budhu aayera ho
dai haru ho ma pani neplai ho, sorry to disaapoint you all
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 04:37 PM
Ashu: I had one basic question, which you avoided answering. Let me repeat: Why do the nepali Ph. D's fail to publish after they return to nepal? Maybe I should ask these questions too: 1) How many research institutions are there in Nepal? How many private foundations are there in Nepal to fund them? How many scholarly research journals are there in Nepal? These, just to start with.
I am well aware of the type of "buddhijiwis" you are talking about, but I detected a generalization from you. And we all know how that works. Further, just recently I heard you bemoaning how you were reluctant to write a review of a book by Nepalese expert because you happen to know them personally. To me, personally, that was a mark of intellectual dishonesty. (I am sure lot of sajha visitors believe you are one of the most intellectual poster in this forum). Even worse, it was an example of a Nepalese malaise--not having the guts to give a fair review just because..." I am not saying it is your personal fault. It is a Nepalese character trait. I do not personally feel that respect for elders should restrain us from being critical and provide constructive criticism. It is a duty that we have to take seriously. This brings me to another point: Who are you asking these questions to? (These questions that are of high calibre and make you stand out in front of everyone's eyes years on end.) How can we expect anything honest from you about your questions when you demonstrate ample qualms about writing a book review in case you end up offending your "friends".
If we fail to critically appraise each other and help improve the quality of scholarship in Nepal, we will ultimately have to face an inevitable national shame in the world arena--sending intellectuals to represent us in the world who end up being laughing stocks. How many times have we heard during negotiations with India how Nepalese had not done their homework or how they fell short becuase of their shabby preparation!!!!!!!!
Finally, possessing a Ph.D. does not have to mean that one has to keep researching and publishing. Not even in the USA, or anywhere else for that matter, does that happen.
My first question still stands? Have you learned anything new since 1994 when you wrote that piece to give you deeper insight into Nepaleseintellectuals ?
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 08:55 PM
Siwalik wrote:
Ashu: I had one basic question, which you avoided answering. Let me repeat: Why do the nepali Ph. D's fail to publish after they return to nepal? Maybe I should ask these questions too: 1) How many research institutions are there in Nepal? How many private foundations are there in Nepal to fund them? How many scholarly research journals are there in Nepal? These, just to start with.
*************
Siwalik,
Earlier, I mentioned the system of tenure that allows freedom to scholars in the US
to pursue their work without worrying about being harrassed by university and
political authorities and without having to fear that they might lose their job.
In light of this, one answer to your question could be: Nepali scholars/intellectuals do NOT have such a system, and hence live in fear that:
a) they might lose their job if they propagate views against the authorities, even when they are right.
b) they might offend the powers-that-be, who, in turn, may harrass them or even beat them up or make life miserable.
Besides, despite glimmers of hope here and there, there seems little or no culture of holding debates in Nepal, and people here are very, very quick to take offence and see slights and insults and innuendos every time they encounter views that try to examine their own thoughts in a critical/different light. Why do you think there are s many 'camps' of intellectuals in Nepal, with one 'camp' NOT speaking ill of another and so on?
In such an environment, how likely are you to find an scholar/intellectual who is willing to go where pure reason and evidence lead them to, and is willing to speak his or her mind?
Hardly any.
Specifically, then:
because there is NO independent university that protects the scholars/intellectuals, because there is no culture of rigorous peer-review garnay culture, and
because there is no culture of discriminating between ideas and personalities, it's very hard to be thekind of rigorous intellectual/scholar/theoretician whom the world of academia respects even though s/he may be sitting and working in Kathmandu.
For my purpose, if I WERE to pursue a career in academia, I'd simply stay in the US,
teach at a university, get some career-building publications out, earn the tenure
and THEN use my scholarly influence to bring about small, small changes in the
Nepali academia by collaborating with Nepali scholars and sharing resources with
Nepali intellectuals.
[In fact, in the last three months alone, I have had the pleasure of informally advising three US-based Nepalis with recent PhDs, who want to pursue rigorous careers in the academia, and were exploring career options in Nepal.]
In other words, as a matter of strategy, I'd try to do my work in Nepal from a position of strength later in my career and NOT be a saheed in my 20s and 30s just trying to set up the system, as it were, and exhaust myself totally.
But different people may have different choices and intereests and life circumstances, and that's fine too.
**************
Siwalik wrote:
Further, just recently I heard you bemoaning how you were reluctant to write a review of a book by Nepalese expert because you happen to know them personally. To me, personally, that was a mark of intellectual dishonesty. (I am sure lot of sajha visitors believe you are one of the most intellectual poster in this forum). Even worse, it was an example of a Nepalese malaise--not having the guts to give a fair review just because..." I am not saying it is your personal fault. It is a Nepalese character trait.
Ashu's comments:
I posted that question to underscore to you all how DIFFICULT it actually is to speak one's mind and still be friends with people who have differences of opinion with.
You know, Kathmandu is a small village, where there are people who hold grudges against one another over perceived slights, and who like to keep scores with one
another and who like to settle scores with their ideological opponents at an
opportune time. Our collective ego here is a giant one; and our collective
self-confidence is puny.
As for the book, having had my doubts and ambivalence cleared up by posters here,
I have been working -- on and off -- on the review. On a personal note, sometimes,
I just need to ask people for their comments on what I should do and what I should
not do -- NOT bcause I am dying for their approval -- but because asking for others' comments help me exand my own choices and thoughts and that in turn help me
make a decision.
That's all.
Sometimes, people you don't know personally give you the best advice, and I
appreciate that fact.
**************
Silwalik wrote:
My first question still stands? Have you learned anything new since 1994 when you wrote that piece to give you deeper insight into Nepaleseintellectuals ?
Ashu's comment:
Yes, the learning is that: It's just that the process of change for the better chugs along at a very, very slow pace in Nepali academia. And the options seem to be: Either you try to revamp the system and possibly be a saheed doing that,
or try make your own career first (preferably outside of Nepal) and then use your influence/strength later to make meaningful interventions.
Realisitically speaking, I, for one, would NOT advise brilliant young Nepali PhD students with a bright academic career ahead of them to give it all up and come back to Nepal right after their PhD and see what they can do. They can do that, of course, but my unfounded fear is that a few years down th road they will turn out to be just as intellectually flabby and lax as most 'intellectuals' here are.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| Wizard from OZ |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 09:25 PM
Dear all
Its an eye opening discussion for me. Having spend last 4 years in lab and then on writing thesis, I know how demanding a PhD degree could be (its a science degree). It was like a long tunnel with no light at the other end. Just now I am seeing some light. I don't know if all my hard work would be rewarded but now its secondary or tertiary. PhD was my choice and I had to bear the it offered. Some of my friends who enrolled for minor degrees have earned thousands of dollars (may be lakhs) in the mean time. But I am still struggling to meet day to day demand. The path is very painful and least. Its your choice.
|
| HahooGuru |
Posted
on 11-Sep-02 09:56 PM
Realisitically speaking, I, for one, would NOT advise brilliant young Nepali PhD students with a bright academic career ahead of them to give it all up and come back to Nepal right after their PhD and see what they can do. They can do that, of course, but my unfounded fear is that a few years down th road they will turn out to be just as intellectually flabby and lax as most 'intellectuals' here are.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
--
Good and worthy advice. Its true very much that you might end up
intellectually flabby and lax as most 'intellectuals' here are.
My additional suggestion: IF you really want to go Nepal, you should
1. Have enough money in your bank deposit for the rainy days ahead.
No money, no life. Forget those old school days, when parents used
to vouch your cost while participating Akhil ko Bhasad in Kirtipur campus
or Pamphadevi ko bhasad in Bhaktapur. The days gone, now you have
to vouch back to your parents, if its not confined to your own family.
..............
2. Be prepared to avoid making everyone happy. Using ideas in wrong
place to make money or fame. NO intellectual prostitution should be
your motto, difficult to practice it in Nepal. You will find several
peoples around you "chodeu tyasta principles ....sab le garchan...
khali kura matra ho... kaam ta sabaile paye samma yahi garcha .."
You should be able to keep your self out of such biz. Otherwise, you
will be hired to rescue others, in those rescuing you will
be wallowing yourself in mud. Thats the beginning of your
"PATAN", just the way CW ko Patan, GRJ ko Patan, Girija ko Patan...
Bamdev ko Patan .... (well, some may claim that they are still powerful,
but, do you call them honestly powerful. Well, for me Sushil Koirala,
RCP, Shailaja, Makune, Bharat Mohan look still honest in monetary grounds).
3. If possible, try to create a background for returning to Nepal after working
abroad for few years. In this period, try make a good contact with Nepali
who are dedicated and are in same profession. If there looks to be none,
use your close friends and relatives (who are very distantly related to your
profession), in starting a professional society, but, use them only to
register the society, not let them misuse it. Then, try your friends in US or
other countries to get membership and gradually phase out those good
friends who are not really useful to the society.
That shoudl not interpreted as misusing your friends, but,
you should clearly tell your motive, no cheating. They are supporting you
(lets be clear, "you are not using them", but, "you asked for temporary support")
just to make your move legal (well, some might call it unethical, but,
in Nepal, no one supports you unless you have private friendship or family
relationship. So, illegal is lasting, unethical can clarified and justifed as time
comes. Priority goes to legality, then, ethics. Ethics has direct relation with
TRUST, I guess. Too unethical peoples are not trustable.)
Try to invite more and more people in the society and make
it independent of your relatives & friend who helped you at the beginning.
Avoid your society being a play ground between UML and Kangressies,
better don'T let such intellectual prostitutes invade your society. Even
if you have strong affiliation, with either one, don't mix it, respect and
promote the dedicated guys irrespective of their political affiliations.
If someone tries to overrun with such political motivation, MUKH bhariko
jabaf diye huncha (not because you are of his opposite pole in politics, but, from
professional perspective... At the beginning there will be some guys
who will try to get benefit of such things. Be Brutally honest, when it
comes to professional matter at least inside your society). Boycott
all these anti-social elements in your society. Well, that will be the
beginning of catching other nice guys who were frustrated of politics
in everything and everywhere.
4. Whenever you have chances to offer something, don't exploit it
first by yourself. Let dedicated guys among the new group you created has
taste of your idea or chances, it should be exclusively based on her/
his performance. Even if you have disagreements (healthy), he
might be a good guy to go ahead rubbing shoulder to shoulder. Its
good to have honest and strong rival, then, to have a cunning YES man.
Well, you will need first 5 years in vain to come to this stage. So,
if you are in between 25-35, start it now, so that its worth to you when
you are near to enter 40s. Spend time and money (if you can)
for the society .... so that it keeps on moving. Its Nepal, poor in
resource. Keep track of your expenditure, don'T let it be loose.
Loose money means entry of corrupts or you are making peoples corrupt.
Don't let it go for CHIYA PAN, thats a bad habit you offered, and it will be
costly in future to avoid such expenditure. ...
Examples: Bharat Prasad Dhital started an organization appros(?)
in his early age while in Nepal, now he died. His name is still there.
CAN started by Sanjeev (I guess) @ MOS Com Nepal . Now,
Sanjeev is authority in CAN, well, very respected, not only in
tongue, but, from bottom of heart.
Last but not least. When you make a foot mark, watch out guys with
erasors. There will be young turks who will join your society and want
to reach to top, by criticizing, by being cynic and sarcastic on you,
.... best way to solve problem is just to keep silence and let them know
who you are. No wallowing with Shit. Just neglect these critics, sarcastic
cynic and borned to be pessimistic peoples.... You indulge with them more
you waste more time. As someone wrote here, when intelligent people and
foolish people have discussion, its very diffiuclt to identify who is
intelligent and who is fool. Just skip them.
As hinted by Sitara, "intellectual
silence" is one solution. You just stop attending the society for a few weeks
months ... let things heel, they need someone who has vision, and the
Shits who tried to destablize you will just vanish. Because, you have to be
productive, talk does not alone produce, and when someone can not
produce, he has to leave, if we boycott his filthy talks. ..... Well, selection
of word is very important when you are in better position, because those
who are under you will have 100s of ways of making interpretation, especially,
when you speak something with good intention, but, goes serves differently.
e.g. a new guy may come to Sajha.com and start blasting me. IF I say something
to blast him, back without caring my fans around here, I will have more loss.
So, I have to wait wait wait, and if it does not stop blast in such a way that
it never returns. Punch dinu nai chha bhane karang bhachine gari punch hana.
Natra just neglect .... Dedication is one thing and public relation is another
flight to success. PR is matter of experience. Listen to those who went before
you.
Many more .............
HG
|
| arnico |
Posted
on 12-Sep-02 12:32 AM
I can't believe I only just discovered this thread!!!
There is far too much material to address this late at night (advanced apologies for any typos and incoherences), but it is good to see familiar "faces".. Siwalik, welcome back to sajha discussions. Sitara, and SMR... happy to see your great contributions. Everyone else: great to see such a lively discussion.
Meanwhile... about "being intellectual" and doctoral degrees... As I am still working on one, I speak with far less authority than our dactar-hahoo-saab... but still, here are a few quick sleepy thoughts...
* the act of acquiring a doctoral degree teaches very little of what is needed to be an intellectual (hence there are lots of people with the degree walking around who are not intellectuals)... however, both require some of the same pre-requisites, including a talent for paying attention to details while maintaining an overview of situations.
* a doctoral degree is a VERY useful training for becoming a researcher (this sounds like stating the obvious, but people often forget what the purpose of the degree is). But (and this, too is often forgotten) the main thing one learns while doing it is NOT just details about the very narrow focused topic one is researching (and becoming an expert on in the process), but the PROCESS OF CONDUCTING RESEARCH ... including the patience, endurance, and rigorous analytical thinking needed in for generating truly new knowledge. Note that many of the best scholars end up as professors in fields quite different from the one in which they did their doctoral degrees. Among three of my past and present advisors, one did a doctoral degree in Applied Mathematics, but ended up as an atmospheric chemist, one did a doctoral degree in biology, but ended up as a professor of public policy, and one did a doctoral degree in physical chemistry and now studying interactions between ecosystems and climate among other topics.
* In the process, many though not all people pursuing doctoral degrees pick up abilities to think logically and acquire an impatience with poorly argued statements. As a result, many people pursuing or having doctoral degrees are quite skilled at tearing other people's work to shreds. This is not something that can only be acquired through a doctoral degree. The often mentioned class in logic that Ashu said he took as an undergraduate would probably do something very similar.
_________
Finally, I have to say that I don't fully agree with Ashu's advice for prospective academics to build careers in universities in the west, for all the reasons already stated (including lack of peer-review process in Nepal, etc., etc.). Yes, it is probably the best advice to give to one person in isolation for that person's career success, without considering others.
BUT, there is quite a sizeable number of us pursuing academic-career oriented degrees abroad... I would venture to guess that the number of Nepalis studying in research-oriented masters degrees and doctoral programs is probably of a similar size (if not bigger) than faculties of all the universities in Nepal. If we include undergraduates intent on graduate education, the numbers are probably larger.
If sufficient numbers of us return to Nepal, together, coordinating with eachother, I believe firmly that we can not only change those aspects of the academic culture that we are lamenting about right now (come on, it does not take THAT much effort to start a peer-review process and to submit research to peer-reviewed journals)... but that we can go beyond that to establish the additional new universities that Nepal needs in order to produce its next generation of leaders and skilled workers. I don't think we would be having to pursue this alone either. Remember that, apart from the media reports about violence, Nepal remains a VERY attractive place for foreign academics to spend sabbaticals and longer leaves while helping us out...
That said, I DO see the merits of climbing up the academic ladder in established institutions when the opportunities arise. A group of fresh PhDs alone is not going to bring about the changes we would like to see in Nepali academia, and there is a lot that one can do in and for Nepal while having a secure tenured position in a country like the US. HOWEVER, I think as a group we can do much better than if we each pursued life-long tenure in the west. If you have seen the film A Beautiful Mind, think of the scene about "getting the blonde"...where Nash points out that cooperation brings about a better outcome for each member of the group than if each acted only in their self-interest.
----------
as a final note: you may be wondering why I mostly write "doctoral degree" rather than PhD. It is because I am attending one of two "odd" schools in the US that give their students a choice of whether they want their doctoral degrees to be called "Doctor of Philosophy" (PhD) or "Doctor of Science" (ScD). They are just labels, but at this point there is a good chance that I might complete and pass all the work required to get a PhD without ever getting a PhD degree:-)
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 12-Sep-02 10:33 AM
From ashu's last comment, it is clear what the real problem is--not the intellectuals who return, but the atmosphere and the infrastructure that is AWOL. From Arnico's posting, the solution is also clear. I woudl say that instead of making light of people with doctoral degrees, one should learn to acknowledge their "sacrifice" (those like Wizard from OZ). What is required is a band of "mavericks," who will take upon themselves to change the system so that sincerity, objectiveness and pursuit of deveopment of nepal can be achieved. For that to happen, it is imperitive that these members of the maverick band ensure financial freedom before they return to Nepal and launch a "crusade" against malpractices of the soceity that still languished in medieval mentality. If we are to make any progress in the world as a nation, it is upon us to establish a system that embraces modernity:
1. A bureaucracy that is meritocratic
2. A value system that integrates scientific orientation
3. Rationality as a foundation of thought
And these changes are not going to come bottom up. The elites should lead to transform the system. In this top down process, it falls upon them to rise above narrow self-interest.
My suggestion to Ashu is that he start believing in himself rather than become a cog in the wheels of Nepalese ineptitude. Arnico has good suggestions. For myself, I would rather place my effort on change than perpetuation of unacceptable values and practices. If martyrdom is the ultimate price, so be it. As the cliche goes, better to be a lion for a day than a dog for thousand years, or something like that. To westernize the phrase: To know what is right and not to do it is a mark of cowardice.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 12-Sep-02 01:01 PM
Siwalik wrote:
"My suggestion to Ashu is that he start believing in himself rather than become a cog in the wheels of Nepalese ineptitude."
______________
Well, Siwalik, truth be told: I have NEVER really thought of myself as "a cog in the wheels of Nepalese ineptitude." Moreover, my primary self-image, for all its faults,
has NEVER exactly been that of a person who does not believe in himself.
But that's all right.
One learns something new on sajha everyday -- even about one's own self, and
that's life.
At any rate, in a spirit of public discussion, I take your suggestion POSITIVELY and
with a smile by:
a) NEITHER feeling the urge now to hurl juicy adjectives at you
b) NOR wanting to shout back to you saying that I somehow perceive -- as some sort of a clairvoyant -- that you are throwing innuendos and belittling my all these mighty efforts (about which I have, alas, written copiously on sajha!!) and . . . you know,
yada, yada, yada.
Hmmm . . .
"A cog in the wheels of Nepalese ineptitude?"
Now that's some food for thought for me, and I thank you for your remarks.
Then again, maybe, by now, I know too much about Nepal and about how things
work around here to appreciate idealism for what it is, and still be able to maintain
a realistic (or so I think) attitude about living and working in our belovedly frustrating Nepal.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 12-Sep-02 04:10 PM
Unfortunately, my elaborate reply became a casualty in the cyberway. The gist of follows:
1. The last posting by Ashu gives a sense of resignation to an oppressive system.
2. There is a need to think individually what future there is for Nepal if a celebrated Harvard grad like Ashu can dismiss my hope for a better nepal as "idealistic".
3. "Belovedly frustrating nepal?' If it were truely beloved, would it not fall upon us to right the wrongs? Should we let it remain repressive (hence backward) even at the dawn of the 21st century?
Again, sorry abou this short note. I am mighty miffed at having lost the longer more forceful thread.
Adios internet discussion!
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 12-Sep-02 04:45 PM
Siwalik (pls don't adios yet), Ashu, and Ernico:
Speaking of changes:
Here are my two bits to zero in on a common goal, and I will confine them to the issue of academic institution, the source of our intellectual thrust.
I am of the view that the people are not inherently born with flaws, even
Nepalis. Like the saying goes, you are what you eat, I tend to believe
that the people respond to the parameters set by an institutional framework.
There are many problems in our Nepali academic institutions, and they are
well documented. One that stands out quite prominently, at least to me, is
the fact that the academic leaders such as, the VCs, Rectors, and the
Deans, are not selected through an open search. For example, even the
relatively new Medical School in Dharan has the top two people in its
administration who are related to the top political leader of the country.
They got appointed when this leader was the PM, so I have been told. I am
not implying that they are not qualified to be in those positions, but an
open search process would have planted a seed to begin a healthy academic
culture in the academic world.
A similar fiasco took place when a pediatrician with an MBBS degree got
appointed to be the VC of TU during the Panchayat regime. The problem is
that many of the so-called autonomous universities in Nepal and their apex
bodies are controlled by the PM, Education Minister, Secretaries and
several other political officials. The subset of the committee members
prepare a "list of nominees" and the Chancellor (PM these days) picks his
crony. Anyway, the process is very similar to this. You will be
surprised to know that this is not just confined to the public university
like TU.
After a bad start at the top, the domino effect begins. The VC hires his
crony in the Rector's position, and they together hire their friends as
Deans and so on.
So, the first order of business, in my view, should be to define the real
meaning of autonomy. That is, the Apex Body or the Senate (whatever they
call it) should not be given any power to search or appoint these top
academic officers. Instead, the search committees should be formed outside
these political units, mostly consisting of faculty and other non-political
individuals from the campus.
I believe, an open process to fill such positions would possibly go a long
way in trying to move some unmovable professionals in the US or any other
western countries. I am not implying that there are no qualified people in
Nepal, but such openness will generate worldwide competition. After
attracting good people to these top positions, the rest will begin to
happen.
A healthy competition and expressions of good ideas among the potential
competitors will begin to send good signals. Obviously, there are many
other issues one must address: incentive structures, signaling mechanism,
salary compaction issue, balance between research and teaching, building a
niche, encouraging funded research, but I don't want to waste your time
explaining all of these.
A culture of open competition in academia beginning at the very top will take care of many of these issues, once you begin to invite open debates without any fear of reprisal. However, "Who is going to bell the cat?"
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 12-Sep-02 07:56 PM
SMR: What you have said is true. In the parlance of political research the phenomonon you have expressed is called "rent-seeking," or "capture". If you read one of my earlier threads, "meritocratic" system is called for. But I also emphasize the "value system" required for a successful society. The present value system is "anti-modernist". Nepal's situation resembles a man trying to run a 100m dash with his hands and feet in sackles.
Economists will tell you that state intervention in the economy will inevitably end up in creating patronage and clientalistic bereaucracy. The main crux for us to solve is how to minimize it. SE Asian have been quite successful in doing this. How? One solution (Korean) is to create a "bifurcated" bureaucracy, which means that some parts of state apparatus is clientalistic, hence inefficient (e.g. internal affairs ministries) but simultaneoulsy creating meritocratic sector that is vital for economic development of a state (e.g. trade, industries, commerce, plannning, finance).
You talk of state autonomy. This means that the state has to be relatively free from the interest of dominant class. If you look at the institutions in nepal, that is far from true. Further, a strong state, which Nepal is not, is a prerequisit for development.
So, it will be redundant to say that Nepal faces a problem of monumental magnitude. But the question still remains: What are we going to do about it? Should we take the Ashu way of perpetuating it in the name of "pragmatism," or should we be "idealistic" in hope of changing the things for the better? What is the duty that each and everyone of us carry? No dobt, some elements will not want chage as they have an entrenched interest in the current way of doing things. Some would be for change, for self-interest or for larger interest. The latter group have a struggle at hand. What methods should they use to attain their goal falling short of a Maoist path? Or to put it another way: Is it possible to formulate a peaceful way?
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 13-Sep-02 10:33 AM
Siwalik:
"No dobt, some elements will not want chage as they have an entrenched
interest in the current way of doing things. Some would be for change,
for self-interest or for larger interest. The latter group have a
struggle at hand. What methods should they use to attain their goal
falling short of a Maoist path? Or to put it another way: Is it
possible to formulate a peaceful way?"
Short of a Maoist path? ... a peaceful way?
I would say, Yes, and I will take a crack at it:
Some argue that the 2007 revolution was not a revolution, and actually it was instead a convenient arrangement between the elite party leadership dominated by a select ethnic groups (e.g., Bahun and to some extent Chettris), the second-tier disgruntled Ranas, and the Palace. Even after 1990, nothing changed in the sense that the eitists' positions got further strengthened with an enhanced concentration of economic and political power especially in Kathmandu. The so-called economic and political minorities got left-out, and one solution that a few articles written in Kathmandu Post and Nepali Times by Bohara suggest a decentralized regional governance and a proportional representation system of election. A lengthy discussion on these structural changes already exists on the thread "Defending the Sadbhawana."
This gist is that the current regional structure can be used so that the five regional governments (a weak form of federal structure if you will) will devolve power away from Kathmandu, allow the regional populace and the leadership to make economic decision on higher education, water resources, health, and to some extent infrastructures, and also be accountable. There are numerous arguments (see the thread and the articles). Obviously, there could be other alternate decentralized structure, and the thread goes on and on on various advantages and disadnantages of different structures. The articles also wishfully hope that these measures may be attractive for the negotiation strategy. (I doubt it, especially in light of the fact that the intensity of the killing fields seem to suggest that the Maoists perhaps seem qute hell-bent on overthrowing something instead of sitting down to talk about these devolutionary measures: decentralized governments and proportional representation. Although, one of the demands of the Maoist's is the decentralization. They do not elaborate on it.) I still think it does not hurt to give these measures a try to see if the maoists will be interested in listening. The NC (Koirala) has finally shown some interest in initiating a debate on the regional governance issue. I am hoping the other smaller parties would pick up on the proportional representation method of election. The PR method should be attractive even for the Maoists.
ON the rent seeking behavior: Without going into much analytical
rambling, I would suggest the following: the alignment between the
political leadership and the business lobbyists must be broken by
taking away the incentive to collude. That is, focus on transparancies
by removing much bureaucratic discretionary power. The current drive
to push for a punitive approach by the CIAA is highly commendable, but
it will not provide a long-run solution. With the opportunity for
corruption available, the price will change, and the people will come
up with a more innovative way to hide wealth. A risky task will command
high premium. So, we must attack the source: remove the discretionary
power in favor of transparencies and rules and regulations.
The second suggestion is to make the party finance transparent. Making
the information fully symmetric you will give the voters more power and
help them make informed decision. Initiatives like these will perhaps
one day begin to attract good and productive people to invigorate our
society. We also should encourage parties to be more democratic to attract good people. It must start with the NC party, a very important fixture in our political map. A drive to transparency in party politics will drive many unwanted characters. The Transparency International Nepal has begun to pick up on this theme and publisize it too (recent news).
These are quite fundamental methods and are quite peaceful too. I don't know if these prescriptions are enough to get the Maoists' attention, but the public at large should be listening them. A public pressure should be put on the government to abandon its unilateral rheroteric: lay down the arms before any talk. They need to start doing their homework.
But I suspect the entrenched ones at the helm of power will never pay any attention to these issues, unfortunately! But I enjoy pondering about them.
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 13-Sep-02 11:17 AM
Siwalik,
Ooops, a typo: I meant ethnic minority not the economic minority in the first paragraph second sentence. Sorry.
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 13-Sep-02 01:16 PM
The sugestion seems to express confidence in the neo-institutionalist solution. I would not put too much stock on it. On a cursory note, it seems like an appropriate solution, but in my opinion, it is too simplistic. The problem is far sinister than assumed. If the structure is infested by mold or termite, it does not really help by repainting the surface.
I would like a different approach. We have to question assumptions at all level.
1. What is the position of Nepal in the world and the region?
A third world country with peripheral economy with very little surplus value in its production. Labor intensive agrarian economy dominated and tied to Indian economy.
Basic lack of security, financial capital, technological skill, shallow knowledge base, and weak internal market.
2. What is the societal constraint?
A majority of the society still mired in traditional-religious views of the world. Narrow elite interest overshadowing and marginalizing majority of the non-valley population.
3. Individual attitude:
Values shaped by centuries of non-modernist views, basic lack of socioeconomic mobility; Dependence on government to provide everything, and lack of individual initiative for change.
Under these constraint, change in instituional setting has little possibility of changing the natural state of things. This does not mean that institutions should not be reformed. Of course that is a welcome sign, but values need to develop that will find resonance to strengthen those institutions. For example, we have a democratic system, but there are increasing number of people demanding the king to take over and impose an absolutist regime. Obviously, the democratic system has produced a cognitive dissonance.
If we assume two things:
1. Humans are rational individuals-economic model; and
2. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely;
then it might help if there is transparency in governmental affairs. Devolution also helps, it might be better if there was less power concentrated at the center. Maybe the center should have a responsibility to formulate fiscal and monetary policy, security concern and foreign policy. The rest should be devolved to the district level (not even regional). The closer the people are to the decision-making center, the better the ability to monitor those in power. By placing developmental responsibility on local authorities at the district level, there is less of a chance of nationwide paralysis if there is corruption. Each district could be free to form a partnership for development with other areas. But that woould be for the DDC to decide.
This would also solve the problem of representation. Taraibashi and Pahadbasha would have their own DDC to work out the political process. My personal philosophy is that if something looks too big to tackle, just start small. Changing Nepal by changing the central authority sounds unattainable. But each person can feel love closer to home and try only to better their own neighborhood and district. Like an invisible hand, maybe each doing his/her part for the district could transform Nepal for the better.
But then, I am in "idealist".
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 13-Sep-02 03:52 PM
Siwalik Wrote:
?For example, we have a democratic system, but there are increasing number of people demanding the king to take over and impose an absolutist regime. Obviously, the democratic system has produced a cognitive dissonance.?
But there are a far greater number of people with much greater intensity, who are asking the King to negotiate with the insurgents, including those who routinely seem to care less to descent upon the Sadarmukams creating horrible carnages along the way. Believe me they are not talking about the same 35 years old status-quo maintaining talk regarding the NGO-driven small decentralization stuff surrounding the hopelessly fragile cluster of units we call 75 DDC and local VDCs with a budget of 5 lakhs each, while the elite at the center enjoy all the economic and political power in Kathmandu.
The big boys are talking about the Republic, power sharing, and constitutional assembly. And, they are also least interested in waiting to see how values and moral take hold in our neighborhood. In this thread, I am not saying that we need to negotiate with them, nor am I advocating their eradication. I am just trying to state the situation the way I see it in the context of the proposition.
Siwalik wrote:
?My personal philosophy is that if something looks too big to tackle, just start small. Changing Nepal by changing the central authority sounds unattainable. But each person can feel love closer to home and try only to better their own neighborhood and district. Like an invisible hand, maybe each doing his/her part for the district could transform Nepal for the better. But then, I am in "idealist".?
This requires the assumption that the Nepali people are not capable of armed revolution. That said,
Siwalik, I will not put any stock on this either to solve our problems. What you suggest is indeed a very peaceful path (with the assumpiton that there wil not be any insurgency), but it is not only very simplistic but yes very idealistic too. During the Panchayat regime, we followed that approach: small steps, don?t rock the boat, back to your village, gau-bikas, focus on 75 DDC, keep the administrative units fragmented into small units so the center can have a nation-wide control, appoint people at the district levels and anchal levels, etc.
I wish it had worked during the Panchayat regime. But it did not, and here we are. Big problems require bigger solutions, and they may indeed sound simplistic. Like the Russians and their democratic experimentation, there is no turning back. The proposed solution I explained earlier is a compromise between the status-quo and the Republic. I am not denying that there are no other better solutions.
Unfortunately, there is no turning back for us no matter how loud the demonstration is in front of the Narayanhiti Durbar. Have to move forward with some meaningful compromises.
But then, I am a neo-classical institutionalist with invisible hands.
|
| SIWALIK |
Posted
on 13-Sep-02 04:26 PM
I will concede that the international environment will support neither the Maoist dream, nor the monarchical designs that some may have and urge (consider there are these people organized as FNA in the USA). Social science researches have shown that sustaining democratic system in a poverty striken country like Nepal is almost a Herculian task. On what basis can we hope that Nepal will be an exception? I ponder the implication!
What I proposed was strengthening of DDC's unlike before or the present. Consider DDC's as firms responsible for their own growth and strategy for development, except for some essential monetary, security and infrastructural responsibilities at the center. The closer the power lies to the people, the greater the opportunity to keep a tab on the wielders of power. It has been apprent enough to me that no political leader has proven to be able to rise above narrow self-interest. But what can we expect if we follow the logic of rational choice (there is one neo-institutionalist perspective)? But I suppose you would like the historical institutionalism. I would like it to succeed, but feel that it might be not the primary methodology for purusal. Before this step, there might have to be an "education" on value system.
My inclination is to dive beyond the neo-institutionalist insights. What are the fundamentals of a society or a human? I would go the cultural route on this one--the insight from culture, value system, and worldview. It may very well be that institutional or rational choice outcomes and negotiations are consrained and shaped by the value system of the society and the individuals...
|
| panday |
Posted
on 14-Sep-02 03:19 AM
folks, we are a society that idolize a god (krishna) and his sneaky acts to win a 'holy' battle for his friends who lost their all through gambling.
aint something that can be changed unless you abolish the mahabharat, and id like to see someone try that
overly simplified?
or is it just that simple?
|
| SMR |
Posted
on 14-Sep-02 04:33 AM
Siwalik:
With an exception of a couple of tyrranical regimes (Cuba and N Korea) and some Middle Eastern and Afican basket cases, the rest of the world has embraced democratic. And bringing back Churchill's cliche may be relevant here too: democracy is the least worse system of government.
That said, the institutional reform is an endogenous and a dynamic process and will not totally not give any room for value system. The US constitution has gone through several changes and every year laws get formed to strengthen property rights, protect environment, and restrict indecency. They abolished slavery too. But, they do not happen in a vaccum. The associated cost get internalized: providing child care at work place or even allowing work from homes...environmental groups bying lands to protect it. These are the examples of simultaneity of values and market. I will not make a judgement about which has a dominating role here.
Further, more than often values respond to market: economic reality influencing family size, tax breaks influencing preference to have children (trust me I can give you some references), and the strong lobbying cannot necessarily stop R or X-rated movies.
Economic reality and other considerations force Nepali professionals and blue-collar workers to go to Maulan by putting a pause on their desh-bikas value. Hundreds of thousand of them go to the Gulf and in other Asian countries. Unfortunately, many who come to the US end up putting a permanent pause on their Desh-Bhakta value. Visa permitting, others would do the same. (I don't want to get into the normative debate.)
Importantly, values change over time too. Just ask yourself, how many days have we spent doing Sradda for our deceased parents as compared to our fathers doing for their parents? These days, many women leave their children at daycare than at gradma's. Changes regarding how we treat our paretnts are taking place in Nepal too. There are now privately run old age homes.
Having said that, public policy debates under a democratic system, protracted perhaps, within a framework allows players to bring their values to bear on the debates, but they are also totally free to do a horse trading too... at least that is the democratic way. It is messy, it is not clean at the beginning, but it works in the long-run, and it happens at our homes too. Numerous states are now pondering about completely legalizatiuon of drugs. What can we say? That is life under a democratic society.
Do we need to educate? Absolutely. Else, how would you create coalition? We must align incentives to form a group dynamics. That is why I am a big proponent of the public university systems in all of the regions (read my earlier thread.) Good education system, open public debates, democracic practices, institutional parameters are all essential elements and must be done simultaneously.
Yes, the last 12 years have shown quite a few flaws, and we must fix them. We must put in place some institutional framework (see my earlier thread) The US also had its share of turmoils in its history: civil war (1 mill casulties), civil rights movement, racial riots and polarization. Granted that there are vast differences between the two cases, but, we cannot afford to adopt the policy of not doing anything.
Further, the issue is not about the international environment. The current problems are home-grown, and they are real, and we better face it, and face it now. Bringing back the incrementalism approach tried during the Panchayat regime by gving more power to the King is not going to work, unless you are willing to bear a huge transaction cost. The palace is not an option here. Just be realistic Siwalik.
You speak of the 75 districts being like firms and having people's power and so on. I don't want to repeat what I said about it again. But, can you imagine a university with a president and 300 academic departments without any Deans or the Provost? Can you imagine the magnitude of the principle agent problem? Transaction cost associated with the monitoring and compliance?
And devolution is more than giving the monetary system to the center. I don't have space to write about it here. The 75 districts are fragile and lack the economy of scale to do an iota of thing. The all-mighty powerful center handles almost 95% of the total budget and gives only about 5% to the local bodies. Don't you see a problem here?
Even during the Panchayat regime the problem was realiged and various efforts of centrally controlled integrate projects (multi-district) were carried out. Instead of trying to paint the surface; admit the weakness of fragility of these units and go for the real thing -- decentralized regional governance and proportional representation to accomodate various voices in the public policy debates.
It would be very nice to see all of us get along, not kill each other, understand the value of neighborhood, follow a benevolent authority, respect each other's value system and so on... but even the road paved with good intentions can still lead to hell.
|
