| Sajha.com Archives | |
| Username | Post |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 03:55 PM
Dear all, Its coming out of a staunch monarchist. NOTE: I am not forcing anyone to read it. Why we need monarchy? Let's first think of answers to these questions: How long ago Nepalis learned to say Republic? How old is the institution of monarchy in Nepal? The answer to the first question will be "very recently" and the answer to the second question will be "from pre-historic times". Yes, Nepalis learned to say Republic probably 100 years ago, where as Monarchy has been here for the last 2500 years. The institution of monarchy is as old as the country itself and the concept of republican state is a relatively new one. So, I would argue that, Nepal is better off being a Monarchy. Bored already? Click on the other thread. Because what you are going to read now is very dry and boring. Although, what I am writings sound corny and to some, it may sound like its straight from some propaganda material, but the reality is: 1. The institution of Monarchy is the symbol of Nepali unity 2. The institution of Monarchy somehow relatesto Nepali nationalism, which in turn is keeping us independent for the last 250 years 3. For whatever reasons, the people seem to believe and like the King than the political leaders Now, let me corroborate on the above points: 1. Monarchy as the symbol of Unity: Believe it or not, the monarchy is the symbol of unity among the Nepali people. Whether it be Sherpas from Solukhumbu to the Hindus of the inner terai to the Buddhists of the hilly region to the Newars of Kathjmandu, all need the King to perform their religious activities. And the King has always made himself accessible to the people, be it for samyak puja at Swayambhu, Some yagna in Chitwan or Khadga Satne and Indra jatra in Hanuman Dhoka. So, there’s this cultural unity because of the King. Raja sabaiko sajha, this has been the tradition of the Shah dynasty and the present king is following the same glorious tradition. 2.The institution of Monarchy directly relates to preserving territorial integrity and avoiding ethnic conflicts in a small “multi-ethnic” country like Nepal. And here’s how: We all agree that there’s much diversity in our country. Moreover, people have their own languages/dialects. Now, when people belonging to certain race/group become richer than the others, they demand or seek their identity. They don’t want to be considered Nepali first. They want to be identified by their ethnic background. Later, this results in trying to make their language(s) national language, their culture Nepal’s national culture which leads to regionalism, communalism and in the second phase this leads to struggle for independence/freedom. And the sad reality is that this has already started in Nepal. The only force that is keeping this movement from gaining momentum is the institution of Monarchy because it somehow/somewhat represents the whole of Nepali population and is neutral in religious/cultural beliefs. We Hindus see him as the incarnation of Bishnu where as our Buddhist brothers see him as the incarnation of Lokeshwara Buddha making him someone who is religiously/culturally neutral and someone who can relate to every faith/culture of Nepal. Just because of this one factor, we have been able to preserve our terretorial integrity otherwise it wouldn't ahve taken much time to resort to baise-chaubise rajya era or become Sikkim. 3. Our republican friends do not realize one thing. People were and are actually very supportive of the King. The 12 years of democracy did not yield any positive result and people seem to like/approve of the King’s actions. No major protests against the asoj-18 move and a people’s participation at His Majesty’s public felicitation hint that the King is still revered, respected and people now want his active participation to clear up the mess of leaders and to find a peaceful solution to end the Maoist revolution. Prakash Chandra Lohani of RPP stated that “given the maoists’ capacity to carry out desctructive activities, their silence during the public felicitation of His Majesties in Biratnagar clearly indicates that the Maoists have accepted the institution of Monarchy as a power house and that they are willing to hold talks with the King, rather than with the political parties” Furthermore, the Maoists have already shown their flexibility on their demands for a republic. This all proves that even the Maoists have now realized that the King is needed for Nepal and no Ram-Shyam-Hari can replace the King (or will have the same influence on the people as the present King has). Also, the King’s call for talks to end the Maoist revolution has sent a strong message to the general population that, it is the King who can free Nepal from all the problems. Time and again the King has made it clear that he is for the constitutional monarchy and has asked the political parties to come up with a national consensus in resolving the present crisis. Its not the King but our elected leaders who do not seem to have any unity or vision to lead Nepal to the 21st century. Forget national consensus, they don’t even have the consensus in their own parties!! Now, in this situation of uncertainity, who is there to look upon except for the King? The Nepali population is thinking more and more along this line and to some extent the Maoists too seem to trust the King than the political parties. This too shows the importance of the King in Nepali politics. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 03:56 PM
And here’s something to think about: Political science has now evolved into an inter-disciplinary learning. We cannot study nor analyze the political situations with just political theories and opinions. Demanding/advocating republican Nepal is like living in your dreams and not wanting to get out of it. Of course you can use profanity, show your anger and share “gopya kura haroo” straight from the palace and try to prove (?) that Monarchy is indeed an evil institution, but where’s the analysis? Can political analysis be made in isolation, i.e, without making references to the social norms and without acknowledging the ground reality(-ies)?For a more concrete political analysis, one has to do a comparative study/analysis and know what the ground realities are. Part 2 to follow.. ahile lai yettinai.. Label me agent and whatever you feel like, but labeling me agent does not give any weight to your arguments. And, hey I did not force you to read it. But, if you all can use this space to spread your republican agenda, then, going by the same logic I have my rights to defend the institution of monarchy. Jai Desh, Jai Naresh! |
| M.P. | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 06:22 PM
Isolated Freak, First of all, in a democratic system, every individual should be allowed to practice/preach his ideals. If you think Monarchy is the need of the nation at the moment, that’s fine. You have every right to defend your logic and the monarchy. Make your point. None it to go in length discussing the whether you can make a claim or not. You can. That’s obvious. You, and many others, think that “The institution of Monarchy is the symbol of Nepali unity” because you, I, all of us, are grown up thinking so. Be it through “Mahendra Maalaa”, “Pancha rallies”, or through visits like the one Gyanendra Shah made recently, the institution of monarchy has always been trying to claim its position as a symbol of unity. Our beliefs have been carved on the basis of our tradition. The tradition here being the reverence towards the monarchy. You think monarchy is a symbol of unity because you are not willing to believe it is not. Most Nepalese believe monarchy is the symbol of unity because they have never seen the other side of the institution. Or rather, they were never *allowed to* see the other side. There is nothing wrong in sticking to the tradition. But sometimes the flip side is worth studying. And as long as the monarchy remains, it will never, I repeat Never, allow us, and the rest 23 million people to understand how we have been brainwashed all along, particularly through education. We have a chapter on Prithvi Narayan Shah (PNS) at least in one course book in each class from the fourth to the tenth. We learnt of PNS as the builder of modern Nepal. If a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, and multi-linguist nation as big as India can exist without a Monarch, so can our tiny Nepal. Don’t tell me it can’t; we have never tried. You say, “The institution of Monarchy directly relates to preserving territorial integrity and avoiding ethnic conflicts in a small “multi-ethnic” country like Nepal.” You forgot to add one point: ‘the institution of monarchy does so by suppressing the minority castes, religions and groups.’ And, for heaven’s sake, when you charge others of making assertions “without making references to social norms and without acknowledging the ground reality(-ies)”, make sure you are not doing the same. The institution of monarchy is not neutral with regard to religions. Nepal would never been declared a Hindu state if the institution of monarchy was neutral. People believe (and unfortunately, this belief too is shaped by the prevalent social and cultural propaganda dissipated by the institution of monarchy) and know that the King is a Hindu King. I would like to know the source of your claim that Buddhists respect the king as the reincarnation of Lokeshwara Buddha. I will be waiting to be enlightened. And Hinduism and Buddhism are not the only religions in Nepal. |
| M.P. | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 06:23 PM
I am not going to talk about your third point in much length. As I have already stated, people are becoming supportive of the king because that’s how they have been shaped. They see no alternative because they were never shown one. About the felicitations in Biratnagar, I give you the benefit of doubt. But personally I am not willing to believe that the crowd represents the actual support to the king. I have read enough stories about Mahendra making mandatory for all government employees to come to see him when he visited a particular place (I do not have any source/book to quote here. That’s why I gave you the benefit of doubt). And your reference to words of Prakash Chandra Lohani is ridiculous as it can get. This is a man who once said that the King should take control of the situation even if it means overriding the constitution. You can not simply collect a hoard of RPP and Save the Nation members and quote them to make your argument stronger. The Maoists have not launched any massive attack for the last few months. That does not mean they support monarchy, does it? You say that the Maoists have shown “flexibility” towards the formation of republic. What kind of flexibility are you talking about? Please enlighten me. As far as I know, the latest formal words from the Maoist leadership came from Baburam Bhattarai (BB) in an interview to Dr. Chitra Tiwari of the Washington Post. And in the interview, BB has clearly stated that the Maoists wanted a republic—a bourgeois one. How does it mean they are being flexible? >>>Also, the King’s call for talks to end the Maoist revolution has sent a strong message to the general population that, it is the King who can free Nepal from all the problems. - This is how we have been deceived in the past. Perhaps “free[ing] Nepal from all the problems” was the reason Mahendra gave when he declared a state of emergency few decades ago. We have been deceived all along. We can certainly hope that the institution of monarchy will act in the interest of the people this time. But the history tells us otherwise. This is perhaps the reason why political parties are not cooperating. And if you ask me, going against the monarchy is one of the few things the democratic parties—NC and the UML—have done in the last 12 years. Thanks for the information on how political science has evolved. However, you contradict with yourself when you have ignored the whole economic aspect of the institution of monarchy. I guess you can not study the institution of monarchy on the basis of social norms alone. I will look forward to your part two, which hopefully will be the economic coverage. M.P. |
| M.P. | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 06:25 PM
Please read the last line of the second last para of my last posting as: ....have done RIGHT in the last 12 years. |
| Rastaman | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 06:33 PM
Hey Rasta says it is them who deceieve I and I.We have both them Monarchy and them Democracy. Mr MP didnt your Democratic leaders ( how many were there) tell I and I to fight for democracy and make them leaders. What did they give I and I? Them your democratic leaders robbed I and I. Did any of them do a single thing? Dont compare India to Nepal. Sorry doesent India have a system of not giving powers to one kind of people in bureaucracy? You know not what you is talking about. It is not Democracy or Monarchy it is them people. Them people want it all for themselves. Them big houses and Pajeros in da kingdom. And next one will not be different. |
| taha cha | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 06:45 PM
Rastaman, You do have some truth in your statement but being pessimist is not a solution. What is your idea for a solution? |
| M.P. | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 07:17 PM
Rasataman, You raise a valid point. Here are a few points you might want to ponder over: ---> We never had democracy in Nepal. As Theda Skocpol and Morris P. Fiorina mention in their article "Civil Engagement in American Democracy", "In a meaningful democracy, the people’s voice must be clear and loud—clear so that policymakers understand citizen concerns and loud so that they have an incentive to pay attention to what is said." The very fact that our concerns, and the concerns of the people of Nepal, have not been addressed well in the last 12 years suffices to claim that we did not have democracy. But we should realize that we, as the citizens of Nepal, are also responsible for where we are now. We did have monarchy. It didn't work. All it created was chaos. We supposedly had democratic leaders. They failed too. Democracy is yet to be tasted. And for that we need to wait, and perhaps struggle, until the Monarchy is abolished and a little more dedicated leaders like Mahesh Acharya, Ram Saran Mahat, and K P Oli replace prison-qualified leaders like Girija, Khadka, Wagle, and MaKuNe. True, your "next one" may not be different but as I have stated earlier, we--you and me--should take the partial blame for that. Let us be "loud and clear" this time so that "next one" hears us and acts on our interest. ---> My comparison between India and Nepal was for the purpose of comparing ethnic, linguistic and cultural analogies between the two countries. I did not understand what you meant by, "doesent India have a system of not giving powers to one kind of people in bureaucracy?" Please elaborate so that I can give my opinion. ---> You are right that a greater burden of the national development lies not on the institution--monarchy or democracy--per se but rather on the people handling them. However, as I have stated in response to Isolated Freak, these people are often shaped by the regime they are in. So, it might as well be that in order to change the people, we need to change the system. ---> In every political party--be it the Maoists, UML, NC, or RPP--and the bureacracies--be it Nepal Police or the Royal Nepal Army--there are haves and have-nots. The voices of the have-nots (have-nots here implies in terms of economic status, social-status--which in most cases is defined by caste system, religion, and gender--and access to information/education/decision-making) have always been unheard. The elite group in each category--the haves--always used the have-nots to protect their interest. You are right, therefore, that we were *used* in 2046. We, however, did not realize that as long as the prevalent social structures--the culture, the system of monarchy, and so on--are active, the power to govern would never reach the groundroot level. Let's wake up this time. It is time for a change; not for lamentation. |
| fRank | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 08:19 PM
"If a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, and multi-linguist nation as big as India can exist without a Monarch, so can our tiny Nepal. Don’t tell me it can’t; we have never tried." M.P. jyu .dont' forget that India before becoming a republic.. was under the british rule for almost two centuries. the british taxed them ill treated them.. thaz y the indians decided to opt for a republic and not monarchy. had the british treated them as if they were their own ppl .india would probably be under the british rule.. .. for example Canada, Australia and New Zealand.. they still prefer Queen Elizabeth as their head of state. .cuz they didn't go thru racism... they never had to be slaves of the britishers.. they were never classified as second class citizens.. now why india isn't going back to monarchy. cuz then. .the muslims will come forward wanting a muslim king. the christians their own. and the hindus their own. and may be the buddhist their own.. don't you see the current crisis in india.. even a small incident becomes a hindu-muslim riot.. c'mon don't tell me the republican system will work in nepal. . the king has always been the symbol of unity.. .and it should remain the same. .if we choose otherwise.. nepal will be taken back 10 years behind time due to numerous riots and probably ppl fighting to get into power.. welll here is a predictions i will make.. if the king were to be removed from power.. the army will take over.. i have no doubt about it. . birsanu bhayo.. M.P. jyu. what has happened in the past 12 years due to the action taken by the Late king Birendra. He decided to go with the ppl of nepal. and declared nepal a constitutional monarchy.. gave us democracy. .what did we do.. we basically @#$%^& it up. the mantris and pradhan mantris and all those sarkari karmachari looted us nepalese of our money. what did we do. nothing .except for watching santosh panta's sarcastic remarks about them in " HIjo aja ka kura".. did we ever raise our voice.. what's the point if we nepalese don't pressure our M.P.s and mantris into working for our own benefits. they gonna go their own way.. as they have done for the past 12 years. ...make money for their own. build mansions...ride mercedes and pajeros, while the sojha sajha nepalis live with an income of $220 per annum... so MP jyu.. i will still vote for monarchy rather than a republic.. there is too much at stake trying to change nepal into a republic.. but you are entitled to your opinion and i am to mine.. so till laters peace. |
| Rastaman | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 08:48 PM
Taha Cha are you reading all these? Rast no want monarchy or Democracy. Rasta want real people of Nepal that toil dem land and never deceieve others like them people who have been deceieving I and I. As you want to know what can we do? Why not you and them acknowledge that you and them have been deceieving I and I for generations. Why dont you and I go forward and tell them how them have been deceieving and still want to deceieve. Now you still say I have some truth. I have all the truth. Until them and you dont agree and tell I about your deception nothing is going to work. So why dont you come forward and tell them people of yours where they have been wrong. |
| safasaja | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 08:50 PM
I fear India will eat up Nepal like Sikkim once Nepal become republic. We just dont have a good leadership. The past 12 years was somewhat on the road to that. And we learnt that there is too much mistrust among variety of caste and ethnicity. People in different parts of the country just dont trust each other. Problem is just too big. BUT I DONT KNOW WHAT THE SOLUTION IS. We may never find one. |
| Rastaman | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 09:05 PM
Hey it is not they dont trust each other. It is we do not trust them anymore. Them people keep us down. Them says I is uneducated and not untouchable. It is them that people dont trust. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 10:27 PM
>>>First of all, in a democratic system, every individual should be allowed to practice/preach his ideals. If you think Monarchy is the need of the nation at the moment, that’s fine. You have every right to defend your logic and the monarchy. Make your point. None it to go in length discussing the whether you can make a claim or not. You can. That’s obvious. <<< Thanks. >>>You, and many others, think that “The institution of Monarchy is the symbol of Nepali unity” because you, I, all of us, are grown up thinking so. Be it through “Mahendra Maalaa”, “Pancha rallies”, or through visits like the one Gyanendra Shah made recently, the institution of monarchy has always been trying to claim its position as a symbol of unity. Our beliefs have been carved on the basis of our tradition. The tradition here being the reverence towards the monarchy. You think monarchy is a symbol of unity because you are not willing to believe it is not. <<< NO. By writing the above lines, you questioned the collective wisdom and judgement of the majority of Nepali population. >>>Most Nepalese believe monarchy is the symbol of unity because they have never seen the other side of the institution.>>> Actually, MP, we don’t need to or can afford to try another system now. It doesn’t work because there’s a theory in socio-cultural anthropology called the “theory of resistance”, which says that if an existing social/political system is replaced by something alien, then the population rebels and wants to get back to the old system. Iran was better off under Shah, Afghanisthan’s problems started when they forced the King into exile and Ethiopia turned into a famine-hit hard nation after they overthrew the Monarchy. This is why even countries like Norway, Sweden and Spain have continued with the system of Monarchy. And MP, we don’’t have any time to try with new systems now. We have to make use and use what we have now to ripe the maximum benefits. Didn’t we try with the democracy for 12 years? What was the result? We are in a huge mess that’s being slowly cleared up and at this point if we are to try something new, believe me, it will take 200 years to clear all the mess created by our “experiment”. >>>allowed to* see the other side. There is nothing wrong in sticking to the tradition. But sometimes the flip side is worth studying. And as long as the monarchy remains, it will never, I repeat Never, allow us, and the rest 23 million people to understand how we have been brainwashed all along, particularly through education. We have a chapter on Prithvi Narayan Shah (PNS) at least in one course book in each class from the fourth to the tenth. We learnt of PNS as the builder of modern Nepal. If a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, and multi-linguist nation as big as India can exist without a Monarch, so can our tiny Nepal. Don’t tell me it can’t; we have never tried. >>> MP, yes, PNS is the builder of the modern Nepali nation state. If you believe its not true, then, I guess, you should write your own history book. Look at the Indian course books, they teach about Mahatma Gandhi, jawahar Lal Nehru and Ballav Bhai Patel to their students from grade 1 to 12.Now, if you use India as an example, I will use Turkey as an example. See, when you talk about nationalism and all this and that, you have to know that nationalism is always forced upon the people by the state. There has to be a common feeling, national agenda, a different culture and language to promote nationalism (Benedict Anderson). This is what Attaturk did in Turkey. To show that Turkey was different than the rest of the Arab countries, he created a new script, promoted a liberal society and as a result of that the Turkish population started thinking that they are indeed different from their Arab neighbors. A coercive nationalism, but that’s what been preserving the Turkish national unity, minus the Kurds. Anyway, getting back to Nepal, one has to understand the state promoted the Nepali language and the institution of monarchy to develop nepali nationalism. Otherwise what is nepali nationalism? What makes us different than India or Paklistan? Its our unique language and our national tradition. >>>You forgot to add one point: ‘the institution of monarchy does so by suppressing the minority castes, religions and groups.’ And, for heaven’s sake, when you charge others of making assertions “without making references to social norms and without acknowledging the ground reality(-ies)”, make sure you are not doing the same.>>> No, So, far no ethnic group minus the members of Tharuwan and Khumbuwan have claimed this. The institution of Monarchy has not interfared in the local cultures/religions of the people. >>>The institution of monarchy is not neutral with regard to religions. Nepal would never been declared a Hindu state if the institution of monarchy was neutral. People believe (and unfortunately, this belief too is shaped by the prevalent social and cultural propaganda dissipated by the institution of monarchy) and know that the King is a Hindu King. I would like to know the source of your claim that Buddhists respect the king as the reincarnation of Lokeshwara Buddha. I will be waiting to be enlightened. And Hinduism and Buddhism are not the only religions in Nepal. >>> MP, when you speak, speak after doing some research. Every 12 years, the Shakyas and Bajracharyas have to perform a ritual called the “samyak puja” at Swayambhu and for that they need the King. Its called Samyak Mahapuja where the King is worshipped as the incarnation of Bodhisatwa Buddha. [My apologies for writing Lokeshwor Buddha in my previous post. I realized that its Bodhisatwa, not Lokeshwor] Another example is of Kumari tradition. Kumari is always chosen from the Shakya clan.I don’t undrstand what other religions are there in Nepal except Hinduism and Buddhism. These are the major religions, but they are in minority. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 10:34 PM
>>I am not going to talk about your third point in much length. As I have already stated, people are becoming supportive of the king because that’s how they have bee shaped.>> Again you are questioning the collective wisdom of the people. Are you claiming that you are smart than everyone in Nepal? >>They see no alternative because they were never shown one.<< The question is, do the people really care for the alternative(s)? >> About the felicitations in Biratnagar, I give you the benefit of doubt. But personally I am not willing to believe that the crowd represents the actual support to the king. >> So what do you think it represents? People gathered to stage a revolution to oust the king? C’mon, give me a break. >>I have read enough stories about Mahendra making mandatory for all government employees to come to see him when he visited a particular place (I do not have any source/book to quote here. That’s why I gave you the benefit of doubt). >> Yes, it was mandatory for every government employee to welcome him, but, look at the flip side since you are so into looking at things that we don’t see: BY making them come to his welcome, the King would actually get to talk to the people, hear their problems and promote/punish the ones he deemed fit. The bureaucracy was clean during his late majesty mahendra’s time. And still today people say that, Mahendra sarkar was probably the best leader we had. >>And your reference to words of Prakash Chandra Lohani is ridiculous as it can get. Whom should I make reference to? Baburam? You? >>This is a man who once said that the King should take control of the situation even if it means overriding the constitution. You can not simply collect a hoard of RPP and Save the Nation members and quote them to make your argument stronger. >> This is your belief, not mine and it does not represent the majority’s view. Just because you don’t believe in what they say does not mean that they are not of any importance. You are talking more along the line, “either with us or against us”. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 10:38 PM
>>The Maoists have not launched any massive attack for the last few months. That does not mean they support monarchy, does it? You say that the Maoists have shown “flexibility” towards the formation of republic. What kind of flexibility are you talking about? Please enlighten me.>> Yeah, seems like you are really out of touch with Nepal and do not seem to know at all. So, let me enlighten you: The Maoists already gave up on their quest for republic a long time ago. They too have realized that they need the King. So, they have toned down their rhetoric and are saying that they would rather hold talks with the King. Actually, the Maoists gave on their quest for a republic more than 14-15 months ago when they were holding the talks in kathmandu. >>As far as I know, the latest formal words from the Maoist leadership came from Baburam Bhattarai (BB) in an interview to Dr. Chitra Tiwari of the Washington Post. And in the interview, BB has clearly stated that the Maoists wanted a republic—a bourgeois one. How does it mean they are being flexible? >> MP, of course they don’t want to be seen as flexible. This is why BRB said that but according to nepali newspapers the Maoists have now agreed to hold talks with the government and the only thing the government is requesting the Maoists to do is to send an official letter to hold talks. [>>>Also, the King’s call for talks to end the Maoist revolution has sent a strong message to the general population that, it is the King who can free Nepal from all the problems. This is how we have- been deceived in the past. Perhaps “free[ing] Nepal from all the problems” was the reason Mahendra gave when he declared a state of emergency few decades ago. We have been deceived all along. ] Panchayat system was the need of that time. Noone has been decieved. >>We can certainly hope that the institution of monarchy will act in the interest of the people this time. But the history tells us otherwise. >> Give me examples from the history. >>>This is perhaps the reason why political parties are not cooperating. And if you ask me, going against the monarchy is one of the few things the democratic parties—NC and the UML—have done in the last 12 years. <<< Well, the political parties have proven themselves worst than the Maoists. At least Mqaoists are fighting for “national interests”, the political parties are fighting/screaming for nothing. Political parties are not co-opearating because the King did not appoint their leaders as Primeminister. This is this plain and simple. >>>Thanks for the information on how political science has evolved. However, you contradict with yourself when you have ignored the whole economic aspect of the institution of monarchy. I guess you can not study the institution of monarchy on the basis of social norms alone. I will look forward to your part two, which hopefully will be the economic coverage. >>> Interesting. Economic aspect. But what? OK the king gets certain amount from the government, but it is still less compared to what politicians make in Nepal. At least the institution of monarchy is clean unlike the political leaders. |
| bewakoof | Posted
on 05-Jan-03 11:49 PM
Ahh, its always time for a change, isn't it ? A new revolution, if you will. Never mind that the last one didn't work. But we need a new one now. Over the last half century or so, Nepal has gone through several systems of government, with one disappointment after another. Do you think another change in the system of government is going to cure all ills? This preoccupation with the system of government is precisely what ails us. M.P, you are right to the extent that we have not really lived without monarchy. Perhaps, we can try that. But do you really think that one change alone is going to put us in a glorious path of progress and prosperity? Our fundamental problem is that we have not sufficiently developed culture or institutions of self-governance and self-reliance at local levels. And this does not come easily. It takes time and patience and is always harmed by persistent changes. For my money, constitutional monarchy is just fine in the context of Nepal. Without getting into the theoretical debate about the merits of this system of government in the abstract, I think most people will agree that it was practiced poorly in the last 12 years. We had Girija, MaKuNe, Khadka, etc. We had rancid corruption. Dealing with Maoists was bungled right from the start. Bureaucracy was politicized. Despite all of that, all was not lost. People were relatively free to speak their mind. For the first 10 years or so, by all accounts, monarchy was quite inactive. We did change the government several times through the ballot. Economy for a while in the mid-90s did grow … I remember growth rates of 6% being reported but don’t quote me on that. I am not apologizing for the failures of last dozen of years. They are there for all to see but in our history we have not exactly had any golden periods of democratic prosperity either. And the fundamental reasons that democratic experiment of the last 12 years were not practiced properly will remain no matter what other system of government we experiment with. Perfecting all the imperfections of our practice takes time. Creating independent institutions takes time. Even as we speak, CIAA is being tried in order to check corruption. It takes time to set up checks and balances in the system. It takes time for people to internalize democratic norms and behaviors. It takes time for people to be assertive. Essentially it takes time for people and society to learn to practice self-governance. Just because we are having setbacks, if we keep changing systems all the time we will never get anywhere. That is akin to tearing down the house because the roof is leaking. We have to stick with it and tough it out. If you think going republic is going suddenly make anything better …. dream on. |
| sagarmatha | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 03:54 AM
I'll be OK with monarchy if 1. King remains constitutional figurehead and does not interfere with everyday politics. 2. he cuts his current expenses of whopping 38 karod to a more reasonable amount and gives every account of the expenses, 3. he and his family members are punishable to any illegal acts. Otherwise, I think it should go. |
| Jhilke Kyailan | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 06:13 AM
IF ji, I think you are missing the point. You are probably right (my own personal guess) that most Nepalis do not favour republicanism, which could be because we have never been allowed to think outside the parameters set by the monarchy. The question today in front of us is "what level of influence should the Monarchy have and should that influence be intistitutionalised?". Althought the last 12 years have dimmed the memories of the public, let us not kid ourselves, life wasn't that great then either. The King, and more importantly, his cronies (you know who I mean) had ABSOLUTE POWER. What he said was the law, was the truth and blah...blah...blah....Plus, infact it was the courtiers who actually weilded the real power.....they were the gaurdians of the channels between the Raja and the Praja...and were very careful to filter all contact the King had with the public. The world today has changed, Nepal herself, has changed in the last few years. The King, the monarchy or who ever .. today cannot have ABSOLUTE and UNACCOUNTABLE POWER. (We can go into a discussion of why if you so desire, but I am hoping the perils of concentrating power in one person, or institution is self evident to you.) The second word I think is the important one.....the question of accountability....In a democracy, (a proper one) if a party isn't fulfilling the peoples expectations then they can be voted out. The party who can fulfill the peoples expectations will be voted in and so forth....The key to power will be ability to fulfill and safegaurd the public's interest, not ones own. That is what is meant by the sovergnity of the people. The Monarchy by contrast, in our past has only looked after its own interest.....and it still has the same courtiers encircling it so am I expected to believe that they have changed. If King G wants to have an influence in our lives, wants to influence the direction which Nepal takes then let him be man enough to accept the limitation placed on him by the the constitution and ultimately by the people.....Basically it comes down to this......the days of the bahusaabs IS FINISHED....Respect must be earned through ones own deeds and not by the ACCIDENT OF BIRTH.....and if the feudals cannot accept this then well.....LET THE GAMES BEGIN.... The monarchy today is the epitomy of the feudal structure of our society to a lot of people....he must show us that he has changed and he must undestand that the wishes of the people and not his own wishes takes precedent in our (not his) country. If he can transform, then Nepalis will accept him as their (constitutional ) monarch if not ....... |
| Satya | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 08:56 AM
I believe that many monarchists are sincere in their view that monarch is the symbol of unity. I was with them before I was matured enough. Now I am a changed man…. Monarchists think that last 12 years as symbol of democracy that failed. This was not the reality. Yes we had more freedoms than in Panchayati democracy during the 12 years semicracy – (I apologize for forgetting the name of the poster in previous threads who coined this term.). But we never had democracy. Now we are heading for autocracy. While it is understandable the view of monarchists that abolition of monarchy might lead us to anarchy I can’t accept that monarchy is a guarantee for peace and prosperity. We don’t need to search examples in other countries – Nepal is a kingdom for several centuries. Did we prosper in the past? Are we heading for prosperity? Monarchists blame so called democracy for the present situation forgetting that king has had the supreme power even in the semicracy. Removing a monarch is like a major operation to remove a tumor. If something goes wrong the patient may die. There is a risk of course. Let the monarchists live with tumor rather than seeking treatment! Previous posters have given some examples of chaos after abolition of monarchy. Nepal was more peaceful during Rana rule than in Panchayati democracy if you read the publications of that period. Sikkim was a kingdom when it was swallowed by India. Tibet was a kingdom when it was swallowed by China. Nepal itself is collection of kingdoms. That is, monarchy is not a guarantee of survival of a nation. Monarchy in Nepal could not be compared with that of U.K., Australia, Canada, Japan, Sweden etc. because they have democracy, not semicracy. Yes, Republic is also not a guarantee for peace and prosperity if the leaders are dictators as our king. But there is always possibility of electing new leaders while monarchy rules out such possibility. Who can guarantee that all kings are capable, intelligent, take care of his subjects ..? Even an officially recognized murderer could be crowned without shame. |
| M.P. | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 10:18 AM
Ahem ahem…here goes my boring speech again: Isolated Freak, I am a novice explorer in the field of politics (not that I am an expert in any other field). Please do not (mis)interpret any of my postings, written in poor English full of grammatical and structural errors, as my will for superiority, popularity, or to quote your words, as my questioning of “collective wisdom and judgment of majority of the Nepali population.” I do have an ego. But if that is revealed here in any way, please understand that it is/was unintentional. When I said that the institution of monarchy has shaped us, and the way we think of it, I did not mean what people thought was wrong. I meant the way people think MIGHT BE wrong. We, or at least I, do not know how people might have thought about the institution of monarchy if it never existed, or if it was uprooted earlier. My intention in introducing the example of PNS was not to claim that he is not the father of modern Nepal but rather to justify my claim that the institution of monarchy has put in a lot of effort, particularly in the education system, to establish itself as a symbol of unity. In a way, this goes with my earlier assertion that our beliefs have been shaped by the institution of monarchy. Inclusion of a chapter in PNS all the classes from 4 to 10 is how. Thanks for your advice on doing some research on how different religions consider the King to be an integral part of their ritual. And also for telling me how different cultural groups use King as a symbol. I am sure, and hopefully you will agree, that we can not keep the king just because someone needs to worship him. About the felicitations in Biratnagar, please do not misunderstand me again (I have been misunderstood enough of times to call myself a misunderstood poet :)). People certainly did not gather to revolt against the King (well, the security officials would have not allowed them to gather there if that was the case)! My question was: how many of the total population present there sincerely/genuinely support the King? We did not have any janamat sangraha there, did we? Whether “Mahendra Sarkar” was the best leader we had remains a question. You might think he was. I may think he was not. We might have different criteria of judging one’s personality, leadership skills, and devotion towards the country. Let making all government employees mandatory to gather at his visiting place counts in favor of him, so be it. I personally think that is not the right way to do things. I did not tell you to quote me. You can quote Prakash Chandra Lohani, Surya Bahadur Thapa, Marichman Singh, Kesharjung Rayamajhi, or the second-kesharjung Mr. Devi Prasad Ojha. But my point is: your quoting them does not make your argument stronger. Otherwise, I might as well quote some random dudes from Bihar and claim how majority of the people in Nepal are against the monarchy. Whether the view put forth by jyotish Prakash Chandra Lohani represents the view of majority of the Nepalese remains a question. When UML launched a massive march recently, it too claimed majority of the Nepalese were against the royal move. I do not believe them either. To measure the success/failure of a political party, or its activities, is the job of journalists and political analysts—provided they have no political affiliation. Of course, if we want less biased analysis. |
| M.P. | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 10:19 AM
I am not in Nepal right now. All I get to see is some template-followed news in nepalnews, a few articles in the Kathmandu Post—that, they say, are supposed to bridge the gap between the King and the political parties, CK Lal’s weekly English lessons in the Nepali Times, and of course, the models in the Saptahik. But as a matter of fact, I had heard/read that the Maoists had given up the call for a republic and a constituent assembly long ago. My argument was based on the latest interview by BRB. Whether the removal of the agenda for the formation of a republic and constituent assembly is because the Maoists think King is the only solution to the present crisis, or it is just another strategy to get back their comrades from jails and to develop their networking, remains a question. Time will show their intentions. By the economic aspect, I meant if the economic progress made during the Panchayat era was better than that during the multi-party decade. I would not mind the King getting a hefty sum of money if it means a stability and peace. But how is the money that the politicians get more than what the King gets? Any numbers on this? I am not saying the politicians should get more. Is the institution of monarchy clean, more than or not like, the political leaders? We don’t know. And we won’t until all the details of what goes in the Narayanhity den is known to the people (if that is to happen at all). Bewakoof, No, as I have said earlier in another thread, the formation of a republic will not unleash a torrent of developmental processes. They will take time. And the formation itself is not that easy. It will take time too. If you are interested in knowing what I have to say on this, please visit http://www.sajha.com/sajha/html/openthread.cfm?forum=2&ThreadID=8657&show=all. Thought piece for the week: “If we need someone to inaugurate ceremonies, to be the “samrakchhek” of Mahendra trust, and to watch horse-race in Tudikhel on the day of Ghodejatra, anybody, even the brick-uthaaune naangaa baabaaj from Pashupatinath, can do that. We do not need a King for these purposes, do we?” |
| M.P. | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 10:23 AM
And, I would like to share a piece I wrote sometime ago. If the Maoists took away 7000 lives only to settle for a share of pie with the King—an institution they have been opposing for the last six years—they have betrayed the have-nots. They have betrayed all of us. This piece intends to awaken them—the Maoists leaders and some of the UML leaders who have quickly changed their color to join the King. As always, amend grammatical and structural errors as you read the article. Let Rolpa Suffer With the Maoists’ formation of a dialogue committee, there once again emerges a glimmer of hope for peace in the country. Be it the Rajbhakta journalists of Kathmandu—who blindly supported the King’s latest move and plunged the country into yet another abysm of deception—or the dissidents from the democratic parties, like Devi Prasad Ojha, the Keshar Jung Rayamajhi of the multi-party era, this is certainly a good news. Now that the King will not compromise his power has been obvious and these seemingly patriotic people will never lose. Even if the dialogue leads to the formation of a constituent assembly and some amendments in the constitution, we, the general people, will not gain a dime. I never thought of the Maoists’ war as a class war. And, now it seems like my hunch was right. The Maoists are not communists! They are not for those who are socio-economically week. No wonder, Baburam hails from elite Gorkha and not from Rolpa. To quote Shaubhagya Shah from the November issue of the Himal, “The apparent avoidance behavior by top leadership on both sides raises the possibility of a gentleman’s agreement between the protagonists to keep the carnage confined to the rural backwaters and not to raise the stakes.” This is what is happening now. The death of magars and bhotes from Rolpa and Rukum will soon be a story, and our children will read of Baburam, Prachanda and Gyanendra as the heroes of the modern times. It is disturbing to note that “on rare occasions when the rebels have targeted the high and mighty in Kathmandu for symbolic intent, the punches have always been pulled: an empty shed, the metal gate, or a boundary wall has been the extent of the class warfare. Such feints pale in comparison to the deadly force employed against the general population” [Shah, “From evil state to civil society” in the Himal, November 2002]. Six years of revolution was not able to change Rolpa-is-in-Mars attitude of the Kathmandu elites. And the recent developments reveal that even Baburam and Prachanda did not want to change Rolpa; they wanted to change themselves. From a jharpaat member of parliament, Baburam will soon become a national hero. In this context, Baburam is just another Keshar Jung. He managed to change himself. He will soon worship the King. |
| M.P. | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 10:23 AM
continued... The recent ordinance issued by the King allowing the palace to determine its own expenditure is surprising. No person in his right mind would want to agitate his supporters at a time when his power and legitimacy are at stake. Many interpret this as a sign that the King wants to take Nepal back to the absolute monarchy era. Surprisingly, this claim is made by the same bunch of quasi-democrats who initially claimed that given the different circumstance were in 2017 and 2057, the King will never be able to cater full power to himself. They, including many journalists of Kathmandu, claimed that the King’s move was a necessity of the time. I do not think the King, by exercising too much aristocracy, wants to dig his own grave so quickly. A person who can bypass the constitution, and sideline the parliamentary parties overnight can not be that dumb. I interpret the ordinance as a signal the King wants to give to the Maoists that he will not give up his power under any circumstance. We have always been in illusion. One of my high school teachers once said, in a series of lies one extra lie is not a lie [on side note: these remarks were about the actions of the Principal of Budhanilkantha School, who supposedly embezzled funds, admitted students by taking bribe, and to quote the teacher’s words: “tried to privatize the school”. The same teacher now happens, perhaps because he realized the green politics going on in the school and stopped criticizing the authority, to be a senior teacher at the school. Yet another example of “negotiations for power”]. I modify the quote for you: in a series of illusions, one extra illusion is not an illusion. When the Maoists blew off a police post for the first time in 1996 in Rolpa district, you—all of us—thought police would control the situation. Then as the malicious scavenging began to disseminate through out the country; you, along with Girija Prasad Koirala, believed the ‘sasastra prahari’ would be able to control the situation. It took you quite some time to figure out that Maoists were actually using the weapons Indian and British army used a decade ago—the same kind of weapons Royal Nepal army is using at present. The ‘sasastra prahari’ remained ‘binaa astra’ for some time since the army—your faith—didn't want to give the weapons to the police. Reason: “they aren’t trained enough”. I am glad you did not take much time to realize that the only way to get the weapons out of the barrack was to mobilize the army themselves. Really loyal army we have. “Jyaan jaalaa tara hatiyaar najaalaa”. A series of talks followed and where are we now? At the same place. We thought we would reach a different destination, didn’t we? The only change in scenario is that the Rolpalis have moved further away from Mars. We were making a circuitous trip. We never lost. Rolpalis are aliens. Let them die. Who cares about the hunger in the far west? Who cares about scars that Rabina and Robin, the children of forest-guard Bhakta Bahadur Regmi, have? We have our lord stationed in Kathmandu. His grandson will get NRs 50,000 [or more] per year anyway. Let’s learn to worship the avatar of Bishnu. Let's modify the national anthem and include the names of all royal family members. Why worry about Baburam and Prachand? They will soon follow our suit. Too bad that we were not enlightened early enough like Ojha and Rayamajhi did! Let Rolpa suffer. Let them move further beyond Mars. Our almighty King will soon hold the National Assembly meeting. He will soon increase the percentage of nominated members to 100%. He might nominate us too. We will soon be the proud members of parliament of the state called Kathmandu. Who cares about the bhare-bhure members of HOR? Some of them represent the aliens. Let them suffer too. Let Rolpa suffer. No matter where we come from, even if from Dadheldhura in far-west Nepal, we are now the elites of Kathmandu. We have grown our bellies too. Soon, Allah will allow us to determine our expenditure ourselves, just like he does for himself. _________________________________________ |
| PrabasiSwor | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 10:24 AM
Here is what BRB stands as published in current issue of Nepali Times, "From the Nepali Press" section: Make peace Baburam Bhattarai via email in Saanghu, 30 December Our party strongly believes that there is no alternative to a joint people’s movement comprising all the leftist and non-leftist democratic forces. Only such a nationwide movement can make bourgeoisie democracy complete. If the present ruling forces agree to make the people sovereign and find a permanent solution to the problem through peaceful talks then we are ready to take part in such a dialogue. We have already formed a dialogue committee for this purpose. We hope that our immediate demands—including holding a roundtable conference, formation of an interim government and elections to the constituent assembly—are acceptable to all three forces in the country, namely the monarchy, parliamentary and proletariat revolutionary, to find a way out. We have constantly said we are ready to carry out either talks or military actions to this end. The other sides have not been able to internalise our demands that we put forward in a very responsible way considering the sensitive geo-political situation and present power balance in the country. We are not talking about carrying out a “New Democratic Revolution” but are only raising the issue of completing bourgeoisie democracy. It is very unfortunate and paradoxical that parliamentary forces failed to respond to our proposal in a manner we expected. If the elections to the constituent assembly are held, the ‘state authority’ and ‘sovereignty’ said to be inherent in the monarchy will be formally transferred to the people. It will also facilitate the movement of parliamentary and proletariat forces. This may, in turn, resolve problems that have plagued us in the past. As far as the issue of involvement of international forces is concerned, we want our domestic conflict resolved internally without the intervention of foreign forces. If the situation demands otherwise, we will have to accept a genuinely true, independent and impartial force or an institution in the role of a facilitator or mediator. |
| PrabasiSwor | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 10:39 AM
Please read "what BRB" as "where BRB" above. |
| aludai | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 12:05 PM
A leader is needed to run a country.Traditionally kings have provided the leadership.There have been various selction criteria in the past for kings if we look at the history.Drabya Shah became king by winning a race. Now- we are talking of republicanism where people choose a leader to govern the country.This is also not a perfect system but this works with educated people knowing the rights and with the right check and balance. Our country has a constitution which gives us an elected leader and some checks in the form of a constitutional monarchy. Looking at papers, all the systems are good.But what about the practicallities? Looking back at our 12 yrs experience, if Girija Koirala were the sole President, Nepal would probably be part of India and GPK a chief Minister.I am speculating on the basis of his behaviour during and after his tenure and I have seen that most of us do not approve of it.Yet he was our elected leader for so long - it is frightening! What we have seen is most people are power hungry and selfish. It is true not only in our society, but also in western democracies who are torchbearer of today''s civilization. Once people are educated and there is a system of check and balance, all the systems work as we have seen. In our case, I do not think we are ready for republicanism yet.With our literacy level, it is counterproductive and a lot of people will suffer unnecessarily and without any gains.Once people are educated, then a healthy debate can go on as is happening in today's Britain. None of these physical things are permanent- things keep on changing!But wait for the right time and time will take its course. |
| Garibjanata | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 02:29 PM
Aludai, I am sorry to say but you have very fatalistic view about the current predicament of the country.We have waited enough,now time has come for all of us to awake from our deep slumber of apathy; we cannot simply waste our life indulging in idle chatter(like most of us are doing here at Sajha) and wait for time to take its course as you have mentioned above.What we need now is a swift bloody voilent revolution which will wipe out all the remnants of feudalism,treachery.deception and corruption.After total annihilation of all the roots of evil who have raped our mother Nepal and subjugated her children for centuries after centuries, we will wake up with a new dawn and together we will start a glorious chapter of re-building Nepal. |
| aludai | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 03:13 PM
Mr Garibjanata, I know there are lots of problems in our society- our poverty and exploitation being two of the important ones; and I also know that something needs to be done. But your way of violence only leads to more suffering. Remember you are not the only one who has weapons- the other party also has it. And you do not have the overwhelming force also- otherwise you would not be kidnapping those schoolchildren. Already more than 7000 dead, so many of our youths leaving our villages. There is a sort of mass migration going on which will lead to mass suffering. I do not know why people do not understand. I have no problems with you supporting any ideology. If you are right, you should be prepared for a prolonged struggle- a non violent struggle, a struggle to educate our people and make them conscious of their rights. Things that come on swiftly also end very swiftly. Pls keep up your good work- but in a non violent way. |
| Deepak Bista | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 05:40 PM
Rational and logic must rule not emotion. People offering suggestions how (who) to rule over Nepal must have much deeper understanding of complex intricacies of orginisation of society (rule of law, policits, cultural aspects of different societies etc). Many of us (myself for sure) do not UNDERSTAND what is meant by democracy, marxism, communism. The problem of ours in Nepal, we all are eperts in every field in general and politics in particular. From rickshaw pullers to taxi drivers, high school students not to mention all college students have the best answers for the country. However, nobody listens to anybody but everyone talks. Let us ponder on this |
| Rastaman | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 06:05 PM
Yes I agree. Rule of law of them people. Organization of society of them telling I and I that I is below them. And Cultural aspect of them people who consider I uncultural and have been ruling I over and over . Why them people so selfish for themselves? Why them need so big houses and Pajeros? And them people are one class of society. Why them people full of nepotism? It has to stop now .The new generation dont look like they want to accept them peoples wrongdoing instead them say I is being a bigot or racist. When Rasta says truth youu all want to argue. Remember only theories can be argued upon. You can not argue on Truth.I accept there are good people in that class of society but only about 2%. Jah live! |
| Sagar Nirola | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 09:22 PM
Hi my name is Sagar Niraula. I am from Gaithersburg, MD. I am currently age of 17 and junior at my school. Hey you know what guys, I want to say that first of all the Nepalese people don't think of anyone but themselves and their family. Have any Nepalese ever wondered those people who live in the mountaineous region are doing with out food, especially the children. When ever I get hungry I think of the children in my own country who won't get to eat. This I will not blame on political parties or monarch or any one else, because these people are just hungry for power and feeding their own family, so much as to that they don't care who else gets to eat, as long as they are eating. I blame the people themselves because they don't want to do anything, but just pray to god and hope for the better. That's not how you get things in life. People got to fight. Don't believe you are too weak. If even 10,000 of the Nepalese voices a concern for inadequte standard of living for people then you will be more powerful then any military in the world. Another thing about Nepalese is that they don't have pride of their country. Once they get a chance, the people are willing to get out of the country and never come back. I bet eventually Nepalese people in Nepal will be the minority group whereas the Indian origin people will dominate the country. I myself hope, when I grow up to be a decent person and get a good job, to go back to Nepal and help everybody but the Indians in my country. I am only racist toward Indians and no other ethnic group because India is to blame for the current situation of Nepal and for sending Madhises into Nepal to show the influence of Indian power in our prideful country and every other group such as the Rai, Limbu, Magar served in the British army to give Nepal the foreign currency it needed, the Sherpas are the future businessmen of Nepal and every other caste offered something but the Indians. I also bet you that the Indians are also funding the maoists and calling them anti-Indians so that the Nepalese won't blame them. I also believe that Nepal one extra player playing a political game in our country. These people are the Indian businessmen who control the politics by money, whoever offers more money the judgement goes on their favor. You know I could go on forever about this but I won't because you people may not care for what I say because you are just another one of those people who probably doesn't give a damn about our country. Now think about this, if I am living in America and came here at the age of eight, and still remember my country, you adults of Nepal came to US or anything other country at a mature age, why won't you guys think of your country. Many Nepalese say what can I do and to them I say, "nothing until you actually try." Remember another thing, the Nepalese has never realised anything they have lost until when they actually lost it, such as the Kalapani, Mahakali Treaty, etc... Long Live Nepal |
| Rastaman | Posted
on 06-Jan-03 09:32 PM
No you are wrong here Mr Nirola. It is them people like Koirala, and them class of people. These class of people would sell their mothers. Do not blame India. These class of people themselves look like Indians and dont treat I and I good. Them people think I and my brothers, Rai, Limbu, Tamang, Magar, Gurung and all as second class people. Them people took the land from I . Them people made kings and said I and I was illeterate and uneducated. Them people kept I and I down. Ask them and you shall get the answers. Indians came because them people called them. So you need to go and talk to I and I how them people sold us. |
| Zubin | Posted
on 08-Jan-03 07:31 AM
I beg your pardon, Mr Sagar nirula? What do you mean by Indians sent in Madhises? You need to brush up you history before you want to do anything better for Nepal. The Terai belt is indegenious region of madhesi people. We never slid inside; Its infact the pahadi counterparts who migrated. You know what, we feed entire nepal, we pay tax, we shape the revolution for democracy and yet look what we get in return! No representation in army, 2% in police, hardly 10% in public service for us 48% of nepalese population. we are 40 lakhs without citizenship and are in state of statelessness, we face the brunt of pahadi bigots just because Hritik roshan presumably said that he hated nepalese. And dont forget, 10 million pahadi people who migrated India enjoy far better and equal rights in India. Madhesis are descriminated lot and its racist rot like you who rot the country by enflaming anti-madhesi sentiments. Make sure your statements are responsible and well informed. |
| free thinker | Posted
on 08-Jan-03 10:21 AM
I am a late entrant into this debate but I think the Monarchy has outlived itelf and will come to an end in the future, especially if the Monarchy plays an executive or politically active role. |
| czar | Posted
on 08-Jan-03 02:25 PM
I recollect correctly someone here wanted examples of how the monarchy has, historically, served its own interests above and beyond those of the nation. It goes without saying that any group contemplates its own welfare and survival before those of others. The monarchy in all its questionable glory of courtiers, assorted hangers-on and wannabes is no exception. What it lost sight of, however, is that like the parasite riding high on the hog, it needs the host to survive to ensure its own. If the host were to be completely drained, whats left ? Unlike a leech or tick, it can't quite wait for the next victim to come along and hop on for another ride. Short of buying that island currently listed in E-bay to establish another 'kingdom' that is... As for examples of greed and sheer criminal acts, - How about the late Dhirendra heading off to Bhaktakpur Durbar Square with a Dept. Of Road's crane to remove a certain statue ? - Soaltee Crown Plaza at that time in the last decade just as the era of "demo-crazy" was coming on, owed a little over NRs. 120,000,000.00 in unpaid electricity bills to Vidyut Pradikaran. A lesser but still humongous amount was owed by Hotel Annapurna. Who had the cojones to claim those bills or cut off the power ? Guess who owned and still owns Soaltee and Annapurna. - How about the debacle of Nepal Airways and the loans granted for it ? Any recollection of just what became of it, and the loans thereof ? How about the loans granted for Hotel Kathmandu ? If you know your people in KTM, you know what I am talking about. - The top furniture makes in Delhi used to await top class sal and sisau from Nepal's forests, which they then seasoned for a few years before using it. For decades the forests were chopped down and sold to India based on the writ of the palace. Years later, permission granted by the Ministry of Forests and Soil conservation for 10,000 cft to the hangers on and bhardars mysteriously became 100,000 cft. On whose writ was this all done ? Taplejung ko sainlabajey's most likely perhaps ? It may sound as if I making unsubstantiated allegations in the mistaken belief that is open season on royalty. Those in the know, will bear out the truth of this and untold other stories of greed, treachery and criminal acts. And thats the lot that have now heroically stuck their fingers in the dyke. Right. The blotted tick is going to save the near terminal host. Holy cow ! |
| czar | Posted
on 08-Jan-03 02:25 PM
I recollect correctly someone here wanted examples of how the monarchy has, historically, served its own interests above and beyond those of the nation. It goes without saying that any group contemplates its own welfare and survival before those of others. The monarchy in all its questionable glory of courtiers, assorted hangers-on and wannabes is no exception. What it lost sight of, however, is that like the parasite riding high on the hog, it needs the host to survive to ensure its own. If the host were to be completely drained, whats left ? Unlike a leech or tick, it can't quite wait for the next victim to come along and hop on for another ride. Short of buying that island currently listed in E-bay to establish another 'kingdom' that is... As for examples of greed and sheer criminal acts, - How about the late Dhirendra heading off to Bhaktakpur Durbar Square with a Dept. Of Road's crane to remove a certain statue ? - Soaltee Crown Plaza at that time in the last decade just as the era of |
| Jhilke Kyailan | Posted
on 09-Jan-03 02:27 AM
How true.....if only the memeories of the people could remember further back than just the last 12 years......selective amnesia??????hmmmmmmm....hmmmmmmmm.....oooophh. |
| khaja biscuit | Posted
on 09-Jan-03 08:01 AM
A slogan for Nepali republicans: We discuss the future that no one can be certain about because the present is too complex for us to understand. |