| Sajha.com Archives | |
| Username | Post |
| white_house | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 07:41 AM
www.Nepalnews.com A group of Maoists shot Debendra Raj Kandel, former minister of state for home, at his own residence at Ekantakuna, Lalitpur at around 7 p.m. Friday, eyewitnesses said at 7:45 p.m. Kandel has been rushed to the nearby Patan Hospital. He took bullets in the head, reports said. There is no immediate information about his condition. Now nobody is safe in Nation Capital Kathmandu. Pashupatinath ley Rakchya garun Mero Desh Nepal lai , that's a only last wish :o( |
| sadabichar | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 07:55 AM
Either Pashupatinath is on Holiday or he cannot take it anymore. |
| MohanGopal | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 08:01 AM
Sadabichar, It sounds like it is a joke to you which you are enjoying much. Come up with an idea, your opinion etc for people's sake. Just shut up if you have no conscience. MG |
| boston_dude | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 08:08 AM
Actually, I do find it irritating when people say "Pashupatinath le Rakchya garun.." Maybe you don't realize it but Nepal is not all Hindu. I am a Buddhist, and I don't need Pashupati ko rakchya. The escalation of violence in Nepal is very sad. I don't think anybody thinks otherwise. B_D. |
| BathroomCoffee | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 08:35 AM
Well somebody's gotta clean up the Garbage right ? What goes around comes around. I don't we have a Son of Sam on a rampage in KTM(I hope not). But he must have done something in the past to provoke this. We have not had Lau and Auder in KTM since 1990. What do you expect ordinary citizens to do when your opponents come to table with consealed weapons ? There cannot be any dialogue untill they are ready to lay down their weapons. Violence breeds violence.. it will keep going around in circles just like the Palestanian issue. I am sure Nepali government retaliated.. then it will be the Mao's turn again. on and on and on ... |
| allare | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 09:17 AM
What can we expect from Maoist ? So called govt can not do anything to protect the civilians, then why they are in power? Should not they quit? If you can not protect your people, then you do not have any rights to be in power by blaming other. Why are you in govt, if your job is just to blame others? Do not just blame Maoist. You have blamed them alot and you are repeating same thing time and time again. Its high time that, once listen and think seriously (keeping interest of Nepal in mind and not your personal interest) what is this all about? what they are trying to say from different means? We simple people will not blame Maoist, we will blame you , whoever are in power and can not protect us. |
| sparsha | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 09:43 AM
"What can we expect from Maoist ? So called govt can not do anything to protect the civilians, then why they are in power? Should not they quit?" Allare, please don't be judgmental so quick. Put yourself in PM's position and see what could you have done? It's easy to blame. How can you stop every firing? every loot? every shot? and every unlawful activity from happening? Tell me, just how? Why don't you look at what Maobadis are doing and rest some blame there also for deteriorating peace and order. I am not saying if the govt. is valid or not. I am not even defending the govt. Blaming govt.( or someone else for that matter) for everything that goes wrong is not right. These five political parties never supported the peace process or negotiation by act (Yes, in their words they always pretended). Now, see who are getting shot? Nepali Congress is also responsible for Mr. Kadel's misfortune. We all lose in this civil war. Don't you think? The King should have let Madhav Nepal form the govt. Having Makune as the PM would have pacified the five political parties (at least for sometime). I don't know why the King chose SBT. May be some "mai baps" didn't like to see a communist leader as the PM or the King himself wanted to play a little game called "kahene ke liye to hum sambaidhanik raja hai lekin rajnaitik riste me hum tumhare baap lagte hain". I really don't know what is so "communist" about UML. UML is a fake communist party (just to exploit poor citizens' dream). Now, since Maobadis are selling dreams to the same target (garib janata) with more vigor and with quick results, UML is losing its grip everywhere. UML is communist? Please. Anyway, we should take an objective look at the situation. Govt. cannot kill all Maoists and cannot stop random and senseless violence. So, bring them (Maobaids) to table again. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 04:10 PM
Sparsha ji, You hit the bull's eyes with that dialog. Here is a cartoon inspired by that.. 
|
| Biswo | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 04:11 PM
Nepeji, That was a great cartoon. One picture is worth a thousand words bhanchhan, yaad aayo! |
| ashu | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 07:30 PM
Nepe, Here is what Hari Roka, a long-time member of the Nepali Left, a political commentator and a PhD candidate at JNU in Delhi has to say about the "ground realities" in Nepal. QUOTE: The end of the ceasefire, Thursdays attacks on army officers in Kathmandu and the terrorist tag on Maoists have sidelined the political parties agitation. The poor response from the public to their anti-king campaign should be a wake-up call, and they should reassess their strategy and timing UNQUOTE. Source: The latest issue of Nepali Times. If you and Biswo have strategic, usable advice to give to political parties on how they can achieve their aims, then, that would be worth reading, for that it could give us insight to unblock the REAL impasse we in Nepal are facing. But if your ENTIRE strategy is just launching attacks against the king again and again, and then have one of your "already-converted friends" jump in and do wah-wah for you, then, sorry, your ideologically driven one-track mind itself goes on to diminish your credibility. oohi "the greatest challenge in Nepal today is NOT to preach to the converted but to win the hearts and minds of those who are skeptics, doubters, uncertain and belong to different camps". ashu |
| bipin | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 08:20 PM
Ashu: I would alos add that the ultimate goal of the Maoists is to establish a one-party republic state and so an unity between the King's men and the parties is essential to defeat the bigger threat. The demonstration by 60,000 peacemakers (more than 300 organizations) on the street also shows that the people do not want to side with the parties nor do they have any inclination to throw the King out. Making the King weak and going after the RNA relentlessly at this point will not make life easier for anyone. The game has begun and just wait and see what happens. Peace! |
| sparsha | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 09:01 PM
This is how I feel right now. Exclude yourself from we if you dont agree. We are giving too much importance to the King. We are chasing him so fanatically that we seemed to be confused with what the chase is for. We have degraded our importance on our own. Lets put our acts together. The king, then, will have no other choice but to confine himself in Narayanhiti. Should he choose to give up, which is highly unlikely, what should we do? Situation, at that time, should dictate our reasoning. Until then, lets look at ourselves. We neither represent ourselves nor trust those who claim to represent us. We are confused. Totally confused. We have reduced ourselves to nothing but ram bharose paper tiger . We love to blame but dont want to take any responsibility. We sound undefeated but runaway or even blown away when challenges come around. We love to boast something we didnt do. Weve got Mt. Everest, our ancestors were brave, Buddha was born in Lumbini, Tenzing was a Nepali, etc. What is stopping us from proving who we are today? Why dont our sensible acts run as fast as our sharp tongues? When murderers are hiding just around the corner and zooming at us, we are screaming at a tied up rango. We are trying to scare the rango with our fear of murders and that is intimidating the rango even more. Nobody is going to stand up for us. We shouldnt be waiting for some sahids. p.s. I think Nepal needs the US style not British style political system. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 09:05 PM
Ashu, I had already read the article by Hari Roka. With due respect to him, I am not sure how he came up with that 'ground realities', and whether that 'ground reality' is the reality of Kathmandu or that of outside too. Yesterday, Maoists looted a bank in Parsa, about a few kilometers from my house in Chitawan. The news said they ran away after looting. Ran away? They comfortably scooted away, according to the local source.When I was there in Nepal, everynight I knew one reality: that even if a bandit comes to my house, the police is not going to come to help me in the night. The police wasn't protecting us.A major rift between the richest guy in my village and his sons[all members of RaPraPa, Kangress] was mediated by the Maoist leader when I was there.And that was the ground reality in Tandi. When in Kathmandu, I was living in a relatively secure , upscale hotel in Thamel. Two incidents however unnerved both me and my hosts: a few meters from our residence was a money exchanger shot when I was somewhere near for my dinner meeting with my friends, and around that time, an army truck had killed a pedestrian."The armies are monsters. They have no regard for us." My hosts working in the reception were saying. Now, what about the 'support' for five parties? I was travelling with my Nepali Congress supporter friends near the 'relay anasan' area. I asked them why they don't join the elders, pointing out to the lack of popular presence. They sneered,and told me,"if this king has killed his own brother, do you think this kind of relay anasan is gonna make any difference?" When I told them I don't believe that the king killed his own brother, I was surprised to find out how lonely I was in subscribing to the official version of the royal massacre. This is the ground reality about popularity of the king and the five parties, at least this is what I saw, not only in Chitwan, but in quite a few places that I went to. People want peace. I agree. Those who went to protest for peace , however, are not the supporters of the king. Let's not define the way we like. I am yet to see the slogan supporting the king, anyway. This fact was what I saw in Nepal. May be Hari Roka's facts are different. May be he knows more than I do. May be his samples are more accurate. Or may be his samples are less accurate, written by drinking cappuccino in Thamel. [You know you find all sorts of people in Kathmandu, some of them even write Lokgeet in their own room!] I have seen enough of leftists, human right activists etc who have no regard for truth anyway, though this by no means implies anything about the nature of Hari Roka. We all live long enough to find out the truth, I believe, or may be we won't live long enough. And let us , the ones with differing views, not-already-converted, know your original pov also about the exit from this impasse. |
| sparsha | Posted
on 29-Aug-03 09:06 PM
p.s. I think Nepal needs the US style not British style political system. For now, the King should let MaKuNe fish or run the govt. or whatever. |
| ashu | Posted
on 30-Aug-03 06:34 PM
Biswo, Here are your facts: 1. Maoists mediated a jhagada in Parsa. 2. Armies are monsters -- a hotel receptionist told you. 3. People do not believe the official version of the Royal Massacre. Again, these are the facts you saw during your two-month or so ko tourism in Nepal. I hate to break this to you: But your isolated instances of anecdotes do NOT add up to analysis of any sort. Sure, they are interesting anecdotes to regale Nepalis in Texas with, but they are quite blase for Nepalis in Kathmandu or elsewhere who do travel much outside of Kathmandu and see the hinterland with their own eyes, even if they cannot write about all that they see. By constrast, Hari Roka -- the political commentator, the former Left worker who has been critical of the King and is honest enough to question political activists --has been in Nepal much longer than you have in the last five years, and has been in close contact with the political netas. I, as a reader, would put a lot more credence to what Hari is saying than what you are saying here. For the record, I am also amused by your obvious back-handed discreditation of Hari. For purely entertainment purpose, allow me to quote your words verbatim: QUOTE: May be [Hari's] samples are more accurate. Or may be his samples are less accurate, written by drinking cappuccino in Thamel. [You know you find all sorts of people in Kathmandu, some of them even write Lokgeet in their own room!] I have seen enough of leftists, human right activists etc who have no regard for truth anyway, though this by no means implies anything about the nature of Hari Roka. We all live long enough to find out the truth, I believe, or may be we won't live long enough. UNQUOTE The minor saving grace, Biswo, is your clever inclusion of the sentence "though this by no means implies anything about the nature of Hari Roka" at the end of the paragraph. I can almost see you with teeth clenched and jaws grimaced. :-) BTW, I called Hari last night, and he confirmed that he does NOT drink cappuccino. :-) oohi ashu |
| ashu | Posted
on 30-Aug-03 07:05 PM
Biswo wrote: >>>>>And let us , the ones with differing views, not-already-converted, know your original pov also about the exit from this impasse. <<<<< I am pretty dumb when it comes to having an original point of view on anything. I do NOT have a magic solution. I admire poker champions, and when I get into something, I like to win, and so, broadly speaking, here is how my mind would work: Unlike you, I am willing to SUSPEND my liking or disliking for the King to accept the fact that he exists and that he is a player in the game. Whether the King is liked by many or hated by most is NOT my concern. Once you -- putting raw emotions and deeply held beliefs and entrenched judgements ASIDE -- accept the King as he is, as a player, then, then you understand that he, like any other self-interested player, has a bundle of choices, each of which would lead to different outcomes. I further accept that some of these choices/outcomes will be good for the King but bad for the nation, and that some will be bad for the King and bad for the nation, and some will be good for the king and good for the nation, and some will be bad for the King but good for the nation. Then I dispassionately try to identify the RANGE of possible outcomes (and I spend a bulk of my time identifying these outcomes), I use my judgment and knowledge and intuition to assess the PROBABILITY of any of those outcomes coming true. From there on, I would forumlate a strategy (a way of getting things done) to get me the outcome that I would want, while being READY to change the strategy quickly if new information and new circumstances and especially if nformation on the contrary emerge . . . until the objective is achieved. Note that this approach takes a NEUTRAL view of the King, and then works to have the King make a decision that safeguards the interest of the nation and also his interest (he's a human being after all!). Your approach by contrast starts with the premise that the King is khattam, and ends with the conclusion that the King is khattam, with others doing wah-wah for you. And that's the kind of CIRCULAR argument that we do NOT need anymore. That's all. oohi ashu |
| Nepe | Posted
on 30-Aug-03 07:07 PM
>But if your ENTIRE strategy is just launching attacks against the >king again and again, and then have one of your "already-converted >friends" jump in and do wah-wah for you, then, sorry, your >ideologically driven one-track mind itself goes on to diminish >your credibility. Ashu, First of all I thank you for your friendly caution regarding my credibility. However I think quite the opposite of what you have just suggested. To me my credibility is my consistent and reason-based (which you might disagree and that is fine) opposition to the institution of monarchy, my unfaltered faith in the ideology of the supreme power to the people and my 'one-track mind driven by that ideology'. I may add more from my resume but anything less than will make me an unreliable, coward, opportunist and a hollow person. Now onto the ground reality stuff. It is not clear to me what you wanted to prove by quoting that para of Hari Roka. Because I completely agree with what he says in his article. The four major points in his article are- 1. The political parties messed up the Maoists problem by launching a brutal crackdown in the past and they dont have a viable proposal to end the conflict now, 2. The ultimate solution to this crisis is to bring the people into the mainstream and give them a say, which is the constituent assembly. 3. It's been almost a year king Gyanendra is trying one thing after another and nothing has worked. He is responsible for this and there is nobody else to blame. (Note that my cartoon which seems to have displeased you and provoked you to come forward to discredit it with a selected quote from Hari Roka actually is in complete agreement with what Hari Roka says in his article !!!!!) And the one you quoted, 3. There is no public support for the anti-king campaign of the political parties. It's time for them to reassess that. I agree. The only thing I will add is it is not only the public but some party sympathizers and even some cadres particularly from the lower level are not that much enthusiastic about the aandolan of the parties. why is so ? Because their andolan is for the kursi and kursi alone. It is not really an anti-king campaign. I mean it has not become so until now. What's anti-king ? Their demand for the publication of the royal properties and limiting the title of 'Their majesties' to the three members of the royal family ? Give me a break. As I has said elsewhere, in front of the mammoth promise of a democratic republic of Nepal by the Maoists, the demands of the political parties is less than a dead mouse. Who would buy a dead mouse from their shop with a price another shop is selling an elephant ? Ashu, you are a business expert. You can give our political parties much better and credible advice than I can. But if you still would like me to do it, I'll do it in next reply. ***************** Bipin, The ultimate goal of the Maoists is to establish an one-party republic. You can say the same thing about the UML, UPF, NWPP and other political parties that go by the name communist. How much scared are you of them ? How much realistic their ultimate goal sounds to you ? It should be the ultimate goal of the struggle for the democracy rather than the ultimate goal of the Maoists or any other utopians that should be our focus. The monarchy, in whichever form, is controversial in terms of the legitimacy and will always remain so. The democratic (multi-party) republic of Nepal is the only thing that is not controversial in terms of the legitimacy. Nobody can question it legitimately. Now assuming we bring it with the mass participation of the people plus the Maoists, how do you think the Maoists would be able to replace it with their one-party republic ? Mass participation is the key word here. Let us not ignore the fact that the Maoists are willing to settle down with the multiparty republic. And we like or not that is the only solution to our political impasse and to avoid prolonged conflict. I am surprised with your bias to interpret public demonstration in the country. You said there was no inclination to throw the king out. I will say there was no support to the king. We are both right, both wrong or what ? Not only this demonstration, but all other previous demonstration of general public, intellectuals and artists are unmistakably and meaningfully neutral. Our Ashu who is very much into the ground reality must have been surprised with this neutrality exhibited by the artists exhibition 'Bichalit Bartaman' in which he had actively participated. **************** Sparsha ji, I totally agree with you that Nepal needs US style system. Regarding too much attention to the king, well my simple understanding is that he is the only obstacle to bring what we need. ***************** To all, I am fully aware that the cartoon I made might have made many simple minded viewers who are not used to see the royals being treated as commoners a bit uncomfortable. I am also aware of the ground reality of the diversity of political views in this forum. That cartoon was my political statement. I am against the institution of the monarchy only, because it is incompatible with the type and the magnitude of social, cultural, economic and political reform our country is badly needing. I am not against the person. I will, in fact, love to see Gyandendra Shah, form a political party and run in the election of the president in the republic of Nepal, if he is interested to serve Nepal politically. |
| gafadi_mahatma | Posted
on 30-Aug-03 07:59 PM
Bad taste! The caricature of His Majesty the king was nausiating and in very bad taste. It not only undermines what King G symbolises - it is outright cheap - rikshawwala stuff. I think King G has the leadership capacity and the confidence to rule Nepal better than all the two-penny leaders put together. Oct. 4? I think that was a glorious day in which King G regained the kingdom his stupid and useless brother had foolishly lost. Why did King G took over? Becasue he could! Challenge me guys, our king has guts and knows what he is doing. he might just be the visionary leader we dream of...we haven't really seen him as a king, have we? Lets give King G a chance. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 30-Aug-03 09:18 PM
>I hate to break this to you: But your isolated >instances of anecdotes do NOT add up >to analysis of any sort. No. These are not the only three incidences I saw during my "tourism" in Nepal. They are neither isolated incidents. I can list you a lot of such incidents, it is just not possible to list all of them here. And I am not such a stupid to make up my mind just by looking at the horizon from the overway bridge in Ratna Park. >even if they cannot write about all that they see. Yes, Nepali people can't write about what they see in king's and Maoist's regime. I agree. But what particularly is difficult to digest,at least in my view Ashu, is the statements from a person who claims he is 'much closer' to realities, and yet doesn't provide anything to prove this. If you say you know ground realities but can't write for fear of your life, I believe you. But then you claim that you are 'much closer' to ground realities. I can believe that thing only after some proof of that since you are now comparing your realities with that of others. We are asked to believe that a person is 'much closer' to realities, and that too without any proof. If one is not able to provide any evidence, it is better he not use comparative words. In Godfather the movie, I remember a group of smugglers converging in Havana and planning for building casino/hotels there, unaware that in a few days Havana would fall to a bunch of ragtag rebels. As long as wine flows freely inthe Kilroy's, and music programs run uninterrupted in Hyatts, Nepal's intellectuals and elites may continue to have that Havana syndrome. >I, as a reader, would put a lot more credence >to what Hari is saying than what you are saying >here. Since you are 'much closer' to reality, you are free to make up your mind. I DO NOT ask you to make up your mind depending on my statements. I have continuously asked people to put their inputs if they know anything about what is going on, for example, which districts are under whom because I always know that my searches have limitation. I remember Isolated Freak's reaction to my 'unscientific' classification of districts. His reaction was something like :Who is this Biswo? Why should I believe him? Yes, no one is asked to believe me. But presenting counter facts are better way than just to say "I don't believe you", "It can't be true because it is not happening in front of my house", "Oh, they are isolated incidents", "Or I believe my friend more". Denials are always easier way to dismiss, anyway. Now, tell me if you have seen any single neutral person outside of Kathmandu who have posted king Gyanendra's picture in his home? Why is Birendra still everywhere, and not Gyanendra? Why people laugh at the mention of him as a king? It is the easiest thing now to blame 'five parties', to ridicule them, to say that they are unpopular. They are the one who don't have guns anyway. Blaming the group with no guns is always easy. And when ex-leftists meet royalists, the mixture in Nepal has always been very interesting to watch. I don't know how truthfully Hari Roka predicted past incidences, please provide me if you know any, did he provide clue for the last truce or did he provide any prediction that this or previous truce was going to be declared invalid by the Maoists? but until I know such precedences of his great investigative journalism, I don't see why I should believe him more than my own eyes. >Unlike you, I am willing to SUSPEND my liking or disliking > for the King to accept the fact that he exists and that >he is a player in the game. Well, who is not accepting the fact that he exists? Oh, come on, man. He exists and he is the root of the problem. He is the player in the game, and the day he decides to abdicate, the game is going to take the other direction. >Once you -- putting raw emotions and deeply > held beliefs and entrenched judgements ASIDE > -- accept the King as he is, as a player, then, > then you understand that he, like any other >self-interested player, has a bundle of choices, > each of which would lead to different outcomes Since I am not fond of writing elementary game theory assumption things in Sajha, I don't write obvious in such elaborate way. The day I think about writing an article on Econometrica, I may provide such glossy wording for stating the obvious. .. >Note that this approach takes a NEUTRAL view >of the King, and then works to have the King > make a decision that safeguards the interest >of the nation and also his interest (he's a >human being after all!). Now, Ashu, you are ready to take a particular view about other parties in this conflict. You are ready to believe five parties are very unpopular. Remember popularity is their only weapon, and saying they are unpopular makes them irrelevant in the game. Then why suddenly you have such a great interest in formulating the validity of the king, and dismissing other players? May be some prejudice? Ashu, it is easy to discredit others, and come up with some fuzzy logic that has some semblance of argument. Denial is easy to do, anyway. That is fine, to take your own words, to regal your friends in Kathmandu watching those gaudy Dohori programs(do you watch them? Thanks for providing the info about Hari's liking of coffee.), but I want you to come one layer down from this abstract layer of arguments and give me what is your solution that you think will make you winner. [Since you have already declared that you don't want to lose, like a poker player?] |
| bipin | Posted
on 30-Aug-03 11:25 PM
Nepe: "Let us not ignore the fact that the Maoists are willing to settle down with the multiparty republic. " Multiparty republic? Nor at wall. Maybe, with a token opposition. They also want to purge the political leadership for their past crimes...banish them temporarily. Create people's court.. read their manifesto. They have killed quite a few at the lower level. Now they are going for the head. "And we like or not that is the only solution to our political impasse and to avoid prolonged conflict." Don't be so sure. Actually some may but many don't like it. Now let me do my own assertion: And we like or not, give up the wishful thinkings which may run in different directions not just the Maoists' or the King's; a negotiated settlement with a give and take is the only ground reality. Like it or not... The 60,000 peace wishers on the strret only proves that no one has a mandate. |
| ashu | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 06:08 AM
Nepe wrote: "To me my credibility is my consistent and reason-based (which you might disagree and that is fine) opposition to the institution of monarchy, my unfaltered faith in the ideology of the supreme power to the people and my 'one-track mind driven by that ideology'." Nepe, Your cartoon did NOT displease me nor did it please me. Don't make assumptions about my reaction, please. That said, you are welcome to hold on to your anti-king beliefs as long as your beliefs are your beliefs. People can only argue with your arguments, and NOT with your beliefs. My long-standing point is that you Republicans have provided no argument, but have found ingenious ways of to dress up your beliefs, and have tried to pass them off as arguments, and though, that's perfectly fine on Sajha, I just wanted to say that that kind game is passe, and that you guys need to think of something else to get your point across. Like I said earlier: Whether I like the King or not, I accept that he exists AS A PLAYER IN THE GAME. That acceptance does NOT mean that I am his bhakta or anything like that. It only means that ONCE you accept that King exists and is a player,only THEN you can make political strategies to win over him, in ways you want. Just attacking the King (who may indeed be khattam and jhoor!) may help you get rid of your bile in the short run, but, let's face it, it does not add any new insights anymore. ****** I posted that quote from Hari's piece POINTEDLY to underscore that DESPITE your previously LUMPING your republican agenda on to the the parties' andolan by THEN attributing (imaginary) public support, the ground reality, as said again by Hari, is and was quite different. Now, ODDLY enough, you -- the hard-core republican -- having read Hari's piece, do a complete about-turn and end up by saying "it is not really an anti-king campaign." What the hell!! But, not so fast. Rremember there's a DIFFERENCE between saying: a) What the King has done has not worked so far (as Hari has said), and b) Nepal must be a republic by throwing the King out (as you and others have been saying on Sajha). Please do NOT try to hijack Hari's sentence to serve your agenda. Still, the larger question is: A) If you realy such a consistent republican, would really you side with these kursi-loving political jokers (who can't even launch anti-king campaign) to be your foot soldiers for republicanism? Or B) would you rather openly side with the Maoists to get your republic? What's it gonna be, Nepe-ji? oohi ashu |
| VincentBodega | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 06:45 AM
I have a question... Why is it that when people write their comments, they attack the person, and not limit their jargon of insult to the ideas and arguments. May be this is the main problem with Nepal. No one is willing to listen. Everyone wants to talk. In this more than a decade of democratic practise we havent seen one full term of successful governing. I thought democracy meant "you are as good as me rather than I am as good as you." All the postings are well thought and very informative but when jaded with personal attacks like such, I cant help but laugh at the immaturity. --VB |
| ashu | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 06:48 AM
Biwo wrote: >>>>>>. And I am not such a stupid to make up my mind just by looking at the horizon from the overway bridge in Ratna Park. <<<< Actually, excuse me, I do think that you are that stupid. Of all the people on Sajha, I can can say that quite confidently because I've had not one (Safa tempo), not two (the "poet" from Alabama), not three (the Kunda Dixit episode) but FOUR (the Deepak Gyawali episode) pieces of solid evidence of your previous intellectually dishonest and ridiculously adamant REFUSAL to accept contrary evidence even when it stared right at your face but did NOT jive with your hard-wired beliefs. In NONE of the above cases, you said, "Well, I asserted A; but the evidence seems to say B. I change my mind." Look, this may not be music to your ears, but though I appreciate lots of other things about you (your wide-ranging knowledge), there are things for which I would NOT take your word. Just so you understand. >>>>>As long as wine flows freely inthe Kilroy's, and music programs run uninterrupted in Hyatts, Nepal's intellectuals and elites may continue to have that Havana syndrome. <<<<< What the hell is this for? If this is true, then do come back and take up the reins here. If you can't do that, then, join CK Lal in bashing up the elites of Kathmandu, when the anecdotal SOCIOLOGICAL evidence seem to say is THAT while the previous-generation elites of Kathmandu seem to have all migrated to the US or other countries, today's elites (those with tons of money in Kathmandu) seem to be all sons and daughters of Congressis and UML and RPP netas whose "village homes" (sob!!, sigh!!) are still in Gorkha, Chitawan, Dhangadi, Nuwakot and so on. More later. oohi ashu |
| VincentBodega | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 07:02 AM
Ashuji, I dont have any question about your intellectual ability. You have won a couple of awards, you are a Harvard alumni, have successful career in Nepal, and list goes on I am sure. I would like to know your views. Whats right and whats wrong about the sytem in Nepal today. What should happen and what shouldnt happen. I have read a lot about bitting pieces out of peoples butts for their views. Lets hear yours. Dont leave it with "I and neither saying this nor that..." Those are not view. Those are dilemmas. I am sure you know that too dilemmas dont get us anywhere it kinda slows us down. Let the world see where you stand and if we can find hearts within we will come after you. I am sure its not gonna be as prolific as you as I sure dont know any Hari Roka to call him and ask what kinda beverage he drinks. Eager to read your view ashuji. Thanks much -- BV |
| ashu | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 07:15 AM
Biswo wrote: "[The King] is the player in the game, and the day he decides to abdicate, the game is going to take the other direction." Yes, but what's your republican strategy to make the King "decide to abdicate"? Are you just going to close your eyes, say 'abracadabra', and the King will vanish? What? And so, that's is precisely my point: You guys are so busy DREAMING about ALL those wonderful scenarios AFTER the King is gone forrever that you conveniently forget that the King, for better or worse, is STILL with us. >>>> [Ashu] You are ready to believe five parties are very unpopular<<<<< I regret that they are unpopular, and I, as a citizen, am FURIOUS at them for bungling so many chances to rein in the King under their control. I am also mad that these guys do not seem to understand the importance of having a number of small wins before going on for the big one (i.e. elections, parliament and back to vibrant multi-party democracy). These guys want the big win now but WITHOUT clearly spelling out their strategy, their vision, their credibility, their commiment and their consistent story, and thereby make it very diffcult for many people like me to rally around them for support. That's my frustration as a democrat. And I fear that the parties -- by saying one thing one day and another thing another day -- have been playing straight into the hands of the Palace that is too cunning and too wily. Why can't these guys make sophisticated yet publicly resounding arguments for democracy and rally people around them? oohi ashu |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 08:13 AM
quite an interesting discussion!! But, why blame the King? Why republicanism gets lumped in every topic, whether relevant or not? and can we trust a fellow poster's judgement, who has time and again, again and again, and almost everytime, showed that all that it matters is the name, defending your friends even when they are wrong to the core constitutes loyalty, and praising without understanding is friendship? If I were you ashu, i wouldn't bother replying to a fellow poster, whose idea of debate is name calling, whose argument is muddled and whose whole thinking is, to put it frankly, confined to a small box. Biswo, Don't you think at times its a wise idea to think from a whole different approach and try to find out why others do not exactly feel the same way about issues as you do? I mean, just a friendly suggetsion after 5 glasses of Reeb pijiu. Shanghai zhen Huaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar!!! Ni YingGai lai Kan Kan..Its so much changed. |
| VincentBodega | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 09:12 AM
Mr. FREAK wrote: "Why republicanism gets lumped in every topic, whether relevant or not? and can we trust a fellow poster's judgement, who has time and again, again and again, and almost everytime, showed that all that it matters is the name, defending your friends even when they are wrong to the core constitutes loyalty, and praising without understanding is friendship?" is this directed towards me? I will only answer it if its for me. |
| tankahang | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 09:51 AM
wat is this a funny cartoon you think.you are poiting to the head of the state.you all freakin people froma limited educated nepalese community you see democracy on the hands of nepalese politicians,shit on you and shit on your thinking capacity.as b p koirala said the king is the most trustful leader of the country and this visionary was and is right.and as far as minister goes he should had been shot but by the military or the police but your freakin leaders wont let that happen.girija,madhav nepal should be the one to go.they should be shot,baburam,prachanda,badal shits they should be shot.once they go sure enough we lll walk ahead. |
| gunda | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 11:24 AM
Hey guys, things are getting too personal here, let's stick to the issues... thanks |
| Biswo | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 01:14 PM
>Actually, excuse me, I do think that you are that stupid. Oh, please intellectual, Mr Harvard, give me a break. It doesn't matter to me whether you think I am stupid or not, as long as I can see through your irrational arguments here. >Of all the people on Sajha, I can can say that > quite confidently because I've had not >one (Safa tempo), not two (the "poet" from >Alabama), not three (the Kunda Dixit episode) > but FOUR (the Deepak Gyawali episode) pieces >of solid evidence of your previous intellectually >dishonest and ridiculously adamant REFUSAL >to accept contrary evidence even when it stared > right at your face but did NOT jive with your >hard-wired beliefs It is very rewarding to go back again and again and try to please your bosses in Kathmandu, isn't it? So what was your safa tempo thing? Is Kathmandu now nice and clean? As for Kunda Dixit thing I certainly understand your desire to visit that again and again. It is always nice in KTM to try to have some kind of blessing of powerful people anyway. I hope you print your replies here and show it to your boss in Himal Media to prove your steadfast service to him, and it will please me a lot if your career graph goes upward due to me. As for Dipak Gyawali, you are the one who wrote here he 'refused' to complete PhD, and I am yet to see the proof of 'contrary' to what I dismissed as a sheer bullshit. And about your grand claim of him making thing great in Electricity department, we will see how it went. In Nepal, I found that electricity goes off every now and then even in monsoon season, often just for one minutes, thereby negatively effecting electrical appliances of home. As for his democratic character, Mr Gyawali ,when he went to my district in Chitwan, had expelled from press meeting a kantipur journalist saying he doesn't take questions from them, and he was also a member of cabinet that furtively appointed Sharad Chandra Shah as whatever that post was. Look, Mr Harvard, think before making claims and deriding others. I have repeatedly told you that your fuzzy arguments may pass as a great thing in Kathmandu in your circle, not here, not with me. You claim that you are much 'closer' to reality. I am tired of your such claims without proofs. When I was dying here to know about realities of Nepal, you were not providing them. Now I am putting here what I know, and asking others to comment on that, and tell me what they know. If you think you are so 'fearful of life' why don't you just shut up, rather than claiming you are 'much closer to reality but can't write'? |
| Biswo | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 01:51 PM
>Look, this may not be music to your >ears, but though I appreciate lots of >other things about you (your wide-ranging > knowledge), there are things for which I >would NOT take your word Just to let you know, I don't need your certificate about my 'knowledge'. I know what I don't know. But the truth is, I don't pretend that I know all, I don't pretend that I will be like a poker player with 'winning' strategy. >If this is true, then do come back and take up the reins here. I believe some one honest, if not I, will, one day, hopefully. I mean when I asked what was the record of Hari Roka in terms of predicting coming political shifts if he had such a great knowledge of politics and nearness with leadership, you were silent. You come up with all sorts of claim on someone else's behalf, and try to muzzle reasonable debate. Frankly, Mr Roka was a small time politican with some small leftist party (ML or Marxist?). I don't remember exactly but I believe he was not a 'politbureau member' or something like that, and was probably affiliated with some bhatri sangathan of a party, though I am open to correction. And present communist leaders don't exactly like 'ex-leftists' to tell them everything. And there goes his knowledge of 'inner things', and with all due respect to Mr Roka, I want to remind readers that Mr Roka never himself claimed [here and publicly] he has knowledge of everything of 'inside politics'. >Yes, but what's your republican strategy >to make the King "decide to abdicate"? I am not republican strategist. I don't like what the king is doing these days, and I don't believe him anymore. I don't think he is going to do any good for our nation, nor will his heir apparent. That's it. Whether he will abdicate, or whether he is forced to do that, is not easy to predict. I found that people don't like him either when I was in Nepal. He is saviour for a bunch of Kathmandu elites who enjoyed the proximity with the royals in the past and looted the nation in the name of the king, but for the rest of the Nepal, his image is very much tarnished. >Are you just going to close your eyes, > say 'abracadabra', and the King will vanish Spicy statements to make conversation good, but that was not what I said. >today's elites (those with tons of money in Kathmandu) >seem to be all sons and daughters of Congressis and > UML and RPP netas whose "village homes" >(sob!!, sigh!!) are still in Gorkha, Chitawan, >Dhangadi, Nuwakot and so on. Since Chitwan came up here, I just want to be clear if you are pointing at me. Say yes, if you really mean this, so that I can reply to you. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 03:02 PM
Ashu, During the past two years of my regular stay in Sajha, on several occasions, several posters have asked you to put your OWN political pov, but I never asked you the same. I always assumed a Harvard graduate must have reasonably bold views/beliefs/doubts/reasonings and you are afraid to put them because you do not want to jeopardize your developing career which very much depend on succeeding in keeping as many people happy as possible in a highly prejudiced and politically charged and opinionated khaldo called Kathmandu. So it did not bother me that you, while doubting and vehemently criticizing others pov, kept your own pov to yourself or gave some ambiguous, dubious and vague answers when others cornered you all this time. Yes, sometimes I had some doubts about your hidden political pov, but I always gave you the benefit of doubt, defended you on some occasions and praised your commendable professional job and other anthropological works. And I have never missed a chance to appreciate your contribution in Sajha- to bring interesting information and provoke others to debate on difficult subjects. While I will continue to do the rest, now, I am not sure if I should be making assumptions about your political pov and keep giving the same old benefit of doubt. Particularly, when in this thread, Biswo and other posters have challenged you to put your own political pov and you are cunningly trying to allude them with the same old tricks of yours- that is your ambiguous, dubious, vague, ambivalent, murky, evasive, deluding, cryptic (see I have got a thesaurus with me !) answers. What are you afraid of ? Of Kathmandu ? I know some people who live in Kathmandu are brave to put their much dangerous view than you possibly have in public. Krishna Pahadi is not afraid to say in public that we need to get rid of the monarchy. And you are coward even to say we do not need to get rid of the monarchy ! What kind of answer is that to the question of Biswo to you- "The king is a player in the game." Of course he is. Who is saying he isn't ? What is that crap about the republicans not saying he is. I say he is the central player of the game. And he is also the game itself. You were asked what do you think about the king. And your answer is- "I am willing to SUSPEND my liking or disliking for the king to&" The same trick. Ambiguous, dubious, vague, ambivalent, murky, evasive, deluding, cryptic answer. "..Note that this approach takes a NEUTRAL view of the King,.." What is this crap ? If you take a NEUTRAL view of the king then you also take a NEUTRAL view of the NC-UML. You also take a NEUTRAL view of the Maoists. You also take a NEUTRAL view of the left leaning civil society. You also take a NEUTRAL view of Nepe and Biswo (what the heck !). Ashu, with your fuzzy logic, abstract view and dubious statement, you are way too inadequate to discredit others. And you are certainly not a reliable friend to the struggle for the democracy in Nepal. You sound like a person who accepts whoever is in power. If the king is in power, you will accept him. If the Maoists come in power, you will accept them. Don't ask me to produce where you said it. You said it everywhere. It's all over. Lastly, about my republican view, I have already replied to your challenge in the thread On Grand Design ..'. Although you left the thread. I kept on and put my views. You may disagree with them, but you can not say my views are muddled. They are clear and logically developed. If there is additional thing you want to know, ask me. I will answer each and every question like before. I take pride in clarity and honesty. |
| VincentBodega | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 03:41 PM
Hey all this bashing must stop !!! I sure didnt mean to disrespect anyone out here. My apologizies if I sounded anywhere near insulting. The reason I cant tolerate people going after each other rather than the main argument is that this kinda practise kills the voice within. It discourages people from putting forward their opinions and thoughts when they know that someone in the "upper" is gonna make a mockery out of them. Hope I am making sense here. I hate to see censorship on people's thought power. Thats all. Mr. Freak, You didnt deny nor confirm whether your comment was directed towards me or not. I will consider you younger than me, both in age and in maturity, and give you the benefit of the doubt. I will however make it a point on how wrong were you in assumptions. You labelled me as a republican, WRONG You refered to me as someones friend here, WRONG You referred to me as someone whos way of thinking is confined in a box, WRONG You have everyright to say what you want, so as anyone else. Noones gonna take that right away from you, and you cant take it away for anyone else either. I respect your view points for the sake that its yours and I expect the same from you. I dont know how to say this better, but next time you make accusations be sure to back it up. --BV |
| Nepe | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 03:43 PM
Bipin, I agree with you that a negotiated settlement with give and take is the reality of the day. The Maoists should give up the goal of an one-party republic and the king should give up his divine right to remain the king as he is now. He should either accept the unconditional Constitution Assembly (expensive option) or better agree to become a cultural king ( like Bajhangi or Mustange Raja) giving up the political status (economic option) ****** To those who are not comfortable or agree with my view of cornering the king. Please think about this. Who is the most powerful person in the country ? It is Gyanendra Shah. It is the only the king and nobody else who can solve or leave it to the mercy of the Maoists to solve the political impasse in the country by their gun. If Gyanendra wants, he can solve it in less than 15 minutes ! Assuming it takes 1 minute to think, 9 minutes to arrange a live broadcast in NTV and radio, and 5 minutes to announce he is quitting and will support the establishment of the republic of Nepal. Yes, just like that. Abracadabra, miracle, the most sensible thing the king ever did, call whatever you like. And there is nobody else who can do that. Now you tell me if there is no point in cornering the king. |
| bipin | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 05:22 PM
Nepe: Sure. I too agree with you. Bush can solve its problem (of getting killed everyday) by getting out of Iraq. Sharon can get out of Palastine. Pakistan can get out of Kasmeer. That nutty Korean leader can flee somewhere to solve the nuke problem. ... Gyandra can too, oh yea, by abdicating! Sure Nepe, why not! What a wonderful solution. I likeeeeeit! Keep it up. |
| barad | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 06:20 PM
yah gyanendra quits,the RNA disbands,and the comrades come marching into narayanhiti,they conduct election for namesakes only,get more than enough delegates to declare nepal a one party comunist republic.the ktm elite get shifted to remote rural areas to toil in the lands..... the pollitical leaders of the old regime are tried before a jan adalat and are publicly hanged............ guess what i will take the "old regime" anyday |
| ashu | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 07:07 PM
Nepe, Please read the following paragraph again. This should answer most of your concerns about my political beliefs. QUOTE: I regret that [the political parties] are unpopular, and I, as a citizen, am FURIOUS at them for bungling so many chances to rein in the King under their control. I am also mad that these guys do not seem to understand the importance of having a number of small wins before going on for the big one (i.e. elections, parliament and back to vibrant multi-party democracy). These guys want the big win now but WITHOUT clearly spelling out their strategy, their vision, their credibility, their commitment and their consistent story, and thereby make it very diffcult for many people like me to rally around them with support. That's my frustration as a democrat. And I fear that the parties -- by saying one thing one day and another thing another day -- have been playing straight into the hands of the Palace that is too cunning and too wily. Why can't these political netas make sophisticated yet publicly resounding arguments for democracy and rally people around them? UNQUOTE ************* Biswo, You are welcome to make fun of Hari Roka, and that's fine. I still trust his political judgement more than I trust yours. That's all. As for Chitawan, that was a GENERIC reference. Often you make sense, and I agree with you. But there are times when you are so ideologically driven that I am just amazed that you do not even display the basic modicm of intellectual honesty when those pieces of evidence throw spammers into your ideology. Besides, while you appreciate hanging out with the Western elites, you seem to have a knee-jerk, atavistic aversion to the so-called elites of Kathmandu, even while, in truth, the composition of the elites (defined as those flush with new political money) in Kathmandu has changed dramatically with the arrival of people from other parts of Nepal since 1990. If you are NOT honest enough to acknowledge this change in the composition of Kathmandu ka elites, then, I fear that you'll fall into the classic CK Lal trap. And that trap works like this: You set yourself up as a lifelong "villager outsider" in Kathmandu. You then use that status to keep on bashing up the imaginary elites of Kathmandu for not letting you into their inner circle, while you frequently travel abroad on junkets available to English-spaeking elites and send your kid NOT to the neighborhood Shiva Puri Madhayamik but to Rato Bangala!! In other words, all you do is retain your village identity to set yourself apart from the rest, while in your mind and heart, you behave like a member of the very elites (i.e. parents of your son's school friends) who you repeatedly criticise in print. It's a wonderfully sham arrangement, don't you think? Just be careful, Biwso that, in your indignation toward the elites, you yourself do not fall into that trap. ****** Gunda, Thanks for entertaining us, and have a good day. oohi ashu |
| Nepe | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 09:03 PM
Bipin, I got your sarcasm right. But you need to work on stretching and twisting the objective reality to suite your views. First you tried to stretch the clearly neutral public stand to suite to the monarchy of Nepal. And now you are making ridiculous analogy of the Gyanendra Maharaj's abdication to wrong side of the Palestine, Kashmir and Iraq problem. One can also make an analogy to how the US used force to abdicate His Majesty the King Saddam Bir Bikram Shahdev and how their majesties the crown princes Uday and Khusay got killed for not surrendering to the force liberating the Iraq. Also note that the legitimacy of the force used in Iraq was questionable. But now its slowly being accepted. Did you, by any chance, advocate for a negotiated settlement with give and take with Saddam Hussain in Iraq before the war ? How would it have been if their people in the former communist East Europe and USSR have settled for a negotiated settlement with give and take with the communist regime ? ****************************** Ashu, I had read that already. It does not cut. Two harmless adjectives that too in a quick breath, almost inaudible, to the palace won't give you a certificate that you stood against the palace. The story that you signed in the petition to take a legal action against the alleged murderer Paras Shah is too old too. I think you indeed have a soft corner for the monarchy (not that there is anything wrong with that). Dipak Gyawali Dai is not alone ! |
| Biswo | Posted
on 31-Aug-03 10:22 PM
>Besides, while you appreciate hanging >out with the Western elites, you seem >to have a knee-jerk, atavistic aversion > to the so-called elites of Kathmandu No, it is not knee-jerk, atavistic aversion to them. But there are some elites who pretend that they are democrat while they are yet to prove so. They are there to safeguard interest of the royals, and they have a reason to do so because they have traditionally benefitted from the existence of these royals. I want you to look at the past of Nepal: Nepal sufferred a lot from 'birtaa' system. What is 'birtaa' by the way? It is the lagniappe thrown to the toadeaters by the potentate of the kathmandu, be it Rana or Shah. It used to happen that people working hard down there in Bardiya or Chitwan would discover that the land they liked so much in their whole life was suddenly given to somebody else by the king. Now who gets Birtaa? Those who are near to kings/Ranas. And where they mostly live? In KTM. And who works in those lands? The sojha sajha non-Kathmanduite poor people. Now, be dispassionate for a minute and think about two persons that you talk about time and time: Dipak Gyawali and Kunda Dixit. Dipak Gyawali's father was the maker of Panchayati law, in the sense that he was the minister for law under Mahendra . Dixit's family have always been close to Rana. In fact, I believe their lineage can be traced to Vijaya Raj Pandit, who intimated to Janga Bdr what fishy thing was going on in Bhandar Khal garden party. Vijay Raj was later given hundreds of thousands of rupees to perform quite a few 'mahaayagya' in Kashi. He returned being 'Dixit', an accolade given to him by the pundits of Kashi. Now, in this context, it is not easy to guess why the king picked up Mr Gyawali as the minister the last time. The Shahs always valued family loyalty before anything else. And just as the Shahs always valued the family loyalty above everything else, we commoners have right to look at those who benefitted from their proximity with the king and the powers with caution, while not being cynic. So, I want to scrutinize the claims of Mr Gyawali and others whose family history is in public domain, and is that of being the associates of the Ranas and the Kings when they were looting the whole nation. Am I wrong here? No. It is natural. I am not biased, I respect their creative works if they have any, but I am not going to buy what you say about them just because you said. And what you said about Mr Gyawali was so fishy, I mean even the dude himself wasn't sure if he should have said that. Ditto with Dixit. He even published something claiming he never said those words. It proves that he knew those words published as 'his words' were not appropriate. I hope I am clear on this. I didn't want to visit this thing again and again, but you refer to them as if you have 'won' those discussion, and as if I was a 'loser' there. Not. Never. -- And don't lump me with Mr Lal. I like his articles very much, always read that, (always read your article too) and that is despite the fact that one of my own siblings doesn't like his articles at all:-) There are some Kathmanduites I like very much. For example, when I read Nepali books, often I try to expand my knowledge by following the contents of that book by meeting with people who could be the source of those books. The writers of most of those books tend to be Kathmanduites. They impress me, their humility often impresses me really very much. [Although the nicest person I ever met was a Pokhereli: Batsyayan(Durga Baral). ] The great thing about these people is often they are so down to earth, that they teach a lot not only by their words but by their conducts too. I owe a lot of what I know, although I am still an ignorant ,to these great people,[ and of course, a lot of what I don't know but could have known are my own faults, needless to say]. So it is nonsensical to say that I am totally against Kathmandu elites. I am against the pretenders, whether they are from KTM or from outside. |
| bipin | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 06:56 AM
Nepe: Glad that you got my sarcasm. "How would it have been if their people in the former communist East Europe and USSR have settled for a negotiated settlement with give and take with the communist regime ? " I thought for a minute you were gonna say ..."give and take with the monarchical systems?" in the early Zar era. You believe on what you want to believe Nepe and twist my arguments any way you want. It does not bother me a bit. That is the fun part about these chat lines. Just remember, the Maoists are on the march to wipe out the Monarchy, infiltarte the army, and then uproot the democratic forces through killings and intimidation at all levels. To bring peace, the three forces --the King, the parties, and the people must come together to defeat the bigger problem. Of course, we can ask the King to abdicate and the Maoists to vanish or completely defeated. Wishfully! It ain't gonna happen, Nepe. So, the solution is the negotiated settlement: come to the table. But then, let's see how the boys are going to duke it out first. That will determine many things too. |
| ashu | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 08:34 AM
Nepe wrote: >>>>>>I think you indeed have a soft corner for the monarchy (not that there is anything wrong with that). Dipak Gyawali Dai is not alone ! <<<<< Nepe, Fair enough!! I would say that I do remain deeply ambivalent about the King. And despite my doing the best to provoke you with sharp words, you guys still have not given me reasons to switch to your camp. But that's OK. Let's keep talking, and maybe the reasons will get sharper and more convincing as time goes along. With an open mind, I am certainly willing to be persuaded with reasons either way. On a larger note, I would like to iterate again that I (as a firm believer in applying the basic tenets of game theory to maximize one's gain in real life!!) accept the Palace as a player in the game . . and I do so WITHOUT being deferential to the Palace or ignoring it altogether as if it did not exist or simply pretending (as I se you guys doing) that it were dead. Moreover, putting cards on the table, I might as well admit that though my father worked for many years as an HMG civil servant, I remain neither close to the Palace nor have been a beneficiary of the royal patronage in any form . . . nor too have I borne the brunt of the royal anger, so to speak. :-) And so, rather than sharing your views just like that, I would like to be persuaded (either way). ******************* Biswo, Though I sympathize with the thrust of what you are saying here, I would also like to say that the stories of the Dixits and the Gyawalis and the other so-called elites of Kathmandu are actually more complicated than what you are saying here. Since I am not a spokesperson for them, I can only urge you to play fair for now, and that is by suspending your judgment about them until you actually talk things over with them when you are next in Kathmandu. I say that because my own experience so far has been that despite my disagreeing with some of their views and opinions, I have actually found both Deepak G and others quite amenable to be persuaded with alternative-to-them viewpoints. Glad to note that you are against the pretenders from anywhere. oohi ashu |
| bijaya.m | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 11:39 AM
Mr. Biswo, Very well said about Dixits and Gyanwalis? There are other Brahmin elites also Pandeys, Satyals, Bhattrai and unfortunately Poudyal also comes in the list. You have said Banaras was a free gun market and PNS brought the guns from there; you have also made an excuse that you were writing the history based on your own past memories only (BTW how old are you??). I have become your fan after I read the praises you have received by your fans as an eminent historian, which you are? We know from the ancient times Kashi was famous as one of the holiest place for Hindus; it was never a gun market. Unfortunately you are predicting the old history but forgetting the recent history of the purohits of "Dilli durbar". The born leaders, rulers and jewel of all the elites, the Koirala family who are also praised and worshipped by the doctor like you. Are they not Brahmins? Are they not literate and elites for you? Mr. Krishna P Koirala, the father of MP Korirala, BP Koirala and GP Koirala who produced three prime ministers out of two wives is not a great man for you? Was he not the favourite os shree teen Chandra like his elder brother Kali Prasad was granted even Sardari by shree teen Juddha, were they not the favorites of Ranas? I am very sorry for your poor knowledge about the facts. Mr. Poudyal your father must have been one of the beneficiary to live in Chitwan because the land your family owns must have been given by the good grace of late King Mahendra as a sukumbasi? I am trying to understand your views, sometimes you argue according to the written history, sometimes you go up to Prithivi Narayan Shah to denounce the kingship of Nepal from the collections of your memories. Is it not a joke? For your information PNS was not created by memory nor you installed King GBBS. As a man of great intellectuality you possess, I want to know in these thirteen years how much loot has been made by GPK out of massive corruption in the name of democracy. Is he any match for the Brahmins for the so called the elites of Kathmandu as you said? At the time of Panchayat the loan figure on the Nepalese head was 28 arab now it has exceeded 9 kharab, in these thirteen years. Why the people of Nepal did not get any relief economically and who are responsible for the complete breakdown of law and order in the country, which is heading towards bankruptcy and collapse? A book, published in 70s called Anticipatory Democracy in which the author sites founding fathers of America and American Presidents how they established democracy and anticipated the future of democracy. During the course of time I have read somewhere the critics of democracy said that "democracy in which donkeys become monkeys and monkeys become donkeys, man becomes woman and women becomes man." In the society in the eyes of democracy the vote of elite and the vote of a fool counts equally. That's why these days' even highly educated societies gay and lesbian marriages are common. I haven't read that how a wise becomes a fool and fool becomes wise. In the pretext of our country and our elites of modern times like you has proved it's a common phenomenon in justifying the misdeeds of so called leaders who ruled the country for thirteen years. Please read the quote below. "The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous while they continue to hold public trust." James Madison. Please note that the mis-deeds of the leaders if not challenged or go un-punished what will be the future of democracy, in Nepal? If the same practice will continue? Every country has its own democracy. Do you also want to give some unique examples of your elite-ness and your democracy? Just arguing for the sake of argument based on assumption will not be helpful, at least try to give the solution of the problem do not try to create more instability and hatred among fellow Nepalese. Dont try to extort your baseless hatred for the king of Nepal and your bish-bamon against other fellow Nepalese. There are many people who love and respect their country more than you can ever imagine. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 11:58 AM
bijaya, You do have problem reading and understanding English, don't you? For your information, I have not said Kashi was a gun market. What I said was the following: "But the gun theory isn't really tested: it is yet to be verified that Kashi (Benaras) had an open arm market." In your rabid outburst, you spent a whole paragraph about this, which people will enjoy as a nice joke. There are a lot of other similar mistakes in your reply, and I will be wasting my time if I try to reply them. You surely sound like an advisor of the current king: at least your intellectual level matches theirs. |
| Binay | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 12:14 PM
Hey Mr. 8-), you have gone way too far this time. This is very lowly of you to exhibit such a despicable, idiotic act in this public forum. Back in those college days in Nepal, we used to call such behaviors MANDALE PRABIRTI. Those Mandales always attacked or at least threatened to attack people when it appeared that it was almost impossible for them to challenge other peoples ideas. Just because you don't like what others have to say, you have no right to try to insult them such a public forum. |
| bijaya.m | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 01:58 PM
Biswo, You have certainly wasted my time in publishing rubbish history of "gun theory" in the first paragraph and you, yourself walk away from your own statement that this theory is "not tested" How can history be tested? Is this the exam you passed?? Here is cut-n-paste of your own statement People say it was gun that helped King Prithvi to subdue the states situated along Himalaya. But the gun theory isn't really tested: it is yet to be verified that Kashi (Benaras) had an open arm market. Given that Nara Bhupal was an almost-contemporary of Peter The Great, who had to go to an extra length to acquire armory and modernize his nation Russia, it is doubtful that guns were marketed openly in Kashi those days. Besides, if British regime also subdued India because it had the gun,a miracle those days, how could guns be so easy to buy?And what exactly was the route to bring thousands of guns to Gorkha? Did he bring it via dense jungle of Chitwan? Or did the state of Chaudandi, or Makwanpur or Tanahu allowed him the route? Is this statement not ridicules and example of you extorted intellectually? I am glad that you approve my intellectual ability and know the intellectual ability of the king and know the psychology. >You surely sound like an advisor of the current king: at least your intellectual level matches theirs. I know some people who need psychiatric help; can I have them contact you for assistance? Are you the brain and advisor of GPK or some body else? I see correlation between your statements and statements of GPK, are you also a partner of his corruption as well? If you can tell me about what you know about the history of Koirala family like you know the history of our founder king and his ancestors.Please do not reply with fabricated lies and imaginations. If you understand please read properly what I have written for the reply of your concocted stories. |
| 8-) | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 02:17 PM
Mr. Binay, Oh the judge of cyberworld and the donkey honte of sajha! have you ever read other threads where I have been accused and assaulted by this same person. If you have you would not say what you have said. I would urge you to read and follow other threads before accusing others. As far as challenging others it is only the idea that differs. If you do not like mine what makes you think that you can call names to others? >This is very lowly of you to exhibit such a despicable, idiotic act in this public forum. Back in those college days in Nepal, we used to call such behaviors MANDALE PRABIRTI. Those Mandales always attacked or at least threatened to attack people when it appeared that it was almost impossible for them to challenge other people s ideas. Your remarks show that you are a goon of tarun dal like Biswo by calling others mandale and showing more nasty character than that of a mandale proves your point?? In one of the cartoon Biswo says >That was a great cartoon. One picture is worth a thousand words bhanchhan, yaad aayo! |
| Nepe | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 04:31 PM
Bipin, Forgive me if I have missed, but I have not read that many postings of yours in Sajha. So I do not know your political views sufficiently enough to go into a full scale debate. On the other hand, if you visit Sajha regularly or have a chance to check my postings in old threads, it could be a lot more easier for me. If you have not, that's fine. We can start afresh. Let's talk about your proposition to make an alliance of the king, the political parties and the people to fight the Maoists who you believe is fighting for nothing but to demolish the democracy and to replace it with a one-party republic in Nepal. First of all, if your concern is genuinely about saving the democracy but not about saving the monarchy per se in your proposal, I salute you. If, however, like a good number of people, educated and uneducated alike, you are 'disillusioned' with the 'pretty bad performance' of the 'democracy' that we have, and think that a greater role of the king might do better, hence a need to save and strengthen the monarchy, I still respect your views. But if you do not have faith in democracy at all and believe that only the monarchy is good for Nepal, like our famous Sajhaite the Isolated Freak, then you have nothing but my scorn. At this point I believe your proposal is a genuine concern for the democracy. Now, while the proposal sounds good and, interestingly enough, is also suggested by the veteran democracies of the world, the US and the UK, recently, I think it is not going to work. Here is why. First and foremost, this has been already tried and it has flopped spectacularly. The whole 6 years of the past until last October 4, Raja, praja ra Party were together fighting the Maoists with every kind of Sam, daan, danda and Bhed of the book. Just check out the report of the Amnesty International and the state's own commission on the Human Rights, our brave boys of the royal Nepal army surpassed the Maoists in using atrocities and abuse (burning houses, killing not only armed Maoists but also unarmed and suspected civilians, multiple gang rape of women, disappearance and what not). The result ? We all know. The Maoists became stronger and stronger and we did not have a clue why it happened. Secondly, despite a good number of Sajhaites and folks at home have hearts large enough to accept Maailaa raja and his family, a large number of folks do not trust the Maailaa raja and his uttaradhikari suputra Paras sarkar. Many Lal bujhakkad laughed at Baburam when he declared at the royal massacre that the old monarchy is over, now is virtual republic, then taken over by a new monarchy. But common people see the discontinum and the current monarchy as a new phenomenon. I do not know if you believe Biswo or not, but I believe that many folks have not chosen to hang Gyanendra Maharaj ko tasbeer in their room. I can confirm that at least my old parents at home have not done so. Thirdly, despite some political pundits, probably educated in the west, like to equate the Maoists to Pol Pot and nothing less, folks at home don't think so. A sachcha komnist is still an adjective for a good moral character and uncompromised fight for the freedom to ordinary folks. Folks don't despise the communists, they despise them for not being sachcha komnist ! Fourthly, Correct me if I am wrong but I see there is a significant support of the civil society and the public for the Maoists' demand of the Constitution Assembly even when everything is not clear about it. The longer the king refuses the Constitution Assembly (don't tell me it is Surya Bahadur Thapa who decides about it. He does not.), the more he will lose the public support. He will be seen as a coward king afraid of the people's decision and playing with the people's blood. So, my friend, while your proposal is probably well-intended. But it is a plain naivete. It's not gonna work. It's not gonna work even if the US sends it's troop in the soil of Nepal, which is very unlikely anyway. Frankly my friend, there is no military solution. Don't deceive us by telling there is. (Bipin, you probably did not mean a military solution. In that case, this is for those who believe in it.) What's the solution, then ? As I agreed with what you said previously. A negotiated settlement. And that is the Constitution Assembly. And then, perhaps, it will be a time to talk about an alliance of democratic forces to defeat the undemocratic forces. Where will the monarchy stand ? Let's leave it to the voice of the people. Or do you have any other viable option ? ********************************* Ashu wrote: >I would say that I do remain deeply ambivalent about the King. Fair enough. You said it. I trust. However, there is a small problem. If you are ambivalent about the King, then, by straightforward logic, you must also be ambivalent about the opposition to the King. You can't be unsure and sure about the same thing at the same time, well, unless, your mind is in a quantum state. So, to me, your ambivalence to the palace itself looks dubious. If you explain why you are ambivalent about the King or why I and Biswo should be too, then, perhaps, things will be clear. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 04:56 PM
8-), I made Gyanendra's cartoon. He is a public figure. So I can. Biswo ji is our fellow poster. You can not insult his picture. As a matter of fact, the cartoon you made isults yourself, not Biswo ji. Anyway, you have gone too far. You better apologize to Biswo ji before your posting gets removed by the webmaster unceremoniously. |
| bipin | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 05:06 PM
Nepe: I have my views and you have yours. I will not scorn yours, nor should you on mine. I don't have to appease you to earn your respect. This is a chat line. I don't believe that the Maoists are a pro-democracy force. They fought one for the last 7 years. Killings occured on both sides. Yes, violations do occur, but the Maoists are more brutal. Let's leave it at that. You may disagree, but that is not important. You asked me of my political view. Here what I believe in : I am for a "direct referendum" for a republic state vs monarchy. But first, the Maoists should surrender their arms in front of the international agencies --UN EU etc. The army should be kept in the barracks to prevent any abuse or manipulation. I also believe that even if the monarchy wins it should be a constitutional one. If you want to know further, the role should be more limited than the current one. Either way, democracy will be preserved and should be strengthened. This is what I believe in. Further, I don't have a problem with the CA elections. On the contrary, we should have one definetely to prevent this from hapenning again. Once for all , let's settle it. But, all I am saying at this point is, just to be careful. The Maoists have some other agenda. Just read their writings and campaingns. Whether you like it or not, the Army and the King and many of his followers constitute a force. (Trust me. I am not one of them.) Thus, asking for his abdication , although sounds cool, tough and republican, it is not a viable option on the table right now. So, why waste time on something that itself is very naive (your language, not mine). I also agree that the army solution is not going to solve it. It will bring everyone to the table. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 05:11 PM
Ashu, I have a question that I don't know if you appreciate asking here. If you don't, let me know, since it is about your latest article in Nepali Times. You said Maoists are collecting monthly revolutionary tax. I don't know if you mean it literally. The revolutionary tax with private sectors , specially the ones the Maoists deem as being run by honest businessmen, was annual in Chitwan and other parts where I enquired about this. Of course, whether it is monthly or it is annually, it is a criminal extortion, but I just want to know if Kathmandu is treated differently. For me ,a typical experience was this: A friend of mine is running a business with [last year's] yearly turn over slightly above 40 millions Rupees. We were talking about FM revolution in Chitwan and Pokhara when the local Maoist leader barged in. He said something about 'puraano sattaa' and 'nayaa sattaa' and tried to convince my friend that the tax being paid to 'puraano sattaa' was actually unnecessary. Then he asked for iron rods worth Rs 1,000.00 and assured that the rods would be used for some school they were trying to build in the eastern Chitwan. "We respect you guys. We know who are honest and who are not." He pointed to another businessman's house nearby. Then he gave a receipt and said that the friend doesn't have to worry for a year. "If someone asks for tax within a year," he said, "just show this receipt." He clasped our hands firmly, and parted. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 05:40 PM
Bipin, I am glad to find you a fellow democrat. Your proposal of a referendum is reasonable too. But did you notice Gyanendra's reluctance to make any compromise ? On a different note, I was surprised, well not exactly, to read your following statement. >Yes, violations do occur, but the Maoists are more brutal NO. Royal Army is more brutal than the Maoists. Read the following posting and three postings following that. You may change your mind. - http://www.sajha.com/sajha/html/openthread.cfm?forum=2&ThreadID=11310&show=all#28998 |
| intruder | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 05:46 PM
Every action has a reaction. Some action has greater reaction than others. And some foolish action, such as the maoist's, has a deadly consequences. such as RNA's brutality. But the bigger question is who promted them to get brutal? Yes violations do occur, and maoists are guilty on every count. |
| 8-) | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 07:02 PM
Nepe, Anyone that participates in public forum is subject to scrutiny, anyone. Can you prevent anyone from speaking in tundikhel, and prevent them from being scrutinized? In democracy your rights and duties go together, like opposition and the ruling party. Your action in publishing the cartoon is a childish and cheap act. I am sorry that you know how to offend others but do not want to be offended. Biswo, I am sorry if I offended you but for every action there is an equal (or even more) reaction. I hope you have learned your lesson. It is good to know that you are already receiving some help. |
| ashu | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 07:10 PM
Nepe wrote: >>>>>However, there is a small problem. If you are ambivalent about the King, then, by straightforward logic, you must also be ambivalent about the opposition to the King. You can't be unsure and sure about the same thing at the same time, well, unless, your mind is in a quantum state. So, to me, your ambivalence to the palace itself looks dubious. If you explain why you are ambivalent about the King or why I and Biswo should be too, then, perhaps, things will be clear.>>>>> Nepe, I love the way you argue. You are such a poet with words that if one isn't alert, it's get easy to be seduced by your words. I loved the way you almost hijacked Hari Roka's "what the king has done so far has not worked" to mean your "the king must leave the country". Here, your asserting that "If [I am] ambivalent about the King, then, by straightforward logic, [I] must also be ambivalent about the opposition to the King" is FALSE both on account of straightforward logic and reality. I guess by now it's clear that the difference between the way you think and I think is this: You want your world in a neatly ordered manner, with everything categorized and cut and dried. You seem to saying, either you are this or you are that. For you, there is no middle ground, no half-way point. I, on the other hand, am perfectly comfortable with ambiguities, which you find hard to understand, much less accept. That's OK. Coming to the issue of hand, I have actually come to PITY the political parties who have become so bankrupt in terms of ideas and strategies. Fighting among themselves, they blew their chances to rein in the King at least a couple of times earlier. They seem to be saying that if they do andolan long enough (by trampling upon non-participiating citizens' rights to go about their daily lives ), victory will be theirs someday. Meantime, they have consistently underestimated the sheer threat that the Maoists (aka pure evil) pose for all. If we all are NOT united against the Maoists now, then, the greater evil is going to take over the country soon. oohi ashu |
| ashu | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 07:24 PM
Biswo, Thanks for reading my latest piece in The Nepali Times. Though as of now, no business house will actually go on record to admit this, the truth appears to be that prominent members of the private sector in Kathmandu -- citing fear, security and others -- have been paying off the Maoists, quietly on a monthly basis. It's a well-known fact that Kathmandu's trekking agencies have long been passing the burden of "revolutionary tax" on to their clients, the foreign trekkers. And trekking guides, many of whom can rattle off the names of Maoist leaders on treking routes, have learnt to play by the Maoist rules. Apparently, the Maoists give out well-printed receipts tothe payees, making the whole thing look pretty legal and aboveboard. Like South America's Colombia's rebels who run an a hugely lucrative kidnapping market, Nepal's Maoists too are, ahem, have become effective fundraisers for their cause. oohi ashu |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 01-Sep-03 11:42 PM
Secondly, despite a good number of Sajhaites and folks at home have hearts large enough to accept Maailaa raja and his family, a large number of folks do not trust the Maailaa raja and his uttaradhikari suputra Paras sarkar. Many Lal bujhakkad laughed at Baburam when he declared at the royal massacre that the old monarchy is over, now is virtual republic, then taken over by a new monarchy. But common people see the discontinum and the current monarchy as a new phenomenon. I do not know if you believe Biswo or not, but I believe that many folks have not chosen to hang Gyanendra Maharaj ko tasbeer in their room. I can confirm that at least my old parents at home have not done so. *************** Nepe, Its yoiur view and its wrong. Have you been to Nepal recently to say, verify Biswo's claims? No.So,. don't try to portray as if what you or your fellow comrade-in-arms thinks is right. Anyways , I know it's just a sheer waste of time and resorces to argue with you, so, I am ending it here. Now, ytou can go on labeling what you want, and guess what, I will just be lauighing at the poor state of argument. namaste. isolated freak, Bei da, Beijing PS: Hapy B'day to san. |
| RBaral | Posted
on 02-Sep-03 05:08 AM
My brief note, to all those who have opted to invest their wisdom to defend our king, is that there is a fierce competition out there. You guys need to try very seriously to impress. On an another note, the King has given a faint light of hope to those Nepali people who want the chaos and ashaanti of Nepal to be put to a rest. Because, King is the one who seemingly leads Nepali Army, the strongest and well organized of the any of the government mechanisms of Nepal. My two cents. Namaste. Rishi |
| Biswo | Posted
on 02-Sep-03 02:12 PM
About who is more cruel: government or Maoists? It is not easy to say. In early days, during Kioshera-2, it was universally established that Nepal Police were absolutely more brutal. They raped women, incidents in which mom was tied and daughter was raped in front of her also came to the light.[I distinctly remember one of such press conferences by Asmita or some 'naari' magazine that featured those tortured women.] When RNA were not fighting, they were very benign. A friend of mine worked for RNA as a medical officer in Salyan, and he told me that he treated a lot of wounded Maoists. A lot of others would verify this. During those days, Maoists started killing indescriminately. I had a chance to meet and talk to a daughter of one of those victims, Mukti Adhikari of a highschool in Lamjung, last summer, and thereby I also had a detailed information about the circumstances sorrounding the murder of a man who was killed just because he taught Sanskrit and was a member of Nepali congress affiliated teachers association. However, these days RNA is getting increasingly more brutal. People in Maoist affected region don't really regard Maoists as more brutal, and one of the reasons why this is happening may be because they are living under the Maoists and are experiencing what is famously called Stockholm syndrome. In Chitwan, I found the conduct of security agencies unacceptable. I hate the way they are said to kill the unarmed Maoist sympathizers. I mentioned it earlier too: two Tharus had recently joined the Maoists movement, and were apprehended quickly. The young duo were first unarmed, and then were asked to run away. Then they shot them when the boys were 'running away'. If government starts killing all new Maoist sympathizers like that, it will only exacerbate the situation. People in Chitwan reported that four other people were killed in Royal Chitwan National Park area, after asking them to run away. It seems like a routine thing rather than anomaly. It reminded me the 'dirty war' of Argentina when those who opposed to junta rulers were thrown out of flying airplanes and thus vanished.It just doesn't seem right. |
| barad | Posted
on 02-Sep-03 04:34 PM
biswojee,i freqently read ur articles in sajha,and most of them are good,but this one is stretching it a bit to far.we need to keep in mind that it is the maoist who have launched a guerilla campaign,they attack and melt into the population.to counter such attacks,there will be mistakes and blatant abuses by the security forces,further more in the maoist hinterland,niceties dont work,what works is fear!nepal doesnt have the resources to win the heart and minds of the people.that is the sad truth. the options before the maoist sympathisers and supporters is simple,as george bush said it,either u are with us or against us. may not be right to us,but tell that to the thousands of maoist victims!!! |
| Biswo | Posted
on 02-Sep-03 07:32 PM
Baradji, I think it is NOT too much to say that our military personnels don't kill people who are unarmed, and already subdued. My highschool headmaster is the most popular figure in Tandi. His name is Purna Bdr Basnet, and he is known to all people in Tandi as a great person with no selfishness. Largely due to his hardwork, Nepal Madhyamik Bidhyalaya is ranked very high among highschools in Chitwan today. He told me how he , a NC supporter, was once kidnapped from house, taken to Royal Chitwan National Park's jungle, and asked to run away by a military officer who terrorized the whole Chitwan during emergency era. If Mr Basnet had been really killed that time, let me tell you Baradji, at least the area between Parsa-Tikauli would have eternally sympathized with the Maoists against the army. Is it too much to ask that RNA and Nepal Police stop killing innocents people or unarmed Maoist personnels? Then what is the difference between them and the cruel group of Maoists(assuming there are two types of Maoists: cruel ones and non-cruel ones), and why should one support RNA/Nepal Police in this fight? RNA/Nepal Police can't win the fight with this kind of cruelty. And when we go to our home in Nepal, will we be safe? Will our kins there be safe? People say that there is no one now who may mediate between them and Nepal Police or army. Previously, if army/police unfairly did something, their representatives would go and mediate between locals and the security forces. But now? People have mediator between them and the Maoists to some extent, but not between them and the army. And that is not a good sign. |
| bipin | Posted
on 02-Sep-03 07:48 PM
Maoists vs RNA: The RNA have conducted human rights violations. So have the Maoists. There is no doubt about that. The Army do react, often in excess. They become aggressive. Just look at the situation in Iraq and Palastine. You will get a picture. Does it mean that you can justify the innocent killing? Of course not. Does that mean they should cave in and get killed in droves? Hell no! On the contrary, they be should be better trained on human rights and at the weapons training at the same time. Can't let your guard down. Well I do too have a lot of anecdotal stories too about both the Maoists and the RNA. When I was in Nepal recently about five six months ago, I came across many people who had been victim of the atrocities. One wrongly got accused of being an informant and was harrased and eventually joined the Maoists. His (very active) sister got murdered in the process of "interrogation." I saw a person with a missing hand (due to the Maoists). His crime? Not letting the Maoists know about the arrival of the school owner from kathmandu so that the maoists could come and ask for what Ashu calls "the revolutionary taxes" i.e., protection money. A young hotel waiter I had met in Kathmandu had fled his village after his brother got abducted for recruitment against his will. A defending uncle was hacked on the spot. The mother commited suicide later after her husband went to india to find a job and the second son fled to Kathmandu to become a waiter. The killing of the army Major that we read about: what was his crime? He was a good guy helping the poor in his village. He was running a school I heard. How about all those NC and UML cadres? Many of them are simple folks like you and me, minding their business providing for their families. Their crime? I don;t believe all of them were crooks. What is the point of bombing the homes of the ministers' parents? Law and order is absolutely necessary, and there is no question about defending the state against the uprising. Observing human rights is too absolutely necessary, but the national security is a must. Better training to handle different situations? Yes! Peace ASAP is the solution. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 02-Sep-03 08:10 PM
I think if both parties don't kill those already captured, already subdued and provably unarmed people, the number of killings can be substantially reduced. It really hurts when you hear about those extrajudicial killings: whether it is of Krishna Sen's, or of Yadu Gautam's, or of Mukti Adhikari's or of those workers of Jogimaaraa. Even the last week's massacre of 19 Maoists in Ramechhap [after tying their hand] is grotesque, gruesome and against humanity. All these killings could have been avoided simply by taking these people in custody, rather than killing them. |
| bipin | Posted
on 02-Sep-03 09:08 PM
Maoists vs RNA: "if both parties don't kill those already captured, already subdued and provably unarmed people, the number of killings can be substantially reduced." I do agree. The RNA has a greater responsibility of being a professional fighting force. The Israelies cannot act like the Palastinians. Americans should not stoop down to the level of the Al Auidas. But, don't take any shit, and don't engage in any extrajudicial killings. By all means defend the country, its infrastructures, schools, and the people. Protect liberty and freedom to say whatever one wishes to say in a free society: No to 4th Oct and No to extortion and No to corrupt politicians. When attacked, fight back, fight back hard. Hunt down the killers, but spare the innocent villagers. Use better intelligence. Peace should prevail! |
| karmapa | Posted
on 02-Sep-03 10:08 PM
[Well, sophisticated arguments or critical thinking will not amount to a rat's pooh pooh if the government or the parties or any other entity fails to deliver. The problem with the intellectuals is they know it too good. And yet none has delivered. All bright ideas have to come from people- and even when they come they collect dust.] ---------------------- Take your pick or a combination or permutation thereof: 1. the Palace protected by the Army, and both backed by the geopolitical forces and foreign powers (and see the country being dictated by vested foreign interests) and the puppet government and its puppet CIAA; 2. corrupt, power-hungry political parties that couldn't deliver and failed to be inclusive, when they were in power (these are the 'gafadi' parties ...ah how they rode those pajeros into the sunset and built greco-roman buildings with fluted columns); 3. Maoists raising some very fundamental issues albeit through violence and terror. (No means doesn't justify the end; and neither does end justify the means.) If I were to take my pick, I would give up. Nepal is not even born yet, it's kicking to be born. But the pain of labor is there. We are all going through it in our own way. Hope the to-be child will not be a son of a gun...a retard...but someone we can all live with. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 05:15 PM
Intruder and barad, Read the following excerpt from none other than the HMG owned Human Right commission's report. ------------------------------------------------ Human Rights Monitoring Report 2002 by the National Human Rights Commission, Harihar Bhawan, Lalitpur - http://www.nhrc-nepal.org/doclinks.asp?group=Papers page 13: B) Rape: i. Rape Committed by the State Party: The incidents of rape committed by the security forces are mostly incidents of gang rape. In several cases, it was found that the army personnel went to various houses, beat and dragged the husbands and the children out of the house and then raped the women inside their houses. Similarly, incidents of arrests followed by the killings of husbands and subsequent raping of their wives were also discovered. It was revealed to the monitoring team that an army squad took two women detained in Dailekh with them to an undisclosed location and then raped them. Their naked bodies were left at the location and the news was dispatched stating that terrorists were killed in an encounter. ------------------------------------------------ So this is what you think is the acceptable reaction of the RNA to the action of the Maoists or justifiable violence ? *********************************** 8-), The webmaster has removed your posting. I hope you learned the lesson. As for my cartoon, you have never seen cartoons of the head of the state anywhere in the world or what ? Read newspapers and train your mind not to be offended by the political cartoons, sir. *********************************** Ashu, This thread has now taken very appropriate turn to the issue of the violence of the RNA (aka more evil, Nepe 2003) and the Maoists (aka pure evil, Ashu 2003). So probably we should put other issues aside and give more room to this issue. Nevertheless, I would like to reply to your compliment and some blames 1. First of all, I am flattered to hear about my khubility. I also have the same fondness of your peerless ability to mortally wound anybody on earth with the finest blend of provocative words. Words coming from your sire not only have ability to kill any living soul, but also to make a dead body alive one more time to say 'ouch'. As for yourself, kudrat ka karishma, without exception, you get away with, without even a slightest scratch on yourself. Very few have mastered this celestial verbal marshal art which you have named 'I attack for making you stronger' ! And I am even more fond of the kawach of ambivalence that you have wore to make yourself untouchable, undefeatable, unarguable, unquestionable, immortal and eligible to say anything about anything that I suppose leaves anybody in awe and bewilderment. I used to think everything has a price. But this Kawach of ambivalence comes free to you. They say a free lunch is actually not free, there is a penalty for it somewhere. However, the free ambivalence has a reward instead. You are fit to any place. Look at you, you get wah wah from Isolated Freak (for your cursing anti-king khema) and you get my 'buttering' (in a hope that your saying you are just not yet convinced of the republicans may soon turn into now you are !). Duitai haat ma laddu ! 2. As for your aarop to me of hijacking Hari Roka, it will make sense if Roka's views are closer to yours than to mine. Are they ? Now, let's go back to examine who tried to hijack him, you or me. There is nothing against the republicanism in the entire article by Roka. But interestingly, he has advocated for the Constitution Assembly, which everybody should know is not a support to the palace but, on the contrary, a discredit to the undisputed divine political right of the King. The Maoists view it as their ingenious strategy to kick the King out from the backdoor. But let us not go that far for discussion. In the part you quoted, Roka suggested the political parties, whose andolan is not getting public support, to reassess their strategy and timing, without further elaborating what they could be. And you presented him as if he was saying that the political parties have become too republican, which is not liked by the public, so they should give up their agitation and support the king. You came here saying, 'Nepe, look, even Hari Roka, a Ph.D. of JNU, is asking the political parties to give up their anti-king agitation. You should do too. Reconsider your republicanism. Be an ambivalent like me'. Now tell me who hijacked Hari Roka ? As for me, I did not deduce whatever you are saying I did based on Roka. I did not reach at the republicanism after Roka. I summarized Roka's article into four points. Where did I misrepresent or hijack him ? At one point, summarizing Roka's view that since Oct 4 it is the King's show (he is responsible for everything), I relate it to the cartoon I made. Is that hijacking ? Can you please show him my cartoon and confirm if he disagree with the nuance of my cartoon ? 3. As for me being a black and white with no room for gray area type of person, I wouldn't say you are totally wrong. It's not that I don't see gray area. I see. But my tendency is to look for fine detail so that I can see the individual black and white components of the gray area. I am also against the mixing up of the separate black and white spots to generalize them as a gray spot. If you have taken 7 lives and saved 7 lives, you are not an innocent man. You should get 7 life imprisonment and 7 rewards separately. ******************* |
| Nepe | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 05:17 PM
Bipin, Assuming that you had a chance to visit the link I gave, when I read your first posting Maoist vs RNA, I was bewildered with your struggle to strike a balance between those two violators. But it was a relief to read in the next posting your conclusion that Peace ASAP is the only solution. You are absolutely right. No question about the need of the peace ASAP. However, I am still interested to know if you stand corrected like Poonte ji graciously did about who is more brutal, the Maoists or the RNA, or stand by your earlier assertion that the Maoists are more brutal. I assume most of the people do not bother to read such reports as I quoted and make their views based on the reporting of the mainstream private media (which are opportunists) or the state-owned media (totally a machine of disinformation as far as the war is concerned) without taking any salt. My point of comparing the brutality of the Maoists and the RNA is not to forgive one or the other. There is no gray area here. I am for, and believe eventually it will happen, that every person of the Maoists and the RNA who has committed war crime should be brought to the justice. Yes, it is a difficult process and is not going to happen anytime soon, the type of punishment could be different than what would be the usual based on various factors. But they should not go unpunished, undocumented and forgotten. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 05:34 PM
I always wonder about one thing: people are willing to give king a chance to remain king not only for his life, but also for his progeny if he gets 50% of votes [constitutional assembly]. All fight seems to be for this, and the king is not willing to allow this. I may be wrong, but it seems that is the truth. I mean no one gives such a lucrative option to Girija Koirala or any other Nepali. If he wins once, it is just for five years, provided everything goes well. Now, recently we are talking about five parties and the king coming together. I think it only polarizes people between pro-king and proMaoist gangs. It is going to be a great chance for Maoists to get support of those who are against king, and yet don't support the Maoists. Rather than capitulating to king in the name of isolating Maoists, the political parties need to isolate both the Maoists and the king. Both are the evils, and both are not supported by that many people in Nepal anyway. And if I remember correctly, during 1989, the cumulative death of people fighting for democracy in USSR was 3, and was in single digit or in no digit in most of the East European countries. In Nepal, it was above fifty and let's not forget Birendra was reasonably reasonable person, at least in comparison to Gyanendra or Paras. Does it mean: if we have to fight for democracy, heck, we fight it against the communists, rather than against the king. I must say that after the making of Surya Bahadur Thapa, king doesn't seem to be a person who is really a patriotic one, who may shield us against foreign pressure. In Nepal's history, Mathavar Singh Thapa was the only prime minister made on the overt pressure of foreign power, made by king Rajendra Shah, as the Britons got pretty upset after the demise of Bhimsen Thapa and rise of anti-British faction in Nepal durbar thosedays. Bhadra Kali Mishra was included in the council of ministers in 2007 in India's bidding, but he was not a prime minister. These are openly known pressures of past. But this time, Surya Bahadur Thapa was made prime minister on foreigners'bidding. I don't like ambassadors of our friendly countries making such obtrusive moves in Nepal's political arena. They should remain friend, not kingmaker. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 05:59 PM
. 
|
| Intruder | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 06:13 PM
Nepe, First of all, NHRC is a big joke. Their integrity has been questioned time and again both by the Maoists and the RNA, for their failure to reveal factual incidence, and in most cases, exaggerating things well beyond one's imagination. Often is the case, is that they are never there to witness it. Given their history of unethical practice and sloppiness, I use my discretion to dismiss their claim. On a second thought, fine, I take their claim...an isolated incidence that may have occurred as Maoists have done the same, only that they have murdered the innocent victims after the crime and thrown the bodies in Rapti river, eliminating all evidence, while the friendly human rights folks were busy posing for a snap shot in picturesque remote Nepal escorted by RNA. And last but not least, you said the violence by Maoists as 'justifiable'? Justifiable? Almost 8 thousand people have died, and you think that is justifiable? If the sky falls tomorrow, that may be justifiable, but Maoists violence is no way near justifiable. Even if they do take over the country someday, which I doubt they ever will, you better be there to help them write a 'justification letter' for their violence using your down right silly rhetoric, so that they can sustain in power for few more days. |
| barad | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 06:31 PM
nepe, i really dont get it,u mean to say that the maoists are more committed towards the human rights than the army.what a joke. its not just about the killing and violence,what about the people who are being extorted,displaced,what about the documented child soldiers in the maoist ranks,looting of banks,destroying infrastructure........the list goes on. wake up dude. the RNA may be not perfect,it did not create this situation,the situation was thrust on them,whatever it is they are the main barrier between a totalitarian one party communist republic and whatever form of democracy we have right now,look at the bigger picture and what is at stake. peace. |
| bipin | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 07:44 PM
Nepe: Thanks for the link. And, I said I read it. Then I responded with my own view. Let me repeat, in many instances the State reacts to uprisings. They then end up overreacting too. Just look at what's happening in Iraq and Israel. Who is brutal: Israelies or the suicide bombers who kill innocent by-standers for the sake of their cause? One who is reacting to the situation or the one who is fighting for the cause. People will take sides and they will have their own arguments. I don't think we can convince each other here. Let's both agree to disagree, but agree that what we need is the resumption of the talks. At least, that is what I believe in right now. Peace! |
| ashu | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 08:11 PM
Nepe, It was me who had posted that long article by journalist Lucia De Vries a while ago on Sajha. Lucia's article, if you remember, talked about the atrocities committed by the RNA. That was, if my memory serves right, the FIRST time anyone had posted an article that was -- based on the evidence from the field -- very critical of RNA. I bring this up because I see you -- true to your black-or-white-with-no-room-for-the-middle-ground nature -- forcing me to choose between the Maoists and the RNA. But I'm not going to indulge you by making a clear-cut choice. To its credit, RNA has established a human rights cell. It has been making its soldiers aware about the underlying human rights issues. True, its efforts are far from enough, and that much more needs to be done and publicized in an honest, open manner. As a citizen, I would not rule out pushing for a War Crime Tribunal later on, and have it spend even years examining the crimes of war, and punishing the guilty, like it's happening in Rwanda, Serbia and happened in South Africa and at Nuremberg . I mean, why not? We have precedents from other countries, right? Meantime, and thanks to voices like yours, mine and many others' and thanks to reports from various agencies, RNA is under a greater pressure to be transparent and obey the "laws of war" . . . and that's a very good thing. But that's the kind of pressure from the public that the Maoists are NOT under, and that's why, among other reasons, it makes them all the more dangerous. As they say in British politics: Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know. ***** In the name of intellectual honesty, you should NOT deleberately confuse Isolated Freak's strong pro-monarchy stance with my ambivalence toward the King. Ambivalence is not acceptance. Also, I have repeatedly asked you to convince me that republicanism is in Nepal's best interest in the present situation. So far, other than WISHING that the King were not there in Nepal at all or sketching DREAMY post-King scenarios, you have given me NOT a single as-it-is reason to take your claim about republicanism seriously. And it's pretty tiring to hear you say the same thing again again, like a broken record. [Meantime, despite repeated requests, since Nepali republicans like yourself are unable to go beyond your emotional blabber and are unable to give Nepal-specific historical and particular reasons for ambivalent people like myself to weigh your arguments on our own scale, I think I'll keep on reading -- what strikes me as -- a great defense for a democratic republic as implicitly laid out more than 200 years ago by Tocqueville in the book "Democracy in America". It's a book I recommend to you, by the way!] ************* I've already told you the DIFFERENCE between what Hari was saying (the what the King has tried so far has not worked and that the political parties' anti-king campaign has been a bad one) and what you have been saying (that there is a huge swelling of protest against the King and that the King should go and that Nepal's future should be as a republic.] Other than that, hey, thanks for the compliments. Though I welcome praise and criticisms, I have learnt to be true to myself all the time, and NOT react to what you and others have to say about me. oohi ashu ktm,nepal |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 03-Sep-03 11:34 PM
. Look at you, you get wah wah from Isolated Freak (for your cursing anti-king khema) and you get my 'buttering' (in a hope that your saying you are just not yet convinced of the republicans may soon turn into now you are !). Duitai haat ma laddu ! ***** One more in the series of nepe's baseless and personal accusations!! Way to go dude.. (that's wah wah in English) |
| ashu | Posted
on 04-Sep-03 04:35 AM
Hey Isolated Freak, How's life in Beijing? ST told me that you amused everyone with your jokes on that late-night flight to Shanghai!! What's the latest update on that proposed trip to Inner Mongolia? Send separate email, hai. ****** Nepe, The last thing Isolated Freak needs from me is my wah wah, and vice versa. IF is staunchly pro-monarch. He has made that much abundantly clear. I have chosen to respect IF's views WITHOUT necessarily agreeing with them wholesale. IF knows this quite well. I know that IF too has disagreeing views re: some of my ideas, but at least he does not call me names. I told you quite openly that I was willing to be persuaded by you. But sadly, so far, I have yet to hear a set of convincing reasons why getting rid of the King is in Nepal's best interest in the present situation. Sure, I accept that one may not like the King. That's fine. But you know quite well that one's dislike alone is never a reason for getting rid of somebody. Tetti ho, kura. As for people's hanging Birendra's pictures while being abusive toward Gyanendra at the same time, it COULD be that people respect the INSTITUTION of monarchy (for what's it worth) if when they do NOT like the personailty of individual Kings. Else, one would think that those who hate monarchy would also NOT hang Birendra's pictures too, hoi na ta? oohi ashu ktm,nepal |
| allare | Posted
on 04-Sep-03 05:49 AM
Hi, I hardly find time to read all the arguments here, so could not say what to write or not without reading them properly. Anyway, I managed to read few last postings from Nepe, barad, biswo, bipin, Ashu, IF. Though, question was asked to Nepe, about why do not we want KING, I have very simple thing to say. I do not want to argu lot here, since my dream is very simple. My dream is that, I want to be KING. Yes, this allare also want to be KING of Nepal. What qualification do I need to be KING? Do I have to born in royal palace? if yes, Why so? Is that qualification? KINGship is not anyone's personal property, its property of Country. So, why can not simple people with required qualification (if there any) can fight for this KING post? Is PARAS more qualified (except being son of Gyanendra) than me to be KING of Nepal and to take care of NEPAL ? Is, PARAS more qualified than IF, Ashu, Biswo, Nepe. etc.. to be KING of Nepal ? Why this post should be inheritated? Why any guy should get this big responsibility without deserving it ? Lets say, If Abdum kalam (Presd of India) were born in Nepal, could he become President of (current) Nepal and lead nepal with this intelligent and dedication? What a pity if we have leader by inheritance who does not know the ABC of desh-sewa. There might be many such people in Nepal, who can not get this chance. So, it means that there is flaw in such structure which could hinder the development of any country. So, guys, we can not change the nature of this KINGship and rules of being KING. Can you ? So, simple thing is to go away with this structure. Thats why, for simple people like me, who can not fight for such post in Nepal (though having all the qualification except being born in that family), I would happyly prefer Republic state, where I can fight, if I have wish, dedication and qualification. |
| Nepe | Posted
on 04-Sep-03 03:57 PM
Intruder and Barad, Me justifying the violence of the Maoists ? I was wondering what this crap these gentlemen are talking about is. Then I went back to my posting and found a minor typo. The sentence should read, So this is what you think is the acceptable reaction of the RNA to the action of the Maoists or justifiable violence [against the Maoists] ? So, with this minor typo, you guys concluded that Nepe is justifying the Maoists violence ! Have you seen anywhere in this thread or, if your are long time Sajhaites, anytime, anywhere me justifying the Maoists violence ? Dudes (this word sounds weird to me, but I am learning to use it from Isolated Freak and you), let me introduce myself to you. There are two major things I do not agree with/support/have sympathy to the Maoists, one is their communist ideology and the other is their violent method. For everything else, I have absolutely no problem with them. Now about justifying the Maoist violence, this is very serious not only for humanitarian reasons but also for strategic reasons. You can not defeat the Maoists without defeating the elements that justify their violence directly or indirectly, intentionally or unintentionally, knowingly or due to lack of brain in their head. Now, let's try to identify these bastards who are justifying the Maoist violence in various ways. I think it is none other than you two dudes, Intruder and Barad who are advocating that certain excessive violence is justified, who have no shame to accept the violence like gangraping of innocent women at their home with their family as a means of spreading fear (how sick !), the RNA boys and officers who have committed war crimes, the police, particularly in their initial operations in the western Nepal and of course those in actual power who instructed and allowed the use of such an unacceptable level of violence in this war. Yes, dudes Intruder and Barad, you are the ones who are justifying the violent path of the Maoists. You justified it by accepting that the end justifies the means. Well, the immediate demand of the Maoists is a democratic republic of Nepal or at least a legal means to achieve it. You may not like it. That is fine. But this is a perfectly legitimate demand in a free world. Now, if, the Maoists want to use violent path to achieve it, why can't they, based on your principle ? If you ask my principle. My principle is non-violence. I am against the Maoists using a violent path, although I too want to see a democratic republic of Nepal. But I want to follow the path of Mahatma Gandhi, of Martin Luther king, of not taking lives but giving lives if necessary. What should the state do ? Instead of sending the RNA to rape women and put on cosmetics of training on Human rights, it should open up a road where a Nepali republican Mahatma Gandhi can walk to the Narayanhiti. There ain't any other way. It is reasonable to fear the Maoists because their ultimate goal, at least in the paper, is to establish a communist state. But you can not finish them off now like what US calls a pre-emptive strike. If you can, then you should finish off the royal family, because they might try to take away the sovereignty from the people permanently too. You might think similar things about others too. Even if everything I said is invalid and you really can use violence to finish off the Maoists, you can't. Do you know why ? Because there is not a single fuc..g person publicly available among the people in Nepal who supports the violence of the state or the Maosists for that matter. It is only a few anonymous poster of unknown vested interest and intention in cyberland who keep posting such an unpopular idea. It is cowards who advocate for the violence as the first option. The braves one don't need no fuc.g violence as the first option. For them the violence is the last option. Until then they try peace. **************** I will reply to Ashu later. |
| bipin | Posted
on 04-Sep-03 06:22 PM
Ashu (or any other): How did the 7th decisive movement go? Could you please shed some light on it? BG |
| barad | Posted
on 04-Sep-03 06:39 PM
nepe, the maoist main demand is a republic,very doubtful it will be a democratic republic.if the maoist really believed in peoples power,why did they not go for a referendum when the govt offered them in Hapure,Dang??BRB,brushed it off by saying it was a panchayati practice.when asked by the press about the murders,extortions,BRB always brushed it off by saying they are trivial matters!! its very nice in principle to agree to nonviolence,who wouldnt !!when u have thugs like BRB extorting,murdering,being the govt of the day,(wether u support the govt or not)it has a responsibility to deal with the situation. now to say that,the response of the RNA to the maoist ,has been to rape women is way out of line,by the way how many such cases is the NHRC alleging???thousands?????thats what u make it seem like.besides the NHRC is filled with maoist sympathizers. sure there have been abuses by the RNA,but they have also tried to correct them,the measures that u term cosmetic,are small but significan steps in that direction.the RNA atleast has some accountability.are there such 'cosmetic ' check and balances in the maoist militia???just yesterday they murdered lila maya tamang,a health worker in ramechap!!last week they tried to kill deuba and kandel..... regarding the king,many may not support him,but the silent majority in nepal supports the instution of monarchy,otherwise the moaist falg would be flying high in singha durbar by now.besides give me one good point as to how i will benefit by removing him? |
| bipin | Posted
on 04-Sep-03 07:33 PM
Nepe: I am not trying to be spiteful or anything like that but, "There are two major things I do not agree with/support/have sympathy to the Maoists, one is their communist ideology and the other is their violent method. For everything else, I have absolutely no problem with them." I am just expressing my carefulness. Just consider: A violent one party bankrupt communist ideology, which has all but vanished from the planet, with leaders who think losing lives in hundreds of thousands for a revolutionary cause (Prachand's word) is quite justifiable. Plus, a careful examination of the 75-or-40 point manifesto reads like a red-book with hidden agendas. With a bankrupt economic ideas but guised behind a host of social engineering rhetorics is outdated. The intellectuals in Iran had a similar reaction to the Mullahs during their revolution and they ended up with a theocracy. Because, they failed to see through the real motives of the revolutionary Mullahs. Even the UML does not want to change the tenure of the current constitution, because they do not trust the Maoists and their intention behind the CA demand. I told you that under a perfect scenario --arm surrender in front of the UN and/or EU by the Maoists and the Army in the barracks-- I would not have a problem to go for a CA or a referendum. The people will give the right verdict. The existing triad in the political picture is not that bad. Thta's why I am not about to trash the Army. They should be held accountable to higher standards, no doubt about that. But, I still prefer RNA many times over the Maoists. I just don't believe that the Maoists are a democratic force. Actually, despite all of their flaws, I would take our current political leaderships over the Maoists in a heartbeat. The King is part of the triad and a force and is here to stay. So, make a compromising peace. Peace! |
| nepalipanda | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 08:58 AM
Bipin: Don't be apologetic. Face this violent revolutionary menace headon. That's the only language they will understand. NP |
| GP | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 12:24 PM
Ashu writes: "Else, one would think that those who hate monarchy would also NOT hang Birendra's pictures too, hoi na ta?" This sentence caught me. Yes, its true. Well, I don't have King's picture at my residence, but, I was surprised to more pictures of Birendra family. Before, Pashupati Samsher's daughter speak or write a book on that night based on her telephone conversation, I am not going to accept neither one of the possibilities: 1. Deependra started killing. (I can strongly feel that if deependra started killing, then, he was shot dead by third person). 2. There could be plot. King G could be part of that plot. If there was plot, what Deependra talked in his two telephone conversations should come to public independently in book form with all background. I wish PashuShamsher's daughter has guts to write this book. Until, then, I will neither accept first one nor second. Before it get satisfactory proofs, I will accept GBBS as king and will also not accuse Dependra.... For me King is more acceptable than BRB as PM or Prachanda as President of Nepal. GP |
| sparsha | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 01:28 PM
Nepe ji, I kept myself away from this thread even though I was reading all the responses. The reason I did not continue writing is I didn't want to repeat myself again and again. But a statement you made, which I am quoting below, encouraged this post. Hope you won't mind me questioning. "There are two major things I do not agree with/support/have sympathy to the Maoists, one is their communist ideology and the other is their violent method. For everything else, I have absolutely no problem with them. " You remined me of a guy from Gulmi I met many years ago. He used to say, "dudh bhaye khir khana hunthyo chamalai chhaina ra po". It sounds as if he got something for khir, but what? Nothing, really. If you take communist ideology and violence out of maoists then what else is left? Nothing. Nothing at all. What makes them Maoists, then? You move on to say "For everything else, I have absolutely no problem with them. " There would nothing else be left -for you to have absolutely no problem with- after you strip them of communist ideology and violence. They, perhaps, can be anything but Maoists. "I would love khir, but don't like chamal and dudh. If Khir abandons dudh and chamal, I would absolutely have no problem with it." Yasto kuro ta haina hola ni, Nepe ji? Ho ta? My point is let's evaluate Maoists for what they are. Not what they should be. Do you like them as they are no? |
| Biswo | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 01:46 PM
King or not king? Let's discuss it in the context of Tibet. I have talked to a lot of Tibetans. They agree that economically Tibet benefitted a lot under China. It was a serfdom, often harried by southern neighbors. We were extracting thousands of gold coin each year from what was essentially the poorest land in the earth. Then China came. And at least, they are economically better off, they have no fear of neighboring countries attacking them etc. etc. Yet they long for freedom, they want the same Dalai Lama back who was the protector of serfs and whose excrements were sacred to the subjects. Why? People in Tibet prefer the self-determination rather than imposed rule. Kings are like external powers who control us. It is wonderful to see how history is twisted to say Ranas were the only ones who plundered us during 104 years. True, Ranas controlled the coffer. But they shared everything with the kings. They gave their daughters to the kings and had very close relationship with the palace. When Naya Muluk was returned, king took 2 district, and Ranas took 2 districts: such was the comraderie. We people had suffered, not them Shahs. Now the nation is poor, wretched, and the king and his son are more unpredictable than anyone we ever saw. Why do some of us lack the courage to see beyond them? Why is this "India is Indira" sentiment plagues some of our educated ones? Traditionally, kings are the ones who were the most powerful in the kingdom. If his son retained that power, he son would also be the king. If someone rebelled, and turned out to be more powerful that the king, then the rebel would start new dynasty. Kings are the symbol of power. There is nothing divine attached to them. They epitomize the matsya Nyaya system of mankind. That's it. No aura, no divine halo, they have nothing. If someone is more powerful than them, they are doomed. Their dynasty is doomed. Kings have been thrown away in history. Thinley said in Himalaya(Caravan) to Karma, " A new king ascends only after challenging the old king". That's the whole thing about the kings. One challenges another existing: either wins or lose. If wins , one dynasty falls and another rises. What is after the king? You, Me, ones around us. After the king, the nation's roads may be safer, hotels and music programs will be safer knowing that there is no royal bully among the audiences, the rule of law can be more easily implemented. See, what has happened to the Supreme Court that the respectable judge Hari Pradhan started? Have any of our institutions survived to provide independent and efficient services to the populace? No. Because kings created servile institutes. Dictators in Kenya, Congo, Iraq have same mantra: that they are indispensable to the national unity.That once they are gone, the nation is going to be divided, fight is inevitable. But the truth is as long as these dictators rule, they rule like parasite,drinking away protoplasm of the nation, making nation poor. 235 years of Shah rule and what we got to show so that we should still prefer them? Nothing. A nation as fractured as before. A nation ranked among the least developed nations in the world, in the Asia and everywhere. Our passport is worthless. Our education is useless. Our production sector is worthless. There is not a single field of acadamic and industrial activities where we excel. And there is one thing common in these 235 years: we had different prime ministers, we had different systems, but the head of state was always the same person, same dynasty, and always had the same sirname. There is nothing wrong with constitutional assembly. Let's see what people want. Those who prefer monarchy to republic should embrace this opportunity to explain their position to the citizens of Nepal, who are now increasingly pursuaded by the agenda of republicans. If you live in Kathmandu, you may not be able to hear the warcry and see the determination of those who are fighting for republican communist state. By supporting the king, people are only, perhaps unwittingly, trying to make sure that this fight goes on forever. It is pipedream to think that Baburam etc will surrender their arm, one can wish, but it will never happen unless we go ruthlessly and kill thousands of those misled boys of rural Nepal (By the way , what the foreigners who supply arms to our rulers care about our people? Do they love our relatives who were misled to be Maoists or army? No. They mainly care about themselves.) Maoists now control the vastland and even their leaders can't call it off, without something to show to their determined recruits.Let's cut the deal with these dudes, may be savages, let's be determined and civilized, and let's be ready to rule our nation ourselves.We can do it. |
| allare | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 02:59 PM
Sparsh and et. al. I have said in my last post that i also want to be KING, but i can not due to the rule of being KING, so why should i support monarchy system? Is not this simple to say that monarchy is not good system in competent world? Anyway, if you guys think that my simple dream is big JOKE , then this JOKE is giving birth to many MAOIST. |
| bipin | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 05:45 PM
The Kingship is not an external force. It is an institution that evolves over time within a soci-economic and political boundary. Some have thousands of years of tradition and get intertwined within the culture. They earn respect of their subjects like in Thailand, Japan, and Spain. King Birendra was close to that category too. I am not a monarchist, but I do not buy the argument that there is a ground swelling opposition to the institution of monarchy in Nepal. At least not yet. The Maoists do have that ferver, but they have a totally different agenda --one party communist state. Giving them what they want is disasterous. Let them come with some compromises and be a part of the slow and messy process of governance known as democracy. As for the Monarchy, a referendum on this would be good for the nation. The Maoists must lay their arms first in front of an international body. The army should be a part of any intimidation. The election of CA would be fine too as long as it can be done fairly without any intimidation and abuse from any side. The current dynamics is such that the monarchy has to emerge as a force to make a difference in our political fate. A smart move would be to forge an alliance with the political parties in the coming days and restore the people's voice by removing these nominated representatives. Bush changed his mind about the UN. So can KG. Be smart. Politics should not be permanent. Some monarchies change through time and maintain their relevance --Japan, Thailand, Spain, UK, and the Netherlands. Historically, they mobilized resources and became the symbol of national pride and delivered wealth to its subjects. They minimized tribal conflicts and provided protection. They conquered lands to enhance their wealth and status. In the world history, there are numerous examples of such battles. The 235 years of the Shah dynasty and its effort of unification of Nepal is that example and you cannot change it. It is a part of the national culture, tradition, and heritage. The US and the Spanish/Mexican war and the loss of the lands to the US is a past history. You cannot reverse it. But, some monarchies become brutal and supressive, and the excessive poverty, exploitation, violence and misery then invite internal forces to unite and confront. The violent regime of the Shah of Iran met its fate. In such struggles, the outside force can also play a role and tip the balance. They can come and change the landscape too: Hitler, Saddam, and the Talibans are just some examples. Humanitarian reasons, like in Liberia, may also play a role in the change of regimes. Nepal has not got to that point. On the contrary, whether you like it or not, the international communities are united in opposing the violent means of the Maoists. The strong regional super power India is with the Nepali Monarch, not the Maoists. Under this circumstance, at least for now, the hint that there is some sort of a ground swell for a republican state is simply false. It may change down the road if the King keeps making blunders (replacing one panch after another). Having said that, in Nepal too, the monarchy needs to change through time. It did respond to that call and did so in 1990. The latest move of Oct 4th was a big setback -- removal of a elected PM. It should have never happened. But the situation in Nepal with Maoists at the doorstep, one has to be careful before thinking about removing the last line of defence --the King and the Army. There is no evidence at all of the people's desire to chage that threshold any time soon. Else, they would have sided with the parties and done that within a short period of time. Yes, the King is taking advantage of this ambivalence. I agree he needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Peace! |
| bipin | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 05:51 PM
Typo: I meant: The army should NOT be a part of any intimidation. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 07:43 PM
>The Kingship is not an external force. What I meant in the last posting is that the kingship is an external force to democracy. It is not an external force in terms of its nationality, but it is alien to the elected bodies of Nepal. Even in its benevolence, it is like Chinese benevolence in Tibet. With 610 million rupees in household expenses pilfered away from national coffer each year, plus unlimited perks, one is bound to speak nicely with his subjects and behave gentlemanly like King Gyanendra does, but that doesn't justify the existence of monarchy, nor does it denote people's desire to keep the institution. I believe people are tired of monarchy's dissipating life and its vague claim of being uniting force of Nepal. > but I do not buy the argument that there > is a ground swelling opposition to the > institution of monarchy in Nepal. At >least not yet. Bipin, you are free to have your belief,and I respect that. But how do we know there is not groundswelling opposition against monarchy? What all republicans are asking is a fair chance to determine this,i.e. CA, and that's where monarchists are chickening out from. Himal once did a popularity survey when Birendra was the king. The support for palace at the time was less than ten percent. I believe it was less than five percent, but I don't remember the exact number. This was a publicly published result then. -- I agree with the rest of what you said. I am not for appeasing Maoists but I don't think allowing CA is tantamount to appeasing them. Anyway, wasn't that exactly what Tribhuvan announced long ago to give to Nepali citizens to create 'ganatantrik' constitution? I know the Maoists are a danger to the democracy. But how are we going to deal with them? Will we fight against them all our life? Will we bequeath this war to our kids? Will we be treating mine-blown kids in our neighborhoods all our life? For saving this worthless system of monarcy? If what the Maoists are publicly claiming is true, i.e. they want CA before they lay down arm, then who is stopping it from happening? The king, right? So, onus is one the king to solve the problem, and it is due to his mad dash to do away with all the vestiges of democratic Nepal that people's desire to resist these fanatics have evaporated, and it is due to his obduracy to rule alone [Eklai Hidne Rahar was the famous title of Himal after that incidence] that the nation has been divided when it had to be united to fight the menace of terrorism. Remember the chuckle of Prajwal Shamsher when the legitimate governments were forced to ask for the help of RNA? They were so happy then. These retards were so anxious to get the helm of the nation at their hand and rule the nation: thinking that they would crush the extremists handily and never give the helm back to people. Should we now categorically follow them? Should we now fight so that these same leeches can suck the blood of our nation and democracy in future too? Bipinji, that is what bothers me when I think about monarchy of present day Nepal. Let's not forget that ability to fight against maoists alone doesn't entitle one to remain in power. We all know about the fate of Alberto Fujimori, don't we? |
| sparsha | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 09:44 PM
Biswoji, I found your ideas on monarchy too radical and one-sided. I perceived the arguments as more subjective than objective. So, your argument failed to convince me for "no king" position. You want monarchy to go. That's fine. I have no problem with that. You own your thought. But when you come to a public platform such as this "sajha" and advocate something, such advocacy not just merely reflects your thought but also attempts to establish your arguments as if valid ones. I agree to the extent that monarchy was not pro-people or pro-nation all the time, is not transparent, needs a severe overhaul or perhaps even elimination but I just can't buy the arguments, which blame the institution for every screwed-up thing. You and I and our ancestors also share the blame. Why are you trying to shift the blame to others and come yourself clean? Please note, I am not talking about blaming the victim or that Stockholm syndrome stuff. The monarchy certainly is a contributory force to the poor state of our nation but is not the only one responsible. Since you blame no one else but the palace for all the bad things and even that in absolute term, I found your position more subjective than objective. Your arguments, probably, would have convinced me to your position, had you set the arguments in relative term. But, it may not matter to you whether I agree with you or not. And that's fine. I am not trying to discredit you. I am merely expressing how I felt about your arguments. Allare, "I have said in my last post that i also want to be KING, but i can not due to the rule of being KING" Prove you're worthy of being a king. PN Shah was not the only King ever existed. Coming here in sajha and wishing to be a king won't do anything. I am neither joking nor took you wish as a joke. Seriously, prove your worthiness first, then complain. BTW, what do you want to be a King for? May I ask? |
| Prem Charo | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 10:03 PM
What kind of shot did he get? MM shot?? DPT, BCG..what??????;O |
| Biswo | Posted
on 05-Sep-03 10:53 PM
Sparshaji, If our ancestors also are apportioned blame for the laggardness of Nepal, fine. But extending your logic, people should never have ousted Marcos, and Chauchesku. Afterall, people were also to be blamed for their crime. Why should only the dictator be ousted? Why blame royal palace? In my opinion, because the buck stops at the royal palace. When we talk about Maoist atrocities, we blame ,rightfully, the Maoists,don't we? Imagine blaming the teacher of Lamjung who was killed by Maoists for what was done to him. |
| bipin | Posted
on 06-Sep-03 12:51 AM
"What I meant in the last posting is that the kingship is an external force to democracy" An "active monarchy" is not compatible with democracy. A constitutional monarchy can coexist with democracy. There are many examples. The past 12 years is our own example. "With 610 million rupees in household expenses pilfered away from national coffer each year, plus unlimited perks, one is bound to speak nicely with his subjects and behave gentlemanly like King Gyanendra does, but that doesn't justify the existence of monarchy, " Once BP said that the monarchy is all about ceremonial extravaganza. If you chose to have this institution, then you cannot nickel and dime. The Pope cannot run his affair and be a Pope living in an apartment going around giving his sermen taking a public bus transportation. His private planes and bulletproof vehicles my be amusing to you and me, but millions of catholics prefer to look beyond them. Don't get me wrong, they all have to prove their worth. In Nepal too, the 235 years old institution is engrained in the culture, and it is strong and vital. You just cannot wish'm away. Even in a democratic society, there are so many institutions that people may find wasteful and worthless and are very hard to get rid of. Don't be offended, why him and not me is not just a valid argument. Bush did not have to take the fighter plane to go onboard a carrier to give his "the war is over" speech. But he did. The democratic governments of the past in Nepal used to have 25% of its MPs on the cabinet. They gave themselves dutyfree Pazeros and many other perks. The monarchy's 235 years old history cannot be just washed away. trust me, it is not that easy. The Manu Smriti in our society can be traced for a lot of our social ills, but it still is kicking and alive after 2/3 thousand years. I will give you this however. The Nepali monarchy must prove its worth especially in the coming days by making some prudent decisions. The Maoists fought the democratic governments during the last 7 years. Amidst chaos, he tried to step in and solve the problem, and now it's time to realize that he cannot solve it alone. The sooner he realizes it the better it is for everyone. "Bipin, you are free to have your belief,and I respect that. But how do we know there is not groundswelling opposition against monarchy? What all republicans are asking is a fair chance to determine this,i.e. CA, and that's where monarchists are chickening out from." The roundswell would have swept the streets of Kathmandu by now. It has not. Else, 300 or so newspaper would have done it a long time ago. I don't read about the call for republican state in these papers. The 60,000 professionals and civil society were not demanding republican state. The slogan for peace is not to be confused with the demand for a republican state. "Himal once did a popularity survey when Birendra was the king. The support for palace at the time was less than ten percent. I believe it was less than five percent, but I don't remember the exact number. This was a publicly published result then." Since you brought it up, the poll is dynamics. The more recent one (by Himal) gave the Maoists only about 20%. The King was ahead of everyone else. The horrible unscientific internet polls do not reflect any ground swelling for a republican ferver either. On the contrary, the King scores pretty well on many aspects of questions against everyone else. "Shamsher when the legitimate governments were forced to ask for the help of RNA? They were so happy then. These retards were so anxious to get the helm of the nation at their hand and rule the nation: thinking that they would crush the extremists handily and never give the helm back to people" Everyone had an illusion that they could crush the rebellion. Girija ousted Bhattarai for the same reason. Deuba got rid of Girija for the same reason. The King declared Deuba an incompetent fellow and stepped forward to solve the problem. Thapa replaced Chand dreaming to repeat his magic. The parties know it better by now, and so they are avoiding it all together. Peace talk is the only solution. Yes, I agree with that the helm should be back to the people, but the people on the other hand do not seem to mind to give the helm to whomever that is capable of solving the problem. That's why they even tolerated a coupld of Pancha rounds. In the Us too, the liberty is shelved (to some extent) for the sake of law and order (i.e., safety). "Should we now categorically follow them? Should we now fight so that these same leeches can suck the blood of our nation and democracy in future too? Bipinji, that is what bothers me when I think about monarchy of present day Nepal. Let's not forget that ability to fight against maoists alone doesn't entitle one to remain in power. We all know about the fate of Alberto Fujimori, don't we? " No, we should not follow them. Letting them suck our blood? Hell no!. Trust me, there are many like you and me who will fight to restore democracy ( a refined one, if I might add, not the kind that the political parties are trying to rerstore). The pandora's box is already open. No one can put the genie back in the bottle. But, the biggest threat to democracy, you may not agree with me, is the Maoists insurgency. They are not fighting to restore democracy or to refine it. They want a wholesae change. The question whether or not we should fight them for ever can only be answered by asking yourselves a few questions: Do you believe the Maoists are dangerous and are single minded about establishing their brand of one-party communist state? In their 75-point agenda, do you see any hidden agenda? When your read about Pranchand and his rhetoric, do you find him ominous? When they defend the Khem Rouge how do you feel? Why do you think that the entire international communities (form Tokyo to DC) are NOT behind the Maoists. On the contrary, the three powers are supporting the King (not for his undemocratic moves) and even have asked the parties to cool off. The RNA and the King need to go through a lot of reforms and so an unified voice between the King and the political parties is the only recourse at least for now. Peace! |
| 8-) | Posted
on 06-Sep-03 10:48 AM
Nepe, As you have repeatedly prayed the web master to remove my cartoon of Biswo and was very proud in praising yourself for that, I think it was a childish action on your part. We from Nepal who think ourselves as little educated should not level ourselves so cheaply. I have made my point about Biswos man gadanta history, abusive behavior and have achieved that goal. It is not important for me that the cartoon was removed by your request (?). Do you think that it is a democratic action not to tolerate a cartoon? If a criticism in a form of a cartoon is not acceptable to you how can you tolerate abusive and offensive behavior and accept that as a part of the norm? What was wrong in the cartoon? FYI BU THYA CHA means a scarecrow in Newari it is not at all abusive in any way. This was a popular term used by Ganesh Man Singh for CPNUML. I tried to use the same to enhance Biswos personality. But the way this thread is going on I wanted to disengage myself from this thread. I do not want to thrash you or to praise you. "Your freedom ends where my nose begins." The way GPK, Makune and others ruled the country for thirteen years in other words looted the country, sold to outside forces and are responsible for disturbances that brought the country total chaos and instability. Shouldnt we learn form history? It is not what you said it is how you said leaves the mark. The way Biswo has expressed his resentment and you started bullying in my opinion it is plain shoddy. We as educated should restrain ourselves to go "insane". I can only pray that god should give us light and enhance our thinking ability which will make Nepal a prosperous country where peace and friendship prevail. When we could not control the so called leaders to behave properly then how you can think that only criticizing, abusing or calling names to the king and others will solve our problem? Do you think that booth capturing, spreading communal hatred, mafia type rule, trying to disintegrate the nation, develop communal hatred among the Nepalese will any way be justified as democracy? When I addressed the support for the king, who I believe symbolizes the national unity; even existence of Nepal, he must prove himself to be worthy son of Nepal Ama and is being blamed unreasonably for the present situation. Even in this precarious condition if he does not take a "firm-hand" and show his ability and courage to defend the people and the nation than who do you think is capable of handling the ship, which is in fire caught in hurricane? Why we justify all the wrong doings, criminal acts of the past thirteen years, encourage communal hatred and insurgency is beyond any justification. It shivers me to think that the educated "elites" like sajha-elites who cannot produce a solution rather engage in "khita-nani", name-calling, bullying and take pride in removing a cartoon, how the uneducated Nepalese mass can or will behave to resolve a conflict and preserve democracy? |
| sparsha | Posted
on 06-Sep-03 11:43 AM
"But extending your logic, people should never have ousted Marcos, and Chauchesku. Afterall, people were also to be blamed for their crime. Why should only the dictator be ousted?" Biswoji, I don't think we are talking about the same thing in the same sense. You are blaming the royal palace for everything, yes everything. This everything argument is just too much for to accept. Yes people are also to be blamed. Why not? Why are there very few sahids we celebrate? It takes guts to stand up for what you believe in-regardless of the situation. Not all people can do that. So, most of the cowards (including myself) shout a slogan and shift the blame for somebody else. Not all people can be ousted. Who is going to oust all the people? Besides, not all people participate in equal extent for the destruction. Even in Maoist groups, I don't believe all are equally violent or blood thirsty. Dictators are ousted because they run the operation. As a source, they are targeted. But they don't run the game on their own. A network is needed to run any game. The network is supported by a large group of people. I blame those people as well (I could be one of them). Not just the person who pulls the trigger is guilty. You know how accomplices are regarded in a crime, don't you? Why blame royal palace? In my opinion, because the buck stops at the royal palace." Who provides the buck that stops at Royal palace? When we talk about Maoist atrocities, we blame ,rightfully, the Maoists,don't we? Imagine blaming the teacher of Lamjung who was killed by Maoists for what was done to him. " No Biswoji, we are not only blaming the Maoists. We are going beyond that. We are blaming the system that created the Maoists. As for the lamjunge teacher, a senseless unprovoked violence needs to be countered. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 06-Sep-03 01:02 PM
Bipin, Apparently, there are kings who live without pomps and circumstances. Norway and Denmark are cited as such. I read in Time about the king of Norway who has to run with commoners to catch a bus, and in one newspaper(I forgot the name) about Dennish royal family, where the 'king' is called 'bicycle king', for his middle-class life. Also I was not talking about internet poll of Himal. Himal's poll that I am talking about was done with ORG Marg, and was a scientific one, while the poll you are talking about is an internet poll, with basically no credibility. Now, let me ask a question to you: what is the solution of this problem, without letting more bloodshed in Nepal? Tell me how can you have both the peace and the king?How many more people are we ready to kill to save monarchy if Maoists keep on saying that they will not surrender unless they have a fair chance to participate in an election that allows people to chose whether to keep or overthrow monarchy? Do I believe Maoists? Hell, no. I think they are cruel bunches, they are not for democracy, they will fight against parliamentarian parties once they defeat the army etc etc., and that they are evil force. But this question dogs me: how better is the force that killed 19 Maoists during Doramba(Ramechhap) in a fake counterattack than the force that killed a healthworker woman ,after mutilating her breasts and nails, for spying? Two days ago, a group of security force jawans went to Tandi Bajaar and Sauraha Chouk, and fired randomly in the air. People seem to be completely terrorized. How good is this force that terrorizes the society that way? People here claim RNA has a human right cell and is trying to improve. That is a nice thing. But just published report, by NHRC committee which by the way consists not of left-wingers but royalist Nayan Bahadur Swaar as president( and non-leftist journalist like Kanak Dixit served in the investigation team), says RNA killed them in cold blood. It was yesterday's news. I don't see any major difference between Maoists'not having human right cell and RNA's having human right cell if all it do is to rubberstamp what RNA leadership says. Personally, I will be satisfied if there is a "nonmandatory" poll that allows people to choose whether they like the institute of monarchy or they want to get rid of it. I just can't believe the claim that the king is popular. He is not. There *is* a groundswell of revulsion against him. I was in Nepal, but I never went to participate in the protests, but that doesn't mean I supported the king. People are 'ambivalent' about the parties, they remember the corrupt past of the majority of central committee leadership of political parties, but people absolutely don't like the present king and his heir apparent, and most of all,they want our electoral system back so that they can choose their representatives again.That's it. |
| bipin | Posted
on 06-Sep-03 01:53 PM
"Apparently, there are kings who live without pomps and circumstances. Norway and Denmark are cited as such. I read in Time about the king of Norway who has to run with commoners to catch a bus, and in one newspaper(I forgot the name) about Dennish royal family, where the 'king' is called 'bicycle king', for his middle-class life. " I agree. And there are those like in Spain, Japan, Tahiland, and the UK. That is not the point I was making. "Also I was not talking about internet poll of Himal. Himal's poll that I am talking about was done with ORG Marg, and was a scientific one, while the poll you are talking about is an internet poll, with basically no credibility." I was not either. I was referring to the Himal/Khabar Patrika one that was done using a nationally conducted random sample, just a few months ago. As for the notorious Internet surveys, they are just like you and me venting their frustration and it does not seem to be for the republican cause. "Do I believe Maoists? Hell, no. I think they are cruel bunches, they are not for democracy, they will fight against parliamentarian parties once they defeat the army etc etc., and that they are evil force." This is where we can converge and take it as a starting point. If we begin with this, then people like you and I can have a conversation towards finding a set of solutions. We must then evaluate the respective pros and cons of the action we support. If we tie the RNA hand too much (not that I am advocating HR violations) the likely outcome would be what you just described. Is that what we want to have happened to our democracy and the future of the country? On the other hand, if we close our eyes to the RNA's atrocities the greater fear would be the radicalization of the army like in the central american countries. You need to weigh the probabilities between the two likely outcome and express your preference for policies to minimize, if possible, both. This is like getting caught between the rock and the hard place. I am not willing to let the Maoists over run the country, but I hate to see the army turn into a military junta. Solution: a middle road; don't trash the last line of defence-- the army, but at the same time put pressure on the King to get rid of his Panchas to come up with a political coilition-type solution. Take advantage of the international goodwill that is out there who do not want to see the country become a one-party communist regime against the will of the people. Pessure the concerned parties to negotiate. Once the paties are pushed to the table, they will come to a compromise, and we all have to live with it. Let them figure out what it is that they want: referendum, CA, and the process. They (both parties) will not come to the table if we continue to vilify the army (unfairly) and make them weak by taking away their ability to fight or we fail to put pressure on the King to retreat to promote the other democratoic forces. |
| bipin | Posted
on 06-Sep-03 08:18 PM
Further, look at some of these items on the Maoists' 75-point agenda and mull over them. It is clear from their manifesto that they want to wage class warfare, caste warfare, and form a united revolutionary Soviet Federation in South Asia by waging "war" against India and anything that is foreign to start revolution in all countries. (Do you think India would sit quietly and watch such a rogue and hostile nation in the north.) Their economic policy is outrageously medieval and they want to make the existing properties rights and titles null and void. They guarantee job guarantee (good luck!) and every thing of course is free. The most menacing items are their intention to banish counter-revolutionary elements from politics (for awhile, OK what a relief!) (like in China's revoltion) and make their party chairman (communist) the commander in chief of the people's army. Wake up folks! 1 The principal purpose of the new people's congress is to institutionalize a people's republic. The fundamental tenets of the new people's republic are to end all forms of exploitation by national capitalists, imperialists and expansionists in the leadership, the unity of labour and peasants, and the enforcement of the dominance of people's rule over class enemies 2...reactionaries who played the role of counter-revolutionaries and acted against the interest of the nation and the people shall be deprived of all political rights for a certain period& 3 All laws, orders and judicial systems of the old reactionary rule shall be repealed and terminated 4 A united people's military force shall be formed with the participation of the main force, subsidiary local force and militia to dismantle the old reactionaries' rule and to keep the people's rule safe. The supreme commander of the people's military shall be the president of the central committee of the communist party& 5 Land expropriated from feudal and capitalist bureaucrats shall be distributed to local farmers without any discrimination and such land will be their private property& 6 All documents pertaining to land loans, ownership and transactions shall be declared null and void until land reforms come into force and the people's government issues new land deeds& 7 freeing national industries from the shackles of Indian monopoly to achieve rapid economic development& 8 The monopoly by the Indians of the trade sector shall be terminated& 9 Financial institutions will be free to carry out lending transactions in rural areas but the interest rate will be controlled 10 priority shall be given to people's military and people's forum for dancing&a ban shall be made on vulgar literature and films. 11 The publication of factual newspapers will be encouraged& 12 If there is more than one caste in an autonomous region, there shall be proportional representation of each caste 13 A strong relation shall be extended with different revolutionary groups and national freedom movements that are fighting against Indian expansionism, the main external enemy within South Asia. And, an effort shall be made to form a South Asian Soviet Federation with revolution in all countries. 14. free education, free health, and guaranteed employment and job. 15. The imperialists' financial intervention caused by ngos and ingos shall be ended& For details see: http://www.nepalnews.com.np/ntimes/issue142/nation_2.htm |
| Biswo | Posted
on 07-Sep-03 07:35 AM
Bipin One can't rationalize the existence of monarchy just by showing the evilness of Maoists. I have never had any doubt about the iniquity of Maoists. They are what they are. Even people in the region under their control told me this. But they also implied that they are more unhappy about RNA's conducts.We all know about Maoists and their principle. But if people in general have problem accepting them,they have even more problem in accepting police/army with king Gyanendra at the top. Nepal Police has deserted posts in these days like a defeated force. People from Makawanpur/Chitwan area told me that now two police posts of Manahari and Newarpani are deserted. If anyone is in a position to confirm these news, please kindly do that for me. People (pro-government,btw) wrote me about this from Chitwan. It seems there should now be a new sense of urgency for those of us who want the supremacy of people to be inviolated, and the democracy to bethe system of governance. It is not by embracing the monarchy that we can defeat another evil force: at least not until the monarchy shows that it is really sorry about its ugly past, and it is really going to deliver only good thing in the future. |
| sewak | Posted
on 07-Sep-03 07:36 AM
What about all the mess created by NC, UML and other parties in the last 12 yrs after the democracy? I think we are also equally responsible for the present mess since we elected those suckers. Now the same butchers are bitching and we are again listening to them as if they are innocent. If I am not mistaken, Maoist problem surfaced because of their mishandling. Just a thought...... |
| bipin | Posted
on 07-Sep-03 10:19 AM
"One can't rationalize the existence of monarchy just by showing the evilness of Maoists." I think we are going in a circle. You have your conversation and I have my conversation with people and we are reading things differently. There is nothing wrong with it. But, that's what we did to bring democracy in 1990 by showing the evilness of Panchayat Raj. We showed evilness of all the Panchas to support Gurija, Bhattarai, and Ganeshman--- our much suffered struggling Netas . And we went for a multiparty system, but it turned out to be less than perfect, and we need to fix it. My point is, it is all about choices, and there is no such thing as being in a perfect state. Second best is the rule not the exception. Democracy is messy and hard to govern but there is nothing better than that, so we settle with this. If there were, you and I would be studying or (whatever we are doing) in Northe Korea not in this evil (to the Maoists) US of A. I don't buy that the Maoists' regime will be any better and I presented my reservation ... a big time reservation that is. Again, we can agree to disagree. To me, being a citizen of a Soviet Federation of all the violent groups in the South Asia is not acceptable, especially in the form of a rogue state at war with India constantly. I even don't know what my rights are under their regimes and sure I don't want that to be decided by a peopl'e court. I don't want to be a part of their social engineering experiment. I don't believe in a single party system without any opposition. We just fought to uproot that and I am not willing to go back to that again. Hence I have my priority. That is, I prefer a strong RNA that values human rights and a alliance between the King and the political leadership to defeat this menace for a better Nepal and for a better form of a democratic system, where even the non-violent Maoists are allowed to play a role under a fair election system. The CA elections or a referendum do decide the fate of Monarchy is fine too, as I said, but under the condition that the Maoists surrender their arms and that the army stay in the barracks. Peace! |
| nepalipanda | Posted
on 07-Sep-03 03:43 PM
BiswoJi: "It seems there should now be a new sense of urgency for those of us who want the supremacy of people to be inviolated, and the democracy to bethe system of governance. It is not by embracing the monarchy that we can defeat another evil force: at least not until the monarchy shows that it is really sorry about its ugly past, and it is really going to deliver only good thing in the future." I agree with your call for urgency, but not by caving in to these violent group or by trashing the RNA constantly or by being critical of the monarchy. If the Western allies had not forged an alliance with the evil Stalinist's soviet, they would not have been able to defeat a bigger evil --Hitler. Even Mao fought the enemy (Japanese) by forging its alliance with the Chang-Cai Shehk (sp?). On one hand you seem to be fearful of the Maoists and the uncertainties they might bring by agreeing to what was presented above about the Maoists and their agenda. Then immediately you turn around and begin trashing RNA and the King. The RNA is not the problem here. The Maoists are. The State must defend the interests of the country. (Please, don't give me examples of how many innocent people are killed by the RNA. I also have tons of example how the Maoists have used people as human shields and all the child recruitment incidents and the hacking of the innocent old people just because their sons were in the police and the army. ) Even if the King brings the much hated Panchayat (I hope he does not), how would that be worse than the Maoists' one party communist "rogue" regime filled with a litany of revolutionary prescriptions? As for you talking to this person and that person in Nepal, I have a tons of stories about the bloody Maoists killing all sorts of people left and right. You also say that the police are fleeing. Well, let's hope that the army and the security force bring some balance here. I may not agree with the CA nor the referendum. Much powerful LTTE in Sri Lanka had to compromise to bring peace, let the Maoists do the same. Don't cave in so easily. Wthin the current constitution, a solution may be found, unless their objective is to create a revolutionary state in that part of world. They are the ones who broke away twice from the peace talk -- once under the democratic regime and next under the King's regime. If the parties start to demand CA or referendum, then we need to think about it. Until then: go RNA! |
| garibjanata | Posted
on 07-Sep-03 07:23 PM
Dear Biswo, Somewhere in this thread you have mentioned that Bijaya Raj Pandit is a forefather of the Dixits which is absolutely incorrect. Bijaya Raj's surname was not Bijaya Raj Dixit, but Bijaya Raj Pandey.Before the Kot massacre, pandey was just another pujakhothe who frequented the Hanuman dhoka Palace,but the bloodbath changed his hereditary destiny. Janga Bahadur who had now become Shree Teen Jang bestowed him the title of - Bada Guruju( Royal Preceptor). Till recently Bijaya Raj's great-great grandson Keshari raj was the Bada Guruju. As for the Dixit family,they looted Madan Shumsher and Jagdamba's property for whom they worked. |
| Garibjanata | Posted
on 07-Sep-03 07:25 PM
ear Biswo, Somewhere in this thread you have mentioned that Bijaya Raj Pandit is a forefather of the Dixits which is absolutely incorrect. Bijaya Raj's surname was not Bijaya Raj Dixit, but Bijaya Raj Pandey.Before the Kot massacre, pandey was just another pujakhothe who frequented the Hanuman dhoka Palace,but the bloodbath changed his destiny. Janga Bahadur who had now become Shree Teen Jang bestowed him the hereditary title of - Bada Guruju( Royal Preceptor). Till recently Bijaya Raj's great-great grandson Keshari raj was the Bada Guruju. As for the Dixit family,they looted Madan Shumsher and Jagdamba's property for whom they worked. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 07-Sep-03 08:32 PM
Garibjanata, I welcome your correction, however, I will welcome it more if you supply it with more evidence. What I read about Bijay Raj Pandit was that he was given this 'Dixit' upadhi by pundits of Kashi after he performed a huge , highly extravagant Yagya. It was an information I read in a book written definitely by some reliable writer, probably Babu Ram Acharya. Pandeys were close to Raja/Ranas. For example, the headmaster of Durbar Highschool was known for his steadfast service to Ranas, and he was a Pandey[Rudra Raj?]. But Pandey are Pandey, not Dixit. Again, I will welcome your correction more if it is supplied with something that I can rely more on. -- Bipin, I think we didn't ask for democracy in 90s just by saying Panchayat was evil. We said multiparty democracy was the best thing available, and we needed that. We had that before, it was hijacked by one king, and in those days when all the world was embracing it, we too wanted it. Unlike 'anticipated' Maoists regime, Panchayat was an incumbent evil force. Now, monarchy is not like the democracy of 2046. Monarchy is irreconciliable, incorrigible, and is still obdurately sticking to its own abstruse maze of arguments that often try to prove that a direct monarchy[they say it 'constructive] is needed to our country.It is not even an alternative to 'anticipated' Maoist rule. I share your abhorrence of Maoists, but there are other ways to tame them. Military solution only to this problem is going to be very difficult at this stage. [Give me a number: how many people are you willing to kill to save monarchy?] One of the ways to solve this problem is to maintain status quo for a few years. Let them govern some of the places that they have conquered.We hold on to our places. When there is storm in the ocean, the best bet a boatman has is to drop the anchor and wait for the storm to pass by. That is what democrats in Nepal can do rightnow.The Maoist are bound to fail as a ruler. I believe in democracy and I am sure Maoists are going to fail to win the hearts and minds of the people they rule. I have seen China, heard the sorry stories of people there first hand and I absolutely believe that this is going to happen. These dictatorial regimes implode from within. The same people who are given dose of roseate dream of society full of prosperity and equity will soon find how empty those dreams were and turn against the Maoist leaders. Then the Maoists leaders will start fighting with each other and finish like the Khmer Rouge. So, challenge to democratic forces in Nepal is to establish that we will be able to outdo the Maoists who are ruling their area of influence, that we should prove that we can do better. We need to be more crafty when fighting with enemies like Maoists. But carrying a wayward king in our shoulders seems like sprinting with a corpse on the back. We are in the juncture of our history where we need to decide coolheadedly and figure out what is good for us and our progeny. Monarchy has proven that it is not happy with the people's force running the state. It wants its pawns to run the government, not people. And so it is not worthy of being kept in constitutional altar with reverence. Personally, I like the way Gyanendra talk, I guess if they give me 610 million annually to spend for my household, I too may be able to do so, but I am sure that 'nice talk' is not enough to give him the job permanently. The kings have only talked. They talked about 'maato suhaaudo system', 'asiali maapdanda', 'adharbhut abasyakata' etc. and we were listening. Isn't it time that they listen to what people are saying?(i.e. CA) |
| bipin | Posted
on 07-Sep-03 10:29 PM
Biswo: "Now, monarchy is not like the democracy of 2046. Monarchy is irreconciliable, incorrigible, and is still obdurately sticking to its own abstruse maze of arguments that often try to prove that a direct monarchy[they say it 'constructive] is needed to our country.It is not even an alternative to 'anticipated' Maoist rule." Don't ask me for a proof, because you don't have it either. There is no comparison between the Soviet Federation of the revolutionary government and the King's rule, constructive or otherwise. Else the people, the parties, the civil society and the Indian factor would have thrown the King out a long time ago in favor of the Maoists. By the way, I do not support any form of monarchy which is not constitutional. "I share your abhorrence of Maoists, but there are other ways to tame them." I am glad that there is a common point here, but I am afraid that we are like the north and the south pole when it comes to a solution. You propose to give more than half the Nepali territory to them in an anticipation that they would disintegrate like the Khmer Rouge and decide to join back to the union. I propse to make the army stronger so that an unified voice of the King and the democratic forces can put pressure on the rebels to come back to the table for a negotiated settlement. "but there are other ways to tame them. Military solution only to this problem is going to be very difficult at this stage. [Give me a number: how many people are you willing to kill to save monarchy?]" Put differently: Or to stop a Communist state, I am ready to beef up the army, equip them, and support them to stop or neutralize the Maoists, because what you are proposing as a solution: -- "Then the Maoists leaders will start fighting with each other and finish like the Khmer Rouge." --is far more dangerous and will cost many many lives. I do not believe that the Khmer Rouge incident was just a result of a bad press as Mr. Bhattarai said in an interview. "So, challenge to democratic forces in Nepal is to establish that we will be able to outdo the Maoists who are ruling their area of influence, that we should prove that we can do better. We need to be more crafty when fighting with enemies like Maoists." The Gandhibad may have worked with the British during those times, but it will not work with the Maoists. Stalin and Mao killed millions for their failed ideology. The Khmer Rouge is more recent. Hitller had to be confronted accordingly. I am not willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of Nepali lives by making them a victim of their Khmer Rouge type regime. The democratic force could not even muster more than a few hundred demonstrators to go against the regressive force, how could you expect them to fight the battle-hardened cadres of the Maoists? They need the army, and they need support from you and me. Human rights violation must be controlled and monitored. I do want to challenge the parties to reform to be clean, democratic, transparent, caring, farsighted, and inclusive. The army is the only hope to provide them with that opportunity. I would rather focus on building that pressure to build trust and cooperation. "One of the ways to solve this problem is to maintain status quo for a few years. Let them govern some of the places that they have conquered." Your abhorrence for the King and the army is so strong that you are willing to let millions of Nepali suffer and be victim of the Nepali Khmer Rouge? And that you are willing to break up Nepal? Don't you think it will be better to invite the UN instead? Who do you think is going to propose this? A nation within a nation? Don't you think a call for a separate Teraoi nation will emerge? You are talking this completely outside the current political realm. You expect the Indian and the western countries (UK and USA) to just watch this appeasement and bnadfnad? Where have you seen such a solution worked out, where you give in to the rebels in a hope that they would fail running their territory and decide to come back to the original territory? How many years do we wait, before they come back? The Union army in the US fought the seccessionists and sacrificed about 1 million lives to preserve the Union. There were attrocities on both sides, but the Lincoln never lost sight of the big picture. Making the army weak and removing them and the King at this juncture is suicidal for the democratic forces. This, to me, is the big picture. Peace! |
| karmapa | Posted
on 08-Sep-03 03:31 AM
As the sons and daughters of Gorkhalis, we are forever fighting yesterday's battles. This is what we were taught in school too: 'Hati hoina dati ladne Nepali ko bani hunchha.' And today they are fighting all across the length and breadth of Nepal...and on the streets. How will the country progress if we haven't shed the ghosts of yesteryears behind? The palace shoulda been tamed once and for all at the time multiparty democracy was reinstated (in the early nineties) by bringing the RNA under the purview of the government. That was not done - a missed opportunity. And this, too me, is the political parties' undoing today. When Sher Bahadur Deuba was fired from his PM post...that marked the turning point. The palace that had until then been the backseat driver suddenly assumed the drivers seat! How can you have democracy without the Army under the firm control of the people-elected government? It just doesnt work. Even in UK and Thailand - both monarchies - the governments control the armies...with purely ceremonial roles assigned to the Kings and Queens and other members of the royal families. I laugh when people say we have democracy in Nepal. I don't know what the hell they are talking about. They tried to export their naïve democracy to Bhutan&and you can see the results in the UNHCR refugee camps in eastern Nepal. So much for democracy! Some Artha Beed writes Democracy=Plurality in this week's elitist Nepali Times, which caters mainly to the ex-pat community, and I see neither, no matter where I look. For instance, the mainstream political space traditionally super-dominated by the BCNs (brahmins, chhetris and newars in that order) is today even much less inclusive than it was during worst periods of the Panchayat era. Not to be outdone, civil society, whose responsibility it is to check and balance the government, among others, and strengthen the institution of democracy, mirrors the flawed composition and structure of the government and resembles it more and more. Among the intellectuals, what liberal space there was, is today dominated by what I call the profiteering liberals: the NGOs, INGOs, the Dixits and their cronies, etc. etc. And yes oh yes, the masks of the political parties fell off when Lokendra Bahadur was sacked, for it confirmed my suspicion that the major political parties in spite of their democratic rhetoric still continue to look up to the palace for pitiable morsels of legitimacy or/and power, which is ironic. After Lokendra Chand was let go, that Surya Bahadur Thapa, Pashupati Samsher Rana and the Mandal of Sadhvana party of the country staked their claims to the next Prime Ministership unilaterally (without consultations with their respective parties) is really the nadir of democracy: the very people who spout democracy are the first to abandon it when the race to be the next PM is on. These very opponents of regression regressed beyond redemption then. No prize for guessing why the UML made the U-turn. Well now here we come to a three-way race between the Tweedeldum (the Parties) and the Tweedeldee (the Palace) and the Tweedeldoo (the Maoists). The Palace has the upper-most hand. Post 9/11, geopolitical force and foreign interests, like I mentioned above, favor neither the toothless political parties nor the violent Maoists. Foreign powers only seek to deal with power&and the power has never left the Palace. Like always&the people are the real losers no matter who represents them or claims to represent them. Why cant the government of Nepal govern? Well because they themselves are being governed? Nepal is not governed from within but increasingly from outside. So much for the Nepal's boast of never having been colonized. |
| allare | Posted
on 08-Sep-03 05:19 AM
Sparsh wrote [Prove you're worthy of being a king. PN Shah was not the only King ever existed. Coming here in sajha and wishing to be a king won't do anything. I am neither joking nor took you wish as a joke. Seriously, prove your worthiness first, then complain. BTW, what do you want to be a King for? May I ask? ] Sorry sparsh for coming here late and bugging(if you feel like that) you again. You asked me the expected question and i am happy. I think, in my second post in this thread, I have asked, how can one qualify for King? I am asking again, how can one prove worthy of being King? Did GBBS prove the worthy of being King? Is Paras proving his worthy of being future king? If yes, then i would highly appriciate that to read from you. I know that, coming here in Sajha and wishing to be a King wont do anything, thats why thousands of Maoist got birth. If you intellectual people do not listen in some kind of this open forum, then you should also sugget some alternative way. I am seriously asking again, what is the requirements to be KING and how should one prove that. Given the scenario that, if some one prove according to your definition, will current political structure of Nepal will allow him to be KING ? Just to reply you as you are asking,I want to be KING to end the KINGship, and apoint president by some rules and regulation and not just merely by being born in royal palace. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 08-Sep-03 07:14 PM
>There is no comparison between > the Soviet Federation of the revolutionary >government and the King's rule, constructive >or otherwise Constructive and 'otherwise'? That is a pretty strong statement. And why not? How do you compare the rule of the cruel widower of Qing dynasty, Cixi, with the communist rule of Hu Jintao? I also don't see how profligate kings of former India like the king of Junagarh who married off his dog in an extravagant ceremony while his citizens suffered from draught necessarily are better than the Castro regime in Cuba. >I am ready to beef up the army, >equip them, and support them to > stop or neutralize the Maoists, And how are you going to do that? Let's not forget in Colombia, even with the billions of help from USA, (former) president Andres Pastrana had to strike a deal with the FARC, essentially giving them about fourty percent of Colombia [of course, for the time being]. We don't have enough helicopters to ferry reinforcements. And of what use are helicopters anyway? The police officers I told to have been indifferent towards the hullaballoo sorrounding it. "It takes six months for a helicopter to arrive here, and that too does not look like a brand new." One quipped."Just tell me when was the last time police were shipped to battle field using helicopter (during battle time)? Helicopters are used just to transport the VIPs to do postcarnage inspection." Frankly, the charm for joining security services is so low, I am afraid if the current situation continues, Nepal army may well be conscripting people ala Guomindang(Kuomintang) in China. We can't beef up the security appartaus rightnow just by bragging because some of our friendly countries are behind us. >The democratic force could not even muster >more than a few hundred demonstrators >to go against the regressive force, how > could you expect them to fight the >battle-hardened cadres of the Maoists? That's funny: if your argument is to be followed, then why do king need the democratic force at all? If they can't even muster more than a few hundred people in their movement, I mean , why do the king and almighty security forces need these people? Why are civil society calling for their cooperation? Of course, there is a flaw in your argument here. They are not the only one hundred people: You know that they are more powerful than what you are trying to indicate, and that is why everyone wants them to cooperate with the king's government. I still believe that people will fight against the Maoist regime. They had fought against the repressive regime of Ranas, and Panchayat and they will fight against the Maoists too. But to fight Maoists to knowingly strengthen the likes of Gyanendra, Paras, Sharad Chandra Shah? I don't think people are ready for that yet. Unless king comes up with some kind of roadmap to return to democratic track, and to give up his unlimited authority, there is no way democratic forces should think about cooperating with him. Let the two enemies of democracy fight with each other first, then at the end of the day, we will fight with whichever remains. |
| bipin | Posted
on 08-Sep-03 08:07 PM
Biswo: We are going in a circle, so I will conclude this exchange with the following: In many of my earlier postings I have proposed an unified front of the King and the democratic forces to repel the Maoists or make them come to the table, so that small students like Deepak Gurung don't get killed in the crossfire. Nepal embarks on a new path with a set of refined democratic institutions that will work for the people to eradicate poverty and create social justice. Corruption reduces and politicians respond to the people and the rule of law. The King stays witinin a constitutional boundary (not like the present 127). Until then let the force be with the RNA. Nice exchanging with you. Thanks. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 09-Sep-03 08:06 AM
You are welcome! Nice exchanging with you! |