Sajha.com

nepal_tour

Kathmandu Pokhara - 6days tour

 

Nepal, the land of splendid nature and rich culture is waiting for you exploration through its different facets. Nepal is well known as a Himalayan Kingdom in the World. Rich culture with various ethnic groups. Out of 10 Highest peak in the world- 8 of those peaks are in Nepal. Wildlife heaven, friendly people, Culture heritage and wide range Geographical diversity. All these are our National properties and great attractions for the visitor - which eventually makes Nepal the best adventure holiday in this planet. The Following our tours Programs will be begin from Kathmandu extension to various religious places like: Pokhara "Land of Mt. Fish tail and Fewa Lake". Pokhara is a remarkable place of natural beauty. Situated at an altitude of 827m from the sea level and 200km west of Kathmandu valley, the city is known as a center of adventure. Phewa lake, the second largest lake in the kingdom, roughly measuring 1.5 km by 4 km, is the center of all attractions in Pokhara. Pokhara is the center of culture and adventure in Nepal. Pokhara is really pretty, located at the foothills of the Himalayas. It is a busy city amidst with tranquil valley. It is the doorway for most of Nepal's popular trekking and rafting destinations. The city remains always full of trekkers and backpackers round the year.

Glance Himalaya Travel & Tours Pvt. Ltd.
P. O. Box: 940, Thamel, Kathmandu, Nepal
Tel: +977-1-4269234, +977-9851045821      
Email: info@nepalhimalayatours.com

http://www.nepalhimalayatours.com

   [ posted by nepal_tour @ 02:36 AM ] | Viewed: 1215 times [ Feedback]

Himalibhai

Namaste!!!!

I am going to file a Green Card based on the marriage. I need a joint sponsor. I would like to request all  to assist me in this situation. Anybody is willing to sponsor for me pls let me know via E-mail willium_bcen@yahoo.com. I will pay you money.

Thanks

   [ posted by Himalibhai @ 09:08 PM ] | Viewed: 1460 times [ Feedback]

if you have time please click on this one too.
http://revver.com/video/1251646

शान्ति निर्माण प्रत्रियामा प्रवासी नेपाली अनिल पाण्डे

Anil Pandey with P M Dahal

नेपालीको अन्तस्करणमा रोपिएको एक मात्र भावना के हो भनेर कसैले स्ााेध्योभने निसङ्कोच भन्नसकिन्छ- स्थायी शान्ति । नेपालीहरु शान्तिका लागि समर्पित छन् । उनीहरुका लागि जसले शासन गरोस् केही छैन । तर शान्ति चाहिएको छ । राष्ट्रपति र प्रधानमन्त्री जो बनोस् वास्ता छैन अमन-चयन भए पुगेको छ । राजनीतिक व्यवस्थामा पनि खास चिन्ता छैन केबल चिन्ता छ त- रक्तपातरहित परिवर्तनमा ।यस पक्तिकारले एक साता लामो नेपाल बसाइबाट हालै आर्जन गरेको ज्ञान हो यो । यस बसाइमा यसले हिजोका खतरनाक विद्रोही नेता प्रचण्ड वा आजका हँसिला प्रधानमन्त्री पुष्पकमल दाहालदेखि पत्रकार कलाकार सामान्य नागरिक सबैलाई भेट्यो । सबैमा शान्तिको चाहना शीर्ष स्थानमा रहेको पायो । उनीहरु सबै नै कथंकदाचित शान्ति भंग भयो भने मुलुक र जनताले पाउने भयानक दुखप्रति निकै संवेदनशील थिए ।

यो पक्तिकार काठमाडौं छोडेर िसंगापुर हुँदै क्यालिफोर्निया आइपुग्दा नपुग्दै शान्ति तथा पुनर्निर्माण मन्त्रालयले जिल्लास्तरमा मात्र होइन गाउँ स्तरमा पनि शान्ति समिति गठन गर्ने घोषणा गर् यो । स्थानीय समितिमा ३३ प्रतिशत महिला सहभागिता अनिवार्य गर्ने गरी सरकारले नियम बनायो । पहिला बनिसकेका र महिलालाई सम्मानजनक स्थान नदिएका समितिहरु पुनर्गठनमा पर्नेभए । पचहत्तरै जिल्लामा शान्ति समिति गठन हुने संविधान निर्माण सत्य निरुपण तथा मेलमिलाप आयोगलाई स्थानीय स्तरबाट सघाउने र नयाँ नेपालको निर्माणमा गाउँस्तरदेखि योगदान पुग्ने वातावरणको पूर्वाधार तयार भयो । यसमा मुलुकभित्र र बाहिरबाट भएका योगदानलाई बिस्रन हुन्न । जब अधिकारकर्मीहरुले शान्ति समितिमा आधा आकास तिरस्कृत भएको सन्दर्भमा पैरवी गरे त्यसलाई गति दिन साचारमाध्यम जुरुक्क उभियो । परिणामरुपम शान्ति स्थापनाका लागि देशभर समिति गठन हुने अवस्था सिर्जना भयो । यसमा एक थोपाको योगदान गर्न पाएकोमा पक्तिकार र यसको संस्था मदरल्याण्ड नेपाल दंग छ ।

प्रधानमन्त्री प्रचण्डसँग आधा घण्टासम्म कुराकानी भएपछि पाएको प्रभावले भने यस पक्तिकारको पूरापुर पुरानो धारणा नै परिवर्तन गरिदियो । लाग्यो अब नेपालमा केही सकारात्मक परिवर्तन भयो भने केबल माओवादीकै नेतृत्वमा हुन्छ अन्यथा कहिल्यै केही हुँदैन । किनभने माओवादी नेतामा परिस्थितिलाई हेर्ने दृष्टिकोण र सबै विचारधारका व्यक्तिहरु यदि राष्ट्रभक्त छन् भने उनीहरुलाई समेट्नुपर्छ भन्ने जुन भावना मैले पाएँ त्यसले मलाई माओवादी र त्यस पार्टीका नेता प्रचण्डको उच्च मूल्यांकन गर्न वाध्य बनायो ।

प्रधानमन्त्री प्रचण्डसँगको कुराकानीमा दुई विषयले प्रमुखता पाए- नेपालमा शान्ति स्थापनाका लागि मदरल्याण्डजस्तो प्रवासी नेपालीको संस्थाले के गर्नसक्छ र अमेरिकाको क्यालिफोर्नियामा नेपाली कन्सुलर कार्यालको आवश्यकता कति छ । यी दुवै विषयमा निकै आशाप्रद कुराकानी हुनसक्यो । यसका बारेमा केही सकारात्मक संकेत व्यवहारमा देखापर्नुअघि नै केही बोल्नु कुनै पक्षका लागि पनि हितकर हुनेछैन । त्यसैले आजै केही नभनौं । समय र परिस्थितिले केही काम हुन सघाएछ भने प्रवासमा रहेका खासगरी क्यालिफोर्निया तथा यस क्षेत्रमा रहेका नेपालीका लागि लाभ नै हुनेछ ।

मदरल्याण्ड नेपालको अध्यक्षका हैसियतले यस पक्तिकारले काठमाडौंमा एक अन्तरकि्रया कार्यक्रमको आयोजना पनि गर् यो । ुशान्ति प्रकि्रयामा प्रवासी नेपालीको भूमिकाु विषयक अन्तरकि्रयामा परराष्ट्रमन्त्री उपेन्द्र यादवले प्रवासी नेपालीलाई प्रोत्साहन दिने जुन अभिव्यक्ति दिनुभयो त्यसको पनि सराहना हुनैपर्छ । जसरी इजरायलका यहुदीहरु जहाँ रहेपनि आपुनो मुलुकको विकासका लागि सदा तत्पर रहन्छन् त्यसरी नै नेपालीहरु जहाँ रहेपनि नेपालको विकासका लागि लागिरहनुपर्ने आवश्यकता यादवले औंल्याएका थिए । उनको भनाइ थियो आज विश्वमा यहुदीको इज्जत यस कारण छ कि किनभने इजरायलको अस्तित्व छ । इजरायलले राम्रो प्रगति नगरेको अवस्थामा विश्वका विभिन्न कुनामा रहेका यहुदीलाई कसैले मान्ने छैन । यसैगरी नेपालले प्रगति गरे मात्र नेपाली विश्वको जुनसुकै कुनामा रहे पनि सम्मानित हुने छन् भन्ने तर्क मन्त्री यादवको थियो । त्यसैले प्रवासी नेपालीले आपुनो मुलुकमा लगानी बढाउनुपर्छ भन्ने धारणा उनको थियो । मन्त्री यादव प्रवासी नेपालीलाई मुलुकमा लगानीको अवसर दिनुपर्ने धारणा व्यक्त गर्दै थिए यसका लागि उनको प्रशंसा गर्नैैपर्छ ।

मेरो नेपाल बसाइका क्रममा मैलै प्रशंसा गर्नुपर्ने अरु व्यक्तित्वहरु पनि छन् जस्तो नेपाल समाचारपत्रका प्रधान सम्पादक तथा प्रकाशक पुष्करलाल श्रेष्ठ पत्रकार तथा मानवअधिकारकर्मी कपिल कापुले यति ट्राभलका मित्र हेमन्त आर कोलाक्षपति मदरल्याण्ड नेपालको नेपाल च्याप्टर प्रमुख जीवन पाण्डे माइ संसार ब्लगका साथीहरु गोविन्द शाही शेखर ढुंगेल ध्रुव थापा रचना िसंह नवीन अधिकारी नारायण बस्नेत र उहाँको समूह कमल रन्धवा रोजर जे रोसन युवराज तिमि_िल्सना भक्त थापा डा। आमोद पोखरेल गीता श्रेष्ठ ललित गुरुङ मनोज ज्ञवाली श्याम पाण्डे तथा उनको समूह रिना पाण्डे मनसुन पाण्डे ऋषि धमला सामन्झ गैरे दिनेश बढु पङ्कज श्रेष्ठ मधु लम्साल विदुर गिरी र उनका साथीहरु रेडियो अडियो समूह प्रधानमन्त्री कार्यालयका समिर दाहाललगायतका थुप्रै नेपाली साथीहरुको सहयोगका कारण मेरो नेपाल यात्रा निकै सफल भयो । उनीहरुको सहयोग नहुँदो हो त एक सातामा अत्यन्त व्यस्त प्रधानमन्त्रीदेखि आ-आपुनो क्षेत्रका सिद्धहस्त अन्य व्यक्तिसँगको सहयात्रा सम्भव थिएन । मित्र हेमन्तको कठोर प्रयासबाट मात्र प्रधानमन्त्री प्रचण्डसँगको भेटघाट सम्भव भएको हो भन्ने कुरामा पनि मलाई कुनै शंका छैन ।

जेहोस् सबैले मलाई सहयोग गरेको र मैले नेपालसम्मको यात्रा गरेको पनि अरु कुनै कारणले नभएर शान्ति प्रकि्रयामा सघाउने उद्देश्यले नै हो । हिजो मदरल्याण्डले भरियादेखि पत्रकारसम्म र बाढीपीडितदेखि स्वास्थ्यकर्मीसम्मलाई गरेको सहयोग पनि शान्तिकै लागि हो । अभाव पीडा र दुख अशान्तिका कारण हुन् भने सहयोग प्रेम र सद्भाव तथा आर्थिक विकास शान्तिका कारण हुन् । मेरा मित्रहरुले मलाई नेपालमा जाँदा जति सहयोग गरे त्यो पनि शान्तिका लागि हो भन्ने मैले विश्वास लिएको छु । ओम शान्ति !

   [ posted by motherland nepal @ 04:25 PM ] | Viewed: 3193 times [ Feedback]

When it comes to oneself “everything is right” but when others do the same “they have done it wrong”. They have chosen the wrong way.
I am not the member of YCL so I say they have chosen the wrong way. They are not doing this in constitutional way. They should let government or the court decide if the accused are right or wrong. They should not be hassling Buddhiman Tamang and his colleagues. Let the court decide on what to do with all accused by Rayamajhi Commission.
Whatever I say or anybody say against it, for the first time I’m happy about what YCL is doing. It should happen in the country which has Impotent Government. Somebody has to punish Culprits. What can we expect from the court that thinks it is not legal to ban murderers like Kamal Thapa to stand on Election. How can we expect the government which is run by corrupts punish other corrupts.
At least you are doing it YCL. Keep it up. I hope you have enough guts to stay strong until you punish the last culprit. Do not forget to review your own leaders background and bank accounts. And at last YCL please don’t forget to put yourself behind the bars because we civilians think you are culprits too. If you do that then Nepal really becomes “Democratic Republican Country” otherwise it is gonna be “Dadagiric Republican Country”. Now we are watching you, you have to show us whether or not you think of Nepal.

   [ posted by nagrik @ 11:27 AM ] | Viewed: 1625 times [ Feedback]

Nepali baba on california.
anil

   [ posted by anilmelvin @ 01:22 PM ] | Viewed: 1828 times [ Feedback]

Vision Geometry

That evening was full of excitement but anxieties were dripping out of my eyes. No wonder hearts were tearing apart and breath were halted. Those salty drops, running all the way thru my chicks were more then a witness to prove “how hard u can fly with broken heart?” It was my journeys from brightness to darkness with a hope of enlightenment afterwards. I heard, “passengers flying TG 579 ktm-bkk please proceed to the counter “………GOOD BYE MUM my flickering lips has no guts to say anything more. Feeling heavy on my heart just touched her feet but stupid me, dint even look at her face. Afraid and scared I hit my way……………

The very next morning was great for me. different smell, I did hear the rush of kangaroos, fizz of VB (Victoria bitter, Melbourne’s favorite beer), Mate and barbeque of bondi(Famous beach of Sydney) , they just started their companionship with my life trail and I guess mero honnacha (Patan krishana mandir sangai ko bhatti ko sauni) ko piro aloo and sandhaeko cholila,kupoondole ko Paan balaju ko chalpahal ani gantabya heen motorcycle yatra haru... aba feri kakani ra nagarkot .......will not be in my journey ahead.
Far very far as far as I can see, my sights r longing for those greeny hills but there are just silent waves waving me welcome up an down in this never ending pacific ocean. I scratch every page in my maleway(Road map of Melbourne). Desperate, anxious, lost but still looking for my way to naubesae muglling to narayanghat. Day and night, thru every tide round o clock may I sketch my highway to my Katmandu thru Greatocean road .....people says hume(Highway that connects Melbourne to Sydney) will never take you to kakani but I am starting my journey from Sydney harbor to nagarkot .
No surprise n u may gossip……….but this is my vision geometry.

SkChirag
13/09/07

   [ posted by SKChirag @ 10:28 AM ] | Viewed: 1809 times [ Feedback]

indian over resturant misuses we all nepali

   [ posted by kale0923 @ 11:28 AM ] | Viewed: 1732 times [ Feedback]

साहित्य पढ्न झ्याउ लाग्छ

by आशुतोष तिवारी

मैले धेरै त्यस्ता नेपालीहरू देखेको छु जो निजी अफिस या राष्ट्रिय, अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय गैरसरकारी संस्थाहरूमा काम गरेर राम्रै पैसा कमाउूछन् । विभिन्न पत्रिका र अंग्रेजीका महूगा किताबहरू किनेर फर्ुसदमा उनीहरू पढ्न रुचाउूछन् । ती किताबका बारेमा आफ्ना मित्रहरूसूग गफ गर्छन् ।

तर तिनै नेपालीहरू नेपाली साहित्यको कहलाइएका किताबहरू- जसको मोल प्रायः पच्चीस रूपैयाूदेखि जम्मा दर्ुइ सय पचाससम्म मात्र पर्छ- भने खोजीखोजी किनेर फुर्सदमा बसेर पढ्दैनन्, एकाध एक दर्ुइजनालाई छोडेर । पक्कै पनि हाम्रा कहलाइएका किताबहरूको नाम त उनीहरूले सुनेका छन् । सायद ती किताबहरू नपढिकनै सुनेका भरमा तिनको सजिलो तारिफ गर्न पनि उनीहरूले जानेका छन् ।

कत्तिले त स्कुले वा कलेज जीवनमा पाठ्यक्रमभित्रै राखिएका साहित्यका केही किताब पढेदेखि पछि अरू त्यस्ता किताब पढ्नु त के छोएका पनि छैनन् । र, छुनर्ुपर्ने कारण पनि देख्दैनन् । अनि साहित्य नपढे पनि उनीहरूको जीवन कुनै निरस या उराठलाग्दो या दुःखी पटक्कै छैन । कुरा के हो भने साहित्य पढ्न उनीहरूलाई मनै छैन ।

एकातिर पैसा र शिक्ष्ँाका आधारमा नेपाली साहित्यको उपभोक्ता हुनसक्ने हजारौं संख्याको जमातको कथा यस्तो छ भने उतातिर मञ्जुश्री थापाको शब्दमा भन्दा- 'धन्न लेखिइरहेका' नेपाली लेखक/साहित्यकारको व्यथा अर्कै छ ।

उनीहरू भन्छन्- 'जसरी जति लेखे पनि किताबै बिक्री हुूदैनन् । मोतीराम भट्टका पालामा पनि १ हजार १ सय प्रति कुनै किताब छापिन्थ्यो भने अहिले पनि त्यत्ति नै छापिन्छ । त्यसमा पनि ६।७ सय प्रति त फोकटमा नातागोता, इष्टमित्र आदिलाई बाूड्दैमा सकिन्छ । साहित्य बुझ्ने, त्यसको रस लिने, त्यसलाई उपयोगी ठान्ने अनि साहित्यिक किताब किनीकिनी पढ्ने पाठकहरूको हुल नै यो देशमा छैन कि क्या हो । होइन भने कसरी कहिले साहित्य लेख्ने वा लेखेकाहरू र साहित्यको उपभोग अनि उपयोग गर्न सक्नेका बीचको दूरी कम गर्ने -' यस्तै यस्तै क्रन्दन सुनिन्छ, यसो दर्ुइ चारजना चिन्तित लेखकहरूको सङ्गत गर्ने हो भने ।

अर्थशास्त्रको भाषामा भन्ने हो भने साहित्यलाई महान बनाइएर बजारमा टन्न 'सप्लाइ' गरिएको छ । तर 'डिमान्ड' खासै छैन ।हुन त माग बढाउने विभिन्न उपायहरू छन् । मंसिर १९ गतेको (Please see elsewhere on this Sajha blog for that article) स्तम्भमा मैले पुस्तक बिक्रीका लागि लेखक, एजेन्ट, प्रकाशक, सम्पादक अनि बजार व्यवस्थापकको जोहो गर्न थाल्नर्ुपर्ने कुरा उठाएको थिएू । टिप्पणीकार भाष्कर गौतमले मंसिर २६ को लेखमा नेपालमा त्यसबारे भइरहेका प्रयासहरू र अझ गर्न बाूकी कामहरू प्रस्ट पारेका छन् ।

निश्चय नै संसारको कुनै पनि देशमा साहित्यका किताब किनीकिनी पढ्ने पाठकहरूको संख्या अन्य पत्रिका, किताब किन्नेहरूको संख्याभन्दा त धेरै कम नै हुन्छ । तैपनि नेपालको पर्रि्रेक्ष्यमा पैसा, शिक्ष्ँा र अनुभवको हिसाबले साहित्य किनेर पढ्नसक्ने जमात किन साहित्यबाट टाढिएको होला, त्यसबारेमा यी दर्ुइवटा कुरा उठाउन चाहन्छु ।

पहिलो त, साहित्यप्रतिको बैरागको बीउ धेरै विद्यार्थीको दिमागमा हाम्रो स्कुल, कलेजमै रोपिन्छ । एकाध एक दर्ुइवटा स्कुलका शिक्ष्ँक छोडेर प्रायःले नेपाली साहित्य पढाउने कामको सफलता केवल शिक्ष्ँा मन्त्रालयका विभिन्न तहका जाूच पास गराउने कामसूग जोड्छन् ।

स्रँेतको अभावमा यसो गर्नु ती शिक्ष्ँकहरूको रहर होइन, बाध्यता हो । फेरि विद्यार्थीले पनि जाूच पास गर्न के गर्नर्ुपर्छ, चाूडै पत्ता लगाइन्छ । बरु उसले चक्रपाणि चालिसेको जन्ममिति कण्ठ पार्छ । भवानी भिक्ष्ँु कहाू जन्मे, मरे र उनका मातापिता को थिए, अनि देवकोटा कुन सालमा शिक्ष्ँामन्त्री भए- यस्तै यस्तै साहित्य सम्बन्धी 'युवा मञ्च'- स्टाइलक टिपनटापन जानकारी घोकेर जाूचमा पस्किन्छ । यसरी पढेर हर्ुकेका धेरै विद्यार्थीलाई साहित्यको पठनपाठन भनेको जाूच पास गर्ने अर्को एउटा बोझमात्र भएको छ ।

तिनै विद्यार्थीहरू जसको संख्या लाखौंमा छ- पछि गएर फर्ुसदको समय आफ्नै मनोरञ्जनका लागि साहित्य किनेर पढ्छन् पाठक बन्छन् भनी चिताउनु र्व्यर्थ छ ।त्यसैले साहित्यका नाममा लाखौं कराडौं रुपैयाूको धनराशि हातमा लिएर बसेका विभिन्न प्रतिष्ठानहरूले केवल केही बूढापाका साहित्यकारहरूलाई दोसल्लामाथि दोसल्ला ओढाएर थचक्क बसाउूदैमा आफ्नो काम सम्पन्न भएको नठानी आगामी दसदेखि बीस वर्षा नेपाली साहित्यका पाठकहरूको संख्या वृद्धि गर्न के गर्नर्ुपर्छ भनी सोच्ने बेला भइसकेको छ ।

यस क्रममा उनीहरूले स्रँेत नभएको तर उत्साह भएका विभिन्न स्कुल र कलेजहरूसूग मिलेर विद्यार्थीको साहित्यतर्फो झुकाव बलियो पार्न पाठ्यक्रम सुधार, अतिरिक्त क्रियाकलाप, पुरस्कार आदिको जोहो गर्न थाल्ने बेला आइसकेको छ । यो काम पक्कै पनि तुरुन्त नतिजा ल्याएर ताली पाइने काम होइन । तर यस्तै कामले यी प्रतिष्ठानहरूको साहित्यको बारेमा सोच कति बृहत् र गहन रहेछ भनेर अरूलाई प्रस्ट हुन्छ ।

दोस्रो, विभिन्न कारणले नेपाली साहित्यलाई हाम्रो समाजमा अनावश्यक तालले त्यस्तो उचाइमा राखिएको छ कि धेरै पाठकले त कहाू छ भनेर त्यो उचाइ देख्नै छोडिसके । अनि नदेखिएकै कारणले उनीहरूलाई साहित्य किन्न, पढ्न मतलब पनि छैन ।

अर्काे शब्दमा भन्ने हो भने हाम्रा लागि नेपाली साहित्य उचाइमा राखेर पूजा गर्ने मर्ूर्तिमात्र भएको छ- न कि आमनेसामने बसी संवाद गर्ने विषय । पूजा गर्न थालेपछि फरक विचारलाई ठाउू नै नदिने गरी कट्टर हुनुपर्‍यो कि त सामाजिक मिलोमतोको लागि फोस्रो आस्था देखाउनै पर्‍यो । त्यसैले देवकोटा महान छन् भन्यो । टाढैबाट नमस्कार गर्‍यो अनि किताब चाहिू नपढे पनि हुन्छ ।

यही फोस्रो आस्थाको कारण एउटा उदाहरणको लागि के हुन जान्छ भने धेरै नेपालीहरू कोही कविको सामु पर्दा उहाू त कवि भनेर काूधमा धाप दिन त दिन्छन् तर बोरलाग्दो कविता सुन्नुपर्ला भनेर भागाभाग गर्छन् । साहित्यसूग संवाद गर्ने अभ्यास नभएपछि हामीलाई यस्तै यस्तै कुरा झेल्नर्ुपर्ने हुन्छ ।

जस्तै, देवकोटाले मुनामदन त लेखे । तर मदनले भोटमा भोगेर भनेका कुरा आज नेपाली कामदारले अरब र मलेसियामा भोग्नुपरेका कुरासूग कसरी राखेर हर्ेने - साहित्यसूग संवाद गर्ने एउटा विषय हुन सक्छ । त्यस्तै परिवारबाट छुट्दै, टुक्रूदै गएको काठमाडौंको समाजमा रुद्रराज पाण्डेले रूपमति उपन्यासमा खोतलेका बृहत् पारिवारिक दाउपेच र मानवता कसरी बुझ्ने, संवादको अर्काे विषय हुनसक्छ ।यस्तै विभिन्न बहसको आड लिएर नेपाली साहित्यलाई अहिलेको उचाइबाट झारेर हजारौं लाखौं पाठकको हालकै जिन्दगीमा ती कृतिहरू कसरी उपयोगी छन् भनेर संवादको ढोका खोल्ने बेला आइसकेको छ । साहित्यकै उत्थानका लागि बसेका विभिन्न प्रतिष्ठानहरूले यस्ता कुरालाई अगाडि बढाउनर्ैपर्छ ताकि नेपाली साहित्यको माग हाम्रै बीचमा झन् बढोस् ।

नत्र यता जत्ति साहित्य जसरी उत्पादन गरे पनि र तिनलाई जसले जति महान् भनेर टाूचा लगाइदिए पनि उता पैसा र शिक्षाको आधारमा पाठक बन्नसक्ने हजारौं नेपालीहरू साहित्य पढ्न झ्याउ लाग्छ भन्दै बसिरहेकै हुन्छन् ।

(Originally published in Kantipur national daily; December 2004. Special thanks to friends at Martin Chautari and other places for many stimulating guff-gaff on this and other topics that helped refine my thoughts.)

   [ posted by ashu @ 10:34 AM ] | Viewed: 3447 times [ Feedback] (1 Comment)

Being a socialite and food lover, I have always had an emotional attachment to Hindu festivals and the food items prepared on these special occasions. But in New York for the last two months, I missed celebrating Father's Day for the first time in years. I remember giving him packets of mithai over the years but devouring most of them myself. Dad's high BP meant good luck for me on 'his' Day.

It's no surprise that Teej is one of my favourite festivals. In Kathmandu, we girls used to hang out, sing, dance and have lots of fun. But this year was a completely new experience for me. I had just got married and was celebrating the fest abroad. But the change of country did little to dampen my spirits. I celebrated Teej with as much verve and enthusiasm as I did while in Nepal. For I am lucky to be living in a locality where the Nepali community has managed to preserve our culture and identity.

I never though Teej could be so much fun. We friends were all draped in red and covered with traditional ornaments such as tika, pote, chura, sindur. When we ventured out on the streets of the Big Apple, people were ogling at us as if we were from another planet. While some took us for participants of a fancy dress party. Some even braved to inquire about our rather quaint attire.

During the daar party, we met hoards of Nepali women, all clad in red. We danced to Nepali folk songs and feasted on typical Nepali food. This is the best part about living in a cosmopolitan city like New York: One gets to have foodstuffs from all corners of the globe. Even while most of the women were fasting the next day, no one was bothered about attending their work or college. Surprise! Even the gluttonous Barsha was fasting.

Teej is not all about fasting for the hubby's long life. It is as much about having loads of fun and enjoying life to the fullest. Teej would have been a different affair back home, but I can't help feel proud about our local community that managed to put together a stupendous gala, thereby celebrating the cultural richness of Nepal.

New York might seem dour and business-like most of the times, but I discovered that it surely comes alive on every Teej.

   [ posted by Barsha Ghimire @ 01:48 PM ] | Viewed: 2326 times [ Feedback]

A PAGE FROM MY JOURNAL

When I was asked what I planned for the future,my answered varied with time a doctor,scientist,housewife......Finally I took science, with biology as my major.But I ended up as a nanny.So professionally I am a babysitter though I never took any lessons for it.Being a mother of a child was the only experience I had regarding my job.

I guess my innocent face and being a person of few words overcame my lack of knowledge and experience to gain this position.I enjoyed my work,everything was great.
It was friday,going home day.I was busy getting things ready for the weekend.Giving bath to the baby boy,I was trying to put pajamas on him who was fighting back kicking and screaming.
"Let me dress you up sweetheart".I said controlling my rage.
"Nooooooooooo,go away".He kicked me.
I held him tight,looked into his eyes.
"I don't like you,you are a bad girl".He screamed at my face.
I took a deep breath as I finally managed to slip the clothes on him.
He spit on my face and ran to his mommy who was busy preparing dinner in the kitchen.
"Oh,sweeti what is the matter."she asked hugging him.
I was in my room ready to leave.As I heard my employer screaming like insane I went in."How did he get that scratch on his neck".She asked me.
As I had no idea I said to her "I am sorry,I don't know".
"What do you mean you don't know,you were with the baby the whole day".
The way she spoke to me riped me apart.All the hard work was worth nothing due to that stupid scratch.

Yet,I pulled myself together.Things were ok.One beautiful tuesday afternoon the baby boy was having a playdate.Everyone was happy and having fun.The boys were playing,mommies were talking.It was a fun place.But that didn't last long.My employer gave her child a piece of gum and he put it in his mouth.She blamed me for that.
"He can play with the gum but he cannot put it in his mouth,he is just a child you are an adult,you know it better".I was confused.How could she think her child would not put the gum in his mouth if she gave it to him?????

Then thing got ugly.I wanted to leave,she decided to let me go.But I have to admit that I broke down.First she wanted me to stay till she found someone.I agreed, than she didn't want me to leave.She told me that I misunderstood her.But I wasn't buying that.Everything was clear to me.I could read her mind as she asked me to leave though she told me that her psycologist friend read my mind before.

I am still working there as I am writing this journal of mine.Nothing has changed but it has left me deeply hurt.What went wrong?I have the same love and feeling for this little boy as I have for my four year old girl living thousands of miles away from me.
After all am I a bad mommy??????

   [ posted by Shanti Gurung @ 07:44 PM ] | Viewed: 2173 times [ Feedback]

Business lessons from an old job

By Ashutosh Tiwari

From August 2002 to July 2004, together with two Nepali colleagues, I ran a small-business support facility called Business Service Aadhar in Kathmandu. Ours was a smartly furnished one-room business counseling office at an equally smart address: Heritage Plaza in Kamaladi. Our job was to help small private-sector service businesses.

Aadhar's parent institution -- the then Private Sector Promotion Project (PSPP) of the German Technical Cooperation (GTZ)- Nepal -- defined help in two ways. The first consisted of providing market-oriented advice to small businesses. The second meant supporting such businesses financially for concept testing, market research and marketing. In either case, the aim was to help small businesses sell services commercially on their own.

The rationale for Aadhar's existence was simple. Small businesses often have innovative service ideas. At times, they even have intriguing ideas such as selling yak cheese on the Internet. But they lack the resources to critically examine how feasible their ideas are. They need information, contacts, networks and access to supportive market players. They also hunger for disinterested experts who can help them brainstorm a way ahead by revising business plans. Often, they remain confused about how to translate -- in a step-by-step manner -- their ideas into profitable ventures.

Clearing up such confusion as an honest broker was Aadhar's role. It offered hard-nosed advice while satisfying the demands of its two constituencies. To its clients, it had to signal that it had the market credibility, the necessary expertise and the networks to help them succeed. To the PSPP, it had to deliver two results: that the money it gave out verifiably generated additional businesses in markets that had not been explored before; and, that other small businesses purchased Aadhar's clients' services.

A critical review of Aadhar in September 2003 by The Springfield Center, a British consulting firm, concluded that Aadhar's work was "non-distortionary support, sensitive to local market norms which encouraged service provider ownership and innovation; effective advice to partners; encouraging greater customer orientation amongst partners through use of market research techniques, such as focus group discussions; outreach outside the Kathmandu Valley; engagement with other influential players in the market place, such as large business houses, the media, academia and some business membership organizations." It added, "Aadhar has developed an effective and motivated team; it has acquired a reputation and credibility in the market place; and it has established appropriate management systems."

But things changed in early 2004. Faced with this country's then deteriorating security situation, GTZ-Nepal reshuffled its development agenda. That resulted in GTZ's placing more emphasis on conflict mitigation activities. Shortly thereafter, the kind of work that Aadhar did in urban areas was absorbed into a new project which found its home at the old Hotel Narayani complex in Pulchowk. That change was necessary to better reflect the new priority which called for reaching out to rural communities.

Still, two years after Aadhar's closure, and having since moved to a new job at a South Asia regional organization, I am struck that whenever I advise clients on business matters these days, I find myself drawing upon the knowledge that I had gained at Aadhar. Briefly, then, here are three lessons that have continued to serve me well.

Business unbundled: At Aadhar, I learnt to see a business in terms of what comes in, what gets transformed and what gets sold. I saw that every business, no matter how large or small, can be unbundled into three core parts. The first part is about coming up with ideas; the second is about putting the internal systems (accounts, logistics etc) in place for those ideas to flourish; and the third is marketing and the selling of those ideas as services and products. Sure, these parts can be divided further. But the main point is that once you have this three-bit frame in mind, business analysis as in what's working and what's not becomes easier to do.

Diversely smart team: I learnt that merely gathering individually smart people does not necessarily make a team smart. Often, our usual practice of getting good people is to hire the credentialed clones-- the ones who dutifully completed their MBAs and spent one summer photocopying documents at a noodle company as a part of their compulsory internship assignment. My approach to recruiting colleagues was to hire on the basis of how they could add value by injecting different skills, networks and backgrounds to what Aadhar's mandate.

The idea then was not to hire people with impressively look-alike CVs. It was to hire to make the existing team smarter by bringing in those who would enlarge everyone's perspectives. This approach must have worked well: the market considered the Aadhar team to be competent. Besides, I ended up learning much from my two colleagues in ways I would not have, had they been just two other US-returned Nepalis.

Client servicing as the PR tool: Ad agencies always told us that the way to build up the Aadhar brand was to spend tons of money placing ads in national media. Our experience suggested otherwise. It was client-focused public relations � the act of incurring shoe-leather expenses to find clients, selling the offer to anyone who'd listen, making mistakes and quickly learning from them, delivering results, and doing activities to bring clients together� that helped us establish the Aadhar brand much more quickly and credibly. Ads only make people aware about what you do. But client-focused PR exercises build up your brand. Once the brand is established, clients actually spend money to do business with you.

To be sure, Aadhar was not a private-sector firm. As a donor-funded entity, it was insulated from market competition. It did not have to worry where the money was coming from, though it had to justify every rupee it spent. Admittedly, these NGO-like attributes are reasons why I would not apply everything I learnt at Aadhar to achieve results in a competitive private-sector business. But in all fairness though, in those adequately lengthy two years, as a mediator between those buy services and those who sell them, Aadhar provided all who worked there a front-row seat to understand the process of managing a small business support unit in Nepal.

(Originally published in Kathmandu�s Boss, a business magazine�s June 2006 issue
under �Thinking Aloud� column)

   [ posted by Ashu @ 02:04 PM ] | Viewed: 2322 times [ Feedback]

MY STORY


So here I was��my first footsteps in the land of the free. A place I�d heard, similar in proportion to the biblical land, flowing with milk and honey�only there was no milk, much less the honey.

It was a particularly hot summer day with the sun beating down ever so hard on the bright yellow taxis. Cars honking everywhere, eager to free themselves from a traffic jam. People pushing their way to meet and greet relatives who had perhaps, come under more fortunate circumstances than me. Needless to say I was a little disoriented but I would not allow myself to be disappointed. After all, I was finally here, which made the 3 something crores that my father had borrowed from neighbors, relatives and friends, �That� much more worth the effort.

I managed to cram my suitcase into the two-door, hatchback 1987 Pontiac Grand AM of a friend. The car was a bare minimum�manual, no air conditioning and an audio that reminded me of a hometown radio station of yester-years. Despite the shoddy surroundings, my friend looked upbeat. He had gotten himself a slight pot belly, wore a big golden ring studded with some cheap look alike amber and his shirt flashed a brand name that I wasn�t aware of at the time. But his silver hair showed signs of a tough life that 8 years in the U.S had exposed him to. Perhaps, I was reading too much into it or perhaps I was too �New� to know the nuances of this so called American life.

One week into my stay and I had overstayed my hospitality. �So what are your plans�, spat out my friend over a can of shared coke and a fan that circulated hot air all around. I got the hint�.Do you know if anyone is hiring, is all I could manage to reply.

I met the world over the next 4-5 days. Pedro the taco shop owner said he had a full staff (of illegals) already. Dmitri was irritated by my inability to understand his accent. The Afro thought I was yet another Chinese out to get his slice of bread and butter, and the white guy gave me the looks he�d call the INS, if I took one step closer. So I was left to choose between Chang from the Chinese carry out across town or Mr. Patel from the shop round the corner. I didn�t like either of them, but my weekly rent was due in another week. Not knowing the �intricacies� of having to commute without a car, I refused to be subjected to another Indian in the land of the free. So I chose Chang over Patel, simply because I wanted a change of scene.

My next few months was a scene out of Dante�s Inferno. I didn�t see the big sign that proclaimed the Nutcracker was playing in town; neither did I see crowds of men and women rushing to watch Cats or Cirque du Soliel. All I was focused on, was perfecting my skills to accurately take an order and the much more daunting task of being the cook, the cleaner, delivery guy all wrapped into one. My humor came in the form of Chang�s attempts to speak english (if that was still English) and success was defined by my ability to make a perfect fortune cookie, with some ambiguous message which squared the meal with finesse. The $4.50 an hour didn�t amount to much, but when you have to work round the clock 9-12, 24/27 not knowing when days turned to nights and weeks to months, what good could a few cents up or down do. All it did was fill the pockets of the creditors back home who�d come knocking on my father�s door before the crack of dawn.

�Man�, as they say adapts to his surroundings and I for sure had come to accept my life as my karma from a past life I had absolutely no recollections of. This was my shot at the American dream and boy was I determined to keep my engines running.

It was 4th of July and Chang had reluctantly closed his shop early (10:00 p.m. as opposed to midnight). So there I was in front of the television listening to the President of the free world, talking about opportunities, freedom and liberty�how America was the champion of human rights, a savior to the down-trodden, all the while slamming the door shut to the possibility of extending that hope over to people like me. Illegal Immigration is what America wanted to cleanse itself of.

Suddenly, the people with the big mansions felt threatened by someone like me, who shared a bathroom with 5 other people. Suddenly, we were a threat to those hunks making obnoxious 6-7 figure salaries and those meek hearted women who�d run to the doc if she sneezed more than once in 2 hours�.whilst I suffered through pneumonia awaiting God�s grace. Suddenly, the America that professed equality for all was in some kind of war with me, who was merely trying to make ends meet��sweating it out to make an earnest buck, working hard, MUCH harder than most people out there. Living a crime free life, and thinking THE WORLD about this �Great Country� which I had dreamt and raved about back in my little hometown.

That night I fell asleep with a broken spirit. I thought about Dr. Martin Luther King and how he�d dreamt about an America where everyone was equal. Yet here I was, 40 something years later�..still unequal in every sense of the word.

I did not dream a thing that night. Perhaps, I wasn�t entitled to one.

   [ posted by Janice Mukhia @ 12:44 PM ] | Viewed: 1993 times [ Feedback]

Creative collaboration
Could Samrat Upadhyay have achieved his success in Nepal?

By Ashutosh Tiwari

Samrat Upadhyay is a professor of English at the University of Indiana in the United States. Most readers of this magazine know him as a Nepali author of two collections of short-stories and one novel. Put out by a top-bracket American publishing company, Samrat?s books have been translated into several languages, and favorable reviews have appeared, among others, in the New York Times and Time magazine. Pundits of Nepali literature never tire of arguing the literary merits, or lack thereof, of Samrat?s fiction. But even they grudgingly concede that when it comes to revenue generation, there is no doubt that Samrat is the most successful Nepali author in history. Could Samrat have achieved a comparable success by being a writer in Nepal?

In a roundabout way, veteran Nepali writer Kali Prasad Rizal says yes. In an issue of Himal Khabar Patrika, Rizal once rued that if only his parents had sent him to a school like St. Xavier?s, he too would have grown up to be a successful writer in English -- rivaling, if not surpassing, Samrat?s fame. Rizal?s claim was certainly intriguing. But what is one to make of the fact even St. Xavier?s, in its 50-year history in Nepal, has produced only one Samrat despite having graduated hundreds of fluent-in-English students?

Surely fluency alone takes one only so far, and if you add ?hard work? to the equation, maybe a bit further. Since there is no shortage of hardworking and fluent-in-English Nepalis who have not had much success as writers, it?s time to accept that in addition to fluency and hard work, an aspiring writer needs something essential to catapult her to the front rank of the profession. That something essential is a market-friendly support network of fellow-writers, agents, publishers, editors, marketers and distributors, libraries and newspapers, and translators.

Take Samrat?s case, as an example.

By his own admission, he gets up at 4 am, and writes for several hours everyday. That?s hard work. He shares his drafts with colleagues, writers and editors. All of them volunteer time to provide detailed criticisms, suggestions and comments. Based on the advice he receives, he revises his work. In the process, he deletes some paragraphs, and adds new sub-plots or endings. In some cases, he discards everything he has written, and re-writes everything from scratch. The work is lonely, but the process of thinking through is collaborative, and it takes time and effort.

Next in Samrat?s support system stands a book agent, who knows publishers and their requirements. She is the writer?s advocate. Since she works for a commission, her goal is to sell Samrat?s manuscript to the highest bidder. Her success is never guaranteed. But in the competitive world of American publishing, where nine out of 10 manuscripts are summarily rejected, getting a good book agent is important, for she knows what manuscripts appeal to which publishers. Once the publisher accepts the manuscript, he hands it over to an in-house editor, who knows potential readers? tastes. She consults Samrat for additional revisions, and, with a team of experts, decides on illustrations, cover photos and the price before sending it to press.

Meantime, marketers devise press materials for promotion: They may want Samrat to go on book tours or appear in media. Copies of the book get shipped to book-stores and Amazon.com, and libraries. Readers? clubs start inviting Samrat for speaking sessions, while newspapers and magazines publish reviews. All these generate a buzz for the book, thereby increasing its chances for higher sales. If the book does well in the US, Indian publishers may purchase the rights to re-print it in South Asia. And this is how Samrat?s book gets into your hands in Nepal.

But it is precisely this sort of market-friendly support system that?s glaringly absent in Nepal. Much of it is due to the fact that the market here is so small that no agent can hope to survive by selling manuscripts to publishers. Besides, with low returns, publishers do not have any incentive to spend money on editing, designing and marketing. Compounding the problem further is our own writers who seem to think that they are so talented that even their rough drafts are eminently publishable, requiring no editorial support. The result is that it?s our writers who end up doing all the work -- from deciding what to write to selling badly designed books with unedited contents.

It?s only recently that we are beginning to see some unbundling of professional responsibilities. The Madan-Puraskar winning novel Palpasa Caf鬠for instance, was written by Narayan Wagle, but published and marketed by Nepalaya, a firm that previously marketed film and music. Yes, it?s tempting to think that because of competitive pressures, rising demands for high-quality books and falling technology costs, the Nepali book market will get sophisticated in years ahead. But until that happens, let?s be clear: No Nepal-based author can hope to have a comparable kind of success that Samrat has had no matter how talented or hardworking she is.

Meantime, the lesson to be drawn from Samrat?s American example is this. In today?s world, a creative work is never the product of only one person, even when that person starts it. It?s the time-consuming collaborative process ?- with different professionals coming together to add relevant bits of expertise along the way -- that shapes how the product is revised, edited, designed, packaged, differentiated, marketed and sold. Remove one or two players from the support structure, and creative outputs will suffer.

Indeed, collaboration is how creative goods ? from novels to rock music to movies to software programs ? make their mark in the marketplace. And collaboration is at the heart of the success of creative places like Silicon Valley or Hollywood (think how long the credit rolls are at the end of movies). This is why, for our creative industries to flourish in times ahead, it?s not enough to say ? as we always say -- that we have the talents who work very hard in Nepal. What we need to do is look for ways develop the rightly unbundled market-support structures so that our local Samrats in all creative fields can reach their full potential in Nepal.

(Special thanks to Ajit Baral at FinePrint Publication for helpfully critical comments on an earlier draft. This article was originally published in Kathmandu?s The Boss business monthly magazine, May 2006 issue).

   [ posted by ashu @ 07:09 AM ] | Viewed: 2463 times [ Feedback]

The Theory of Socialism According to Marx and Mill

John Stuart Mill and Karl Marx both have made a significant impact on the history of Economics. Mill supported the Capitalist movement that was going on during that time whereas Marx detested Capitalism. Mill, having worked as an administrator at East India Company, comprehended the fact that Capitalism, for the most parts, brought about positive outcome for the society. However, having studied Jeremy Bentham, he was also influenced by the Socialist view of Bentham. He believed that socialism should be integrated with classical liberalism in order for the society to maximize happiness and avoid the opposite. On the other hand, Marx had radical views about Capitalism. He believed Capitalism to be a system where the people sowed the seeds of their own destruction. He argued that the Bourgeois will always rule over the proletariats. Therefore, the thesis of my paper discusses the reasoning of Mill towards favoring Socialism combined with Capitalism, and that of Marx looking at Socialism as a temporary step before the society reaches the highest form of economic order, Communism. I shall discuss this through the two economists� view on labour, wages and capital, profit and private property, government intervention and competition and lastly through their views on �revolution�.

Mill gave a special attention to labour in his analysis of economic conditions. Although he believed in the fundamentals of classical economy that there should be division of labour and that trade was beneficial to the society as a whole, he also pointed out some corrections which show his Socialist side. He recognized the class conflict among the landlords and the rest of society. He believed that labour should be allowed to form unions in order to freely demand higher wages and better rights at work. He believed that working hours should be shorter and promoted universal education. Although Adam Smith had briefly touched on different types of labour, Mill distinctly talked about different types of labour according to their contribution, and introduced a social judgment on the types of labour. For instance, he considered women as a part of the productive labour force. Mill was one of the first Economists to give importance to women. He believed in analyzing long run benefit to the society.

�To community at large, the labour and expense of rearing its infant population form a part of the outlay which is a condition of production, and which is to be replaced with increase from the future produce of their labour.�

Marx�s view of labour is similar to Mill in that he promotes well-being of the working class, which he terms �Proletariat�. Although Marx advocated women�s right by arguing for divorce laws so that the bourgeois could not exploit women, what distinguished Marx from Mill was his extremist view on Labour. �The Communists have no need to introduce community of women; it has existed from almost time immemorial.� He believed that the society was divided into two major classes, the bourgeois and the proletariat, and that the proletariat was ruled by bourgeois. He believed the proletariat class to be the forces of production, and the one that ultimately affects the relations of production, which then causes the need for change in the society. He argued that as people form unions or get education in the Capitalist society, it causes changes in forces of production, and hence, this change should be accompanied by a transition to Socialism, and further changes in the orientation of labour would bring the economy into Communist state. Thus under Capitalism, Marx describes necessity of change in labour organization as follows:

�The laborer becomes a cheaper commodity the more commodities he creates. With the increase in value of the world of things arises in direct proportion the decrease of value of human beings. Labor does not only produce commodities, it produces itself and the laborer as a commodity and in relation to the level at which it produces commodities. The objectification of labor manifests itself so much as a loss of objects, that the laborer is robbed of the most necessary objects, not only to maintain his own life, but even objects to labor with. Indeed, labor itself becomes an object, which only with the greatest effort and with random interruptions can be acquired. Appropriation of objects manifests itself so much as estrangement, that, the more objects the laborer produces, the fewer he can own and so he plunges deeper under the mastery of his product: capital.�

Mill and Marx�s view of wages and capital also distinguishes them. Mill believed that wages depend upon capital and the proportion of population (the number of labouring class ). He believed that the demand and supply of labour determined the wage of the labour. Moreover, his socialist view of wages is clearly stated in the following lines:

�Wages, like other things, may be regulated either by competition or by customs. In this country there are few kinds of labour of which the remuneration would not be lower than it is, if the employer took the full advantage of competition.�

Therefore, one can immediately see that he believes in fundamentals of capitalism by saying that competition is the principal regulator of wages, but custom and individual characters are the modifying circumstances for wage of labor. Moreover, Mill believed wages to remain in the general rate (long run equilibrium) unless there is a change in the amount of capital or the number of labouring force. Therefore, we see that Mill established a direct relation with Wages, and agreed on this theory with Ricardo. In addition to this, he said that capital is the accumulated stock of the products of labor. After discussing such aspects and manifestation of capital, such as fixed versus circulating capital, Mill examined the social forms of production, such as cooperation, combination of labor, production on a small and large scale, and the increase of labor, which results in the increase of capital as well as production.

In contrast to this, Marx viewed wages and capital in an extremist view. He believed that labourers earn the least amount of wage for the amount of work they do. As they become more productive, they get less and less for the amount of work they do. Marx believed that the price of the commodity is composed of wages, rent and surplus profit. He argues that in order for the wages to increase, and the labour to be better off; the rent and surplus profit should also come to working class. The rent and surplus would go to the proletariat only when they were allowed to own the capital. This is his reasoning to promote ownership of capital in the country be controlled by the Proletariat. Therefore, he establishes the relation that labour and capital compliment each-other, and therefore, the capital should be used to create a better life for labourers.
�And so, the bourgeoisie and its economists maintain that the interest of the capitalist and of the laborer is the same. And in fact, so they are! The worker perishes if capital does not keep him busy. Capital perishes if it does not exploit labor-power, which, in order to exploit, it must buy. The more quickly the capital destined for production � the productive capital � increases, the more prosperous industry is, the more the bourgeoisie enriches itself, the better business gets, so many more workers does the capitalist need, so much the dearer does the worker sell himself. The fastest possible growth of productive capital is, therefore, the indispensable condition for a tolerable life to the laborer.�

Among the proposal of Communist beliefs, Karl Marx and Engels clearly state: �Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.� Once again, Marx seems to claim the formation of unions, or institutions to lobby for increase in wages, and lower the surplus profit for the bourgeois (Mill�s proposal of socialism into capitalism) as a step towards reaching the perfect state. His claim is that once labour forms such unions, all must unite as one to take the capital in the hands of the state, and hence, maximize the happiness for the proletariat. This state, he called, Communism.

We further discuss profit and private property in order to see the different views of Mill and Marx. Mill agreed that property can be owned privately, and that this allows the rent to be lower since the landlords compete among themselves. However, Mill feels that there should be some form of control by the government so that the landlords do not exploit the labourers.


�If private property were adopted, we must presume that it would be accompanied by none of the initial inequalities and injustice which obstruct the beneficial operation of the principle in old society�..�

Mill goes on to talk that even if complete public ownership was appointed in the society, �the division of profit might be either that of complete equality, or of apportionment to the necessities or deserts of individuals, in whatever manner might be conformable to the ideas of justice of policy prevailing in the community.� Therefore, once again, we see that he brings out the idea that how profit is divided in either privatized market or a centralized government depends upon the social ideas, culture, and what is believed to be right by the society. As far as private property is concerned, Mill believes that humans are in control of private property.

�In the social state, in every state except total solitude, any disposal whatever of them can only take place by the consent of society or rather of those dispose of its active force...the distribution of the wealth therefore depends on the laws of the society.�

Mill argues that the methods employed to distribute wealth, and hence decide how much private property is held, is through trial and error. He states that if people are allowed to own private property, then people will have more incentive to work because they would be the owners. He believes that society should be set up in a way that everyone gets to control a certain amount of property, even though not everyone can have equal amounts.

As opposed to this, Marx�s view of profit and private property is extreme. He believes that a Bourgeoisie is nothing but a lazy pig who tries to make profit from the work of the Proletariat. �But does wage labour create any property for the labourer? Not a bit.� He, therefore, argues that the surplus amount gained from produce does not go to the labourers who deserve it, but goes to Capitalists who exploit wage labour. Moreover, Marx argued that private property is useless because it only supports Bourgeois. He therefore argues that the concept of private property should not even exist in the society. In fact his proposal as a Communist is �abolition of property in land.�

�You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us; therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.�

Therefore, one can almost see that Marx would have considered Mill�s step as anti-thesis on the existing Capitalist society, and ultimately his step as the theory. Therefore, Mill�s Socialism is seen as a step towards Communism by Marx.
The next topics to be discussed are Government Intervention and Competition in order to differentiate the views of Mill and Marx. Mill believed that government intervention and competition were both very important aspect of a fair society. Mill recognized the fact that perfect competition had its flaws. Despite this, he still favored Competition compared to a society where people do not have to compete. He also argued that competition, overall, is for the betterment of the society. This is also one primary area where he directly talks against the extreme Socialists, and points out that although he favors socialism to a certain extent, he would not agree with extremist point in this one.
�But while I agree and sympathize with Socialist in this practical portion of their aims, I utterly dissent from the most conspicuous and vehement part of their teaching, their declamations against competition� They forget, too, that with the exception of competition among labourers, all other competition is for the benefit of the labourers, by cheapening the articles they consume�But if competition has its evils, it prevents greater evils.�

As far as government is concerned, Mill recognizes that there should be limitations as to how much of interference there should be from the government upon a society and a business. He discussed how most people thought the role of the government is to prevent and suppress force and fraud. One can argue, that by mention of force, Mill pointed against Monopoly, and by fraud, he meant that no individual shall do wrong onto another.

�Again, however wide a scope we may allow to the doctrine that individuals are the proper guardians of their own interests, and that government owes nothing to them but to them but to save them from being interfered with by other people, the doctrine can never be applicable to any persons but those who are capable of acting in their own behalf. �Can it make over the interests of one person to the control of another, and be excused from supervision, or from holding the person thus trusted, responsible for the discharge of the trust?�

It is unclear as to what exactly Mill thinks about government intervention, and to what extent he favored such intervention. However, it is clear to us that Mill did indeed support a limited form of intervention.

Marx�s view on Competition and Government Intervention is contrasting to the one of Mill. Competition is a big part of a Capitalist society, and therefore Marx saw it as a hindrance to the ideal society. When humans loose touch with their humane side and are concerned with only earning higher profits, Competition is an excuse they use in order to exploit labour. Competition also made labour wages cheaper. In my opinion, Marx saw a lopsided picture of the economy, and refused to acknowledge that competition made rent cheaper for the labourers as well. He also failed to see labourers as consumers. Marx did, however, agree that competition decreases the profit for the capitalists, and eventually should shift the wealth to the Proletarians.

�The battle of competition is fought by cheapening the commodities. The cheapness of the commodities depends, ceteris paribus, on the production of labour, and this again on the scale of production. Therefore, the larger capitalists beat the smaller.�

According to Marx, the government intervention should be obvious in the society. While Mill believed that government should intervene in a few selected issues in the society, Marx took this socialist view one more step and say that government should provide for those who cannot afford or act. Moreover, Marx seems to give importance to education, minimum wages and other such benefits. As a communist idol he considers this Socialist approach a step towards the goal of a state-ruled society. He also believed in extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state. Therefore, he ultimately says that everything should be state controlled, and then only can everyone be better off in the society.

Lastly, we compare the view of Mill and Marx towards revolution in order to bring out their socialist and communist side respectively. Moreover, we also analyze their thoughts on each other�s philosophy to truly bring about the distinction between these two economists. Mill rejected the idea of revolution. He argued that a revolution is a change of government effected by force, whether it is by a popular revolt or by a military usurpation. Mill, being a socialist, believed that political and economic questions are solved with a maximum agreement among men if they are dealt with in a factual, empirical spirit. Marx, on the other hand, believed that he was constructing a political language which was intended to empower the working class. He believed that it was necessarily for people to act on solidarity, and that force is necessary in order to take over the current system which was suppressive. Thus, �the communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling class tremble at communist revolution.�

Mill speaks against Communism. He points out the fact that communism was influenced by Socialism, but was taken to an extreme. He points out that when a Communist government promotes equal education for everyone, the work given to all labour would not produce the efficient results.

�A contest, who can do most for the common good, is not the kind of competition which Socialists repudiate. To what extent, therefore, the energy of labour would be diminished by Communism, or whether in the long run it would be diminished at all, must be undecided question.�

Moreover, how would the standards of measuring different kind of labour be decided in the Communist society, and who would do lower work, and who would do the higher work. Who decides that? These are the question Mill raised in opposition to Communism. He said that �communism exists only in ideas.� He also states that compared to the Capitalist society, if communism tries to balance the power, it would be as but �dust in the balance.�

Marx, on the other hand, argued that Socialism existed in different meanings for different classes of the society. It started with �Feudal Socialism�, where the bourgeoisie tried to show that it was good for the society to give power to them from the traditional Landlords or Kings. This gave rise to �Petty-Bourgeois Socialism.� This is where the small peasant proprietors become a class between the Bourgeois and the Proletariat. Marx argues that both these Socialism has proven fatal to the society. �It proved, incontrovertibly, the disastrous effects of machinery and division of labour, and the concentration of capital in a few hands�� Therefore, Marx argued that the true Socialism was that of German Socialist movement, which was eventually led to Communism in the country.

Therefore, in my opinion, Mill�s ideas and theories are clearly a bridge to that of Ricardo, Smith and Marx. Marx was an extremist who believed that Communism should be reached through any medium, precisely the reason for failure of this theory. Mill�s theory balances out capitalism and socialism, which most societies practice now, without any major conflict. In my opinion, Marx contradicted his own theory at the end. He believed that due to changes in society, the on-going ruling government changed from Feudalism to Capitalism. He agreed that Capitalism would change into Socialism, but he assumed that once the society reaches Communism, the society stops to change. In this manner, Marx failed to predict the long term changes in future, and presented his point of their through a narrow stance. Therefore, I would agree with Mill as far as the theory of Socialism is concerned, in that, the government needs to help mold the Capitalist environment into helping everyone, and not just the ruling class.






BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1. The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx
2. Principles of Political Economy, John Stuart Mill
3. The Letters of John Stuart Mill
4. Marxist Socialism, Shlomo Avineri
5. Utilitarianism and Other Essays, J.S Mill and Jeremy Bentham

   [ posted by Anastasia @ 07:13 PM ] | Viewed: 2021 times [ Feedback]

Adam Smith � Theory of Trade and Government Intervention into Free Trade

Adam Smith, also known as the Father of Economics, was born in Scotland. Two of his books �The Theory of the Moral Sentiment� and �The Wealth of Nations� have made a tremendous impact on the economic behavior of the countries in the world. At the time when Mercantilist had the government completely woven under their spell, Adam Smith appeared as an imperialist through the promotion of Internationalism and the anti-England of policy and thought. In his book �The Wealth of Nations,� Smith discussed the issues of production of labor, the theory of division of labor, the changes in price, capital, profit accumulation and the nature of market economy. In discussing the above, he explicitly refuted against mercantilism, and promoted free trade. The thesis of my paper talks about Adam Smith�s view on mercantilism and trade, government intervention, and his rationalization into free trade.

In order to understand Smith�s opinion about trade, one must understand the basic ideas of mercantilist view of his time. Mercantilists viewed the wealth of the nation to be fixed. Hence, any increase in wealth and economic power of one nation resulted at the expense of the other. Therefore, they believed that the government should regulate the economy so that the workers would get a low wage for a cheaper production. The domestic consumption should be minimized so that more goods could be exported to collect gold and silver. About this, Smith wrote:

�In the meantime one of the principal effects of those discoveries (America and of the sea route to the East Indies) has been to raise the mercantile system to a degree of splendour and glory which it could have never otherwise have attained to. It is the object of that system to enrich a great nation rather by trade and manufactures than by the improvement and cultivation of land, rather by the industry of the towns than by that of the country.�

Adam Smith completely debated the mercantilist argument, saying that the wealth of the nation is not gold and silver, but it is the skill and the productivity of the labor. Hence the land and labor of the country should be used to produce goods rather than just bringing in goods as an intermediary to trade with little profit. Moreover, Adam Smith defined the role of production as consumption, and not the collection of bullion as the popular belief used to be. He suggested that the major focus of the country should be to consume more, and hence more production and availability of more goods is better for the country. In order for this to happen, Smith promoted the policy of Laissez Faire which he explained by means of his �invisible hand doctrine.�
��.every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own again, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.�


Smith was profoundly religious, and saw that the �invisible hand� as the mechanism by which a benevolent God administered a universe in which human happiness was maximized. He believed that God had created humans with a nature that leads them to act a certain way, and in this case, to maximize their own utility. He also believed that the world as we know is pretty perfect and everyone is equally happy. Despite equal happiness, the human nature leads us to think that we would be happier if we were wealthier. This leads us to struggle to become wealthier, thus increasing the sum total of human happiness through the mechanisms of exchange and division of labor. There is one important thing that one should note when analyzing Smith�s �Invisible Hand Doctrine�, and it is that moral norms are necessary for such a system to work, that in order for exchange to proceed, contracts must be enforceable, people must have good access to information about the products and services available, and the rule of law must hold. After the assumption of the perfect society, Smith thus advocates his views about trade, and this is where his Laissez Faire Doctrine stands out.

Mercantilism brought about improper allocation of resources. The fundamental problem that Smith pointed out in mercantilism was the fact that the merchants had manipulated the King to employ his money into helping merchants of the country bring in raw produce from foreign countries. Although Smith was pro-trade, he didn�t agree that the labor of Great Britain was being employed into manufacturing only. He observed that the sole purpose of the labor was to add �value� into raw materials by working for the forced minimum wage. The goods were then exported it to some foreign country in order to gain profit for the merchant and the King. He saw that it was doing little justice to the productive capacity of the laborers. After that, countries started focusing in self-sufficiency, and tried to do everything themselves in order to produce at the cheapest, and then export it so that the profit is more. This according to Adam Smith was the worst thing an economy could do because the productive capacity is much higher if trade was allowed.

Moreover, Mercantilist operate to keep commerce, labor, or capital from following the channels in which they would otherwise go, or they cause inefficiency because they attract to a particular species of industry a greater share of the factors than would ordinarily be employed in it. He cites the example of the pin industry, where if one man was to do all part of the process, he would make 20 pins a day, but when the task was divided, they made 200 pins a day. If the economy as a whole did this it would be beneficial for the society because the goods would be abundant, and they would be able to trade it with each other to fulfill their needs and wants. This is also known as his �Absolute Advantage� theory.

�The natural advantages which one country has over another in producing particular commodities are sometimes so great, that it is acknowledged by all the world to be in vain to struggle with them�..But if there would be a manifest absurdity in turning towards any employment, thirty times more of the capital and industry of the country, than would be necessary to purchase from foreign countries an equal quantity of the commodities wanted, there must be an absurdity, though not altogether so glaring, yet exactly of the same king, in turning towards any such employment a thirtieth, or even a three hundredth part more of either��it will always be more advantageous for the latter, rather to buy of the former than to make.�

Adam Smith thus believed that in order for the absolute advantage to take place in the economy, there should be �abolition of existing systems of governmental regulation, though [Adam Smith] nowhere brings the several items in the program together.� Smith advocates four major reforms when it comes to the rules of the government that should be changed. He believes that there should be free choice of occupations by abolishing apprenticeship regulations and settlement laws. There should be free trade in land through the repeal of laws establishing entails, primogenitures and other restrictions on the free transfer of land by gift, devise or sale. There should be internal free trade which should be established through removal of local customs taxes. Lastly, Smith believes that free trade in foreign commerce by abolishing duties, bounties, and prohibitions of the merchantilistic regime and the trading monopolies of the chartered companies.

Adam Smith revolted against the government intervention mainly because of his argument, as previously stated, that the wealth of nations depends upon the productivity of labor and the proportion of laborers who are usefully or productively employed. He recognized the serious conflicts between private interest and the public interest in the market. If the government puts on restrictions, or supports one particular industry through import restrictions, then the companies become unproductive due to lack of competition. They will know that whatever they are doing will be enough for them to profit, or to reach the breakeven point. Hence, they will not come up with new technology or better production method in order to stay competitive in the market. Smith argued that the trade allows the division of labor and specialization, which further increases the productivity of labor, therefore providing an opportunity to increase the wealth of the nation. Smith also introduced the concept of increasing returns as labor becomes more and more specialized in its task.
�When the market is very small, no person can have any encouragement to dedicate himself entirely to one employment, for want of the power to exchange all that surplus part of the produce of his own labour, which is over and above his own consumption, for such parts of the produce of other men�s labour as he has occasion for.�

Smith then argues about the monopolistic power and its negative effect on the country. Monopoly occurs due to government intervention. This occurs when one company controls the entire industry. Often, governments support one large company in order to support the industry. Since there will be one dominant supplier in the country, they can raise the price of the commodity more than the real price of the commodity. Hence, there is improper market occurring in the country. Smith also points out that the monopolists act in their own interest, and not for the benefit of the country. For example, he talks about the monopoly in the corn market, where the monopolist might destroy part of the crop in order to gain extraordinary profits on the crop.
�People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. [The cord dealer, on the whole, performs a useful service, but because of his] excess of avarice he does not perform it perfectly. [The merchant exporter sometimes finds it to his interest, when dearth prevails both at home and abroad], very much to aggravate the calamities of the dearth, [at home by exporting corn].

Lastly, Smith argues for free trade and lack of government intervention by discussing the determinants of the price of the commodity. Smith said that the price of a commodity is determined by the rent of the land, the wage of the laborers, and the profit to the merchants. Smith argues that the rent of the land and the wage of the laborers are pretty stable. When there is government intervention that protects the merchants it gives them the power to raise their profit. This leads to extraordinary prices for the commodities. Conversely, when there is no government intervention, the society works in balance, the society can revolt against higher prices for a commodity by choosing its substitute in the market. Therefore, this controls the merchants from exorbitantly raising the profits.

Adam Smith is the father of economics, in that he saw a broad spectrum which no one else of his time saw. He believed that the policy for international trade should be the same as that of the free trade at home. Trade should take place based on the absolute advantage each country has in comparison to that of the other country. If one country is better at making pins, and the other one is better at making cloth, then they should each specialize in pins and cloth respectively, and trade in order to benefit each other. There should be no government intervention in the country. Although he came up with the idea of specialization and division of labor, he failed to see that the division of labor impairs the intelligence, enterprise, marital courage, and moral character of the laborers. Smith had much sympathy for the laborers and farmers, but he had little trust in the government. He recognized some of the exceptions where perhaps the intervention of the government was needed, but he refused to acknowledge that there are both positive and negative sides to having a government intervention in any case. Although Adam Smith advocated laissez faire, and free trade with extensive historical examples, he did recognize the fact that this highly depends upon the circumstances the country is in. His historical examples, and depth of knowledge has made Smith, the greatest contributor in the history of Economics, and this particular theory of laissez faire and free trade has sculpted today�s world in the mold Smith advocated.





REFERENCES:
1. The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith, Penguin Press
2. Adam Smith and Laissez Faire, The Journal of Political Economy, Jacob Viner, JSTOR

   [ posted by Anastasia @ 07:11 PM ] | Viewed: 1997 times [ Feedback]

An Analysis of Why Capitalism Doesn�t Work for Developing Countries?


The Mystery of Capital (de Soto)

Heterodox economics refers to the school of thought which do not confirm to the mainstream paradigm of neoclassical economics. This school of thought tries to focus on the dynamics of an economy, and claims to explain the more complex phenomenon of an economy. Hernando De Soto (De Soto), a Peruvian is one of the heterodox economists who has time and again tried to explain informal economies. He claims that the poor people are the solution, not the problem. In his book, The Mystery of Capital, De Soto tries to explain why capitalism has not worked for the Third World and Communist nations. He claims that the major problem with such economies is the lack of proper legal system that should be present for the economy to realize its full potentials. Moreover, De Soto claims that the concept of �Capital�, as explained by Smith, and perceived by the West, has not been understood by the Third World. The thesis of my paper analyzes De Soto�s theory and its validity. I shall also discuss whether there are additional factors involved in the failure of capitalism in the Third World.

De Soto starts by the necessity for the Third World countries to realize the problem of what he calls �extralegal� economy. De Soto, like classical economists, favors capitalism. �Capitalism stands alone as the only feasible way to rationally organize a modern economy.� He then goes on to explain that the triumph of capitalism only in the West could be a recipe for economic and political disaster. �If the Third World and former communist nations cannot escape the influence of the West, neither can the West disentangle itself from them.� De Soto claims that lack of information and skills to utilize the concept of capitalism in the Third World people and culture are not adequate explanations to the failure of capitalism. He claims that the major stumbling block that keeps the rest of the world from benefiting from capitalism is its inability to produce capital, and this inability is to be blamed at the legal system of the country. He claims that the idea of capital is difficult to grasp because one knows it exists but cannot see.

He explains his theory of lack of understanding of capitalism, firstly by explaining the missing information problem in Third World countries. De Soto says that 80% of the population of the Third World country led their lives in extralegal economy. De Soto goes on to explain how extralegal economies existed. When technical revolution occurred, most people had rising wages in the cities. Recognizing the lucrative offer, more people moved into the city. Moreover, there was an increase of population due to increasing sophistication in medical science. Therefore, due to too much movement into the city, there existed shantytowns, and hence occured, unplanned constructions. �4.7 Million Egyptians have chosen to build their houses illegally�It is very nearly as difficult to stay legal as it is to become legal.� De Soto claims that most people stay illegal because the cost of staying legal is more than benefits of becoming legal. De Soto emphasizes the importance of the governments to recognize such an economy, and how the government should try to legalize it. �Undercapitalized sectors throughout the Third World buzz with hard work and ingenuity.� When people buy lands, and don�t inform the registry office, the exchange economy becomes constrained and sluggish. And hence, there is a start of the extralegal sector.

De Soto then talks about the �Dead Capital� syndrome that occurs because although the poor people own the capital, there is no way they can invest, or do anything productive with it. �Dead capital, virtual mountains of it, lines the streets of every developing and former communist country. In Peru, 53% of city dwellers and 81% of people in the countryside live in extralegal dwellings.� Therefore, De Soto claims, as opposed to the popular belief of Economists, �international poverty� is not accurately viewed. �By our calculations, the total value of the real estate help but not legally owned by the poor of the Third World and former communist nation is at least $9.3 trillion.� He claims that this asset is ready to be used, and to be transformed into capital.

De Soto then moves on to talk about the lack of concept as a problem that occurs in the Third World, mainly, the mystery of Capital. He uses it to explain why capitalism fails in the Third World and former Communist nations. De Soto blames the West for having forgotten how they changed assets into capitals, and hence, their inability to teach the Third World countries how to do so. He emphasizes the importance of distinguishing physical assets from the real capital. Real capital is that part of country�s assets that initiates surplus production and increases productivity. De Soto also refers to Smith and Marx when he explains this idea.

�Smith emphasized one point that is at the very heart of the mystery we are trying to solve: For accumulated assets to become active capital and put additional production in motion, they must be fixed and realized in some particular subject �which lasts for some time at least after that labour is past. It is, as it were, a certain quantity of labour stocked and stored up to be employed, if necessary, upon some other occasion.�

De Soto claims that the concept of capital is not recognized by Third World countries. Third World countries are infamous for inflating their economies with money, while not being able to generate much capital. Bringing dead capital into life requires a process for fixing an asset�s economic potential into a form that can be used to initiate additional production. For instance, the land owned by people in the Flavelas of Brazil cannot be used for collateral because it has not been registered with the government. Ownership changes hand so fast, that when an investor wants to purchase such lands, he doesn�t bother to go through the legal procedures either. Therefore, all the income of the economy is being highly minimized.

Moreover, De Soto moves on to emphasize that the system of private property ownership as a way to recognize capital was discovered by the West. It is the formal property that provides the process, the forms, and the rules that �fixes� assets in a condition that allows us to realize them as active capital. He moves on to explain the some effects of Formal Property System that worked for the West, but which the Third World countries have not yet discovered. Firstly, capital is born by representing the asset in writing. The description should contain economically and socially useful concept as opposed to mere visual description of the asset. Oftentimes, no papers exist for such provisions in Third World. In the West, one person from one country can buy lands based on the title, without having to physically go there. Secondly, such representation of writing needs to be integrated into one major formal system. In the Third World, dozens of organizations have this, but not a single concrete system exists. In the West, the asset can be evaluated and exchanged easily due to such a formal system. Lastly, De Soto points out the fact that releasing owners from restrictive local arrangements and bringing them into a more integrated legal system facilitates accountability. The authorities are able to learn about legal infractions and dishonored contracts. In my opinion, this is one major important issue Third World countries have to deal with. Legitimizing business deals and winning the confidence of investors remains a challenge for most Third World countries to this day.

De Soto moves on to explain the mystery of political awareness that Third World countries should solve. He explains the concept of Braudel�s Bell Jar in the society. He also looks at the reason why the Governments do not realize the concept and existence of bell jar. The concept looks at the fact that the legal society, which is very small in proportion to the extralegal, is inside the bell jar. The extralegal sector, outside the bell jar, cannot enter the legal sector due to political and legal system. �The failure of the legal order to keep pace with this astonishing economic and social upheaval has forced the new migrants to invent extralegal substitutes for established law�.the migrants in the developing world can deal only with people they know and trust.� A legal failure that prevents enterprising people from negotiating with strangers defaults the division of labor and fastens would-be entrepreneurs to smaller circles of specialization and low productivity. I agree with De Soto in the limited productivity forced by lack of supportive legal system, and that the political leaders of the country need to realize that legalizing such sectors is the key step to leading their countries towards developments. Moreover, De Soto emphasizes that political blindness consists of being unaware that the growth of the extralegal sector and the breakdown of the existing legal order in the Third World are ultimately due to a gigantic movement away from life organized on a small scale toward one organized in a larger context.

De Soto merely touches on the problem of international trade in this section. �When migrants move from developing and former communist countries to advanced nations, well-developed institutions eventually absorb them into a networked property system that helps them produce surplus value.� I feel that De Soto should have put more research into this particular arena. This is one problem most developing countries are facing today. Most of their educated and skilled countrymen are pulled by U.S., Canada and eastern European countries through migration and skilled visa programs. More people have abandoned Third World countries, and the demographics have resulted in more skewed ness towards ageing and dependant population. De Soto does not address this problem as to why the Third World Countries have not been able to move forward in the corporate battlefield.
De Soto, after having promoted capitalism thus far, moves on to bring some of his Marxist beliefs. �These extralegal systems, in my opinion, constitute the most important rebellion against the status quo in the history of developing countries since their independence...� He said that the biggest rivals of the extralegal sector is the government itself, and since the extralegal sector is so large, the government is not able to fight against it. Therefore, when people get frustrated with the system, they will fight back. Most governments have realized this, and De Soto claims, have started recognizing such extralegal sectors. Eventually, all governments will have to compromise and legalize the extralegal sectors, but the question of timing is the key mantra for a Third World country�s success claims De Soto. This mixture of capitalistic and Marxist belief makes De Soto a truly heterodox economist. However, De Soto does not back up this argument with any factual evidence. He discusses the history of United States, but the West has always been, and for a long time shall continue to be, different than the Third World countries. Therefore, in my opinion, the evidence in the West cannot convince the rest of the world.
In the last section of his book, De Soto enlightens the readers with the failure of legal system, and some of the misconceptions one operates with in the Third World countries. The misconceptions De Soto talks about are as follows:
1. People stay in the extralegal sector in order to avoid paying taxes.
2. Enacting mandatory law on property is sufficient, and governments can ignore the costs of compliance with that law;
3. Existing extralegal arrangements or �social contracts� can be ignored.
4. People�s conventions on how they hold their assets, both legal and extralegal can be changed without high-level political leadership.

De Soto moves on to discuss these misconceptions. He mentions that according to his research, the cost of lack of insurance, the potential market the businesses could make the cost greater than the tax they could avoid. He also points out that the challenge today in most non-western countries is not to put all the nation�s land and buildings into the same map, but to integrate the formal legal conventions inside the bell jar with the extralegal sector outside the jar. De Soto emphasizes that no major legal change has gone without major political responsibility. De Soto explains this through the �meta-rights� theory, where he claims that the citizens should get the right to the property rights. �The demand for codification is a demand of the people to be released from the mystery and uncertainty of unwritten or even of case law.�
Overall, I think De Soto points out a very important arena that most Economists had not explored, or bothered to think about. His view on the legal system, the lack of strong political stance is something we can observe in every Third World country. For example, Zimbabwe, Nepal, and Liberia � all these countries are going through a strong revolution in an effort to unite all sectors of their divided economy. However, some of the claims De Soto makes is questionable. De Soto gives the illusion of rigorous study, but gives no proof. He does attach some charts, but with no explanation of what those charts say. For instance, he never says how he and his team determined whether a building was formal or informal. Moreover, according to Table 2.1 in his book, the calculation assumes that 85% of urban dwellers are informal. This percentage is much higher than that in three of the four countries for which De Soto provides detail- Peru (53%), the Philippines (57%), and Haiti (68%) . Only in Egypt is the number higher (92%). This is a classic example of how statistics can lie in one�s analysis.
In the countries that De Soto studied and came up with the solutions, one must ask, why did he choose such countries? Each of the country De Soto studied (Haiti not included), has the second or third highest level of informal activity in its respective region. This makes them ideal countries for De Soto to study. But it makes them less ideal countries from which to extrapolate estimates of informal activities or assets in other countries. Moreover, the policies, or the level of explanation De Soto gives has been that for the governments that have somewhat come in terms with the informal sectors. De Soto nowhere talks about countries like Liberia, or Libya to discuss what those kinds of Third World countries should do.
Another point where De Soto�s argument can be debated over is that he clearly dismisses the cultural orientation of the country, and people�s mind set as something secondary which has nothing to do with why Capitalism did not work there. In most Third World countries, Capitalism is a western idea which represents the idea of �Social Darwinism.� What people do not understand is, only if they are productive and the best will they reap the benefits of the society. Moreover, the East has always valued stability and certainty in standard of living. Capital economy is an anarchic chaos, constantly threatened by mass unemployment, stagnation, and collapse. For the present, advanced capitalist countries maintain prosperity by military spending and foreign dumping. This is something Third World countries oppose. Moreover, such countries see a lot of Multinationals penetrate their country, and reap profits while their domestic firms are forced out of the market. De Soto fails to see all these prejudices which lies in the Third World populations� mind.
Overall, De Soto�s book �The Mystery of Capitalism� is a good one, in that it focuses on the major issue of lack of good integrative legal systems in the Third World countries. This comes out to be true in general. However, De Soto should take other factors into consideration, and also include some Eastern countries in his research to get a concrete result.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. De Soto, The Mystery of Capital, 2000
2. H. Alger & S. Legree, �Capitalism� East and West, 1961
3. www.redflag.org, Capitalism�s Agenda for Poverty in Africa.

   [ posted by Anastasia @ 07:09 PM ] | Viewed: 1975 times [ Feedback]

By Ashutosh Tiwari

In the spring of 2004, together with a long-time friend Surendra Sthapit, I taught microeconomics on Mondays and Wednesdays for a total of four hours a week to full-time MBA students at Kathmandu's Ace Institute of Management for a semester.

Ace's officials appeared quite confident about taking a risk on a relatively unknown, yet professionally busy, quantity like me.

At the time, I had a demanding full-time job -- running a business development facility called Business Service Aadhar at Heritage Plaza in Kamladi. And the last thing I needed was sleepless nights worrying about what and how I was going to teach the following day.

Still, after talking things over with friends, I accepted the early-morning teaching assignment for two reasons.

First, I wanted to develop the discipline of being a teacher: preparing lesson plans, devising problem sets, and answering difficult questions that the students might ask.

Second, I wanted to see whether Surendra and I could help make economics a fun and exciting subject that students saw as having immediate real-world applications.

Briefly, then, here are four lessons we took home from our teaching work.

VALUE STUDENT DIVERSITY: Nepali MBA students come from a variety of academic, ethnic and social backgrounds. Some have BBA. Others have previous degrees from engineering, hotel management or arts and humanities faculties. Some are scions of reputed business families. Others hardly know anyone influential in Kathmandu. Some went to fancy high schools, and can dream in English. Others find it difficult to carry conversations in English. Some understand differential equations. Others don't know what y = mx + c means.

Similarly, some have been overseas. For others, Kathmandu is the first major city they've been to since leaving villages. True, institutions such as Ace need to do more outreach activities to attract a diverse set of qualified students from traditionally underrepresented ethnic groups, and academic and social backgrounds.

But as things stood, we found the students united in their desire to earn the MBA degree to do well in life, either in or out of Nepal. That is why investing time to get to know the students can be quite helpful. That way a teacher understands where the students are coming from, what their dreams and aspirations are, and how they expect to use the education and the degree to lead productive, fulfilling lives.

EMPHASIZE LOGIC OVER MATH: Economics, as non-economists are amazed to find out, is best taught by using calculus. Indeed, mathematics has long been the shorthand of economics, just as it is of physics. But given time constraints and students' uneven academic backgrounds, it was neither possible nor practical to turn MBA micro classes into calculus boot-camps. As such, a judgment call was necessary to decide how to teach microeconomics effectively.

As a teacher, you want students who are going to be managers later on to get enough practice to be able to reason economically by using straightforward logic, and not get stuck on mathematical techniques.

With this goal in mind, apart from using basic algebra, our teaching was through deductive reasoning. For the students, learning economics then became a relatively background-neutral pursuit: If they made efforts to think through and argue logically, then, they could reason well by making use of the standard economic assumptions and principles.

ECONOMICS TO UNDERSTAND EVERYDAY LIFE: Almost all students appeared to have previous economics training that convinced them that the subject was dry and boring, and had zero relevance in their lives. And their teachers apparently taught the subject in ways to hammer home that belief. The result was that the students came to class -- all ready to be indifferent to indifference curves and theories of perfect competition. Yes, they "knew" economics in a memorized sense. But they had no understanding of how to use it to interpret and explain everyday issues.

We attempted to confront this problem by using Nepal-specific, drawn-from-the-headlines examples whenever possible.

The idea was to underscore that economics is very much around us, and that, with some effort, students should be able to apply, at a minimum, classroom learning to dissect news items that appeared in the business press.

To that end, we started each class by having a student or two present short economic analyses of newspaper reports. From explaining why oil prices were rising globally to why Nepali fashion models appeared to have short careers to why music-video producers do not pay much money to actors to what could be done to improve the traffic flow to ease the congestion at Putali Sadak, the students explored a variety of news-items through the lens of economics.

At the end, each wrote a five-page paper in English explaining some everyday issue that made them show their competence in economic reasoning. The downside of all these activities was that we were behind in covering the syllabus, and had to arrange for additional classes to catch up.

But the greater reward was that most students appeared to have become genuinely excited by economics. They repeatedly told us they had never thought that the subject could have such immediate and widespread applications in their lives.

FOCUS ON THE CORE: It's very tempting to cram everything about microeconomics in a semester. Since most MBA students are beginners, such an approach can be self-defeating for two reasons.

First, the students are not going to be economists per se. They are going to be managers who need to use the tools of economics to make managerial decisions in private or public sectors.

Second, teaching too many concepts often confuses the students, who end up having a scattered view of the discipline. As such, it is more important, as a mater of teaching strategy, to ensure that, at a minimum, the students thoroughly master the core concepts of incentives, opportunity costs, trade-offs, marginality, trade, competition and other such cornerstones of economics than about the relatively obscure points about, say, the cobweb model.

Looking back, I am not sure, despite our best efforts, how much economics the students really learnt from Surendra and me. Hindsight is always better, and surely, we could have done better in ways more than one.

But as it happens with any teaching activity, it was us who, at the end of the semester, learnt a lot more about the subject and about the art the teaching economics.

[Shortly after completing the semester of teaching, Surendra Sthapit left for London, England, where he's pursuing banking-related advanced studies; Ashutosh Tiwari took up a job in Dhaka, Bangladesh at the South Asia-focused office of the International Finance Corporation (www.ifc.org), the private-sector arm of the World Bank. This article first appeared in Kathmandu's BOSS business monthly, April 2006 issue.]

A related article in The New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/12/business/yourmoney/12view.html

   [ posted by ashu @ 06:01 AM ] | Viewed: 3159 times [ Feedback]

Missing the larger point
By Biswas



American academia has been buzzing of late with the debate between the Creationists, the proponents of the Intelligent Design theory, originally espoused by English clergyman William Paley, and the adherents of the Darwinian Evolution.



As modern biology is unable, the creationists argue, to explain many complex processes that sustain life, the highly complex mechanism of blood clotting and the protein-directing traffic system of eukaryotic cells in humans, or the psychological basis of dream, for example, only God, an intelligent creator, can design and regulate such superhuman processes. Therefore, in addition to Darwinian evolution, Intelligent Design theory should also be taught in schools.



On the other hand, the evolutionists butt in, the most complex biological phenomena maybe readily explained if they can be divided into simpler sub-stages. The process of clotting, for instance, is comparatively simpler in jawless fishes as it involves fewer steps. Evolutionists believe science and religion don’t go together hence all efforts to mix the two up are inadvisable as they can only mislead young minds. Here is my take.



One night, a cockroach zoomed inches past my nose and lodged on the curtain beside. I was aware that roaches have fractured vision and seldom fly unless in desperation. But I didn’t know their frail looking antennas are in fact quite resilient and that they sit on fabrics with firm grip. My casual effort to pull it off from the curtain with one of its antennas went in vain. Neither did the antenna break and nor was I able to detach the insect from the curtain (Of course, I didn’t yank it with all my might). Maybe, their antennas have evolved over time and have got stronger as predators kept tugging at them. Or, an intelligent creator might have designed them strong.



Without the intrigue of knowing how the insect would respond, I would never have pulled its antenna. And I could only imagine how it would react before I did.



I believe the most important function of school education is to make the students more intrigued about the subject at hand and imbue in them a sense of imagination about it. Such educational material that allow learners to think for themselves, rather then make them second-hand recipients of pre-ordained set of theories, would ensure that the students would decide for themselves what is worth believing and what is not.

   [ posted by Biswas @ 04:18 PM ] | Viewed: 1818 times [ Feedback]

Nude Kathmandu
By Biswas



The hottest tourist spot for the rich and the famous this year is the southeastern European country of Croatia. Tourists are enamoured by the breathtaking scenery of its paradise islands like Hvar and Dalmatian—but, apparently, the biggest draw are the nudist beaches offshore these isles. Landlocked, we are oceans away from any nudist beach, nevertheless, we can take some solace from the fact that the bare-all sands can well be dispensed with in Kathmandu, the nude capital of the world.



No matter where you are in Kathmandu, if you fail to notice nudity, you are either blind or a nudist yourself, or better, an alien or one among the Maoist-driven coterie who have descended into the capital. With much hullabaloo about the hankie-shorts and kerchief-pants in the newspapers recently, I will go no further to elucidate the small-is-beautiful dress mentality of Kathmanduees.



Lest you think nudity is all about shedding, again, I am afraid you are wrong — at least in Kathmandu. It seems that the newly varnished Great Walls of Kathmandu appal the theatre owners no ends: until they have clothed, papered rather — talk about fashion! — these walls over with oversized educational posters with perfect A’s they can’t have a good night’s snore.



Even then, you might pitch in, when the capital is flanked by gun-trotting hucksters on all sides, how can I assert that Kathmandu is as bare as Ronaldo’s pate? Point noted. But again, grant the men in green one genie wish and I will stick my neck out and predict that the rejoinder will be: Less clothes, fewer arms. The government, I am reliably informed, after its ingenious ‘back-seat’ public trust building campaign, is butting heads together again for an ordinance on nudity, a few lines of which was leaked: Reliable intelligence from Iraq tells us that some uncivil members of the society may be planning suicide attacks in Kathmandu. Hence this ordinance forbids wearing all kinds of clothes with no exception, which otherwise maybe used to conceal weapons. The offender will be summarily incarcerated if found garbed.



Kathmandu’s denuded roads sans greenery; the skin-shedding weather; the bare or be bared troupe of politicians—all hint at our nudist haute couture.



On the other hand, the red-brigade is hell-bent on equating peace with nudity, as is the case in Croatia. The country reeled under a bitter civil war after its independence from former Yugoslavia in 1991. But for the last ten years peace has returned which has in turn boosted the countries’ tourism. Now many a tourists come here to bask in the beaches under the Mediterranean sun. Hence, our comrades contend that peace is directly proportional to nudity. Violence is the only means, they say, to preserve our well-draped culture. Well, they do have a point! The more the peace, the less people seem to wear.

   [ posted by Biswas @ 04:17 PM ] | Viewed: 2389 times [ Feedback]

As the earth has been revolving in a constant rate for ages, many things on its periphery are also gradually changing. And one of the things, that is constantly altering is the way we think. In our parent’s time, they used to meet their life-partner first time straight on the marriage spot. Few lucky ones used to get a glance of their will-be in pictures before hand. This might sound like fairy tale to many; especially to those who are polished with the sense of western independence and have spent major part of their lives in Europe or North America. That is the reality but the scenario is gradually changing. At least, we don’t need to wait till the wedding date to get a glance of future life partner today. Furthermore, there are numerous examples where parents only know about the marriage of their offspring after the marriage itself. But this transition has not been silky. There still exist few hurdles in the current practice where these two opposite ends of the philosophy merge together. Majority of guardians regardless of their location (east or west part of the world) are still influenced by the old practice and the young ones advocate independence and freedom to take their own decision which creates tension in the family. Please note that I am not advocating the teenage infatuation or stubbornness here. I am representing the views of independent, mature and responsible age group.

Marriage is certainly not a kid’s game but a major decision in life of choosing someone to spend the rest of the life with. Selecting a life-partner to spend whole life has become a hard drive on icy roads these days as we often come across a predicament whether to go for parent’s choice or your own. Few lucky ones, who haven’t picked the one to spend the life with or have decided they will go with parent’s choice or determined to go for their own choice, might not trip on this dilemma. In our Nepalese context, it’s hard to go against parent’s will as we are brought up in the environment where we are taught to be respectful to the elders, maintain cordial atmosphere in family and be disciplined. In one hand, most of the parents want their son/daughter get married with someone they pick. But in another hand, the young generation wants to get married with someone they have known for sometime. Boys do have a bit of freedom in this matter and they can at least convince their families if the girl is from similar social background; whereas girls are major victims of this traditional ill-practice. They are not even endowed with any opportunity to choose someone for themselves. And, even if she manages to find a guy for herself with similar social background, she is destined to sacrifice her feeling with the fear of crossing the family barrier and her role as a loyal daughter to her parents. The major point of the conflict is whether a boy/girl has the right to pick his/her life-partner or not. Isn’t there any middle way out of this clash?

The prime factor which generates this conflict of interest is racial or caste system. I guess our generation really doesn’t care about whether his/her beloved is from same race/caste or not. Many are dealing with an impasse where the parents only accept the new member of the family from same race/cast; but they might end up with inter-caste affairs. Let me present few examples here. There is one friend of mine who fell in love with a girl from another caste and they are living together in America. My friend talked with his family about the girl and his family just got freaked out. Now this young couple is in the verge of break-up because my dear friend is reluctant to go against the will of the parents. And, there is another similar story. A girl fell in love with a friend of mine who is studying in Canada. He likes the girl, who goes to the same university as him, very much as she is smart, beautiful, educated or full of qualities a guy seeks in a wife. But the main problem is that they belong to different caste and their families have become a big obstacle between them. For many, the caste/race system has become a daunting challenge between the heart and the parents. Many parents are open enough to accept the new member in the family regardless of the race/caste these days which is really a good beginning. But it still can be a highly debatable issue between old and new generation in most of the Nepali family at the present context but I hope this problem will slowly fade away along with the time and emergence of new generations.

The race/caste system is not the only root of the conflict. There also exists a misconception among Nepali parents that young generation is not mature enough to take their own decision. Kids always remain kids for them. Whoever kids choose even if they are competent and from the same social background (race/caste), the parents are overwhelmed with the conservative reflection that the kids always come up with wrong choices. It’s not that parents are really enemies of the kids but they always possess a superiority complex that they have torn more clothes than kids.

So, what’s the way out from this disagreement between old and new generation? Although they say that love is blind and it doesn’t really care about any bars, we can’t be really blind picking life-partners for ourselves. We, at least, need to open one eye to look towards family’s perspectives. The young generation need to be selective so that family won’t be able create any traditional barriers like race or caste. We need to look before we leap. Someone may stamp me as racist because of my opinion but being pragmatic; I am advocating this doctrine especially for those whose family is strict enough to break the relation with the kids rather than accepting a new member from different race/caste. I guess that will be a good way out where you can still kill the snake but you won’t break your stick either. Few still dare to jump on the fire and might end up with extinguishing the fire as the time passes. And, parents also need to confirm with kids whether they have picked someone to spend the life with beforehand rather than just imposing their decision on kids. Children always do not come up with wrong choices. If both parent and kid give due respect to each other’s perspective, we may end up with better solution of this conundrum than ever lasting family dispute.

   [ posted by Rabin Bhattarai @ 04:01 PM ] | Viewed: 1833 times [ Feedback]