Model 1: Girija Is To Be Blamed

The NC was in power more than most during the 90s, and Girija was Prime Minister more than most. But instead of consolidating the democracy, the Girijas of the world became the new establishment. Massive corruption was institutionalized. The aspiratinos of the Madhesis, the Janajatis, the Dalits, the women, the poor were not given proper channels. Things fall apart when the center can not hold.

Girija's inflexibility that served so well in his quest for democracy became his bane post-democracy. A party with a clear majority going for mid-term elections is ridiculous. Girija does not know how to save face: he only knows how to corner his opponents into desperation. He does not understand compromise and coalition building is the name of the game in a democratic framework.

Because the moderate center did not perform, the left and the right came in to fill the vacuum.

Model 2: King G Is To Be Blamed

The king gets neither democracy nor constitutional monarchy, or he would not talk of being a "constructive monarch." He has acted a mirror image of the Maoists in trying to fill the vacuum left by the political parties. That might be cunning, and possible in the murky waters of today, but it is not magananimous. The king patronizingly refers to the country as his family. That shows a lack of gut-feel for basic premises in democracy.

King G got Chand to almost double the royal budget. That is NC style brahmaloot many times over.

Model 3: Deuba Is To Be Blamed

Why get rid of the parliament, bro! In the first place....

Model 4: The Maoists Are To Be Blamed

Not even the Chinese are Maoists anymore. The haat bazar in a remote village in Nepal is the market economy in action. The ancient Buddhist republics were democracies in action. Those twins are the necessary engines for growth. Gorbachev knows more about communist theory than Prachanda or Baburam, and he has said the market is it.

The LTTE have been far more lethal than the Maoists can ever hope to be, militarily. And the LTTE were not able to take over Colombo even after 20 vicious years. So the military option is out.

It is laughable of the Maoists to think the king will willingly give over power. Not this king. If anything King G will want to expand his role.

The dictatorship of the proletariat is not about to happen. Instead it is a game of who will blink first, and the two extreme sides do not care if the commoners suffer in the interim.

Supermodel 1: Panchayat II

There is a very real possibility the king decides he has had enough of it, and he plain takes over. Which will be the final blow of the right to the rest of the political spectrum. But such a move will, by definition, engineer a massive backlash. And more than Maoists will rally behind an all-out call for a republic.

Supermodel 2: "Jana Sarkar"

That does not exist in the rural areas either. It is more statelessness, lawlessness. And the urban centers hold strong. It can not be imagined Kathmandu can be taken over by the Maoists.

Not going to happen.

Supermodel 3: Constituent Assembly

This is the only option for quickie peace. But one suspects those now in power will not go for it. Instead they will wait and wait and wait. For the Maoists to possibly tire out. In the mean time, the people be damned.

Iraq will soon have elections for such a thing. And they will do fine for it.

Let the people decide.

But such a move will have to be simultaneous a total disarming of the Maoists.

Supermodel 4: Inflexibility

That Giriaj disease pervades the entire political spectrum. Mero goru ko barhai takka. This more than anything else is holding progress back.

Nepe. Nice numbers. Looks like the yoing blood in the coutry is die-hard republican like you.

"This is just my attempt to understand the current situation in Nepal and my analysis may sound sometimes naive/far-fetched as well."

Gokul ji, however your analysis may sound,(i am not educated enough on nepali politics to decide) your views are very intresting to read, be it in Science or Politics. Please do make your visit in sajha more frequent so we can enjoy more peace, calm and deep thoughtful posts.


Regarding this post, all i am doing is learning in here, nothing to add.

Gokul ji,

Acoording to the Constitution of Nepal, the National Defense Council which consists of the Prime Minister, the Defense Minister and the Commander in Chief, controls the army. The commander in Chief is chosen by the Prime Minister. Clearly the army should be answerable to the Prime minister.

The loyalty of the army to the King is extra-constitutiona thingl. Perhaps para-constitutional is a better word to describe it because it has been an unexplainable para-normal thing to many political pundits of Nepal. They and even our political parties which are demanding that the army should not be controlled by the King do not know how exactly are they going to change that by re-writing the constitution while retaining the throne.

*************************

Iso Freak,

Once we agree that the Maoists should be disarmed and the King defanged/dethroned, it is not a difficult thing to carry out. Simply they should be done simultaneously. The defanging/dethroning of the King should be made contingent on the disarming of the Maoists. That's all. It is just a simple question of technicalities.

The idea of keeping the King as it is or, worse, empowering him is not going to help anything.

**************************

Paramendra,

Nice numbers ? So you were not aware of this before ? No wonder you thought republicanism is a distant posiibility.

Nepe ji,
You said:
Where doe the royal loyality come from, if it does not from the constitution ?

र यो ब्रम्हरहस्यलाई एकछिन नखोलि राख्छु । पहिले हेरम् ककल्ले सोध्दा रैछन् ।

Alright we are talking now.

Nepe wrote: Iso Freak,

Once we agree that the Maoists should be disarmed and the King defanged/dethroned, it is not a difficult thing to carry out. Simply they should be done simultaneously. The defanging/dethroning of the King should be made contingent on the disarming of the Maoists. That's all. It is just a simple question of technicalities.

Here, who is we? We the people or the political parties? So what are the technicalities involved. Please explain.

Let's look at the historical parallel (I love history): Russia before the Bolshevik takeover. The Romanov monarch abdicated. There was a Provisional Govt. but the provisional govt. was weak, because it could not provide the leadership that the people of Russia were looking for, especially due to the disastrous performance of the economy following the World War I. There was a leadership vaccum, and the Bolshevicks easily took over the government. Even Lenin during his exile in Switzerland hadn't thought that it would be that easy. he had ocne remarked that maybe h would never see a Red Russia in his lifetime! What made the Red Russia possible in Lenin's lifetime was the leadership vaccum that existed in the transitional period.

I see that leadership vaccum in Nepal. Who/which party is promoting Republicanism in Nepal? So even if tomorrow the King decided that he has had enough and abdicates, who is going to take over the state? The democratic or pretending to be democratic parties are weak and it will be very easy for the Maoists to take over. Then comes the Army, will the Army show any resistance against the Maoists if the King abdicates? We are having a civil war in Nepal, not democratic debate, as far as my thinking goes. So the only solution that I see to have burgeoise democrats take control of the nation is: Start a movement with a LEADER who is credible. Girija, Madhav Kumar Nepal have lost their mass appeal. There has to be a new leader, who is a NATIONALIST and who can UNITE the divided -economically, politically and ETHNICALLY- nation, if your dream of a Bureagoise Democracy is to be achieved.

The time of Bolsheviks when the communist ideology was virgin, stainless and looked extremely promising does not compare with today when it remains as a flop, stained and unacceptable ideology.

However, you are right that the current top leadership of two major parties NC and UML do not measure up to leading the republic revolution.

माकुने र गिरिजाको राजतन्त्रवादी नेतृत्वको वर्चस्व खतम गरेर गणतन्त्रप्रति रुझान भएका 'स्वच्छ छवि' का नेताहरुको वर्चस्व स्थापना गर्नु गणतान्त्रिक क्रान्ति तर्फ बढ्ने अनेकौं कदमहरु मध्ये एक हो । युवावर्ग, नागरिक समाज र जनसाधारणहरुको बढ्दो गणतान्त्रिक रुझानले पैदा गरेको चापले पार्टीहरुको आन्तरिक क्रान्तिलाई प्रोत्साहन गर्नेछ । त्यसैले अहिलेको समय भनेको गणतन्त्र प्रति व्यापक जनसमर्थन जुटाउन कस्सिएर लाग्नुपर्ने समय हो । (त्यही भएर आशु तिवारी जस्ता गणतान्त्रिक आन्दोलनका प्रतिक्रियावादी दुश्मन हरुको उछित्तो खनेको हो मैले for pure sense of activism for republicanism. I don't have any personal grudge against him )

गणतान्त्रिक अभियान पार्टीहरुको जिर्णोद्धारको निम्ति मात्रै होईन, माओवादीको अपरिभाषित एक्काइसौं शताब्दीको जनवादको विरुद्ध पनि हो र राजाको महत्वाकांक्षाको विरुद्ध पनि हो । वास्तवमा गणतन्त्र नेपालको ईतिहासको यो घडीमा जादुको त्यो छडी नै हो जसले सबैलाई- पार्टीहरु, माओवादी र राजालाई- ठीक ठाउँमा ल्याउँछ ।

यस समय गणतन्त्रको विरुद्दमा लाग्नेहरु अज्ञानी, निराशावादी र दासहरु हुन् ।

यस समय गणतन्त्रको विरुद्दमा लाग्नेहरु अज्ञानी, निराशावादी र दासहरु हुन् ।

Nahuna pani sakchan. Tapaiko yo brihat bakya lai ma samarthan gardina. BUrjuwa Prajatantrik Ganatantra Nepal ki ta bandai bandaina, banyo bhane pani, safal hundaina. Yuba haroo ko josh ra vote lai tyatti mahatwa nadinus. Aja jo jossiye, bholi ti selauchan. Ra ahile ko paristhiti ma, joon bela desh ko saxyam yuba shakti bahiriyeko cha, kaam ko laagi, padhai ko lagi ya desh bata ajit bhayera, ti jossine yuba haroo lai syabas bhannu bhanda tini haroo sita daraunu parcha, kina bhane, tyastai chahine-nachahine samaya ma tattiyeka yuba haroo le garda Khumeni lai power ma lyao Iran ma.

Ok, what i am trying to say is:

When you analyze politics of any given country, one important thing to look at is the recent demographic shifts in that country, especially in the cities. Kathmandu's population has almost doubled in the last 10 years. People are migrating en masse to Kathmandu. Also Nepal's population is quite young. So these youths in kathmandu, who migrate from therural areas, not necessarily for their higher education is the group that makes the majority of all those Pratigaman rallies and all that because they are either unemployed, underemployed or underpaid. That's the angry youth population, who is very easily persuaded. They are the ones who will go destroy the jame masjid and burn the Qatar Airlines office, without thinking what their actions mean or will be translated within Nepal and elsewhere. So you see these people chanting pro-Republican slogans in Ratnapartk as a good thing, I don't. For me these are the people who are angry and they have their own reasons to be angry. And when people are angry, when the mob is angry, they will elect, choose whoever can exploit their angry mood, for example, Kumeni in Iran.

This is all from my side to this discussion.

Here, I forgot to add one thing:

If you ahve contacts in Nepal, ask them to carry out a survey during one of those Pratigaman Biruddha rallies, with these questions:

Age Group
Place of Birth
Education
Their reasons to be in Kathmandu [Education/Employment/Something Else]
Are You Employed?
The reasons that you are in the Rally [ I believe in democracy/ My friend is partcipating so I came along to see/ I have nothing else to do]

either unemployed, underemployed or underpaid

Let me explain this: During the Great Depression in America and Europe, a survey was carried out by Gallup. 87% said they would support Russia if there was a war between Russia and Germany. Also look at the development of fascism and how it spread all over the globe: unemployed, underemployed and underpaid people became the brand ambassador of fascism. So the time is not so favorable for a Burjuwa Prajatantrik Ganatantra of Nepal.

Let me explain this: During the Great Depression in America and Europe, a survey was carried out by Gallup in America. 87% said they would support Russia if there was a war between Russia and Germany.

America managed to control the spread of fascism in its territory, others were not lucky. From Italy and Germany, it spread everywhere because the whole world was danwa-dol. Also it brought to power through democratic elections, Hitler and Mussolini.

Alright done enough explaining, if it makes sense, that's fine. If it doesn't, that's fine too.

Nispaksha ji,

First of all I must thank you for being साँच्चिकै निस्पक्ष in your previous postings. Particularly I appreciate your pointing out to Ashu how he is confusing 'what should be' with 'what will be'. And of course your frank remark about Nepe's आफुसंग विमति राखने हरुको उछित्तो खन्ने काम ।

As I have admitted in the previous posting, I do उछित्तो खन्ने काम, but not to all आफुसंग विमति राखने हरु. It is only to certain category of people. विमति त यहाँ साझामा लगभग सबैसंग राख्छु कुनै न कुनै कुरामा । From Gokul ji ( on philosophy) to Sitara (on faith) to Biswo (on issues like abortion and Sanskrit for Nepal) to Paschim ( on republicanism) and everybody else. उनिहरुप्रति मेरो कत्रो श्रद्धा र सम्मान छ ।

अब लागौं ब्रम्हरहस्यको कुरा तिर ।

यो ब्रम्हरहस्य मैले साझामा यस अघि खोल्दै नखोलेको चाहीं होईन । ल हेर्नुस मेरा यी पाल्सी शब्दहरु एउटा पुरानो posting बाट (हाम्रा पानी पण्डित दीपक ज्ञवालीले टिके मन्त्री भएर प्रजातान्त्रिक नागरिक समाजप्रति बेबफाई गरे भन्ने मेरो अप्रसन्नताबाट भड्केका आशु र अरुहरु संग मेरो शास्त्रार्थ बाट उद्धरण गरेको )

- http://www.sajha.com/archives/openthread.cfm?threadid=11327&dsn=sajhaarchive2003

"In a plain and simple language Gyanedra abused dhara 127. If you want, I can show you it's letter does not give him any right to take over the executive power against Prime minister's will. I can also show you other article and clauses that does not allow him to take over the power on his own discretion.

Still, I am not saying that Gyanendra Maharaj ko kadam was unconstitutional. It was neither unconstitutional nor constitutional. In fact, it has nothing to do with the constitution. Yes, Sajha folks, you heard me right. Gyanendra Maharaj lied to you. This lier did not use the clause 127 of the constitution to take over the power. He actually used the clause 001 of the paraconstitution of Nepal. Ever heard about it ? No, na ? Let me introduce you with it. This is a very old sambidhaan, let's say, more than 200 years old. There aren't too many clauses in this paraconstitution, but they are clear cut about what they say. No way to make alternative interpretation like 2047 ko constitution. All right, so the clause 001 of it states that the Royal Nepali Army shall be fiercely loyal to the monarch. This is the clause which Gyanendra Maharaj had used to kick out Deuba and take over the executive power. Had Gyanendra only used the clause 127 of the 2047 ko sambidhan, Deuba could have easily kick Gyanendra's ass and declare on the national TV that he still is the prime minister of Nepal."

Aba chai sambidhan ko ek copy chai ma pani rakhnu parla jasto cha. K ho k ho ? Sabai ko aafnai defination. Big G ko aafnai, raaj bhakta ko aafnai, republican ko aafnai, aru sabai ko pani aafnai. O ho nepe daju lai jadau garnai birseko, jadau gare hai dajju. Hoina daju yeuta kura kya, yedi tapai le bheneko jastai hudo ho ta, world community, ajha hamro mitra rastra k herera baseko ta ? Army ta raja ko bafadar, pahila pani thyo, ahile pani cha ra bhawisya ma pani hune cha teshma malai ta kunai doubt chaina, tara kura aayo, yedi raja eklai ko nirnaya testo hune bhaye, aru le birodh kina garenan ta ? Nepal ma tetra sambidhan bid haru chan tini haru ko ghaita ma ghaam kina laagena ta ? Nepali janata lai "jo nepal ma nai baschan" nepal ko sambidhan ko gyan chaina hola ra ? Yedi Big G le dictator ship nai kaayam garna khoje ko ho bhane India or china especially India le accept garcha hola ta ? Hamra maobadi ra Big G ma kunai link huna sakne sambhawana kelauna sakidaina ta ? Royal family ma tetro ghatana huda maobadi le tyo opportunity ko faida kina uthayenan ?

Khai k ho k ho ? Ma sanga ta khali question matra cha, nepe dajju ra aru dajju haru pani hai pheri, yo mathi ka kura ta tapai haru ko bicha ma bhai raako kura link hola nahola, maile sabai posting padina. bhako bhako ko matra uttar diye pani huncha.

Ani ammai jhandai birseko

What I have understood till now about article 127 is " dhara 127 le baki sabai dhara ko pani sukaucha ta sabai jaha dhara 127 ko owner kaha nai jaanu parcha re kya" maile bujheko thi ho ki hoina. Ahile tyo dhara 127 ko owner chai hamro Big G. Yesh ma maile bujheko kati ra bujhna baki chai kati ho ? Ani yo 001 number ko dhara chai kata bata aayo ?


Lau Jai hos Nepal aama ko
ra tinka santan ko (some exceptional exists)

Thanks for revealing the puzzle.

Though I appreciate your ideological clarity and consistent activism for republican democracy in Nepal, I am not much impressed by this latest revelation of yours. During the formulation of current constitution, it was well known that palace wanted to retain some power and institution of RNA also needed a credible institution to rely on. So, there are some vague provisions in the constitution such as Security Council and mobilization of RNA under the order of the King. What the elected politicians should have done is, give clarity to such provisions by operational practices. For example, King Birendra could not have dared to intervene if the elected prime minister had attempted to reform RNA.

Constitution is just one component of formal institution and what is important in the real world is the informal institutions. Usually change and reforms are realized in the form of formal institutions (such as constitution), which are supposed to bring changes in the informal institutions (power relationships and others). But the new constitution of 2047 and political leadership could not generate kind of momentum that is strong enough to break down the old informal institutions (in leftist lexicon the feudal socio-economic structure). Rather the new leadership found it handy to negotiate for some accommodating space within the old informal institutions (such as UML saw big opportunity in NGO industry).

So, Nepe ji, the barrier to republicanism is not King or palace (in fact they are helping it with Raj Parisad like saga); it is the mindset of Nepali people. The unique characteristic of Nepalese people is: Willingness to claim political stakes WITHOUT taking due risks. That always makes them to follow a supposedly easy but muddled path which ends up consolidating the very institutions, which they claim are fighting against.

We know majority of Nepali intellectual think that it is not up to Nepali people to decide on the political future, it is the foreign powers, who decide on this matter. We are too good to demonstrate our patriotism through vandalism but too weak even to THINK, let alone to ACT that we CAN decide on what political system we want.

-Nispaksha

निस्पक्ष जी,

तपाई मेरो "रहस्योदघाटन" बाट प्रभावित नभएर ठीकै भएको छ, किनभने तपाईले हाम्रो राज्यसत्ताको खाका बारे यस्ता मिहिन प्रश्नहरु उठाउनुभयो जसको अक्सर गोलमटोलीकरण भएको देख्छु मेरो पहुँचको छलफलहरुमा । यस्ता मिहिन प्रश्नहरु बेगर अहिलेको सबभन्दा ठूलो प्रश्न '२०४७ को संविधानको असफलता प्रणालीजनित हो कि व्यक्तिजनित हो ?' को सही उत्तर भेटिने छैन र यो उत्तर बेगर संबिधान पुनर्लेखन, परिमार्जन, अक्षरश: कार्यान्वयन, क्रान्ति वा कुनै पनि प्रकारको परिवर्तनको मतलबपूर्ण कुरा गर्न सकिदैन ।

तपाईले उठाउनु भएका सबालहरुले, स्पष्टै छ, हाम्रो सम्विधानको र सत्ता चलाउन पुगेका सबैको कामको व्यापक शल्यक्रियाको माग गर्दछन् । यो वृहद काम म एक्लैको बुता, समय र यो थ्रेडको आयतनले भ्याउने कुरा होईन । त्यसैले एकाध बुँदामा केही संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी मात्र गर्न चाहन्छु ।

१. सेनाको राजाप्रतिको वफादारीको श्रोतलाई मैले अतिरिक्त-सम्वैधानिक (परा-सम्वैधानिक) भनें । भावमा मेरो अडान त्यही भएपनि तपाईलाई प्रभावित पार्ने मनसायले ल मैले मानें- त्यसको जड २०४७ को सम्विधानभित्रै छ । तर कहाँ छ त त्यो ? सम्विधानको मेरो पठन र मनन दुवैमा मैले त्यसलाई सम्विधानको अक्षरहरुमा देखिन । राजालाई सम्विधानले राजाको झुपडी भित्रको मामला र हकवाला तोक्ने बाहेक अरु कुनै कुरा पनि आफ्नै तजबिजमा गर्न पाउने हक लेखेर दिएको छैन । "प्रधानमन्त्रीको सिफारिशमा श्री ५ बाट गरिबक्सनेछ" भनेको "राजालाई त्यो अधिकार छैन" भनेर स्पष्ट भनेको हो ।

तथापि मेरो कवि आँखाले हेर्दा भने तीनै शब्दहरुले राजालाई उनले आँटेको खण्डमा ती अधिकारहरु दिएको देख्छु । यसो भनौं, ती शब्दहरुका सोझा अर्थहरुले हैन कि ती शब्दहरुका चालढाल, जिउ मर्काई, आँखा सन्काई, सिंगार पटारले राजाको ईच्छा जागे नाजायज सम्बन्धको लागि झ्यालबाट पोटुका खसालेको छ ।

कुनै रसिक शायरले लेखेका थिए-

एक ही मायने नही रखती तुम्हारी हर 'नही'
एक झुझलाकर 'नही', एक मुस्कुराकार 'नही'

२. संक्रमणकालिन सरकार (जसलाई अरुसंग तुलना गर्न मिल्दैन) पछिका सबै सरकारहरु अपवाद बिना (हुन त कोही ९ महिने एमाले सरकारलाई आंशिक "सफल" सरकार भन्छन्, तर स्थायित्व पनि त कडी हो सफलाताको) निर्विवाद असफल भए, आर्थिक- सामाजिक सुधारका मामला देखि तपाईले प्रस्ताव गर्नु भएको 'कार्य पद्धतिद्वारा प्रजातान्त्रिक सत्ताको सुस्पष्टिकरण को काम' सम्म । यसमा मेरो विमति छैन । तर यसो हुनुको कारण के हो त ? शायद यो कारणको पहिचान र त्यसको निदानको मामलामा हामी बेग्लै छौ भन्ने छनक पाउछु म । ल पहिला तपाई हाल्नुस तपाईको कुरा, अनि म हालौंला मेरो । मलाई विश्वास छ तपाईका कुराले म लाभान्वित हुनेछु र मेरा कुराले तपाई मनोरन्जित हुनुहुनेछ ।

लौ त बाँकी अर्को खेपमा ।

वास्तवमा गणतन्त्र नेपालको ईतिहासको यो घडीमा जादुको त्यो छडी नै हो
!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?

Yo kura malaai katti pani chitta bujhya chhaina. Tara tyas agadi sabai heram hai ta. Lamo lamo postings ayechha.

नेपे जी,
गाँठि कुरा के हो भने नेपालमा कोहि पनि धर्मको बाटोमा हिँडेनन् । राजा, नेता र वुद्धिजीबि लगायतका सबै वर्ग र पेसाका जनहरुले अधर्मको बाटो समाते । मैले यहाँ भन्न खोजेको धर्म पशुपतीको दर्शन वा दक्षिण कालीमा बोकाको वली चडाएर गरिने कर्मकाण्डी धर्म होईन । यस सन्दर्भमा धर्मको अर्थ आफ्नो कर्तव्य पथमा रहि निष्फल कर्म गर्नु हो । भन्नुस त नेपालमा आफ्नो कर्तव्य पथको पहिचान गरि तद्अनुसारको कर्म गर्ने कति छन् ? नेपाली जनहरुलाई आफ्नो भन्दा अरुको कर्म गर्नुमा आनन्द आउने जस्तो देखिन्छ । राजा, गुट-नाईके जस्ता; सम्भ्रान्त, चोर वा भीखमगा जस्ता; नेता, कार्यकर्ता जस्ता; कर्मचारी, ठेकेदार जस्ता; वुद्धिजीबि, नेता जस्ता; आदी आदि, होईन त? यसको नतिजा के हुन्छ भन्दा, गीताको यो श्लोक बुझौँ

श्रेयान् स्वधर्मो विगुण?????? परधर्मात् स्वनुष्ठितात् ।
स्वधर्मे निधनम् श्रेय????? पर धर्मो भयावह ।।

अर्थात, अरुको धर्म (कर्तव्य) मा पूर्णता हासिल गर्नु भन्दा अपूर्ण भए पनि आफ्नै कर्तव्य पथमा गरिने कर्म श्रेयस्कर हुन्छ । अर्काको कर्तव्य पथमा हिड्नु भन्दा त आफ्नो कर्तव्य पथमा आउने मृत्यु धेरै उत्तम हुन्छ, किनभने अर्काको कर्तव्य पथमा हिड्दाको परिणाम सधै भएङ्कर डरलाग्दो हुन्छ ।

नेपेजी, अब तपाई भन्नु होला यो त आग्राको र गाग्राको कुरा जस्तो भएन र ? छैन, तपाईले उठाउनु भएको प्रश्नको उत्तर यसै भीत्र पाईन्छ । कसरी ? भनी सोध्नुस न ! तब सम्म म पनि यो रहस्यलाई नखोलौँ ल ?

निष्पक्ष

निष्पक्षजी,

नेपालमा कोहि पनि स्वधर्मको बाटोमा हिँडेनन् भन्ने कुरा धेरै हदसम्म सही हो तर गाँठी कुरो यो होईन । मेरो विचारमा गाँठी कुरो त किन हिडेनन् त भन्ने प्रश्न हो ? नेपालीहरु स्वधर्मको बाटोमा हिंड्नै नसक्ने वा हिंडाउनै नसकिने जाती हुन् भनेर भन्न खोज्नु भएको अवश्यै होईन निष्पक्षजीले । कि हो ? होईन भने किन हिंडेनन् वा हिंडाउन सकिएन, त्यो हो गाँठी कुरा ।

४० भन्दा बढी भोटो फटाईसकेको छु मैले र मलाई सोध्नुहुन्छ भने उपयुक्त वातावरण दिएमा आजको समय सुहाउदो स्वधर्मपालन गर्न सक्नेमा नेपाली भन्दा बेहतर जाती अरु देखेको छैन मैले ।

फेरि राजनीतिक बाहेक अरु क्षेत्रलाई दोष दिने भनेको बदमास मालिकको दोष उसको निरिह कमारोलाई पनि दिनु जस्तै हो ।

अनि, २०४७ यताको राजनैतिक नेतृत्व नराम्रोसित नष्टभ्रष्ट र स्वधर्मपालनमा विफल भएपनि केही व्यक्तिहरुको incompetence बाट भएको होईन त्यो । त्यो सामुहिक पतन थियो र त्यसका पछाडी धर्मको खाका जिम्मेवार छ भन्ने मेरो जिरिह छ । धर्मको खाका निरपेक्ष रुपमै खराब भनेको चाही होईन है मैले । ईतिहासको फरक कालमा हुँदो हो त यो एक आदर्श धर्म हुन सक्थ्यो भन्नेमा मलाई अविश्वास छैन ।