Shree5 wrote: "Ashu has somewhere said: " I do NOT back up the royals as much as I am interested in questioning democracy to make its ideas better for the Nepali context. Questioning democracy is NOT the same as being pro-monarch. My attitude is: when you question something in a genuinely I-want to-learn-about-this manner, then you come up with a better understanding of and higher appreciation for it. " ***** Shree5, thank you for bringing this up. As a life-long idea-junkie, yes, I would RE-AFFIRM that, the paragraph above pretty much sums up my attitude towards understanding ideas of all kinds . . . ideas I find in all sorts of media from Web postings to newspaper articles to research papers. I dislike dogmas of any kind. I believe that vigorous exchanges of tentative to EVIDENCE-driven ideas in public domains (through open debates, Web postings, newspaper articles, research papers and so on) make up the BEST way to learn new things and unlearn old inadequate concepts. And sharply playing the Devil's Advocate is often an intellectually effective way to understand the potential and the limitations of most ideas As economist-philosoper Amartya Sen sayd in his latest book "The Argumentative Indian" (the contents of which are quite applicable to us Nepalis as well): QUOTE "Discussions and argument are critically important for democracy and public reasoning . . .They are central to the practice of secularism and for even-handed treatment of adherents of different religious faith (including those who have no religious beliefs). The argumentative tradition, if used with deliberation and commitment, can also be extremely important in resisting social inequalities and removing poverty and deprivation. Voice is a crucial component of the pursuit of social justice. UNQUOTE In that spirit, let's allow viewpoints of all on Sajha. Let's celebrate Sajha's heterodoxy without CARICATURING (in blatantly false terms) those who disagree with us or have ideas that are different from ours. Tetti ho. oohi ashu