Posted by: TM April 10, 2011
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
History has proved over and over again that no political form of government, in absolute sense, works.
Communism - e.g. Pol Pot's Cambodia, Kim Sung Il's North Korea, etc.
Here is an real-life anology that shows Communism's stance of Equality does not work in nature.
With the same set of teachers and school facilities, how come a student from Budhanilkantha goes on to get a PhD in Physics from a world-class university while one of his classmate rings cash registers in NY soliciting "Would you like fries with that today"?
Darwin's Survival of the Fittest (based on an invidual's abilities and drive) theory has withstood the test of time for sure.
Capitalism (Free Market) - e.g. Great Depression era USA, Nepal ( Free Market = No consitution=Anarchy).
Adam's Smith's Invisible Hand definitely needs a leash lest they run up Mona Lisa's skirt.
Socialism - European Union Welfare States like Spain, Portugal, UK, the USA too (Medicare, Medicaid)
Never make promises you may not be able to deliver or do not elect leaders who display financial incompetence. Daniel Loeb, a young hedge hund manager, who recently purchased a $100 million dollar residence in Manhattan criticizes that American government is under a 'crisis of leadership' in terms of finances. With Medicare and Medicaid entitlement bulging, can the US run the government on 8 cents of each revenue-dollar?
Monarchy - e.g. Nepal, pre-Khmer Rouge Cambodia
Lucrative posts were provided to kins and yes-men. In Rana/Shah dynasty case, the doctrine was that literacy spells end to the enchanted party (chauraasi byanjan bhoj). Haves and have-nots got defined in perpetuity. Anyway, we are all Nepalese as a whole no matter what the ancestors did or did not do.
Fascism - WW II Italy
Corporations and government work hand-in-hand with little regard for the people.
Dictatorship - Hosni Mubarak, Gaddhafi
Privatized firms were being used to provide sweet heart deals to cronies and relatives while the majority of the population struggle to meet ends.
Regarding Nepal, no royal dynasty prevails forever and no political strong man will live forever. I hope the Kirats, the Lichchhavis, the Mallas, the Shahs, the Ranas and the Koiralas, as each invidual leader has done something good for Nepal that people will come to respect of as the leader's great legacy. Legacy is permanent and is all that matters when history is reviewed. The wealth amassed during power will in most cases become the dividing force in the inheriting generation and fun or lust while in power are just flitting.
So while a good lot of us are at a safe distance from the cauldron of battle called Nepal, the unsettling question has been who shall run the government there? I have a counter question - why on earth should anyone provide opinions on how to make their breadsticks at Olive Garden if he/she hardly ever eats at that restaurant?
Thus the logical and justful answer to who runs Nepal, in my opinion, is - it should be a leader or a political form picked by the majority of the actual inhabitants in Nepal. Fortunately or unfortunately, the truth is that the last election was won by the Maoist party in a landslide. Let's respect who the people picks as their leader or party this time and every time.
Communism - e.g. Pol Pot's Cambodia, Kim Sung Il's North Korea, etc.
Here is an real-life anology that shows Communism's stance of Equality does not work in nature.
With the same set of teachers and school facilities, how come a student from Budhanilkantha goes on to get a PhD in Physics from a world-class university while one of his classmate rings cash registers in NY soliciting "Would you like fries with that today"?
Darwin's Survival of the Fittest (based on an invidual's abilities and drive) theory has withstood the test of time for sure.
Capitalism (Free Market) - e.g. Great Depression era USA, Nepal ( Free Market = No consitution=Anarchy).
Adam's Smith's Invisible Hand definitely needs a leash lest they run up Mona Lisa's skirt.
Socialism - European Union Welfare States like Spain, Portugal, UK, the USA too (Medicare, Medicaid)
Never make promises you may not be able to deliver or do not elect leaders who display financial incompetence. Daniel Loeb, a young hedge hund manager, who recently purchased a $100 million dollar residence in Manhattan criticizes that American government is under a 'crisis of leadership' in terms of finances. With Medicare and Medicaid entitlement bulging, can the US run the government on 8 cents of each revenue-dollar?
Monarchy - e.g. Nepal, pre-Khmer Rouge Cambodia
Lucrative posts were provided to kins and yes-men. In Rana/Shah dynasty case, the doctrine was that literacy spells end to the enchanted party (chauraasi byanjan bhoj). Haves and have-nots got defined in perpetuity. Anyway, we are all Nepalese as a whole no matter what the ancestors did or did not do.
Fascism - WW II Italy
Corporations and government work hand-in-hand with little regard for the people.
Dictatorship - Hosni Mubarak, Gaddhafi
Privatized firms were being used to provide sweet heart deals to cronies and relatives while the majority of the population struggle to meet ends.
Regarding Nepal, no royal dynasty prevails forever and no political strong man will live forever. I hope the Kirats, the Lichchhavis, the Mallas, the Shahs, the Ranas and the Koiralas, as each invidual leader has done something good for Nepal that people will come to respect of as the leader's great legacy. Legacy is permanent and is all that matters when history is reviewed. The wealth amassed during power will in most cases become the dividing force in the inheriting generation and fun or lust while in power are just flitting.
So while a good lot of us are at a safe distance from the cauldron of battle called Nepal, the unsettling question has been who shall run the government there? I have a counter question - why on earth should anyone provide opinions on how to make their breadsticks at Olive Garden if he/she hardly ever eats at that restaurant?
Thus the logical and justful answer to who runs Nepal, in my opinion, is - it should be a leader or a political form picked by the majority of the actual inhabitants in Nepal. Fortunately or unfortunately, the truth is that the last election was won by the Maoist party in a landslide. Let's respect who the people picks as their leader or party this time and every time.
Last edited: 10-Apr-11 05:31 PM