One valid argument I have is that all Newar castes have specific occupational roles to perform in soceity (like Jyapu = farming, Bare = goldsmiths, Kasai = butchers, Sayami = oilworkers, Rajopadhyay = Hindu Brahmin priest, Bajracharya = Buddhist priest, Chitrakar = painter, Prajapati = potter makers, Deula = cleaners, Kapali = tailors, Nakami = ironsmith, Tuladhar, Tamrakar, Kansakar = merchants, etc.) Likewise, Shrestha's traditional role in society had always been in governing and administration since the Malla times. They are the Chhetris of Newars, there is also a Newari word 'Chathariya' / Kshatriya (?) to denote to few upper-caste clans among the Shresthas (like Malla = kings, Pradhan = chief ministers, Rajbhandari = royal treasurers, Raya = advisers, Kayasta = writers, etc.) who are the Kshatriya caste descendants of Malla and Lichchavi dynasties.  And since they were the controllers of their society (just like how Bahun-Chhetri are of the Khas society, or how Terai Brahmin-Rajput are of Madhesh), they too gained substantially and over-time had over-representation in all fields. Last edited: 09-Apr-16 12:59 AM Last edited: 09-Apr-16 01:13 AM

Rajesh BP · Apr 9, 2016 12:40 AM

@rajesh, no the notion of bahun chetri as 'oppressors' or 'rulers' is actually a new notion. u cant call the 15 or 25 families that ruled nepal to represent 1 crore bahun chhetri. till 2007 saal, there were rana families ruling the centre and the chaudharis,thakur,mukhiyas, jimmwal, subba,rai of the local caste ruling in local level as feudal lords.So there were tharu chaudharis ,magar mukhiyas/jamindars,rai subba/dewan, jha jamindars, bahun chetri mukhiyas jumwal, kirati subba/dewan etc in respective places. after the maithali speaking mallas and lichhivis, the shah rule saw the ascendance of pahade thakuri ,khas,bahun and magar in central power.so till the rise of jung bahadur we can see generals and ministers of magar ,gurung and khas families alike. but after junge, the ranas(kunwars) monopolised the state power and even the other reknowned bhardar families like thapa,basnyat,pande,other kunwers, rana magar were confied to junior officers and reginal governor level. so it was actually a matter of a family rule rather than some ethnic kind of oppression as presented now. also the newar high caste was always very close to the shah family and a lot of royal counselers, ambassadors,creditors,chautaria and kaji were newars too.

shiva_linga · Apr 9, 2016 8:50 AM

No I agree, this portrayal of Bahuns as the oppressors and this severe anti-Bahun feeling really proliferated since the democracy in 1991, and it just exploded after 2008. And to a good extent, there is no doubt that Bahuns have become the largest beneficiaries after the fall of the Shahs (symbolizing the downfall of Chhetris I suppose), but again to portray entire Bahun population as oppressors just because there happens to be majority Bahun politcal leaders in Singha durbar currently is looking at one thing and concluding a totally different thing. As you said, the vast majority of Khas Chhetris were and have never been at the center of power. Even today, majority of them reside in the least developed part of Nepal - Karnali and far west. Just because the Shah and Ranas and the handful of other Chhetri clans happened to be in power does not mean the entire 40 lakh + Chhetri population are in any way the rulers or part of the oppressing juggernaut.

Rajesh BP · Apr 9, 2016 11:51 AM