This is what I do NOT understand about people like Anil Jung Shahi -- who are, if you do careful reading of what they post, too partisanally ideological to even talk about democracy (which is all about rights, rights and nothing but rights). Let me give a fresh example. On one hand, he tells Isolated Freak: "Nevertheless, it is your right to DHOGO someone merely because she was married to the King." Then, notice how quickly , he rushes in to pass a completely uncalled-for judgement about how some people might (oh, my God!) CHOOSE to exercise that very right, which Anil himself recognized only a moment ago. He now writes: "By choosing to DHOGO someone merely of his/her birth, and not out of respect to their deeds YOU (capitalized because it is a general YOU) have displayed admission to subversion" This is RIDICULOUS, insulting and too prissily sanctimonious. I mean, once you recognize something as a right, why can't you ACCEPT that people may choose to exercise that right in ways that might offend your super-delicate political sensibilities? If you can't accept that, then, what can you really talk about democracy? *** Let me give an analogy. There's a guy in Ratna Park who sells soft-porn magazines. The police have taken him to a court at least three different times. Every time, he's haulked before a judge, the court has given him a clean chit, saying that he has every right to sell those magazines as a free seller. But the Nepali police NONETHELESS arrest the guy again and again, harrass him and try to throw him into jail. I have always found this to be a ridiculous situation. When the guy has clearly violated no rules of the land (and he's got a court statement to prove that), why the hell are the police harrassing him? The reason is this. The police CANNOT understand that once someone has a right to do something legally (and morally) in a democracy, that person may do something using that right that may well VIOLATE your or mine or his personal sense of what's good and what's bad . . . AND THAT IS PERFECTLY ALL RIGHT. That's the very essence of having a democratic mind-set. Likewise, sure, Anil J Shahi is ENTITLED to bring up his opinion about subversion. But by juxtaposing it right next to "but they have a right to do so" comment, he gives a clear signal that he's more interested in telling other people how to live their own lives as per his own ideologies than in expanding their overall degrees of freedom. oohi ashu