Posted by: Vivant December 2, 2009
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
"The Maoists in Nepal should be given their fair share of credit for spreading the idea of liberation and political consciousness to people who have so long been supressed and exploited by the the power elites. I hate that disgusting sarcastic smile this speaker brings on her face when she says "We brought them (Maoists) into power which was a very big mistake again." People voted for them for God's sake !!"
Sure, but unless we are living in a time warp, today's Maoists are a far cry from the days when the People's War started. They have now become the biggest obstacle to political stability and the rule of law because of their disregard for due process whether it be in the Constituent Assembly or in the streets, neighborhoods and villages. Through the policies they advocate and the tactics they use today against the middle-class, professional classes and small businesses, they have shown an utter disregard for personal property and individual rights and provided us an insight into their subversive agenda to grab power and wealth in the name of the poor.
I also challenge the notion that the Maoists have raised awareness in any meaningful and objective way amongst the underclass. Far from it, they have used propagandist tactics to brainwash the poor into believing they can become rich overnight by taking to the streets and waging class warfare against the "rich". The so-called "consciousness" they might claim to have spread is a political get-rich-fast scam like those you saw in the US before the financial system tanked. Their bubble too will get busted once the poor realize people like teachers, lawyers, doctors, small businessmen, engineers, farmers etc are not going to part so easily with their hard earned income and assets. That is how I interpret her comment about the country making a mistake in voting the Maoists to power and I think she is right on the mark.
""Labor movement is restricted and we have the tightest labor laws in South Asia".
This is so vague again. I don't know a friend in Nepal who have had problem working in Nepal irrespective of their nationalities. The reason Nepal needs some restriction in labor movement is due to the open and porous border with India. Nepal will collapse on the day migrants/workers flock from India in thousands. Bihar and Uttar Pradhesh, India's most impoverished states in the North surrounds Nepal. Nepal's economy will not be able to contain the sheer volume of migrant workers coming in from India. "
The labor laws in Nepal are archaic, restrictive and ineffective - take the case of migrant overseas workers. The laws on the books, as well intended as they are , have become nothing more than a source of corruption for bureaucrats and a means to harass the very poor people they are designed to protect. You need look no further than the immigration area of the TIA to find it swarming with government officers preying on poor Nepalese going to places like the Gulf and Malaysia and extorting money from them.
There is nothing to stop Indian workers from coming into Nepal other than demand and supply. If the streets of Kathmandu are not teeming with Indian workers today, it is not because we have effective laws that stop them at the border. If anything it is because we don't have enough jobs to employ them. A no-brainer given that our people are leaving the country in droves to seek employment elsewhere.
Where I part ways with her is I think her organization might have been somewhat disingenuous in representing itself to the Nepali people. She says (and I paraphrase) she cannot openly say she is a libertarian in Nepal for fear of bodily harm or danger to her life (at least that was the implication). If Sunil Babu Pant can say he is gay and face the consequences and Kamal Thapa can openly advocate bringing back the monarchy, she is just being a cry baby in my opinion. If you hide your true beliefs behind a deceptive facade, just for the sake of acceptability, how are you any different from the Maoists who are doing exactly the same thing but from a different ideological angle?
Last edited: 02-Dec-09 10:15 PM