KATHMANDU, NEPAL, 15-SEP-2002: An army soldier warns photographers not to take pictures as he and other security personnel were on patrol along a busy street in Kathmandu, Sept. 15, 2002. At least four bombs went off today in the capital, a day before a nationwide strike called by Maoist rebels, but no one was injured, police said. [Photo by Devendra M. Singh, copyright 2002 by AFP and ClariNet]

Okay, I was refraining from commenting on the "mainstream" debate of this thread, because this topic has been talked about with candor in the past -- and I'm not fond of reinventing wheels; but I see some remarks here that might portray Biswo-ji as this "mainstream" voice who is supporting RNA unconditionally, one who is being hostile to "dissenting" views and questioning people's efforts to question things, one who is disparagingly generalizing the rural populace, etc.

Frankly, if there is one person here on Sajha who has criticized the RNA most brutally *AND* offered some of the most imaginative suggestions to better that institution at the same time, it is him. And only him.

A subtle reader will note that I don't agree with all he is saying -- and we have had disagreements on many issues before. But I *do* share the thrust of his points here that the so-called intelligentsia in Nepal and beyond -- from the bazaar academics and Rights activists to writers and the Bikase ilk -- has often found it fashionable to dwell on low-risk-high-return gambits of fact-less opinion making. And RNA being an untested, feudal, detached, sort of an unholy cow with royal links is a sexy target for cheap shots today, because despite all its flaws, you know a Jawaan won't come to your house in Teku to behead you at broad daylight. So by all means indulge and "critique". Try writing the same about the Maoists -- who incidentally probably don't know that even Chairman Mao said "heads don't grow back like chives", calling for some 'politeness' before killing a civilian senselessly.

Thanks to Nepali democracy, institutions like RNA and its patron the Palace, are no longer sacrosanct and have been vilified famously in recent years. You no longer become a hero in Nepal by saying unpleasant things about them. But we have to recognize that these are extremely trying times for Nepali sovereignty; and while cautioning and warning the RNA against excesses (and post-war possibilities of, for example, trying Nepali Generals from the Jungi Adda in the Hague for war crimes) have great merits, to pretend that what is ongoing in Nepal is a fair, refereed match between two disciplined sportsmen -- and to come up with novellas about broken and rigged rules that gentlemen shouldn't be breaking lest the "quality of war" falls, is absurd. This is a bloody, barbaric tussle that is guaranteed to produce NO victors, only losers. The sooner all this violence is subdued or ended, the better.

I am NOT urging anyone to keep quiet about the RNA, or support it blindly. The state HAS to act more responsibly and it can't stoop to the level of the terrorists in tactics it adopts; but at times like these, we have to choose sides and extend constructively critical support to a party by doing *least* damage to its mission (and this doesn't mean shut your eyes). And if you are a journalist looking for an opportunity to secure a story in the New York Times or a place on a discussion panel at some obscure Danish university, my polite suggestion to you is: go write about apple orchards in Jumla or smiling Japanese tourists climbing bloody Mount Annapurna.

gosh!
bloody? from you?? hehehe
whatever are you and arnico drinking these days.
tsk tsk :)

Nepal has done some PR for which we need to give it credit. For example, in the beginning it went to the villages with the aim of construction and wining people's trust. Fact is, people just don't remember the good deeds in the long run.

Also just because the CNC of army was performing Puja need not necessarily mean that he was not paying attention to the goings on of the army. For example, the CNC of the american army used to spend hours at the press conference and also he may have spent considerble time praying his own gods but that was not brought out as something evil. SO why does praying to the Hindu Gods need to be brought out as something evil?

May be the CNC was in the inauguration ceremony of the "priti" cassette as a PR exercise. But was mis-interpreted. I don't know the CNC and am not a insider of army but we have to give them credit when they diserve. We always criticize any and all the people in office without regards to whether that particular person is good or not.

What This will do is: it will frustate those good people in high office from trying to compete with the bad-doers since the people do not differenciate between them.

Paschim Ji,

I agree with you but, it is quite disheartening to listen to people denounce those who question; raise issues and question the "facts" they read. I am neither for the Maoists nor the RNA ( Unfortunately, I fall into the category of those Passivists:...Human Rightist).... but when I went to KTM this summer, and after talking to the local people, found out that people are as frightened of the RNA as of the Maoists.
They are still dealing with the the trauma of the Royal tragedy....'truth' has been vague or assumed and loyalties toward the throne are divided. The young people in KTM are afraid that they will be swiped off the street on bogus charges of being "Maoist". Two youth from our neighbourhood disappeared for a few days before they were released! And no, there was no accountability from anyone. Yes, people do live in fear of both. I talked to so many people, "intellectuals" as well as "non intellectuals", and the general tone of the environment is one of paranoa or apathy!

No! it is not one of my grieviances against My country but rather against those who have no qualms about throwing adjectives and or hurling insults against those who "post" or "question" here. It is almost like George Bush's "If you are not with us, you are against us!" Such a thought translates into "If you don't fight terroists, you are yourself a terroist". Why????????????? What is the harm in "thinking" things out, "talking" and or "expressing" opinions? By my two previous posts; one on "human rights" and the other one on "weak intelligentsia", I have no doubt that I will be cheerfully hanged as a "Maoist" or a "Mao sympathizer" by some of the Patriots here in Sajha!

And with this said.... I rest my case on this subject!!!!!!!!


Hahooguru ji;
As a well-meaning fan, I suggest you extract the "chewing gum" that seems to be stuck on your teeth; Hence, the sound of "GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" Were you trying to take the "Christian God's" Name in Vain? As for things flying over your head, it must be the Halo around your esteemed head!!!
:)

I think someone said it before...we cannot hide all the ills, pretend all is fine, and simply try to move on--we cannot just write/talk about "orchards in Jumla, or smiling Japanese tourist climbing the bloody Mt. Annapurna" (gosh, one would have reasons to believe Annapurna literally might be bloody these days!) while the country is in turmoil.

The ONLY way to solve the crisis at hand is to take it head on, struggle with the reality, laud the parties when they deserve it, criticize them when they fail to deliver (constructively, of course!), introduce numerous creative ideas, and try each one of those ideas until you find the one that works.

While I agree that some intellectuals/politicians may be criticizing the RNA simply to find an escape goat to hide their own short comings, which is utterly wrong, I also think there are some other quarters that are critical of either side of the conflict in a constructive manner. Where they err, no matter which side they are, I believe it is a rightful duty of the enlightened to be critical of them.

The RNA has a boulder task on it's shoulder, of fighting the terrorists while maintaining the balancing act of seeming humanitarian while being tough. We must certainly be cautious in criticizing an organization that has been called upon to do something that many had failed to do to begin with. However, when they commit egregious blunders like failing to pick up on the "bhela" of thousands of Maoists near their bases, one would only wonder if they are at all upto their task. It would also help if they let the journalists roam the war zones freely so that the public can confirm their "clean" handling of the battles, that they are doing their utmost in respecting human rights both of the enemies and of the civilians. I certainly loathe the jungalee Maoists when they commit crimes against human dignity, but it is worse when a well-established state institution does the same. I fail to comprehend the idea that gaining popularity by doing the right thing can be harmful to the morale of the soldiers.

There are, of course, other qualms I have about the RNA, like nepotism, casteism, corruption ("commissions" on purchase of military hardwares), etc.(the fact that these are prevalent in other sectors of the governmental institutions does not justify it's presence in the army), but these are issues that would require a whole new debating forum.

So long!

Biswo wrote:

Let's put it this way, my case rightnow is not about RNA and its publicity
stunts, but about intellectuals and their easy way to show their flashes of
brilliance and courage by attacking whichever side is easy to attack.

After all,RNA is ,at least, less evil among the two party exchanging barrages in
battlefields rightnow. The victory of RNA is means status quo for intellectuals, and
its succumbing to rebels doesn't mean that.

There is no point for us to laugh out loud at the bad luck of RNAs, and try to
portray them in worse light unwarrantedly, like the photographer was doing.

***************

Biswo,

You have already declared -- quite grandly -- that the so-called intellectuals in Kathmandu (whoever they are!) are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome".

Now, is there anything further for you to say?
No.

Now, I am NOT going to sit here and argue with you whether people in Nepal are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome" or not.

As someone living in Kathmandu, I know that people here -- both intellectuals and non-intellectuals -- are simply tired of the violence, and are eager to get on with their lives.

They also know that when the jawaans with last names such as Rai, Gurung, Magar,
Pun and so on get killed in the field, those hapless souls seem to get killed under circumstances that only go on to hint loudly about RNA's own puzzling states of unpreparedness and even, by extension, overall lack of seriousness about
WINNING this war, if this is what they want.

No, I am NOT saying that the jawaans are not serious: but what infuriates me -- as a citizen -- is that: more and more I see the jawaans being made some sacrificial lambs when BETTER and MORE THOROUGH preparations against Maoist attacks could have been made . . . in Surkhet, in Dang, in Arghakachi and so on . . . but were not.

You and others seem to think that being critical of RNA is tantamount to being supportive of the Maoists, or that it is tantamount to commiting some act of
treason or being a traitor.

But the truth is that most people crticize the RNA because they care about it, and really
want it to succeed and are sorely disappointed, even crushed, when it doesn't.

You know, Paschim seems to admire your bravery. But the fact is that you could NOT even confront me openly about that posting which I posted -- in my own name,
the one about a journalist's account that was critical of the RNA.

Records show that you showed your disdain NOT by arguing with the SUBSTANCE of that report but by announcing that my (the poster's) tone was "gleeful", and tried to "fasao" me into some sort of "guilt by association" with Lucia, as though I myself
were in some sort of cahoots with other intelletuals in Kathmandu to denounce the
RNA.

Such was your tactics that others like Nepe felt compelled to remind you NOT to
extend the state of Emergency into sajha!!

And you accuse me of "resorting to extreme comparisons"!!

[Sure, I play hardball, but you can't accuse me being unfair, and I remember my
previous debates with you re: Safa Tempo, re: that poet from Alabama,
re: Kunda Dixit's statement and so on.]

******************

Biswo wrote:

Yes, army has problem, but our intellectuals too have problem, and often that
problem is so glaring, gaping that it doesn't behoove them to stand in the
pedestal of virtue and smirk piously and selfrighteously at the army.
------------

Well, even if people are indeed smirking at the RNA, so what?

Would other people's smirking destroy the RNA as we know it?
No.

And if you say that smirks would kill the RNA, then what kind of RNA do we have anyway that cannot even handle criticisms by some members of the public -- the
very folks who fund the army in the first place?

Our democracy is far from pefect, but if we can all push forth the idea that in our democracy, no one -- including the King and the Army and the political leaders -- is ABOVE critical questioning either by the individuals or by the mediam that would be such a great achievement.

If the RNA doesn't know this, well, it should -- BY NOW. And it's our duty -- as citizens -- to remind the RNA that we are not back in some pre-1990 ko Nepal.

***************

Biswo wrote:

I didn't say that. And let's not overkill the matter by unnecessarily bringing everything
about army. The issue we are addressing now is : are our intellectuals right
in condemning army in everything, running gleefully at every chance to condemn
army, circulating propoganda without even bothering to corroborate them?

________


Well, listen, you cannot have it both ways.

You cannot declare the intellectuals as people suffering from Stockholm Syndome
on the one hand, and then turn around and ask for "corroborartion" on the other
hand?

If they are suffering from SS, then they can't corroborate.
If they can corroborate, then, they are not suffering from SS.

Still, to test your own hypothesis (i.e. that the intellectusla say things wthout corroborating) why don't you, for a start, take Lucia's article as it is, and then start proving it WRONG or exaggerated by visiting the field yourself and coming up with counter-evidence?

Then I and others can take your criticisms seriously.

Unless you can do that, or have that done, let's face it, your GENERAL gaali-stuffed criticisms of Nepali intellectuals from afar are as HOPELESS as their, as you say,
criticisms of the RNA . . . and, if so, that makes you both hopeless in your own
GENERAL gaali.

So what's new?

Re: Maoism -- let us simply agree to disagree, and let that be that.

A very Happy Indra Jatra to everyone!!

oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal

Biswo wrote:

Let's put it this way, my case rightnow is not about RNA and its publicity
stunts, but about intellectuals and their easy way to show their flashes of
brilliance and courage by attacking whichever side is easy to attack.

After all,RNA is ,at least, less evil among the two party exchanging barrages in
battlefields rightnow. The victory of RNA is means status quo for intellectuals, and
its succumbing to rebels doesn't mean that.

There is no point for us to laugh out loud at the bad luck of RNAs, and try to
portray them in worse light unwarrantedly, like the photographer was doing.

***************

Biswo,

You have already declared -- quite grandly -- that the so-called intellectuals in Kathmandu (whoever they are!) are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome".

Now, is there anything further for you to say?
No.

Now, I am NOT going to sit here and argue with you whether people in Nepal are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome" or not.

As someone living in Kathmandu, I know that people here -- both intellectuals and non-intellectuals -- are simply tired of the violence, and are eager to get on with their lives.

They also know that when the jawaans with last names such as Rai, Gurung, Magar,
Pun and so on get killed in the field, those hapless souls seem to get killed under circumstances that only go on to hint loudly about RNA's own puzzling states of unpreparedness and even, by extension, overall lack of seriousness about
WINNING this war, if this is what they want.

No, I am NOT saying that the jawaans are not serious: but what infuriates me -- as a citizen -- is that: more and more I see the jawaans being made some sacrificial lambs when BETTER and MORE THOROUGH preparations against Maoist attacks could have been made . . . in Surkhet, in Dang, in Arghakachi and so on . . . but were not.

You and others seem to think that being critical of RNA is tantamount to being supportive of the Maoists, or that it is tantamount to commiting some act of
treason or being a traitor.

But the truth is that most people crticize the RNA because they care about it, and really
want it to succeed and are sorely disappointed, even crushed, when it doesn't.

You know, Paschim seems to admire your bravery. But the fact is that you could NOT even confront me openly about that posting which I posted -- in my own name,
the one about a journalist's account that was critical of the RNA.

Records show that you showed your disdain NOT by arguing with the SUBSTANCE of that report but by announcing that my (the poster's) tone was "gleeful", and tried to "fasao" me into some sort of "guilt by association" with Lucia, as though I myself
were in some sort of cahoots with other intelletuals in Kathmandu to denounce the
RNA.

Such was your tactics that others like Nepe felt compelled to remind you NOT to
extend the state of Emergency into sajha!!

And you accuse me of "resorting to extreme comparisons"!!

[Sure, I play hardball, but you can't accuse me being unfair, and I remember my
previous debates with you re: Safa Tempo, re: that poet from Alabama,
re: Kunda Dixit's statement and so on.]

******************

Biswo wrote:

Yes, army has problem, but our intellectuals too have problem, and often that
problem is so glaring, gaping that it doesn't behoove them to stand in the
pedestal of virtue and smirk piously and selfrighteously at the army.
------------

Well, even if people are indeed smirking at the RNA, so what?

Would other people's smirking destroy the RNA as we know it?
No.

And if you say that smirks would kill the RNA, then what kind of RNA do we have anyway that cannot even handle criticisms by some members of the public -- the
very folks who fund the army in the first place?

Our democracy is far from pefect, but if we can all push forth the idea that in our democracy, no one -- including the King and the Army and the political leaders -- is ABOVE critical questioning either by the individuals or by the mediam that would be such a great achievement.

If the RNA doesn't know this, well, it should -- BY NOW. And it's our duty -- as citizens -- to remind the RNA that we are not back in some pre-1990 ko Nepal.

***************

Biswo wrote:

I didn't say that. And let's not overkill the matter by unnecessarily bringing everything
about army. The issue we are addressing now is : are our intellectuals right
in condemning army in everything, running gleefully at every chance to condemn
army, circulating propoganda without even bothering to corroborate them?

________


Well, listen, you cannot have it both ways.

You cannot declare the intellectuals as people suffering from Stockholm Syndome
on the one hand, and then turn around and ask for "corroborartion" on the other
hand?

If they are suffering from SS, then they can't corroborate.
If they can corroborate, then, they are not suffering from SS.

Still, to test your own hypothesis (i.e. that the intellectusla say things wthout corroborating) why don't you, for a start, take Lucia's article as it is, and then start proving it WRONG or exaggerated by visiting the field yourself and coming up with counter-evidence?

Then I and others can take your criticisms seriously.

Unless you can do that, or have that done, let's face it, your GENERAL gaali-stuffed criticisms of Nepali intellectuals from afar are as HOPELESS as their, as you say,
criticisms of the RNA . . . and, if so, that makes you both hopeless in your own
GENERAL gaali.

So what's new?

Re: Maoism -- let us simply agree to disagree, and let that be that.

A very Happy Indra Jatra to everyone!!

oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal

>Biswo wrote:

>Let's put it this way, my case rightnow is not about RNA and its publicity
>stunts, but about intellectuals and their easy way to show their flashes of
>brilliance and courage by attacking whichever side is easy to attack.

>After all,RNA is ,at least, less evil among the two party exchanging barrages in
>battlefields rightnow. The victory of RNA is means status quo for intellectuals, and
>its succumbing to rebels doesn't mean that.

>There is no point for us to laugh out loud at the bad luck of RNAs, and try to
>portray them in worse light unwarrantedly, like the photographer was doing.

>***************


>Biswo,

>You have already declared -- quite grandly -- that the so-called intellectuals in
>Kathmandu (whoever they are!) are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome".

>Now, is there anything further for you to say?
>No.

Why?

>Now, I am NOT going to sit here and argue with you whether people in Nepal are
>suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome" or not.

Unfortunately, that is what you are picking in my whole posting.

The problem with your posting is it is quite ambivalent: reflecting perhaps your own
views in almost everything including our previous debates. Your
views like I don't like Maoists/ I don't like RNA / Maoists are not gonna do
cultural revoultion stuff /So I am right is just the sign of that.

>As someone living in Kathmandu, I know that people here -- both intellectuals and non-
>intellectuals -- are simply tired of the violence, and are eager to get on with their lives.

I didn't say they are not. I said that, however, their action has something I find
objectable.

Please refute what I have said. If I haven't said something, then refuting that
is not gonna yield any point for you.

If your point is they are so true all the time, they are so inspiring in this time of
difficulty, then , that is what I am going to disagree on.

>They also know that when the jawaans with last names such as Rai, Gurung, Magar,
>Pun and so on get killed in the field, those hapless souls seem to get killed under
>circumstances that only go on to hint loudly about RNA's own puzzling states of
>unpreparedness and even, by extension, overall lack of seriousness about
>WINNING this war, if this is what they want.

Well, I checked last time, and I found jawaans of more diverse sirnames among the
killed. So, there goes your attempt to narrow the list of killed ones.

And if you check more ordinary people killed by Maoists, you will find more diverse
name.

But most importantly, the defeat of RNA in some fronts doesn't provide people with
excuse to laugh out loud and pretend THEY ARE GREAT and 'maile ta bhanekai
thiye ni'.

>No, I am NOT saying that the jawaans are not serious: but what infuriates me -- as a
>citizen -- is that: more and more I see the jawaans being made some sacrificial lambs
>when BETTER and MORE THOROUGH preparations against Maoist attacks could have
>been made . . . in Surkhet, in Dang, in Arghakachi and so on . . . but were not.

I didn't say you were saying Jawaans were not serious.

So, it surprises me to read your rebuttal, you are rebutting something that I haven't
said.

>You and others seem to think that being critical of RNA is tantamount to being
>supportive of the Maoists, or that it is tantamount to commiting some act of
>treason or being a traitor.

Again, untrue.

My posting is this: ridiculing RNA jawaans for all reasons, including for not mugging
for photograph, is something ridiculous.

>But the truth is that most people crticize the RNA because they care about it, and
>really want it to succeed and are sorely disappointed, even crushed, when it doesn't.


>You know, Paschim seems to admire your bravery. But the fact is that you could NOT
>even confront me openly about that posting which I posted -- in my own name,
>the one about a journalist's account that was critical of the RNA.

This is crazy. I didn't criticize you on that posting because I was not interested in
arguing with you at that time. I have my right to ARGUE with you when I LIKE,
where I LIKE, and I am only amused at your charge of ' aginai kina bhaninas'
type.

It also proves, folks, that I was not against postings of such kind.

I was against the attitude of posters who find it easy to attack and, circulate
unfounded truth about, RNA.

Period.

I find your whining about all that story and your drawing of Nepe's name on this
as 'your friend in argument' as unnecessary and ludicrous. Because frankly I have
replied Nepeji already about my comment on his comment.

If you post something, but you are not ready to take criticism about that, then
what kind of readiness for argument is that? What kind of "I WRITE IN MY
NAME, I AM READY TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT" claim are you making?
And for your information, in this forum I am also writing stuff in my name,
and your argument about that, again and again, only is like 'indra ko agaadi
swarga ko bayaan'.

>Records show that you showed your disdain NOT by arguing with the SUBSTANCE of
>that report but by announcing that my (the poster's) tone was "gleeful", and tried
>to "fasao" me into some sort of "guilt by association" with Lucia, as though I myself
>were in some sort of cahoots with other intelletuals in Kathmandu to denounce the
>RNA.


I didn't show my disdain for you.On the contrary, I respect you as a fellow
poster.

Your posting was an instance in this site, which I could use as my argument at any
time I like.

That is what posting in public domain means.

Your record is here, for all us to see: how you try to argue about things you don't
know, how you try to circulate things without corroborating, how you try to kill
arguments about SUBSTANCES by resorting to extreme comparisons despite
repeatedly promising not to do that.

And of course, I could use that as an example any time.

>Such was your tactics that others like Nepe felt compelled to remind you NOT to
>extend the state of Emergency into sajha!!

>And you accuse me of "resorting to extreme comparisons"!!

>[Sure, I play hardball, but you can't accuse me being unfair, and I remember my
>previous debates with you re: Safa Tempo, re: that poet from Alabama,
>re: Kunda Dixit's statement and so on.]


I don't mind your playing hardball, because I stand by my opinion.

I am also NOT afraid to express my opinion openly about my friends and talk
openly about them. I don't defend someone just because they are my friends.

To speak up your mind about your friends, you once needed courage. Now, take
RNA as example, you are speaking about RNA with harshness because, one can
argue this way also, you know you don't need courage, or you don't run risk of
antagonizing anyone seriously, and unlike with friends,you don't risk a friendship
with RNA jawaan.

I know this statement sounds harsh to you, but I am sure you will be able to
look at your own previous arguments, and take this as a good advice from me,
my friend.



>Biswo wrote:

>I didn't say that. And let's not overkill the matter by unnecessarily bringing everything
>about army. The issue we are addressing now is : are our intellectuals right
>in condemning army in everything, running gleefully at every chance to condemn
>army, circulating propoganda without even bothering to corroborate them?

_>_______


>Well, listen, you cannot have it both ways.

Ashu, you are making this argument unnecessarily boring.

I am providing examples ka examples about why I think what I think.This was one
of them.

>You cannot declare the intellectuals as people suffering from Stockholm Syndome
>on the one hand, and then turn around and ask for "corroborartion" on the other
>hand?

Why I can't? What kind of censorship is this?


>If they are suffering from SS, then they can't corroborate.

No. Stockholm syndrome is different from ability to corroborate. Even during the
'hypnotism' of hostage takers, one can corroborate the facts.

>If they can corroborate, then, they are not suffering from SS.

Well, you know better:-)

>Still, to test your own hypothesis (i.e. that the intellectusla say things wthout
>corroborating) why don't you, for a start, take Lucia's article as it is, and then start
>proving it WRONG or exaggerated by visiting the field yourself and coming up with
>counter-evidence?

Because I don't have to do that, because I am not the writer or I am not the
circulator. Listen, if you are trying to circulate something, if you are hoping the readers
to believe that you are veracious, the onus is upto you to corroborate at least
something.

>Then I and others can take your criticisms seriously.

which 'others'? Don't say you are not taking my criticisms seriously. Because this
is gonna be a big lie from you. Otherwise, why are you awake in the midnight
and writing so furiously and voluminously?

>Unless you can do that, or have that done, let's face it, your GENERAL gaali-stuffed
>criticisms of Nepali intellectuals from afar are as HOPELESS as their, as you say,
>criticisms of the RNA . . . and, if so, that makes you both hopeless in your own
>GENERAL gaali.

Your argument here is again devoid of SUBSTANCE.

>So what's new?

>Re: Maoism -- let us simply agree to disagree, and let that be that.

Yes, because you couldn't find any source to prove your points that Prachanda
Path is different from(revision of) Maoism and that Cultural revolution is something
they are not gonna repeat in Nepal or what?

Anyway, you are always free to write whatever you write, and run away from that
whenever you want.And even to accuse others of being like Maoist when someone finds
fault in them.

>A very Happy Indra Jatra to everyone!!

Same to you!

>oohi
>ashu
>ktm,nepal

Two respected heavywights of Sajha. Ashu and Biswo... :) Good debate guys. We got chance to learn.

So far Biswo is little bit stronger than Ashu in this debate game. Let's see what will happen in next round.

A few words of ignorance!

1. There are many motivations/reasons/interests from which I see people criticizing the Nepali government/army. Among these positions I find two important constituencies:
a. Dyed in the wool communists who want to have a communist republic. They are not formal Maoists guerrillas who fight in the trenches in Sandhikharka or Accham, but they do it with their pens in Kathmandu. Their sole purpose is to discredit the government, create schism between the government and the people..and generally give the impression that the Maoists are better than this chor government. They might say I am neutral, I am independent leftist (a la Tuladhar), I am only a human right activist or civil society person, but you know where their sympathies lie by reading a couple lines from their writing or speaking.
b. The second group of people I see attacking the government/security forces are the actual beneficiaries of the present and the past regimes...they or their ancestors became "successful" by bribe, commission, contract, or outright embezzlement of public positions. Now they have some guilt and fear of being brought to justice or notice (like the now aborted CIAA actions against the 22 Tax officials). The best way to hide that blemish and blend with the 'people' is to shout the loudest against the government and show off your leftist/romantic/progressive image. So if you blast the RNA now as corrupt, feudal, castist, murderous, genocidal...etc. etc., you get the credentials of being the enlightened popular conscience. After all,what better credentials of speaking for the people than legitimating the Maoist ...who are The People!
2. And there are those who criticize the Government/army, from a foreign perspective...foreign journalists, human rights, Amnestry etc., foreign governments, and scholars. They all have their own ideological/political axes to grind in the Nepali conflict.
3. And there are a few people who criticize the government when it fails through omission or commission. This criticism is constructive, to improve the governannce. They don't make a mountain of a mole hole when the army chief was found to be releasing the music tape when the Maoists made a suprise attack. When the al Kaida struck the Twin towers and the Pentagon, Mr. Bush was chatting with grade school children in Florida. Nobdoy laughed at Bush saying "Look, the country is being attacked viciously, what is our president doing...playing with keta keti!" The RNA chief was lucky that the journalists did not find him in a bath room at the time..."Kasto bekuf senapati, uta tetro hamala huindaicha, yeta eu turi gardicha!"

Peace!

What it looks from Ashu vs Biswo?

Citing dissatisfaction on previous threads, is sign that they are tending to
be personal. When you get personal, you end up quite away from
the core of the thread. Your relation will soon end up in GALI-GALOUSE
and never reparable. ITs based on my experience in SAjha.com and
other places like SCN, TND. So, either one party should stop, even though
we have not drawn a final conclusion. Well, there are some topics which
has no clear cut, YES NO borders, but, very blurred. The topic you are
discussing surely has a blurred border line, and its better to suspend
before your personal engine cools down. Well, discussion is never ending
process when we have border that is very blurred, as in the current topic.
Both of you had valid points, and we have to take it. Let all readers grasp
it, before it becomes:

First, its interesting.
Now it is tending to be boring.
Let it not be, yaaaaaaaaaaaaaawing.

A friend of mine, who was very agressive in his college and univ days, is
now so cool. When I asked him whats the reason. He told following story:

Two very knowledgable bidwans "RISHI MUNI", were invited to discuss/debate
on a topic and asked to discuss on either side of topic. king, the organizer,
asked peoples to listen to them. The discussion / debate started, it continued
for days, almost 1 week. Then, the wife of "A" rishimuni, stood up and said
that his husband is goig to loss this debate. Well, every one was surprised,
because there was no indication who could be winner. The wife clarified that
her husband's voice is now up, she addred "it seems he is drained out of contents for
further discussions (he knows it), well, it may take another one week to finally
conceive the loss, but, I suggest him to give up right now, before it becomes
late, he loss all his achievements of the pasts". Well, after hearing her reco.
the RISHI realized and gave up the debate until he gathered more material to
continue the topic..... Shall we?

Sunne lai sun ko mala, bujhne ... jala....

Iti sri.

HG

Biswo wrote:

"or you don't run risk of antagonizing anyone seriously, and unlike with friends,you don't risk a friendship with RNA jawaan."


This is an example of what I mean about your debating strategy.

You make an assumption.
Then you give your conclusion by extending that assumption to a point and also by LABELING the opposition as this and that.

But when challenged to back up your assumption, then, you say, "Oh, I didn't say
that" and then change try to change tracks and go on to pillory your opponents all
the more.

Another example: I am focussing on the Stockholm Syndrome because once you characterize opponents (intellectuals -- the THRUST of the discussion here, in this
case) as suffering from such a disorder, then, there's really nothing left for you to
say and you have basically colored the debate in highly prejudicial terms.

That'[s why, I issued you a simple challenge: Prove Lucia's article wrong on FACTUAL grounds, and then your criticisms shall have weight.

If you cannot do that, then, you have no right to use that article as a stand-in for intellectuals' so-caled cowardice, and then go on to lump others as suffering from
some kind of SS.

In the above case, you simply ASSUMED that I have no friends in the RNA, and
then went on to give your interpretations of my behaviour.

Let me just say that your assumption is flat-out wrong.

[I try to answer ideas with ideas whenever posssible, and NOT try to argue back by
posting parts of my resume or CV to show/intimidate others just who I know in
the Army and who I don't. In other words, I am NOT interested in posting my resume
as a defense mechanism. And so, I am not going to publicly boast about my high-level and low-level connections in the RNA. Let's leave this at that.]

***********
Re: Maoists, all you have said is: you jave read jhilko, Janadesh and so on.
Fine.

But just DECLARING that you have read those newspapers is NOT the same as documenting proofs for your argumements.

And when I got tried of your "I have read this, this and this, therefore I am right" attitude, I simply said let us agree to disagree.

But no, you wanted to seize that chance to portray me as running away from the debate. I mean, what can I say?

Finally, I have been careful NOT to bring in extraneous assumptions, not to hurl adjectives at those who disagree with me, and have tried to stick to the TEXT of
kurakani (even going to the extent of carefully QUOTING others.

And I am happy to be doing just that.

One more tip: I have actually have had a long conversation with Khagendra Sangraula. My impression is that he writes the stuff he writes in part to play to the certain gallery
of readers who he knows will be reading his stuff, and nodding yes to it.

A intellectual, by definition, writes for himself or herself and deals with the consequences as they come. One criticism one can make about intellectuals
in Kathmandu is that they write for others and NOT for their own selves, to
confront the truth as they see it.

oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal

Guruji,

Please be assured that this discussion , if past is any guide, is not gonna irreparably
harm relation between Ashu and I.

Even though I haven't personally met Ashu, we have cordial email relationship,and
it will remain so whenever situation arises. Because Sajha's discussions are, still
despite reaching border, ideological. Like I always said, despite disagreeing with
Ashu a lot of times, I also respect him for a lot of his strength.

People shouldn't expect candy-bar talk all the time here.

--
Ashu,

Lucia's stuff didn't come suddenly, and veracity of the stuff wasn't my issue from
the start.

What I was trying to point out was this: that whenever our intellectuals get fodder
for cheap shots, they jump at that 'without' even bothering to corroborate it.

Did I say Lucia was wrong? Anywhere in my posting?
No.

What I said was this: the intellectuals seize the moment for some free cheap shots
at the side that is the most tolerant.Like this photographer did.Like you did.There
was a context for my quote.

Now, another cheap shot is asking me to proof the veracity: fully knowing that I
am living in Houston, Texas and in no situation to go to Maoist affected areas and
inquire about Lucia's sources. This is what I wanted to point out when I was
talking about courage and resignation of our intellectuals.

It bothered me immensely when you implied those living afar can't criticize the
intellectuals, ie KTM intellectuals can do without such criticism. Criticisms as
innocuous as those posted in sajha.com shouldn't be met with such
vehement antipathy, and that in no way is a democratic practice.
--

Thanks for your points about Khagendra Shangraula. I respect him for his writing
style, and I read him regularly. But like I said, I disagree on those issues that
I find deplorable.

I am not a member of fan club except for Guruji's, as you very well know.

Biswo,

I too assure you and our respected Hahoo-guru-ji that all these heated discussions will have NO harmful effects in my cyber-friendship with you.

One mark of the younger generation of Nepalis like us should be: We are free to
disagree with one another, even heatedly and vehemently, without being sworn enemies of any kind and without disparaging one another.

If we can achieve that -- collectively and consistently -- then, that's a solid progress over our parents' generation.

I also agree that we need not sweet-talk one another all the time and should feel
free to speak up our mind, even when our differences are sharp.

**********

That said, yes, you can criticize intellectuals from afar. But my suggestion is: go light on adjective-hurling while being heavy on substance-challenging. That's all.

My only concern is that just as we all want criticisms, or for that matter praise, of the Army all backed up with evidence and all that, let us also ask for criticisms of the intellectuals all backed up with evidence too.

I mean, that our intellectuals are khattam is a well-known fact, and we won't get anywhere repeating that endlessly. I, for one, am more interested in WHY intellectuals are the way they are.

In another thread with Siwalik, I pointed out some of the institutional set-ups and oranizational structures in Nepal that are NOT amenable to the flowering of
independent thoughts -- the hallmark of any intellectual worth his name. Another
poster SMR gave some exellent pointers on how those problesm could perhaps be tackled.

In my earlier posting in this thread, I wrote that intellectuals like Khagendra Sangraula appear, at times, NOT to be speaking from their heart but to be playing to the gallery,
by being some sort of a crowd-pleaser.

I regret that about Khagendra Sangraula, but having watched him from close enough quarters, I have come to understand, or so I think, why KG does what he does at
times, his saying these outrageous things that are at odds with his intellectual
persona.

I am also thinking that maybe -- thorough no one's fault -- there are indeed limits to having independence of thoughts in Nepal, you know. At any rate, the issues here
are sufficiently complex to come up with easy answers.

Then again, only by doing an OPEN kura-kani are we going to get a handle on these matters.

oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal

I have few things to say. So dhilai bhaye pani raakhdaichhu.

First of all, I want to say, after reading the whole thread and concluding for myself that we still do not have an uncontroversial ‘national resolve’, one of the basic thing a country needs to move forward, I succumb to a deep sadness and despair. But I have faith in our future. It will be before long that we will find our resolve and when that happens every citizen, including me, Suna, Sitara, Ashu and every KATOjis, will trust the state like Biswoji, Sipahi refusesji, Paschimji and HGji and, when necessary, will fight with Maoists, or any force challenging the state for that matter, with the same vehemence and resolve. Until then, let’s fight with the Maoists and support the state of Nepal with whatever resolve our conscience provide us individually. Expect more than this at your own expense of testosterone and serotonin.

If I have to check one thing as the most responsible for the current tragedy of Nepal, I will check our wrong culture of claiming/accepting a concession. I fondly recall this ‘concession theory’ of mine was approved by our revered HahooGurudev himself. Let me borrow a para of mine from the thread of 'Politics and Hope'.


"...Yes, I know Maoists are Mao, Pol Pot, and Josef Stalin rolled into one. I have no doubt about that. I have closely studied them. But I believe these three characters that constitute them can be killed one by one without firing a single shot if we wish so and if we have courage, vision and wisdom. Let me elaborate my thoughts. Naya Keta and Dilasha in some of earlier postings have argued that we probably have a proper political system in place, but we lack a political culture. Agreeing largely on this, I would put it in this way. Apart from a small flaw, we have an almost proper political system in place. But that small flaw is significantly preventing a good political culture to emerge. Because the system encourage us to ignore the flaw as harmless or even worse forces us to misrepresent that flaw as necessary and good, we have inherited a corrupted political culture which is liberal to accept some overlap of truth and falsehood. Every politician and political party in Nepal think when they say one right thing, they have earned a concession of telling three lies. And everybody have practiced that concession without a second thought and without shame. Maoists are the best user of that. Their thought system goes like this- since they oppose monarchy, they have concession to be Stalin. Since they are against casteism, sexism and social injustices, they have right to be a Pol Pot. Since the other politicians and royals are crook, they have obligation to be a Maoist. If we rectify our flaws and weaknesses, we will disarm Maoists from this concession. It is equivalent of breaking their back for good...."


I want to emphasize that nobody- the palace, the political parties, individuals- is free from the Concession Syndrome in Nepal. I dare to extend it here and argue that a part of the anger of our friends including Biswoji were in may be due to the Concession Syndrome. RNA is engaged in the most critical task of defending the state and the people. So ignore minor weaknesses and flaws. Suppress everything that may challenge their morale It may sound right. But look at it this way, Maoists are using the same thought process as I elaborated above. So, in a way, you are justifying the Maoists - by doing what they are doing. Justification may be no big deal for you. But it is definitely a big deal for Kathmandu ka ‘unhelpful’ intellectuals.

Let’s talk about the unhelpful intelligentsia with whom Biswoji and other friends are so furious. First of all, it is natural for Biswo et al or anybody to be furious over these intellectuals for their unhelpfulness at such a sankat ko ghadi for the country. But it is not going to make any difference. If we want to make a difference, we must try to understand their problem and do appropriate things to earn their full co-operation, commitment and resolve. There is no other way unless we resort to become a Mahendra raj.

(Talking about raja Mahendra, didn’t he complain once that intellectuals were not helping him ?)

I saw a lack of patience in Biswoji in understanding these unhelpful intellectuals. Biswoji dismissed them as possible sufferer from Stockholm Syndrome or enamored by Maoists or simply attackers of the weak party, that is the RNA. Of course there are varieties of intellectuals. It will be very helpful exercise to identify who they are and why they are what they are.

Interestingly, a new poster, Sipahi Refusesji, also tried to identify other classes of intellectuals in his frankly written two postings. He classifies them as hidden communists, the rich and the corrupts fearful of blemishes and the foreigners. SRji does not seem to be recognizing the non-communist, non-corrupt domestic intellectuals critical of the flawed democracy particularly republicans like myself.

Anyway, overall this is a grim picture. This shows how deep the sankat of our country is in. There is one more worrisome scenario. When we compare the strength of Maoists and the government, the same rule does not apply to both. Maoists win by not losing the battle but the government can win only by winning it. The strength of the government is those who support the government, the strength of Maoists is those who support the Maoists plus those who do not support the government. So what is the bottom line ? The bottom line is that we can not defeat the Maoists with a government which does not enjoy the massive popular support. Does our government enjoy the massive popular support ? No. So what should we do to make people support the government massively ? This is the prime question of the moment. If we are serious about defeating Maoists, this is where we should ponder.

I will write more about that some other time..
.
.
.

Lastly,

I am glad to see a lot of friends participating and debating on life or death kind of important situation of our country, but I am really surprised to see Biswoji and so many other friends mad at the poster who posted that picture of the army patrol. There is nothing that insults the army in the caption, which reads:

ATHMANDU, NEPAL, 15-SEP-2002: An army soldier warns photographers not to take pictures as he and other security personnel were on patrol along a busy street in Kathmandu, Sept. 15, 2002. At least four bombs went off today in the capital, a day before a nationwide strike called by Maoist rebels, but no one was injured, police said. [Photo by Devendra M. Singh, copyright 2002 by AFP and ClariNet]

Nor I could see the picture itself any objectionable. It is a very common picture you see every now and then in foreign media when they cover the places of conflict. This picture just vividly reminds us about the situation in Nepal. As I matter of fact, this picture stunned me. I did not identify myself with it. It looked very foreign to me. It wasn’t the country I was familiar with. Anyway, I thought this picture is suitable for the gallery of the ‘Bichalit Bartaman’. Did you see the gallery there ? It feels a sort of bizarre, that ‘Bichalit Bartman’ which was also sponsored/organized by Biswoji and Ashuji has similar photos in its gallery, but in Sajha it caused such a hangama !

Nepe ji;

Well, what can I say!
You are among those very few with the ability to 'see', 'think' and express with such finesse and and wisdom a very complex yet "deteriorating" matter. I am sure there are many of us who would not want to be "labeled", "lynched" or "shot" just for taking the time to "contemplate" and express an opinion that is not hard line.

I would like to thank you for that. As usual, you make sense!!!!!

Teaching/working with innercity kids as well as handicapped children, I have reached the point in my life where I see most of the suffering as unnecessary. I abhor "Bush's" foreign policies when the very County I work in is begging for air-condition in the school building!!!!! Yes, in US. we are fighting to have enough school rooms and books!!!!!!!!!! Anyone can be magnanimous and dictate the "right" way but working within the "challenging" system is another matter entirely. I detest that "Bush" is spending X amount of money on waging war while the children of the country are going hungry!!!!! Illiteracy in US is very high! One of those dirty secrets of a great country. As the educators working "within the system", we wish he would look into the innercity culture; spend in parent education, early childhood education, pre/post natal education, cultural awareness programmes, social and community awareness. The ways of the GREAT US is not Perfect!!!!! So...ofcourse, I question, why war????? why violence??? Why not spending the money in rebuilding at a grassroot level. Nepal's socio political climate had reached a certain peak...if not the Maoist then it would be some other faction!!! How many can actually rationalize that if it had not been for Maoism, there would be peace. NOT!!!!! when any form of living hurts then dying will become a better option. Again, am I justifying the actions of the Maoists? NOT!!!!! BUT, how long can the poor go on living in abject conditions without the basic infrastructure needed to uplift them from their "dayaniya" conditions? The BASIC human tendency is to "better" one's condition; that is the very basic survival instinct endowed by nature....Even RAW power will not suppress it!!!! And the sooner our government realizes it, the better for all involved.

>I dare to extend it here and argue that a part of the anger of our friends including
>Biswoji were in may be due to the Concession Syndrome. RNA is engaged in the most
>critical task of defending the state and the people. So ignore minor weaknesses and
>flaws.

No, again this argument is not true.

I never said to ignore the minor flaws of RNA. Not. Nepeji, please do a favour, to
avoid misunderstanding, please quote where I said that before jumping to criticize
me.

What I said was this: that people are jumping to criticize RNA because it is easier to
do that.Like that flippancy of the photographer.

>So ignore minor weaknesses and flaws. Suppress everything that may challenge their
>morale It may sound right.

Yet another untrue.

Nepeji, it again saddens me when you hurl 'aarop kaa aarop' without even bothering
to quote where I called for suppression of evidence of weakness and flaws.

I was furious at army or police when Krishna Sen's news came out. I was furious at
army when Kavre massacre of eight(?) people was reported. I have been against
the excesses of police during Kiloshera two. And you fail to appreciate my previous
postings in which I repeatedly cautioned army brass against excesses, because they
would be tried in future for their crime against humanity.

But I am FOR providing RNA with better equipments ,against the position held by
some liberals who would want our RNAs to fight with fist against the mercenaries
with mortars and machine guns.

I am for providing RNA Jawaans with some more respect, and not for parading them
as against democratic norm and opponent of freedom unnecessarily.

I don't want RNA jawaans to first go and 'dhog(stoop at the feet)' all intellectuals at
KTM, get their aashirbaad, their consent and then embark on their war.(figuratively
expressed)

At the moment RNA jawaans were slaughtered like madcows, some people
evinced nauseating schadenfreude at their bad luck . I tried to laugh at those
smirking intellectuals, and that is in no way more than my exercizing my own
democratic right.

Even if you have problem with your neighbor, you don't laugh when he is
suffering from plague, because the plague is a contagious disease,and sooner or
later it would also attack you.

>Let’s talk about the unhelpful intelligentsia with whom Biswoji and other friends are so
>furious. First of all, it is natural for Biswo et al or anybody to be furious over these
>intellectuals for their unhelpfulness at such a sankat ko ghadi for the country. But it is
>not going to make any difference. If we want to make a difference, we must try to
>understand their problem and do appropriate things to earn their full co-operation,
>commitment and resolve.

Nepeji, one thing you are forgetting is: I am not a representative of a ruling party,
so it is not my job to coax those captious intellectuals into agreeing my view. I
am not coddling babies here, I am providing arguments to resist the views I find
obnoxious because they sometimes bother me very much.

Do I get a penny by keeping this corrupt government here? No.

Then why do I support RNA in their war?

Because it is RNA fighting on behalf of us, and unless it is proven otherwise, until now
RNA is fighting to safeguard our democratic institutes.

If some intellectuals want to earn some points by attacking RNA and thus appeasing
what they see as joggernaut rolling towards capital, fine. I have no interest in
appeasing them, or make them respect RNA. It is their view, they are free to
have their view,and I accept this as their fundamental right.

>I saw a lack of patience in Biswoji in understanding these unhelpful intellectuals. Biswoji
>dismissed them as possible sufferer from Stockholm Syndrome or enamored by Maoists
>or simply attackers of the weak party, that is the RNA. Of course there are varieties of
>intellectuals. It will be very helpful exercise to identify who they are and why they are
>what they are.

Well, thank you for pointing out my impatience, Nepeji, but I have been around since
long, and I am tired of intellectuals of all brands from Padma Ratna Tuladhar to ,well,
our very well human right activist fellow poster Milan Karkiji.

Yes, I try to understand them, of course. But there were some professors whom
I respected, and they turned out to be kowtowing to Nepali Congress top brass
for lucrative jobs.

Sloganism has been mainstay of a lot of intellectuals. I was surprised to find the
famous poets penning poems for Nepali Congress ko rukh chinha and praising its
leaders unnecessarily like a bhaat in first general election 2048.(I wonder if someone
else had read that anthology too.)

We changed the system in 2046: but those intellectuals who flourished by 'writing
poems for' the queen, and praising the royals unnecessarily in Panchayat repeated
exactly the same trick to new leaders,and thus hijacked our democratic values.

My fury was aimed at the collective group of those people whose cushy seat,not
necessarily an extensive tour and researches backed up with solid evidences,
in Kathmandu provide them with idea to manufacture illusion in the kingdom about
the state of the kingdom, or who is good and who is bad.

They find Maoists good when it is needed, and they target RNA when they find it
weak. They change the side like the old 'hajurbaa' of Bhim Nidhi Tiwari's play
"Shilanyas" who was spectator at the race for Gorkha Darbaar and at the
end of the day, they gloat that their side finally prevailed.

As Nepe(mama!) said:

This picture just vividly reminds us about the situation in Nepal. As I matter of fact, this picture stunned me. I did not identify myself with it. It looked very foreign to me. It wasn’t the country I was familiar with

When I saw this picture in some website, I felt as if I am looking picture of internal war ravaged African country or somewhere else where people have to live under the reign of terror. We have to live in such an unsecure environment; everywhere explosion could take place, at any time innocent peoples could be killed in an unimagianble manner. It is the same country where I used to live before 10 year ago?

Under posting of this photo thread, many sajhaites actively participated to have discussion on many other related issues like RNA, Nepali Intellectuals, Journalists, Maoist violence and so on. Anyway, Our democracy only prosperes with strong civil society and any healthy discussions, of course, helps our civil society to make stronger.

Thanks for all the participants of this thread.

This thread is real interesting................... good for new comers.

capital these days .... 2/5/05
Nepali policemen keep watch at a busy street in Kathmandu February 4, 2005. Nepal's army said on Friday it would step up its offensive against Maoist rebels fighting to overthrow the monarchy, days after the king sacked the government, arrested political leaders and seized power. (Arko Datta/Reuters)