I just visited The Nepal Digest ( www.thenepaldigest.org) site after a very long time, and found out -- much to my dismay -- that it has ceased publication as of last March.

The parting editorial implies that the editorial team quit over its supposed inability to implement free and fair editorial decisions, and hurls veild blame at other people (whoever they might be!)

My question: What happened, guys? Were the differences of opinion so great that
the publication had to, well, die out like this?

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

Likewise, sometime late last January, The NATION newsweekly in Kathmandu died out after the editors and the publishers had a falling out after only a few months together.

My question: Again, were the differences of opinion so great that the patrika had to be killed?

*********

My observation: While working in Nepal as a business advisor, one thing I noticed
again and again was this. That most business partnerships (among Nepalis), started
with great hopes among friends, eventually soured to bitterness . . . so much so
that people who were earlier friends had become sworn enemies by the time the
ashes cooled off from the corpses of their business.

********

My question: Are most of us Nepalis fundamentally incapable of working on a team that has people who hold different ideas from us?

Alternatively, when the going gets tough, is it easier for us to fight with one another than address the problems at hand so that at least minially amicable solution can be found?

******

My comment: Isn't it ironic that while we do everything nice and polite with one another to avoid conflicts and confrontations, our lives in Nepal and Nepali societies might well
be mired in unaddressed and simmering conflicts . . . ranging from that of the Maoists
to businesses gone sour?

oohi
ashu

If Nepe said he's a communist, does it mean he's a Maoist double agent disguised as a democracy supporter?

Maybe he's trying to get the support of pro democracy people to overthrow monarchy then he's going to double cross the pro democracy people by showing his true Maoist colour?

One is allowed to muse I suppose...

Everyone Nepe brings up war I wonder what war he is talking about. Whichever war it is, war is stupid.

The reality is that noone's overthrowing monarchy anytime soon. The general Nepali people need to be careful of the hidden agendas of these so called netas who are only behaving according to what is beneficial for them in the short or long run depending on thier individual goals.

Haha....
Saroj says: I hate personal attacks when one is merely presenting his opinions. Everyone should be free to present their opinions without being personally attacked and categorized as king supporter or not.

and SAME SAROJ SAYS:

f Nepe said he's a communist, does it mean he's a Maoist double agent disguised as a democracy supporter?

Maybe he's trying to get the support of pro democracy people to overthrow monarchy then he's going to double cross the pro democracy people by showing his true Maoist colour?

I CAN NOT STOP LAUGHING NOW...

-------
OK
PS: I also have some reservations on both NEPE's writing about ASHU and ASHU's writing about NEPE, but SAROJ here is... haha...I can not say anything...

OK

You are putting too much weight on some kids monologue.

Ashu,

>>Craft a message for the janata.

Exactly that is what the political parties are doing. And the message is - The rule of the king was failure then, is a failure now.

Remember George Bush?

Does not matter what a measurable failure you are, prove that you opponent will be no better. Make it a referendum on king, not on the failure of political parties for last fifteen years. Make it a referendum on 235 years not the 15 years. Be strident, inculcate more. ?What's the matter with Kansas? will become What?s the matter with Kathmandu.

Again, NOT for democracy in an abstract sense, but for a valid component of democracy called judicial independence.

Ashu dai,

Is judicial independence a component or a summplement of democracy? I think the whole independence etc. falls under the rule of law, which is not a component of democracy, but a supplement to having a fully functioning liberal democarcy.

Please feel free to correct me.

Houston,

Your message might be correct.
Let's say it is.

But the janata is NOT buying it to come out in support of it in large numbers -- as EVIDENCED by their lack of participation in these rallies.

Maybe the janata is NOT stupid.
Maybe the message itself is STUPID.

Have you thought about that?

In politics, it's important to keep the message simple, vivid and personal so that it MOVES people to take actions. It's for no reason that leadership in politics or in
anything is about stirring people's emotions for a cause, and the word 'emotion'
shares the same root as the word 'motion'.

Sure, for the sake of this kura-kani, saying that the King is looting the country may get you brownie points with the Nepe-esque intellectuals to earn your usual loaf of "wah-wah-cha-cha" kind of praise.

BUT for the janata at large, the acts of loot committed by the netas is MORE vivid, more personal, more recent and more easy to understand and more of something that they can relate to . . . therefore find it easy to respond to by giving the netas "gaali".

And this is what MOST Nepalis do.

Similarly, Maoist atrocities are also MORE vivid, personal and easy to understand
and then DENOUNCE . . . for almost all reasonable people.

OK, Bush might not have the 'right' message. But whatever his message is, it seems to work well to give nightmares to the Democratic Party, which is in a complete disarray.

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

ISO, let me correct myself: judicial independence is a component of liberal democracy.

The word liberal in 'liberal democracy' implies, as per Farid Zakaria, that all the usual bill of rights are there; if so, then, for that liberal democracy to function, there has to be
a mechanism for those rights to be defended in case of violations. Judicial independence assures that violations can be examined without undue political pressure.

oohi
ashu

Ashu said,''The King has done me no harm nor has he hurt me. ''

For a citizen of Ashu's stature, it is VERY SAD that the approval or criticism of the actions that determine the fate of the country is made on the basis of whether he has been harmed or hurt by the King or not. The problem with majority of Nepal's intellectual elites is their opinions and reactions on a political consequence are totally influenced by the magnitude of effects that it generates in their life. If the consequences have null effect in their personal life, they close their eyes at the actions that they know are going to be detrimental for the country and the people.

Why can't we oppose the actions that are against the values of democracy, that we have witnessed ourselves in places where we have learned and been educated, working so nicely and effectively for the benefit of the people? Should the learned elites not broaden their mental enclave beyond their personal gains and losses, to impart justice on the expectations and respect that ordinary people bestow upon them?
I find it very disappointing to hear from Ashu that he confines his perspectives within his own personal gains.

However, in this particular discussion, Ashu has raised some genuine concerns which every pro-democratic individuals should take note of:

1.''But you could never understood that whenever I went to Ratna Park to watch the julus, all I and my friends collected was disappointment about the lack of direction of the julus and disgust about how parties were doing their jhagada even there.''

2.''The tragedy of Nepali democracy was that it was never made 'personal' for people to tend it as their own.'' (however this contradicts from Ashu's earlier comment ''Neither I nor my immediate family members have ever benefited or been harmed from any patronage or lack thereof of the royal family in any capacity ever''. Why can't you act differently than those semi-educated, under privileged politicians then?

3.''Nepali journalists are out on the street NOT for democracy, but for a valid component of democracy called press freedom. ...Likewise, Nepali lawyers are out on the street.
Why? Again, NOT for democracy in an abstract sense, but for a valid component of democracy called judicial independence. ...The challenge to political parties is this: Craft a message for the janata. ''

Nepal's democratic movement must address the above concerns that Ashu has raised.

Having said that, we cannot expect anything good for the cause of democracy from Ashu because he is VERY PREJUDICIAL against the democratic supporters ,he SIMPLY IGNORES the mistakes made by the KING and he only HIGHLIGHTS the flaws of an immature democracy.

Ashus (plural) do not dare to explicitly support the King just to ensure that they won't be alienated from the democratic circle, if the change of political equations take place. But in their inner self, there is a ray of hope of favour and fortune from the palace. Either in the form of royal appointments or in some other ways.

For me, it won't be a surprise if Ashu(s) are given some important portofolio in a public position by Royal decree any time in the future. Hardly there will be any surprise, if their name falls on the Royal honour list. OTHERWISE, THERE IS NO REASON TO REFRAIN FROM OPPOSING DICTATORSHIP IN THE COUNTRY.

Newuser,

Please treat my arguments carefully.
Ask for clarification where either I have been unclear or where you don't understand
me.

My point is this: I am personally NOT as opposed to the King TO THE DEGREE Nepe
and others are in this forum.

The operative phrase here is : TO THE DEGREE

That's all.

Maybe if Mahendra had jailed my parents or Birendra had confiscated family's property, perhaps I would have been an anti-Narayanhiti person in the Nepe mold.

But none of that ever has happened to me.
And I can't generate bitterness on cue out of nothing.
Sorry.

That is why, failing to SHARE the anti-monarchist zeal TO THE DEGREE that Nepe and others insist others MUST SHARE does NOT, ipso facto, make me a King's supporter.

All it does is make me NOT as virulent a critic of monarchy as Nepe is . . . or, for that matter, NOT as big a supporter of monarchy as Isolated Freak is.

ANY open mind would ACCEPT that different people look DIFFERENTLY at monarchy, and that, right or wrong, these diverse views must be allowed to exist in a public forum.

Why can't you accept this fact? Must you label everyone who is not as enthusiastic as you are about the anti-monarchy parades as "king ko chamcha"? This stance of yours is what I find anti-democratic.

I bring up this example to ARGUE that all politics is personal in the sense that UNLESS Nepali political parties talk again and again about how democracy delivers TANGIBLE personal benefits to ALL citizens, their mere expressing abstractions about democracy will NOT get them any traction on the street.

EVER.

[In American politics, candidates personalise problems and benefits of certain policies by citing stories that involve real people. But in Nepali politics, when is Girija Koirala going to talk about the hardships faced by, say, Ram Prasad Pudasaini of Geta VDC in Kailali
Zilla to say why democracy matters for even ordinary shop-keepers?]

At any rate, my thoughts on monarchy are clear: The king is a self-interested player in the political game, JUST as political netas are also self-interested players in the game. They both want the gains for themselves.

I do NOT for a moment believe that either party is doing what it is doing for the GREATER good of the nation, whatever that greater good is.

So, stripped of rhetoric and ideals and cafe-salon philosophy (the type that Anil Jung Shahi is fond of spouting here on Sajha), all we see are starkly naked ambitions on
all sides.

I have NO problem with such naked ambitions.
Politics would not be politics without naked ambitions for power.

Since both sides can't just display naked ambitons just like that, they have to finess it with 'democracy'. As such, 'democracy' has become a MEANINGLESS word in Nepal.

Hence, we have this SILLY situation:

a) The King says that what he's doing is for democracy.
b) Political parties say that they're doing is for democracy, and
c) Even the Maoists have the audacity to talk about democracy.

And something that is said to belong to everyone really belongs to no one.

Hence, my idea: It's time to talk about democracy in personal terms in Nepal.

Journalists do that because if you take away their right to write, it affects them personally. For lawyers, if you take away the authority of courts, that affects the lawyers. They respond to what is personal.

But journalists and lawyers CANNOT and DO NOT bring out julus against the recent bus bombing in Madi, because -- let's be clear-eyed -- that incident, though sad, did NOT affected them personally.

And so, for most citizens, what have they really lost in PERSONAL terms since February 1st to rally for democracy? Sadly, the leaders TALK loftily about democracy but give very few concrete reasons as to why democracy RESPONDs to the plights of the common people.

Peopel don't vote for ideas.
They vote for other people who respond to their personal stories.

In today's Nepal, who's telling stories for the majority to listen to and respond?

The Maoists are telling stories of inhumane acts.
The parties are telling stories of ill-coordination and internal jhagada.

Only the King, for better or worse, seems to be saying, "I am in charge. For three years. Leave it to me."

Sure, the King's message might be wrong in the fundamental sense. But except for unemployable intellectuals, who cares about fundamentals? King's message seems to have been grasped by most people . . . so much so that few want to go behind
political parties and rally against it.

This is the REALITY.

Now, so-called democrats can close their eyes and deny that such a reality exists.
Or they can start crafting messages that DILUTE the effect of the King's message in
the eyes of the janata.

oohi
ashu

ISO, let me correct myself: judicial independence is a component of liberal democracy.

ashu dai,

was just pulling your legs. it did make sense and i got what you wanted to say.. k garney.. have to find ways to spend hot beijing days.

ashu dai,

was just pulling your legs. it did make sense the first time I read it and got/understood what you wanted to say.. k garney.. have to find ways to spend hot beijing days.

Summary:

Some of the intellectuals (Ashus???) are:
1. Selfish, and
2. Opportunistic

Nowadays, second point over weighs the first one. It is NATURAL and nothing SURPRISING --- especially during DIFFICULT TIMES.

That's all.
-----
OK

OK,

You call yourself an engineer.
But what kind of an engineering mind do you have?

Your capacity to make judgments about other people with NOT a shred of evidence
is amusing.

Earlier, on another thread, you made a list against me WITHOUT a shred of evidence
to back up your accusations.

Now, just because, here, I shared some (hopefully PROVOCATIVE, even unsettling) thoughts to generate some further discussions . . . perhaps contradicting your worldview, you resort to hurling adjectives at me.

Give me a break, yar.

Challenge my ideas; show better arguments so that I can learn from you. But calling me this and calling me that just goes to show that people like you who call themselves do NOT have the time or the temperament to really think what democracy really means.

oohi
ashu
*******

newuser bhai,

Hate to write this, but you sound very childish when you make such outlandish claims/remarks:

"Ashus (plural) do not dare to explicitly support the King just to ensure that they won't be alienated from the democratic circle, if the change of political equations take place. But in their inner self, there is a ray of hope of favour and fortune from the palace. Either in the form of royal appointments or in some other ways. "

How do you explain this? So everyone should dance to your tune? agree with what you say? Isnt that following Stalin, rather than Lincoln? Is it Stalinist brand of democracy that you subscribe to? Just curious.

"For me, it won't be a surprise if Ashu(s) are given some important portofolio in a public position by Royal decree any time in the future. Hardly there will be any surprise, if their name falls on the Royal honour list. OTHERWISE, THERE IS NO REASON TO REFRAIN FROM OPPOSING DICTATORSHIP IN THE COUNTRY. "

What you see as dictatorship might not be seen as dictatorship (given the chaotic and confusing situation in Nepal), and people have different views, bhai.. you cant expect everyone to think the way you think, say what you say, write what you write..can you? Isn't one basic component of democracy FREEDOM to choose? People choose whatever they feel comfortable with. You cannot just choose for the people. When you start imposing your views as right and moral, you are actually insulting the other person's intelligence and thinking capability.

Newuser,

Since I have been using my own name on Sajha since 2000 and since I stand behind my postings and since I know that the TRUTH behind my postings can always be checked (hence, there is an in-built incentive for me to be always truthful), let me tell you that:

a) Unlike in the case of some Sajha folks, NO politician, royal or otherwise, has ever
held me up in his lap and said, "this boy will do something for the country".

b) Unlike of some Sajha folks, I do not have an entire village or a town totally invested, since my boyhood, in my political or whatever success. Believe me, except for my family, no one really cares about my whatever success -- as it should be.

c) Add (a) and (b) and you'll find that freed from the burden of always having to live up to other people's expectations, I can afford to be just be myself, and this ability to just be onself is the purest form of freedom.

d) That is why, contrary to what you seem to believe (very highly, I might add), I personally have NO illusion that I will be tapped for this post or that post by this party
or that party or by the monarch himself. I'd rather earn my achievements through the old-fashioned way of hard-work than take short-cuts based on who I know.

oohi
ashu

Ashu Dai,

Lets discuss (though I am not good at discussions)

BUT,

I hesitate to discuss about the PUBLIC INTERESTS in terms of PERSONAL GAINS AND LOSSES .

Is not the following sentence sufficient not to discuss further?

''The King has done me no harm nor has he hurt me. ''

I do not think we need more discussions over it. It's VERY CLEAR.
------
OK

OK wrote:

"I hesitate to discuss about the PUBLIC INTERESTS in terms of PERSONAL GAINS AND LOSSES . Is not the following sentence sufficient not to discuss further? "


Fine.

Then, hesitate.
And, don't discuss further.

But why hurl adjectives at me?

Have I ever hurled adjectives at you?
No.

oohi
ashu

This thread definitely reminds me of a Nepali ukhan that I heard from one of the respondents during my fieldwork "झींगाको प्‍वाँख उखेल्दा आन्‍द्राभुडी छरपष्‍ट" भने जस्‍तै यहाँ त रडाको पो मच्‍च्‍िएको रहेछ बा । Tyo pwakh ukhelne lai thaha hunu parne ho akhir jhinga ko ke po hunchha ra... Tyesai chhodi dya bhaye, ke po garthyo ra, yeha tyeha jahan mitho guliyo milthyo tyehiko rachchyan ma bholthyo, bekar ma...

Nepeko euta saano annecdotal comment le yetti sahro tauko dukhai ta nahunu parne ho? Maybe I am wrong. Well, this is NOT the first time that Ashutosh had to be so defensive of his 'in-between' position.

Ashutosh, nothing personal, but would you care to listen to a humble suggestion? If you are the man of your words, be honest with yourself, if not with others.

Try NOT be redundant in your stance. As a student of economics, you are proud to claim that you are not interested in ?NORMATIVE? issue when it comes to the issues related to the King; however, on the other had, you "as a private citizen" never fail to PREACH the "rights" and "wrongs" to political parties, civil societies, journalists, doctors, lawyers,.....you name it. But hey, it's you, who loves to slice, shape, selectively present facts, data or whatever it is in your preaching to others.

Huna ta haamra tira bhanchha ni "धोबीको कुकुर न घरको न घाटको" (I am using it figuratively, hai pheri..)

I, for one, have NO problem whatsoever with your 'soft corner' toward the King; your PERSONAL choice to resign to ?HEAR NO EVIL, SAY NO EVIL, SEE NO EVIL? of the Narayanhiti palace speaks for itself. If you do not wanna be NORMATIVE, practice first what you preach to others. That's all.

Going back to the thread, I think I would be rather interested to know 'why and how does Nepali Times manage to sustain under the same settings when the NATION fail?' It's gotta be more than just 'differences in opinion.'

Ok, you don't have much to say but you want to say something to appear intelligent. If you don't have much to say, stay quiet! Don't open your mouth and show everyone that you have a two year old's brain.

Isoalted Freak जीले मुटु माथी ढुङ्गा राखी भन्नुभोः
''Hate to write this, but you sound very childish when you make such outlandish claims/remarks:''

I am bemused to see Isolated Freak replying to a 'childish remark'. यसमा भन्दा बढि के भनौ, हैन त ?
It's not only you who have complained me of being childish. As time passes, those who really think newuser's performance in sajha as childish, will gradually see substance in his logic.I know, at times I have argued with some childish commentators very unnecessarily but at the same time I know that I F doesn't think newuser a child from his inner self. अब मेरो विश्वास गलत हुन नि के बेर ? :P

Coming to my points that drew your attention, सत्य कुरा तितो हुन्छ हैन र ?

To be honest, I have always tried to study the demeanour of some very educated intellectuals who make subtle defence of King's autocratic moves while lodging grave allegations against the political leaders. Mind you, I do not mean to I F (or Ashu) by this, there are few more in or around my periphery, probably with much more recognition but taking the same line as you do. Overlooking King's mistakes but taking every chance to lambast the politicians. For eg, they commend the King's anti-corruption rhetoric. But when I ask them about the detention of Narahari Acharya and Nawaraj SUbedi (who is regarded by many as the cleanest MP in Nepal's parliamentary history), they never answer my question, forget about answering them satisfactorily. When T Giri's Loan heroics is raised in the discussion, they are blindfolded!

Now, as I very sincerely like to see those intellectuals (including you) joining pro-democratic alliance, thinking that their efficiency could be an asset for a democracy, I have tried to find the reasons that impede them from criticising even a single authoritirian move by the King. In almost every case, I have found that their family roots are associated with 'purana panchas'. I don't mean here that all purana panchas are bad, but they are loyal to the King. I am not sure, if you qualify to this category or not but my instinct says that I F has some links with the 'darbariyas'. Prove me wrong and I will salute you.

धेरै लेखेर यहाँको समय किन खेर फालौ र ? म शितल निवासको 4416001- 24 संग बेला बेलामा सम्पर्कमा रहन्छु। त्यहाँका (केहि) शाखामा हुने अधिकृत, उपसचिव र त्यसमाथीका नियुक्ति सरुवा बढुवासंग हुँदो न खाँदोको update हुन मन लाग्छ मलाई। यसमा कुनै गहन कारण छैन केवल कुन डेस्कमा अहिले कसले काम गरेकोहोला भन्ने जिज्ञासा मेट्न मात्रै। त्यसोत त्यहाँ feb 1पछि सम्पर्क गर्न भ्याएको छैन। जेहोस यसो गरौ न त , हामी दुई जनाले परिचय साटौं- केवल आधिकारिक नाम मात्र, अरु पर्दैन। राजाले शासन केहि वर्ष टिकाएमा अनि हेरौं शितल निवासमा हुने नियुक्ति/हेरफेरहरुलाई।

मैले आफैले आफैलाई सोध्ने गरेको छु - Isolated Freak जस्तो विदेश मामिलाको विद्वान प्रजातान्त्रिक प्रणालीमा पनि त शितल निवास भित्र अटाउन सक्छ, अनि किन उ राजाका अप्रजातान्त्रिक कदमहरुलाई देखेको नदेख्यै गर्न चाहन्छ ? के उसले पारिवारिक पहुँचबाट अलग भएर आफ्नो क्षमताका भरमा करिअर निर्माण गर्न सक्दैन र? सक्छ तर सजिलो बाटो हुँदाहुँदै किन अप्ठ्यारो बाटो हिंड्ने हैन त?

Again, this is pure speculations. I might be totally wrong but you have got the time to prove me wrong. If you did, I will accept that my aforementioned comments were childish indeed.

ल त आजलाई यति नै. BTW Meyer को The Dust of Empire पढिरहेको छु। Thanks for your referrel. प्राज्ञ भन्दा पत्रकारका किताबहरु रमाइला भएजस्तो लाग्छ. Interesting reading so far. I am a novice on IA. Suggest me some more books pls.

Ashu Dai,

Could you please enlighten me on the following issues--- of course, for discussion:

1. What is peace?

1a. What is peace for those who "have" and, for those who "have nots"?
1b. Why do "Gyanendras" need PEACE and "Rolpalis" need WAR? Is not it because Gyanendras "have" and Rolpalis "have nots"? Why is it not better to die in a WAR for Rolpalis than to die without food ?
1c. Why do Gyanendras "have" and "Rolpalis "have nots"? (Very important to know)
1d. What are the percentage of Gyanendras and Rolpalis in NEPAL---> 5% and 95% respectively or different?
1e. Is not there any difference between the peace in the line of corpses and peace in the happiness? Is not there any difference between the peace inside a JAIL and inside a free society?
1f. Why should we give permission to Gyanendras to kill people in the name of peace? What is the difference between Gyanendras' killing and Prachandas' killing ? Is not it similar? Is it better to kill those who "have nots" than to kill those who "have"? Is it a social justice? How can we believe that Gyanendras will bring a long-lasting peace?

2. How the essentials of human society: Human Rights, Freedom, Democracy and Peace are related with the vested interests of particular political ideologies?

2a. Why do Grandendras and Prachandas" afraid to accept these basic essentials of civil societies?
2b. How can we relate these basic essentials only with political parties? Do only political parties need all these or the general people need?
2c. Is THE FAILURE OF SOME LEADERS equivalent to THE FAILURE OF DEMOCRACY? Is it a fair and a good analysis?
2d. Why don't we think to replace the BAD leaders with the GOOD ones and preserve these essentials--- instead of giving chance to a FOOLISH/CRIMINAL DICTATOR along with our essentials?

----
OK

PS: I do not have any problem to accept GYANENDRA, PRACHANDA or ANY POLITICAL LEADERS who do not take my personal rights, freedom, legal justice, democracy and peace. To me, only peace has NO MEANING.