Source: http://www.ekantipur.com/

Ensuring Victory Was of the People

By Anil J. Shahi


The most recent proclamation by the King to restore the dissolved House of Parliament, and the subsequent welcome of the decision as the “people’s victory” by the Seven-Party Alliance comes as a bitter disappointment to those who believed the movement could have – or should have -- achieved much more: A Republican Democracy. What Nepal needs, we believe, is a total structural transformation, not just a power shift from feudalistic guardians to political elites. The total annihilation of the feudal structure, which protected the monarchy, and which, as in the post-1990 revolution, will probably continue to protect the political elites, should have been the ultimate goal of the recent movement. Given that the movement had gained tremendous momentum towards achieving that goal, sudden “agreement” to end it is seen by many as a great opportunity sorely missed.

Well, we have been hit by a heavy dose of realpolitik. The masses on the streets were probably beginning to feel battle-fatigue; common Kathmanduites beginning to feel the pinch caused by soaring prices of food, or the lack thereof. Many were likely getting tired of almost three weeks of curfews and unrests. The international community, particularly the Indians, still held firm to their long-standing policy of “twin pillars” in Nepal. And, most importantly, our so-called leaders never had the courage, or the vision, to believe in Nepal without the monarchy. Their demand of the revival of the dissolved House of Parliament was fundamentally flawed right from the beginning -- I am still wondering how the House that is to be governed by the Constitution of 1990, which does not allow amendments on the issue of a constitutional monarch, will be able to announce a Constituent Assembly that would ensure that the fate of the monarchy will be decided by the people.

Given that the outcome of the movement, however bitter, is probably sealed for now, I, for one, am willing to accept defeat and look forward, and try to make the most out of it. If the political leadership is to prove to the Nepalis that the movement was genuinely targeted at restoring sovereignty on the people, and not merely another grab at power, they must then act swiftly and decisively on several issues that are of utmost urgency at this transitional period.

First and foremost, they must consider replacing the Constitution of 1990 with an interim constitution. The new constitution must severely curtail the authority of the king. This should include, but not be limited to, his command of the army. Given the king’s notorious past records, there is a distinct possibility of him ordering the troops back into the barracks once again, making it extremely difficult for the new government to rule. In order to ensure firm loyalty of the army to the civilian government in the new structure, it might even be advisable that the new interim government replace senior army officials who might still hold utmost loyalty to the king with those who would be likely to submit to the collective will of the people of Nepal. The declaration of a new interim constitution would also pave the way for an unconditional Constituent Assembly election, ensuring that the fate of the monarchy would be in the hands of the people of Nepal. [The Constitution of 1990 sets forth the consolidation of “Constitutional Monarchy” in the preamble, making it not subject to any amendments.] This insistence on an unconditional Constituent Assembly does not presuppose a republican government as the ultimate goal; rather, the matter should be left for the Nepali people to decide through a Constituent Assembly. The wounded tiger is likely to strike back with greater vengeance, thus the new government must take into consideration any measure that would prepare them for any such surprises.

As stated in the agenda of the Seven Party Alliance, the issue of bringing the Maoists into peaceful mainstream politics should be of utmost priority as well. They should not only work to enhance their 12-point Memorandum of Understanding with the Maoists, but should make serious and honest efforts to reach a permanent peace accord with them. The peace agreement must be comprehensive and far-sighted – every aspect of conflict transformation must be addressed. Some that come to my mind at the moment are: Issues of gender, caste, and ethnicity; displacement; rehabilitation; disarmament; transitional justice; post conflict development; integration of the Maoist soldiers into the national army, etc. It would be prudent to seek international help in this regard. Maoists must also learn two important lessons from the recent Jana Andolan: a) Peaceful protests proved far more effective than armed revolution; and b) If the Nepali people were capable of making the monarch with a solid backing of the army capitulate, they can surely handle the Maoists too if it came to that. The Maoists must give up violence and their extreme communism.

It is also imperative that the interim government at least establish a framework for prosecuting any serious cases of corruption in the past, and of gross human rights violations during the conflict. The latter should not only include violators from both the security forces and the Maoists during the years of Maoist rebellion, but also those who committed such grave crimes during the 18-day nationwide uprising. From army generals to high-ranking officials of the king’s government, to the corrupt officials from the parties themselves, these criminals and rights violators must not be spared.

Many Nepalis have also been disappointed by the old leadership’s (leadership in this sense is already plural) refusal to recognize their past mistakes, step aside, and pave the way for new faces. That is to say, democratization of the leaders’ respective parties should also be in the agenda. After all, one cannot fathom a truly democratic country until the elements ruling it are democratic themselves. A good start would be for the members of the interim government to commit themselves to resign permanently from politics after the results of the Constituent Assembly are in and the new constitution formulated. I am sure people have appreciated all of their contributions to the country, and to the cause of its democracy, and would respect them even more if they submitted to new leadership, for the betterment of our country, in the nearest possible future. It would be a farce in the name of democracy if the people were to see the same Prime Minister who has failed the country in the past be allowed to assume the responsibility again.

Finally, the Nepali civil society that played a highly praiseworthy role in the fight for democracy must also not rest so fast. They must remain vigilant and alert of not only the king’s surprise actions, but also of the future democratic governments. It would be their duty to continue to ensure that people’s voices are being heard, and that the victory will not go futile, for the war is still going on.

While it may not have met the expectations of many, the end of Jana Andolan 2006, has ushered in a new era in Nepal, and has opened a window of opportunity for a better future. It surely is up to the leaders of Jana Andolan 2006 to prove to the disenchanted that it is not going to be an utterly disappointing déjà vu all over again. It is incumbent upon the leaders to prove that the Andolan was truly about the people and not just the political leaders. Nepalis have had to fight for democracy five times in nearly six decades -- almost once every ten years – in 1952, 1962, 1979, 1989, and 2006 – and one would hope that this time, it’s for good.



Posted on: 2006-04-29 08:50:55 (Server Time)

To confess, at one point I also thought the revolution is now lost for next several years. I thought our politicians are going to succeed to give us a fake revolution one more time.

My observation of popular sentiments for past few days has changed that.

What reassure me is that people are seen still not relying on the politicians. They are relying on nothing and nobody but themselves and their vigilance.

In the victory mass meeting, they forced politicians to publicly commit to the revolution. On politician had to say, "I do, I do, I do." Others had to make their voice loud and clear.

But here is what reassures me completely. They did not trust even GP Koirala (may God give him good health and long life for him to see how much more than he ever could dream could be achieved by "people power") !

They demanded him at the meeting. And they demanded him not to celebrate him as the messiah, but to make him say he would not betray the revolution. They wanted to hear from him the same "I do, I do, I do".

Republic is now a household, office, park, restaurant and bus word.

"Ceremonial monarchy" had a logic before Gyanendra killed unarmed citizens and before he surrendered. It definitely made a sense to seek a compromise with a power to reckon with, a power that could potentially kill hundreds of unarmed freedom fighters.

Now that the king is a killer and now that he is no more a power to reckon with but just a half-dead horse, what logic is left for "Ceremonial monarchy" ?

So I think, "April revolution" is not taking rest yet. It is waiting for it's completion in the CA or even before that. Our politicians are not only forced by people to say "I do, I do, I do", they will be forced to dream and see Nepal without monarchy.

I am confident, fully confident.

So, to friends who are giving up rebelpolitik and are ready to compromise with realpolitik, I would urge to hold on. The revolution is live and kicking. It just took a slower tempo, that's all.

क्रान्तिप्रतिको दृढसंकल्प र दृढविश्वासलाई धरमराउन नदिऔं । क्रान्तिले हामीलाई एउटा अविश्वासको मोडमा अलमलिईरहेको अवस्थामा नभेटोस् ।

शायर सलिम कौसेरको यो बेजोड शायरी हाम्रो लागि चेतावनी बनोस्:


कभि लौट आए तो पुछना नही, देखना उन्हें गौर से
जिन्हें रास्ते मे खबर हुई कि यह रास्ता कोइ और है

- http://mushaira.org/audio/redir.php?tp=ram&filename=salim1.rm


Nepe

Did people stop making Nepali flags? What the fu(k are some party flag doing on top of a national monument.
Nepalese have lost their nationality. What I saw out in the streets of Kathmandu was not the love for one's country; some were frustrations, some were greed and almost all were ego!
Quote me on this, If you want to bring Nepal and Nepali values down, go find a Nepali to help you, you won't fail!
Peace

I am not as optimistic as Mr. Nepe is. I can only accept up to this fact that Gyane will not try to consolidate his power for pre-1990 era which he tried his best up to this point. People are unarmed and Gyane can just turn as Maoists and shoot all the protesters down. His and his latthak son's logic will be if they are loosing the grip on power, they will take as many lives as they can. Dog once it gets mad, will do anything. If you think positively about them it's going to be your fault. If people are warning leaders it for this reason because people know better than this feudalistic society and politicians believe.

"There was a moment on the last Saturday afternoon of the protests that encapsulated the problem when the crowd surged into the centre of the capital, well inside the "shoot on sight" curfew area and within a mile of the royal palace. Tens of thousands of them jammed into a junction which had both ways blocked by the police, who were vastly outnumbered. One road led to the palace. The right man or woman at that time, leading that crowd, could probably have taken those people to the king's doorstep. Instead the crowd was leaderless. The police opened the other road, the crowd cheered their small victory and they all streamed by, the momentum was lost. The king was saved, for the time being" (source: BBC)

Now, think what would we have got if there was someone who could hold the mass? These leaders, mark my word now will do every thing to save ceremonial monarch. Their only fear is Maoist but they are taking care of them by giving a piece of pie in the cabinet. Why would Maoists care if people got any benefit of the movement or not. After all, they have been amassing their wealth looking people's deposit from the bank. We are deceived again. There might be nominal gain but I wouldn't be surprised if there is no gain at all.

i just finished reading that articles in ekantipur and surfing Sajha. Wow, that's poonte!

" The total annihilation of the feudal structure, which protected the monarchy, and which, as in the post-1990 revolution, will probably continue to protect the political elites, should have been the ultimate goal of the recent movement"

I don't think it is possible to start anew in Nepal at this point of time, and whether the leaders like the institition of monarchy or not, they know they cannot simply do away with it. Despite their amazing stupidity they seem to realize that Nepal is served better with the institution, than without it. So far the parties' position on the King is vague for understable reasons. They don't know how to manage the transition after the traditional strcture comes crumbling down, and they know that the new institution will need a long long time to institutionalzie itself in Nepali pshyce. And given today's volatile situation, they know that in the absence of the old structure, the nation is either going to find itself in a long civil war, or will see a system that is not favorable to them.

So far the political parties' strategy seems to be, as one recent artilce in nepali himal states, raja dekhayera janata tarsaune, janata dekhayera raja tarsaune. This time they succeeded in having their demands met by making the crowds chant republican slogans, but if you recall, many parties are still vague on the issue of monarchy. They just don't know what to do with it. And in the absence of any clear cut vision and plan, their best bet is to keep it.

Let's not forget Nepali people have a very short-term memory and the political ideology(-ies) is not highly developed. Today we rally for Girija, tomorrow we are against him. Or Yesterday we were chanting "yespali ko haija girija lai laija" and today we are making him our "biggest democracy fighter"... We also seem to forget that even during the course of this 7 party-led birodh since october 2004, many times they have broken their alliance to serve their own individual power aspirations.. and have compromised with the King. This is actually quite scary. When you have this kind of irresponsible and devoid of fixed political values leaders and parties, and a young forgetful population, the nation will not see a developed functioning democracy. Of course some structural changes are necessary, I don't disagree with you on that, but those changes should be well thought out and gradual. No society remains stable when the traditional structure crumbles down all of a sudden. It takes a lot of planning, ideological education and persuassion BEFORE the structural change, if the new structure is to establish itself firmly. Its easier to talk about it, but its extreemely hard to put in practice, in my view.

" The total annihilation of the feudal structure, which protected the monarchy, and which, as in the post-1990 revolution, will probably continue to protect the political elites, should have been the ultimate goal of the recent movement"

I don't think it is possible to start anew in Nepal at this point of time, and whether the leaders like the institition of monarchy or not, they know they cannot simply do away with it. Despite their amazing stupidity they seem to realize that Nepal is served better with the institution, than without it. So far the parties' position on the King is vague for understable reasons. They don't know how to manage the transition after the traditional strcture comes crumbling down, and they know that the new institution will need a long long time to institutionalzie itself in Nepali pshyce. And given today's volatile situation, they know that in the absence of the old structure, the nation is either going to find itself in a long civil war, or will see a system that is not favorable to them.

So far the political parties' strategy seems to be, as one recent artilce in nepali himal states, raja dekhayera janata tarsaune, janata dekhayera raja tarsaune. This time they succeeded in having their demands met by making the crowds chant republican slogans, but if you recall, many parties are still vague on the issue of monarchy. They just don't know what to do with it. And in the absence of any clear cut vision and plan, their best bet is to keep it.

Let's not forget Nepali people have a very short-term memory and the political ideology(-ies) is not highly developed. Today we rally for Girija, tomorrow we are against him. Or Yesterday we were chanting "yespali ko haija girija lai laija" and today we are making him our "biggest democracy fighter"... We also seem to forget that even during the course of this 7 party-led birodh since october 2004, many times they have broken their alliance to serve their own individual power aspirations.. and have compromised with the King. This is actually quite scary. When you have this kind of irresponsible and devoid of fixed political values leaders and parties, and a young forgetful population, the nation will not see a developed functioning democracy. Of course some structural changes are necessary, I don't disagree with you on that, but those changes should be well thought out and gradual. No society remains stable when the traditional structure crumbles down all of a sudden. It takes a lot of planning, ideological education and persuassion BEFORE the structural change, if the new structure is to establish itself firmly. Its easier to talk about it, but its extreemely hard to put in practice, in my view.

but its extreemely hard to put in practice, in my view. = put into practice..


Today the people have turned against the monarchy, but tomorrow, the chances of the same people turning against the parties are high too. Sometimes the crowd chants "hamro raja hamro desh, pran bhanda pyaro cha.." sometimes it chants "raja aau desh bachau" sometimes it chants "raja chahidaina".. you see this inconsistency? Wait until Dashain.. you will see many people who chanted slogans against the monarchy lining up infront of the Palace to recieve tika from the King! Its amazing how the crowds forgot that Girija and Deuba dissolved the house because of the in-party fighting. They even forgot that it was not the King but Deuba who dissolved the last House of Rep. to "pradhan mantri paad ko maryada bachauna"..

The civil society is also not fully developed. Think of it, who has come up with a persuassive plan for the structural change and how to go about it. Is there anyone with a well-thought out plan for the transitional period? Given the low level of political ideological development in Nepal and its other flaws, the "transition" plan has to be really well thought out. Simply saying if we have a republic and things will turn better overnight is not a very good persuassive argument/plan. They need to have all their bases covered and make public their plans/agendas.

Talking about the Army: The Army has always said its purpose is not to defeat the maoists but to bring them to negotiations. But its the democratic parties who came up with the hardline "total- annihilation" policy towards the Maoists. Girija used the Police, DEuba went a step further and mobilized the Army and even declared them terrorists. The King did not put a reward of 5 million Rs on Baburam, or did he? The King did not say that the Army will fight for ten years because “it will take ten years to defeat the Maoists”, did he? Did the King mobilize the army out of his whim? Let's not forget the past: it was deuba who declared the state of emergency and brought the army out of its barracks.

" Given the king’s notorious past records, there is a distinct possibility of him ordering the troops back into the barracks once again, making it extremely difficult for the new government to rule.:"

There's a contradiction here, Anil ji. If the political parties are so concerned with peace, why do they need the Army to rule? What do you mean here: Are you implying that the Army should keep on fighting the Maoists, while they negotiate with its (maoists) leaders? If the poeple and civil society is abcking the new "people's govt." why do they need the Army? All should be fine now, no? Since they have already reached some covert and some overt agreements with the Maoists, it will make more sense if they can bring the Maoists to negotiations and finally into the political mainstream, without the help of the Army. If they still insist to use the Army or rely on its support for peace, then you know, the parties do not really are about the situation in the country. All they care about is their own petty personal interests.

"The Maoists must give up violence and their extreme communism. "

Why? What would make them give up their beliefs just because the parliament is reinstated. The maoist are confused now- just look at their recent "contradictory" press releases. Just tell me, what makes you think that the parties and the Maoists will sit down for a nice dinner and chat, and after a hearty meal of good food and wine, declare that they (the maoists) will don new clothes from now on. Its not going to happen.

You are right about the international community. A nation that relies so much on aid, and foreign political intervention rather than its own resources and institutions and people, is bound to follow what the donors and foreign masters want them to follow. The world opinion is still not favorable to the Maoists and having the Maoists either join the mainstream or form their own governmnet is a no-no for them. They would rather have a long civil war engulf Nepal rather than let the fighting parties reach a truce. Its that simple. So the conflict is going to be nasty, brutal and long. We are indeed a sad example of a nation without any political independence and these days, a nation without any self-respect. Where in the world you will see even the diplomats engaged in local politics and make "sensetive" comments?

Now let's talk about the internal structure of the parties: Our parties follow the Bihri model. Its one step short of communism's personality cult, but 3 steps above of ordinary/normal leadership. Again the same people are the Sava;patis/Sachibs for 20 years, and don;'t even talk about resigning/retiring. They will have the parties break than change the leadership. Remember the formation of Deuba Congress. These totally out-of-sync oldies who cannot think anything except their own ineterests, have created all the political problems in Nepal, rather than the institution of monarchy. Think of it, maybe because we don't have a fully developed politically consciouss population, maybe we do need a Patriarch like Girija, despite all his flaws - and our tremendous hatred for him -- to lead us. Why didn't the crowd that wated democracy in the nation, didn't want democracy within the parties? Now that Girija is back again, are all his and his cronies past crime sof curroption etc. whitewashed? Its amazing when we forget the past, because the past is probably the most realibel guide to the present and the future. Given these peoples' past, I am not very optimistic and I don't even see this alliance holding strong after 3 months. In party and inter party bickerings will soon begin and again one of the parties will rely on violent street protests and boom! back to where we were!!

alik lamo bhayecha.. ali sachyarea padhnu hola...

just to remind you again but more to the people who believe that since we are on different ideological planes discussions between us should be an all out peronal warfare that should have a "winner", than healthy "ideological" questioning and such: I have nothing against you personally. I know you are aware of it, but the recent trend in Sjha has been, people automatically assume that "you are getting personal" if you do not accept the claims posted here. I hope I made my position clear to those people.

So I think, "April revolution" is not taking rest yet. It is waiting for it's completion in the CA or even before that. Our politicians are not only forced by people to say "I do, I do, I do", they will be forced to dream and see Nepal without monarchy.

I am confident, fully confident.

nepe Sir,

Don't be confident yet. I am sure you have heard that in politics there are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies. And our leaders know what it implies more than anybody else. The April "revolution" is already taking rest. Like I said in my above reply to Poonte, Nepali people have a very short term memory. In this revolution the media, especially Kantipur played an important role to mobilize the people, but it will have to change its tune with the changing situation. Don't forget that the external forces that have a lot of influence in the nepali media, are still not-all-out favoring getting rtid off of the monarchy yet.

The people in their moment of frustrations and anger did chant some republican slogans but I don't think they will remember it for a long time. The process of forgetting begins when the leaders and the media start shifting their focus. Our political persuassion and idelogy seems contextual- it changes with time. On the one hand, its good because it makes us pragmatic, but, sadly on the other hand, it makes us vulnerable to political manipulations. And the whole April revolution, for the most part, as I see it, was a good example of public manipulation by the parties.

I'd rather force the govt. to open more schools, make education mandatarory to all children.. depoliticize the academia and abide by the rule of law, than what's being proposed now. Then only we will have a mature population that can decide for itslef what is good and what is bad itself. I think the whole concept of popular soverignty means that that peope are making decsiions without being led or manipulated by the parties. Then only we;'ll see the parties change and instead of the people relying on the parties for political guidance, the parties will be relying on the people . Then you can talk about what needs changing, what needs preserving.. So if the parties do want a major structural change in future, they have to start working on it now.

>> I'd rather force the govt. to open more schools, make education mandatarory to all children.. depoliticize the academia<<

I.F. ji
i admit i didn't read the AJS piece up there - i am short on patience. but i did scan through your thoughts - i like it, although it's not satisfactory, of course. you are a realpolitik-ician, it seems, and that's fine. what else to ground our unbounded and irrational exuberance stemming from faux-victories than a healthy dose of "reality", eh?

but truth be told, you are as jaded with this reality as anyone else. oh, how you disdain the practicality of the people when you lament their fickle political beliefs. "real" is fine. it's great. we need to be reminded of it. but it is the same old same old, no? admission: right now, i am tired of tired people. tired people who define every bend in the road with a ideal-real dichotomy. and so i write. for tomorrow i will be tired again.

let me start with your idea of education. it's good. sounds good. but does an educated populace really make that ideal informed decision. ah, it's a matter of degrees, you may say. i dunno. who is to say an educated populace is (going to be) any less fickle than our less-than-ideal populace? even assuming they are "better" deciders, the more fundamental issue is the decision of the populace whether they are informed or not, no? their decisions do count regardless of the information-content, don't they?

"educate the people - they'll make better decisions"...(oh, how condescending that sounds! i am suffering from vertigo right about now from being on this high-horse.) the effectiveness of "education" [substitute education with your pet infrastructure project if you wish] depends crucially on what happens in the environment where we "educate" . an "educated" mass is the goal, but how we get there matters. education does not guarantee us better outcomes. education, with other conditions, may give us better outcomes.

put another way, "educate the people - they'll make better decisions" ... in the future! education bears fruit in the long run, but what about the short run? and no we can't ignore the short run, cause in the long run we're all dead.

I read Poonte's article.
It's well over 1200 words.

It contains

nine "should"
11 "must",
three "probably" and
three "likely"

As one of my writing teachers used to say (and I am quoting him from memory, to give you the gist of what he once valuably taught):

"Don't use too many 'must' and 'should' in your writing unless you are writing a technical 'how-to' manual. Nobody likes to be lectured at by being told what "must" happen, and what "should" be done in an on-and-on manner. Hinging your
sentences on such words is no way to persuade others about your point of view."

Personally, as one of Poonte's tough-admirers, I would have been happier to see him argue one point of view, any point of view (i.e. we need CA for this reason; or we don't need CA for that reason; etc) from the beginning to the end of the article, and leave it at that rather than see him try to cover the ENTIRE future of Nepali democracy in one article -- thereby unwittingly casting himself as some sort of a scold-master.

Other than that, a good contribution to the ongoing debate and kura-kani.

oohi
"staring at a writing deadline late night at work with no idea about what I am going to write about"
ashu

tired,

not to test your patience, here's my answer:

"the more fundamental issue is the decision of the populace whether they are informed or not, no? their decisions do count regardless of the information-content, don't they? "

yes they do count but if the population is better informed and educated then it significantly reduces the chances of girija like people to become PM time and again.

you being short in patience and i being swamped with acdemic commitments, i think we both should be content with this short conversation. :-)

View/Share this post only

yes they do count but if the population is better informed and educated then it significantly reduces the chances of girija like people to become PM time and again.
=
yes they do count but if the population is better informed and educated then it significantly reduces the chances of girija like people becoming PM time and again.

you being short in patience and i being swamped with acdemic commitments, i think we both should be content with this short conversation. :-)

ok this too got screwed up..

you being short on patience, and I being swamped with academic commitments, I think we both should be content with this short conversation.

See you around.

No matter how euphemistically you put, the revolution of 2006 was fueled by several factors such as:
1. King Birendra and his family's slaying
2. Paras's errant behavior
3. Gyanendra's parliament sacking
4. Maoist problem
5. Gyanendra's utterly photo-unfriendly distorted facial expression

Now democracy has prevailed.

No doubt, some Nepalis from within and outside of Nepal will use this opportunity to grab a lucrative position in the government.

Let me analyze the scenario here-
An article in Kantipur when the iron is red hot, a sajha poster with the link, and a crafted and well-edited feedback within short 5 hours in support rally.

All this is nothing but a carefully created set planted by members of close-knit and closed-door polit-bureau like google-group members.

On a side note -- if you have trouble with a sajha thread being read and reread, invite isolated-freak.

.I.F.

दिन रहे, दैबले साँचे, गफ त हुँदै गर्ला...

Rbaral,

What kind of silly accusation is this? --
" An article in Kantipur when the iron is red hot, a sajha poster with the link, and a crafted and well-edited feedback within short 5 hours in support rally.
All this is nothing but a carefully created set planted by members of close-knit an closed-door polit-bureau like google-group members. "


Wah gajjab Cha BA!!!

As Nepe himself had said about their 'close knit democracy group' being overflooded with wah wah's and congratulations, it is not surprising that thier patting-each-other-on-the-back attitude has spilled over to the ever democratic sajha kurakani.

I mean after a while you get tired of the wah wah's you receive from inside the 'closed democratic forum' and want to go out into a broader diaspora like sajha and try to gain more wah wah's but fail sharply as far as the number of 'should-count' and 'must-count' go. Kudos to ashu for introducing this new concept which will stick to our tongues or fingers rather for some time to come.

Let me inject my first 'should' here by mentioning that the so called democracy masters and phds' should stick to their own closed minded group with their accepted come-pat-me-in-my-back-otherwise-I-hate-you kind of attitude.

oh maybe i posted without thinking here:

Rbaral I regret my earlier post.. i thought you were assucing me of being in that close-knit group, just realzied that you meant somebody else. My bad.