H1b started a thread asking for logical reasons for ousting or supporting king. So, in this thread, let's attempt to give some logical reasons why his ousting is essential for development of Nepal:

Let's first try to diagnose the reasons for Nepal topping the list for the least developed countries (LDCs):

I’ve tried to explain according to theories of Socialists.

1. Legacy of colonialism : The countries with the history of colonialism often lagged behind in the race of development. We were not colonised. But they have discovered the term called 'internal colonialism' which suits to explain our country. Even after colonialists left these countries, they left the legacy of colonialism in these countries. But this time it’s not the people from foreign countries, its the elites of the same country. They influence the making of every policies and law, and have direct approach to top government levels thus influencing to make any changes in their favor. These are like the parasites for the country, they don't care anything for the country. All they care is about money making. They don't care about the welfare of the people, about the pollution, about the disease outbreak. They have the ability to go to settle other countries, and thus care less for their own country. I gave this as the number one reason for lagging behind in our development.

Royalists often belong to this category. They want to save the monarchy because they consider themselves as the elites. Somebody posted in the thread yesterday claiming to be most learned, educated, and able to foresee the future. They are educated and learned; but they care very less for the country. They are at the top positions and make excellent development plans to prove to be able to foresee the future. But why all our development plans have failed? How did these clever people fail to see the mistakes and keep on repeating these mistakes in making development plans? I would like to cite the quotes from Mr. Krishna Prasad Sigdyal. In his participation of some economic forum in london, he said that everybody said that Nepal's aims were excellent but they asked where the plans were. They said, what Mr. Sigdyal have narrated as Nepal's development plans were only the dreams, and there were no plans on it.

2. Unequal distribution of wealth : Royalists are often the wealthiest people in the country. In most of developing countries, least percentage of people (<10% of population) shares the major portion (more than 2/3) of country's wealth. I’m not asking to nationalize their property like the communists. What I’m saying is that it reflects the situation of our country. These are the people who are taking part in polls like in sajha.

They claim 49% of people support monarchy. How about 99% of people supporting republican from college polls that are probably more fair than the internet polls.

3. Absence of democracy: Governments are not liable to address to any problems of nations in undemocratic country. It's more likely that public will never learn about the major problems in the absence of strong opposition and a strong censorships of media. Governments are likely to perform better and address to the needs of people in democratic society. They can't afford to ignore the problems in the light of exposure by media and the voice of oppositions. This is why the first thing that the king has to do after take over was the complete censorship of media, ban on protests, and suppression of oppositions. In these kinds of society, people with problems can never speak up; media can't write about the problems, and there is no opposition. These types of governments are just waiting for a failure, and that's what happened in Nepal.

Let’s compare the current scenario of Nepal with the one without the establishment of democracy in 1990. Where would Nepal be now? Do you think that king or then Panchayat system would have realised the mistake and make any changes in the constitutions? Would there be the possibility of rising of strong media like kantipur and others? Would there be the possibility of newer television and FM stations? Would there be the presence of NGOs (including the ones from royalists like Anuradha Koirala's Maiti Nepal) attempting to solve the problems of Nepal? Could we ever have got an opportunity to come abroad? Could there be possibility of private banking sectors or blooming of private schools, colleges and universitites? Would mobile phones ever come to Nepal? The sanctions made after "Magh 19" had already been voided in NTC.

We portray royal family as saviors and then they start to think themselves as god being capable to do anything. They never learn a lesson and don't change no matter where they go. Didn't you hear of princess of Saudi Arabia deported from Boston a couple of months ago? She had brought Indonesian maids and let them work for mere $300 per month, hiding their passports.

4. Unequal laws and privelidges: Why do these wealthiest people of the country need to be protected and exempted from any tax? Why do these so called most educated and most learned people cannot compete with the non-elite class and need privileges for non-entering competitions? Haven't you heard of Lok Man Singh Karki? He never needed to give exam for Lok Sewa, and was promoted to even chief-secretary. He enters administrative service from king’s direct order (one simple letter). Why do these wealthiest people need money from government for their health check ups? Deuba government released 2 crores for king's sister. That legacy is still continued. This time, Sushil Koirala was blessed with 60 lakh rupees. Why do general public and often the important personalities from non-elite class never able to get any sort of help from the government?

So called democrats are also trying to do the same what royals had done in the past. They are trying to revive that legacy; in that case, they are also doomed to failure.

5. Centralisation: Everything is still centralised in kathmandu. So it puts the risk of country's collapse if anything happens in kathmandu. It also shows the unequal distribution and representation inside the country. So-called elites have strong interest for this centralisation and are very reluctant to favor any policies for decentralisation.

6. Equal representation: Class with lowest representation and minority groups need special protection so that they get an opportunity too. So there should be special provisions for these people in every sector. The voices from minority groups are very unlikely to be heard in authoritarian rule, let leave about giving equal rights.

People in Nepal have now realized the value of equal representation. But their means of doing is wrong, and may be motivated by some selfish group of people. What triggers them to fight for their rights?

Let’s add more logical reasons for ousting the king.

Please refrain from using any verbal assaults or vulgar words in this thread. Use logic if you can.

Nepal and Nepalil can survive without Monarchy ...but due to the Indian eyes on huge Nepali resources and to stop authoritarian Communism in Nepal ...ceremonial king as head of state is needed......But king should not have any political and military rights ..only a symbol of head of state....I think it is better....otherwise.....Nepal and Nepali people again bound by uncertainty.....instibility...so on...Think coolly and ......lets make a broad base democratic system......

BE aware.....No leaders from panchayet...and no leaders after 1990-2006s failed democracy......Fresh and New leadership ,it is a huge task of every Nepali shoulders now....

This is the perfect example. When you can't use logic and disagree, use all your vocabulary to assault the person, and start blame game.

Countrylover, you're right. Because of the failure and incapability of political leaders, king seem to be the savior. USA is concerned that more radicalism won't replace monarchy like the ones happened in Aghanistan and Iran. Even India is concerned to save monarchy now. That seems kind of logical too in the awake of maoist rampage, and raga of strikes by all the people. But what we should not forget that king has not realized his mistakes which is reflected in his defensive speech this week. That means, he won't get satifisfied by curbing the rules as you mentioned.

Why the fug you want to mold ME into into your specification ? I am nepali and I speak filth. in other words you are saying i cannot belong to your ideal Nepali Society just cause I speak filth ? IF YOU IGNORE 100 LIKE MINDED IDIOTS LKE ME YOU HAVE ANOTHER MOVEMENT. there will be filthy speaking nepalis, there will be perverted Nepalis, there will be illiterate Nepalis.... so on and so forth. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE STOMACH FOR IT THEN YOU SHOULD NOT BE TALKING PUBLICLY. CAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE IN NEPALI SOCIETY. PERVERTS, POTTY MOUTH, CORRUPT POLITICIANS, SLAVE TRADERS, DOCTORS, WRITERS, ARTISTS, MUSICIANS SO ON AND SO FORTH.

I'm not specifying any ideal nepali society. I don't know how to deal with the filthy people and probably sajha is the only one I'm going to speak publicly. There're all kinds of people in society, and they will use their own way to raise their voice. Filthy will use filthy way, but I don't how to respond to filthy people. I just want to talk logically, that's it.

Suppose you're giving speech in public, and filthy person starting assaulting you verbally. What'll you do?

You don't ignore them ... you try and ingage them. They are part of YOUR society too. If you ignore them, they will feel left out and will resort to what the Maoist and Madhesi resorted to.

coffee, if u speak filth, u cannot be taken seriously on certain issues. but hey, u can be an entertainer or be an artist and prove me wrong cause that is what artist do. they defy the norm and come out victorius... normally running ur mouth the way u do, u are likely to get nowhere. oh yeah, forget about being like maoists and madeshis.. it's not in u coffee as u are full of shhhhhhhhhhhhhcaffeine.

" Give me more evidence how can you raise all these good questions and say that king or monarchy is going to save us from all these problems? Do you consider them as god? Otherwise, it's not going to be possible. There're significant number of people who doesn't see monarchy as unifying power or the symbol of unification. If you can convince me, I'm ready to start lobbying for monarchy. You mentioned that monarchy can be me? How? I'm old enough to wait to marry princess and Prerana is already married. The thing that I don't like about monarchy is that you've to be in blood relation. There is no value of other people. "

Do you agree with me that every step Girija, MaKuNe or Prachanda take, they have to or are taking orders from India. Specially, in my opinion, I have found Prachanda more close to Congress I of India than BJP. That was the reason why these leaders declared secular state without any logical debate. Since Congress I is against Monarchs (thus, monarchy) of nepal (Rajeev Gandhi case and others), against Hinduism, Prachanda has been the most loyal dog for them. Girija and others were loyal to BJP. whereas, our royal family has never been the loyal dog of indian governments. they have tried to keep a proper distance from both india and china. Just take an example, once Gyanendra took over, he distanced himself from india and tried to bring china more close so that the nepal can be equidistant from both. Since, they are not from khas or kirat or madhise or bhote or anything, they have been able to be equidistant from all the ethnic groups of nepal, while working for the integretity and sovereignty of the country. Thats why, monarchy can be an unifying entity of Nepal. Lets say, if prachanda becomes king instead of gyanendra, then he will convert nepal to india. same with girija, if he becomes the sole head of the country, nepal will cease to exist. there is a need of absolutely non-political, non-alligned figure to represent nepal.

if anybody can save the integrety and sovereignty of Nepal, then other problems are minor.

No. I do not consider them as god.

question to those who do not see king as unifying power: who do u think, if becomes the head of the country, will represent the unifying figure of Nepal?

Ya, why stick to Gyanendra or Paras as king? Lets make my son the king. I am against president thing because, the fight to become the president creates biasness, cunningness in the leaders. and when they get the power, there are high chances that it will be misused. and, frequent change of the head denigrates the head's respect.

fck blood relation.

Copycat,

I don't know about Girija, but I doubt about Prachanda being able to be president or prime-minister in the context of maoist atrocities. He can never get mandate from people to be president considering half of population in Nepal is now Madhesh, and he lost support from that region already. I don't know which party or which personnel is close to whom in India. May be you're right. But you mentioned that with King, Nepal will be Nepal, and you mentioned that other problems are minor and let king save the integrity and sovereignty of Nepal. We had that integrity and sovereignty in last two century of king's rule, didn't we? So what went wrong? Ask the meaning of those to poorest people dying from hunger in Humla and Jumla. What do they care about? Isn't the feeding of them more important than anything else? I strongly disagree to consider other problems minor. Other problems are the most important things. To maintain at least the basic necessities like food, clothes, shelter, electricity, drinking water, health care, transportation, and education facilities are the most important thing. I'm ready to follow anyone with concrete vision and plans to fulfill these things. But the reality is that none of current political powers (king, political parties, or maoists) have the vision to do at the moment. But I still have some hope that it will be realised in the presence of democratic system, and some good leaders will emerge. But I'm hopeless with either the maoists or king system because they care more to suppress people's rights, censorship than anything else. I agree that leaders are corrupted and selfish but at least they will also do something good.

You're right again about creating biasness and cunningness from president system; that's why we need to create a good system to check all these, and prevent these things from happening. There can be a solution.

I think instead of playing blame game...we yoouths and educated person should do something for Nepal rather than for ourself.....We can't depend on any current political leaders and Secretaries...

LIVEWIRE !!
Do you know me ? NOPE ! DO I KNOW YOU ? NOPE !! THEN WHY THE FUG THIS ASSUMPTION ? WHAT I WILL BE AND NOT BE IS NONE OF YOUR FUGGING BUSINESS(FUGGING jANNEY). Yeah I FUGGING DEFY THE NORM THATS RIGHT !! THATS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND ME PAL. YOU WANT TO BE JUST ANOTHER SHEEP IN THE HERD.
Normally ? ha ha ha This is normal for you ? he he YOU CAL THIS NORMAL REALITY FOR YOU ...HE HE I FEEL SORRY FOR YOU. WHETHER IT IS LIKELY GET ME ANYWHERE ... HA HA HA YOU WILL NEVER KNOW. AND YOU KNOW WHY ? CAUSE PUNKS LIKE YOU AIN'T GOT THE KAHUNAS FOR IT. YOU JUST WANT TO BELONG AND BE PART OF THE HERD.
ME TRYING TO BE LIKE MAO'S AND MADHESI'S ? HE HE R U FUGGIN KIDDIN ME ? I WOULD NEVER WANT TO BE EITHER OF THEM. I AM VRY COMFORTABLE WITH WHO I AM AND WHERE I AM. NO NEED FOR PUNKS LIKE YOU TO COME AND REMIND ME.

I agree with you bathroomCoffee. Our past policies ignore minorities that is why we are seeing maoists and madhesi problem. Instead of ingoring them. We need to learn about them and embrace them in our system. Then only we all are on same page. If you ignore certain group, it is not helpful for the development of the country. For the development of the country the contributions has to come from every corners. If certain group of people are left behind, it will pull the whole developed system down. That is why in USA, there is more benefits for the black and hispanic. That is why USA want to increase diversity. So, that they can learn and teach others and march on development even on fast rate.

"logical reasons to oust the king"

since when have humans been logical creatures? make your emotional judgement. king/no king

the brain will supply the logic once the decision has been made

Kanda, I think that i'm a logical person. My hypothesis is that removal of king will do good to a country, so I put some logics to prove that. If you can refute it, I'm ready to follow your hypothesis (or your emotional judgement or decision).

I can't agree more with your last sentence.

Bhutan has a king but it is more or less an indian territory.

.
you 'think' you are a logical person

be honest with yourself

when you saw my post, wht was the chain of thoughts ?

ws it:

'point a: this person thinks i am not logical, point b: i made a logical hypothesis and made valid arguments to arrive at a logical answer, therefore i am logical, point c: this person is wrong

or

"wtf? whos this idiot who thinks im not logical? i'll show the mofo" and at that point, your brain pointed out to you that the reason you are logical is because you made a logical argument?

The question is not about me. The question is about logic. I may be logical or not logical.

I said you were right when I saw your post. We often draw conclusions first and then try to find evidence, logics and supporting arguments to prove that. I did the same, where as the opposite should be the correct one. But again, prove my arguments wrong with your arguments rather trying to be personal.

I'm a dishonest person and illogical person if that can help you to bring to talk with logics. What I am doesn't matter. I never intend to go into politics.

Under our King we have the best chance. All the so called 'democratic forces' are nothing but dubious and frauds who fool people and earn a living by over-selling democracy.

purwa_phaancha said:
Under our King we have the best chance.

You are right.You have a best chance but what chances do you see for others who are not panchha?

Under any system or under anyone's leadership, people cannot get all the goodies. People cannot cherry-pick things that they like and throw away the stuffs that they dont like. In essence it's a package deal.

Anyone who question the motives of the king should come up with better alternatives which are urgently needed in present day Nepal. If they (presently) dont have any alternatives better than the leadership of our king they got no choice but to accept what our king has to offer.

Unlike so called 'democratic forces' our king is not going to make a living by selling democracy or doing big talks on democracy nor will he make fradulent and dubious claims that he cannot deliver.

Furthermore, many areas of Nepal's political system is badly undisciplined (a standard set by so called 'democratic forces' by politically interferring in every aspect of government, legal and social sytem of Nepal). These areas needs complete overhaul and our king will take a stern disciplinary actions in these areas.