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

Emodus,

Unlike you guys who are reduced to forever REACTING to the King (because
you hate him so much), I am NOT for reacting to King's moves.

Have you ever made King react to anything you say and do?
Never.

Putting the normative issues aside (and that's because I personally do NOT have the philosophical depth to argue them convincingly to the public at large), I simply accept the King as a self-interested player in this political game who is out to maximize his
gains.

I do not, as I have said earlier, for a moment believe that what the King is doing is for the greater good of the nation. But I understand that whatever he does, he has to dress it up in a "I am doing this for the country" garb. The same logic also applies to
how I view political netas' pleas.

This is why, once you accept the king as a crass, self-interested player (and this is contrary to what real royalists believe), there is no need for you to expect much from the King. You just expect him to do things that, he thinks, are going to be help
him rule/reign long.

Only the time will tell whether the King gets what he wants or whether his decision will prove to be disastrous for himself.

At this moment, frankly, I don't know and I don't care . . . about a future that has NOT arrived here yet.

This is why, I have no personal interest in getting entangled in what the King OUGHT TO BE and what he OUGHT to do and so on, because I think such discussions are futile and
even foolish.

Having said that, I am much more interested in seeing where and how the political parties FAILED and what could be done now to do "damage-control" and REVERSE their failure and turn that into success.

I mean, if you spend all your energy on the King, where's the time and the energy to turn things around for the parties?

Look at the King. He's using Tulsi Giri to take all the heat, while he's having Kirti Nidhi Bista do all the work. Giri's role is that of a circus performer: say outrageous things, entertain the masses, get all the media attention, and deflect the attention from the King and Bista, and, when the time comes, exit from the stage to go back to Sri Lanka.

With so much media energy and attention on Giri, who is keeping tabs on Bista, the real kaam-daar of the Panchayat?

Earlier, I talked sbout the NEED to craft messages that make people believe,
in stark personal terms, that democracy is in THEIRpersonal interest, and that democracy is it not about letting Girija be back in the saddle so that he can loot
again.

As long as the public views democracy as a means for Girija et al to have another opportunity to loot the nation, no one's going to line up behind the parties. And that's
a tragedy.

So, yes, I do want to RECAST the terms of the debate to argue what the parties, given the king as the king, can do to move ahead than listen to just another senselessly useless monarch-bashing kura that simply DIVERTS the resources needed to strengthen the parties.

But to do that, I first had to strike at the central nerve of the monarch-bashers who are used to getting an easy audience on Sajha to point out that despite the puffery, theirs is a useless and reactive stance. :-)

More later

oohi
ashu

"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."

Look, let me repeat myself again: What you consider autocratic might not be seen/considered autocratic by other "rational" human beings. How hard it is for you to understand this?

"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! "

What about that NC guy Chataut or someone, who was blacklisted by the CIAA and had an arrest warrant against him, but was seen meeting with GP KOIRALA in Baluwatar. Kantipur even published a picture of this meeting. I am not saying everyone in pachayat was clean and pure, but Panchayat from time to time arrested high-profile people, including DB Lama and Bharat Gurung, who were in quite influential positions with all the necessary connections, when they were arrested.

Good to know you are in touch with high-profile people in Nepal. I am not as lucky as you are, and I have no direct or indirtect access to the people in Shital Niwas. Congratulations on your reach and connections. I'll contact you when I have to renew my passport.

"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, what kind of childish assumption is this? What makes you think that I cannot compete.. I have full confidence in my ability and competitiveness. If i were choosing an easy path, I wouldn't have continued with my studies. Coming from a middle class family with no political connections whatsoever, I have to study, rely on my comepetitiveness and confidence. Yor are 100% mistaken to believe that I defend the King's move so that I can have an easy way out.. waht kind of logic/assumption is that? Can't people be supportive of the King thinking that may be he will be able to clean up the current mess and restore law and order in the country?

If you use that kind of dangerous logic to defend yourself, you lose credibility. You don't comment on others just out of the blue based on your WILD imaginations.

Let's use reverse logic: Maybe you are looking for an easy way out ebcause you have connections and parivarik pahunch with the parties. Who knows? Maybe you don't feel confident and competent enough to succeed in the King's regime. Who knows? Now you clarify your stance, so that we know you have no uletrior motives in criticizing the King. Ye baba.. bhanne ko paani euta limit huncha ni. Fine disagree with my views, that's the kind of democracy I believe in, but you don't have any rights whatsoever to ooutright label me incompetetive and all that. Challenge my views, not me.

If you believe in democracy as much as you claim to, then defend your position in a non-personal, scholarly way. I have no problems with that. Having come across many briliants students/friends who donot think like me, and who just knock me out with their brilliant defense/points in class discussions/presentations and informal talks, I have come to like challenge. It only makes you refine your arguments. You are always looking for the loopholes in your own arguments and in their arguments.. and as a result you can have a great non-personal, non-offensive discussions, debates over coffee/beer. But if I follow your kind of logic, become personal with everyone .. and tell every American I come across who believes in democracy, "dude you seem to be a CIA agent".. People take PERSONAL remarks seriously, understand this simple fact. Unless you have credible facts/evidence/proof to back up your claims, you do not make such "defaming" points.

I hope I made myself clear, and I do expect an apology for your outlandish claim yet again.

and sorry for this disgression:

If sajha democrats are real democrats and not just idealists looking for popular support, then start criticizing the non-democratic ways of your comrades-in-arms. If you are in my camp, you have "Saya khat maaf" won't work. People geta way branding/labeling or making wild assumptions about others. What kind of democracy that you all believe in? Is it orwellian democracy- "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others?"

Anil ji,

You can use the example of this thread to compare/contrast MR JOSSE for your next piece!

छुरी बन काँटा बन ओ माइ सन, सबकुछ बन किसिका चम्?चा न बन! (Sung by Md. Rafi)

Chamchon ka jamana hai! What to expect from Ashus (yes plural) other than chamcha giri!

Iso bro, my motives were not to fire up the discussion. Calm down, I have no where questioned your competence. For instance, ''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'' and ''Isolated Freak जस्तो विदेश मामिलाको विद्वान '' and ''के उसले पारिवारिक पहुँचबाट अलग भएर आफ्नो क्षमताका भरमा करिअर निर्माण गर्न सक्दैन र? सक्छ''

I have showered respect to your scholarly credentials everywhere and it was childish of you to ignore those sincerely expressed tributes and pick the speculative points, which I had used to back my argument. I have already said prove me wrong and I will salute you. You have responded ''Coming from a middle class family with no political connections whatsoever'' Thats enough for me now. But again, time will tell if I was 100 percent wrong.

I genuinely believe that people of your caliber deserve a place in an area of your expertise no matter what kind of political system is in place in the country. The only question is how these talents get into the system - from front door or back door. Pardon me but I have seen ''Neta's '' blind supporters getting decisive positions from back door and similarly ''King's '' blind supporters more often. There are some deserving people obtaining such responsibilities, but from back door because they blindly supported those who were in power. Your lopsided comments in favour of the king prompted to my suspicions that you might be given responsibilities not for your genius but for your support to the royals. The reason for my suspicion: you have failed to criticise the King's wrongdoings (ok, lets not say dictatorship because we differ in the meaning of dictatorship) even just for one time.

Again, you could not say that the unlawful detention of Narahari Acharya and Nawaraj Subedi is despicable. Again you could not say a single word against Tulsi Giri. What is the reason of this prejudice? I have always condemned corrupt leaders and I know how corrupt is Chataut and even GPK. So let me despise the suspicious allegiance of Chataut with Girija. In fact, I have always said in my comments in sajha that GPK should be removed from the presidency of the NC (similarly Makune) and all the corrupt leaders should be axed from general membership of the parties. Although my concerns hardly make any difference, at least I have not ignored the wrongdoings of pro-democratic leaders. Now CAN YOU CONDEMN THE KING FOR UNLAWFULLY PUTTING NARAHARI ACHARYA AND NAWARAJ SUBEDI BEHIND BARS ? CAN YOU DESPISE TULSI GIRI AND DEMAND HIS RESIGNATION FROM THE KING'S CABINET? I don't insist you, but that might help to erase my untoward suspicion on you.

Finally, ''If you believe in democracy as much as you claim to, then defend your position in a non-personal, scholarly way.'' I will try my best. But wasn't that you who branded me 'childish' when I was discussing with Ashu? I thought how come I F feel offended when my statements were aimed at particular sets of people who I personally know, based upon correlation of their stance on past and present events. As far as your competence is concerned, let me reiterate again - I have utmost respect for your vast knowledge on International politics and affairs. Your performance in sajha speaks for your profound accomplishments. I can only revere your ability and competence. Please do not act like you didn't understand what I meant from my earlier comment. Sincere apologies if you misunderstood me.
One of your fan,
newuser.

''If sajha democrats are real democrats and not just idealists looking for popular support, then start criticizing the non-democratic ways of your comrades-in-arms. If you are in my camp, you have "Saya khat maaf" won't work. People geta way branding/labeling or making wild assumptions about others. What kind of democracy that you all believe in? Is it orwellian democracy- "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others?

Anil ji,
You can use the example of this thread to compare/contrast MR JOSSE for your next piece! ''

I don't think Anilji has time to sort out the difference between I F and newuser. But if he has, please quote the sentences from my comments which you (Anilji) think have violated the ethics of responsibe discussion. My 'comrade-in-arms' need not give me any edge in your judgement but let me ask you to ponder practically instead of being theoritical on the issues I have raised.

Newuser,

"You have responded ''Coming from a middle class family with no political connections whatsoever'' Thats enough for me now. But again, time will tell if I was 100 percent wrong. "

Just waht entitles you to know my family/personal background whether now or in the future? What rights do you have to know about my personal background? Have I asked for your's? We are discussing ideas here- counter me with valid points, not like an ideologue who does not see anything beyond whatever he believes in.

" Your lopsided comments in favour of the king prompted to my suspicions that you might be given responsibilities not for your genius but for your support to the royals. The reason for my suspicion: you have failed to criticise the King's wrongdoings (ok, lets not say dictatorship because we differ in the meaning of dictatorship) even just for one time."

You are imagining a lot and the worst thing is, you are considering your imaginations to be real. Give me a break! Ye baba! consider this my last communication with you if you do not change your getting PERSONAL strategy. What you see as dictatorship or wrongdoings might not be seen by MANY PEOPLE as dictatorship or wrongdoings. I personally don't see it that way and I don't hesitate to say it. I have my rights to say what I feel as long as I don't get personal or offensive. Also I am not looking for you to give me the title of swatantrata senani or confer a democracy medal on me.

You think differently, I think differently.. its that simple. You are not entitled in any way to know my family personal background. I hope I made myself clear on the family matter.

Regarding your Acharya and whoever behind the bars, I don't know why they are there. You brought the case of Tulsi Giri and whoever it was, I countered it with Chataut. Tit for tat-quid pro quo!

I said you sound childish with your outlandish comments. If you didn't make those personal outlandish coments, I wouldn't have remarked that "because you make such comments, you sound childish." I didn't say you were childish, but your rather harsh comments/claims were childish, which makes you sound Childish because only when run outs of legitimate valid points in debates/discussions, one comes up with such nonsense!

" Please do not act like you didn't understand what I meant from my earlier comment. Sincere apologies if you misunderstood me. "

I didn't understand nor I understand your way of debating now. Look, I don't read or I can't read what others don't write. I read what they write and understand reading the words they use and what those words imply. Your earlier post implied "Explicitly" that I was looking for an easy way out and I have parivarik pahunch..

There was no misunderstanding re: your first post: you were pretty clear on your first post.. now If you are saying look the words I used imply something else, I have nothing to say. As far as I see, the problem is, I didn't misunderstand you, I UNDERSTOOD YOU.

Good luck and best wishes for your future!

Well, we have made clear our views on this argument. Let me express my final words now.

Your greivance was mainly at ''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. ''

And I have made this judgement taking note of some first hand- clear cut- already expressed opinions/indications by concerned people themselves. Moreover, I have a list of royal appointees who have been undeservedly or deservedly placed and promoted to important public positions because of their unprecedented support to the King. I know I am not wrong to back my statements with hard evidences. While discussing Nepali politics, quoting definitions of books and theories and overlooking the ground realities is incomplete and incomprehensive. So I adhere to the above statement and REQUEST you not to take it personally as I have NOT included YOU in the above catagory. The succeeding discussions emerged only because you vehemently protested at my personal opinion.

Like I have said somewhere before, lets not take any generalised accusations as personal. I respect your preference for privacy as much as I have for mine. Everything came up during hot discussion and there's no need to keep grudges on issues raised during heated debates. It's all over now.

Thanks for your wishes and good luck to you as well.
newuser.

Look newuser,

"Everything came up during hot discussion and there's no need to keep grudges on issues raised during heated debates. It's all over now. "

This is not an excuse. You cannot make this kind of excuse and cover your mistakes. If you can't control the heat, then why involve in discussions in the first place? So it might be a good idea to think, revise and edit your posts and make sure you are not accusing or suspecting or imagining others looking for an easy way out, before you submit those. It will asve a lot of your time and other people's time.

OK I F:

Dear sajahites, considering Isolated Freak's continuous protest at my reply to Ashu in this thread, I'd like to make the following changes in my previous statements. Please read:

''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. ''

as

''Ashus (plural-Isolated Freak excluded) do not dare to explicitly support the King just to ensure that they (Isolated Freak excluded) won't be alienated from the democratic circle, if the change of political equations take place. But in their (Isolated Freak excluded) 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. ''

Also :
''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.''

is corrected as

For me, it won't be a surprise if Ashu(s) (Isolated Freak excluded) 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 (Isolated Freak excluded) name falls on the Royal honour list.

Further, I would like to apologise for the inconvinience or any injustice caused to Isolated Freak due to these comments and assure you all that I shall specifically exclude or include his name in any generalised remarks in the future to avoid repeating such situations.

PS, I request other sajhaites to submit their usernames if they want me to be specific in their names as well.

:)
In Jest,
newuser.

Trying to get back to the issue of TND..
I had always enjoyed TND, simply put it was a job well done and the people involved deserve nothing but praise for such quality voluntary work. However the internal politics, dispute and the difference in opinion between the administration and management (figuratively speaking) got TND down. That is my opinion as an outsider.

About personal attacks on Ashu, it is nothing new in Sajha. I have seen this over and again that people with difference in opinion simply cannot accept or disagree with each other in civility and they have to get personal, be offensive and throw adjectives. Many times it is an opportunity to "get back" for the disagreements in other threads. Couldn?t agree more with Poonte when he said we need "cultural revolution" I think he means we need to learn how to agree on disagreements and respect each others opinion even though it varies in Dan Qualye's quote (joke) "360 degrees" (ok I have to say only half of 360 degrees will do )

This is not the forum to present my personal opinion about Ashu, Nepe, IF and others however I would like to say that I respect for who you are and what you stand for. The difference in opinion makes Sajha interesting and a wonderful where ideas brew and expand, let that wonder spread every where except we keep the personal attacks to ourselves and set example how to communicate without offending others.
Peace

चुतियाहरूसंग बहस गनु बेकार छ isolated freak jyu. उनिहरुले २० पेज लामो theory लेख्?दा सबै ठिक तर उनिहरुको बिचार बिरुद्घको theory चाहि overlooking ground realities. यस्?तो पो हुनु discussion भन्?या

Trying to get back to the issue of TND..
I had always enjoyed TND, simply put it was a job well done and the people involved deserve nothing but praise for such quality voluntary work. However the internal politics, dispute and the difference in opinion between the administration and management (figuratively speaking) got TND down. That is my opinion as an outsider.

About personal attacks on Ashu, it is nothing new in Sajha. I have seen this over and again that people with difference in opinion simply cannot accept or disagree with each other in civility and they have to get personal, be offensive and throw adjectives. Many times it is an opportunity to "get back" for the disagreements in other threads. Couldn?t agree more with Poonte when he said we need "cultural revolution" I think he means we need to learn how to agree on disagreements and respect each others opinion even though it varies in Dan Qualye's quote (joke) "360 degrees" (ok, I have to say only half of 360 degrees will do)

This is not the forum to present my personal opinion about Ashu, Nepe, IF and others however I would like to say that I respect for who you are and what you stand for. The difference in opinion makes Sajha interesting and a wonderful where ideas brew and expand, let that wonder spread every where except we keep the personal attacks to ourselves and set example how to communicate without offending others.
Peace

and it makes you puke to see someone's pathetic attempt at humor

I would like to change my previous message as well to

चुतियाहरू(exclude newuser)संग बहस गनु बेकार छ isolated freak jyu. उनिहरु(exclude newuser)ले २० पेज लामो theory लेख्?दा सबै ठिक तर उनिहरु(exclude newuser)को बिचार बिरुद्घको theory चाहि overlooking ground realities. यस्?तो पो हुनु discussion भन्?या

Ashutosh,

I feel pitty for you. I tell you why.

All I said in this thread was that you stick to what you claim you are: you claimed that "as a student of economics, you do not want to be NORMATIVE." And then I pointed out that you should pratice what you preach: don't go around preaching political parties, civil societies, journalists, doctors, lawyers... about the "rights" and "wrongs," that you have never failed to do, online and offline, all these years.

Weren't you being NORMATIVE in these cases? Unless you tell me otherwise that different standards apply to the KING vis-a-vis the other Nepali in general, you certainly sounded REDUNDANT in your stance. If you wanna support the king, say so: whether you put in polished words like "self-interested player," "friendly dictator," "bhagyadata," "bishnu ko awatar".... or anything of your choice. Say so, rather than wizzling around and pointing fingures at others weaknesses. BE A MAN OR AT LEAST ACT LIKE ONE. That's all.

As I have already said in another thread, I can accept your "in-between" position, so won't try to dwell on this again. It must have been very difficult for you to be in such odd positions.

Anyway, allow me to quote Durga Lal Shrestha's verse (in melodious, soothing voice of Ani Choying Dolma on Nhun Bajracharya's composition) that I am listening now:

फूलको आँखामा फूलै संसार
काँडाको आँखामा काँडै संसार
झुल्‍किछ है छाँया बस्‍तु अनुसार

Emodus ji, Right on the mark. Ashu Paradox. He accepts the King in a neutral way, but he can not take the opposition to the King in the same neutral way, yet he is not a nuanced monarchist !

आशुको यो वेवकुफ दावीलाई लिएर साझामा धेरैपल्ट सिङौरी खेलाखेल भैसक्या हुनाले मलाई धेरै भन्नु छैन । आशु र मेरो यो दुई वर्ष पुरानो सम्वाद नै पर्याप्त होला ।


Thread: Minister Shot
Posted on 31-Aug-03 03:02 PM by Nepe
Link: - http://www.sajha.com/archives/openthread.cfm?threadid=12124&dsn=sajhaarchive2003 (does not work, though. Is San not maintaining the archive anymore ?)

Ashu,

During the past two years of my regular stay in Sajha, on several occasions, several posters have asked you to put your OWN political pov, but I never asked you the same. I always assumed a Harvard graduate must have reasonably bold views/beliefs/doubts/reasonings and you are afraid to put them because you do not want to jeopardize your developing career which very much depend on succeeding in keeping as many people happy as possible in a highly prejudiced and politically charged and opinionated khaldo called Kathmandu.

So it did not bother me that you, while doubting and vehemently criticizing others pov, kept your own pov to yourself or gave some ambiguous, dubious and vague answers when others cornered you all this time. Yes, sometimes I had some doubts about your hidden political pov, but I always gave you the benefit of doubt, defended you on some occasions and praised your commendable professional job and other anthropological works. And I have never missed a chance to appreciate your contribution in Sajha- to bring interesting information and provoke others to debate on difficult subjects.

While I will continue to do the rest, now, I am not sure if I should be making assumptions about your political pov and keep giving the same old benefit of doubt.

Particularly, when in this thread, Biswo and other posters have challenged you to put your own political pov and you are cunningly trying to allude them with the same old tricks of yours- that is your ambiguous, dubious, vague, ambivalent, murky, evasive, deluding, cryptic (see I have got a thesaurus with me !) answers.

What are you afraid of ? Of Kathmandu ?

I know some people who live in Kathmandu are brave to put their much dangerous view than you possibly have in public. Krishna Pahadi is not afraid to say in public that we need to get rid of the monarchy.

And you are coward even to say we do not need to get rid of the monarchy !

What kind of answer is that to the question of Biswo to you-

"The king is a player in the game."

Of course he is. Who is saying he isn't ? What is that crap about the republicans not saying he is. I say he is the central player of the game. And he is also the game itself.

You were asked what do you think about the king. And your answer is-

"I am willing to SUSPEND my liking or disliking for the king to . . ."

The same trick. Ambiguous, dubious, vague, ambivalent, murky, evasive, deluding, cryptic answer.

"..Note that this approach takes a NEUTRAL view of the King,.."

What is this crap ? If you take a NEUTRAL view of the king then you also take a NEUTRAL view of the NC-UML. You also take a NEUTRAL view of the Maoists. You also take a NEUTRAL view of the left leaning civil society. You also take a NEUTRAL view of Nepe and Biswo (what the heck !).

Ashu, with your fuzzy logic, abstract view and dubious statement, you are way too inadequate to discredit others.

And you are certainly not a reliable friend to the struggle for the democracy in Nepal. You sound like a person who accepts whoever is in power. If the king is in power, you will accept him. If the Maoists come in power, you will accept them. Don't ask me to produce where you said it. You said it everywhere. It's all over.

Lastly, about my republican view, I have already replied to your challenge in the thread On Grand Design . . '. Although you left the thread. I kept on and put my views. You may disagree with them, but you can not say my views are muddled. They are clear and logically developed. If there is additional thing you want to know, ask me. I will answer each and every question like before.

I take pride in clarity and honesty.

Correction: Read 'anthropological' as 'philathropic '

अनि यो चै कथित प्रतिगमन-विरोधी आन्दोलनबारे सम्वादको एक अंश, माथिकै थ्रेडबाट ।

Posted on 30-Aug-03 07:07 PM

Ashu,

First of all I thank you for your friendly caution regarding my credibility. However I think quite the opposite of what you have just suggested. To me my credibility is my consistent and reason-based (which you might disagree and that is fine) opposition to the institution of monarchy, my unfaltered faith in the ideology of the supreme power to the people and my 'one-track mind driven by that ideology'. I may add more from my resume but anything less than will make me an unreliable, coward, opportunist and a hollow person.

Now onto the ground reality stuff. It is not clear to me what you wanted to prove by quoting that para of Hari Roka. Because I completely agree with what he says in his article. The four major points in his article are-

1. The political parties messed up the Maoists problem by launching a brutal crackdown in the past and they don t have a viable proposal to end the conflict now,

2. The ultimate solution to this crisis is to bring the people into the mainstream and give them a say, which is the constituent assembly.

3. It's been almost a year king Gyanendra is trying one thing after another and nothing has worked. He is responsible for this and there is nobody else to blame.

(Note that my cartoon which seems to have displeased you and provoked you to come forward to discredit it with a selected quote from Hari Roka actually is in complete agreement with what Hari Roka says in his article !!!!!)

And the one you quoted,

3. There is no public support for the anti-king campaign of the political parties. It's time for them to reassess that.

I agree. The only thing I will add is it is not only the public but some party sympathizers and even some cadres particularly from the lower level are not that much enthusiastic about the aandolan of the parties. why is so ?

Because their andolan is for the kursi and kursi alone. It is not really an anti-king campaign. I mean it has not become so until now. What's anti-king ? Their demand for the publication of the royal properties and limiting the title of 'Their majesties' to the three members of the royal family ? Give me a break. As I has said elsewhere, in front of the mammoth promise of a democratic republic of Nepal by the Maoists, the demands of the political parties is less than a dead mouse. Who would buy a dead mouse from their shop with a price another shop is selling an elephant ? Ashu, you are a business expert. You can give our political parties much better and credible advice than I can. But if you still would like me to do it, I'll do it in next reply.

We were referring to the following article by Hari Roka.

- http://www.nepalnews.com/ntimes/issue160/headline.htm