Dear all,
here is a piece that landed in the junk mail of my hotmail email account. Shishir bhai, who is one of my favorite around when it comes to politics and strategy writes these lines from kathmandu as he happens to be there in regards to his summer project.

Cheers!

Uhi Rajeev,
CT, Amrika




July 14: Kathmandu, Nepal



Life In Kathmandu:

Yesterday evening 7:30 PM, I was returning back home after an evening tour of
downtown Kathmandu (New Road and Basantapur), we saw significant numbers of
people gathered outside of a small restaurant in Samakhusi, about half a
kilometer from where I live. When we queried the crowd, we were told ýsuspected
Maoistsý shot a teacher, who taught at a nearby public school. We were there
within few minutes of the incident, soon afterwards police arrived.

Similarly, last week a police officer was shot dead by the Maoists within a
block of where I live.

Yet, live doesnýt feel out of ordinary in Kathmandu. People go to business as
usual. I guess, there is no alternative to it but itýs amazing how we live
without sense of urgency towards the political violence in the country. Over the
past decades, the deaths of people have become so ubiquitous that people rarely
notice it anymore.

In the last decade or so, at least in the past half-a-decade, since I have left
Kathmandu, the benefit of insurgency seem to have come in the form or rising
business in real estate and consumer products. When I had left Nepal in 1998, it
was difficult to find a buyer to purchase land in Kathmandu. The housing market
had fallen flat. Now, story is completely different.

The rising violence has forced many in the countryside to flee for safety and
obviously, in Nepal there is no place safer (!) than Kathmandu. So, almost
everyone seems to be building house here. Since there is also demand for rent,
the houses are growing taller. In the mean time, because of lack of opportunity
in investment, newly opened private banks and financial institutions have found
real estate sector a hot area. They have also opened credit markets on consumer
goods, so that people now are buying cars, motorbikes and other personal goods
such as electronics on installments basis. So, Kathmandu feels much more
affluent than it was four or five years ago.

It is irony, that all these happened when tens of thousands of people died in
the violence over the last few years. The biggest irony possibly is that the
Maoists have aided in creating a more prosperous middle class, that now can
afford (be that in a credit) more consumer goods than it could otherwise.

Because of this (feeling of business as usual, feeling of personal and economic
security), I feel, there is less urgency among Kathmanduýs elites to resolve the
current political crisis and also because of such circumstances, Maoists have
difficulty in mobilizing strong mass movement that they have always planned to
carry out in the capital city. Thus, they resort to killing individuals and
chosen to terrorize people.




Graduate Student
Robert M. La Follette School of Public Affairs
University of Wisconsin-Madison

We have a dead lock to resolve the conflict arsing extreme values of the geriatric conservative chain smoking Cigarette Merchant Gyanendra and equally lunatic and cave era and Jurassic Park specimen the COMMUNISTS OF KATHMANDU.

There is no solution but the Nepalese masses must take weapon and over throw the both lunatic value systems.

Declaration of Republican Democracy based on liberal market economy is the only way to gOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Tara dai,
yeah I do agree. WE NEED A REPUBLIC NATION.

Socialist system do not produce great deal of wealth for the masses. We saw that in Eastern block countries and of course CCNP. The reason for this failure can be found in human nature.

The crux of the problem we have right now is that we have disprportionate amount of wealth accrued to a very few selected individuals which is inherently destructive for the prosperity of nation. You know , I know and every other Nepalese know about this.

We need democracy is what I shouted along w/ Ganeshman and Kp ji during my 10th grade studies. I thought I knew nothing about what I was doing. But the fact remained that no one knew what they meant by taking out all the "julushes" shouting we want demorcacy.

Democracy should create a context in which free-market economic system called capitalism could evolve. Adam Smith , in his classic WEALTH OF NATIONS, written in 1776, described "the invisible hand of self-interest" as the center of human behavior.


Uhi Rajeev
Michigan


Ps I refrain from talking politcs or religion at Sajha. So please do not expect much from me on those topics. Thanks for understanding!.

Mr. Rauniyar ji,

Allow me to add my experience in this field. (please keep in mind that I am neither a politician nor I supported anyone).

1. It is not the party we should choose, the smart person should win the election (its not happening in Nepal).
2. Very few smart ppl have chosen their carrier as politician. Most of the politician in Nepal are a) corrupt b) with low IQ c) emotional d) lost, they really dont know what to do.
3) Talk of the parties and so called netas are like "prastabana of Panchyati
Sambhidhan" that read "Shosan Rahit Samaj ko Nirman Garne" like a satire

4) Useless "karmachari tantra" . After "BA" (say arround 20 yrs) if you work hard you can become "Sakha Adhikrit". The famous "Sakha Adhikrit" enters into the "system" and start to learn " How to be corrupt in 100 days". After 3-4 yrs in service he is expert in making politician and ppl fool. I believe Panchyati system institutionalizeed this type of stupid working system

5) Lack of creativity at higher level. If we go to tax office to pay tax its always a big "jhanjat" to pay the tax (what a paradox).

6) System of "tippini" in Prasasan. If a TU Teacher has to go abroad for a one month of training he will be selected in TU first then the "file" goes to "mantralaya" and "sakha adhikrit" start "tippini" it goes to "mantri" back to "sakha adhikrit" and finally to TU. If the teacher is from "Jilla" campus the file first goest to TU central office and then to Jilla campus. What a lengthy stupid process why cant the VC of TU canýt make final decision? This is just one example how HMG works.
7. Now letýs go to Local bodies. If we go nagar palika for "Naxa Pass". Its like one has to go through "Chakrabhiew". There is no one window shopping for ordinary ppl.

HMG do not have any system. Those so called system what they say they have is nothing but chaos because they can not deliver routine output for routine work.

Regarding the development of the country. Let me start from 1960s because they say the real developmental work started from there. If I look other countries from 1960 onwards, I usually ask question to myself a) how many countries developed into so called "first world" after 1960 and what was their political system? b) How many countries developed into so called ýsecond world" and what was their political system c) how many countries remained third world and what were their political system?
let me answer question a) After 1960 only South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan (questionable) became first world (where total output is surplus) and all of them had one man show (Military dictatorship in S. Korea), Li Quan Wu in Singapore, British non elected system in Hongkong and one man show (Chiang Kai Sek and his family) in Taiwan,
answer to question b) lots of countries developed into so called "second world" (where total out put meets the demand) examples are Malaysia, China, some previous communist countries, some middle eastern countries, and what about their political system all one man show (non election, except in Malaysia where also there was one man show of Dr. Mahathir Mohammad).
for question c) majority of countries remained so called "third world" (where total output does not meet the demand) and their political system. Mixed, so called democracy and dictatorship or Monachism.

So, what we need and what will work for us ? Its getting too long allowme to stop here for the time being
Contdýýý..

First thing first:
a) After 1960 only South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan (questionable) became first world (where total output is surplus) and all of them had one man show (Military dictatorship in S. Korea), Li Quan Wu in Singapore, British non elected system in Hongkong and one man show (Chiang Kai Sek and his family) in Taiwan.
NONE OF THEM HAD TO MANAGE AN ACTIVE MONARCHY.
Malaysia does have a rotating monarchy, but that's pretty close to republicanism.
Before you can aspire for a commoner 'strong' man--Chairman Prachanda for example--join the Maoists.

Mr. Rauinyar Ji,

Above answer shows that political system matters but not too much. Most important is the Leader and his capacity. A real capable leader can turn a third world country into a second world and finally to first world in approximately 30-40 yrs. This time can be shortened if the political system is democratic.

Now lets see what happened in Nepal. After 2007 BS, B.P. Koirala emerged as a leader, reading his autobiography I came to conclusion that "he tried" but he was not exposed enough to "how to carry out developmental activities" and after some time personality clash was developed between king Mahendra and him. By reading different books by different Nepali politician I also came to conclusion that lots of other political Leaders were fueling personality clash between king and Koirala. May be this was the beginning of unfortunate political history in Nepal. Till date there is always personality clash between leaders and Kings.
After the Royal coup of 2017, BP faced a different situation and he was unable to handle that situation (that means he was not a versatile leader) King Mahendra single-handedly tried to make country developed for 15 yrs (2013-2028) but firstly his effort did not match the countryýs requirement (country needed much more) and secondly he failed to understand the importance of system so everything was done on "HUKUM" basis and no workable system was established, because of this beaurocrat did not develop independent thinking habit. They tried to seek guidance from "darbar" on everything.

King Birendra , may be because of his educational background came to understand that it is very important "structured development" and he tried his best for 16 yrs (2029-2045) but like king Mahendra he also failed to establish the mechanism for the development and most of the developmental works were done either on "hukumi" basis or as a political show against banned political parties

So, some countries developed into second or first world because of one man show that had system working, we failed because we did not had system but "Hukum pramangi"

After democracy political parties came into the picture but Leaders were corrupt, irresponsible, and stupid vacuum of not having the system provided them a wonderful opportunity for corruption.

Madan Bhandari showed some sign of capable leader. He also proved that he was capable of dealing with challenges but he is history now. After him the leadership of that party is completely lost.

Now, allow me to say some about Maobadi, they raised very genuine question, approached to the govt very genuinely, they were very serious about the problem they raised. But then Prime Minister Mr. Deuba and other political parties were having daydream that now ýthey are the bossý and nothing else is important. They failed to realize the warning finally a fourth biggest party became underground.
The problem with Maobadi, in practice is, after first few yrs of so called ýkrantiý they shifted their behavior. They have no values for human life (in this regard they are comparable to the ýjamindaarý which also have no values for the life of outcasts and poor). It seems to me that they can not listen to the criticism and, anyone who opposes them should be wiped out.
Main ideology of ýmaobadiý is a book written in late 19th century by Marx and its style of implementation by Mao in china. The book was written when idea of political science was not so developed and its implementation in Mao style in China was carried out when the world was in transition after Second World War. Now the situation is different. Human rights have become general knowledge. Everyone (at least educated ones) knows what development is. Ppl understand what governments are for. They also know what type of govt is good and what type of govt is bad. Everything is open. Different means of communication have changed the world dramatically. And, our Maoist friends are looking answer for our needs in a book which was written more than 100 yrs ago, their revolution is based upon a revolution which was carried more than 50 yrs ago.


For me, Maoist are like book worms, they love one book and they treat that book like ýdharmashastraý. They lack creativity, for them, every answer of our problem is in that ýdharmasashtraý. If they continue like this after few yrs they will either become tired revolutionary and will register their name as a ýfailed revolutionaryý in history or a anarchist group unless the state does something very stupid.

Its again getting longer, allow me to stop here for time being, I hope I can finish this in next session.
(Contdýý)

Mr. Shaiva,

Thank you for the comment. PPl can not be communist/kangress or royalist. Only politician can be Communist/kangress or royalists. Ppl are only the supporter of good government. I consider myself a Nepali, which is more powerfull then any king, political parties/ and maoist. Only problem is these three are tricking me, the ppl, playing with my rights and they dont have respect for me, the ppl.

Mr. Runiyar,


So whatýs good for us? One man shows run by the king failed. Multiparty democracy-we have bitter experience of it and if we continue to run this system as we are running it today-It will defiantly be failed one day. Shall we go for republic system then? Or back to active Monarchy? Which is our choice? What if Republic system also failed?
Between 2012 to 2017 (I am not sure about this time) Monarchy was lobbying against the multiparty system, trying to convenience ppl that active monarchy is only the solution. In Panchyati era Leaders convenienced us remedy for everything is multiparty democracy, now ppl are trying to convenience that Republic is only the solution. There are lots of failed republics, arenýt there? After all theses failed experiments where is our lessons learned. Are we behaving like "nachna najanne agan tedoo"

I am not against the republicsm. If ordinary ppl arenýt able to enjoy their right any "ism" is not going to work. If there is no structured mechanism to carry out the operation no one can help. Who is going to run the republic? Same failed leaders?
What we need is real leader, mechanism that operates the system, respect for each other, mature thoughts, otherwise changing the system every time we fail to run it will be like a "Mriga trishna" running for water in a desert where there is no water. Are we in Mirage? We should make system work for ourselves otherwise no system will work for us. Please allow me to end this discussion now.

Thank you.
Enjoy the life

1. There are no 'people' in Nepal, only subjects. Once they become people, they will learn how to be "communist/kangress or royalist".
2. If somebody is not ready to fight for her rights, she runs the risk of being tricked.
3. Republicanism is the "structured mechanism" that may or may not ensure good governance. Active monarchy is not meant to govern, it is meant to rule, as in misrule.
4. One can always throwout failed leaders, or become one herself. But what to do with a failed king? Pray for another Dipendra?
5. Many republics have failed, some have succeeded. All active monarchies have failed through out the history, everywhere in the world.
6. Search for a "great" leader is real Mrig Trishna. The world has to make do with compulsive liars like Blairs and Bushes.
7. A little reflection never did any harm to anybody.
Thank you for reading my observations.

Mr. Shaiva,

Thank you for your input.

1.First of all I will not dare notlabel "subject" to the nepalese. But you are free to have your opinion.
2. I am not searching for "great leader" leaders are already among us, only problem is present system is such that only corrupt/illitriate/potentially immature ppl are being pushed forward.
3.Kings are the part of the dead system. I do not know why we are giving them so much importance. If political parties are able to win the ppls heart. King can be neglected very easily. But, it seems that instead of winning ppls heart parties (including maoists) are trying to win kings heart. Maoist want to have "golmach" sammelan with King, what asatire. Why Maoist/Amale/Kangrss conduct a "golmach"
sammelan, participate in the election, form the government. Thus formed governement can devote itself entirly for the benefit of the ppl and in 5 yrs time King will be out of picture. But, no we want to talk with king or only his representative (maoist are saying that) what is so special about king?
4. For general ppl like me, present crisis is like three mafia gang fighting to show their muscle power. Ordinary ppl will always suffer whichever maffia gang is in power.
5.If parties beleive in ppls power do "golmach sammelan" among themselves but, no, they need king. Its political parties that is making King stronger, no one else.
6. It seems that parties either do not beleive or do not have self confidence that they can win election and work for the ppl and base their power on ppl not on king. 7.They always wanted king in a silver "Kisti" handover the power to them and say ok guys here is the power and now you are free to do "Locknow loot " in the country.

Allow me to quote followings from a paper I read few yrs back.

The winner says it may be difficult but it is possible
The looser says it may be possible but it is too difficult
The winner is always a part of the answer
The looser is always a part of the problem

Enjoy the life

1. "Kings are the part of the dead system." Good.
2. Now, please join the Maoists in their demand for Golmej or whatever. Proper Kriyakarma of dead Hindus is important. Otherwise they become Bhoot. See how Rana's Bhoot in the form of Dipendra and Kichkinni Devyani destroyed the Roayal Family?
3. Why blame parties? Join one to improve their functioning. Or open a different one like Rajeshwar Devkota or Narayan Sing Poon.
4. Is indulging in Locknow Loot inalienable right of Shahas, Ranas, and Gurujyus only? Let poor Wagles have a go at it. They will destroy themselves in the process.
5. Yes, enjoy life, for as long as it remains enjoyable for the well off Nepalese subjects of Shahas.

Mr. Shiva,

1. After reading three of you inputs it seems to me that you are emotionally attached to the parties. When someone is emotionally attached to something she/he is biased and incapable of independent thinking.
2. You label Nepalese as subjects (twice) that directly means either you are blaming or you are complaining about Nepalese. And, if you are using that word just to provoke then you are underestimating ppls power.
3. On one hand you say ýwhy blame parties" on the other hand yourself blame Nepali ppl. This proves my first point. And, also your attitude "I know everything about everythingý and others donýt know "anything about anything". In former Soviet Union for 70 yrs they never blamed party but blamed ppl and what was the result you know.
4. By logically putting parties above the ppl you directly or indirectly indicated that you still dont know what is politics. In old days ppl used to say ýKing is above the Sambidhan" and now you are saying "parties are above pplý, May be you are "New Avatar of King". Very striking similarities ha?
5. It seems to me, you are 100% right in your fourth point, by saying that you gave me the impression as you were saying ýIs indulging in Locknow Loot inalienable right of Shahas, Ranas, and Gurujyus and Wagles only? Let poor Maoist have a go at it. They will destroy themselves in the process. And, I thank you for this, for giving indirect hint about your intention.
6. Panchyat system treated ppl as subject and try to educate them for more than 40 yrs and you know what happened.
7. Multiparty leaders treated ppl as source of power for more than 50 yrs. They remained in the heart of ppl, survived all the odds and finally came to power. Once in power they started to treat ppl as subject and you know what happened in 12 yrs.
8. From the beginning you are labeling ppl as subjects, you should know your destination.

Enjoy the life