Well now everybody seems to be rallying around the name "Ramraja Prasad Singh" as the 1st president of new Nepal. I dont know much about him except he was accounted for bombing some king's convoy in 2042. I think overwhelming support for his name is the result of our psychic-consciousness towards madesh and madeshi rights that have been embedded in our subconcious mind ever since the madesh movement. His nomination may lead the madesh aandolan from wilderness to a logical end, unthreatening to national sovereignty. But the risk of him being just another rubber-stamp, on the back-drop of his political inexperience and lack of broad-based political affiliation, can't be ruled out. Because he has no mass appeal, he is just single and he has no such political charisma could hinder his political decisions and actions to be taken at the time of national political crisis. No doubt his appointment will be a great milestone in making madeshi people feel inclusive towards the national process and helps in bringing them into the national main-stream making them feel less marginalised.  But he will be judged by how much he will try to bring disgruntled armed madeshi group into the negotiating table and how will he help bring the traitors ,who have burned the national flag in the past as a protest, into the court of justice.

Let's give him the benefit of doubt for now.....................

 

>So to expect any political parties to back off at this

>major junction where it has long term implification

>on them, their seat in parliament and their political

>power, is a politically callow statement.

 

Maverick-jyu,

 

If cabinet berth is what helps political parties, all the glory to their fight. However, isn’t the Constituent Assembly-parliament is where political parties should be showing their show ?

 

>It does allude the hangover of some kind of trashy

>one party communist doctrine of maoist enthusiast.

 

Not really. First of all, the doctrine of one party regime is trashed by Maoist themselves (The new Maoist doctrine of “Democracy for 21^st Century” adopted by them in 2003). So the classic communist doctrine of one party is dead for Maoist themselves, unless they revive it again.

 

Then, what I was talking about was one-party government just like in any democratic system when there is a majority party. Not even that. I was actually asking to give Maoist only a free hand (nothing more) to form a government of their wish (including making alliance of convenience to any party/parties they like). Communist regime is a too much stretched imagination here.

 

So, Maverick-jyu, you are basically overestimating the value of government (cabinet) by underestimating the value of the assembly-parliament by overlooking the fact that it is dominated by non-Maoist power anyway. Otherwise, my point was- let Maoist run the government as the assembly-parliament is dominated by other political parties anyway for check and balance.

 

Nepe

 

 

I thought he active politician among BP  and late king Mahendra.

I thought he is doing politics with BP, Ganesh man and late King Mahendra and so forth.

Nepe Guru,
 Arent we discussing of the political parties upon a political scenario?
One classic mistake of every political discussion is being back n forth between the idealistic scenario and political scenario. Idealistic, when its favoring their goal, and political, when its not.
"If cabinet berth is what helps political parties, all the glory to their fight. However, isn’t the Constituent Assembly-parliament is where political parties should be showing their show ?"""
Oh really, if its so, then why were Maoist bargained in the pre-election scenario for the ministerial berth, (taking the majority aside), just going by ur words of "showing their show in the floor".

I can pretty much bet that you wouldnt have said "I was actually asking to give Maoist only a free hand (nothing more) to form a government of their wish (including making alliance of convenience to any party/parties they like)" replacing other party with Maoist if any other party would have got slight majority.
I dunno if its on the paper, but wasn't the putative agreement was to form all party government?  We didnt have direct election of the executive power, did we? So whether you like it or not they have to make some kind of coalition. So I dont understand, in political sense, that what do u mean by let them run the way they want.


"First of all, the doctrine of one party regime is trashed by Maoist themselves"
I didn't say they follow it, did I?  I said its a hangover of the previous doctrines which they were following upto two years back. The major hangover is the communist mentality of omnipotent leader whom communist have this tendency of demagoguing. I believe, this beget  the present political impasse; as Maoist dont want their supremo under some one and at the same time they want to clinch all executive power.

Beside, you didnt write any thing of my major point.

Maverick,

 

I was actually having a different kind of hangover when I replied to you. It was of several threads of discussion going on in NepalDemocracy Group regarding the same issues we are talking here.

 

Spirit of the interim constitution, matter of “check and balance”, credential of Maoists and so on have been in our discussions there. So my mind was carrying over some debate from there.

 

Anyway, here are mero bicharharu regarding your questions.

 

 

Idealism/Realpolitik

 

I don’t know if you had a chance to read my earlier posting above, however, I was suggesting NC/UML to stay away from the government for their own good (to be specific, for a better election result next time). It had very little to do with idealism.

 

Allow me to share some explanation from my postings in ND forum:

 

“I think the best strategy for NC/UML to come back

to power and save the country if that is what it would be is not to

fight with Maoist (for power sharing, for example) but to work towards

winning people's sympathy and trust.

 

In my view, if NC/UML let Maoist run the government, that will be a

baby step towards winning people's sympathy. NC/UML needs to show

patience, humility, soul-searching and audacity to win people's

sympathy and heart. There is no other way. And, most importantly,

there is not enough time for that. Two years will pass like a blink.

NC/UML better prepare for the next election rather than play

mathematics of this election.”

 

“This election showed that, for wining the election, NC must not depend

on it's "democratic" credential, international "recognition", it's

role in the peace process or the error-mongering of Maoists only.”

 

 

Agreement for coalition:

 

There was one. As we know it by SPA-M coalition. However, it was for the transitional period before the election. There is not any agreement/understanding for the post-election time. One might ask, even if there isn’t any agreement, why can’t we continue the same old coalition or at least the spirit of it.

 

Here is why. First of all, election happened and it’s mandate should override everything else.

 

Second, if we look at the pattern of power-sharing in SPA-M coalition (Maoist sharing equal power with NC and UML) and the election result (Maoist securing 100% more seat/power than NC and UML each), we must conclude that Nepali people rejected the pre-election power-sharing scheme and they clearly said we want Maoist in the driving seat.

 

People have spoken. That is why.

 

 

Interpretation of the popular mandate:

 

Even without the correction I had suggested earlier, Maoist are unprecedentedly, overwhelmingly ahead of the runner up parties (Maoist 36%, NC 18%, UML 17%). This, as a matter of fact, should be more powerful even than, let’s say, a simple majority with a close runner up (51%- 49%).

 

So with or without the consideration of the correction for proportional representation meant for Constituent Assembly, it is absolutely clear that people voted for Maoist to drive the gaadi, not for three drivers each from Maoist, NC and UML.

 

Maverick, this, I hope might be able to convince you that I am talking realpolitik and not idealism.

 

Nepe

Nepe Guru,

You may be 100% rite on ur analysis of how other parties should act in coming days to get the support of the people. What ever I read of your other post in recent time, you have shown a great deal of faith for the CPN-M, hence you are making conclusion and analysis on the basis of ur assumption and expectations towards other parties and mainly towards CPN-M. But going by recent political incidences, other parties and people who voted for them don’t have same amount of trust in the CPN_M, that you have shown. So this is where the ideal and realistic politics come into picture. You are assuming that ok this is what they should do and this is what others should do, upon your perspective of the current political scenario. But, from what I have seen from behavior of the other parties, they simply don’t trust the maoist. Some of the comments made by top notch maoist leaders are clearly patronizing, so may be some ego is involved too.

 

In this thread, I retorted when you told that Maoist should given full hand upon the government. I said it may be ideal (for us) but not politically correct (for leaders n supporters), simply coz other party don’t trust them. If something happens with a slightest of chance, you and I may be drinking coffee in our office writing on that in sajha, but other parties have to deal with many things.
Also, we shouldn’t trust anyone with power. For making constitution it may not effect as it will be done in the assembly. What about other issues like integration of PLA, activites of YCL and great number of political appointees which maoist have been doing recently in governmental offices? I don’t want to see them doing all these single handedly with this not-real “kam chalau” 2 yr term.

Coming to ur previous post point.

Here is why. First of all, election happened and it’s mandate should override everything else.

            I am not saying it should be over written. They should definitely lead the goverment. But we didn’t have direct election for the executive power, did we? So whether they like it or not (or u like it or not) they have to make some sort of coalition in the future. Either they have to take all other parties leaving NC and UML or they have to take either of them to make any majority.

And I don’t understand this over hyped word “mandate”. What was the mandate for? Was it to write constitution as maoist ideology says, was it to make Prachanda the premiere or was it to form full government or was it to YCL controlling traffic in Kathmandu?

 

“dadu pani diyera, panyou pani diyera, bhare aafu thandaram pariyo bhane ta majja aayeni Nepe guru. Mukhya kura tyahi bhairacha”

Have a good day

If something happens with a slightest of chance, you and I may be drinking coffee in our office writing on that in sajha, but other parties have to deal with many things.

Exactly Mav!.  KUDOS to you.

Nepe, "So, for everyone’s true and long term good, it is very important for other parties to stay away from the Maoist government or at least not to appear trying to tie Maoist’s hands and feet."

What if they take the country towards dicktatorship ? Still we should stay away ? Don't be talking like a Moron Nepe.

 

Nepe, "One, the minorities have no obligation to be in the government. What they have is a right which they can use by deciding to support the largest party."

 

In othr words they should just keep quiet ? Just like during monarchy and have their civil rights crushed by the Maoist again ? Man Nepe you are soo full of bullshit !!!

 

 

Nepe,"Third, and the most important of all, this election was meant for Constituent Assembly and was aimed towards making as “hung” as possible. So what Maoist got is despite that tendency. In other words, had it been for electing the government (and no pressure for making it “hung”), Maoist would have secured much more votes. So we should assume that the actual votes for Maoist government is much more than the votes they got for Constituent Assembly."

Nepe is fugging constitutional assembly going to feed Nepali Janata ? Constitutional Assembly ain't worth shit if it is not making Nepali People's lives any better. YOU ARE FUGGING TALKING LIKE A TRUE POLITICIAN NEPE MAHARAAJ. Tyatro manchey ley jyaan diyeko contitutution assembly lai hoina ki Nepal ra Nepali ko betterment ko laagi ho.

 

Nepe, "If cabinet berth is what helps political parties, all the glory to their fight. However, isn’t the Constituent Assembly-parliament is where political parties should be showing their show ?"

Ayoo khaali political parties political parties ko matrai kuraa garch yo gadhaaaa !! What about Nepali Janata ?

हिजो ज्ञानेन्द्र ले शासनसत्ता लिँदा खेरि , देशका केहि जनता थिए जो खुशि भएका थिए । उनलाइ एकचोटि मौका दिऔँ भन्ने भावना थियो । तर अरु पार्टि हरुले उनलाइ सहयोग नगर्दा अहिले मुरै राजसँस्था नै हरायो ।

उत्तिकै मात्रामा नभए पनि ज्ञानेन्द्र ले मागेको ३ वर्ष र अहिले माओवादिले पाएको दुइ बर्षको लागि बहुमत उस्तै उस्तै हुन् - केहि जनविश्वास, धेरै सतर्कता ।  मेरो व्यक्तिगत राजनैतिक  विष्लेषण अनुसार त के लाग्छ भने, माओवादिको खुवि भनेकै अहिले को सरकारलाइ कसरि समायोजन गरेर लैजाने र  नयाँ संबिधान लेख्ने भन्ने मा देखिन्छ । हिजो जँगलमा बसेर बिरोध गर्नु भन्दा आज को कर्तब्यधारणको काम धेरै गुना कठिन छ । ठुलो पार्टि भएको नाताले कुरा मिलाउने, सबैलाइ खुशि बनाएर संबिधान लेख्ने काम माओवादिको काधमा पर्छ । समायोजन कसरि गर्ने हो उनै जानुन ।

नेपेको एक कुरा सँग म पुर्ण असहमत छु, त्यो के भने, यस्तै चाला हो भने अर्को चुनावमा काग्रेस र एमाले पत्तासाफ हुन्छन् भन्ने अविव्यक्ति । याद राखिराख्नुस, ठुलो पार्टि भएको नाताले कुरा मिलाउने जिम्मा माओवादि कै हो, त्यसैले, यस्तै किचलो बढ्दै गयो र देशमा शान्ति भएन भने दोषि हुँदा हुँदै पनि पार्टिहरु चोखा देखिन्छन् । र त्यसैगरि माओवादि अरु कुरामा दोषि नदेखिए पनि कुरा मिलाउन नसकेको भन्ने पक्षमा कमजोर देखिन्छ र अबका दुइ वर्ष को असफलताको उसको असफलता मा गनिन्छ । अनि माओबादि लाइ नै घाटा हुन्छ ।

नेपेको अर्को नमिलेको कुरा के भने, पहिले का सहमति त चुनाव सँग रद्द भए भन्ने । तर दाजु, सम्बिधान मा त अझै मिलेर चलाउने भनेर लेखेको छ रे नि त । त्यो नै सबैभन्दा ठुलो प्रमाण भयो नि त सहमतिको सरकार, मिलिजुलि सरकार बनाउनुपर्ने । होइन र?

 मेरा गोरुका बार्है टक्का । - नेपे ।

Maverick,

 

I agree with your arguments overall. However, there is a couple of things I look at differently.

 

NC/UML does not trust Maoist.

 

If it is about democracy, I don’t think so. If they really do not trust Maoist, they would never have made 12-points agreement with them in 2005, 25-points peace accord in 2006, interim parliament and government with them, election and so on.

 

Then, if NC/UML really think that Maoist is not committed to democracy and it is going to try to impose anti-democratic system and activities, it actually should be making NC/UML very very very  happy inside. Because a bad Maoist is what NC/UML are desperately needing to show to the people so that they can get back people’s support to come back to power again.

 

Realistically (not idealistically) saying, a bad Maoist is a good luck to NC/UML and a good Maoist is a bad luck to NC/UML at this point. It is obvious.

 

So, what NC/UML is saying about ‘trust’ regarding Maoist is just a political posturing and nothing more.

 

Popular mandate:

 

Since there were too many agendas with complex relation among them for this election, it is hard , if not impossible to draw absolute conclusions. However, it is not that difficult to draw relative conclusions.

 

For example, was this mandate for three drivers (one each from Maoist, NC and UML) or a single driver ?

 

I will say, it was for a single driver. I have presented my explanation already earlier (how the pre-election power sharing scheme has been turned down). And yes, “Bhitte rasptrapati” should also count. I would think Nepali voters endorsed Maoist agenda of Prachanda as the first executive president of republic Nepal. Nepali voters will probably not mind the ceremonial presidency to go non-Maoist. However, they certainly would disapprove executive presidency/premiership to go to non-Maoist.

 

What should NC/UML do ?

 

Don’t waste time worrying about “democracy” and “country”. Start thinking about winning the next election. If what you are doing right now helps you, great. Else, forget about it.

 

As far as taming Maoist is concerned, Nepali people have already taken the matter in their own hand (by not bringing NC and UML to power to tame Maoist and by putting Maoist in driving test !). Nepali people did not trust NC/UML for taming Maoist. That’s what the result of the election is all about. So NC/UML’s role and ambition to tame Maoist must not be more than what Nepali voters expected of them. That’s my point.

 

Wise, risky or unwise, Nepali people have decided to test Maoist. So let the test be as uninterrupted as possible. Also because the unintended interruption by NC/UML is not going to be appreciated by Nepali voters in next election-test.

 

So prepare for next election and prepare good. That’s my or anyone’s best advice to NC/UML.

 

 

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

 

 

Bathroom,

 

>What if they take the country towards dicktatorship ?

>Still we should stay away ?

 

I was asking NC/UML, not you, to stay away from the Maoist government. You should too, if you were thinking to join the government. Otherwise you are good. We all should be watching Maoist from wherever we are. That was my message.

 

>they should just keep quiet ? Just like during monarchy

>and have their civil rights crushed by the Maoist again ?

 

Yes, keep quite, until it actually starts to happen.

 

>is fugging constitutional assembly going to feed Nepali Janata ?

>Constitutional Assembly ain't worth shit if it is not making Nepali

>People's lives any better.

 

It seems you are in the impression that CA is only for writing a new constitution and nothing else. No, CA will be functioning both as a constitution drafter and a regular legislative body (parliament) [Interim Constitution of Nepal 2007, article 83]. It was this parliamentary function of CA that I was talking about when I said political parties should be showing their show in there.

 

 

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

 

 

Copycat-jyu,

 

>याद राखिराख्नुस, ठुलो पार्टि भएको नाताले कुरा मिलाउने जिम्मा

>माओवादि कै हो, त्यसैले, यस्तै किचलो बढ्दै गयो र देशमा शान्ति

>भएन भने दोषि हुँदा हुँदै पनि पार्टिहरु चोखा देखिन्छन् ।

 

कसैले त्यसो देख्लान् । कसैले मैले भनेको जसो देख्लान् । मुख्य कुरा कुन कुरा देख्ने समुह कति ठूलो होला भन्ने हो । माओवादी ईतर पार्टी चोखा देख्ने समुह ठूलो होला जस्तो लाग्दैन मलाई । माओवादीले “देख्यौ त, हामीलाई काम गर्न दिएनन् यी दलहरुले” भनेर दलिल दिएपछि ती दलहरुको आकार अहिले भन्दा पनि सानो बनाईदेलान् भन्ने पीर छ मलाई ।

 

>तर दाजु, सम्बिधान मा त अझै मिलेर चलाउने भनेर लेखेको छ रे नि त

 

मिलेर भनेको छ, तर सबै सरकारमा बस्नै पर्छ भनेको छैन । झन् सरकारमा दुई शक्ति केन्द्र बनाई त्यसलाई बाँडीचुडी खानु त भनेकै छैन ।

 

>ठुलो पार्टि भएको नाताले कुरा मिलाउने, सबैलाइ खुशि

>बनाएर संबिधान लेख्ने काम माओवादिको काधमा पर्छ ।

>समायोजन कसरि गर्ने हो उनै जानुन ।

 

हो बल्ल कुरा मिल्यो । गाँठी कुरा यही हो ।

 

 

Nepe  

 

याहाँ नेपेगुरुको कुरो हदै सत्य हो समायोजन सहमती सरकार बनाउनु  चुनाब परिणामले अनर्थपुर्ण बनाइसक्यो । बास्तबमा अन्तरीम संबिधान टिके संसदहरुको अबैध दस्ता हुन र त्यसलै यसलाइ गुरुमन्त्र मान्नु पर्छ भन्ने केही छैन । गिरीजा जस्ता पदलोलुपले मात्र १० बर्षको सहकार्य खोज्छन तर देशलाइ अर्को तानाशाहीमा धकेल्ने बाहेक केही नमिल्ने गएको २ बर्षले नै देखाउछ । तर यसमा समर्थन हुदांहुदै कतिपय यही संबिधानबाट बिगतका महत्वपुर्ण राष्ट्रिय निर्णयलाइ नै उहाँ सर्वोपरि मान्नुहुन्छ र केही समस्या देख्नु हुदैन । तसर्थ उहाँका तर्कहरु मेरो गोरुको बार्है टक्का भने जस्तो लाग्छ या घुमाउरो भाषामा, "समय सापेक्ष" या "मौसमी तर्क" :)

Mr. Truth-jyu,

 

चुनावपुर्वी सहमतिको सिद्धान्तको नै अन्त्य भईनसकेको भई शक्ति बाँडफाँडको चुनावपूर्वी फर्मुला मात्र सकिएको र त्यस फर्मुलालाई चुनावको नतिजाको आधारमा अपडेट गर्नुपर्छ भनेको हुँ है मैले । सहमति त सरकार बनाउने विशुद्ध प्रयोजन भएको संसदको आगामी चुनाव नभएसम्मको लागि अपेक्षित छदैछ -- खास गरेर सम्विधान-निर्माणमा – र, सरकारको हकमा समेत यथासम्भव पालना हुनेनै छ भन्ने लाग्छ मलाई ।

 

चुनावपूर्वी अन्तरिम संसद र यसले गरेका निर्णयहरुको वैधानिकताको हकमा कुनै प्रश्न उठ्न सक्दैन । प्रश्न वैधानिकताको नभई निर्णयहरुको औचित्यको हो भने त्यो कुरा बेग्लै भयो ।

 

लोकतन्त्रमा लोकतान्त्रिक निर्णयहरुको जहिलेपनि आवधिक वा अर्को निर्णय नभएसम्मको लागि हुने हो वैधानिकता । अरु त अरु अपरिवर्तनिय भनेर गरिएका निर्णय समेत अर्को निर्णय नभए सम्मको लागि मात्र अपरिवर्तनिय हुन् । लोकतान्त्रिक प्रणाली भनेकै त्यही हो । अन्तरिम संसदले गरेका सम्पूर्ण निर्णय पनि अपवाद हुने कुरै भएन ।

 

जहासम्म तपाईसंग विचार आदानप्रदान गर्न पाएका केही निर्णयका औचित्यको प्रश्न छ, मेरो पुराना विचारमा कुनै परिवर्तन आएको छैन । बरु अलिक विचार परिवर्तन भएको विषय यही सहमतिय सत्ताको मुद्धा हो ।

 

म यो सहमतिय सत्ताको सिद्धान्त सम्विधान-सभा (सम्विधान निर्माण) मा मात्र नभई संसद/सरकारमा समेत लागु हुने कुरामा आसावादी थिएँ र त्यसको औचित्य समेत देख्थें । तर अहिले अलि बढी आदर्शवादी भएर सोचिएछ भन्ने लाग्छ । मैले मेरा तर्कहरु राखिहालें । अब जे नाम दिनुहुन्छ, दिनुस् रे क्या ।

 

Nepe

 

 

What NC/UML should do is a good topic for another thread.

NC/UML does not trust Maoist.
 
If it is about democracy, I don’t think so. If they really do not trust Maoist, they would never have made 12-points agreement with them in 2005, 25-points peace accord in 2006, interim parliament and government with them, election and so on.
 
Then, if NC/UML really think that Maoist is not committed to democracy and it is going to try to impose anti-democratic system and activities, it actually should be making NC/UML very very very  happy inside. Because a bad Maoist is what NC/UML are desperately needing to show to the people so that they can get back people’s support to come back to power again.
 
Realistically (not idealistically) saying, a bad Maoist is a good luck to NC/UML and a good Maoist is a bad luck to NC/UML at this point. It is obvious.
 
So, what NC/UML is saying about ‘trust’ regarding Maoist is just a political posturing and nothing more.
 
 
Democracy is not about just election. It is a process. Yeah, they are agreeing upon going to election. But being a major opposition house if you start controlling traffic in the city, patrolling the wards then there are enough apprehensions for others to not-trust them. The responsibility of the opposition is to goad the government to the right direction, not to open their own faction which would work like a parallel to a government. They are there to help the government, not to compete with them. You tell me if that is democratic???
How many Democratic Party, you know in the world which gives stipend to the cadres, armed them and put them in some barrack like structure? (other than hamas)
 
Those 12 and 21 points agreement you talking about are no-obligations agreements, which are good when every body agrees to do it. I don’t know how you see the power sharing, but I see it as a tug of war. Those who have the better support they have the more rope (power). So definitely, Maoist and their leaders got more rope because of the issues they raise. But at this point where we haven’t deciding how much rope (power) should be given to all those players (people, parties and other structures), it won’t be a wise decision to let one player get all the rope (even at one particular level); especially when they were the dissidents. 
Also, I don’t know why this 2 year interim term is so important. Frankly, it would be fishy if they do any corruption charges major players of the past, start major projects and continue their throngs of political appointees in governmental offices in this period. Once you are elected to full period, then they are welcome to do so depending upon their power given by the constitution. 
So as for now, there should be enough check to them at every level before a firm power sharing structure is formed and agreed.
 
(Form other post where I wasn’t participating)
I have seen you couple of times posting Insec data of who killed how many and all. You may have own interpretation for your postings. But let me tell you my interpretation about you posting those data.
My interpretation is you don’t give a damn about all those security forces who died saving ur head. You don’t care about those who got bullet on the head just to stop ur house getting blown up. You think them as a warmongers who died fighting with such forces who wanted to wipe out the middle class.
 
AGREED, there were irrational killings from the security forces and there were insane missions. If you can separate the stats and show who died because of what reason (either they were unruly, or they died coz they were doing duty which was told to them) then I would be happy to get some insight. Otherwise don’t try to villainies them by pitting everyone in same basket. Can you go n say the same stat to the mother of the one who died in a battle, or the son who didn’t see his dad? There were enough security personals who died not even knowing what were they dying for. So to come up browbeating with those stats just to win an argument is pretty ridiculous and clearly unthankful. I hope you won’t do that again. AND, I simply don’t care under what context you gave it. It is pretty disparaging by itself, irrespective of the context.
	
    

          

           
 
 
 

View/Share this post only 

Maverick,

 

Here are my few cents/reply

 

This election term: just a transitional period or more ?

 

The argument that this 2 and ½ years is not a full election term in purpose and in time period, although right in general, fails to address the specific result of the election.

 

Why did Nepali voters put Maoist overwhelmingly ahead of all other parties ?

 

That’s the question here.

 

If it was for drafting a constitution alone or doing just some transitional time passing, Nepali voters would have given all parties equal status. It makes no sense to vote overwhelmingly for one single party, does it ?

 

So, as far as my interpretation of the election result is concerned, Nepali voters want much more than just drafting the constitution and passing transitional time from Maoist.

 

Maoist needs to reform but also needs a honeymoon

 

Should other political parties say to Maoist, “We are not going to accept people’s mandate before you reform” ?  Well, they can do so and also appear doing exactly that. However, the best thing to do, in my view and in view of how Nepali voters are doing things, is to give Maoist some time. Maoist needs and deserve at least an uninterrupted honeymoon period.

 

Nepe and Maoist

 

Maverick-jee, you are free to interpret my postings. However, as far as I am concerned, I am beyond supporting or opposing one or the other party.

 

As for the data I present, if they happen to defend or condemn one or the other party, although I don’t think so, is not my fault. As for INSEC data, whenever I have brought it up, it is always to show (because it does show so) how both the Maoist and the ruling democrats have violated Nepali people.

 

And you might not know, however, I have been advocating, in closed forums until now, for uncompromised justice to all victims of the abuse during the insurgency and after.

 

And I certainly reject your defense for abuses from security forces. As I said, my position is that, it does not matter who the perpetrator is and what the pretext was, every single victim of abuse must have the right and opportunity to seek justice.

 

So, no amnesty to anybody, door of the court of law open to everybody all the time, have been my two dear agendas and they will remain so throughout my life. And it seems to me that this is going to be pretty lonely journey. However, I am not going to give it up.

 

Nepe

 

Nepe and Maoist

Maverick-jee, you are free to interpret my postings. However, as far as I am concerned, I am beyond supporting or opposing one or the other party.

As for the data I present, if they happen to defend or condemn one or the other party, although I don’t think so, is not my fault. As for INSEC data, whenever I have brought it up, it is always to show (because it does show so) how both the Maoist and the ruling democrats have violated Nepali people.

And you might not know, however, I have been advocating, in closed forums until now, for uncompromised justice to all victims of the abuse during the insurgency and after.

And I certainly reject your defense for abuses from security forces. As I said, my position is that, it does not matter who the perpetrator is and what the pretext was, every single victim of abuse must have the right and opportunity to seek justice.

So, no amnesty to anybody, door of the court of law open to everybody all the time, have been my two dear agendas and they will remain so throughout my life. And it seems to me that this is going to be pretty lonely journey. However, I am not going to give it up.

Nepe Guru, I dont know what are you trying to do here. Are you refuting what i said or accepting it? I asked you not to throw some generalize stats and villainies all the men who died to save ur head.

Maoist needs to reform but also needs a honeymoon..

Would you care to illustrate what do you mean by honeymoon period and how long it should be?

This election term: just a transitional period or more ? Nepali voters want much more than just drafting the constitution and passing transitional time from Maoist.

Is this a new thing after any election?? Seriously, you expect other parties to give "honeymoon" period?

I guess this thread should be ended. Because after all the postings we made, we are basically in the same place where we started. So no point extending further. You want/expect other supporters and parties to let them run free (or wild, depending upon ur political stance, or ur term honeymoon period) when they don't have a simple majority in the parliament, when they have been constantly showing their non-democratic behavior ,their 19th century jargons and constant threat of proletariat's dictatorship. You are entitled of ur opinion. I respect that. And please dont put jyu-jee n all after me.

See you in some other thread. And, if you dont need a "DR" infront of your name to join that google group, let me know what is it.

haina yo thread ajhai chali rachha?

anyway my demands if he becomes the president

1. he should wear daura suruwal in the oath and thereafter everytimes he appears in public

2. he should take oath in  nepali

3. he shouldnt speak in hindi as other madehsi lawmakers are doing in CA assembly

I don't give a shit about RPS Khate..

अब राजनीति भन्या साधुहरुको भेला त हिइन नी जसलाइ कुनैलाइ मोहमाया लालच छैन । फेरी अकबरको जस्तो न्याय मिल्ने जमाना पनि होइन । तसर्थ कि सिद्दान्त (संबिधान) चेप्नोपर्यो या फेक्नोपर्यो । निर्णयहरु परिवर्तनिय हुन्छ मान्छू तर बिना जनादेशले  देशमा भैसकेको  क्षेति त फर्कदैन कुरो त्यति हो । त्यसतै मावोबादीले एकल सरकार बनाउन तर अरु पार्टीहरुले शंका गर्ने पुर्बाधार स्वयं मावोबादीले खडा (बन्दुकको पृष्ठभुमि) गरेको होइन र? background check त संसारको norm नै त हो। हत्याको दोष लागि सकेका संग केवल आश्वाशन (घोषणापत्र) भरमा त सुत्न सकिदैंन । आखैं चिम्लने हो भने जनतालाइ हतियार हुनु पर्यो अमेरिकामा जस्तो । गिरिजा खेल सकिएपछि खेलको नियम बनाउदै छन त्यो पनि मान्य हुनसक्ने कुरो भएन ।सही कुरो, बिश्वास नहुने भए किन बुंदे सम्झौता ? भनिसके जवाफ यो भद्गगोलको सर्जक, हतारको चुनाबका कारक गिरिजाबाजेले नै दिनुपर्छ तर उमेरको हिसाब र अगाडीको पृष्टभुमि हेर्दा शायद उनि भनिरहेछन, "८५ बर्षको उमेरमा अझै resume बनाउदै छु ।राष्ट्रपति मलाइ लिगेशी बनाउनको लागि देउ, बाँकि मरे पछि डुमै राजा" ।

Maverick,

 

Heroes vs victims

 

Nobody has saved my head. Both the insurgent and the state’s forces have hit on my head hard instead.

 

Clearly, you and I are not tuned to each other here. That is why you are not getting me.

 

As I said, to me, there are no heroes in this war.

 

May be there are. But I don’t care about them at this point. The people I care at this point are the innocent civilian victims of both insurgent’s and the state’s abuses (people looted. tortured, killed or “disappeared” by them) who or whose loved ones are waiting for their property/dignity/life/whereabouts to be recovered/restored/known.

 

Your concern is for heroes. My concern is for the innocent victims. It’s like we are talking apples and oranges.

 

So let’s end this meaningless dialog. As for your concern that some “generalized data” might vilify certain heroes. I neither recognize those heroes, nor think they are more important than the victims of their heroism ! What more clear answer that this can I give you ?

 

Honeymoon

 

>Would you care to illustrate what do you mean by honeymoon period

>and how long it should be?

 

First 100 days of a new government. 3 months are enough to get the idea of where things are heading to.

 

>Seriously, you expect other parties to give "honeymoon" period?

 

I do. Because that’s a norm for how things move after every election, but mostly because Maoist have already floated their intention/desire/plan for every issue/question other parties are raising (PLA, YCL, confiscated properties, democracy and so on).

 

Nepaldemocracy google group

 

It is a recommendation based group. All you need is a member who knows and recommends you to the group. It has 249 members at the moment. So I would think there is a pretty good chance that at least one member might recognize and recommend you when you apply for the membership directly. So just send a message to the group with a small introductory note about yourself indicating your interest to join the group.

 

http://groups.google.com/group/nepaldemocracy?hl=en&lnk=srg

 

Hope to see you in the group soon.

 

Nepe

 

Mr Truth-jyu,

 

>गिरिजा खेल सकिएपछि खेलको नियम बनाउदै छन्

 

Couldn’t agree more.

 

नेपाली जनताले माओवादीलाई साँचो सुम्पने निर्णय गरिसकेपछि गिरिजाहरु साँचो लिन यो यो शर्त पुरा गर्नुपर्छ भनिरहेका छन् ।

 

अब गर्ने भनेको माओवादीलाई साँचो सुम्पेर सतर्कताकासाथ तिनीहरुले के गर्छन् हेरेर बस्ने र माओवादीले मतदातालाई दिएको वचन पुरा गरेरन्, उल्टो गरे वा गर्ने तर्खर गरे भने त्यही बेला जेजसो गर्न आवश्यक हुन्छ गर्ने गरेर बस्नुपर्छ ।

 

अन्य दलहरुले पाएको जनादेश त्यही र त्यति मात्र हो ।

 

Nepe