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

NewUser:

What do you mean by "khula samaaj"? I guess you are referring to the illusion created by corrupted neta in their hey days when they could do anything they want without caring for regular people.

May be you never got a chance to look at the flip side of the coin. I call it a "Black Decade" during the rein of netas like Girja, Makune and other chor. Man, they screwed up whatever we got big time. All the leaders are nothing but a dog waging their tail when their master sends order from Delhi.

Here's interesting article from BBC although it is few months old.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4502455.stm

TFN makes me laugh.

Lokman bro thanks for your sensible message.

I found this thread interesting:

Nepe wrote:

"Rajpal Singh is a NUANCED monarchist, let's say, a political photocopy of our own Ashu Tiwari."

Ashu writes:
Nepe, thank you for throwing this flame.
Fortunately, it's verifiably FALSE.

For Ashu's info,
Just before the closer of TND, Sardar Khalifa 's
posting in reader's comment forum was so noisy
and full of flames hurled against a reader who
seemed staunch supporter of Democracy. At one
time, Sirdar Khalifa tried tell the editorial what they
should publish and what they should not.....

If you had seen these postings by Sirdar Khalifa
(i.e. Rajpal Singh), you will surely realize that
Rajpal is not currently a democrat of '90s TND
's editor in chief. He has left democracy long time ago,
thats what I felt from his postings in TND's readers'
discussion section. I agree with Nepe's claim that
Rajpal, i.e. Sirdar Khalifa was clearly acting against
the on going publication norms of TND. I am sure
Rajpal i.e. Sirdar Khalifa should be the reason TND
was closed, eventhough he was advisor, but
the reader's section clearly showed Khalifa was
not letting Ujjwal what he wanted to publish, e.g.
Surendra Devkota's articles or Kamala Sarup's articles....

Join eNepali Janata Party (Republican)

Written on behalf of
eNepali Janata Party (Republican)

I liked the words written by newuser:
Having said that, we cannot expect anything good for the cause of democracy from Ashu because he is VERY PREJUDICIAL against the democratic supporters ,he SIMPLY IGNORES the mistakes made by the KING and he only HIGHLIGHTS the flaws of an immature democracy.

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.

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. OTHERWISE, THERE IS NO REASON TO REFRAIN FROM OPPOSING DICTATORSHIP IN THE COUNTRY.

eNepali,

Guru-jee, I don't know how much computer savy "Sirdar Khalifa" was, but I would not be surprised if he did not know that the webmaster can track him through isp.

The political parties are a despicable lot. Let's be objective and not let our political biases cloud our judgement. The parties and netas have a proven track record of neglecting/abandoning the people, more so the rural folks.

The fact that they are willing to ally with the Maoists murderers (Girija was hobnobbing with Maoists leaders during his visit to India) rather than with the people speaks volumes about thier fabled treachery and thier lust for power. We have lost the count of the number of times the politicians have stabbed our backs.

But who is at the helm is secondary (non-issue) to a common man. When are we actually going to worry about the real issues of the people? When are we actually going to bring real changes in people's lives?

Nepe writes:
I don't know how much computer savy "Sirdar Khalifa" was, but I would not be surprised if he did not know that the webmaster can track him through isp.

Nope. Sirdar Khalifa, we all know since '90 TND, is Rajpal. Its open to sun
truth. Sirdar Khalifa was posting series of postings and articles openly
and these postings were there until the last hours of TND's Part II life.
I will not wonder if these 200X-2005 issues of TND be erased and re-written.

CyberSpokesman for
eNepal Janata Party (Republican)

eNepali Janata Party, CyberSpokesman, what next? eGuruJi busy with CyberSex?

Well,

eNepal Janata Party is to be renamed: Tentative Options are
(a) eNepal Janatantrik Party
(b) Nepal eJanatanrik Party
(c) eNepal LokTantrik Party
(d) Nepal eLoktantrik Party

Please let me know your views on this topic on its relevant thread
entitled: eNepal Janata Party. Lets free this thread for its original
subject.

Nepe,

As I have often said in the past, I have NO problem with your republican views.

Hold on to them.
Fine.

You have your views, which, I find, a bit too extreme (and, at any rate, so far as I
can see, ground conditions in Nepal do NOT support your views at this time.

My ONLY problem is when you seem to think that ONLY you alone (along with those who agree with you) are right, and then when you go on to label these other different viewspoints as those of monarchists, nuanced monarchists and so on and so forth.

I also suspect that because I happen to a real-named COMPARATIVELY (and the key word here is: comparatively) high-profile Sajha poster, you feel entitled to take malicious potshots at me for no sensible reason. Maybe that is how you play the game,, but in the process, you do disservice to the cause of democracy, which when stripped to its core, is about allowing ALL views to come to the fore.

I mean, that you are so desperate to turn me into a monarchist will come as news to those who know me well -- personally and professionally.

FYI, I had had a chance to explain what democracy was/is to Gagan Thapa himself when he interviewed me for an hour on a radio program on KATH FM in 2001. My response to Gagan (with whom I have exchanged thoughts in public in Nepal) at the time was the same as it would be today: We have to have faith in democracy's self-correcting mechanisms.

I suggest that you start by admitting that your views (the success of which is based on a future NO ONE can predict at this time) add up to only ONE SLICE of all the available views out there, and then you live with that fact.

I mean, there are you guys, the "clear-eyed" republicans; and there are hard-core monarchists; and there are others whose views fall on various other shades of the political spectrum. You don't have to agree with others' views. But why the hell can' t
you even ACCEPT that other views (right or wrong) DO exist as well?

Or is that diversity of thoughts too hard for you to even grasp?

When you label the other sides in FALSE and communist-like propaganda-esque manner (simply because they are NOT in your camp), you ultimately raise questions about your own so-confessed democratic mindset. In other words -- like the King, political parties and the Maoists, you too can chant about democratic ideals -- but when one sees how you treat differing opinions, then, that does NOT inspire much confidence in your own democratic mind-set.

So, yes; hold on to your republican views.
But be aware that it's LEGITIMATE for others to hold on to VARIOUS other views too -- views that won't jive with yours, and that's fine.

Who's right?
Only time can tell.
Let's at least agree on that.

After all, just like democracy, a human mind too has a great capacity for self-corrections based on new experiences.

oohi
ashu

NewUser:

Well. You can laugh as long as you want. But be careful you might choke yourself. Fact of the matter is, people are sick and tired of the leadership we have in the last 12 yrs. But I guess you still dont get it.

Well just read the BBC news I link up there.

Have a geat day.

Most of the politically aware people that I have talked to in KTM have begun to lose any hope they had from the parties. Especially with these politicians trying to join hands with the Maoists. Most people here are more interested in having a stable lifestyle than anything else. These are common Nepali people like small grocery owner, rickshaw driver, the 'aamai' who makes tea outside ratna park.

For me the betterment of the lives of the common people is more important than the so called democracy in Nepal which unfortunately becomes the means for few select individuals (politicians) to cash in while they have 15 minutes of Power. Along the pursuit of which, the lives and the livelihood of these common people are neglected and ignored.

Saroj Bro:

What you said is a reality. Can you repeat that LOUD & CLEAR TO NewUser? I heared you well. Lots of people got it clear. Many in Sajha got it. Why doesn't NewUser get it?

Commoners dont care about politicans and their ideology anymore. They just want peace and security.

Just look at todays news.

http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=44005

What matters in politics is the middle class.
Middle class size changes as the politics of the
country changes. Middle class usually includes
the peoples as outlined in "Nepal" patrika.

Current Royal Politics includes upper tier and
lower class does not worry about what politics
is? Because politics hardly helps them directly.
So they are usually insensitive politics and if you
survey them they were always negative to
changes .... "Ahile je chha thikai chha".
Similarly, the people who some Sajhaities surveyed
through their personal contact around them
hardly see any benefit of having open democracy.
Because they are priveledged class people, they
will benefit from Royal System because rulers
are accessible to them through connections.
That is why the Kumai Bhaun community in Kathmandu
rules Nepal. You try to find Kumai Bahun including
other Bahuns from Kathmandu, they were never for
People's democracy. From 2046 to 2059, they had
always dual role. Now, again these Bahuns don't like
People's democracy and are back to Royal Rule.

I am not trying to bring caste issues, but its a fact.
I learn more about Nepali politics, I realize this fact more.

Try it. You will also feel it.

For
Nepali eJanata Party.

eNepali,

Fine.

Do NOT believe Akhilesh's observations.

Do NOT believe what I have to say (after doing some informal surveys among people I know who live in both inside and outside of Kathmandu) either.

Why?
Because, well, we do NOT represent the so-called Real Nepal (which only people like you seem to have a hotline to).

Fine.

But how do you explain the results of this survey?

These surveys were taken in 35 districts of Nepal by interviewing random almost 3000+ Nepalis by the firm AC Nielsen (the firm that gave the world Nielsen Ratings that dominate TV ad money in the US) with help from a research firm called Interdisciplinary Analysts.

Maybe -- after goinng through the survey -- it's time to ACCEPT that there are indeed MANY, MANY views out there in Nepal, and that's perfectly all right in these confusing times.

[I might add that you will never find Nepe throwing the results of this survey around on Sajha to make his point the way he used to trot out that leftist rag Dristi patrika's pro-republican tables on Sajha] :-)

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

-http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue239/headline.htm

March 18-24 2005

HEADLINE
What people say

? Three-quarters of Nepalis believe in democracy
? More than half of them want a constitutional monarchy
? Only five percent are for an absolute monarchy
? Only five percent don't believe in a monarchy


A nationwide public opinion poll has shown that the Nepali people overwhelmingly want a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy?two provisions to which King Gyanendra reiterated his commitment during his royal proclamation two months ago.

The poll, conducted by Interdisciplinary Analysts with AC Nielsen in 35 sample districts, was taken before February First and reflects the national mood just before the king sacked the government and imposed emergency rule.

Most of the 3,059 respondents felt that although a system in which political parties answerable to parliament is the most legitimate form of government they faulted the parties and their leadership.

Interestingly, only five percent wanted the king to have absolute powers and the same proportion were for a republic. Most felt that the Maoist insurgency should be settled through negotiations, but they distrusted both the Deuba government (which was in power in December) and the Maoist leadership, preferring third party mediation by human rights groups or the UN.

The most interesting revelation in the poll was that a very small proportion of people knew or understood what the constituent assembly demand of the Maoists entailed and only ten percent actually wanted it (see box, p4). Restoring parliament also received low priority, with only ten percent favouring it.

Even though some of the results many appear contradictory especially regarding the ways to overcome the present stalemate, the Nepali people seem to want an overall political framework in which the
constitutional monarchy, parliamentary democracy and the Maoists all fit in.

By disagreeing with the demand of the political parties for restoration of the house, the Maoist demand for constituent assembly and their preference for a constitutional monarchy, the people are sending ar message that they want all three forces to come together and resolve differences.

Conclusions of past public opinion surveys in this country (Nepali Times, #38, #115, #140, #218) have proven time and again that the people have a great deal more wisdom than they are given credit for. They are pragmatic, not swayed by slogans and extremism, they have their priorities well figured out, and they know who the crooks are.

An overwhelming majority of Nepalis still favour a democratic government. In spite of everything that has gone wrong in the past 15 years, they don?t blame the system. They do identify specific disadvantages of democracy, and in order of priority, they are: misuse of power by those who wield it, corruption, politicians forgetting constituencies after being elected, politicisation of the administration and continuous protests by opposition parties.

Despite these drawbacks, they say the two most important advantages of democracy are: freedom of expression and the right to elect rulers.

The people overwhelmingly reject republicanism and an absolute monarchy, and if the proportion of those undecided on the role of the monarchy (14 percent) is excluded, support for constitutional monarchy becomes 63 percent. However, there is an age and education factor in responses. People above 56 and the less educated seem to be the one ones most in favour of a more active monarchy. Most with college education or higher favour a fully constitutional monarchy, although it is in this age group that republicanism has the most adherents.

On the Maoist insurgency, most respondents felt the priority should be for negotiations. They reject options like suppressing the Maoists militarily and strongly believe that the ongoing conflict can?t be resolved by military means. They blame the failure of past negotiations on the lack of flexibility on the part of the government and the Maoists. Three-fourths of the respondents believe the conflict can be settled through negotiations. A significant number favoured third party mediation by the UN (20 percent) human rights organizations (25 percent).

Sudhindra Sharma and Pawan Kumar Sen

The nationwide Contemporary Political Situation in Nepal opinion poll was conducted by Interdisciplinary Analysts and ACNielsen and funded by The Asia Foundation. A closed-ended questionnaire was administered on 3,059 respondents in 35 sample districts in November and December 2004. Eleven field supervisers and 48 enumerators took part.

Ashu,

Your first posting.

I don't understand why have you been repeating the most childish and meaningless allegation all the time, that I say that only I am right.

If that's what I am saying by posting my views, then everybody is saying the same thing. You are also saying the same thing. Every Ramey, shyamey, Harkey whoever posts anything in Sajha or anywhere in the world is saying the same thing- that only they are right.

Why is it that you only found Nepe to allege that ? Are you and other posters not saying that ? Are you saying that you are not/might not be right and Nepe might be right instead ? If you are, then say it. Write that after every sentence you write. I will do the same for you.

If not, please stop replaying this broken record of stupid nonsense . Mind you, this has been your takiya-qalaam (thego). You can not say anything without uttering this nonsense first.

*** ***

Democracy is a fundamental thing. You can not contradict it. You can't have a democratic right to renounce democratic right itself. All Monarchists, nuanced or otherwise, don't get this, which is ,however, no surprise at all.

*** ***

I called you "a nuanced monarchist". The qualifier "nuanced" is there for a reason. It is there to acknowledge your thought process. It is not a thoughtless labeling.

Now to ACNeilsen Survey and the Student Poll. To begin, here is a part of my discussion in an email group (which is now organized as a Google Discussion Group "Nepal Democracy"), that might interesting for you.


From: Deepak Khadka
To: . . . .
Cc: . . . . .
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: Controversial middle ground philosophy

[skipped]

I think the "Democratic Middle Ground in Nepal" by LDN [note: it turned out LDN is not the official owner of the document] is an important political document for the simple fact that it is a political roadmap for Nepal prepared by a group of 18 intellectuals of North American Nepali Diaspora.

Having not seen any vigorous discussion on it in Nepali forums, I was thinking either it has been accepted by Nepali community as it is or it simply has gone unnoticed.

It's good to see some discussion initiated.

My own opinion about the document is this:

1. Has valuable ideas for reforms in the post-democracy era
2. However, does erroneous assessment of the current situation
3. And, clueless about how democracy actually is brought about

I hope to share my thoughts in detail in appropriate forums, although frankly speaking, the list of the authors and their resume I am aware of are very intimidating to this amateur writer. I have tried to comments randomly about this and that in my postings in freenepal.org. However, that is just a fraction of what I would like to share.

In this email, I would like to comment on Anup jee's reference to "Neilsen National Survey 2005" which reportedly found only 5% of the Nepali population have republican sentiment.

Also let me tell that the following statement from the MG manifesto is appears to have based on the above.

"Currently, a vast majority of Nepali people do not support abolishing the monarchy and establishment of a republican state."

A wrong approach, intention and statement based on a wrong information !

And I am saying this fully knowing what WRONG means.

First, approach. When you are studying something that is rapidly changing, what is more informative and helpful, the TREND or some one point data ?

It's the trend.

Look at the above statement from MG.

Let me illustrate what I am talking about.

Kul Chandra Gautam, who has professional obligation for being as unbiased as possible, invaraibly writes in all of his article the following (not exact words)

"The republican sentiments, particularly in Nepali youths, are GROWING everyday"

MGers do not care that it is GROWING. All they care is 5% that "Neilsen National Survey 2005" reported.

But here is a catch. The information coming from "Neilsen National Survey 2005" is WRONG.

Once again I am saying it fully knowing what WRONG means.

The "Neilsen National Survey 2005" did not ask a clean question like if you are for Republic. It asked a "leading" question that clearly led the respondent to take that monarchy is there to stay. Let's see the proof in the pudding itself.

The question asked was:

"Q 26: What type of monarchy should be in Nepal ?"

I rest my case.

just one more thing. This one is about a poll MGers are either not aware of or did ignore it.

Anybody is aware of Student Poll 2004 ? They actually called it a mini-referendum on monarchy.

35346 students from more than 20 campuses from all over the country took part in it. Note that the number of the participants of this poll is 10 times (!) more than that participated in "Neilsen National Survey 2005" (of course sampling in the later).

And the result ?

More than 90 % students supported the Republic Democracy !!!!!!!

I don't have to add what students are meant when it comes to political changes in Nepal ?

MGers has spectacularly failed to inform themselves with right information about important things.
[skipped]

**** ****

Relevant links:

Here are links to the report and news about the survery and the poll I am talking about.

The Survey conducted in 2005 by ACNielsen Nepal Pvt. Ltd.
- http://www.asiafoundation.org/pdf/Nepal-ContemporarySituation.pdf

Students' Referendum on Monarchy 2004
- http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=11526

(The news is reporting the result of the 'referendum' conducted in TU. At this point, as you see in the report, about a dozen campuses already have conducted the 'referendum' and had shown similar overwhelming support for the republic. I do have the result from all of the campuses if you are interested to see.)

**** ****

On a prejudiced conclusion published in Nepali Times


From: Deepak Khadka
To: . . . .
Cc: . . . .
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 4:07 PM
Subject: Missing "republicans" located in "80%"

Bravo Pramodji !

You located the missing "republicans" in 80% of mis-labeled crowd.

I do hope those friends of ours who have been using "5%" proof for dismissing republicanism in various public forums will now use diligence to use the questionable data and prejudiced conclusion.

I have already explained the questionability of the data. For my new assertion that the analysts presented prejudiced conclusion, please refer to the widely read and referred summary of the report published in Nepali Times. (I believe that's what most of us have read) http://www.nepalitimes.com/issue239/headline.htm

Read the following sentence in the summary:

"The people overwhelmingly reject republicanism. ."

I am a professional scientist myself. I was shocked to see Sharma and Sen claiming to have obtained this ANSWER to the QUESTION they never asked.

Even more shocking was to see some MGers taking it as the ultimate truth and spreading the good news like a wild fire. (my apology for being dramatic, but "5%" proof has really dramatically hurt the cause of republicanism.)

So I humbly request all to use deligence while using the data and statements from AC Nielsen Nepal Pvt Ltd, Survey 2005.

And thank you Pramodji for identifying some bases for a proposal of a New Middle Ground.

The old Middle Ground stands on "Fear factors".

The new Middle Ground should be based and realism and some "Dare Factors".

That's all from me for today.

But I will continue to be a part of learning and discovering the new, realistic and bold Middle Ground.

Deepak Khadka


----- Original Message -----
From: "Aryal, Pramod" <. . . . . . . . . >
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 10:53 AM
Subject: RE: Post using real name please

> Shiva jee,
> First of all let me talk about Dinesh Prasain. I just did not listen to
> his talk, I know him very closely too and we spent several hours
> together after the talk. The word "middle ground" is not the one about
> the paper, but one that explains the path to choose between two
> intimidating forces, Maoists and monarchists with guns.
>
> Now going through the statistics, 5% monarchists, 5% republican and 80%
> constitutional monarchists(?).
>
> I think the statistics is 5% absolute monarchists, 5% absolute
> republican (Maoists type), and 80% constitutional forces.
> Now it is time to dissect these 80%.
> In my opinion the society is divided into 5 main streams of thoughts.
> The respective 5% are two thoughts and remaining 80% is divided into
> three more separate thoughts who are loosely knitted but their can be a
> major shift of their thoughts.
>
> One thought among these 80% is that they want soft landing for monarch.
> This group comprises of people who think that going for outright
> republicanism might create blood bath before reaching that point. Second
> group in this comprise of people who think that Nepal can not handle
> republicanism and the void and vacuum created by this might take Nepal
> to a kind of civil war, or military junta. Third group in this category
> are from so called inherent elites who have benefited from feudalistic
> class, either by being member of that house, the house of Shahs and
> Ranas, their coteries, the Thapas, Basnyats, Pandeys (Chetri Pandeys).
> Raj Guru Khalaks, like Dixit, Satyal, Aryal, and other Brahmins who have
> been in Kathmandu for three to four generations atleast, other Brahmins
> who have served house of Shahs or Ranas, like Dhakal, Rimal, Bhattarai,
> Pahari, Dhungana etc. who have been in Kathmandu for at least two to
> four generations. The business community, the Newars like Amatya groups,
> Pancha Kanya Groups, Chaudhari group, Golcha house. And beneficiaries
> during Panchayat rule, the newar community and Brahmin/Chetri where the
> bureaucracy was divided like one secretary from newar and one secretary
> from Bahun/Chetri.
>
> Out of these three groups, first two groups would eventually come
> towards people if the greater mass will think otherwise, and would feel
> sorry for the situation would devote time and energy to overcome this.
> The third group, will splinter into two factions, and one faction will
> join the group with monarchists 5% till the end and if monarchists will
> lose the battle then eventually join the people force to safe guard
> their inherent interest and these will be more vocal democrats. Other
> faction will join peoples group because they are the most opportunistic
> class, and they can sense the change coming. Like in 2007 BS, this class
> changed their plate on house from Shri 3, to Shri 5 as soon as the
> revolution prevailed.
>
> So in changed pretext, new statistics should be a merging point. Now the
> new middle ground is:
>
> People Empowerment where people will decide the fate of monarchy and
> Maoists alike. This middle point will bring Republican democrats to
> accept that people are the ultimate decision makers. These republican
> democrats though espousing republican sentiment, but can not forge
> alliance with Maoists due to their ideology and methods. This group
> consists of large number of UML cadres and followers, greater chunk
> (substantial) of younger generation cadres and followers of NC (both).
> Those still having thoughts of constitutional monarchy want the monarchy
> to stay but with more less power and they will accept the term
> empowering people and people deciding the fate of monarchy but not going
> to republic. If the majority of people having faith in people
> empowerment will decide for republican set up, these group will join the
> republic without much revolt against republic but grudgingly saying that
> this should not have happened, and we should always keep option open
> about bringing monarchy back.
>
> So we got to wait, how this people empowerment group, the 80% of pre Feb
> 1, will shift the paradigm and go ahead. Thus now the middle ground
> paper that we talk much about will have paradigm shift, and instead of
> asking King to be constitutional monarch, it should as for empowerment
> of people and king should heed to the peoples aspiration, then we will
> have perfect middle ground or third lane in two lane traffic. There is
> always small shoulder in traffic lane, and during constructions, these
> shoulders are used to make a lane for flow of traffic, so we should not
> worry about creating a third lane from this space.
>
> Pramod