Irrespective of whether the government succeeds on the peace and constitution front, Jhala Nath Khanal will probably fail in his other stated objective ‚Ä" 'of strengthening institutions of governance'.
Frequent changes in government after 1990 resulted in frequent changes in personnel and the rapid circulation of elites. At times, there was slight tweaking of policy. But the real tragedy of politics in the last two decades has been that no dispensation had the political commitment, will or strength to reform the administrative apparatus, fight interested lobbies, and formulate and implement policies with the broader public interest in mind. The real aim has been survival, in order to extract and use state resources to expand one's base and consolidate power.
Khanal will not be able to do much for the simple reason that he will have to invest all his energy in political management and balancing conflicting interest groups to survive. To think that he has any time or incentive or skills to invest in resolving issues like power cuts and unemployment is naïve.
Second, his cabinet consists of old-timers like Bharat Mohan Adhikari and Bishnu Poudel, who have the backing of key business interests and have developed their political base by catering to their interests. The first-timers, mostly from the Maoists, have gained access to state power after a long wait. If the first Maoist stint in power is any indication, the priority will be less to think of ways to radicalise administrative structures than to steer them towards catering to their political base. The pressure on these Maoist ministers will be even higher as their political base has waited patiently for years, if not more than a decade, to gain the patronage that others have capitalised on. Some ministers may have new ideas, but the constraints of their parties will diminish their ability to act independently.
Even if Khanal and his cabinet try to steer reform, through cracking the whip on certain public sector institutions, introducing new personnel, making the administration more accountable, or breaking the cop-criminal nexus, a coalition of established interests will raise the alarm. Most of these moves will have a hint of partisan motives. The NC-inclined bureaucracy, the commercial interests that will lose out if public schools or health institutions even begin to succeed, the corrupt security apparatus, and the media, which is an entrenched part of the establishment, will begin saying this is all a conspiracy to 'take over the state'. A cry for 'democracy' will be raised to force Khanal to play along with the status quo.
Nepal's best-known television anchor, Vijay Kumar Panday, has a reservoir of political anecdotes. One such story is about the time he went to meet a prime minister, soon after 1990, in his office chambers. It was morning, and the PM was inside, taking a nap. Panday was amazed, and said aloud, "Sir. There has been such a remarkable political change. Expectations are so high. Don't you have to work and deliver instead of sleeping?" The PM laughed and adapted an old vernacular metaphor to denote insignificant change: "It is all the same. If I work, the result will be 19; otherwise 18."
Call it fatalism, but that may well have been among the most profound political insights into running this country. It explains why there was little substantial difference for the common man when GP Koirala was in office, working four hours a day, or when Dahal or Madhav Nepal were heading government, working 12-14 hours a day.
For an overhaul in governance, old patronage networks have to be broken down; fresh politician-bureaucrat equations must be created; ruling parties need to have a degree of security so that they can stop worrying only about survival; constituents have to begin demanding 'public goods' and not merely 'private goods'; and a consensual political compact on certain issues needs to be worked out. It is unlikely Khanal will be able to do any of this. And even if he does, the opponents will raise the cry of 'democracy is in danger', or 'state capture', to block any effort at governance reform ‚Ä" since governance reform is so inextricably linked to which political constituencies get what resources.
The '18-19' framework will remain unbroken. And Khanal will join the line of PMs who, despite the support of 'revolutionaries', reinforced the status quo in the way this country is run.
how can a person succeed when his whole castle is built on lies?
how many nepalese are there who would not support change- end of nexus between¬†bureaucrats¬†and criminals etc etc?
all commies want is to capture to full fill their vested interest.
STOP HATCHING TOTALLY FABRICATED PROPAGANDA.¬†
18 FEB 2011 | 3:31 PM NST
Sure, any moves to end the capture of the state by corrupt patrons will be denounced as "undemocratic".
But can MKN and Oli actually bring down the government if MJF still supports it?
If Khanal fails at any other objective but succeeds on peace and constitution front, that would be quite an achievement.
Isn't it clear that no government can successfully make real changes until the veto held by India and those who will claim any changes are "undemocratic" is completely ended by bigger defeat for those forces in elections under an agreed constitution and with the NA under civilian supremacy?
If this government can actually hold elections instead of preparing the way for military rule like MKN it will have opened the way. That seems to be why opponents are so hysterical about it even though it has not yet tried to do anything at all.
18 FEB 2011 | 5:55 PM NST
3. Sandeep Dhungana
Feels refreshing to read an article from Prashant that has no mention of India. There are a lot of things for an able Nepali newsperson to talk about in terms of Nepal and her interests you know. Leave the Indians to talk about India and its interests
18 FEB 2011 | 8:28 PM NST
I am sorry Prashant but you are all over the place with this article. What is it that you are talking about?
A) That there is no hope for Nepal regardless of who is in power.
B) That there is no hope for Nepal because some people are not yet in power.
C) That Nepal is hopeless because it is Nepal
You suggest that "But the real tragedy of politics in the last two decades has been that no dispensation had the political commitment, will or strength to reform the administrative apparatus, fight interested lobbies, and formulate and implement policies with the broader public interest in mind."
As far as I am aware, the only dispensation that was in power was the socialist elite of the country, namely the NC and the UML, mostly NC.
Reformation of the administrative apparatus would require firstly the identification of problems which need reformation and the designing of the path that would lead to the final stated objective. What you require with it is patience and careful deliberation, not exactly the qualities of GP Koirala.
Saying that nobody could fight "interested lobbies" is extremely vague. Who are the interested lobbies. I guess you are talking about land-owners, industrialists and social groups represented through NGO's and INGO's.
The idea that they would not be interested in preserving their interests under any rule is not naive, it is plain ridiculous. Without continuous negotiations and compromises the right policy framework simply cannot be designed.
The problem with the Nepali political leadership was that just as they expected to mollified, they mollified to meet expectations. They simply did not have, and do not have, the requisite skills, patience, or desire to undertake a careful study of the set of demands presented to them. They simply wish the problems would go away, and throw every sop at it to make it go away.
What is broader public interest that you talk of?
It is an important question because everybody appears to have their own definition of it. Is destroying religion in a society "broader public interest", is pleasing every section of it "broader public interest", is it the communist version of "broader public interest", Koirala's version or Deuba's.¬†
It is only once you have identified which public interest we are talking of that we can evaluate actions accordingly. You have not done it because you are simply not interested in it.
18 FEB 2011 | 8:45 PM NST
5. Slarti Second, his cabinet consists of old-timers..........and so on.
Where are you, what are you talking about?
This is a government which has exactly 99 days of legitimate tenure. It's main objectives are three. First, set up the structure. It has been two weeks and that has not been done.
Second, try and get the best out of the time available to do whatever that can be done about this constitution thing and about the peace which is not.
Third, it needs to have the right kind of plans in place to ensure that there is no free-for-all chaos after May 28. The aim should be some clear action plans A,B and C that they could fall on to ensure smooth functioning of the nation.
How much time is left after that for "new ideas", "radicalism" and transformation?
The second element of my view on this article is this. Maoists may have radical ideas but is radicalism the only requirement for better administration in your book.
Do you eliminate corruption by being radical? Do you enhance¬†bureaucratic productivity by having a plan which is merely "radical"? What about substance? You simply fail to say a single word about that.
That the Maoist political base has waited for this for years is a fine argument. But the validity of that argument is a function of identifying the political base on some evidence.
What evidence do we have of identifying that other than the election results on the basis of a false assumption that they were fear free. But reading your articles, it repeatedly appears that you have never ever bothered to look carefully at the election results and evaluated what the numbers and patterns reveal.¬†¬†
18 FEB 2011 | 8:57 PM NST
6. Slarti "Most of these moves will have a hint of partisan motives. The NC-inclined bureaucracy, the commercial interests that will lose out if public schools or health institutions even begin to succeed, the corrupt security apparatus, and the media, which is an entrenched part of the establishment, will begin saying this is all a conspiracy to 'take over the state'. A cry for 'democracy' will be raised to force Khanal to play along with the status quo."
You go on to make a sweeping remark about each and every institution brushing aside the fact that most of their weakness is a direct result of the political squabbling over the past two decades which every single politician is responsible for.
You are saying that any move directed at improving the performance of critical institutions would hint at partisan motives. People smell partisanship when a change in ideologically driven and not policy driven. And also when the point of that change is to establish political control over the institution instead of enabling an institution to better meet its objectives.¬†
Do you expect this government to make a token show of an improvement during the next three month that it has? Do you expect me to be fooled by the assertion that a sudden shift is possible without careful evaluation of the present functioning of all these institutions?¬†
The security establishment is corrupt! The media is corrupt! Cry of taking over the state! How wonderfully have you swept in all these generalisations in defence of a government that has not even been formed and has not done a single thing.
This more than anything smells of a partisan media which is already setting itself up to defend its corrupt, anti-national and ineffective political masters.
Finally, what is the status quo? Where does it come from? Who is the status quoist here? Whose dream is it and are you having fun?
18 FEB 2011 | 9:09 PM NST
7. Slarti Call it fatalism, but that may well have been among the most profound political insights into running this country.
I don't call it fatalism. I call it stupidity. I call it foolishness, and I think that GP was always fatal for the fate of this country and these quotes simply prove it.
It is not a profound political statement. If true, it is a verification of doubts that the political leaders of this country want power to simply enrich themselves and destroy this nation.
The idea that you can make things work by working 16 hours a day is equally ridiculous. The job of a countries leadership is to enact its vision through the various arms of the government. It is a big task and failure is common. But that beauty of it is that out of 10 well thought out action plans, if five deliver that changes expectations completely and has a big impact on results in all sectors of the economy and the society.
18 FEB 2011 | 9:15 PM NST
8. Slarti What is an overhaul in governance?
What is a patronage network? Whose patronage? It has been five years of this chaos and 21 of democratic rule? What does actually have to be broken down?¬†
Fresh politician-bureaucrat equations must be created.¬†
What is a politician-bureaucrat nexus? What is the equation in a nexus? What does the nexus and the equation depend on? How do the two survive amid a plethora of laws and regulations, rhetoric and violence utilised over the years?
Ruling parties need to have a degree of security. Fine, but security from what and for how long? Who guarantees that security? What is to be done if the confidence with which that security is provided is breached?¬†
So that they can stop worrying only about survival. Really, why would a political party care about delivering if survival is ensured? If they stop worrying about the next election (surviving it) what exactly is the point of democracy?
Constituents have to begin demanding 'public goods' and not merely 'private goods'.
Who differentiates between a "public good" and a "private good"? If constituents merely respond to appeals, what is the point of having regulations, limitations, and statutes? Why can't everybody simply be given a lesson in government moral expectations from the citizenry and be done with it?¬†
and a consensual political compact on certain issues needs to be worked out.¬†
You keep sabotaging the very idea of democracy. You do not want a debate, you arbitrarily wish to label institutions and people according to your convenience while shouting democracy as a totem for protection. What are the certain issues which require consensus? There is already a very strong consensus on the fact that there should be no corruption, did that eliminate corruption? There is a very strong consensus on the need for democracy, but not on whose democracy, the UML, NC, Madhesi or the Maoist? There is an overwhelming consensus over the need for consensus but in practice?
It is unlikely Khanal will be able to do any of this. And even if he does, the opponents will raise the cry of 'democracy is in danger', or 'state capture', to block any effort at governance reform √Į¬Ņ¬Ĺ since governance reform is so inextricably linked to which political constituencies get what resources.
Who are these political constituencies and what are the resources they are squabbling over? Why is it that resources are in the hands of the government to share with these constituencies instead of in the hands of the people where they belong? What is going to change so radically by concentrating more resources in the hands of the government? Why must anybody assume that the clamour for these resources would dwindle if the concentration of resources is enhanced in the hands of the government?¬†
There are just limitlessly large number of questions that come up from your article. However, the sole conclusion anybody can derive is quite simple, you are setting up the excuses that you are going to use for this governments failure. Perhaps also that you are a bad propagandist.
18 FEB 2011 | 9:33 PM NST
who cares, can you be more specific: whose castles are built on lies?¬† Jha or Khanals?¬† Who is hatching the propaganda?¬† The author of this piece or our new PM?¬† Perhaps you could concentrate more on what you're saying as opposed to alternating between all-lowercase text and all-caps.
18 FEB 2011 | 12:48 AM NST
Dear jha , The article tile to much as describe in content there in is it " shame - shame" of old English in modern phonetic.Please help me to understand I am also a farmer's SON.Very tough language.- if abbreviated more meaning PM (Propaganda Master)- very fantastic position.
19 FEB 2011 | 12:17 PM NST
Clear and simple thing has become muddled. We all seem to think that success or failure of writing a new constitution will depend on¬†the prime minister¬†and his government.
If that was the case, why did Nepalis¬†even bother to elect a Constituent Assembly?¬†
A government's is to govern.
A Constituent Assembly's duty is to write a constitution.
Why can't we see through this simple thing?
No one is stopping the 601 CA members from writing a constitution.
The fiery rhetoric from Prachanda that constitution will be written only if they lead the government or the home ministry has nothing to do with constitutiion writing. It is all aboout power.
For the task of constitution writing, it makes no difference¬†whether the prime minister is Jhal Nath Khanal, Pushpa Kamal Dahal or Nani Maiya Dahal.
19 FEB 2011 | 10:03 PM NST
12. Vija Srestha
Addition to reply 11.
I for once really agree, but you have forgotten very simple and main detail to explain.Why is it that Khanal and Dakal do not go ahead with anything or why CA doesn't go ahead?I agree that it is about power and also let's not forget that Khanal's and Dakal's plan is to write constitution according to their party wishes,which means the explanations,interpretations will be according to what they think is the right way to live.Feudalism,Socialism ,human rights according to their impretation.That is the only reason everything has stopped.¬†I agree it must not stop if we ever plan to write the constitution according to the highest standards of human rights, but we also must understand that the whole government system will be based on it and therefore political forces are pulling into different directions.It is a very big difference what government system will be written in constitution and till now annoucements made by Khanal or Dahal are only about their ideology which is not acceptable to millions of Nepali citizens.Would you like to live in a system where you have rights only at the level of human rights 2 centuries back or where everyone will have the same rights either you work or not ,either you get paid according to your education or not,are you a farmer or a biznessman,are¬†you talented,hardworking or are living like parasite.Millions of Nepalese have been doing the job while these two Parasites were living the life ,forcing young people to join the so called PLA,which by the way exists illegally as guns brought in Nepal must be only for Nepal Army purpose,as protection not used for attacks as it was done by PLA¬†and in the end we have one more problem to solve¬†and we are back to point zero.,just using them as slaves to do the Dakal's and Khanal's dirty work.15 years of their absence ,looting,killing ,living on looted money and doing it with the most seen illegal means and not cotributing to the society is unacceptable.That is the simple thing we need to tell to millions of Nepalis.Can we name one thing that was given to the people of Nepal by these two parties that would be appreciated by poor .Empty wessel makes most noise.
20 FEB 2011 | 2:47 PM NST
Better let's ask ourselves-- What¬†is my duty as a citizen, as a journalist, as a teacher, as a lawyer, as a doctor, or as a professional¬†to the new Republic? Why not to give benefit of doubt to the new coalition? At least, after mockery of more than 15 attempts, the CA members¬†have demonstrated some wisdom to elect a new PM without¬†a remote control¬†from abroad. Bravo, guys !! Let's give them a chance towork, yet let's monitor their actions, do a proper follow-up by the civil society and evaluate their performance on the job.¬†It is not a surprize that a¬†priviledged section of Nepali society¬†(the "sukila-mukila" class) has always been skeptic towards any sort of Change; their level of cynicism was so high they could never imagine that the abolition of feudal monarchy was possible in our lifetime, nor could they ever¬†believe that the sovereign people of Nepal could¬†one day elect their own representatives¬†to the CA to write the people's first constitution in the history of Nepal. These are achievements of historic proportions by any standard of democracy! Despite all the constraints and stagnations, the Nation has come all the way to this juncture. If the current coalition could just provide stability and confidence to the people that we as a Nation can manage our own affairs and assure that "Yes, we can" build our own destination ("Swayambhoo!") I would give them high credits. This¬†alone would be an equivalent to more than half of the¬†JOB done. The other half is just a matter of technical details. Let's give a chance with all the sincerity!
20 FEB 2011 | 11:01 PM NST
14. who cares
#its jhallu ram's success which is built on lies:
* jhallu ram had been using the terms like unity, unity govt for peace, bringing together all the parties, but 7 pts secret agreement between the two bosses have exposed it, the way they dealt on¬†minister¬†sharing too showed that the term "unity" was just a ploy.
- how could anyone sign a secret deal (except for the deal that says about bringing in/starting dialogue with the rest) and talk about unity? secret deal itself is sidling non signers.
- many of the points in that 7 pt also prove them to be divider- not just between parties but also among leaders in the same party.
- how can they make a deal on¬†ministry¬†when other parties especially, NC, when they have not even approached (genuine) NC for bringing them in the govt.?
the loud talker/s turned out to be the dividers, they turned out to be hatching this conspiracy for a year, the main brain behind this secret deal, bam dev, has been talking about left alliance for a long time- i wonder if he had been disclosing secrets/mind (info shared by jhallu ram with his associates) of jhallu ram like how much he is ready to give maoist, to maoist, etc.
before this secret deal, democrats have been negotiaing with maoist, but this deal shows that commies want to bypass NC and other democrats.¬†
#regarding lie propaganda- in this column, i was referring to p jha.
his columns are not just propaganda but rather lies.
- in his previous columns, he wanted to brain wash readers that its other who do not want to cooperate, its only jhallu ram and puspa who want to work together will all...¬†above¬†mentioned points prove that they have always been dividers and also they have been showing that sign regularly, but this p jha wants to¬†manipulate¬†the truth. ¬†
- even in this column, he wants to force in that only moaist wants to make a better change, and all others are against it. but he never cared to explain how will maoist bring in better change, what is their economic agenda and how will it make a¬†difference?
of course, entry of a new party always bring change and maoist has already brought change- did not many¬†bureaucrats¬†joined maosit union as they became largest party?¬†
- and still p jha is circulating lie propaganda that bureaucrats are loyal to NC, UML.
- so on and on.
those individuals who are raised by good parents always reject those who lie to them, who betray them. here, 7 pt secret agreement, in the case of some civil¬†society¬†members, medias, dai cheures in UML are saying- since 7 pt agreement has already been signed, and this govt. was formed on the basis of that agreement so others should accept it, cooperate with it.
in nepali press there used to be news, regularly, regarding "HOW RAPES ARE¬†CONVERTED¬†INTO¬†MARRIAGE".¬†
21 FEB 2011 | 10:50 AM NST
15. who cares
bla bla bal, you all are useless, only shah are capable.
21 FEB 2011 | 11:09 AM NST
After the 1990 political change the political parties had an immense opportunity to establish a moderately prosperous and largely peaceful country. They squandered that opportunity because of one man who wanted it all for himself and himself alone.
Immediately after the changes were brought in he started off by sidelining all potential adversaries. Suppressing all dissenting voices. Creating the conditions of hopelessness which would eventually wreak this country.
The King was completely sidelined and showed absolutely no signs of any interference whatsoever. Governance standards were not set. Political rivalry and games of deception meant that the idea of governance, policy making, objective reviews of bureaucracies functioning, and economic reforms took a backseat. Too far back to attract more attention than the petty political sloganeering.
Somehow, from somewhere, a damaging insurgency starts and is fed by government ineptness, and deliberate worsening of the situation. This is also perhaps the first time that this particularly damaging man is out of power. Reputedly the only person to have known everybody who mattered between Mechi to Mahakali.
This was also the time when the King was again respected and honoured, completely aloof from the day to day functioning of the state, he is praised for being an "ideal constitutional Monarch".
Things started getting worst, until suddenly all hell breaks lose and the King dies along with the rest of his family. Situation deteriorates from being tough to impossible. Everybody knows that country would soon be a republic. Even the knew King is not crowned. It takes exactly six years to make the new man completely powerless. Eight to dethrone the man.
Enter the third new era. Five years have passed. I quote the comments made by the Maoists just before they started the war:
"It has been six years since the autocratic monarchical partyless Panchayat system was ended by the 1990 People's Movement and a constitutional monarchical multiparty parliamentary system established. During this period state control has been exercised by a tripartite interim government, a single-party government of the Nepali Congress, a minority government of UML and a present Nepali Congress-RPP-Sadbhavana coalition. That, instead of making progress, The situation of the country and the people is going downhill is evident from the fact that Nepal has slid to being the second poorest country in the world; people living below the absolute poverty line has gone up to 71 per cent; the number of unemployed has reached more than 10 per cent while the number of people who are semi-employed or in disguised employment has crossed 60 per cent; the country is on the verge of bankruptcy due to rising foreign loans and deficit trade; economic and cultural encroachment within the country by foreign, and especially Indian, expansionists is increasing by the day; the gap between the rich and the poor and between towns and villages is growing wider."¬†
21 FEB 2011 | 6:57 PM NST
Rapes are converted in marriage- shame shame- jha also same same too much data missing look at comments.
21 FEB 2011 | 7:01 PM NST
Continuing from my note above, my question is quite simple. Why were more than 15000 people murdered by the Maoists in cold blood. Over 400,000 families destroyed for ever and children orphaned and scarred for all their lives?
Nobody in the Nepali press, everyone of whom appear to be ideologically hinged to a particular party, has ever presented the true picture of the situation that this country is in.
All attempts appear to be directed at diverting peoples attention to non-issues. Take this article for example, it deals with problems emanating from actions that have not yet been taken.
What nobody seems to ask is what causes all of this?
The tendency is to immediately delve in deep conspiracy theories and use mind-boggling terminologies to fill column space. Which, it is hoped, would befuddle enough people to get some appreciation for the wonderful terminologies and in-depth analysis (simply because the impressed masses are completely out-of-depth, so the depth must be great, eh).
I think there is an easier way to find out what this is all about. It does not involve any socio-cultural commentary or any conspiracy whispered in dark passages of power. I am pretty sure that Prashant is perfectly capable of explaining this. I am waiting for the day when he will do us that favour.¬†
21 FEB 2011 | 7:41 PM NST
Look Slarti # 18. We are member of FDR Nepal ( Feudal Democratic Nepal yet no state). To be new feudal they have bee murdered in 15000. We¬† are land¬† almost no one compatible in wealth We forced to declare Jonathon as premier, dholnath, kholnath, gholnath.... all in way to join the cabinet. If Lord Pashupati Nath will come in way we will go to Public Revolt meance more killing innocent and declare People Republic of Nepal. Don't be serious .... join your cam as S. Nath.
22 FEB 2011 | 10:04 AM NST
For #18, obviously not a real person:
More than 12,000 of the 15,000 you mention were murdered in cold blood by the royal police and army of Nepal. Ditto for orphaned children, widowed women and displaced people.
What caused all this mayhem? Go ask Shah and Ranas who made a mess of this poor country, amassed great wealth by looting it and treated everyone else as slaves to be sold or killed at will.
Want to know the real issue? The real issue is that no one has ever been punished for over two centuries of crimes against humanity.
Need further explanation? Bring back Nepalese¬†money¬†put in foreign banks by Rana, Shaha and Bahun robbers and Nepal will be able to pay off all its foreign loans in a ziffy.
Yes, everything else is merely commentary.
22 FEB 2011 | 2:50 PM NST
# Mahadev #20 . My lord surprising you get three years in FDRN never disclose or oppose in public, like Indian trust and bahun are in majority in or camp. What stop yo yet?Now you speak.Do you clear Democracy promote in current way . Don't irritate my friend ....... river take it course. Enjoy Coventry to be fresh . Jay .. nathcommunity.
22 FEB 2011 | 4:22 PM NST
If only you take a deep breath and read what yo have written once and try getting the gist of it, ¬†you and the article essentially shout the same thing. just that your commentary is more basic and his starts from where you end.¬†
Ideologies and big talk is for politicians and commentators. What common men really want is simple solutions. And that can start anywhere. If there's any doubt, look westward to the entire arab kingdom and then think, where are we heading?
22 FEB 2011 | 7:05 PM NST
#20, Mahadev, Lal Salam
I am writing to apologize for my counter-revolutionary and regressive note in which I thought it would be fit to question the great party's actions in relation to its consequence's.
Particularly the ones that actually occurred in contrast with those that the great party would like us to believe occurred.
For instance, I completely forgot the directive of denial which sought to explain how truth that does not serve the objectives of the party, (which include the betterment of the proletariat and painful death to bourgeoisie,¬† which, in turn, involves fooling the former and replacing the latter by the party leadership, and mid-level commanders) is not truth but untruth.
I also made the mistake of believing that if you pick-up a gun and aim to shoot an armed soldier, particularly when he is aware of your presence, or he is aware of your intention to harm him, it is a treacherous and, (as comrade Mao said in his volume of obscene Maoist jokes) typically oppressive of the said soldier to shoot back at you, at the revolutionary.
I fully accept that to have offered the truth and by seeking an answer for actions, I am now to be shot.
The blame for which would directly fall on the King, his family, The Rana family, the military leadership, soldiers who for a part of the military, and on each and every Bahun and Newar for their culpability that the party imagines fit to apply to them. In addition, all and sundry must be blamed for the event, which will be denied at a later date to have ever occurred.
In line with the party policy, I deny that any of the party leadership are Bahun, Newar, Middle-class, that they travel in cars (which are air-conditioned), that over 100,000 YCL are living in facilities paid for by the people of this country. Who, mind you, deserve death, which is also to be blamed on the aforementioned criminals and regressives, and that the party itself has made many billions in revenue.
I completely deny that there is no truth in the fact that 15,000 people died during a conflict which was never needed, and as a matter of course, some time in the future, would never have happened, and later still, never actually happened.
All those 15, 000 people died of sudden bout of depression that stuck them exactly at the moment that the party saw convenient.
Hell, since we are at it, I also deny that there are any cats, confirm that all dog's are counter-revolutionary, and the moon is a symbol of imperialism.
I fully accept that internationalism is nationalism and that everything in the world was evil before the day the party came into being.
Anything else comrade Mahadev, because you see, your extraordinary derision is kind of getting on my nerves, which by the way, as you say, are actually electronic circuits.
22 FEB 2011 | 7:56 PM NST
Thank you Axman.
I know that my article is not exactly ground-breaking and that the fact that I have picked up from Prashant's article and not distinguished those line by at least italicizing it is not helpful.
My last two comments are what they are, and I will not be writing anymore.
Here is the gist of my comments.
1. This article is pointless.
The reason why it is pointless is outlined in comments. You just have to separate the lines I have quoted.
2. This article prepares for failures that would emanate from actions that have not yet been taken.
3. That the real issues, the real questions that need to be dealt with and asked are not being, as they say, dealt with and asked.
4. There is a pattern of pointless articles such as these, they all point to the idea that communists are afraid of the real issues.
5. The real issues are
A) To deal with and effectively, clearly and non-ideologically ask honest questions about what happened over the past two decades.
B) Now that we know that we not only cannot, but will not have a Royal institution, decide what exactly do we need to have and exactly why we can't get them.
I hope that is clear, if not, thanks and bye bye.
22 FEB 2011 | 8:05 PM NST
25. N Jha
You are a cad mate, don't you know that fact is fiction. We are in the New State of Denial, learn to live in it.
Mahadev for President, Axman for his sidekick. Prashant will deal with the fallout of their actions, that have not yet occurred.
22 FEB 2011 | 8:21 PM NST
26. who cares
arthur: the most¬†irritating.¬†
i suggest all three of you to get together and begin threesome life style.¬†
i think you three complete one another.
arthur: has guts to drop stone - believing it to be an A-bomb- in total darkness.
jha: likes to give birth to an imaginary pony.
slarti: sell dog meat with mutton or should i say, inject lies in between bitter truth.
arthur: has no idea what he is talking
jha: lacks confidence/shaky¬†
slarti: blinded by over obsession¬†
arthur: ?? may be enjoying reality show
jha: pay back + build a name
slarti: wants to bring back the dead
arthur: get a life
jha: make your own life
slarti: restart your life
22 FEB 2011 | 8:55 PM NST
27. who cares
you are half right,
the main difference between these two are one wants to bring back the dead and another one has been trying to bring in the agent of death.
22 FEB 2011 | 8:57 PM NST
@ # 22 AXMAN ---Thanks to inspiring Slarti.but @ slarti #Yet believe in death. It confused me is it force or natural ,or Punishment. In trim constitution do not allow, would Slarti take pain to clarify more.He deserve thanks for apology and recognize others.The view of great Party depend on vision of Great Leader. with exception of confront they never think for forced death, Further more rana/ pancha or sah all diminished to their shape. But where we are lying only constitution and peace. how long it will sustained if minimum not started simultaneously. Slarti your view very intresting
23 FEB 2011 | 11:41 AM NST
Don't really understand why everyone's bickering over some media article - these so called leaders must be laughing their "socks-off" looking (not reading) these comments because they can't read nor understand the views of the public nor represent them.¬† Stimulates the mind does mean nothing really against practicality!!¬† So why don't we all enjoy the party while it lasts to bring the country down!!¬† It won't take long ......