Nepal’s National Statistics Office finally published details about Nepal’s languages, religion and ethnicity last week. It had previously released the national report of the 12th National Population and Housing Census in March without including data on these three social demographic parameters. The new data increases the total number of ethnic communities to 142, the total mother tongues spoken to 124, and major religions number 10, similar to the 2011 census. There are now 17 more ethnic groups compared to data from the 2011 census. Twelve foreign languages from the previous census were removed, and 13 new languages added to the list of mother tongues spoken in Nepal. Only the number of major religions remains unchanged.&nbsp; The first modern census in 1952 recorded languages and religions for the first time in Nepal. A breakdown of the country’s ethnic communities was first recorded only in the 1991 census. Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/whose-country-is-it-anyway">Whose country is it anyway?</a>, Editorial Interestingly, the total number of ethnic communities in Nepal has increased in each consecutive census since 1991 because of better record-keeping and greater awareness. Every census since has been doing a better job showing Nepal’s ethnic heterogeneity. But while the latest national census represents the ethnic and linguistic diversity of Nepalis, this diversity is reflected nowhere in the corridors of power. <div class="embed-block"><iframe src='https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/14059550/embed' title='Interactive or visual content' class='flourish-embed-iframe' frameborder='0' scrolling='no' style='width:100%;height:600px;' sandbox='allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation'></iframe></div> Nepal’s founding king, Prithvi Narayan Shah, described the country he had unified as “a garden of many ethnicities and castes” and leaders since then have extolled Nepal’s “unity in diversity”. But political and socio-cultural representation and wealth is heavily skewed in favour of men from dominant caste groups.&nbsp; The representation of minority communities in Nepal’s legislature, government and civil service is only determined by a constitutionally mandated reservation system that has a quota system for women, indigenous people and Dalits. Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/counting-on-nepal">Counting on Nepal</a>, Editorial While affirmative action has meant better representation than before of marginalised groups, men in the highest rungs of power seem to believe that women and minorities are not qualified for direct elections or senior civil service positions. Indeed, indigenous and Dalit representation in politics, society and in the workforce (including the media) is tokenism at best. This was reflected in local and federal elections last year when major parties snubbed women and minorities in direct elections, and most were elected to fill quotas under the proportional representation system.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20230608110656_35bdb721198f40eb2a56149282cb5459cf69e22199551aa70d010e4a684bd863.jpg" data-media-id="editor_3" data-image-id="20230608110656_35bdb721198f40eb2a56149282cb5459cf69e22199551aa70d010e4a684bd863" data-rendition-name="original" width="1051" height="814" loading="lazy" alt="Ethnicity bar"> </figure>  Marginalised communities continue to be excluded and persecuted, are victims of political and social violence while the men in power scramble to sweep such injustices under the rug. An emblematic case is the killing of Nabaraj BK and five of his friends in Rukum West three years ago because villagers discovered that he was going to elope with a ‘higher’ caste girl. Three years later, the perpetrators are still at large because of political protection. Meanwhile, even as new languages are identified, Nepali consistently has the largest number of speakers by virtue of being the official language. There has been a small growth in the percentage speaking Nepal Bhasa, but it is a small increase. In fact, Nepal is at risk of completely losing some of its indigenous languages, with as many as 23 of them having less than 1,000 speakers in 2021.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2023061012064_94b76860124c005c8ba010b034f3a54332357faa90c9017d0e2df5e740dda3b8.png" data-media-id="editor_4" data-image-id="2023061012064_94b76860124c005c8ba010b034f3a54332357faa90c9017d0e2df5e740dda3b8" data-rendition-name="original" width="1378" height="1256" loading="lazy" alt="Languages in Nepal"> <figcaption>Languages in Nepal</figcaption> </figure>  Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/institutionalised-inequality">Institutionalised inequality</a>, Editorial More than 81% of respondents in the census said they were Hindu, followed by Buddhists, Muslims, Kirat and Christians. Despite deep anxiety among Hindu-right groups in Nepal and India about proselytisation, the proportion of Christians has increased only slightly to 1.76% and Muslims to 3.1%.&nbsp; Parties lobbying against secularism have long speculated that there is a conspiracy to undercount the proportion of Christians in Nepal to lessen the chances of a national backlash. There is also a possibility that Christians tell enumerators they are Hindu just to be safe.&nbsp; Whatever the case, there are other hints of data discrepancy. In 2011, more than 61,000 people did not state their religion, but the 2021 census shows that not a single person refused to divulge their religion. And there were zero cases of respondents choosing ‘Other’ as an option for religion. This is highly improbable. The census office had earlier said it was not possible to have a breakdown of religion and ethnicity because of ‘confusion’ among respondents who said they were from unlisted ethnicities or faiths. There was also speculation that the bureau was not issuing data deemed to be sensitive. So, the question arises: why was it suddenly possible to make the data public? Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/political-patriarchy">Political patriarchy</a>, Editorial Shristi Karki

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1084x550

Census or consensus?

<img width="1360" height="680" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221114091156/6372037e9c7e80680e0b2811jpeg.jpg" alt=""/>Ours is the Age of Angst. It is an era of anger, apprehension, fear, confusion, division, polarization, and an increasing distrust in and disdain for institutions. Thanks to the proliferation of digital technologies, we are both spectators and gladiators. We can switch roles in the blink of an eye, whizzing back and forth between the audience seats and the dry, dusty arena. Social media platforms have become the Colosseum of the twenty-first century. In these digital arenas – small and large, local and international – <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/the-social-media-contagion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">a new fight is staged almost every day</a>, and though the contenders tend to change often, the language of loathing and mistrust remains constant. But whereas the ancient Romans were entertained by their brutal and bloody spectacles, we moderns are only made angrier by ours.The etymology of the word is important. Anger comes from the Old Norse angr, which connotes distress, affliction, sorrow, agony, hurt. Anger is directly related to pain of a kind that so many of us, East and West, now feel, though we might not express it in those terms. Underlying the shouting matches and pervasive silences, driving them, is the simple truth that we are hurting.Not that long ago, the world felt like a different place. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, optimism abounded. But it was an optimism that verged dangerously on complacency. History, many commentators maintained, could move in only one direction: linear, forward. Its arc would inevitably bend toward justice. Back then, we easily used expressions such as ‘being on the right side of history’. The underlying assumption was that tomorrow would be more democratic, inclusive, egalitarian, and interconnected than yesterday.The biggest optimists of those days were the techno-visionaries. Their buoyancy knew no bounds. Whenever they left Silicon Valley and took part in international conferences or cultural and literary festivals, they confidently assured us that information had become pure gold. It was all we needed to build a better future. With more information, and then even more, people would surely make the right political choices. The speedy spread of information would topple dictatorships and bring about much-needed social change.Sound and furyThe <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/opinion/nepals-e-conomy-rapidly-goes-digital/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">growth of digital platforms</a> would carry democratic ideals to the farthest corners of the world. Even those countries that were lagging behind in democratisation would sooner or later have to join ‘the civilised world’. At the beginning of the Arab Spring, this mood was so prevalent that many took it for granted that Facebook was having a positive impact on the world. Pundits and experts <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/06/evaluating-irans-twitter-revolution/58337/">hailed</a> the post-election uprising in Iran in 2009 as the ‘Twitter Revolution’.Around the same time, a young Egyptian couple <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Egypt_Christiane_Amanpour/egyptian-names-baby-facebook-sites-role-revolution/story?id=12964978">named</a> their newborn daughter ‘Facebook’. A few months later, a family in Israel <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-13417930">named</a> their third child ‘Like’. I often think about those kids, Facebook in Egypt and Like in Israel. What kind of a world have we given them?The spread of information of course neither guaranteed nor generated democracy. Today, there is far too much information (let alone random misinformation and malicious, systemic disinformation), but very little knowledge and even less wisdom. They are completely different things, and in focusing solely on information, we have neglected knowledge and abandoned wisdom.Information is about speed, discrete snippets of data, numbers. Between ‘numbers’ and ‘numbness’ there is more than rhythm and rhyme. When we are bombarded with so much information, we do not process what we read or what we hear. A constant overload of information gives us the illusion that we have knowledge about anything and almost everything.Little by little, we have forgotten how to say, ‘I don’t know.’ If we are unfamiliar with an issue, we can easily Google it, and in the next five to ten minutes we will be able to come up with something to say about it. And if we take a few more minutes, we can even convince ourselves that we are experts – even though those snippets of information do not amount to knowledge.How can we decrease the amount of information we deal with on a daily basis, but increase our knowledge and ultimately our wisdom? For knowledge, we need to slow down and beware of dogmas, not least our own. We need to get up and leave the audience seats and the dry, dusty arenas. Knowledge requires books, reading across disciplines, slow journalism, in-depth analyses, nuanced conversations, avoiding hasty judgment. And wisdom requires us to unite the mind and the heart. For wisdom, we need not only purely rational analysis but also emotional intelligence, empathy, a sense of humility, and compassion.We need to hear each other’s stories and pay attention to the silences.The Roots of WisdomAt the beginning of the pandemic, when Londoners were allowed to go out for walks in public parks, I started noticing signs placed here and there. ‘When all this is over, how do you want the world to be different?’ they asked. Beneath the question, passersby had scribbled their own answers, using their own pens. Someone had written, ‘When all this is over, I want to live in a world where I can be heard.’It is a sad irony that in an age when we were all supposed to have a voice thanks to digital platforms and the inevitable, unstoppable spread of liberal democracy, almost the opposite has happened. Millions of people around the world feel voiceless. Amid the deafening cacophony, they know that they are not being heard.Our daily lives are replete with negative emotions that we do not know how to process or where to channel. But we do not like to talk about it, certainly not in the United Kingdom, my adopted land, where expressing emotion is considered a sign of weakness. And certainly not in my homeland, Turkey, where many absurdly presuppose that women are emotional beings whereas men are more rational.Human beings of all ages and genders are emotional creatures. When we connect with each other, we do so through stories and emotions. What we believe in or fight for depends on stories and emotions. And what we remember and take with us even when we are uprooted and deracinated, we remember through stories and emotions.I have always regarded every emotion as a source of raw energy, like a mineral that can be processed into various forms, a metal that can be sculpted into different shapes. Rather than trying to suppress our emotions, it seems healthier, and perhaps a little wiser, to recognize their existence, talk about them openly, and create inclusive spaces where we can understand and explore how our mental health is strained.It is okay not to be okay in an age such as ours. It is okay to feel worried or displeased in the face of all that is happening. The crucial question is not whether we are angry or distressed, fearful or frustrated, but what we will do with these feelings. Can we turn raw emotions into something positive and constructive, both for ourselves as individuals and for our communities and societies?Liquid TimesAt the end of the day, if there is one thing that is far more destructive than any emotion, it is the lack of all emotion: Numbness. Indifference. Lethargy of the spirit. The moment we become so desensitized to the deluge of information that we barely register what is happening in another part of the world, or just next door, is the moment we are completely severed and disconnected from each other. And that is a far more dangerous threshold. We are at a crossroads. The decisions that we make today will have long-lasting consequences for the planet, for our societies, and for our individual and collective mental health. This might be the Age of Angst, but from here to the Age of Apathy is but a short and fateful step. We need to make sure we do not take it.Many years ago, when I lived and wrote my novels in Istanbul, I was interviewed by an American scholar who was in the city researching ‘Women Writers in the Middle East’. We had a nice conversation, and in passing, with a soft, amiable smile, she told me that it was understandable for me to be a feminist: I was Turkish, and I was in Turkey. The way she spoke made it clear that she saw no reason why she should be a feminist: she was from America, a country where women’s rights had already been achieved, and where democracy was solid, stable, and safe.Yet ever since 2016, this dualistic view of the world has become incoherent. After Brexit, the election of Donald Trump, the rise of <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/the-message-is-the-medium/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">populist nationalism </a> across Europe and beyond, the erosion of liberal democracy, and the emergence of ‘illiberal democracies’ flirting with authoritarianism, this deep-rooted duality has lost its purchase in the minds of even its staunchest advocates.Now we know that there is no such thing as ‘solid’ countries. We are all living through liquid times, to use a term <a href="https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Liquid+Modernity-p-9780745624099">coined</a> by the late sociologist and political thinker Zygmunt Bauman. History does not necessarily advance in a linear way. If these are liquid times, it feels like the current has accelerated with the pandemic, the climate crisis, and the widening and deepening of inequalities – social, digital, racial, gender, class-based.This is a moment when we need global sisterhood, global solidarity. We need feminism everywhere, just as we need to care about human rights and freedom of speech and minority rights everywhere. Whether we are dentists, students, engineers, or poets, whatever we do and wherever we live, we do not have the luxury of apathy. From the possibility of another pandemic to <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/climate-change-is-a-disaster-in-the-nepal-himalaya/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">environmental catastrophe</a>,  from cyber-terrorism to refugee crises, we have massive global challenges ahead, none of which can be solved with the rhetoric of nationalism, isolationism, tribalism, or group narcissism.We must connect with nature and understand our responsibility to our planet. We must connect with each other and strive to become engaged, involved, knowledgeable, and wise citizens. Connecting is our only way forward.While stories bring us together, untold stories and entrenched silences keep us apart. Our voices might not be heard by those in power. But we are not powerless, and we are not voiceless. We are capable of changing the world. © Project SyndicateElif Shafak is one of Turkey’s bestselling writers. Her books include <a href="http://www.elifsafak.com.tr/books/23">The Bastard of Istanbul</a> (Viking, 2006), <a href="http://www.elifsafak.com.tr/books/31">Three Daughters of Eve</a> (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2019), and, most recently, <a href="https://www.elifsafak.com.tr/book/the-island-of-missing-trees">The Island of Missing Trees</a> (Viking, 2021).

1250x600

The Alchemy of Angst

<img width="1440" height="798" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110121148/636ce5269c7e80680e0966edjpeg.jpg" alt=""/>The role of women in Nepal’s socio-political landscape is still on the margins, despite decades of activism. Nepali Times interviewed MP and outspoken gender rights activist Binda Pandey about the perpetual struggle of Nepali women for recognition and equality. Nepali Times: Have the demands of Nepali women from the past century had any results at all? Binda Pandey: From as early as 1916, Yogmaya Neupane had led movements against caste-based discrimination, sati, child marriage and polygamy while pushing for the recognition of remarried widows. Mangaladevi Singh formed the Nepal Women’s Association in 1947 to present a political front for women’s demands. With the backing of the Nepali Congress (NC) and Nepal Communist Party (NCP), the Association called for equal opportunities for women in education and employment and equal inheritance rights. With the end of Rana rule in 1951 came municipal elections in 1953 and Parliamentary elections in 1959. But women’s representation was severely lacking. Only Sadhana Pradhan and Dwarika Devi Thakurani were elected into municipal and parliamentary offices respectively. The NCP didn’t even bother raising a woman candidate in 1959. Despite their role in the political struggle, women were not involved in policy-making by their political parties. Schools for women were opened and the police started receiving female cadets. But with the exception of sati being outlawed in 1920, none of the demands presented since Yogmaya’s era was addressed.Did the Panchayat system fare any better? The partyless Panchayat system banned all political groups, including women’s organizations after the 1960 coup. Other than outlawing child marriage in 1963, the Panchayat system mostly worked against the interest of women. Therefore women emerged at the forefront of the anti-establishment movement with leaders like Shailaja Acharya who led the first anti-Panchayat demonstrations, declaring that King Mahendra had “no right to celebrate democracy while silencing it”. Female candidates contested the Independent Student Union elections and were at the frontlines of the 1969 Jhapa rebellion. Women took part in the 1979 student protests, rallying against gender-based discrimination. With the creation of the All-Nepal Women’s Association (ANWA) in 1980, female leaders called for implementing equal inheritance rights, equal opportunities in education, and obtaining citizenship via one’s mother. The Namita-Sunita rape-murder became another flashpoint as women took to the streets demanding action against gender-based violence. They received underground support from student groups, trade unions and political parties. These uprisings ultimately led to the 1990 People’s Movement. <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepals-cycles-of-revolution/">Nepal’s cycles of revolution</a>, Nepali TimesAnd were those expectations met afterwards?Women had high expectations after contributing to the success of the 1990 People’s Movement. We called for 50% representation of women in the National Assembly, drafted demands including proposals for citizenship through mother’s name, laws for strict punishment of violence against women and establishment of family courts to oversee such cases. However, the leaders ignored our proposals for change. In fact, what little progress had been made was also reversed. A provision to grant citizenship to naturalised Nepali children with foreign fathers and Nepali mothers was repealed in 1991. There was apathy towards addressing gender-based violence. I went with a delegation to the government to demand justice for two minors who had been sexually assaulted in the capital. We were ignored, and told that women had to defend themselves with chilli sprays and long nails. We realised that women needed to be in power to achieve true emancipation. A constitutional amendment increased the number of women in local level offices from 136 in 1991 to 40,000 in 1999, while 5% of all candidates for the House of Representatives and National Assembly elections were required to be women. How were demands for gender equality affected by the insurgency? The Maoists triggered a change in the perception of women. With female combatants active on both sides, the state realised that women could carry guns, too, and do what men did. Women started forging their own identities independent of men. Local Mothers’ Groups and small savings and credit groups empowered women to be financially independent. Political parties started incorporating women’s issues and a National Women Commission was set up. In a landmark decree, the Supreme Court ordered an amendment of the Muluki Ain to guarantee equal rights over inheritance for all children.But while political bigwigs post-insurgency threw their weight behind women, the outcome did not reflect that. Upon the re-establishment of Parliament in 2006, our demands for citizenship through the mother, equal ownership over family wealth, strict punishment for gender-based violence and one-third representation in Parliament were ignored. Only after we pressured then-MP Bidya Devi Bhandari to file a Public Interest Litigation was one-third participation secured on all levels of the state. After another week of agitation, the Constitutional Draft Commission included four women who pushed for equal ownership of inheritance and equal-work-equal-pay schemes. Provisions were created for access to health, employment and social security. Reproduction and priority over childbirth were declared a woman’s right. Also established were the rights of all children, regardless of gender, to ancestral property, the duty of family members towards each other and ethnicity-based citizenship from either parent. What challenges lie ahead?While democracy has increased women’s representation, policy-making is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few men despite the inclusive structure of the state. Overall, our political leaders have shown that they are good at waging revolutions against the existing system, but not changing it.True equality requires political change to go along with an overhaul of patriarchal values that affect politics. Political leaders are still unable to accept women in power, often undermining their achievements and struggles. The political establishment must realise that the support of women is crucial to their staying power, and a loss of that support could spell doom. Only then will they be spurred to act. Read also: <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/women-leaders-seen-but-not-heard/">Women leaders seen, but not heard</a>, Shristi Karki

“Nepali leaders unable to accept women in power”

mainNavigation

footerNavigation

opinionSubnav

socio-politics

Census or consensus?

The Alchemy of Angst

“Nepali leaders unable to accept women in power”