Nepe ji,

Democratic forum kharej garne prastab rakhnus aba. Andolan pani sidhiyo.. SPA le pani koi napayera corruption kanda ma investigate bhairaheko, afnai party ma democratic policy chalna nadine manche lai PM banayo...

Ke lok tanta, ke raj tantra... sabai uhi ho... naya din ko kiran le naya suruwat leula bhanyo ghumi pheri tyenhi chakbui ma phascha...

Yo sati le sarapya des ko kahile unnati hundaina....

Yo rajniti ko chakra biu bata niskina udar man bhayeko desh lai kehi garu bhane neta chahinch, Nepal ma tyasta neta durlav nai paicha, paye pani bichara haru le kahile maunka paundainan...

khoi malai tha changa bata khasya jasto bhairaheko cha.... aru ke bhanu...

What follows is a posting from a republican member in which he shares his views regarding the mandate of Jana-andolan. It has a reference to a different view in the group.

So, it is to show some degree of diversity of opinion in the group.

Enjoy !

Nepe




From: ...
To: "nepal democracy"
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 3:29 PM
Subject: [ND] Re: wecome back, ... jee and ...jee


>
> ...jee and ...-jee,
>
> A warm welcome with red vermillion of victory, although incomplete yet,
> over the most powerful enemy of freedom of Nepali people.
>
> I would like to take this opportunity to share my view regarding what
> exactly is the mandate of Jana-andolan and what our intelligentsia
> should or should not be doing to make that get realized, if it has to.
>
> The way I saw it for 19 days that shook Nepal and particularly at the
> point of utkarsha Nepali people were determined for was DEMOCRATIC
> REPUBLIC. And everybody saw it was one foot away.
>
> How it ended is a different story. The way it ended does not change the
> fact that Jana-andolan's voice was for a democratic republic of Nepal.
>
> Political parties' could not go beyond their old road map to take up
> new popular voice of democratic republic from Jana-andolan. That does
> not change the fact that Jana-andolan's voice was for a democratic
> republic of Nepal.
>
> People celebrated the political decision calling it incomplete but one
> that opens the way. That does not change the fact that Jana-andolan's
> voice was for a democratic republic of Nepal. In fact, it just
> re-iterates that.
>
> Constituent Assembly is a certainty for now. It might re-iterate or
> reject the voice of Jana-andolan. Yet, it does not change the fact that
> Jana-andolan's voice was for a democratic republic of Nepal.
>
> Some of us have started to work out a way to a compromised version of
> "ceremonial monarchy". That does not change the fact that
> Jana-andolan's voice was for a democratic republic of Nepal.
>
> ONLY THING THAT CAN CHANGE THE FACT is a denial and acceptance.
>
> Some of our friends right here in this forum and a lot of other peoples
> in Nepal have already started to dismiss/deny/forget that Jana-andolan
> ever spoke REPUBLIC.
>
> I read one of our friends in one of the messages implying that all that
> Jana-andolan did was- it approved SPA's roadmap. No mention of
> REPUBLIC.
>
> SPA's roadmap was approved by the King. Jana-andolan only took that as
> a partial victory. That's all. It is not true that Jana-andolan took it
> by giving up it's desire for REPUBLIC. It took, if it ever did, as
> still a way towards what it wants.
>
> Some technicalities ended the physical part of Jana-andolan. However,
> the message is alive, valid and obligatory to all who claim to
> represent Nepali people.
>
> So, in a nutshell, Jana-andolan has given a revolutionary mandate for
> republic democracy. Our politicians are obliged to take it and work for
> it.
>
> Constituent Assembly is going to be a re-test of that mandate. So,
> there is a chance for getting a new mandate. However, until then, our
> politicians are obliged to take the mandate of Jana-andolan at least in
> a TACIT form.
>
> The same goes for Nepali intelligentsia and international friends.
>
> So, please refrain from denying that Jana-andolan's revolutionary
> mandate was not for a democratic republic.
>
> Please refrain from engineering Jana-andolan's mandate to suite your
> individual bias and limitation (may be I am doing that myself ;-).
>
> If you do not like what you heard from Jana-andolan, you have a chance
> in Constituent Assembly.
>
> Finally, if anybody feels, as I was alleged before, I am promoting my
> own brand of republicanism and not really the Jana-andolan, feel free
> to reject it.

...

________________

Nepejee, I used to admire the forum. But the following line has changed me;

● Most of the active members are not comfortable with criticisms. So nobody criticizes nobody.

How can members who want to be called "active for democracy" be not comfortable with crticisms? Healthy criticism is the norm of the democratic discussion. By trying to negate this norm, these "active members" have shown that they also have a "autocrat" inside them.

View/Share this post only

Gautam-jee,

That's the way it is. However, I think it is a cultural shortcoming than anything else.

साथी हो,
यदि त्यो फोरममा तपाईंहरु यति धेरै कमजोरी र हास्यपद निरंकुसता देख्नुहुन्छ भने किन त्यसलाई किन त्यति महत्वका साथ यहाँ आलोचना गरिरहनुहुन्छ। कि, तपाईंहरुले आफ्नो ठाउँ नपाएर रुष्ठ हुनुहुन्छ?

जुन थ्रेड हेरेपनि त्यही आलोचना। खुल्ला रुपमा गफ गर्न मन लाग्नेहरुलाई साझा जिन्दावाद छँदैछ नि!
नामै "साझा"; जो पनि आउन सक्ने जान सक्ने। आउनुहोस् चौतारीतिर र छलफल गरौं।

नेपेजी, तपाईं पनि अचम्मको बुज्रुग हुनुहुँदो रहेछ। तपाईंको फोरम यदि बन्द खालको छ भने त्यहाँ भएका छलफल किन साझामा पोष्ट गरिरहनुहुन्छ?के तपाईंहरुको ग्रुपमा छिर्नका लागि अयोग्य ठहरिएका साझाका अभागीहरुलाई कृपा गर्दै हुनुहुन्छ? कि तपाईं कोही ग्रुपबाट चुनिएर आउनुभएको छ (सांसद जस्तै) र आफ्नो ग्रुपलाई केके भैराछ रिपोर्ट दिने उत्तरदायित्व बोक्नु भाछ? कुनै सदस्यले प्राइभेसी हननको नाममा मुद्दा हालिदे के गर्नुहुन्छ हो?

उफ्-- यो के जात्ति डेमोक्रेसी फोरमले पनि साझामा नचाहिंदो महत्व पाइरा' देख्दा मलाई अचम्म लाग्छ।

गालबजी,

साझामा जे पनि छाप्न हुन्छ भनेर छापेको नि । साझामा अरु फोरमको कुरा ल्याम्न हुन्न नै त होईन नि, होईन र ?

अनि त्यो त्यो फोरममा पनि के समझदारी छ भने त्यहाँ पोस्ट भएको कुरा सम्बन्धित पोस्टरको सहमति लिएर बाहिर छाप्न हुन्छ ।

अन्त्यमा, समिक्षात्मक आलोचना भन्दा बधाई सन्देश आधिक्य भा हुनी हुनाले त्यो ठाउँ कहिलेकाहि आफैलाई विरक्त लाग्दो लाग्छ । ढाँटी कुरा के ।

Gautam ji,

You beat me to it!...with all due apologies to you Nepe ji, the "Democratic forum" is an oxymoron for a group of people who don't want criticism - the right to question and oppose is the core of any group/society that is Democratic..what you describe is Dictatorial...perhaps, the fact that Monarchy in Nepal was brought to its knees ought to provide food for thought for those in leadership positions for the group.

Enough offense has been done in the name of Democracy and Democratic ideals..surely, the virtual world of google groups need not be insulted as well! For those of us who believe in "true" Democratic ideals of the right to question, be questioned and accountability, this "Democratic forum" is a mockery of the very word "Democratic" and the noble ideals it represents!

Nepaali-jee,

It goes both ways. You can criticize, but you can not force an individual to listen to and respond to your criticizm, unless that person is responsible to you.

Nepe Ji,

I really don't want to single you out as the only member of the forum to bear the brunt of the vitriol here on Sajha, but, allow me to clarify my point:

I at no time indicated that I wanted to FORCE the members of the forum to accept the democratic process but, for an organization that wants to have a prominent role and assume the mantle of speaking for the "Nepali People" surely, they have a moral obligation to entertain notions/opinions that are different to the ones they hold? They may not necessarily agree with them, but not agreeing with an opinion vs. banning them outright (explicit or tacit) is very different.

A culture of imposed silence which is in place because of acknowledgement that it is likely to ruffle feathers is not a very democratic process - I don't intend to force change but would acknowledging that people have different opinions be the end of the forum?

"Most of the active members are not comfortable with criticisms. So nobody criticizes nobody. "

Funny.

I agree with Gautam on the nature of the democracy within forum.

SAJHA==JINDABAAD.

प्रजातन्त्र साथी,
धेरै नरोऊ।

म पनि निकै सक्रिय भएर आन्दोलन मा असोज १८ को बिरोध गरेको थिएँ, माघ १९ नहुँदै ।
त्यति बेला पनि आन्दोलनमा धेरैको समर्थन थियो, तर अन्त्यमा एमाले का नेता ले 'प्रतिगमन आधा सच्चियो' भनेर कुर्ले । देउवा बाजे फेरि प्र म भए । म त त्यो बेला देखि नै जति रुनु रोएँ ।

धैर्य गर, केहि समय उनि हरु देखि रिस उठेर आउछ, पछि बिस्तारै त्यो घट्दै जान्छ ।

के गर्नु, पतीत भए पनि, आफ्ना भन्ने उनै सात पार्टी त हुन । अरु को छ र हाम्रो कुरा सुनिदिने ।

here's my take on Nepal's recent political developments

From the beginning, I had felt that the reinstatement of parliament was a flawed demand. But the parties demanded less and even the Maoists more or less accepted it. In the Kantipur interview, Prachanda said:

‘सात दलसँग हामीले भनेका छौं- तपाईंहरू संसद् पुनःस्थापना चाहनुहुन्छ, हामी त्यसलाई समर्थन गर्न सक्छौं । सर्त के हो भने निरंकुशता लाद्न चाहने राजाबाट पुनःस्थापना प्रयास नगर्नुहोस्, सर्वोच्च अदालतमा पनि छाया परेको छ त्यता पनि नहेरौं । जनताको बीचमा आएर पुनःस्थापना गर्नोस्, हामी जनमुक्ति सेनालाई तुरुन्तै बदलिदिन तयार छौं ।‘

‘तपाईंहरू संसद् पुनःस्थापना गर्नोस्, समर्थन गर्छौं, वार्तामा बोलाउनोस्, आउँछौं, सेना साझा बनाऔं, आधिकारिक र वैधानिक सरकार त्यो हुन्छ ।‘

- http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnepalinews.php?nid=64875

Maoists should have never accepted with the SPA to reinstate the parliament in the first hand. Their idea of reinstatement without the King’s approval was a better option indeed but they can’t complain the way they are doing now because they had agreed in principle on the SPA’s demand of House revival. Their latest series of statements are symptomatic of their political dishonesty. At least they have declared ceasefire now, but the truce must be strictly implemented. They can’t violate their own ceasefire in the way they did before, if their intentions are honest.

SPA, on the other hand has also shown utter negligence at the very start of the new process. They should have at least informed the Maoists before accepting and welcoming the King’s announcement Monday. While they consulted Maoists and secured the rebels’ support for the movement till Monday, how could they not even inform them before jumping to celebrate their victory? The Maoists have valid reasons to regard this as a betrayal.

The SPA was also immensely pressurized from the international community to make a compromise with the monarchy, while the threat of Maoists take-over was also highly exaggerated. So they took a chance when the King offered to back off. Reportedly, the King’s announcement on Monday was drafted by Subash Nembang, a point to be noted significantly.

King couldn’t have been cowed more by the people. It was a scene to behold when he read the announcement on Monday. He finally realized that the people would demolish the walls of Narayanhiti and called the SPA for his rescue. SPA did a great favour to their nemesis by offering olive branch at a decisive moment. Instead of planning conspiracy against the political parties, Gyanendra should now be grateful for them. The sooner he forgets this generosity of the parties, the quicker the monarchy will end. SPA has proved to be the greatest friend of the dumb wannabe dictator. The royalists should be grateful for the SPA leaders;)

Nepalese people were ready to knock down the monarchy. But they were at least satisfied with the outcome. Otherwise the movement would have continued. So let’s respect the people’s decision right now. People have given perfect lessons to the King, parties and the Maoists through this movement. They are no ignorant lots, as many elitists believe. While the King has been forced to give up his dream of authoritarian rule, the leaders have been taught the consequence of losing trust of the people and also the Maoists strategy has been thoroughly discarded. People can bear the excesses for a while but when time comes, they can defeat all the evils. They will always emerge as the winner in decisive fights. DON’T UNUNDERESTIMATE PEOPLE, NEVER.

Now that something has been achieved, the job of true democrats is to keep watchful eyes at the political parties and the Maoists. Criticisms will be shifted towards those who are at the helm of power. And that will only force the parties not to repeat the mistakes of the past. If they do it again, they will be shown the exit door. Gyanendra’s fate will be decided by the constituent assembly. As for the Maoists, they have also realized their limitations. They have no options than to recognize the people’s quest for peace. Those who behave honestly will survive; those who try to deceive will suffer a shameful defeat in the hand of the Nepalese people.

For a republican like me, it would have been great if Gyanendra had gone right away. This was a missed opportunity : But there is still an easier way out, with chances of less bloodshed, in the form of constituent assembly. People will decide and everybody has to agree the verdict, no matter what. For now, all democrats should focus on pressurizing the political parties not to make any mistake, whatsoever. They must bring an end to the Maoists violence at any cost. The loss of monarchy is very negligible, to the dismay of our royalist friends ;)

NEPE YOU ARE NOTHING BUT FULL OF SHIT !!!
THIS FUKER THINKS ALL THE PEOPLE THAT DIED IN NEPAL IS FOR THEIR FUKING CAUSE(AKA DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC). IN WHICH ONLY FUKIN LIKE MINDED PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE. NOT EVERY NEPALI IS WELCOME TO CRITICIZE OR QUESTION THEIR MOTIVE. HE HE FUK YOU AND YOUR DOOOOUQWAAASSSHI NEPE !!

Nepe is nothing but an oppertunistic SOB. Hijacking of the PEOPLE'S Movement to benefit his own, omiting THE PEOPLE. Tell me how you're any different than any of those Corrupt Politicians(always scheming for themselves only) in Nepal. MR MAPAII !!!!