I have seen soo many individauls in sajha, floating around saying, Nepal isnt yet ready for democracy, Nepa has seen misry in Democracy, etc etc..

I am a not a political man, but i would like you all, who have given your opinions on various threads, answer this question, IF NOT TODAY, WHEN IS NEPAL READY FOR DEMOCRACY ?

and when answring this qustion, i would like you to give me a realistic view not an imaginary. Please do not say, King will give us democracy, that is a insane thought. Would you give your brand new car away just because some begger begged for it? No, ofcourse NO!! Same is the situation, dont expect democracy can be snacted from the King that easily.

Sooo..When do you all think of becoming democratice nation? if you dont consider democracy being one of the greatest political system, please say so and do expalin.

Sorry Bro, Gotta nine inch nail hanging betn my legs

Sarwa pratham sabai lai jadau hai,
I completely support ajsab in what he has said. Democracy ko laagi pahile ta infrastructure chahincha, jun desh ma kaalopatre sadak sabai thau ma pugeko chaina, tyo desh ma aru infrastructure ko k kura garnu. Dherai agadi Kathmandu bata 3 ghanta para ko yeuta gaau ma gaako. There was no electricity, forget bout the electricity there was not even the presence of minimum sanitation requirement ( toilet). This place is right ouside the valley. Now do these guys know anything bout the democracy. I believe they don't care. Jun desh ma janata lai haat mukh jorna garo bhai rakheko cha, jun desh ma bihana khaye pachi beluka k khaane bhanera kamauna jaanu parcha tyo desh ma democracy ko marma tyo garib janata le bujhchan hola ta ? Malai ta kati patak laagcha, hamro desh ka neta haru lai nai thah chaina prajatantra bhaneko k ho ra tesko aauchitya k ho bhanera. Tini haru ko laagi prajatantra bhaneko, tanna ghus khau, moj udau, tall paryo bhaneko, sansad bata sutkeri subidha pani liu (ram ram ram neta haru le sutkeri subidha) tanna motau, ani kasaile pani bolyo bhane tyo prajatantra birodhi kaam huncha. Do any one of us know about any one being imprisoned in corruption charges ? Hami sabai lai thah cha ni kolle kolle ghus khaye bhanera, tara hami le k garyo ta ? did the people do anything accept talkin with budi and chora chori and relatives. England has no constitution but is one of the most democratic country, Y ? Because, people there understand what is democracy and how it works and leaders are aware of their rights and duties. India ma, there were leaders like Neharu, sastri who set up the frames and since then every one has been following them. Nepal ma Indian hoina Biharian democracy aayo. Nepal ka leader haru India ma hoina bihar ma asylem liyera baseka thiye, india ma hoina bihar ma padheka thiye, so obviously complete bihari style.
Bihari democracy and nepali democracy is same.
Pahile janata lai literate banau, educate the people about what is democracy ? let the people feel the true democracy, not gundaraaj. Then they support democratic revolution. Nepal ma democracy ko paryaya ghuskhori baneko cha. Kasari samarthan garne prajatantra lai nepali le. Nepal ma kati jaana le padheka chan wa dekheka chan prajatantra ? How many people are educated ?

The present situation of Nepal is exctly like the pre-revolution period in france, couple hundred years ago.

High fly u telling us bout ur tail, right?Ttypo bhako jasto cha. Ali choto puchhar bhayena ra. Well gadha ko puchhar ta chotai nai huncha kyara. I am sorry i didn't realize that. My bad. Sorry once again.
(wink)

Ready for democracy? Maybe after 20 years. 20-30 years if we embark on economic refoms, 50 years from now, if we don't.

Also confused bro compared the King's move to Hitler's. Now let me attempt to clear that confusion:

1. The King had no options. IT wasn't your multiple choice questions with A/B/C/D/E/None of the above options.

i) Do you agree that Nepal was facing an internal (and to some extent) external security threat? [here's how we define security threat: something that does not allow the state to function properly; it does not let the people to engage in their economic, social and political activities, i.e., it severely affects the economic and political well being of the state; it can affect the terretorial integrity and national unity of the state; it LIMITS THE POLICY OPTIONS OF THE STATE.. these are all I can think of now].

Going by this definition of internal security threat, Nepal was facing an internal security threat and that limited the state's policy options. Every state, every modern state in it's constitution has provisions to deal with this kind of threat. State of Emergency is one of the most commonly/widely practiced measures when dealing with the internal and external security threats. Another extreme measure is imposing martial law.

When a state declares the state of emergency, no matter whether in India or America or Nepal, certain rights of the people are automatically curtailed. The state becomes powerful because it has to be powerful to eliminate the threat(s) it is facing. Even in America, in the aftermath of September 11, there was a media-guideline issued. In the land of Press Freedom, if you look at the data, last year a few journalists were arrested for publishing what the state thought was "sensetive" information. If I am not mistaken, 2 NY Times journalists are still in detention for refusing to identify their sources. There goes your FREEDOM. If a minority's freedom is to be restricted/taken away to ensure the majority's freedom, then the state has to do it, and it will do it unless and until it lifts the state of emergency.

I hope this makes sense.

OK, tell me, if you were teh King what would you have done? Its easier for us to think that he had options and he chose the worst option available. I believe otherwise. He had no other option that declaring teh state of emergency. And as I said above, when the state thinks it is facing security threats, it has to take harsh and extreme measures.

Now imagine you are the King of Nepal.

1. The security sitaution is worsening. The rebel focres have controlled a significant portion of the country.

2. The governmnet in place fails to negotiate with the rebel focres.

3. The political parties do not unite for a national cause. They have their own security, foreign policy and this and that agenda, but they don't have a national agenda.

4. In the name of peaceful protests, public properties and infrastructures are destroyed.

5. Students are deprived of their rights to be able to learn in a terror-free environmnet.

6. The press is irresponsible. It just does not differeniate between sensational and sensetive materials.

7. The people are angry.

8. The governmnet is corrupt.

9. There's a leadership vaccum.

10. Foreign powers have starte dto meddle in the internal politics.

11. The economic growth is less than 2% a year.


Now, if you were faced with this situation, what would you do? You have two options: either you dow aht the majority of the Nepalis are doing or planning on doing, i.e., just go abraod.. or take the executive control to try your best to clean up the mess. The King chose the option 2.

The discussion goes back to fundamental question.

Ganendra acted only because he had military power that was loyal to him( not to the government). If RNA had not been loyal to him he would have had no option but to sit and see no matter how bad the situation would get.

GAdha Houston,

You name it , and I call U!!!! you r right that things r not as plain and simple as we portray it ..but you should be practical...

As IF has posted, the KG's efforts are commendable in the sense that he is trying to build infrastructure...It's very dangeours to learn words and sentences without learning ABCD....


you know what our parties did?? they already started folding out books uttering sentences without educating people about ABCd...party leaders cited ideology-statements by rote from different books to innocent people....forget about the corrupt leaders..even so called honest leaders had nothing to deliver except reading scripts by rote...these activities led nepal to nowhere..aftermath of multi-party democracy, nepali got lost in the translation, and the result>>>>we have maoists!!! again , we r lost in translation coz we have been failing to read royal aspiration,,,

..it's time to bring country back into track..and this is possible only when parties confess their mistakes and support KINg constructively to create a better nepal......

hope to hear comments.........

So, you need education and infrastructure for democracy, huh? What crap!

Tell, what was the level of education and the state of infrastructure in the US in 1776 (or whenever was it that they became independent?)

Education and Infrastructure and Development come THROUGH democracy.

Development (except of the personal kind) is not possible in Nepal without peoplecracy, empowerment of the people.

You guys talk of East Asia. Hah. Well, anyway, I don't want to get into a technical discussion but just state something, and let me know if there is anything wrong with that:
Autocracy/Dictatorial rule is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for development. Nor is it a required precursor. What it does do, is impede and postpone development for the duration of the regime.

In exteremely rare instances have autocracy has brought stability and economic development in very feountries. Chile is one of very rare exceptions where military ruler General Augusto Pinochet ruled Chile with iron fist and brought political stability and economic prosperity however it came a staggering price of 1000s of murders and kidnappins of anti-Pinochet activists.

After his rule ended in 1990, General Augusto Pinochet has been charged with murders and kidnappings.

But next door neighbor Argentina shows how we cannot generalize those exceptions.

haha IF, bro i have educated enough to understand some points. But again it seems like I am still not learning something..


"If a minority's freedom is to be restricted/taken away to ensure the majority's freedom"

That state mostly occurs only on Republican System. Autocratic rule, restricts majority's freedom for their own purpose. You mean, Gyanendra has cencorships on because he is doing good to majority?? BULL! example, plz give me a good one.

OK, tell me, if you were teh King what would you have done?

I know what i wud not do. TAKE POWER IN MY HANDS LIKE HE DID. It does not require P.H.D on Political science nor requires to read thousands of books, it only matter of being logically and morally right.

confused, you are missing the point ebcause you are ignoring the reality. :-)

la yeti bhandai, ma yo baad-bibaad bata out.

uta global affairs tira lagna paryo aaba.