Here's the link.
http://nepaljapan.com/gallery/DC/New_Folder/july/chalchitra%20mahotsab.htm

For the Royalist toadies politics is matter is faith, so what is the use of ration, logic?

Bhagya Badi ko Tarka ? what a hokum there could be more than this?

Hmm...,

ISO writes:..."as long as the institution remains a constitutional institution"...

Now, you are contradicting here with your own statement.
How are you defining KG's move on Feb 1? Is he still a constitutional
monarchy or active monarchy? Well, if you call hin con.Mo. even
after he is the head of council of ministers, then its either your
ignorance or deliberate lie ... twist of truth.

GeoGuru

Geo Guru,

I meant as long as the institution of monarchy is there, and as long as the constitution of Nepal accepts and recognzies the institution, as a Nepali citizen I will show my respect to the institution, whether some like it or not.

Heard lot and read a lot....

We as NEPALIs are not worth anything.....

Everyone is so opinated....we have opinions for everything.....it seems we are all arm chair revolutionaries....from the comfort of our chairs we are able to change the world....change the views and the options...

I have been visitng Sajha for some time now and man the crap i hear....it's a good time pass..i admit that....but when it comes down to the real thing...everything just fizzes...it's all opinions...hahhahahaa.....ppl. suck out here...

Yes there are some writers...and writers by nature are good players of words...and they can really play around with words....i am really sad for the sorry state of affairs of out here....

Ok ppl. tell me one thing seriously...apart from the imported knowledge from crap sites and the articles.....where do u views and convictions stand?

Here i hear "Opinions" from leftists...from the royalist and the middlist.....and almost 99% are echoing their views from places afar...and yet....(No words)...no one's in the battle front and yet the voices are the most pitched...why?

I know i would and could be hearing lotsa but i am sure no one can justify his/her stand..so ppl. stop being so damn sure of u're convictions!

Hey morons what is your capability to understand what Shiva Dai was thinking when he performed that act, let him enjoy his fruits of an act so much hyped personally for a prejudiced groupism and a typical example of Ma.........

Returned to sajha after a long time.. Anyway..

I have no problem whatsoever if a person (e.g., not just Shiva Shrestha, but also Sachchit Shamsher, Bharat Keshar, Sharad Chandra Shah, Tulsi Giri, Jagat Gauchan... any other ABC perso or even Isolated Freak) says it's their "culture" to bow down to the King, Queen, or Paras the way Shiva is doing here on the picture. As long as they limit such practices to themselves or the followers who are happy to being patronized is fine, but my point here is what the people like Bharat Keshar and Sharad Chandra Shah are upto these days?

They do it by choice, but I find it appalling that some people here in the thread ignored the fact that the very feudal people like Bharat Keshar, metaphorically speaking if you will, have used the same concept to COERCE other Nepali to practice the similar acts in the name of 'culture' in the past (i.e., Rana and Panchayat Periods). And, this is where, I think, the problem lies. There no need to discuss how practicing such things would put the person in high moral (the benefits associated with it), and how anyone who opposed to such feudal practices had to run for their life. Look no further than Taleban?s moral policing as the worst example of such feudal, coercive cultural practices.

As much as anthropologists indulge the cultural relativity on observing certain practices, NO anthropologists that we know or read of, take my words on this, can accept or valorize for that matter, any COERCIVE cultural practice as the standards of certain cultural groups. One is, however, free to argue about the fine line between what defines a coerced practice. Monarchists best bet would be to get Shaubhagya Shah, an un-orthodox anthropologist, on this.

Having said that, if anyone wants to suggest others to read anthropological literature to have so-called ?cultural sensitivity? toward own?s culture (i.e., suggesting Anil to be sensitive to understand his own Nepali, not any other specific ethnic groups culture) s/he has to do much better job than listing some outdated concepts and the book ?patterns of culture? of Ruth Benedict: these are mostly dealt in ANTH101 and some ?history of anthropological theories?. Anthropology has come a long way since the context of World War II, which prompted Ruth to write the book. Interestingly, what many readers do not know is that Ruth was allegedly hired by the US Army to write about complex Japanese cultures, including their toilet training. But that?s besides the point here on this thread.

On a side note, I don?t think one can put the bowing down to the royals in the same level as the bowing down to husband or gurus like Sai Baba. The cultural meanings of their bowing down are entirely different. Here is an example:

" They do it by choice, but I find it appalling that some people here in the thread ignored the fact that the very feudal people like Bharat Keshar, metaphorically speaking if you will, have used the same concept to COERCE other Nepali to practice the similar acts in the name of 'culture' in the past (i.e., Rana and Panchayat Periods). And, this is where, I think, the problem lies. There no need to discuss how practicing such things would put the person in high moral (the benefits associated with it), and how anyone who opposed to such feudal practices had to run for their life. Look no further than Taleban?s moral policing as the worst example of such feudal, coercive cultural practices."

How can you prove that they (bharat keshari et. al) are coercing people to bow low to the royals? If they were coercing, then why it was only Shiva who bowed down to the queen?

" As much as anthropologists indulge the cultural relativity on observing certain practices, NO anthropologists that we know or read of, take my words on this, can accept or valorize for that matter, any COERCIVE cultural practice as the standards of certain cultural groups."

I agree, there is no way to valorize and glorify any coercive acts or practices, but the thing is, Shiva was not coerced, he did what he did out of his free will, out of his respect to the institution of monarchy.. and he decided to display his respect in a manner that suprassed the social and cultural practices and expectations. He was not coerced to do what he did.. so we cannot criticize what Shiva did (i am not saying you criticized his action), nor can we criticize and label the respect which Shiva and others have towards the institution of monarchy which makes them engage in such displays of respect as resulting from years of manipulation. This is where I differ. And when you label people's collective thinking, resulting from their unique cultural, historical and other factors, as "manipulated" and "coerced", I find it quite culturally insensetive. Of course, we can look at it from Etic-Emic perspective: What Anil engaged in was Etic perspective (if it can be called that) without any Emic perspective, which makes it no different than the first generation anthropologists. If Emic perspective was scientifically explained without being "insensetive" then I wouldn't have any problem with the explanation.

" Having said that, if anyone wants to suggest others to read anthropological literature to have so-called ?cultural sensitivity? toward own?s culture (i.e., suggesting Anil to be sensitive to understand his own Nepali, not any other specific ethnic groups culture) s/he has to do much better job than listing some outdated concepts and the book ?patterns of culture? of Ruth Benedict: these are mostly dealt in ANTH101 and some ?history of anthropological theories?. Anthropology has come a long way since the context of World War II, which prompted Ruth to write the book. Interestingly, what many readers do not know is that Ruth was allegedly hired by the US Army to write about complex Japanese cultures, including their toilet training. But that?s besides the point here on this thread. "

If you read my earlier reply to Anil ji carefully, I said, this book "might be a good place to START". Her explanation of the cocnepts of "normality" and abnormality" among the Hopi, Juno, Pueblo etc cultures of America, led to the development of mdoern anthropology/ethnographies. In my opinion (and I am not that well read in Anthro), this book is the foundation on which the mdoern day ethnographies rest. Of course, we can start by reading Sherry Ortner's PhD thesis, Sherpas Through Their Rituals, or Lynn Bennett's Dangerous Wives and Sacred Sistsers, or other famous ethnographies such as Nisa, Number Our Days, The House of the Lims, Idioms of Masculanity and others, but you will have a hard time understanding the concepts and methodology Lynn, Sherry, Margery and others employ to explain the cultures they are analyzing, if you don't know the basics that Ruth explains. Its like studying Machiavelli's the Prince to understand the basis of Realism in IR.

Yes, Beneddict was hired by the OSS to understand the japanese culture. She also wrote a book on Japan , Crysanthamum and the Sword.

a bon rat, bon chat!

Nepe writes:

"आशुको खेदो खन्या होईन, तर ओकेजी कृत मेरो र धेरै साझावासीहरुको अतिप्रिय धारावाहिक 'मन्जु मलाई माफ गर है' प्रति आशुले देखाएको मूर्खतापूर्ण असम्मान र शुन्य सम्वेदनशिलतालाई मैले सहन सकिनँ ।"


Nepe,

I did not know that I was showing मूर्खतापूर्ण असम्मान र शुन्य सम्वेदनशिलता.
What else was I showing, man?

I thought my reply was a response to OK's tendency to reach sweeping conclusions about other people with ZERO verifiable evidence.

Then again, I love the way you purport to read my mind, only to come out WRONG and WRONG again and again.

Keep it up!!

That said, first of all, I liked OK's Manju stories, and have already made some unsolicited suggestions to OK.

Second, on a conceptual level, even if I -- as a mere reader -- did not like it (despite others' liking it), I should feel free to express my dislike here without being labelled as someone showing मूर्खतापूर्ण असम्मान र शुन्य सम्वेदनशिलता . After all, just because many people like something is NO reason to like that something. Else, people like you will turn writings into fossilized idols, NOT entities to have critical dialogues with.

Third, despite OK's and my kich-kich, you noticed how OK appeared to have warmed
up to my reference to his Manju story. You probably saw that as a dangerous sign. That's when you knew that you had to do something to throw cold waters. Hence, you rushed in and had to paint my comments as मूर्खतापूर्ण असम्मान र शुन्य सम्वेदनशिलता so that the distance between OK and me would continue to widen.

Nice trick, Nepe.
But some of us can see through your tactics well enough. :-)

OK, your Manju stories are good.
Keep up the good work.

oohi
ashu

ok, this is a little out of context. but to all the Royalists who think that KG is a better alternative for current Nepal, lets leave the political definitions aside and look into reality for a second. all these people that KG is appointing, someone who cheated the bank with millions of dollars, aka Tulsi Giri, someone who plotted to kill a journalist and was caught red-handed, aka Bhim Prasad Gauchan (read UWB for the report) and etc. what do you expect of people like them? i mean, do you seriously believe that people who had once been penalized by teh government for criminal activities are capable of leading all of us?? someone who can pocket millions of rupees of government property, is caught red-handed and roams freely without being penalized, and refutes the law which pleads him guilty- and you think he can take us out of hte political quagmire we're falling into?

these are the people who represent KG's government. what does it prove? if KG was even thinking 0.1% of getting the country out of hte political mess, we do not have a shortage of smart Nepali people in economics, in education, finance and the shit, to appoint them as ministers.

and for those crying out loud that democratic government was corrupt, these people are saner you think?? i think these people are not only materially corrupt, but they have nothing to offer morally. at least political leaders in democracy were selected and hand-picked by us, what right do these morons have to lead us when we don't want them to? how can educated people like IF and Ashu oversee the ground realities? are we all so numbed by political glamor and definitions and arguments that we fail to see the ground reality? lets forget about democratic or non democratic government for a minute. if i had an option, i wouldn't want democracy given that democracy in nepal is so synonymous to our leaders who are corrupt to their bones. but look how fair minded and moral KG and his chamches are, they hail from all kinds of criminal backgrounds!!

i think the demand of today has to be putting pressure for fair minded, educated and experienced people in the council of ministers and other bodies of government rather than on democracy or monarchy. actually people ARE putting pressure on KG, directly or indirectly, by criticizing his appointment of people who don't deserve the positions. but KG is completely ignoring the challenge. because he doesnt care a penny for his country and people. if he did, he would have proved that he is working towards our interest by getting some work done in a positve way, for example appointing people who are knowledgeable in the field and can contribute. its almst 3 yrs..hell ya! it is a lot of time to at least have shown his interest by showing what kind of people he is appointing for his government!!

finally, if KG has so much guts (since he does seem to have guts to have kept Tulsi Giri's appointment continuous, even after it is all out that he illegally pocketed and ows the country a LOT of money that TG is never gonna pay!), and if KG trusts his own people who he thinks worship him like omnipotent god, let him come out of his lil cocoon and face the damn election! then may be we can think of an alternative to democracy!! geee..

and IF and Ashu need not answer- since their only medication seems to be, look how bad the democrats did!

DC Girl,

Why are you lumping me with IF all the time?

I know IF personally, and I respect his RIGHT to his opinions though he and I often disagree about a lot of things, and those disagreements have NOT affected our
working relationship so far.

FYI, unlike most people writing about democracy from afar and telling us the usual boring platitudes as if they just discovered them at some park in Washington DC,
IF has:

worked in Nepal,
worked for a foreign policy think tank in a questioning manner,
reads a lot,
loves discussing various ideas,
takes risks with his ideas even to the point of being unfairly ridiculed in public forums, has done his best to network with various stripes of people in Nepal and abroad,
and, as far as my experience with him goes, remains open to be persuaded otherwise with EVIDENCE.

And he's only in his 20s -- not someone with life in Nepal already over and who
then goes on to spew venom from afar.

IF is NOT as simple-minded or as close-minded as some of his Sajha critics, with Nepe
acting as their Pied Piper, paint him as.

In fact, I would say that over the last few years, I have learnt much from IF (because
his views are so radically different and because he refuses to settle for easy platitudes and because he brings a totally different perspectives that would not have occurred
to me) than from the chorus of so-called democrats who repeat the usual "king is bad" and then form an echoing chamber for their views, but are actually IMPOTENT when
it comes to putting themselves in harm's way to fight for their convinctions.

One learns a lot when surrounded by people who hold different views.
One does NOT learn anything when one is surrounded by people who repeat one's one stances.

I like IF for a different and a diverse perspective he brings to this PUBLIC sphere.

A true democrat would learn from IF NOT to ridicule monarchy (an easy thing to do!)
but to better understand some of the reasoning that has shaped the decisions that REALLY affect the lives of Nepalis in Nepal today.

oohi
ashu

Thanks ashu dai for your kind words.

DC Girl,

"And IF and Ashu need not answer- since their only medication seems to be, look how bad the democrats did! "

By saying this, aren't you going against what you preach here, i.e., democracy? Isn't democracy all about accepting the fact that diversity exists? Kasto prajatantra yo- "pure clas prajatantra" or "elites prajatantra" or " aprajatantrik prajatantra" ?

Gajjab cha ba!

Now to answer to some of your points:

1. Chakra Bastola and company were plane hijackers.
2. DB Lama, who was elected unopposed from Rasuwa as a NC candidate was thrown in Jail by the Panchayat govt. in curroptin charges.

" he would have proved that he is working towards our interest by getting some work done in a positve way, for example appointing people who are knowledgeable in the field and can contribute. its almst 3 yrs..hell ya! it is a lot of time to at least have shown his interest by showing what kind of people he is appointing for his government!! "

He actually vtried to do that by appointing Deepak Gyawali, Dr. Devkota, Anuradha Koirala and all after Asoj 14, but the political parties wouldn't let them work..

" and if KG trusts his own people who he thinks worship him like omnipotent god, let him come out of his lil cocoon and face the damn election! then may be we can think of an alternative to democracy!! geee.. "

Dherai tatera/rishayera lekhna hundaina because it sounds plain humbug to many of us here.

Happy to see this thread being revived after it was pushed all the way to third page.

Isolated Freak, I was also glad to notice that you finally understand the difference between the "emic" and "etic" perspective and a few other anthropological jargons you tend to use so naively here in this forum; I guess your Ashu Dai's little lecture to you on the ABC of book publishing business (re: Lynn's book getting second edition) did in fact help toned down your usual denial and arrogance. I see Lynn's book, which you once despised openly so much right here in this forum, has now made to your reading list. Now, let's get beyond what you know of anthropology (or some other disciplines for that matter) besides some excerpts posted on the internet and a few introductory level books, so that we can only focus on the topic of this thread.

First, give me your definition of culture, and then I will answer your ?why ?you people? so culturally insensitive? kinda statement. I am asking this because such populism statements can be seductive, but a culturally sensitive reader (or anthropologist) has to look beyond the rhetoric to understand what a person meant to say, and what and what does not constitute a culture. If you say bowing down to the King, Queen or Paras LIKE THE WAY SHIVA did is indeed a common culture of contemporary Nepal, you have a bigger problem to fry: you will need a couple of more lectures like the one Ashu gave you before. I would rather leave it for your anthropology reading.

Second, as one can see, what Shiva did in fact took everyone there by surprise or at least they (e.g., Queen, Lokman S. Karki, Tanka Dhakal) look kinda awkward?but hey that?s my reading, you are free to interpret differently. My reading is that Shiva is just mimicking an emerging fashion of bowing down to the feet that I see in Hindi Musical Contests like Saregam and Antakchcheri. Bowing down in such a way to your own life-long mentor/guru is a gurukul tradition, but to mimic the similar style in a contest (e.g., musical contest, awards) and the setting where power relations do make a difference toward your upward mobility, is nothing more than a cheap strategy; my point is it takes awhile to be considered as a culture. Hence, Shiva?s bowing down should be considered in a slightly different realm than KHOKRO RASTRABAADI (raaajabaadi) tradition that the MAKARTANTRA raaj is trying to promote.

Now that the absolute monarchy and cronies like Sharad Chandra Shah are back in the business, I would not be surprised if Sharad Chandra?s notorious ?HANUMAN STYLE? bowing (boy those were their days and now d?j? vu all over again) is being set a standard like the way he instructed within the National Sports Council. So, I am looking forward to days when you and even in-between people like Ashutosh start mimicking the same HANUMAN style bowing. Good luck! Just don?t coerce other Nepali in the name of ?culture.?

IF, ghumdai firdai rumjhatar bhane jastai, here you spit the venom again:

"1. Chakra Bastola and company were plane hijackers.
2. DB Lama, who was elected unopposed from Rasuwa as a NC candidate was thrown in Jail by the Panchayat govt. in curroptin charges. "

your justification once and again is- oh, KG and his people are corrupt? look how corrupt your democratic leaders were. yes, leaders were corrupt, i agree. but we needed a better replacement, right? and that is what most royalists stand on- democratic leaders were of no use, so lets give KG a chance. and by force or without, KG is taking his chance. lo and behold, what are we getting? Tulsi Giri and his likes with branded immoralism- worse than what Machiavelli would have envisaged or committed.

well i said IF and Ashu might not answer this exactly for reasons above. we can argue for ever and get into loops, but give me one more reason why you think KG should rule- besides the hackneyed, 'lets give him a chance'. if you can, i will definitely second you. justifying how bad the democratic government was isnt the solution. Kg is taking the chance by the way, whether or not we shut up.

if KG were coming up with better options and had shown some 'signs' of progress, on anything, lets talk about the conflict, or economic issues, or anything- for these 2/3 yrs, people would have calmed down a lil may be. instead, we, the people are cornered away by physical and intellectual mutilations, and are appointed (not our pick) people to lead us who are no less corrupt than the political leaders. so where is the solution? where are we going with this? and what do you mean the political parties didnt let them work, Anuradha koirala and the likes..i don't know when and how political parties rallied against these ppl demanding their resignations. enlighten me here.

"and if KG trusts his own people who he thinks worship him like omnipotent god, let him come out of his lil cocoon and face the damn election! then may be we can think of an alternative to democracy!!"

tattiye pani, selayera bhane pani, this is a very fair process of letting someone rule over us, or rule for us, whatever. here KG is not asked to quit, he has a chance to win if HIS people trust him. and KG will not have angry people like me dishing his deeds, he can execute his plan for 'peace and development' if he gets there.

sorry for mixing up Ashu in here, may be i did go a little overboard, but the jist of your justifications for KG's rule is somewhat similar. and Ashu, i don't see your point in explaining IF's affiliations and his nack for politics. may be you're directing this to someone else, because i don't have anything to do with where he worked and how old he is. if he brings one strong argument, with regard to this issue, i will take it, even if he were under 18. and no, democrats don't brew up ideas in DC parks..like you and IF, we have also studied, have worked, and have a grasp of contemporary issues on Nepal and elsewhere. about whether or not IF is simple minded or close minded, i don't have much to say, but everybody has his/her own biases on certain issues, and IF is no exception.

well, of course, we learn more when we are surrounded with different perspectives, that is why i am here to hear a concrete argument (and not get into mundane discussions on topics like Shiva shrestha le falano ko khutta kina dhogyo- dhogyo ta dhogyo, you can't undo it now, and it is HIS personal choice- i disagree with ppl who make a fuss out of this, be it democrats).

my emphasis here is, if you espouse KG's government so much, why aren't you doing anything to stop him from appointing people like TG? or are you happy with it? or you think the likes of Bhim Gauchan can do something (ya, receive his monthly salary) to get us out of this quagmire? hah! see the irony? because you can't do anything about it.

Ashu, you keep telling people in this forum its easy to sit our ass here and discuss- if i'm not mistaken, we're all sitting our asses here and talking, including IF. unless you've gone out and made significant changes, we're all JUST talking. so from now on, stop accusing people of where they live and how detached they are from political life in Nepal-Ashu, you do live in Nepal, but you fall into the 'elite' group which is quite detached from the everyday socio-economic problems of hte majority poor class in rural Nepal, so all you are doing is, like other posters here, sitting here and TALKING.

nack for politics= knack for politics

Ashu wrote:
>Nepe,

>I did not know that I was showing मूर्खतापूर्ण असम्मान
>र शुन्य सम्वेदनशिलता.
>What else was I showing, man?

Nothing more. But if you ask for now, then I will say- inability to apologize gracefully. And some funny way of getting around it.

Nepe,

Let me get this straight.

You are suggesting that I have to apologize to OK for merely saying "Maybe Manju will forgive you after all"?

In other words, you want me to apologize to OK for making a passing reference to a FICTIONAL character from another thread . . . because by doing so, I showed, मूर्खतापूर्ण असम्मानर शुन्य सम्वेदनशिलता.

Strong words, Nepe.
Strong words.

And you are playing well to your gallery.

******

How about this alternative explantion?

A: OK shares your political ideology.

B: And you'd go to any length to defend those who share your political ideology REGARDLESS of how wrong they are about many other things.

C: There is no chance for you to want to have OK to apologize to me for making sweeping and false generalisations about me (see various threads), would you? Having OK do that would take way the bite from your fire-breathing tactics, wouldn't it?

D: So you fall back on me, asking me to apologize instead for a reason even you must realise is ridiculous.

****

Finally, my attitude is this: OK deserves to be treated as an EQUAL in this forum, where his ideas -- like anyone else's ideas and writings -- can be challenged, praised, attacked, revised and referenced by anyone else anytime.

OK, like anyone else, is NOT to be worshipped and given uncritical 'wah-wah'.
Doing so would be a disservice to him as a fellow Sajhaite.

oohi
ashu

" Isolated Freak, I was also glad to notice that you finally understand the difference between the "emic" and "etic" perspective and a few other anthropological jargons you tend to use so naively here in this forum; I guess your Ashu Dai's little lecture to you on the ABC of book publishing business (re: Lynn's book getting second edition) did in fact help toned down your usual denial and arrogance. I see Lynn's book, which you once despised openly so much right here in this forum, has now made to your reading list. Now, let's get beyond what you know of anthropology (or some other disciplines for that matter) besides some excerpts posted on the internet and a few introductory level books, so that we can only focus on the topic of this thread. "

Emodus, I am glad you are glad. Regarding Lynn's book, I read it when I was in college in 1999, 3 years before it was relaunched by the Mandala Book Point. I was present at the book launching in Kathmandu, and even asked Lynn herself some questions regarding her intepretations. I was not convinced in 1999 or in 2002, or even today with her interpretation of Nepali women dancing during the Teej and Rishi Panchami. I asked her what made her come to the conclusion that women are showing their oppressed sexuality by dancing during the Teej festival and by wearing red. And she didn't give me a satisfactory answer. There are other interpretations too, which I didn't agree with, and thought (which i still think today) these interpretations can be challenged. Lynn's book was written in the 70s, and based on the existing social-pshycological theories then, it must have seemed right, but the social sciences have come a long way, and in the light of new development in theories and disciplines, her work can be challenged. It cannot be hold as "brahma-bakya" when talking about Nepali bahun-Chetri society. However, in Nepal we don't have the tradition of critically reviewing the books, because we don't want to make the authors angry. I do have an immense respect for Lynn because she worked in Nepal in the 70s, sounded nice, polite and didn't mind me going to her book launching (along with a friend) uninvited, and tried her best to answer my questions. But that does not mean, as a Nepali, and as a student who studied anthropology for 2 years in college cannot question her, or voice his dissatisfaction at some of her interpretation. So I started a thread called "critical review" of Lynn's book, not criticism of Lynn and her work, and her Columbia education.


" First, give me your definition of culture, and then I will answer your ?why ?you people? so culturally insensitive? kinda statement. I am asking this because such populism statements can be seductive, but a culturally sensitive reader (or anthropologist) has to look beyond the rhetoric to understand what a person meant to say, and what and what does not constitute a culture. If you say bowing down to the King, Queen or Paras LIKE THE WAY SHIVA did is indeed a common culture of contemporary Nepal, you have a bigger problem to fry: you will need a couple of more lectures like the one Ashu gave you before. I would rather leave it for your anthropology reading. "

Look we can disucss further on culture and other stuff, if you do not assume a condascending tone. Look either you didn't understand what I wrote or you are deliberately trying to misread me. I did not say bowing low to the royals constitutes Nepali culture. What i said was, the respect the majority of Nepal's population has towards the institution makes them engage in such displays of respect, which is neither socially expected nor required. Its the RESPECT that's a part of our culture, and this is not a result of years of manipulation as some implied and this feeling of respect makes some people bow down. Just because their RESPECT towards the institution makes them engage in scuh acts, does not mean they are coerced or they are doing it for material gain or being manipulated. This is what I have been saying all along.

And I think I already had my enough dose of anthropology in school. however, if you are willing to be my mentor or Guru, you are more than welcome to. Haven't read new ethnographies in years, so reccomend me books and articles that you think are useful in understanding culture and society.

" Second, as one can see, what Shiva did in fact took everyone there by surprise or at least they (e.g., Queen, Lokman S. Karki, Tanka Dhakal) look kinda awkward?but hey that?s my reading, you are free to interpret differently. My reading is that Shiva is just mimicking an emerging fashion of bowing down to the feet that I see in Hindi Musical Contests like Saregam and Antakchcheri. Bowing down in such a way to your own life-long mentor/guru is a gurukul tradition, but to mimic the similar style in a contest (e.g., musical contest, awards) and the setting where power relations do make a difference toward your upward mobility, is nothing more than a cheap strategy; my point is it takes awhile to be considered as a culture. Hence, Shiva?s bowing down should be considered in a slightly different realm than KHOKRO RASTRABAADI (raaajabaadi) tradition that the MAKARTANTRA raaj is trying to promote. "

That's your interpretation and offers one explanation to what Shiva did. Yes, everyone present there seemed to be in an awkward position becuase that's not what they expected or what the protocol required. However, Shiva went further and bowed down. As I said earlier, nobody can get into Shiva's head and know why he did what he did, but I tend to see it as his display of respect towards the institution, than trying to gain something or mimicking from popular Hindi tele-shows. That's my interpretation. You have your's. And unless Shiva himself comes here and clarifies, we both are free to hold our opinions to be true.

" Now that the absolute monarchy and cronies like Sharad Chandra Shah are back in the business, I would not be surprised if Sharad Chandra?s notorious ?HANUMAN STYLE? bowing (boy those were their days and now d?j? vu all over again) is being set a standard like the way he instructed within the National Sports Council. So, I am looking forward to days when you and even in-between people like Ashutosh start mimicking the same HANUMAN style bowing. Good luck! Just don?t coerce other Nepali in the name of ?culture.? "

Look I don't know about Sharda Chandra Shah and his Hanuman style bowing. And like I said earlier, I am free to show my resepct to the institution in any manner I deem fit. I can bow down or kowtow to the King, and that's my business. I am not forcing you or coercing you or anybody else for that matter to do what I do. You are free to show your respect (or disrespect) any way you want. That's your individual right.

Showing respect to the institution of monarchy is a part of nepali culture/ritual. However, one can show the respect in a way that one deems fit. This is my argument. You are free to agree with it or disagree with it.

"but we needed a better replacement, right? and that is what most royalists stand on- democratic leaders were of no use, so lets give KG a chance. and by force or without, KG is taking his chance. lo and behold, what are we getting? Tulsi Giri and his likes with branded immoralism- worse than what Machiavelli would have envisaged or committed. "

But who is there to lead the nation? There's a leadership vaccum and the King is trying to fill that. You are in DC, your other democratic friends (whom one can assume to be better than the leaders back in Nepal) are in faraway places. So what the King is supposed to do? He has to trust the people that he thinks he can work with.

" if KG were coming up with better options and had shown some 'signs' of progress, on anything, lets talk about the conflict, or economic issues, or anything- for these 2/3 yrs, people would have calmed down a lil may be. instead, we, the people are cornered away by physical and intellectual mutilations, and are appointed (not our pick) people to lead us who are no less corrupt than the political leaders. so where is the solution? where are we going with this? and what do you mean the political parties didnt let them work, Anuradha koirala and the likes..i don't know when and how political parties rallied against these ppl demanding their resignations. enlighten me here. "

Look the political parties screwed their biggest cance to gain cedibility when they opposed the King's cabinet formed in Asoj. If they had realized that the King has taken over and there's no way to reverse the action, and if had they supported the King's cabinet in its effort to resolve the Maoist crisis and hold elections, we probbaly would be seeing a totally different political scenario in Nepal. The political parties themslves let their golden oppurtunity pass by. They could have worked with the King to achieve their political interests, however they chose to do otherwise. They could have stayed out of the governmnet, but could have supported the cabinet/team the King had assembled to resolve the political impasse. They did not. Instead they went rallying around demanding the King to reverse the action by certain date/time and assumed a non-cooperative stance. This was where the political parties failed. And the worst thing is, they haven't realized it yet. What the King wanted was a coalition of constitutional parties to oppose the Maoists and force them (the Maoists) to come to negotiations. And I still believe that's what he wants. I don't think the King wants to sideline the political parties, its the political parties who are sidelining the King by not clarifying their position vis-a-vis the Maoists, and are pushing the nation towrads further turmoil. The best bet for the parties now is to form a coalition to provide "constructive" feedback and work with the King's governmnet to force the Maoists to come to negotiations, and to hold general elections. They more they oppose the King and talk of joining hands with the maoists, the more the nation is going to suffer.

la agree gare garnus, disagree gare garnus, mero bhanen yetti ho...!