Share this
Twitter
Myspace
Digg
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Googlize this
Blinklist
Facebook
Wikio
Export PDF
Print
E-mail
The younger generation may be energetic and vibrant but well-informed it certainly is not. The younger generation is not only an integral part of the current highly partisan and divisive political culture in Nepal but it is also responsible for most of the current regular disruption of the economic and social life in Nepal as well as for a large part of the violence plaguing almost most part of the country. By Puran Agrawal
Soon after forming the government, the then Maoist Finance Minster Babu Ram Bhattarai publicly urged the NRNs to come forward and participate in the formation of a new democratic Nepal. Since then similar calls have been made by others in various walks of life. Dibesh Kamacharya’s (DK) Change in Nepal: An NRN’s Perspective published on Nepalnews is the latest.
Kamacharya needs to be both congratulated and thanked for establishing an ultra-modern biotechnology facility in Nepal. One can only wish it a very rapid success. One can also agree with him in his assertion that many of us have “complained about things that are not working or have not worked”, that “for too long we have played this blame game”, that too often “the educated bunch in Nepal is too eager to act as an armchair political expert, but when it comes to actually hitting the pavement and doing something concrete, they are either disengaged or too pompous to be there”.
But the above is a one- sided portrayal of the reality. First, he is too cavalier in dismissing the role an organisation like the NRNA can play in providing information on the specific needs and the specific expertise which can meet those needs, forging links between different interested parties and negotiating with those in powers for certain facilities and assistance. Kamacharya as a businessman is rather in a very fortunate position in the sense that if he can marshal the requisite skill, experience and financial resources, he can make a start in Nepal. But many others cannot do anything worthwhile in Nepal unless they know the right people in the positions of power and influence. Does he really think that it is as easy for a doctor or engineer or any other professional to use his/her skill in Nepal without the blessing of those who control the profession of medicine or engineering, especially when that person is doing a full-time job in the country where he/she lives? Even a retired doctor will face many obstacles if he wanted set up a clinic in Nepal in the current uncertain economic and political environment.
As a retired university lecturer I have tried to find a suitable teaching job but without much success. Firstly, there are many other younger people with similar qualification who are looking for similar jobs. Second, as the recent debate about the Tribhuwan University illustrates, the teaching environment and culture in universities and colleges in Nepal are not very congenial to those who simply want to teach without getting involved in the current internal and external partisan politics.
Kamacharya is too unkind to those who send scholarship money and/or build health posts and clinics. Firstly, scholarships money and health posts and clinics are in great demand in Nepal and can change the life of money for the better. Where would those of us who had the privilege to study abroad be if somebody had not provided the scholarship money? Secondly, he ignores the simple fact that most individuals can only make small-scale contributions and such small-scale contributions can in the long run lead to large-scale progress: It is worth remembering a well-known Chinese saying: A journey of thousand miles begins with one small first step and the famous words of the first man on the moon Neil Armstrong in 1969: One small step for man and a giant leap for mankind.
Kamacharya in his article rightly points out that to bring about significant change in Nepal we need “a community based movement, a movement that highlights patriotism and engages in community in a way that is non-divisive and unifying....we need to present with alternatives to the current political culture of greed and short-sightedness....to define our vision, determine our destiny. It is really a shame to see the political parties espousing big agendas but not anything in practice.” But if those who point out the shortcomings of our political masters are to be branded as armchair political experts, then who would be the agents of political and cultural change in Nepal? In a political and social environment which is extremely divisive, a political culture which is totally dominated by greed and short-sightedness, who will be the catalyst that brings about the necessary change? And without such a change, how can any ordinary Nepali citizen, let alone an NRN, hope to make any contribution? Only businessmen like him ?
He is right in asserting that we Nepalis are “no less smart than anyone else and we are no less capable than any one else” but only partially right in his assertion that “the younger generation in Nepal is energetic, vibrant, well-informed and patriotic.” The younger generation may be energetic and vibrant but well-informed it certainly is not. The younger generation is not only an integral part of the current highly partisan and divisive political culture in Nepal but it is also responsible for most of the current regular disruption of the economic and social life in Nepal as well as for a large part of the violence plaguing almost most part of the country. I grant that there are many young people like Kamacharya who are energetic vibrant, well-educated and well-informed. But sadly they are a minority.
As for patriotism, all one can say is that there is patriotism and patriotism. Who are the real patriots: the Maoists, the Royalists, those who want Madhesh One Pradesh, those who want one-party-people’s democracy or those who want a multi-party democracy, those who want a Presidential form of government or those who prefer a Prime Ministerial one, those who want a unitary constitution or those who demand a federal one, those who want to retain Nepali as the national language and lingua franca or those who want other languages like Hindi, Maithily , Bhojpuri, Limbu etc. given an equal status, those who want closer relation with India or those who would prefer to declare India an enemy state and throw our lot with China?
(Author’s email: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it )
View Comments