CNAS Journal Vol. 39 Social Movement After Liberalism, Marxism...by Prof. BK Mabuhang

Contributions to Nepalese Studies, Vol. 39, (Special Issue 2012), 35-83

Copyright 2012 CNAS/TU

AFTER LIBERALISM, MARXISM – LENINISM AND

MAOISM WHAT NEXT 'ISM' DOES NEPALESE FATE

ADHERE TO?

Balkrishna Mabuhang

Abstract

This article is divided into four major parts. First part highlights the social

diversity and discrepancies along with the efforts to build a monolithic nation

state. The second part tries to review the theoretical discourse on pluralism

and its derivatives Nepal has perceived to be, and experienced on political,

ideological, and social enigmas. Third part reveals the major discrepancy on

Maoist insurgency and popular Second People's Movement. And fourth part

sheds light on Constituent Assembly, state restructuring, and conclusion.

Social Diversity with Discrepancies

Despite its heterogeneity, Nepal is neither a melting pot like America1 nor is

like People's Republic of China which is trying to maintain the homogeneity

with an overwhelming majority (96%) of Han nationality. Rather, we are

closer to the Republic of India in terms of its spatial proximity, social and

cultural accessibility and diversity in languages, Indigenous Nationalities

(INs), and religions. Despite of profound ethno-demographic and linguistic

diversities concentrated in different geographical locations, and watersheds of

multiculturalism, Nepalese Nation State building project could not envisage

them as fundamental premises. However, states that are enriched by different

languages, cultures, religions and traditions are to consider diversities as

opportunity (Majeed et al., 2008). Both neighbouring countries, China and

India, have accommodated their diversities to the fullest extent, no matter

what political system they are practising.

In Nepal, there are 5 Development Regions, 14 zones, 75 districts and

many other local units; none of them is identified with social, cultural,

linguistic and regional sentiments and population not least in nomenclature.

Development, minus socio-cultural values, of the last six decades could not

address the development destitute; nor could the socio-cultural groups who

were marginalized against national integration be protected. The present

structure was introduced in 1972, followed by the one in 1982, during the

autocratic Panchayat regime. The process of subdivison of the country into

36 CNAS Journal, Vol. 39, (Special Issue 2012)

five development regions: Eastern, Central, Western, Mid- Western and Far

Western by creating a series of north-south growth axes or development

corridors to tie-in the economy of Tarai with that of the hills (Gurung,

2005a). However, at the moment, many development experts argue that the

present structure, a five-regional development model can promote

complimentarily between the two topographical economies by facilitating

movement of trade, labour, and capital. The essence of making a vertical unit

which comprises Tarai, hill, and mountain, Bohora (2003) argues it mirrors

the major river basins of Nepal and thus will make development of water

resources easier by minimizing hill versus Tarai conflicts in sharing the

benifit. However, Nepal has the least significant experience in working with

reciprocity in the development sector between mountain, hill and Terai region

in the last 6 decades. In fact, the current regional structure was purely a

conception of the elite and development experts in the ruling hierarchy; it

was not a grass root demand, which is so prime in designing the units and

subunits of the state. The ruler centric performance of the structure showed

that it was designed neither for devolution of political power to the people

nor for addressing any grievances of the marginalized socio-cultural groups

(Sharma, 2007).

Despite their alleged Indian background, administrative terminologies and

place names of the early Lichavi period were mainly in non-Sanskrit

language (cited in Bista, 1991). However, this was subsequently replaced by

Sanskrit in a very tricky way, since Casteism has played a predominant role

in the governance of Nepal. During Panchayat era, Hindu nation state

ideology was imposed in such a way that even the existing names of

mountains, places, rivers, and even individuals' were replaced by those names

that were very alien to local culture, and inhabitants. For example,

'Chamchamlungma' (Limbu languages) is called Mt. Sagarmatha (Sanskrit),

similarly Mt.Phaktanglungma to Mt.Kumbhakarna, Mt. Chen-chenlungma to

Mt. Kanchanjangha and so forth (Chemjong, 1964). One interesting feature

we can visualize in the travelogue of Late Dr. Harka Gurung (2007) on

suffixes to the names of rivers, mostly, in the hill area is that, they end with '-

wa' in the eastern part of Nepal, with '-di' in central part, and with '-gad' in the

mid and far western parts. The words- 'wa' in Limbu language, 'di' in Magar

language, and 'Gad' in Khas language, all stands for water or springs. But the

river names follow from east to west: Mechi, Koshi, Bagmati, Narayani,

Gandaki, Rapti, Bheri, Seti, Karnali, and Mahakali; all sound feminine and

they mostly stand for Hindu deities. In this way, were chosen also the names

of political units after the names of mountains, places and rivers. The central

After Liberalism, Marxism – Leninism and Maoism 37

authority in Kathmandu, decided everything without consulting the local

inhabitants. So, despite their apprehension, the INs could not stand against

the State during the autocratic Panchayat regime. The nomenclature of sub-

states was also indifferent to interests of local inhabitants.

On the other hand, the process of state building resulted in ethnic

stratification (Hagen, 2007). During the State- building process, many ethnic

groups lost land to high-caste Hindus, as was the case for the Limbus of far

eastern Nepal in the nineteenth century (Caplan, 1970). There are numerous

similar cases found in different groups. According to 2001 Census, Chepang,

a small hill IN group accounts for about 50000 population concentrated in the

mid-hill and is divided into 5 districts, followed by Raji with 2399 population

divided into three districts and Thami with population 22,999 divided into

two districts. Even in Tarai, Dhimal has 19,537 population divided into two

districts, and Tachpuria with 13,250 population is divided into two districts.

Similarly, Hayu with 1,821 population is divided into two districts, and

Hyolmo with 570 population in central mountain is also divided into two

districts. The worth noting point in this narration is that the State while

building its sub-states, deliberately overlooked the existence of such

multicultural groups. There was no consultation with INs, ethnic groups,

linguistic and cultural groups and local inhabitants. The State tried to disperse

the multicultural population guided by a unitary set of thinking; also it often

considered social diversity the constraint for developments, and this all

contributed to inhibit the existence of acquired identities.2 There are some

groups of INs, such as Kumal, Bhujel and Kusunda; linguistically called

potentially endangered, endangered and moribund respectively, who are well

neither well off economically, nor represented politically or advanced

educationally.

There are 100 caste/ethnic groups, the National Census 2001 reported.

Out of them, only 18 groups are demographically visible, that is each exceeds

more than 1 percent of the total national population according to 2001

national census and cumulatively they account for more than 81 percent of

the total population. It shows the remaining 88 caste/ethnic groups, though

numerous in numbers, accounts for less than 19 percent population

(Mabuhang, 2009). Of the larger groups, Chetri of hill origin accounts for

15.8 percent of the national population, followed by hill Bahun (12.7 %),

Magar (7.1 %). Tharu (6.8 %), Tamang (5.6 %), Newar (5.6 %), Muslim (4.3

%), Kamai (3.9.0%), Yadav (3.9%). Rai (2.8 %), Gurung (2.4 %), Damai (1.7

%), Limbu (1.6 %), Thakuri (1.6%), Sarki (1.4%), Teli (1.3%), Chamar

(1.2%), and Koiri (1.1%) and so on. There are interesting tendencies Nepali


ethno-demography shows. On the one hand, hill Hindu highest caste group

Bahun accounts for the second largest population, but is not concentrated in

any geographical area, is rather spread across Nepal especially in the hill

region. On the other extreme, the lowest stratum of Hindu, Dalit group that

includes like Bishwokarma, Pariyar, Mijhar, Wadi and Gandharva - does not

concentrate on any particular geographical location. It is also spread across

the country especially in hill region. In contrast, INs are concentrated in

particular geographical points in all regions- mountain, hill, and Tarai. The

former two- Bahun and Dalit- are of the same stock, and are a dichotomy in

the Hindu hierarchical value structure, whereas, the latter groups do not

belong to this cultural structure.

Historical Legacy of Nepal

Most states grew round a nucleus and expanded by conquest and

aggrandizement; the case of Nepal was no different (Gurung, 1986). Until the

mid-18th

century, the territory presently occupied by Nepal was a congeries of

diverse political units. The valley, popularly known as Nepal khaldo was

inhabited by Newar community and was surrounded by the largest group

Tamang in between Budhi Gandaki in the west and Dudhkoshi in the east. From

Dudh Koshi to Arun river, there are more than a dozen of different Kirati

offshoots, historically known as Nau lakh Kirati (nine hundred thousand Kirati)


by number and as Koich and Khambus nomenclature. Beyond Arun river, up to

Tista river, the area was popularly known as Limbuwan However, the Sughauli

treaty signed between Nepal Government and the East India Company in 1816

maintained the Mechi river, the eastern border of Nepal. So, Limbuwan was

divided into two modern nation states, Nepal and India. Political organizations

were loosely formed of tribes with some confederations.

Das Limbuwan (of Ten Limbus chiefdoms) was well established during the

medieval period in far eastern part of present day Nepal (Chemjong, 6th edition

2003). West of Nepal Valley, the Magar inhabited Gandaki basin in the lower

hill with a confederation of Bahra Magarat (Twelve States) mainly along lower

Kaligandaki, followed by the higher region occupied by the Gurung with a

league of Gyu Rong (Nine Chiefs), later supplanted by the Ghale from Manang.

Bahra Magarat disintegrated with the penetration of Khasa Thakuri from the

west and Sen Thakuri from the south. By the 18th century, the Gandaki basin had

at least 24 (chaubisi) petty states led by Thakuri chiefs. Gorkha was the eastern-

most lordship in direct contact with the Nepal valley. The Khasam realm built in

Karnali basin extended to a large area west of the Gandaki, except the northern

belt of snows (Jadan), had a homogenous Khasa population. The Khasa Mallas

of Jumla had an imperial tradition from 11th to 14th century including Kuman,

and Purang in Tibet. Apart from this the southern part comprised about 18

percent of land that was covered up by dense forest known as charkoshe jhadi,

where more than a dozen INs, including different types of subgroups of Tharu,

and other ethnic groups inhabited fighting the endemic Malaria disease.


Let us begin with the well chanted saying of Prithvinaran Shaha, "...if

everyone is alert, this will be a true 'Hindustan' of the four jats (caste), greater

or lesser, with the thirty- six classes (Stiller, 1968)." There are different

versions of it, but it depends on how one perceives the Nepalese society and

interprets it (Mabuhang, 2011). Prior to emergence of Prithivinaran Shah,

Sen Dynasty overran different strata of both inner Tarai and Tarai, stretched

from west to east and that they were competed for the Hindu Pati (Head of

Hindus) was prevalent among them (Stiller, 1968:13). According the

Chronicles of Sen Dynasty, they came from Chittaur of India. Despite King

Prithvi Narayan had subjugated all Sen kindoms of petty states ( Baishi and

Chaubisi), he had a mission to create an Ashali Hindustan (Hindu's true holy

land) with four Vernas- Brahman, Chhetri, Baishya and Sudra and 36 Jats

(denomination of each verna), means either the plurality within the Hindu

custom and cultural realm or beyond it, is not clear. Prime Minister Junga

Bahadur Rana introduced Muliki Ain (Civil Code) in 1854 based on the

casteism to enforce Hindu culture and values through statutory provisions in

the society. King Mahendra scrutinized some direct discrimination, made

sure that some traditional practices and belief system were maintained,

however, the legal instruments' jurisprudence was to be Hindu values and

ethos (Hofer, 1979). The discrepancy persistently exists even today though

Nepal was declared a Secular, Federal and Republic State by the first meeting

of Constituent Assembly. It was not joyful for those who were in status quo,

however, when CA became unable to promulgate the constitution of new

Nepal, there is a debate if the CA decisions would be commendable or not.

An Enigma of Hindu Nation State Building

The early 19th century, European idea was that a nation requires a state to

express its will (Burghart, 1993). Nation states of West Europe attempted to

create culturally homogenous polities, which are harmful to the very idea of

diversity (Oommen, 2008). Nepal was built as a nation of only Hindu cultural

values and ethos against numerous INs, cultural and linguistic groups. So, it

was a nation- state based on a faulty premise. A partyless Panchayat system

which was propounded by King Mahendra lasted for 30 years because it was

taken for granted to express Hindu values: religion, culture, language, and

country code in the name of a system devised based on its own soil and

water. However, as fundamental aspects of Panchayat, which King Mahendra

envisaged, was what the Europeans adopted in the early 19th century that a

nation requires a state, but this served the interests of only the Khas Arya

group. Nepali nation was also designed to serve the interest of an ethnic


group characterized with Hindu King, Hindu religion, language, culture, and

ethos against others. This was a recurrent theme the Rana Period (1846-

1951) enhanced by adopting the country code (Muliki Ain). In contrast,

democracy and freedom of culture, language, and belief in every sector

invoked the ideology of secular state as well. The debate on the issue of

Hindu religious kingdom versus secular state which pertinently occurred in

political discourse prior to and during the drafting of the 1990 constitution

showed that the tradition was still very much alive (Whelpton, 1997).

It is quite common to regard 'Nepali nationalism' as simply a borrowing

from the nineteenth century European ideology. According to Worsely,

'Nationalism is also a form of ethnicity... it is the institutionalization of one

particular ethnic identity by attaching it to the state' (cited in Oommen, 2012).

The Nepali nationalism is also strongly felt by those whose language, culture,

symbols, and heroes are taken care of by the State. They are fully articulated

in education, media, bureaucracy, and culture, costumes, and help create a

self-conscious of nationalism. The curriculum, textbooks, and reading

materials from the primary school up to higher secondary school are found

unfriendly to the pupils of INs (Mabuhang et al., 2005).

Though the Gorkha chiefdom was expanded to a larger nation, it couldn't

retain 'Gorkha' as the name of largely extended nation state. Rather, it

borrowed the name of 'Nepal' from 'Nepal Mandal' that confined Kathmandu

Valley in the core dwelled by Newar INs, and its periphery. The language of

Gorkha was called Gorkha Bhasha (language) until 1909 (cited in Burghart,

1984). The National official News paper is still called Gorkha- Patra (Paper

of Gorkha). But, ironically Gorkha rulers accepted the name Nepali for their

language, instead of retaining Gorkha Bhasha. One plausible reason is that

Nepal was much bigger, civilized, and it had a long history, and all this was

an attraction. Consequently, the country received the name Nepal and the

language was called Nepali and also it was given the state of lingua franca

among the multilingual speakers of Nepal. Another plausible reason could be

that Gorkha showed cruelty while attacking Kathmandu; so, it may have

come as a gesture to heal the pain. Gorkha rulers adopted both the name of

country and the name of the language along with deities that 'Nepal' had

traditionally in Kathmandu valley. When Nepali became the lingua franca, it

was imposed upon as the medium of the school level education across the

country including Kathmandu valley. Not only did the imposition of Nepali

language force the multilingual people to receive education in the second

language, but also it began the process of acculturating them into Hindu


culture and values. One interesting case of conversion through education is

instantiated here.

In Humla district, the people from the villages of Barain, Buwa, Kallasa,

Kuti, Puma, and Nepka have given up their Tibetan culture (Lama, 1993). It

was during the Panchayat reign that, in the name of national integration, King

Mahendra pushed Hinduism deep into the northern belt. Lama shared the

story of his own experience:

"I was one of the boys who went to Mahendra Jana Jagriti Pathsala

(Mahendra Public Awareness School) in my village Todpa. In the year

1965, my teacher Sita Ram Paudyal changed my name from Tshewang

given by the village Lama to Chhakka Bahadur.

Many Tibetan (Tibeto Burman language family) speakers that inhabited

the hills gave up their cultural heritage and took up Hindu way of life.

This process was introduced across the country. For example the real

name of poet and Chancellor of Nepal Academy, Mr. Tilbikram Nembang

was Ojhahang Nembang in Limbu language. Similarly, the real name of

former Ambassador for Japan, Ganesh Hyonzan was Phurba Hyonzan in

Tamang language. The case analysis of the educational profile of Panchthar

district in eastern Nepal, illustrates that there are 371 schools. Out of them,3

schools named after Hindu deities account for 206 (55.53 %), followed by

Hindu literary words (29.9 %), Limbu literary words (11.9 %), Buddhist (2.0

%), and Rai (0.5 %). Meanwhile, Panchthar is one of the core districts of

Limbuwan, where Limbu population inhabits dominantly (40 %), followed

by Rai (14 %), Bahun (12.5 %), Chetri (10.7 %) and so forth. This gives a

glimpse of phenomenon of Hindu nationalism imposed upon the

multicultural people of Nepal.

Even after declaration of the republican state, when the Vice- president of

Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal took an oath in Hindi language with

Dhoti, Kamij costume4, it was seriously raised among the hill Nepali

linguists. Although his mother tongue is Maithili and it is quite common to

speak Maithili in his resident and he served as the Justice in Supreme Court

in Nepali language; how dare he go against Nepali language? His taking oath

in Hindi was dubious. The reason was that the party nominated him as a

candidate of VC, but he raised the issue Hindi to be recognized as the

regional lingua franca in Tarai-Madhes. However, Hindi songs are quite

common during Hindu religious functions and marriage and other functions

and party events both even in rural and city areas among the hill people. One

instance, Madhesi people often take as an example of behaviour of hill people

is how they welcome the elect Indian Idol- 2007, Mr. Prashant Tamang from


Darjeeling district. He was supported by many hill groups. People from

Darjeeling district, Sikkim, Nepal and many other places voted

overwhelmingly for Prashant in the contest.

Responding to a petition against the Vice-president Jha, Supreme Court

ruled against the Vice-president and asked him to take oath in official

language. However Jha rejected the verdict and argued that if all the

languages spoken in Nepal 'are given due respect' he can consider re-taking

oath. The Vice President position became vacant by charging him that he

could not perform any duties in capacity of the Vice President and was not

entitled to special security and privileges. After six month off duty Vice-

president was reactivated from 7 February, 2010, after he took a fresh oath of

office and secrecy in Nepali language,5 and national dress

6- labeda Suruwal,

Coat, and Topi). Taking oath in mother tongue other than Nepali is permitted

after a recent amendment in current Constitution.

This is all the by-product of mono ethnic nationalism tried to establish in

Nepal for the last almost a century long history. It really shows a

manoeuvring the State did to homogenize different cultural groups into

Hindu religion and culture. Also, the state tried to homogenize all languages

into hill Nepali language. However, there is a counter argument also. The

local elites had to learn the ruler's language and at least display Hindu

symbols in order to prove loyal and be treated on an equal footing with

emerging Hindu elites (cited in Gellner, 1997). And it is also a phenomena

well established with regard to Sanskritization where social mobility and

opportunity grasping are necessary to come into the mainstream from the

perspective of periphery (Rex, 1976).

As the counter movement against Hindu Nation State comprises three

major streams namely INs movement, Madhesi movement, and Dalit

movement along with religious minorities are persistently challenging the

mono-ethnic nation state. Of them, INs issue is cropping up with distinct and

different identities than the Hindu nation state since 1991. There are three

words confusingly used in Nepali language: Jat (caste), Jati (Ethnic), and

Janajati (Nation). The third one is popularly used in both neighbouring

countries, like 'Nationalities' in People's Republic of China, and Tribal

Communities in Republic of India. There are other three words: Adibashi

(Indigenous), Aprabashi (Migrant), and Mulbashi (Main inhabitant) are also

become important in Nepal since 1993.7 However, both neighbouring

countries do not accept the word Indigenous in their context. Gurung (1996)

argues that Nationalities (Janajatis) is used now a days instead of Ethnic

(Jati), where as Adibashi (Indigenous) is also used in place of Nationalities.


Adibashi is related to time frame where as Janajati is related to community or

a cultural group. The third one Mulbashi (Main Inhabitant) is also in the

discourse instead of Adibashi (Indigenous). It is argued that all mongoloid

stock of socially, culturally, and racially different groups are indigenous, but

not Janajatis and Adibashis. Because these two words connote the meaning of

nomad or migrant, Chairman of Mongol National Organization (MNO)

argues. However, this is not fit epistemologically, since there is not an issue

of main (mul) and branch (hanga). From Hindu four- fold point of view there

might be mul (four verna), and hanga, (thirty six caste), but when we talk

about the dichotomy of Hindu four-fold system and INs, then this does not

exist. He stresses that Adibashi/ Janajati implies the migrant, nomads, as

Gypsies does in Europe (cited in Hagen, 2005). However, Adibashi/ Janajati

word has been used persistently in the last three decades and the State also

has recognized them as "Adibasi/ Janajati"-

"by removing all sorts of existing economic and social inequalities and to

set up and develop their healthy social life based on justice and morality,

thus consolidating the national integrity, and preserving such peoples'

identities and cultural diversity by developing their language, literatures,

arts, scripts, religions, and cultures and by creating special opportunities

for their education, well-being and employment (NFDIN, 2003)."

However, Nepal Federation of Nationalities (NEFEN) defined Indigenous

Peoples as Nationalities (Janajatis) in 1991:

"...a community with its own mother tongue and traditional culture but not

falling under the traditional four-fold varna of Hindu Varna system

(NEFEN, 1991)."

As an inference, we can summarize that the mono- ethnic nation state

building is ended with the aspiration of people who fought for democracy and

accommodation of diversity in a larger national8 state. In order to synchronise

the issues that were left as legacy of the mono-ethnic nation state, a newly

emerging federal state needs to accommodate them in an innovative way.

Pluralism

John Hick, the most famous philosopher, is advocating a religious pluralist

position. Hick argues that we should view all of the great world religions

(e.g. Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism) as providing equally

efficacious paths to the same Real because all have an altruistic message at

their core (Meeker, 2007:193). He argues that but not all religions are 'true' in

the more common propositional sense because they obviously assert contrary


views. However, Hick argues that being nice to everyone does not require

being right about everything. He contends that people of all religions view

the Real through their own peculiar cultural lenses, which are influenced by

historical precedents, environmental conditions, and so on. The Real is thus

constructed in the image of the particular cultures of the adherents. In Hick's

own words:

'religious exclusivism and religious pluralism are of different logical

kinds, the one being a self-committing affirmation of faith and the other a

philosophical hypothesis'.

Despite the separation of church and state in America, religion and

politics have long influenced each other in ways direct and indirect (Elshtain,

2003). This theme was advanced by Alexis de Tocqueville, who argued that

the nation's religiously formed democratic optimism was something new

under the political sun, for it led, in practice, to the associational enthusiasm

he observed when he toured America during the Jacksonian era. That church

and state in America are in fact separate means. America has secular

government - but it does not mean that American society is a secular society.

Reacting to the nativism of the Americanization movement Kallen (1970

[1924]) initiated the philosophy of "cultural pluralism" that would eventually

be embraced enthusiastically by liberal reformers of his time and, years later,

would become a dominant shibboleth of both liberals and conservative

intellectuals on ethnicity and minority issues (quoted in Elshtain 2003). In

Kallen's racialist formulation, individual people in America are inherently

members of groups and ethnic stratification is culturally (if not genetically)

rooted, making it absurd to argue for the kind of unity that assimilationist

vision argues. By the 1990's "multiculturalism" became the term of choice for

those advocating a vast range of pluralist positions, from those wishing to

acknowledge the demographic diversity of American society to those wishing

to over-turn a Eurocentric hegemony. Very similar kind of notion the

Neplease pluralists also resemble. They don't like to say Hindu a religion;

rather, it is the 'Sanatan' (tradition) practices in the region of Brahmputra

river in the east to Indus in the west. The Hindus no more look apart from the

other people of Nepal than a tree does from its trunk (Sharma 1997: 490). In

contemporary Hinduism we find attempts to broaden the meaning of

Sanatana Dharma as the eternal Hindu religion and to also embrace the

religious traditions of the Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs, and all the traditions of

Hinduism (Dimitrova, 2007). But it is also a tricky manipulation that all

practices including Buddhist come under the Hindu. It simply tries to mess


with the different philosophy and value of a particular submerged into

another.

Pluralism is a multi-faceted concept. Conn (1973) postulated at least four

distinct ways in which the term pluralism has been used. First, "value

pluralism" is one way in which societies exhibit several competing value

systems; and societies do not have value pluralism when they are of

'ideational consensus'- acceptance of a common symbol structure, that is,

agreement not only on broad principles but also on the terms in which these

principles will be expressed. Second, "Cultural Pluralism" refers to the

existence of multiple cultural groups within a society. Due to cultural factors

and economic or status factors that arise in connection with modernization,

society constitutes multiple groups. Referring Haug (1967), Conn argues that

young nations may experience the existence of pluralism in a society

covering large sparsely populated areas, engaged chiefly in agriculture and

the poor. Their governmental functions are still shaky and unstable, as

literacy rates are low and various interest groups that struggle confusedly for

dominance tend to increase the intensity of more plural polity. Third,

"Structural Pluralism" focuses on the structure of political system in which

the number of issues are raised and resolved with the notions of decentralized

decision making. And lastly, "Social Pluralism" where the diversity arising

from modernization characterizes the society with diverse interests that are

allowed to organize and compete with each other formally and informally for

rewards. Socially pluralists societies allow organizational interests and

competition independently as an intermediary body between government and

citizen.

Now, of much concern here is what to do for social pluralism with

democracy. Though it is complex, there are four ways of relationship Conn

proposed between social pluralism and democracy:

First, Social Pluralism socializes the individual to democratic norms.

Second, it increases the exposure of individual to political questions

and helps increase participation.

Third, it provides alternative leaders for democratic systems. and

Fourth, it provides alternative policies for democracies.

As Manley (1983) says, 'even inside the pluralist school, serious doubts

have arisen about the theory's ability to explain the American system:

the relationship between pluralism and such central issues of

democratic theory as equality, distributive justice, and peaceful

social change.'


A close reading of James Madison (or, for that matter, Marx) shows that

there is no necessary contradiction between groups and class. Madison treats

groups as subdivisions of the broad social division between those with and

without property, but after the rise of socialism and class analysis in the

nineteenth century, pluralism and class analysis were pitted against each

other. Toward the end of his pioneering study of groups, Bentley (1908) took

up the question of class and made it clear that group theory was intended as a

critique of class theory. In Bentley's view, Marx's theory of class struggle

was a crude form of group theory. The failure of the so-called proletariat to

unite behind a common interest and seize power proved Marx wrong, in

Bentley's view (cited from Manley, 1983). Indeed, Bentley (1908, p. 467)

says, "A proletariat class, such as Marx and Engels conceived it, simply did

not exist." It indicates something different notion in the context of Nepali

society where more than 90 percent people rely on their subsistence economy

which is basically agriculture. Every household is the unit of society, and

every clan has a distinct and different affinity than an ideology. Sometime

people feel awkward when members of a clan annoy each other on political

or ideological matters.

Multiculturalism

The term multiculturalism was first introduced in Canada in 1971 as part of

the government's policy to deal with the two main communities in the

country- the English speaking settlers and the French speaking counterparts

(Kymlicka, 1995). Since then this concept has taken on new dimensions and

today it is used to discuss issues of diversity as a result of race or ethnicity,

class, gender, culture, and sexual preference. Multiculturalism is considered a

leftist political ideology that sees all cultures, their mores and institutions, as

essentially equal (Kumar, 2011). There is not any hierarchy between and

among cultures; they is simply different. Multiculturalism represents a new

kind of universalism– one where integration of individuals into the state is

not predicated on a total disengagement from particularistic community ties.

Rather, people are included into the nation state as members of diverse but

equal ethnic groups. And the state recognizes that the dignity of individuals is

linked to the collective dignity of the community to which they belong. A

multicultural society needs a broadly shared culture to sustain it. Since it

involves several cultures, the shared culture can only grow out of their

interaction and could both respect and nurture their diversity and unite them

around a common way of life. Typically, multiculturalism here is a social


doctrine that distinguishes itself as a positive alternative for policies of

assimilation, connoting a politics of recognition of the citizenship rights and

cultural identities of ethnic minority groups (Kymlicka 1995; C. Taylor 1992)

and, more generally, an affirmation of the value of cultural diversity.

Ideas of multiculturalism and minority rights have been 'internationalized'

in two distinct ways (Gellner 2001). First, a discourse of multiculturalism is

circulating amongst elites who participate in international networks of

activities, scholars, and policy makers. Through these networks, a certain

way of talking about ethnocultural diversity is being diffused around the

world, premised on principles of tolerance and ideals of Justice. Within this

discourse, minorities are seen, not as problem to solve or a threat to be

neutralized, but as legitimate members of the state whose identity and culture

must be respected (Kymlicka et al. 2005). Second, formal international

standards of minority rights are being adopted by international organizations

such as the UN, the World Bank, and the ILO. These organisations have

attempted to codify minimum standards for the behaviour of states in relation

to their minorities, and to establish mechanism to monitor state compliance

with them.

Kymplicka raises the question what do we mean by Western models of

multiculturalism and minority rights? He put on three important aspects the

western democracy has been observing: Minority Nationalism, Indigenous

Peoples, Immigrant Groups and Metics (temporary migrants). In the context

of Nepal, diversity especially concerned with identity, autonomy, is related

either with Minority Nationalism or Indigenous Peoples. So these two aspects

are discussed here.

Minority Nationalism

Will Kimlycka (2005) argues:

The first concerns the treatment of sub-state/ minority nationalisms, such

as the Quebecois in Canada, the Scots and Welsh in Britain, the Catalans

and Basques in Spain, the Flemish in Belgium, the Germans in South

Tyrol in Italy, and Puerto Ricans in the US. In all these cases, we find a

regionally concentrated group that conceives of itself as a nation within a

larger state, and mobilizes behind nationalist political parties to achieve

recognition of its nationhood, either in the form of an independent state or

through territorial autonomy within the larger state.

Most of the states felt that to have a regional group with a sense of

distinct nationhood was a threat to the state. So various measures the nation

states made to erode this sense of distinct nationhood, including restricting


minority language rights, abolishing traditional forms of regional self-

government, and encouraging members of the dominant group to settle in the

minority groups homeland, so that the minority becomes outnumbered even

in its traditional territory. In contrast, Majeed et al. (2008) argue that

diversities are not to be considered as a burden but as an asset that states can

build upon. Unfortunately, however, diversity is often considered by

politicians as a problem that states have to accommodate. On the contrary,

one has to consider diversities as an opportunity for states that are enriched

by different languages, cultures, religions, and traditions. It doesn't mean that

accommodation of diversity will bring peace in a state rather it would

contribute to sustainable development as well.

In India, during the colonial period the British considered religion to be

the primary marker of difference in Indian society; so they set policies

towards religious communities. Over time, they introduced some limited

democratic institutions and a concept of civil society, community and caste

identities granted recognition in a number of state institutions like the army,

the law and the franchise (Kumar, 2011:29). The Congress defended the

notion of a pluralist society and a neutral state based on equal citizenship.

However, Congress also promised recognition and protection for religious

communities and non-discriminatory state policies at the same time. It also

rejected the British view that India was not a nation and articulated a secular

and inclusive nationalism in which there would be equal respect, equal

opportunities and equal liberty for all, regardless of their religious affiliations

or social location.

All countries just mentioned have accepted the principle that these sub-

state national identities would endure for indefinite future, and that their

sense of nationhood and nationalist aspirations would be accommodated in

one way or other. This accommodation had typically taken the form of what

we could call 'multinational federalism'. It was creating a federal or quasi

federal subunit in which the minority group formed a local majority, so that it

could exercise meaningful forms of self government.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, only Switzerland and Canada

had adopted this combination of territorial autonomy and official language

status for sub-state national groups. In two broad patterns of cultural

diversity, Kymlicka (1995) argues, 'nation' means:

"...a historical community, more or less institutionally complete,

occupying a given territory or homeland, sharing a distinct language and

culture. A 'nation' in the sociological sense is closely related to the idea of

a 'people' or a 'culture'- indeed, these concepts are often defined in terms

of each other. A country which contains more than one nation is,


therefore, not a nation- state but a multination state, and the smaller

cultures form 'national minorities'. The incorporation of different nations

into a single state may be involuntary, as occurs when one cultural

community is invaded and conquered by another, or is ceded from one

imperial power to another, or when its homeland is overrun by colonizing

setters."

Cultural diversity may arise from individual and familial immigration

where such immigrants often coalesce into loose associations which

Kymlicka says 'Ethnic Groups':

"..which typically wish to integrate into the larger society, and to be

accepted as full members of it. While they often seek greater recognition

of their ethnic identity, their aim is not to become a separate and self-

governing nation alongside the larger society, but to modify the institution

and laws of the mainstream to make more accommodating of cultural

differences."

Oommen (2008) argues that 'national minorities':

"have historically legitimate claims to an ancestral homeland; as in the

case of Scotish and Welsh peoples in Great Britain or an adopted

homeland, as in the case of the French in Quebec in Canada and the

Spanish and Portuguese peoples in Latin America.....the national

minorities only when viewed in the wider context of the federal polity but

they are usually majorities within their homeland."

In regard to ethnification and destruction of diversity, Omman argues:

Ethnification is a process through which the link between territory and

culture is attenuated, and the possibility of a nation sustaining its

integrity is put into jeopardy.

There are at least six different types9 of ethnification Oommen pointed

out. Similarly he also analysed the ethnification is a process through which

some collectivists are defined and perceived as outsiders. There are at least

four contexts in which this happens:

1. When the mainstream cultural community in a multination or poly-

ethnic state asserts that it constitutes the nation, and that others

should be assimilate in the interests of the "nation"- Waspization in

US, Russification in the former Soviet Union, and Hanization in

China

2. Even, when a collectivity belongs and lives in its homeland, it may be

perceived as cultural outsider because of its actual or attributed


association with conquest and colonization. Hindu view Muslims

and Christians who are natives of India as cultural outsiders, and not

as part of the nation.

3. When descendants of a people may be defined as aliens and driven

out, even after they have been in a country for several centuries-

Turks in Bulgeria.

4. A people may be driven out of their ancestral homeland because their

religion is different, for example the Zoroastrians and Baha's of the

Persian Gulf earlier and the Hindus of Kashmir valley recently.

Indigenous Peoples

Indians and Inuit in Canada, the Aborigines of Australia, the Maori of New

Zealand, the Sami of Scandinavia, the Inuit of Greenland, and Indian tribes in

the US have been in the struggle of recognition and self-identification, self

development and right to self determination. In the past, all these countries

had the same goal and exception that IPs would eventually disappear as

distinct communities, as a result of dying out, or intermarriage, or

assimilation (Kymlicka, 2005). Various policies adopted to speed up this

process, such as stripping IPs of their lands, restricting the practice of their

traditional culture, language, and religion, and undermining their institutions

of self-government. However, there has been a dramatic reversal in these

policies, starting in the early 1970s. Today all of the countries just

mentioned accept, at least in principle, the idea that indigenous peoples will

exist in the indefinite future as distinct societies within the larger country,

and that they must have the land claims, cultural rights (including recognition

of customary law) and self government rights needed to sustain themselves as

distinct societies. Indigenous peoples were considered as the temporary

society in the late 60s. When ILO Convention 107 urged the member states to

adopt the necessary policy measures to bring such temporary societies into

the main stream that extremely hurt native peoples or indigenous peoples

across the world. By virtue of their struggle and genuine argument,

international community became ready to update the instruments, so as ILO

formed a task force to study about the Indigenous Peoples.

All accumulated issues are now identified with social identity that polity

less likely spelled out in the history. However, the federalism compliment

with social diversity and identity issue too is less likely to be discussed in the

Nepalese political discourse.


Ideology and Democracy

An ideology is:

- an organized collection of ideas, "scientific ideas";

- it can be thought of as a comprehensive vision;

- as a way of looking at things, as in common sense and several

philosophical tendencies, or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant

class of a society to all members of the society. The main purpose

behind an ideology is to offer change in society through a normative

thought process.

- Ideologies are systems of abstract thought applied to public matters

and thus make this concept central to politics,

- Every political tendency entails an ideology whether or not it is

propounded as an explicit system of thought.

- Positive characteristics like vigour and fervor and negative

characteristics like excessive certitude and fundamentalist rigor.

Organizations that strive for power will try to influence the ideology of a

society to become closer to what they want it to be.

Political organizations (including governments) and other groups (e.g.

lobbyists) try to influence people by broadcasting their opinions.

When most people in a society think alike about certain matters, or even forget

that there are alternatives to the status quo, we arrive at the concept of

hegemony (Wikipedia).

The term ideology usually refers to a systematic, elaborated and delimited

system of thought, like political ideologies or religious doctrines (Schmid,

1981). In macro-sociology Marxist as well as liberal, ideology is often

considered as a level or instance of a social formation, or as a social

subsystem. Then ideology is opposed to other levels or subsystems, like

economy or politics, and refers to a particular institutional space.

Liberal Democracy and Nepalese Polity

What view should liberals take of the internal practices of non-liberal

religious and cultural minorities within liberal democracies? This issue has

divided liberal opinion into two main camps (Crowder, 2007). In one camp

are those who see liberalism as standing primarily for the autonomy of the

individual person; and in the other, there are those who identify liberalism

with maximal toleration of the beliefs and practices of different social groups.

This debate raises fundamental issues in liberal political theory, and it has

attracted a variety of contributions from leading theorists since the 1980s.

Among the most significant of those contributions was the exchange between


Will Kymlicka (pro-autonomy) and Chandran Kukathas (pro-toleration) in

the early 1990s. However, both arguments are complementary to each other

rather than contradictory when we take their perspectives in case of Nepal.

Autonomy is the prime question for those groups who are distinct and

different and have been discriminated and excluded for the last two and a half

century. But they are still living in their traditional homeland with dominant

population even tolerating the predominance of Hindu high caste. Now the

rights of those excluded and marginalized groups, despite their overwhelming

demography and the territory belonging to them, have begun to be claimed

with the advent of democracy. Now, the challenge is whether liberal

democracy would be able to manage it, and the suppressed group would have

the space to stand on equal foot with the dominant groups. So, the 'table' is

begun to turn and toleration is synchronically shared among the groups who

are sharing the table. And it is also important to have a degree of tolerance to

be a pluralist. Yet, the political parties dominantly brought up in mono-ethnic

nationalism are still conservative and reluctant to be accommodative.

In this crucial juncture, Nepalese polity might take an unwanted

discourse- extreme left and right. One is arguing, first for freedom,

democracy and accountable government through parliamentary democracy,

and second is arguing for development, prosperity, and of course accountable

government through democratic centralism, but there does not seem to appear

any meeting point. It is an outcome of the discourse gone through dream of

Liberalism, Marxism and so on. In promotion of both democratic and

communist perspective, from 1930s to 1960s, an increasing number of

Nepalese studied in India and imbibed the discourses of nationalism,

Maxism, and civil rights which flourished there (Gellner, 2001). There are

several political changes that have taken place, and in every time more or less

an old regime would be abolished with the popular support through people's

movements hoping that a change would take place along with newly adopted

system. With greater hopes of freedom, Nepalese people fought agianst Rana

oligarchy and that ended in 1951 with the active leadership and semi-armed

struggle against the Rana regime amidst the 20th century. The commitment

made by B.P. Koirala, founder of the Nepali Congress (NC), on the eve of

establishment of NC said:

".. It is so pity that Nepalese don't have their organization that fought for

modernity, but All Indian Organization (Akhil Bharatiya Sangathan)

needs to be formed by incorporating Nepalese with overarching aim to

fight for accountable- government and freedom of India.10"


NC was founded in 1947 by Nepalese dissident exiles in India as Nepali

National Congress (Whelpton, 1993). Many dissidents had also been active in

the Indian Nationalist Movement and in adopting the organisation's basic

principles: combination of socialism and parliamentary democracy as its goal

and Gandhian non-violence as its tactics. Later, the name was changed to

Nepali Congress in 1950 when it was amalgamated with Nepal Democratic

Congress, an organization set up by estranged members of Rana family. It is

to be taken in notice that NC was premised on three pillars: modernity,

accountability, and liberty. Also to be noticed here is that the political parties

along with King Tribhuvan were committed to promulgate the Constitution

through Constituent Assembly, but they were jeopardized because of a

decade long transition. After carrying out a research into the case of

prolonged transition and the actual situation the nation was facing, Nepali

Congress (NC) leader B.P Koirala in 1958 took a stance against holding a CA

calling it highly unnecessary. So, King Mahendra promulgated Constitution

of kingdom of Nepal with consensual agreement between the monarch and

the political leaders. After which, parliamentary election was held the same

year in which NC secured more than two third majority NC showed that it

was committed to democracy.

Following the aftermath of Rana oligarchy, multiparty democracy ran

with political perplexity whether power lay at Naranhity Durbar (office of

King) or at Singha Durbar (office of Priminister) for a decade. According to

Prasai (2011)11

, people began to utter a curse, "May Congress intrude into

your house!." He says, "This was to vent their anger at the party and the

administration for reason that the police gave clean chits to NC activists' who

were arrested for stealing." One of the reasons why rumour spread against

Congress government was due to the campaigning of Yogi Naraharinath,

Chairman of 'Karmavir Mahamandal'. Eventually, King Mahendra seized the

power by arresting elected Prime Minister along with his team by accusing12

that parliamentary democracy was alien to the traditional political culture of

Nepal (Burghart, 1993). The proclamation of Panchayat system's nurtured the

Hindu Religious kingdom against the backdrop of parliamentary system's

failure. The elected NC government failed to mobilise the administration to

serve the people's interest. With the power interest of the Monarch, the

multiparty democracy was restrained in 1962, and Nepal survived with the

dark age of 30 years. Democracy was crushed for three decades. However,

NC even launched armed insurgency remaining in semi underground

situation. Its top leaders B.P. Koirala, G.P. Koirala and others were in exile.

In 1976, when Indira Gandhi's state emergency had made India a less


congenial place of exile, B.P. Koirala returned Nepal, announcing the cause

of 'national reconciliation' and although court proceedings were started

against him in connection with the party's previous violent campaigns, he was

eventually released.

Panchayat did not envisage diversity under its communitarian principle.

There were 6 class organizations as the sister organizations of non-party

Panchayat system namely Youth, Women, Agriculture, Ex-Army, and

Elderly were organized time to time; but didn't have any arrangement for INs,

Dalit, Madheshi, Muslim, etc. There were dissidents within the Panchas who

were from different INs, ethnic, religious, and regional communities; so they

had an apprehension and worry about their deteriorating situation of identity.

They couldn't express it, since they had accepted the sole authority of Hindu

religious kingdom and authoritative leadership of king. Some social

organizations established during 1950-60, during democratic period, the

Backward Classes Organization established in 1956, included the Gurung

Welfare Organization (Gurung Kalyan Sangh), Tharu Welfare Society (Tharu

Kalyankari Sangh), Kirat League, and Dalit Sangh. With the prohibition of

political parties who were in favour of democracy, Panchayat swept away all

social organizations that could make democracy much more broad-based.

The apprehension of Panchas concerning their communal issues was

expressed covertly, which the Monarchy communicated its angry reactions

through brand names "MaGuRaLi" which meant a combination of Magar,

Gurung, Rai, and Limbu. Later it became larger "SheTaMaGuRaLi" by

adding "SheTa" (Sherpa, Tamang) (Gurung, 1997).

During Panchayat period, King Mahendra was aware that NC was in exile

in India so, one day they might come to take over the power. In order to

neutralize the Indian support for struggle for democracy, King initiated

keeping good relation with China and getting it involved in emergent

political dynamics. He wrote a letter to Chairman Mao Tse Tung through his

envoy Khagendra Jung Gurung (personal conversation with Mr. Gurung).

According to Gurung, King Mahendra gave him an assurance that he might

deliver the Swiss Confederational democracy, if all the national got united.

Since India was accessible to and culturally convenient for Brahmins, so

many relatives of Pundits who visited Banaras especially for religious

purpose allured them for education too. As Soviet Union became an attractive

place for Marxist or communist blocs, many Nepalese youth also were

destined to Russia for the purpose of study and its allies also opened the

avenue for Nepalese to learn technical subjects. In addition, they gained

practical experiences of what communism and socialism can deliver the


people. This phenomenon might be the reason that influenced a significant

number of population with the ideologies of Marxism, Leninism, and

Maoism. Despite State restrictions to read and write books against Monarchy,

books and literature on Marxism, Leninism, Mao Tse Tung and Zuche

Thought were published in Nepali languages sponsored by various

Friendship associations. This discourse largely imparted the ideology of

Marxism, Socialism, and Nationalism to Nepalese readers and intellectuals.

Chin Sachitra (China Pictorial) in Hindi language was abundantly available.

Common people would read stories and see colourful pictorials and indirectly

get influenced as well as influence other people with ideas about communist

state and society. Most of the bookshops freely distributed Chin Sachitra as

the cover for books and copies. Apart from that, walls inside the rooms were

covered up by Chin Sachitra. So people would enjoy watching photographs

of Comrade Mao STe Tung, Chao-enlai, Comrade Chu Teh and so on. Seeing

these great leaders with smiling faces, working with farmers, peasants, and

ethnic minorities emotionally and psychologically embalmed many readers

with feelings that communists regime would be far better than the Monarchy.

In this way, common people were found to be sympathetic towards

communism, especially in the hills.

Marxism and Leninism (ML)

The ideological of Marxism, Leninism and Maoism were taught to peasants

in small hots, in the dark rooms with soundless conversation for fear of life

threats from Rana dictatorial regime about only six decades ago. When Rana

oligarchy was thrown away, and after about a decade Panchayat autocracy

came and more or less the same phenomenon occurred for three decades from

1960-1990. People fought against it and restored the multiparty democracy.

They entertained enormous hopes and thought that it was their dreams come

true. Not quite satisfied with the functioning modality of parliamentary

democracy, then a small tiny fraction of communist party began

phenomenally the same kind of teaching to people by whispering to their ear

against the malfunctioning system. The people's war against feudalism and

all kinds of forces that suppressed the Nepalese people needed to be crushed

down by armed struggle. However, armed struggle was rather an old and

common strategy of communist groups who believed in societal change

through class struggle.

A radical, Communist Party of Nepal- CPM (ML) was once active in

Jhapa in the seventies. The revolutionaries cut the heads of landlords and

declared to establish the dictatorship of peasants, workers, and proletariat


groups through new democracy as comrade Mao Ze Dung established against

the internal feudalism and external imperialism in the fifties. With the 'Core

Principle' of democratic centralism (Janabadi Kendriyata) extracted from

Marxism, Leninism and Mao Tse Tung thought the CPM (ML) adopted

armed struggle under the broader principle of class struggle established in the

eighties. It made the Panchayat autocracy in the nineties when ML also

joined NC. There were as well so many other organisations involved in the

struggle. ML came out over ground in the aftermath of Panchayat in the

nineties, and become CPN (UML). In reality, Marxist, Leninist, and Mao Tse

Tung thought spread in South Asia, when Naxalites Movement developed in

the seventies in India with the active leadership of Charu Majumdar. ML

originated with the school of Charu Majumdar in Jhapa, but after 16 years,

dissolved into parliamentary democracy following the discourse of Jyoti

Basu of west Bengal incidentally. And now what is on ground is the liberal

democrats that relies on market. Nevertheless Maoist emerged as

revolutionary force and social change agent in the Nepali society. There can

be differing opinions, but the truth is the entire society is passing through a

sociopolitical paradox. And this is a persistent question.

Apart from political commitment and struggle against Panchayat regime,

late 1989 was also characterized by economic hardship caused by the trade

embargo which India had imposed on Nepal. When iron is hot, one has to

beat to bring it into size; political leaders too sped up their movement against

the Panchayat system. The third dimension of the revolution was one of

ethnic and religious conflicts cropped up against the Panchayat (Hoftun,

1993). Though it came lately, it was fundamental to fuel the movement

against the Panchayat autocracy and to get success in the democratic

movement. However, as the saying goes, the morning shows the day, in the

victory day celebration in Open Theatre (Khula Manch), the third rank leader

but with strong hold among party cadres of NC, G.P. Koirala declared that

the first peoples' movement symbolized the victory of all forces including the

Panchas. In such an excited mass meeting, people showed their

dissatisfaction, pelted stones and shouted against him.

Over three decades' long tug of war between democratic forces and

Monarch ended in the nineties, but the descendant of B.P. Koirala in Nepali

Congress, G.P. Koirala never gave attention in creating a dialogue between

freedom and national interest as the two sides of a single coin. Consequently,

people at the grassroots started feeling that multiparty party democracy

would not protect the interests of both the people and country. The leaders

kept only chanting but ever failed to define democracy at the grass roots. It


was often said 'infancy' had to face the armed struggle at 6 when Maoist

declared the People's War. Ganesh Man Shingh,13

an iron leader of NC, of

Newar ethnic background, who led the first peoples' movement for the

reinstatement of multiparty democracy, had also shown his dissatisfaction.

While he passed away, he had already quitted the party, and he was charged

by his opponents that he became a communal at the end of his life.

Communism (Nationalism) versus Other 'Isms'

This discourse of communism and other 'isms' engaged both Pancha and non-

Pancha that is NC and Communists camps during Panchayat period of thirty

years. It was believed that the period contributed to the growth of

communism in Nepal. Communists invoked INs largely, and taught them

well that Max, Lenin, and Mao all fought against the high caste/class

chauvinism, so it is a matter of core principle of Communists to go against

Hindu King, Kingdom, and ensure the autonomies for respective

communities. This notion was well established. So INs' understanding of

struggle against monarch was a fight against mono-ethnic nation state and to

achieve the autonomy, whereas that of other groups' was a fighting

spearheaded against feudalism. As a result, INs largely joined the communist

parties, not the congress party. The communist ideology says that any kind of

discrimination and suppression is against the Marxism, so class struggle is

the only strategy to get rid it. So, struggle against Hindu casteism also comes

under the principle of Marxism, Leninism, and Mao Tse Tung thoughts. But

very surprisingly, two pro- Marxist Magar leaders left their party in the

aftermath of Panchayat autocracy in the nineties. Leaders Mathwar Singh

Thapa from NCP (Puspalal group), and Gore B. Khapangi from ML, among

others formed a party called National Peoples' Liberation Party (Rastriya

Janamukti Party). Despite their enthusiastic start in building a political party

aiming to address INs issues in the beginning, mostly retired soldiers who

had given their potential skill and knowledge to British Crown and Indian

govenments were found gathered under the active leadership of the two

active post- communist ideologues. It was ironic, since most of the soldiers'

background was either British Gurkhas or Indian Gorkha Rifles, they

appeared apathetic towards the communists. However, their INs background

and the issue the party raised especially the question of proportional

representation with population in all sectors attracted them. Since, social

exclusion was rampant, the principle party adopted attracted the cadres.

Another interesting phenomenon was that intellectuals of INs' background

seldom joined the party.


There was another initiative to form the party led by INs personalities. It was

mainly of leaders once associated with Panchayat. That was Nepal Rastriya

Janajati Party led by Khagendra J. Gurung, Kajiman Kandangwa and Bhadra

K. Ghale. They manifested that Nepal should adopt federalism based on

ethnic identity. There were 12 units they proposed with names representing

INs, Ethnic groups, and Languages.14

After the promulgation of Constitution,

the party ought to change its name: Nepal Jana Party under the chairmanship

of Bichar S. Kandangwa, since the constitution did not permit the party with

the communal connotation such as Janajati (Nationalities). Meanwhile,

Pashupati Sena was permitted as a political party. In fact, Janajati community

comprised very few intellectuals who didn't join the polity intended to raise

INs issues, though they experienced various kinds of discriminations. Socio-

cultural and political grounds for INs issue were comparatively poor, since

the polity on identity was part and partial of the major parties. Gurung

(1985)15

wrote a monograph on discriminations and exclusion the State made

against Janajati community. It was banned by the local administration so

that very few readers might have an opportunity to read it. On the other hand,

politicians who fought for democracy or new-democracy would have largely

understood that such discriminations would be healed when Panchayati

autocracy ended. So, they didn't go vigorously on various aspects of

democracy and didn't leave their parties. During the last ten or fifteen years,

multiculturalist model has begun to be pushed by ethnic activists and has

begun to receive some, though as limited, official recognition (Gellner,

2001).

INs intellectuals who were politically also trained felt strong sense of

unity that ultimately lobbies with the state and create awareness about

own socio-economic, cultural, and political rights. So, they organized a

series of meetings jointly with the political invoked Janajati leaders. When

intellectuals differed from the political leaders who were strongly

committed to form political party, the discourse split into two ways: one

went to form a party and second went to form a Federal level organization

of Nationalities. So, Nepal Federation of Nationalities (NEFEN) was

established in 1991, by representing eight16 INs organizations. NEFEN

defined INs the community with its own mother tongue and traditional

culture and does not fall under the traditional four-fold Hindu Varna

system. It has plainly declared that those social or ethnic groups who fall

under the Hindu hierarchical ladder are not eligible for becoming Janajati,

because thye need also to have their own territory. Thereafter, the new

word Janajati (Nationalities) was introduced in Nepal for the sake of

Indigenous/ Tribal/ Native/ Aboriginal/ Inuit/ Sami/ or whatever word is

used across the world. In the context of Nepal, the word has meant two


important aspects: one it is distinct and different from the mainstream

group (Hindu Religious Hierarchical Population), and has the territory

from time immemorial and two it felt threat due to State's encroachment

and is in an endangered position. It appealed the international community

to protect their basic human rights as other's are taken into account.

Since the Constitution of Nepal 1990, also expressed certain welfare

measures for Janjati, it became imperative for political parties to form a Task

Force. At the same time, one has to discuss here what democracy really

meant for such a diverse society in religion, language, ethnic groups and

Indigenous INs.17

The light at the end of the tunnel goes to Maoists who set forth the goal of

Republicanism. As a result, the Hindupati-Asali Hindusthan-Hindu Kingdom

constitutionally ended on 28 May 2008. Political parties reached consensus to

turn Nepal into a Federal Republic State. And, it was about 'u' turn for NC to

agree to adopt the change. The other side of the democracy- social diversity,

its cleavages, and stability is often ignored, then to flatter as nations' heritage,

ornament, etc. and interested to talk about individual liberty is the maximum

benefit democracy can deliver.

The general people felt the Constitution of Nepal 1990 did not address the

minimum aspirations they had. Most of those the state killed in Kathmandu

Valley during 1990 movement were Newars who belonged to the local

community and were non-political. Their family members often expressed

dissatisfaction with the political parties for their disregard of victims of the

movement (Ogura, 2006).The belief, expectations, and hopes were

overwhelming that democracy would deliver rights and respect to INs, Dalits,

Muslims, Madhesis and others. However, multiparty democracy went in very

classical way. The classical liberal democratic model and its variants denied

constitutional recognition to distinct communities as bearers of rights, who

placed emphasis on enforceable human rights, including the rights to

individual practice of one's religious, cultural, or linguistic preferences in a

national democratic frame work (Haysom, 2002).

Though, larger number of left wings somehow joined the reinstated

multiparty democracy, even believing that further amendments to the

constitutional would fix their expectations, the political leaders just remained

glued to the rhetoric that it is the best constitution of the world. The attitude

sent a negative massage to the grassroots. Things did not go as expected. The

Constitution failed to address the tripod of issues: one, INs' issue of

autonomy, Madhesis' issues of regional/ linguistic autonomy; second, Dalits'

issues of end untouchability and special protection measures as a reparation;


and third, other crosscutting issues including religious minorities. One of the

interesting features CPN/UML projects is that it approaches to prolitariat and

peasants' dictatorship, and one day it will reach socialism. One of its INs

community cadres, Biran Rajbanshi, committed suicide18

in the Central

Office of the party simply because while his party was in power, Madhav K.

Nepal was Prime Minister, and Bhim Rawal was the Home Minister, among

others, could not support him by appointing his son, Shambhu Rajbanshi, in a

nominal Jagir (service). It is remarkable here that in every reshuffling of the

government more than 1500 political appointees newly formed government

can replace especially in executive level. And thousands of job seekers can

go into job market at least on daily-wage, contract and temporary basis

through them, but it didn't happen in case of voiceless people, despite their

entire life contribution. However, the party still claims that Marxism and

Leninism is its guiding principle; it is committed to work for proletariat,

peasants and farmers, and it will give special treatment to INs, Dalits,

Madheshi, Muslims, and others.

Maoist Insurgency: A Dichotomy of Class and Identity Issue

Class Issue: A radical leftist group invoked by Maxist, Lennist, and Maoist

thoughts believed that without armed struggle, the feudal institution of

monarchy would not be abolished. With the restoration of democracy in the

nineties and constitutional Hindu Monarchy, many leftist groups joined

multiparty democracy. But, a tiny fraction led by Pushpa K. Dahal

(Prachand) and Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, even after joining the parliamentary

democracy in 1992, skewed into armed struggle in 1996. Unlikely, people

believed in the scope of armed struggle, it gained a significant size and made

a devastating effect on the State. Many studies and accounts agree that one of

the reasons behind the armed struggle was that the multiparty democratic

government misused the police force as did the Panchayat autocracy for thirty

years last. The other important reason was INs, Dalit, Muslim, Women,

Madheshi, and other groups could not be satisfied by the democratic

governance that centred itself in Kathmandu. In fact, for some groups like the

INs, political exclusion increased in the parliament, cabinet, administration

and judiciary after 1990 compared to the autocratic years 1962-90 (Lawoti,

2005). Human Rights Violation was overlooked during Panchayat period.

Annual reports published on Human Rights began to set forth, since the

restored multiparty democracy ensured HR in its fundamental principal.

Following the first half of the decade showed that Human rights violations

increased unexpectedly during 1992- 1996 (INSEC, 1996). Despite the


democratic state delivered some basic rights such as freedom of press,

freedom of assembly, and so on, common people could not distinguish in

their life between the performance of Panchayati autocratic regime and

multiparty democratic system. One of the fundamental aspects of human

rights, such as social, cultural, and groups rights were restrained during the so

called democratic system.

Identity Issue: Under the multiparty democracy, many INs felt a strong sense

of freedom, so they wanted the democratic constitution ensure their group

rights. Bishwanath Upadhyaya, chairman of constitution drafting commission

expressed dismay over the fact that the vast majority of suggestions to the

commission were concerned with issues of regional, linguistic, ethnic, and

religious identity (Hutt, 1994:35). Main discrepancies lay in the identification

of multiple identities relative to social, cultural, linguistic, and regional issues

which Nepal could not address ever since its inception, because the

orientation was dubiously towards Ashali Hindustan not its plurality. Let us

recall back the first people's movement and the cleavages the newly declared

constitution tried to address:

Political parties are free to organise, the proportion of the legislature that

is directly elected is larger than it has ever been, and the power of the

palace, though still substantial, has been greatly reduced. But communal

groups have been granted only minor, non- fundamental concessions.

Though Radio Nepal now broadcasts news bulletins in Hindi and Newari,

full news summaries may only be heard in Nepali or English. Similarly,

Nepali remains the language of government and post-primary education

throughout the kingdom. Some concessions have been made to women's

groups, but these are mostly nominal while the demand for a secular state

forced only one change: the granting of a right to all sects and

denominations to run and maintain their own institutions. The demands of

Tarai organizations have been largely ignored, Human Rights groups have

been more successful: the death penalty has been abolished, there is

protection against discrimination on the basis of religion, race or gender,

and protection against preventative detention. Some of these rights are

granted only to Nepali citizens, while the constitution itself discriminates

against women in its section on nationality: according to Article 9, the

children of male citizens are considered Nepali by descent, while those of

female citizens must reside in Nepal for 14 years before they can become

citizens (Hoftun, 1993).

In contrast, Sharma (1997) argues:


"Nepal has liked to believe that, despite its cultural diversity, its history

has been marked by an ethnic harmony in a multi-ethnic society, free of

all kinds of ethnic tension. He argues ethnic politics in Nepal first surfaced

in the year leading up to the referendum of 1980. The Nepal Federation of

Nationalities (NEFEN) put on 17 point demand, Sharma doesn't accept

them arguing that NEFEN (Nepal Janajati Mahasangh) and others reflect a

totally different perception of Nepal's political, economic, social, and

cultural processes from that of the Hindu Majority."

Issues of Peasants, Workers, and Proletariat

In reviewing the first five years of the People‘s War, Maoist party concluded

that it could not achieve its political objectives by means of a protracted

People‘s War alone. So, the leaders decided to adopt a strategy of urban

insurrection, as well as work to mobilize a general public rebellion phrased as

the ‗Prachanda Path‘ that referred to a fusion of the Chinese model of the

Protracted People‘s War and the Russian model of urban insurrection (Ogura,

2008). In Maoist understanding, People's War (PW) was 80 per cent politics

and 20 per cent warfare (Verma et. al, 2007). Hardly 5 years reached, the

infancy of multiparty democracy, however, faced the major stroke of

Maoists', armed revolution following their decision to go for PW. In the areas

of their influence and dominance, like Rolpa, Rukum, Jajarkot and Salyan,

they started attacking landlords and government functionaries and local

leaders of congress party and their voters. In the mean time with the direct

guidance of Central authority, district level administration used excessive

force on the Maoists' local activities. The unleashing of violence by the

Maoists was also retaliation against the severe police action against their

activities under a military operation code named 'Romeo' during 1994-95

(Muni, 2004). The human rights violations made by the state side reported in

human rights reports really shook everyone how inhuman a democratic

regime could go.

The story of conflict is something different. Prior to Maoists' emergence

as an influential force in the remote areas of Rolpa, Rukum, Salyan, and

Jajarkot, local leaders of Panchayat entered into NC, and perpetuated the

suppression against the Maoist local cadres. The grudges the Maoist had with

Panchas during Panchayat would have been ended at least with the

restoration of democracy, but the reality turned out differently. Panchas took

refuge in NC and this trickily changed the environment and suppression

continued. NC could not deliver the administration that ensures democracy-

security, freedom, and accountable government. Rather a pattern had been

established: the left would take to the streets against the landlords,


exploitation and so forth and the Congress government would use brute force

to maintain law and order (Thapa, 2003:42). Congress' misuse of the police

force fuelling of the situation spearheaded the armed insurgency. Barsha Man

Pun from Rolpa, one of the deputy Commanders of P W, argued:

We are communists, so we always talk about the class struggle. Firstly, in

our society there are distinct economic classes of rich capitalists, poor

peasants and labourers. Secondly, most of the people in power are Indo-

Aryan high caste Hindus, but very few people from the lower castes and

Janajatis [ethnic groups] are included in the power structure. Thirdly,

people from regions such as Madhes [a plain region bordering with India]

and Karnali [a Himalayan region in western Nepal] have traditionally been

excluded from the power structure. Fourthly, outcaste Hindus and the

Dalits, are still discriminated against, even in the 21st century. And fifthly,

partly because of the Hindu religion, women in Nepal do not have equal

rights with men in relation to property, education, health and so on. We

fought peacefully for these oppressed classes for several years through the

parliament and the street movement. But the government tried to suppress

us by using police force and charging us with thousands of false crimes. In

particular, after Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala of the Nepali

Congress dissolved the House of Representatives because of an intra-party

dispute in July 1994, we concluded that the parliamentary system in this

country cannot work for the betterment of the people. We therefore

decided to quit parliament and boycott the mid-term election in November

1994 (cited in Ogura, 2008).

Largely Kham Magar, INs of remote villages joined the underground

people's movement. One of the reasons they came to join with Maoism is

their lucid and natural behaviour pretty much suited with Mao Tse Tung's,

"Three Main Rules of Discipline and Eight Points for Attention".19

The

ideology of the Nepalese Maoist movement is strongly egalitarian and

communalistic: these two features are attractive to the Magars because they

have always stressed the sense of equality and mutual help which prevails

among their group (Lecomte- Tilouine, 2000).

The 'fusion' well chanted by Maoist leaders sounds philosophical and

implies different meanings. Every component of the society understood it

relative to their plight and concern. Hence, it may have different meanings

for different people. As a result, people joined the movement by sacrificing

their lives and possessions. It was a fusion basically of insurrection between

urban and rural; the political and the armed; caste and class or something

else. It really asked for further study and diagnosis. In spite of this, a lot of

social scientists made efforts towards it. However, the initiatives have not


focused on the root causes of conflict especially focusing on subjugation,

suppression, discrimination, and exclusion of larger proportion of population,

such as INs, Women, Madhesis, Dalits, who were looking for avenues. On

the other hand, over the years, subjugation, exclusion, discrimination and

isolation turned the excluded groups into the peasants, workers, and

proletariat class. So, from both angles, either social discrimination or

economic deprivation, excluded and marginalized population was very much

in combustible condition. Here is an excerpt taken from Ogura's study on

Beni attack, to substantiate the socio-cultural background of combatants.

Table 1: Common Characteristics of Maoist Guerrillas Involved in Beni

Attack in 2004

1 Age

Most of the armed Maoists were under 25.

There were many children carrying long guns that

almost reached the ground due to their small height.

There were some senior ―volunteers‖ over fifty.

2 Gender and ethnic

group/caste

More than 30 % of the armed Maoists were women.

Most of the armed Maoists were Dalits (low castes),

Mongoloids and Tharus.

Most of the volunteers were either Magars or Dalits.

There were also Kshetris, Bahuns, and Tharus among

them.

There were many Maoists with black faces20

3 Languages

The Maoists were speaking some language of

western Nepal.

They were speaking languages that the people in the

bazaar didn‘t understand.

Some Maoists were speaking a Hindi-like language21

They were using code language while checking

memos.

4 Equipment and

dress

Some Maoists were holding communication sets that

looked like cordless phones and communicating

with people elsewhere.

Armed Maoists were wearing combat dress very

similar to that of the RNA.

Most of them were wearing cloth shoes of the ―Gold

Star‖ brand22

Some Maoists bought ―Gold Star‖ shoes in Beni

bazaar.

The body of a Maoist was later found, holding new


―Gold Star‖ shoes that he had just bought in Beni.

5 Volunteers

Many volunteers were wearing stained clothes. They

looked as if they had not changed their clothes for

many days.

Some volunteers said that they had been taken for

programmes by force.

Some volunteers were wearing sandals.

Some volunteers were cleaning the guns of

guerrillas.

6 People from distant

places, outsiders

One child said that he had walked seven days to

reach Beni.

Some volunteers said it took twelve days to arrive in

Beni from their district.

All of them appeared to have come from outside of

Myagdi district.

They didn‘t know about the topography of Beni.

Some Maoists didn‘t even know about the location

of the Kali Gandaki river.

7 Role of the local

Maoists

Local Maoists made plans about where to set up the

treatment centres.

Some Maoists were accusing the local Maoists of

bad management.

Local Maoist leaders including ―Pravin‖ were seen in

Beni bazaar.

8 After death

Maoists dug holes to bury bodies beforehand.

They carried bodies as far away as possible from the

front line.

Some bodies had their right arm raised as if doing lāl

salām (red greeting).

Some bodies were covered with red party flags and

some were wearing black bands around their heads.

9 Fearless

They were not afraid to die at all.

Some Maoists fired towards helicopters from the

ground.

10 Behaviour They drank beer but no hard drinks.

Source: Ogura, 2004

Ogura has presented the Beni attack of Maoist in a beautiful manner.

When you read her article, presumably you feel that you are watching a film.

The purpose for which Maoists' caused the Beni attack was strategically

important because they wanted to show their strength which was parallel to

that of the state. And one of its objectives was to give the massage to the state


that the Maoists were approaching to the centre very soon, and similar kind

of attack was supposed to be caused in the east as well. According to

Magar:23

"This Beni attack was the last action under the strategy of ―unification of

decentralized actions.‖ Magar reports in the article that ―Avinash,‖ the Third

Battalion Commander of the PLA, told him that they had already completed

the process of decentralized actions, dependent centralization, and unification

of decentralized actions, and were preparing for ―highly centralized

attack‖(cited in Ogura, 2008).

Most of the fighters were below 25 years. This is proven by the guns the

Guerrilla carried because they were longer than their heights. Culturally,

Nepalese women in the rural areas particularly from Bahun and Chhetri caste

groups did not feel comfortable to be out without their parents or guardians.

Guerrilla consisted of almost one third women, and among them two to three

women were from Bahun and Chhetri groups. In Beni attack, there were

guerrillas largely from Dalit, Magar, and Tharu INs. From the dominant

groups such as Bahun and Chhetri there were comparitively less number of

people. Linguistically they were of Tibeto- Mongoloid group especially from

Kham Magar. Also, there were those who spoke the regional languages of the

Western hill and those who sounded like speakers of Hindi, perhaps they

were the speakers Tharu or Maithili, or Bhojpuri languages. In esssence, the

local residents did not understand them much. These are some very striking

features of Maoist insurgency and of their guerrillas. Maoists were found

reluctant to shed light on these features when a political discussion was held

in the civil society. Late Dr. Harka Gurung shared his perception while a

group of INs intellectuals met him just after a week the Maoists became

public. He said,

"Don't worry about the management of physical weapons, rather you

should cautiously work while you manage the human weapons, I mean

Dalit, Madheshi, INs, along with Youth and Women (Author was present

in the team)."

It was not coincidence that the Maoist strongholds were in west Nepal,

particularly, Rolpa and Rukum, where the Magars are dominant (Thapa,

2003:79). However, the Maoists may mystify it and say the fusion was

between People's War and Peaceful Political Movement by putting aside the

INs issues along with Dalit, Madheshi, Women and Muslim. This does not

mean a virtual conjunction of these two contenders against the State, which is

semi-feudal for the Maoist and communal for the INs. Despite this objective


difference, the radical struggle of the Maoists is being reinforced by ethnic

liberation front while the civil movement of Janajati has benefited from such

identity formation that had been long suppressed (Gurung, 2005b). But when

Madheshi People's Right Forum (MPRF) broke away from the Maoists and

launched the Madhesh Movement clearly hinted that Maoists are not

sensitive towards the deprivation of identity. However, the socio-economic

marginalization of the mid-western coupled with the "fighting spirit" of local

ethnic communities- especially the "Magar Clan"- triggered the armed

uprising (Pandey, 2005). Kham Magar is a Tibeto- Burman population living

in the mid Western part of Nepal. Historically, linguistically, and culturally

they considered it a nation. People were angry when politicians politicized

their life in the aftermath of the restoration of democracy and the after the

launching of the insurgency.

It is important to mention here that the Leninist discourse on right to self-

determination is asserted by Maoists across the country. It is dogmatic to

advocate the Leninist perspective of right to self- determination up to

secession in the context of Nepal. However, the essence of right to self-

determination is camouflaged with the rhetoric of its misinterpretation in

such a way that people in general do not even want to hear a word about it.

April Movement 2005 and Its Consequences

It is well taken that April Movement did settle the Maoist insurgency by

bringing them into mainstream politics and uprooting the two hundred forty

years' institution of old Hindu Monarchy. It is really the breakthrough Nepali

polity did, but what it yields has become the pertinent question when at the

"Constituent Assembly," all parties agreed as a process to resolve all issues

messed up. Obviously there were many hopes and beliefs, but the

unanswered question at this moment is what was the goal, the mission and

the vision of April Movement for political leaders, indeed. Unlikely the

Captain Maoists along with other major political party leaders seem to be in

confusion. It is well understood that Maoists who fought for 'New

democracy' and when it came in agreement with other forces, it was

imperative to leave the dictatorship of protracted proletariat, peasants, and

farmers; but what about the state restructuring along with federalism where

overwhelming people dream to see, a New Nepal? However, all parties come

to an agreement on Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA), and it here where

there has clearly been expressed identity matters including the class

disparities to have been the vision of the agreement. Article 3.5 of CPA says:


"In order to end discriminations based on class, ethnicity, language,

gender, culture, religion and region and to address the problems of

women, Dalit, Indigenous people, ethnic minorities (Janajtis), Terai

Communities (Madheshis), oppressed, neglected and minority

communities and the backward areas by deconstructing the current

centralized and unitary structure, the state shall be restructured in an

inclusive, democratic and forward looking manner (CPA, 2006)."

The CPA has clearly envisioned the agenda of state restructuring;

however, it could not spell out federalism as such. So Madhesh movement

ruptured, and the state was forced to negotiate with Madheshi People's Rights

Forum (MPRF), and make a negotiation:

"In order to eliminate all forms of discriminations made by the

centralized and unitary state against, inter alia, the Madhesis, indigenous

people/ nationalities, Dalits, women, other backward classes, minorities,

Muslim communities and also to create an environment to move forward

all Nepali people including the Madhesis, into a single national

mainstream by restructuring the state into an inclusive democratic and

federal structure;…… While restructuring the state, an arrangement of a

federal governance system comprised of states with autonomy shall be

made…"

Accordingly, the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2006 accommodated the

aspirations of diverse groups with the commitment that Constituent

Assembly (CA) would address the issues:

The State of Nepal is mentioned in Article (1).... secular, inclusive and

fully democratic State. Similarly Article (5) about the languages of the

nation in Sub-Article (1) says: all the languages spoken as mother tongues

in Nepal are the national languages of Nepal; Sub- Article (2) says: the

Nepali language in the Devanagari script shall be the language of official

business. However, the use of one's mother tongue in a local body or

office shall not be barred. The State shall translate the language used for

such purposes into the language of official business for the record.

The Interim Constitution has also provisioned for education in mother

tongue for children who are different than Nepali. Article (17), Sub-Article

(1) says, "Each community shall have the right to receive basic education in

their mother tongue as provided for in the law." The clause, 'provided for the

law' is often found barred that obstructs the state to implement the

constitutional provisions.


The Interim Constitution of Nepal 2006 is found to be very positive towards

gender issues. It has enshrined the provisions regarding rights of women in

Article (20):

Sub-Article (1) says, "No woman shall be discriminated against in any

way on the basis of gender." Similarly Sub- Articles (2), (3), and (4)

ensure the right to reproductive health and other reproductive rights.

Physical, mental or any other form of violence against women shall be

punishable by law, and sons and daughters shall have equal rights to

ancestral property. These provisions seem to be greater changes, no matter

how much substantively women may have been benefiting.

One of the severe social problems Nepal has been facing is untouchability

among the so-called low caste community from the Hindu high caste people.

The Interim Constitution has made profound provisions such as, 'right against

untouchability and racial discrimination' in Article (14):

Sub- Article (1) says, "No person shall, on ground of caste, descent,

community or occupation, be subject to racial discrimination and

untouchability in any form. Such a discriminatory act shall be liable to

punishment and the victim shall be entitled to compensation as provided

by the law." Sub- Articles (2), (3), (4), and (5) guarantee the use of

services, utilities available to the public; production or making available

of any goods, services or conveniences, purchasing or acquiring such

goods, services or conveniences; not allowed to purport to demonstrate

superiority or inferiority of any person or a group of persons belonging to

any caste, tribe or origin; or not to justify social discrimination on the

basis of caste and tribe; or to disseminate ideas based on caste superiority

or hatred; or to encourage caste discrimination in any form. The violation

of above mentioned rights shall be punishable in accordance with law.

It clearly reveals the changes between the constitution of 1991 and 2007;

however, people who are overwhelmingly stuck with the forthcoming

constitution didn't see it substantively. The provisions of Interim Constitution

are perceived as provisional.

Constituent Assembly: Social Identity and Federalism

The globalization process has been that the ideological identification of the

centralization of power in the state with the homogenization of social and

cultural differences, a fundamental heritage of the democratic revolutions of

the 18th century to the modern state, has been undermined by the

redistribution of specific powers and aspects of sovereignty from states to an

increasing number of international regulatory bodies (Turner, 2006). These


changes are contributing to a paradigm shift in the forms of social space-time

(chronotope) associated with the idea of progress and the hegemony of the

modern nation-state. The changes brought by globalization are spread around

and current issue is how to address those issues. Turner suggests that re-

framing this cultural chronotope is called ‗synchronic pluralism‘, in which

there is neither a direction of historical time towards the creation of culturally

homogeneous national societies nor are states identified as unique centers of

sovereignty. So, chronotope associated with the new social movements based

on ethnicity, feminism, and regionalism is seen under the broader perimeter

of multiculturalism.

Social scientists have also intensified their longstanding interest in the

concept of identity in recent years (Jenkins, 1996). Sociologists have

pondered and explored the tension between individual identity and the

constraints of social structure. Anthropologists have examined the cultural

expression of identity, its meanings, and how it is maintained at group

boundaries. Social psychologists have focused on the multifaceted and

situational contingent nature of individual identity. They have also identified

social identity as a powerful ingredient in the development of in-group bias

and intergroup conflict (Tajfel, 1981).

Despite the recent emergence of identity politics around the world,

researchers of political behavior have been slow to incorporate the concept of

identity into their empirical studies (Huddy, 2001). This seems odd, given

that demands for group respect and recognition are at the heart of new social

movements that argue for the rights of women, religious minorities, diverse

ethnic and racial groups, and gays and lesbians (Taylor, 1994).

Constituent Assembly is the desire of Nepalese people for the last 6

decades when they got freedom from Rana Oligarchy. However, it didn't

happen at that time. Nepal had a very bad experience then when transition

went up to almost a decade. NC was very much criticized; palace played with

political forces eventually closed the door to CA and parliamentary election

occurred for the first time. After forty five years, politicians agreed on CA

that would make people's constitution by removing the Monarchy that

obscured the CA process at that time. So people were hopeful and

enthusiastic to see their aspirations portrayed in the new constitution.

The manifestos made public by the political parties are expected to guide

them during Constitution making process. Maoist and UML followed by

Madheshi forum and Terai Madhes Domocratic Forum laid the emphasis on

identity. One of the reason why, every political party adoted identity as the

basis of federalism is perhaps its overwhelming base population, as may be


seen in government statistics. INs population accounts for about 37.2 percent,

despite many INs believe that they have been under counted. One interesting

instance we can share here is that prior to Maoist Insurgency, though

strategically important in size, NC and UML were not much sensitive

towards INs, Dalit, and Madheshis issues. But later, NC too was also found

to establish INs Federation within its party structure. When Maoists came

into mainstream politics, NC and UML also formed INs' organizations in

their party, however, they accuse Maoist party of misleading the ideology

from Class to Caste. Similar instance Maoist experienced even during the CA

election. Below is a summary of the various political parties' proposals for

delineating the provinces.

Table 2: Summary of Political Parties' Proposals for Delineating the

Provinces

S.N. Parties Commitment

1 CPN (Maoist) Ethnic make-up, geographical features, linguistic basis and

economic feasibility

2 Nepali

Congress

National integrity, geographical location and convenience,

population, natural resources and economic feasibility,

interrelationship of the provinces, linguistic/ethnic and cultural

identity, political/administrative perspective

3 CPN (UML) Geographical location, population and ethnic habitation,

mother tongue and language used, cultural characteristics,

administrative convenience, socioeconomic interrelationship

and feasibility capacity, availability of natural resources and

means and history. Constituent units shall be named in way

that will reflect identity ethnically, language, culture and

history. Federal and local units shall be multiethnic,

multilingual, multi-religious, and multicultural.

4 MJAFNepal Geography, ethnicity, language, social, cultural characteristics,

diversity and homogeneity

5 TMLP Geographical similarity, cultural and linguistic, population and

economic similarity, similar climate, similarity in economy

and agriculture

6 Sadbhawana

Party

Language, culture and community

7 RPP Geography, population, caste, cultural identity, natural

resources, economic feasibility.

8 CPN (ML) Mix of caste groups and communal tolerance, stability,

security and balanced development; mix of the Himal, Pahad

and Terai, economic sustainability, uniformity in ethnicity,

language and culture, similar historical background and


geographical convenience.

9 Jana Morcha

Nepal

Caste, language, population, region and geography, natural

heritage and source of income.

10 CPN (United) Ethnicity, language, cultural concentration and geographical

situation/condition

11 N.Majdoor

Kisan Party

Based on existing zones.

12 Rastriya

Janashakti

Party

Natural and geographical characteristics, ethnic, linguistic and

cultural factors, status of economy, resources and

administration

13 Sadbhawana

(Anand Devi)

Geographical specificity, history and culture

14 Rastriya

Janamukti

Party

On the basis of geographical region with the majority of one

caste/ethnic group; as far as possible on the basis of religion,

historically inhabited by one ethnic group, on the basis of

language and culture

15 Sanghiya L.

Rastriya

Manch

Historical background of ethnicity or language for the

autonomy of a specific region, the ethnic group should be

indigenous to the state concerned.

16 CPN (Unified) Geography, population, caste, cultural identity, natural

resources, economic feasibility.

17 Nepali Janata

Dal

Opportunity for the development of natural resources;

population, language and culture, giving priority to national

unity.

18 Dalit Janajati

Party

National integrity, geographical conditions and convenience,

population, natural resources and economic feasibility,

interrelationship between states, homogeneity in language,

ethnicity, and culture, political and administrative feasibility.

19 Nepa Rastriya

Party

On the basis of ethnicity, language and region, with priority

for indigenous people

20 Chure Bhawar

Ekata Party

Geographical characteristics

21 Nepal Dal Geography and population density

22 Nepal

Loktantrik

Samajwadi

Party

Origin of ethnic groups, demography, natural resources,

history, language and culture etc.

Source: UNDP - Constitutional Advisory, Support Unit (CASU) & German

Technical Cooperation (GTZ)

Table 2 clearly shows that parties spelled out social identities- ethnicity,

language, and geographical region as the fundamental basis for federalization


manifest in their political commitment while they contested the popular adult

franchise election for CA. They were and should be guided by their

commitment in CA logically; however, it did not happen.

It was a good sign that CA composition was inclusive. For the first time

in Nepal's history and perhaps be in Asia, Nepal took positive measures as

regards social inclusion in CA composition. Out of the 601 CA members,

Madheshi accounted for 34.1 percent, followed by INs 33.2 per cent, women

32.7 per cent, Dalit 8.2 per cent, and others 30.2 per cent.24

So, following

this, State Restructuring and Division of the State Power (SRDSP) in CA

decided the basis of federalism to be 'Identity' and 'Capability' unanimously.

But when the Committee decided the federal units by its majority vote, the

CA process entirely stopped, and the different alternative models evolved in

different parties out of the CA process. On this was stuck the CA process,

and ultimately was made to see its demise without promulgating the

constitution. It has led Nepalese polity to a crossroad: hold on to the legacy,

backtrack, or fastforward to the new phase, broad based democracy and

multiculturalism.

Conclusion

In Nepali language the "jati" (ethnic group), the "Jatiya" (Ethnic), and the

"jatiyata" (Ethnicity) are quite often used to connote the Janajati (Nations)

and the janajatiyata (Nationalities) and this is reflected even by foreign

scholars in their writings. In my observation it is just reverse in reality. Often

the mainstream intellectuals are heard to call the Nepali terms jati, jatiya, and

jatiyata 'sensitive,' but why? If it connotes the indigenous groups, I mean

Janajati (Nations), they were never heard sensitive to any matter related to

them or to the State. Of course, the Jati (ethnic groups) are sensitive to any

matters, because they are considered alien to native area and Janajati people.

In every moment, they keep on thinking about their gains, loss, prosperity,

and are often conscious about how to dispel uncertainty. Epistemologically,

genus of ethnic group goes back to people who had left their native place and

got new identity ethnei, ethnic, and ethnicity in a place of destination

(Oommen, 2012; Kymlicka, 1995). I may be bias, but in my observation

comparatively migrants are much sensitive than the natives. So terms are

adversely used for natives even in scholarly work. And I think it is due to the

biasness of the colonial perspective. When native perspective and issues are

concerned, there emerge new terms for example, Janajatis (Nationalities/

Tribes) in Asia including Nepal, Inuit in Hokkaido Japan; aborigines in


Australia and New-Zealand, First Nations in Canada, Sami people in Europe,

Indians in America and so forth.

There are other words quite contentiously used such as Adibashi/

Anadibashi (Indigenous Peoples), Aprabashi (migrant), and Mulbashi (Main

inhabitant) in Nepal. It is well known and articulated in the literature about

who came from where; but it became problematic when Janatis (nationalities)

claimed group based democratic rights in republican constitution. The

parameter of Adibashi is then taken as a camouflage jacket even for Bahun,

Chetri, Thakuri, and Dasnami. So, a pertinent question now is how long a

resident should be designated as Adibashi (Indigenous Peoples)? Or, are

there any socio-cultural, historical, and territorial evidences to define the

Janajati? Of course, there are many essential characters to become Adibash.

Yet, when we take the cut- off year or point referring to the so-called

unification period of king Prithivinarayan Shah, it does not exceed 240 years.

Meanwhile, Vedic Hindus are here over the last thousand years or so. So,

pre- or post- unification, it does not make any sensible difference when we

talk about the years per se. But when socio-political rights and issues are

concerned with reference to Janajatis, then Hinduwization, Shankritzation,

and Bramanization are the major issues that played a role to exclude them by

subjugating and assimilating or mainstreaming into monoethnic nation state.

Of course, unification is important since Hindupati, Asali Hindustan, Hindu

Religious Kingdom, Hindu culture and ethos are historically taken as the

guiding principle of mainstreaming in mono-ethnic nation-state building

project.

The political discourse through which Nepal came across reveals that in

every movement a ruling party is abolished and rulers are denounced; and

people feel that they are emancipated. But all changes become false

ultimately, and another initiative begins right after the aftermath of the

previous one. It all comes as a never ending game the Nepalese polity is

fighting against. In such dilemma, obviously people, nations see their. One

persistent question is whether we do bear democracy as westerners do; if yes,

the outcome of globally accepted multiculturalism ensuring group based

rights along with individual freedom and liberty needs to be considered as

Kymlicka argues: create 'multinational and polyethnic State,' and it is

possible only through federal political arrangements.

In fact, Nepali State is made of elites rather than of people's

representatives from the very inception. The undefined conflict enduring

from the beginning is in between the elitism and group interests. This is what

is in Bentley's view that Marx's theory of class struggle was a 'crude form of


group theory.' He further argues that the failure of the so-called proletariat or

of the call 'unite behind a common interest and seize power' proved Marx

wrong. Indeed, Bentley (1908, p. 467) says, "A proletariat class, such as

Marx and Engels conceived it, simply did not exist (cited in Manely, 2010)."

And it is true in the context of Nepali society, where indigeneity and

peasantry is much more prevalent than to be capitalists. Apart from this, of

course, the casteism prevails in the society. The 'revolution' which class

struggle provoked is found volatile. So, the question of 'fusion' between 'Arm

Struggle' and 'Identity Conflict' is pertinently persisting. However, Maoist do

not interpret it this way. So, the question of ideology, if we refer it to the

definition of Wikepedia offers us, it is an organized collection of scientific

ideas with comprehensive vision proposed by dominant class of a society to

all members of the society.' Brahmins are dominant in Nepalese society in

intellectual entrepreneurship so they are able to harvest the fruits as well.

However, what a society looks for in return must be tangibly shown. In a

very abstract way, different 'isms' are interpreted and are applied for their

particular interest. And Maoists are the last ones where there were many

people who fought for everything and found nothing. This illustrates an 'ism'

in their deep heart for which they sacrificed everything. Of course,

democracy has a wide universal and global space than the dictatorial system.

All 'isms' seem already exhausted in Nepal; however, new forces may emerge

with relevant and appropriate ideology in a democratic setting. And it is

imperative, for Nepal to exist as a vibrant democratic state in future.

Notes 1. The Americanization was primarily initiated through the public school system.

New York Superintendent of Schools William Maxwell declared in 1913 that the

―great business of the department of education in this city [is] to train the

immigrant child … to become a good American citizen.‖....In 1893, while visiting

an elementary school in a New York City tenement district, Jacob Riis overheard

children reciting a type of a pledge of allegiance to the flag that included the

phrase, ―one country, one language, one Flag!‖ In the New York City public

school system, the use of any other language within or near the schools was

forbidden(http://sdonline.org/48/the-cultural-pluralist-response-to-

americanization-horace-kallen-randolph-bourne-louis-adamic-and-leonard-

covello/)

2. Individual identity may change as s/he prefers to be, so it is likely to be 'ascribed'

one. But collective identity on which s/he has nothing to do, but ancestrally or

traditionally one has got by birth is likely to be acquired, such as race, ethnicity,

mother tongue, etc. However, the importance of individual choice in identity


acquisition holds even for what we think of as quite fixed characteristics such as

race and ethnicity by virtue of different reasons (Nag, 1995).

3. Information adopted from Dulal (B.S. 2068) and analyzed for the purpose of this

article. Out of 371, there are 279 primary schools (grade 1 to 5), followed by 43

Secondary School (grade 9-10), 42 Lower Secondary School (grade 6-8), 15

higher secondary (grade 11-12), and 2 Campuses.

4. Jul 30, 2009) On July 25, 2009, after a year-long trial, the Supreme Court of

Nepal ruled that Vice President Parmananda Jha's taking of the oath of office in

Hindi, instead of Nepali, on July 23, 2008, was unconstitutional. The two-justice

bench, comprising Chief Justice Min Bahadur Rayamajhi and Justice Balram KC,

stated: "[t]he oath in Hindi stands annulled as it is against the legal provisions…

Since he is responsible for upholding law, the vice-president must take his oath of

office and secrecy in Nepali."

5. http://www.nepalnews.com/main/index.php/news-archive/2-political/4021-jha-

takes-fresh-oath-in-nepali-maithali-to-revive-vp-post.html

6. In 2017 B.S. Daura Suruwal was announced as national dress for men in

government services and other national programs. Daura suruwal took a great

pace of development in those in those years. Very few of Nepali now wear Daura

Suruwal. After 2046 B.S none of the elected or interim governments is able to

define and announce any national the national dress

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daura-Suruwal)

7. United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations decided 1993 year as

the Indigenous Peoples Year.

8. The National State should refer to such states that consciously nurture cultural

diversity within their territory and endorse cultural pluralism, that is, dignified co-

existence of cultural communities, as a value (Oommen, 20012).

9. (1) A national minority may continue to be in its ancestral or adopted homeland

and yet it may be ethnified by state sponsored colonization, particularly by a

native dominant collectivity.

a. Transforming the oiginal inhabitants of a territory into a minoritized and

marginalized collectivity;

b. Labelling a collectivity in such a way that it has no moral claim over its

ancestral or adopted homeland;

c. Some nations are subjected to ethnification as a result of a division of their

ancestral homeland into two or more state territories,

(2) Denial of fully-fledged participation in the economy and polity to an

immigrant collectivity which had adopted the land in the which it has

migrated as its homeland,

(3) The tendency on the part of a settler collectivity to identify with its ancestral

homeland even after several decades, sometimes even after centuries, of

immigration,

(4) Ethnification occurs when state attempts to integrate and homogenize the

different nation in its territory into a common people.


(5) If those who migrate to alien lands are denied citizenship rights even when

they become eligible for them, they are ethnified in that they are treated as

strangers and outsiders.

(6) Even when migrants are accepted as co-nationals by the host society, the

former may not want that identity and might wish to return to their homeland.

10. The Searchlight, Patna; 2 October, 1946; Source: Pradeep Giri, Archive of B.P.

Koirala (B.S. 2066) cited in Historical Documents of Nepali Congress, in eds

Gagan Thapa et. al, 2067.

11. Prasai is vehement supporter of Hindu Religious Kingdom and Monarch against

the multiparty democracy. He is continuously writing in opposition to republic

and Maoist( http://www. weeklyblitz.net/1973/nepalese-political-scenarios-1950-

2011

12. Panchayat Democracy enshrined as:

Whereas, the parliamentary system could not prove suitable on account of the lack

of education and political consciousness to the desired extent and on account of its

being out to step with the histoy and tradition of the country and wishes of the

people;

Whereas, even the installation of the government elected by the people could not

impart to the people as sense of participation the administration...

Whereas, the country has experienced that the fulfillment of OUR aim, namely to

conduct the administration of the country on the basis of popular consent and to

achieve the real objective of democracy by associating the people to the maximum

extent possible with the administrative system, which is possible only through the

medium of the Panchayat system which has its roots in the soil of our country and

is capable of growth and development in the climate prevailing in the country.

13. Ganesh Man Shingh did not accept the name of the Congress Party as B.P. Koirala

proposed the All Indian National Congress Party.

14. (1) Khasan, (2) Jadan, (3) Magarat, (4) Tamudhim, (5) Tambasaling, (6) Nepal,

(7) Khambuwan, (9) Limbuwan, (10) Kochila, (11) Mithila, (12) Bhojpur, (13)

Awadh.

15. Hidden facts in Nepali Politics (Nepali Rajnitima Adekha Sachchai).

16. (1) Kirath Yakthung Chumlung (KYC), (2) Kirat Rai Sanskritik Sangh, (3) Tamu

Bouddh Sewa Samittee, (4) Langhali Pariwar, (5) Nepal Bhasha Manka Khala, (6)

Thakali Sewa Samittee, (7) Sunuwar Sewa Samaj (8) Nepal Tamang Gdhedung

17. In most of the writings ethnic groups used for native people of Nepal, which is

western view, but indigenous peoples of Nepal defined themselves as

Nationalities. Task Force formed by Nepal Government for the establishment of

the foundation for the promotion of nationalities, is ―that community who has its

own mother tongue and traditional culture and yet does not fall under the

conventional fourfold Varna of the Hindu Varna system or the Hindu hierarchical

caste structure‖ (NEFIN 2009). Nation or nationality refers to peoples who have

settled in a certain territory, who have their own language and culture, and desire

to self-determination, have trade relationships with each other and are independent


and sovereign (Gurung 2006). According to NEFIN (2009), each indigenous

nationality or Janajati has the following characteristics:

• A distinct collective identity;

• Own language, religion, tradition, culture and civilization;

• Own traditional egalitarian social structure;

• Traditional homeland or geographical area;

• Written or oral history;

• Having "We" feeling—a sense of self-identity

• Has had no decisive role in the politics and government of modern Nepal;

• Who are the indigenous or native peoples of Nepal; and

• Who declares itself as "Janajati"

18. Cadres of the ruling CPN-UML citing the party's apathy in the suicide of veteran

cadre Digendra Rajbanshi and hundreds of relatives and well wishers of the

deceased Rajbanshi and UML activists chanted slogans against the party and

staged demonstrations. Vehicles plying on the highway have been stranded

following the protest. The agitators accused the party of neglecting Rajbanshi who

was actively involved in the party for the past 37 years. Party negligence was the

major cause of his suicide, the agitators claimed. Rajbanshi, 65 had committed

suicide by hanging himself from a plum tree in the premises of the UML

headquarters at Balkhu, Kathmandu. He was staying in the party headquarters in

the hope of finding a job for his son Shambhu, 25 for the past two months. He met

senior leaders of the party and ministers as well but to no avail. He was

disappointed with their responses and ultimately killed himself, a family source

said. He was a colleague of KP Sharma Oli, Radha Krishna Mainali, Biren

Rajbanshi, CP Mainali and Mohan Chandra Adhikari among others during the

Peasants' Uprising in Jhapa during 1970s and was sentenced to six years

imprisonment in Birgunj and Kathmandu on the charge of sedition (The

Himalayan, 18 April, 2010).

19. The three rules: (1) prompt obedience to orders, (2) no confiscation of peasant

property, and (3) prompt delivery directly to authorities of all items confiscated

from landlords.

The eight points were: (1) Be polite when speaking, (2) Be honest when buying

and selling, (3) Return all borrowed articles, (4) Pay compensation for everything

damaged, (5) Do not hit or swear at others, (6) Do not damage crops, (7) Do not

harass females, (8) Do not mistreat prisoners (http://en.

wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Rules_of_Discipline_and_Eight_Points_for_Attention).

20. It appeared that they smeared their faces with black powder.

21. This may be Tharu or Maithili or Bhojpuri.

22. Popular made-in-Nepal shoes specially for villagers.

23. One of the combatant, I am not sure, but may be Pashang. He is also from Magar

Community.

24. Ironically others category outnumbered, since dominant groups who have a

overwhelming representation didn't want to be recognized with the potential

category of inclusion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warlord


References

Bista, D.B. 1991. Fatalism and Development: Nepal's Struggle for Modernization.

Madras: Longman.

Bohara, A.K. 2003. "Empowerment crisis: regional governance and the mixed

proportional representation system of election." In D.B. Gurung (ed.), Nepal

Tomorrow: Voices and Visions. Kathmandu: Koselee Prakashan, pp. 86-101.

Burghart, Richard. 1993. "The Political Culture of Panchayat Democracy." In Michael

Hutt (ed.), Nepal in the Nineties. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp.1-

13.

Bentley, A. F. 1908. The Process of Government. Evanston, Ill.: Principia Press.

Caplan, Lionel. 1970. Land and Social Change in East Nepal: A Study of Hindu-tribal

Relations. Kathmandu: Himal Books.

Chemjong, I.S. 2003 4th Edition. History and Culture of Kirat People. Kathmandu:

Kirat Yakthung Chumling.

_____.1964, B.S. 2021. Limbu- Nepali- English Shabdakosh(Dictionary).Kathmandu:

Nepal Academy.

Conn, Paul H. 1973. "Social Pluralism and Democracy." American Journal of

Political Science, 17:2, pp. 237-254.

Conn, Paul H. 1973. "Social Pluralism and Democracy." American Journal of

Political Science, 17: 2 (May, 1973), pp. 237-254.

Crowder, George. Apr., 2007. "Two Concepts of Liberal Pluralism." Political Theory,

35 :2.

Dimitrova, Diana .2007. "The Development of Sanatana Dharma in the Twentieth

Century: A Radhasoami Gum's Perspective." International Journal of Hindu

Studies, 11:1, pp.89-98.

Dulal, D.P. 2068. PanchtharkoItihas. Kathmandu: Ramadevi Thapaliya.

Elshtain, Jean Bethke. 2003. "Against Liberal Monism." Daedalus. On Secularism &

Religion (summer, 2003), 132:3, pp.78-79.

Gellner, David . 2001. "From Groups Rights to Individual Rights and Back: Nepalese

Struggles over Culture and Equality." In Jane Cowan et al. (eds.), Culture and

Rights: Anthropological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

_____.1997. "Ethnicity and Nationalism in the World's Only Hindu State." In David

Gellner, Joanna Pffaf-Czarnecka and John Whelpton (eds.), Nationalism and

Ethnicity in a Hindu Kingdom: The Politics of Culture in Contemporary

Nepal. Amsterdam: Overseas Publisher Association.

Government of Nepal. 2006. Comprehensive Peace Agreement, 21 November,

Concluded between the Government of Nepal and the CPN (Maoist).

Gurung, H. 2007. Maile Dekheko Nepal (Vignettes of Nepal). Translated Basanta

Thapa, Kathmandu: Himal Kitab.

_____.2005. Nepal regional strategy for development. Working Paper Series No. 3,

Nepal Resident Mission, Asian Development Bank.


_____.2004. "Social Exclusion and Maoist Insurgency." Proceeding ILO Convention

No. 169 and Peace Building in Nepal, (Kathmandu: FEFIN & ILO Nepal).

_____.1997. "State and Society in Nepal." In David Gellner , Joanna Pffaf-Czarnecka

and John Whelpton (eds.), Nationalism and Ethnicity in a Hindu Kingdom:

The Politics of Culture in Contemporary Nepal. Amsterdam: Overseas

Publisher Association.

_____.1996. Janajati Serophero. Kathmandu: Nepal Adibashi Janajati Mahasangh

_____.1986. Nature and Culture.Kathmandu: Saroja Gurung.

Gurung, G. 1985. Nepali Rajnitima Adekha Sachchai (Hidden Facts in Nepali

Politics). Kathmandu: Gopal Gurung.

Hagen, Susan .2005. "Race and the Politics of Identity in Nepal." Ethnology, 44:1,

pp.49-64.

- (2007), Creating a 'New Nepal': The Ethnic Dimension. Washington: East-West

Center

Haug, Marie. 1967. "Social and Cultural Pluralism as a Concept in Social System

Analysis." American Journal of Sociology, 73 (November 1967), pp.304.

Haysom, Nicholas R.L. 2002. "Constitution Making and Nation Building." In Raoul

Blindenbacher and Arnold Koller (eds.), Federalism in a Changing World

Learning Each Other. McGill- Queen's University Press.

Hofer, Andras. 1979. The Caste Hierarchy and the State in Nepal: A Study of the

Muluki Ain of 1854. Innsbruck: Universitatsverlag Wanger.

Hoftun, Martin. 1993. "The Dynamics and Chronology of the 1990 Revolution." In

Michael Hutt (ed.), Nepal in the Nineties. New Delhi: Oxford University

Press, pp.1-13.

Huddy, Leonie. 2001. "From Social to Political Identity: A Critical Examination of

Social identity Theory." Political Psychology, 22 : 1,pp.127-156.

Hutt, Michael.1993. "Drafting the 1990 Constitution." In Michael Hutt (ed.), Nepal in

the Nineties. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Jenkins, R. 1996. Social identity. London: Routledge.

Kamata, Yoji .1999. "The Implicit Mode of Domination in Nepal: Fatalism and

Bahunism as The Main Causes of Underdevelopment." Contributions to

Nepalese Studies, 26:1, pp.65-81.

Kumar, Chanchal. 2011. "Multiculturalism in a Global Society: Minority Rights and

Justice." Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 1:3.

Kymlicka, Will. 1995. Multicultural Citizenship. Oxford: Clearendon Press.

- 2005. "Liberal Multiculturalism: Western Models, Global Trends, and Asian

Debates." In Will Kymlicka and Baogang He (eds.), Multiculturalism in Asia.

Oxford: University Press, pp. 22-55.

Lama, Tshewang. 1993. "Who cares for Humla... ." Himal , September/ October

Issue.

Lawoti, M. 2010. "Multinational Statehood." Kathmandu Post, 26 Nov, 2010.

_____.2005. Towards a Democratic Nepal: Inclusive Political Institutions for a

Multicultural Society. New Delhi: Sage Publications.


Lecomte- Tilouine, Marie. 2000. The History of the Messianic and Rebel King Lakhan

Thapa Magar: Utopian and Ideology among the Magar. No. 19.

Mabuhang, Balkrishna. 2009. "Federalism from Ethno-demographic and Linguistic

Perspective." In D.B. Gurung (ed.), Towards A Federalized Democratic

Nepal. Friends for Peace Publication.

Mabuhang, Balkrishna et al.2005. Bidhyalaya Starko Pathyakram Adhyan ra

Bishlesan: Adibasi Janajati Dristikornma. Kathmandu: Adibasi Janajati

Utthan Pratisthan.

Manley, John F. 1983. "Neo-Pluralism: A Class Analysis of Pluralism I and Pluralism

II." The American Political Science Review, 77: 2, pp.368-383.

Mazeed, Akhtar et al. 2008. "Building on and Accommodating Diversities." In Ronald

L. Watts and Rupak Chattopadhyay (eds.), Unity in Diversity: Learning from

Each Other, 1:3, pp.20.

Meeker, Kevin .2006. "Pluralism, Exclusivism, and the Theoretical Virtues."

Religious Studies, 42:2, pp.193-206.

Muni, S.D. 2004. Maoist Insurgency in Nepal: The Challenge and The Response

.New Delhi: Observer Research Foundation.

NEFEN .1991. Constitution of Nepal Federation of Nationalities.

NFDIN .2003. National Foundation for Development of Indigenous Nationalities: An

Introduction.

Ogura, Kiyoko . 2008. "Seeking the State: The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)."

Berghof, Transition Series- 3, Berghof Research Center for Constructive

Conflict Management. , 14-20 April, 2006; Nepali Times, Days of Future

Past, No. 294.

_____.2004. "Realities and Images of Nepal's Maoists After the Attack on Beni."

European Bulleting of Himalayan Research (EBHR- 27).

Oommen, T.K . 2012. "Ethno-nationalism and Building National States in South Asia:

Towards Federalism." In Chaitanya Mishra and Om Gurung (eds.), Ethnicity

and Federalism in Nepal , Kathmandu: Central Department of Sociology/

Anthropology.

_____.2008. " Nation Building and Diversities." In Ronald L. Watts and Rupak

Chattopadhyay (eds.), Building and Accommodating Diversity, New Delhi:

Viva Books.

Pandey, Nishchal N. 2005. Nepal's Maoist Movement and Implications for India and

China. Kathmandu: Manohar Publishers.

Rex, L. Jones .1976. "Sanskritization in Eastern Nepal" Ethnology, 15:1, pp.63-75.

Sharma, P. Raj .1997. "Nation- Building, Multi-Ethnicity, and The Hindu State." In

David Gellner, Joanna Pffaf-Czarnecka and John Whelpton (eds.),

Nationalism and Ethnicity in a Hindu Kingdom: The Politics of Culture in

Contemporary Nepal, Amsterdam: Overseas Publisher Association.

Sharma, Vijaya Raj .2007. "Comparative study of Federation Proposal for Nepal."

Liberal Democracy Nepal Bulletin, 2:2.

Shmid, Herman .1981. "On the Origin of Ideology,"ActaSociologica, 24:(1/2), pp.

57-73.


Stiller, L. F. 1968. Prithivinarayan Shah in the Light of DibyaUpadesh. Ranchi: The

Catholic Press.

Tajfel, H. 1981. Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Taylor, C. 1994. "The politics of Recognition." In A. Gutmann ( ed.),

Multiculturalism: Examining the politics of recognition. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press, pp. 25-73.

Thapa, D. and Bandita Sijapati .2003. A Kingdom Under Siege: Nepal's Maoist

Insurgency, 1996 to 2003. Kathmandu: The Printhouse.

Turner, Terry .2006. "Anthropology as Reality Show and as Co-production: Internal

Relations between Theory and Activism." Critique of Anthropology, 26:1,

pp.15-25.

United Nations Development Programme . 2008. Designing the Federal State in

Nepal, Report of a Conference, 26-29 February 2008, Dhulikhel, Nepal

Verma, Anand Swaroop and Gautam Navalakh .2007. "People's War in Nepal:

Genesis and Development." Economic and Political Weekly, 42:20 (May 19-

25, 2007), pp. 1839-1843.

Whelpton, John .1997. "Political Identity in Nepal: State, Nation, and Community." In

David Gellner, Joanna Pffaf-Czarnecka and John Whelpton (eds.),

Nationalism and Ethnicity in a Hindu Kingdom: The Politics of Culture in

Contemporary Nepal. Amsterdam: Overseas Publisher Association.