False narrative

This article was first published in The Kathmandu Post, Jan 26, 2015.

By now, UCPN (Maoist) leaders Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Baburam Bhattarai must understand very well that in a consumer culture, a colour television appeals more to the Nepal masses, including themselves, than the Communist Manifesto. However, one should not forget a decade-long communist movement was successfully concluded in Nepal in 2006, despite Francis Fukuyama’s ‘grand narrative’ of the end of history in 1989. The Maoist leadership, especially former Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai, was no doubt well aware of Fukuyama’s announcement of changes in the human landscape with a victory of consumer culture over communism before kicking off the armed insurgency in 1996.

It is not that Maoist leaders do not know what is best for the country; it is just they have been swallowed by the fear of being sidelined in national politics for the foreseeable future. This makes them anxious, and the media, civil society, and all other stakeholders should realise that leaving constitution writing completely to the Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN-UML will not lead the country forward.

Maoist agendas

Political parties are getting more polarised each day and they seem unlikely to promulgate a 

constitution acceptable to all. The Maoists have been sticking to a federal structure based on

ethnic identity while the NC and UML are on a different boat. Pressure from the people is

mounting because of the general perception that all problems will be solved once we have a constitution. Ironically, the media is not supporting the opposition for a democratic and free society. In an interview with the BBC Nepali Sewa, Bhattarai said that the media is taking the side of the so-called upper class and feeding their interests.  

In a recent interview with Kantipur Daily, Pitambar Sharma, a notable thinker, highlighted that

the NC-UML feel that they were dragged into the process of federally restructuring the country.

Putting aside all illogical issues related to ethnic identity that the Maoist party is talking about, we all know that it was the primary driving force, which attracted all of us to be a part of this historic change. The issue of inclusion was more important for the Maoists than for any other party, and that is what has made our CA one of the most inclusive institutions ever in Nepali history.

There will always be a section of the people who will stick to superficial and simplified versions of reality. And they generally come from the upper class of society. Media managers, of course, try to go with who is in power, since a large part of media business is all about corporate decisions rather than speaking the truth or supporting vulnerable groups. We have been seeing how the Indian media is often entirely in favour of the powerful, the government, and business leaders in recent times. Sometimes, it seems Nepal is a reflection of Indian minds in most cases—from the media to politics.

Multiple identities

Ideally, communism treasures the idea of protecting the dignity of the poor and the marginalised

and advocates for their betterment. Having said that, our society has moved far beyond and we continue to exist in an orderly exchange of personal choices and sharing of preferences. Politics has gone beyond ideology and our identity is not just defined by our ethnic roots. Each individual makes distinct choices and holds different aspirations and beliefs. All these make a person and their roles in society a reflection of what they think, do, and try to deliver. All these actions are limited by one’s social, economic, and political status. Ethnic identity alone, therefore, hardly matters. The Maoist’s insistence on federalising Nepal along ethnic identities is therefore faulty.

Federalising Nepal based on ethnic identity could discourage the flow of people from one place

to another due to a fear of being marginalised. That would be reflected in our production system.

Innovation will be subdued as movement of people comes to a halt. This scenario gives a clear

indication of potential conflicts among and between different states. Meanwhile, we are also not

sure about checks and balances in the new federal structure of the country.

Against this backdrop, what happened in the Constituent Assembly (CA) last Monday midnight was not mere political agitation. It was a reflection of our social and political culture and level of tolerance. There are innumerable things that make one individual or group angry but the fear of losing one’s identity is the most compelling. The social, economic, and political development of Nepal is concentrated in a group that has access to power. A large section of society still lives with no access to education, health, or basic sanitation facilities. What we should not forget is that our CA members are products of our social reality and economic status. Drafting a constitution might be just another political game for some, but it is a battle to protect identity and respect for a majority of the people, especially for those who have been marginalised and exploited for a long time.

Decent dissent

While the Maoist party is not an absolutely honest political force, it is true that it gave voice to

the concerns of the people. It is the same force that fought against feudal lords in our society.

Having said that, we live in a society where there is still a stronghold of those who benefitted

from the monarchical system. No matter how liberal society seems while observing happenings

in the Capital, Nepal remains far behind from looking at the corners of the Far West and along

the borders with India, where access to Kathmandu is a mirage.

So this is the time to show political maturity and tolerance for each other. Again, supporting the

argument to leave constitution writing in the hands of the NC and UML alone would not be a wise

move by the media, intellectuals, and activists. What we have been trying to institutionalise were

not the agendas of the ruling coalition. However, the Maoist party also has to calm down and

adopt decent ways of expressing dissent.

Poudel is a researcher at the Beijing-based ThinkIN China