- http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2007/others/guestcolumn/apr/guest_columns_09.php

In Defense of the “Non-intellectual”

By Pramod Dhakal, Ph.D.

In a short span of 50 years they have made the country economically defunct, environmentally ruined, and reliant upon foreign donation and remittance for feeding its people. Let us have a look on those top brains of Nepal like MBB Shah, Gyanendra Shah, Rishikesh Shah, KI Singh, Tulsi Giri, Prakash Chandra Lohani, Surya Bahadur Thapa, Pashupati Samser Rana, Tanka Prasad Acharya, Subarna Sumser Rana, BP Koirala, Nagendra Prasad Rijal, Kirti Nidhi Bista, and even Ram Saran Mahat. Their talent and education would be among the best of people but they could not find any mathematical magic for the fairness and prosperity of Nepal in all the books written in the world.

By Dr Pramod Dhakal

The English-educated and Internet savvy Nepalese have started a number of mailing lists that pour emails at a rate that there are not enough hours in the day to read them all. Involved in these groups are some self proclaimed “intelligent” and “educated” cyber-friends who love to edify the self. Although they mostly do superficial and self-serving discussions on the name of the people and “the motherland”, still I go there to get some fodder for the brain when the mind wants a break from usual work. While doing so, I came across some pitiful emails proclaiming a survey about the “uneducated” and “unintelligent” politicians of Nepal. However, despite my strong grievances towards the failed leaders, I found the kind of criticism done by these propagandist friends to be in poor taste. Therefore, I would like to write some words in defense of those politicians and to point out the hollowness of the thoughts of our “intelligent” friends.

Before going to the subject matter, however, I must also tell that I find Nepal’s old political leadership lacking vision and wisdom, predisposed to corruption and ineptitude, attached to power, and holding sway in the parties, and the country, due to a culture of impunity in the parties and in the government. At the same time, it would be unfair to ignore their contributions to the positive developments that have happened from the time of signing the 12 Point Agreement of November 22, 2005 to the formation of interim government of April 1, 2007, which has presented a new opportunity to build democracy, peace and security in Nepal. Therefore, they deserve their fair share of credit along with all the criticisms that they have earned.

Coming back to the topic, the conclusion of the emails under discussion was that “our good brains do not involve in politics/parties”, “Nepalese politicians are in lowest grade in global ranking”, “the majority of politicians are criminals, chor, fataha, thag, murderers, smugglers, and corrupt”, “the rejected brains have been ruling over the cream brains in Nepal, a great reason for failure of the country”, “80% of key political leaders belong to the rejected brains group”, “most TU students are in centre of politics and not students of highly rated +2 and A level private colleges, who rather are abreast in the politics of the First World”, “Girija, Prachanda, Makune are no superb graduates like Tony Blair from Oxford and Bush from Yale”, and so on.

Well, criticisms can be eye openers and forces of positive change if done properly. However, the manner used in these criticisms is neither fair nor constructive but rather indicative of the intellectual bankruptcy of the appraisers. These criticisms are presented with numeric figures as if they were the result of scientific and objective studies, and the authors claim to be non-political, but any thinking person can figure out that they are manufactured for biased and purely political agenda. We all know that doing “politics” was illegal in old Panchayat Raj and Rana Sasan, and their keepers threw political opponents in jail, banned political literature that opposed them, and even executed political leaders as “non-political” acts. Students of government sponsored Swatantra Bidyarthi Mandal were paid and trained to carry out “non-political” activities against those who participated in “politics.” So much for the non-political politics!

However, the most annoying part of it is the labels like “cream brains” versus “rejected brains”, where the appraisers think that they belong to the “cream” category and politicians opposed by them belong to the “rejected”, and thus completely failing to do a fair and balanced assessment of the reality. The ridiculousness reaches its peak when assertions are made that +2 and A level private school graduates and Oxford graduates are intellectually superior to other humans. Further our “intelligent” friends found example like George W Bush to be indicative of Ivy League genius! Have we forgotten how the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was proved to be true in the UN? Was not it that everyone in the world who questioned that assertion was labeled either brainless or a supporter of a dictatorship?

The most famous leaders of modern times like Churchill, Gandhi, Lenin, Mandela, Mao, Martin Luther King, and Reagan, attended ordinary institutions. Even Albert Einstein, a man noted by Time as Person of the Century, would be a “rejected brain” for the first 30 years of his life if our “cream” friends were to appraise him. The most famous inspirational leaders of all time, like Confucius, Buddha, and Chanakya, did not attend any illustrious universities like Oxford, MIT and Harvard; despite that, top intellectuals around the world admire those thinkers with awe. Qin Shi Huang, one of the most famous rulers in history credited for feats like Great Wall and Terracotta Warriors, was hardly literate and Genghis Khan was an illiterate man raised by a destitute mother. Our Ivy League PhDs are still studying to date to figure out how those men might have built up organizational, technological and visionary capabilities so rarely achieved by anyone else in the history of mankind. Even Nepal’s Maoist movement is worth noting. How did those leaders, once ridiculed by even failed leaders like Deuba, develop and manage such a large and complex organization against all odds with capability to fight an army trained and sponsored by superpowers, and managed by top Generals? It could not have been possible if talent was present only among the elite Nepalese. The feet of our “cream” friends would have shaken if they had to develop and manage a system with a fraction of that difficulty and complexity. The moral of this is that books taught in Oxford and Harvard do not have pre-fabricated solutions to Nepal’s problems; the solution can be found only from within and implemented only by harnessing our own human potential.

Our “cream” friends seem to not question the intellect of Gyanendra or Paras while they are busy blaming every other politician. They are blinded due to biasness and, therefore, cannot see the counter productive role they themselves are playing. Further, Nepal was ruled by virtually illiterate people of Shah and Rana dynasties for two centuries. They ruled without giving anything back to the people, only collecting taxes from the self-reliant people of Nepal who lived off the natural resources that existed in their surroundings. These pathetic rulers kept Nepalese people in complete darkness but, fortunately, did not know how to destroy the resilience of our people. Then, there came an era when our foreign educated PhDs landed in Singha Durbar to engineer Nepalese economy to modernity.

In a short span of 50 years they have made the country economically defunct, environmentally ruined, and reliant upon foreign donation and remittance for feeding its people. Let us have a look on those top brains of Nepal like MBB Shah, Gyanendra Shah, Rishikesh Shah, KI Singh, Tulsi Giri, Prakash Chandra Lohani, Surya Bahadur Thapa, Pashupati Samser Rana, Tanka Prasad Acharya, Subarna Sumser Rana, BP Koirala, Nagendra Prasad Rijal, Kirti Nidhi Bista, and even Ram Saran Mahat. Their talent and education would be among the best of people but they could not find any mathematical magic for the fairness and prosperity of Nepal in all the books written in the world. It would not be an exaggeration to say that their failures are greater than that of the illiterate Ranas. The weakest of all – Padma Sumsher – my have earned more touting rights than our Western educated talents! Note how Dr Prakash Chandra Lohani, a Board First student of Nepal, western educated and talented economist became a complete failure. Folks from Nepali Congress think Dr Ram Sharan Mahat is also a “tall” man but his failures are even more so spectacular! Look at the “American-style” corporatization of elementary schools to universities for “Singapore like fast economic progress” and ponder what fed the last 11 years of conflict in Nepal! By the way, it was not fed by the poverty most touted by “experts” but by the blatant injustices inflicted by such policies on poor and non-urban Nepalese. They only added new dimensions of corruptions on top of those already existed during Panchayat Raj and Rana rule. If another Board First and exemplary genius like Dr Baburam Bhattarai were to inherit this system of governance and start pleasing our Harvard-loving intellectuals, it is only a guarantee that he will be an utter failure as well. Unless we adopt different political and economic models and modalities that are responsive to Nepal’s natural and human realities, and are manageable by indigenously available human capital, Nepal will not see the light at the end of the tunnel.

However, these talent loving friends are not bleeding for what they call mother Nepal but are attempting to fool us with their self-serving logic. Let us not venture into what they attempt to bring to us for it is better to be poor with intact human dignity and freedom than stable Rana Sasan and Panchayat Raj. These “intellectuals” are worried that the big posts will now be handed over to the party operatives but they are so blind to not figure out that their party-less and bureaucracy-centric vision is thoroughly hollow and bankrupt. Their system is so corrupt that even sandal-wearing politicians become corrupt and start dejecting their own people if they ever enter there. Then again, if our “cream” friends are so superior to the rest of the public-school educated Nepalese, why don’t they come to the fore and lead?

Further, can any western education teach vision and wisdom? They can only produce mechanical brains with some statistical and mathematical abilities to attempt to implement something based on what the books say. But we need different mindset, unbound by books, one that has a vision in the first place and can translate that vision into reality. Only a leader that has experienced the ground realities of everyday people, is empathic to the pain of those people, has risen beyond self, has determination and confidence to lead the masses of people, and has management and organizational capabilities, can ever lead a country to greatness. This is not an easy feat for an everyday talented person but our book-loving friends are too naive to know that. Our Harvard educated PhD and non-PhD friends indeed attempted to build Nepal their way but they have only met failures. Many of them have already left Nepal in frustration and we know that they have no magic to solve the complex problems of Nepal and no persona to lead Nepal.

The challenge of Nepal is in finding a visionary leader who may come from the most humble of beginnings. But unless the system is restructured to make it conducive for new and better leadership to emerge past the old ones, all those potential leaders will die in the womb of Nepal long before they can display their mettle. There is severe need for transparency on how things are done from a household to the nation, from the individual political worker to the party. But today’s reality is that whoever happened to be at a high position will stay there till his or her death, even if the position was obtained by inheritance and not by inherent quality. Once in power, they are able to do anything with impunity as there are no checks and balances. But even if they were to exist, they would be ineffective when systems are too complex for them to be comprehensible to common people. But we have this notion that we could be masters of any complex system if only we had an opportunity to attend Harvard or MIT. But the unfortunate reality of the fact is that these institutions cannot teach any such magic to us.

Another problem to be understood is that our self-serving intellectuals seem to have too much free time, which they spend in bashing others and in writing loads of hollow complaints. When there is nothing better to do, everyone’s pastime naturally becomes petty politics (of course if they were real geniuses as they claim, they would have figured out the solution to the problems a long time ago). Until the day the system of governance is made simplified, resilient, self-sustaining, and self-improving, these problems will remain and the same talented people will use their brain to keep the system corrupt for their personal gain. Only a self-improving system can continuously enhance its capacity to deliver more service through the use of same amount of human resource. However, a system based on “natabad”, “kripabad”, “chakari” and “chaplusi” can never be self-sustaining and self-improving. In a corrupt system, our “intellectual” friends will never serve the “non-intellectual” and ordinary leaders elected by the people even if a fair system of electing the representatives were to be instilled. And, let us leave this topic of self-improving systems for yet another article!

संशोधन!
प्रकश चन्द्र लोहनि बोर्ड् फस्ट आएको सरासर् गलत हो। २०४७ साल् ताका कन्तिपुर दैनिक मा बोर्ड् फस्ट् हरु को सूची दिएको मा भूल बस प्रकश चन्द्र जोशि हुनु पर्ने मा प्रकाशचन्द्र लोहनि हुन गएको थियो। त्यहि लेख लाई आधार् मानेर कसैले लेख्छन् भने उस्को अज्ञानता हो। सो लेख् प्रकाशन भएको केहि दिन् मै संशोधन छापिएको थियो। शायद् धेरै ले पढेनन् र अझै भ्रम रहेछ। सो संशोधन मा २०३२-३३ सालको बोर्ड् फस्ट् को पनि गड्बड् थियो। सो साल मा पहिलो चोटि गोर्खापत्रं मा नाम् निस्केका बोर्ड् फस्ट् भन्दा ५ अंक बढि ल्याउने डा सुनिल रत्न कंसाकार् थिए, जस्को नाम छुटाइएको थियो।अस्तु!

Was there kantipur daily in 2047 BS rahulvai? I have read many of yr articles in sajha. alikati sudharne ho ki? Aru data dine belama bichar puryaunu parla. ki mero galti chha?

TU मा पैसा नतिरी पढ्यो....अनी थ्यही backgroundले US छिर्यो PhD गर्नलाई....Phd हुन्छ US or west बस्यो...anyhow....अनी फलनो, पी यच् डी भनेर लेख् लेख्यो.....लेख् थ्यही nepal ko system nai khattam....remember they get phd with the same education they had back home....देशलाई केही गरौ हैनकी just to give the impression hey im one fkkknn falano... one biddyaan ...phd.. i can write some crazy....
this may not apply to Dr. Dhakal but .....

We talk about democracy and all that, but politics in Nepal is actually a closed, and driven-by-the-top game.

The barriers to entry are too high for ANY educated Nepali -- whether that Nepali is educated at Harvard or Harampur.

As far as I can see, it's going to remain that way for long.
A typical career path in Nepali politics goes like this:

Assuming that you do not have politician parents or relatives who
can give you a leg up, you have to have joined politics in your
teens or in your 20s, either at a community level or as an
activist of some sort.

Usually, for educated people, college-level politics gives you your street credentials to later graduate on to mainstream national politics on.

By and large, the 'educated' crop of today's netas came from campus politics, while others rose up through community activism (including anti-Panchayat work in the grassroots.)

Once you are in Nepali politics, you need to have champions who can push you along and introduce you to all the right people whose blessings you will need to climb up the ladder.

But you cannot be too smart, too independent, too much of a maverick and have a mind of you own. Nor too you should be a 'media star' on your own.

Unless you are prepared to spend more than a decade lying low, swallowing your pride and basically kissing the shoes of senior politicians and willing to work in near destitution (and thereby
ruin your family life), it's virtually impossible to have your
big political day later on.

That said, the point is: Whatever you do, you should not come across like a potential threat to the old guards. [Think of Gagan Thapa or Man Mohan Bhattarai - where are they now? Pretty much marginalized!]

As an aspiring politician,the biggest deal is to to get 'an election ticket' from your party. To get that, you will have to badmouth your colleagues, backstab your friends and basically be a selfish/ruthless bastard who is out to get his 'ticket' at the expense of former friends. So, you see, you need to have a certain mindset here . .

[In fact, the seeds of most political rivalries in Nepal are sown at this stage, and these rivalries play out in various ways throughout the lives of most of our politicians.]

Once you get your 'ticket', and get elected from a constituency (you need not have to have lived in that place or even care for the people there!), you can aspire to be a mantri as well as to be on the Cenrtral Working Committees (CWCs) of your party.

Once you become a mantri ( which is a temporary poistion) or a CWC member (pretty much permamnent), it's pretty much gravy after that. You can do pretty much anything you want.

In summation then, let's say, if you are a smart 18-year-old now, and want to be a politician in Nepal someday -- forget that free ride to Oberlin or Oxford at this point. Those degrees will simply make you just another jagiray in today's world.

Instead, look ahead, and be prepared to spend your next 20 years paying the dues in Nepal so that in your 40s, you may be in charge
of the Ministry of Forest!

With the price so high, no wonder that most 'smart' Nepalis (smart, narrowly defined as an ability to do well on three-hour exams!)
simply do NOT get into politics in Nepal.

oohi
"merely a politician watcher"
ashu

Ashu dai,

that applies in corporate or real world too!
not only in nepali politics .rarely you will find some one from grass root coming to limelight on their own.
but i give you this , in america or western world ,if you are exceptional you cut thru it! a mediocre is a mediocre everywhere.

Biggest example of AmericanPolitics GEORGE W.BUSH!!!

Very interesting write up.

A few lessons learnt about politics:

Nepali politics is what happens to your country when you are too busy to care about it

You can pick a bone with Gyanendra or Prachanda or Girija from the comforts of your loft outside Nepal but to what avail? You can rail all you want against them or wax as much eloquence for them but your voice is unlikely to have much affect, no matter how good your intentions, unless it can be heard on the ground in Nepal and transform people's thinking there.

Lead, follow, or get out for the way

But for god's sake stop bitching and moaning. Your criticism of Gyandendra, Girija or Prachanda will usually carry more weight when you propose an alternative (and a realistic one at that). If all you can so is whine, you prolly shouldn't be talking about politics because you are wasting everyone's time, including yours.

Go bowling, jogging or swimming or something

If the only thing you do outside of your work life is talk politics and more politics, and your idea of change is talking about American politics instead of Nepali politics, there is a good chance you may develop "tunnel vision" and in the process not be able to add anything of value to the political discourse. Politics is a bad hobby for a man to have if it is the only hobby he has.

Learn to respect your opponent

There is nothing as easy to deflate as the ego of a pompous, patronizing and contemptuous person. Abusing your opponents is usually a sign of mental bankruptcy. Shouting down your opponent to conceal your lack of alternative ideas is the oldest trick on the book and you will only get you so far with it. The rubber will eventually hit the road and you better have plenty of cushioning to support your ideas or risk getting exposed for what you really are.

Just my thoughts.

Ashu,

Our posts crossed. Very interesting thoughts there especially on the career path in politics.
There was a time when politics attracted the best and brightest but for reasons that are too long to dwell on here, the "best" of our society ( and we continue to produce quite competent people in our country both from the government and private schools) tends to go into anything but politics. A lot of people think you dont have to be in politics to contribute to the country. On the contrary, if the past is any indication, politics is where you can often end up contributing least to the country.

हार्वर्ड भनेर नामै तोकेको धुवाँधार गाली गरेको भएर आशु ब्रो लाई पर्नु चोट पर्‍या जस्तो छ।

हार्वर्डकाले पनि नेपालाँ खासै लछार्ने त केहि हैनन। नेपालाँ जे छन, उनै नेतै छन।
तर जे भए पनि त्यो आर्टिकल बुलशिट चाहिं छ ब्रो। के लेख्न बसेको, के लेखें भन्ने सम्म सोमले चाल पाएको देखिदैन। फेरि त्यो गाली गरेको अर्को कुन वेब बेस्ड ग्रुपलाई हो, त्यहि एनडि त होला नि।

अनि, barrier to entry को कुरो आयो, कुन देशाँ दु:ख नगरि नेता बन्न दिन्छन र? पढेलेखेको भनेर नेता हुन कहि पाइदैन। हाम्रो देशको barrier to entry चिनको लागि स्वर्ग हुन्छ होला, भारतैका कति साथिहरु संग कुरो गर्‍यो भने उनीहरु पनि 'हे हाम्रो देशको राजनीतिको कुरै नगर, पढेलेखेको मान्छेले छिरेर सक्ने कुरो हैन' भन्छ।

हाम्रो देशको राजनीति त्यति नराम्रो छ जस्तो लाग्दैन ब्रो। मलाई नेगटिभ बन्न मन लाग्दैन। म आशावादी नै छु। चुनाबमा राम्रै मान्छेले जित्नेछन, एकपल्ट चुनाब हुन त दिम।चुनाबै नभएर पो पिर पर्‍यो, शेरे देखि ज्ञाने सम्म सबलाई सत्ता पाएपछि चुनाब नगरौं जस्तो लाग्छ।

Ashutosh's observations are correct. Unless you are willing to start off from the grassroots and devote a substantial period of your life, you can't succeed in Nepali politics. Outsiders have to overcome many hurdles. This is true to some extent even in the highly developed countries.

It is wise decision to want to be educated at the Western Universities. But you have to brave many ordeal and travails of Nepali politics before you can taste success.

Finally PIRE dhanyabad, Dhakal ko bakamfusse lekho ko bisleshan gareko ma.

Pire wrote:

"हार्वर्ड भनेर नामै तोकेको धुवाँधार गाली गरेको भएर आशु ब्रो लाई पर्नु चोट पर्‍या जस्तो छ।"


Not at all.

That said, wink, wink, I am starting that phase in my
life where I know that the university will someday be
very proud of me than for me to remain stipudly proud to have attended the university!

Other than that, I was simply sharing my GENERAL observations, information and knowledge to get the conversation going.

Tetti ho.

Enjoyed your humor, though!

oohi
ashu

I spelt 'stupidly' wrong above!
How stupid of me!

Forgive the typos.

oohi
ashu

ashu bro,

kurai kuro maa, I just saw this comment in Nepalnews on the article above posted by some reader and got curious.

"I know that Ram Sharan Mahat pretends he went to Harvard, but in actuality he went to Berekly, a school of much lower standards. "

Is it true that Mahat went to Berkeley? And is Berkeley 'that' lower standard school?

I thought Mahat went to University of Bombay, and that Berkeley could be anything but a school of much lower standard. Can you clarify on it?

Pire,

I am not sure about Dr. Mahat.
You will have to consult others about that.

But -- wiser now, after having worked with graduates of
a number of top universities in the US, UK and Asia -- I would NOT -- for PROFESSIONAL reasons -- put too much emphasis on or get carried away by someone's attending Harvard or Berkeley or some not-so-famous-school.

The 'elite' degrees are great for the FIRST 'good' job . . . to open the doors, so to speak.

But -- my view is that -- after that job, one should 'rise' on the strength of one's work performance and professional productivity and NOT on the SOLE basis of where one went to school 5 years ago or 15 years ago. [If you are doing that, then, there's something wrong with you!]

Parents and relatives remain foerver impressed with their children's achievements, of course! :-)

But the real world --and here I am talking about most fields in which other people pay salaries -- is a lot harder to impress without solid performance in life and in a chosen career.

So the "harvard effect", if there's any, is good for a year or two. After that, it's just brutal hard work, with occasional breaks to share info and news and views on Sajha :-)

oohi
ashu

Well talking about harvard, I saw documentry about it few years back where this english grad. was busy making porn and others got busted in drug ring etc etc. A recent case of plagarism from this 19 yrs. old indian origin lady is still fresh in my mind.These ivy league colleges grades system were inflated anyway ( read in USA TODAY few years back) where there were no policy of giving student C as it reflected negative impact on their images. I don't know how they have changed now but one thing is sure in my mind- nobody impress me where they graduated from. All I want to see is action (+ve one) and their positive impact in people lives. One thing about this thread and I guess there was one recently another, so called intellectuals dearly missed to address problem in context of nepal as they try to rationalize their action based on what they learn in foriegn countries. Look at this nobel winner Mohamad Yunus, I thought he was brilliant to realize what works and not. Talking about polictics, this ticket system really baffles me, why do you need approval from central office if he/she is electable(popular) by people? well politics or democracy is not even clean in USA, why bother to analyze poor countries?

Mr Truth writes:

"Talking about polictics, this ticket system really baffles me, why do you need approval from central office if he/she is electable(popular) by people?"


Therein lies this explanation.

As things stand, you cannot just be well liked by people
of, say, Jumla or Morang. Your political party, if you are a member of it, must also like you enough to give you a ticket so that it can throw its institutional weight around your candidacy.

No political-party ko blessing, no hopes for you to be a politician. It's as simple as that.

This means, ambitious young politicians have to spend more time pleasing their party netas in Kathmandu for election tickets than genuinely caring about the welfare of people from Morang and Jumla.

And this is exactly what they do, even engaging in corruption to enrich their party. And that is why, party leaders turn a blind eye to those who bring in lots of money (of dubious source!) into the party's kitty-box.

So long as this continues, I disagree with Pire that our political system will really bring forth "good" people.

It simply can't and therefore won't.

The incentives are all just wrong for people like, say, Gagan Thapa or Dilli Chaudhary (a Tharu activist) or
Gauri Pradhan (a children's advocate or Man Mohan Bhattarai . . . to really have an influence in the process.

oohi
ashu

Quarrel looks never ending! Instead, write down to airlines for direct flight to Kathmandu or sort of thing that could make a direct impact to the kingdom’s economy. Your knowledge might help that country, which was poor, remained poor and still no different yet it heavily subsidized educational system to produce heavyweight like you...

हरेक डिग्री वा जाच भनेको अर्को एक लेभलको लागि मात्र काम लाग्ने हो। तपाई SLC मा तोप् हुनुहुन्थ्यो भने त्यसले खालि IA/ISc पढ्न हेल्प गर्ने हो, त्यो भन्दा बढि केहि हैन। आजीवन त्यो पुरानो कुरो संझनुको केहि फाइदा छैन। हार्वर्डकै डिग्री पनि जागिर खान लाई वा अर्को ठुलो डिग्री लिनलाई मात्र हो, त्यो भन्दा पर हैन। मान्छेले पलपल आफ्नो मुल्य सिद्ध गर्नु पर्छ। जीवन पुरै संघर्षै संघर्षको कथा मत्रै हो!


मेरो बिचारंआ राम्रो स्कुलहरुमा यो कुरो सिकाएको हुन्छ नै।

Beautifully said...
learning process is never ending...perennial...above all and always its an individual’ attitude and/or ability that matters or counts for not an academic education…btw why SLC as benchmark? malai ta piresirle pirr parnu bho...ma ta slc fail haina hai slc+8 years in Nepal India US....padhechu bhanna pani khojya haina padheharuko league ma basna khojya pani haina....my only point is if i’m concerned i should do the right thing and if im educated i can do better...

मैले किस्नेकालेब्रोलाई पिर पार्ने गरेर केहि भने जस्तो त लाग्दैन। अब किन SLC नै भनिस भन्नुहुन्छ भने त्यो खालि नाम दिएको मात्र हो, कुनै पनि डिग्रीको उपादेयता अर्को लेभलमा जान मात्र हो। यो पनि राजनीतिमा चुनाब जिते जस्तो हो, एकपटक चुनाब जिते पछि त्यसको प्रयोग खालि त्यसपछिको टेन्युरको लागी मात्र हो। अब मैले उहिले चुनाब जितेको आज सांसद बना भनेर त पाइदैन नि।

अब मैले लेख्दा लेख्दै के लेखें, राम्रो या नंराम्रो उदाहरण कस्तो दिइयो कुन्नि, तर होपफुल्लि मित्रहरुले बुझ्नुभो होला मैले भन्न खोजेको कुरो। I also think Ashu said exactly the same thing, तेसैले खासै नयाकुरो भन्या जस्तो पनि लाग्दैन।

haina maile nai badhi bujhna khojechu....take it easy.....