Bijay Raut is himself a racist!
Bhesh Bhandari
I appreciate your proper response. I am 100% in aggreement with you. This
is what all Nepalese should think.
Let people not be mislead by "Nepali
language" and "Nepali". Nepali language is infact a "Khas" language. Nepal
word is
derived from Newar. "Nepal Bhasa" is a Newari language. Why is it "Nepal
Bhasa" then?
Nepali does not mean only those who speak Nepali (Khas) as their first
language. These people were not long ago called
Khas. Nepal and Nepali words came later originating from Newari language.
It
may be
good idea to change the name of the Nepali language to its original name
Khas. This may make life easier for non-Khas groups. Though I may be wrong
to say great Bahuns as Khas because they also speak Khas language. Khas is
normally used to call Chettries in the mid-west part of Nepal. Great Bahuns
may not like to be called Khas. It is too complicated.
Bijay thought only about his race, not all races existing in Nepal. He is a
racist.
He does not realise that he should give equal value to every community in
Nepal. He suggests those northern Nepalese to join India than Tibet. He
proposed all
other non-Bihari look people to join India. He is definitely a racist.
Again, he thought only about his race not other races in Nepal. There is no
doubt he
is a racist.
Remember, casteism is much more serious issue than racism. Mr Raut
represents upper caste, therefore he does not utter on caste system. Any
practice on caste is immoral, illegal and crime against humanity. Has he
thought about oppression of his own him-looking like people to be
liberated? No! because he belongs to a supreme race (caste)! Therefore he
is a racist.
Bijay Raut 99
Mr. Bhandari:
Do we know each other? I am surprised that you have called me a racist for
no valid reasons. I am sure I have not said anything against any race. You
definitely need to re-read my article. My article is not about racism or
casteism, it is about national unity and Nepalihood.
I don't know who told you or how you claim that I am from a "upper caste."
Just to keep the facts straight, Raut in Terai belongs to "Vaisya" Group.
They will be categorized into "back ward" class in Bihar along with Yadavs
and Koiries. I wish I were from a higher caste. Then the people of my
caste won't be discriminated by "Jha" Brahmins or other "Kayastha" and
"Bhumiyars".
Try to keep your facts straight before typing. In this case, you should
have contacted me to ask what caste I belonged to.
Bijay Raut
MC Box 3670
Middlebury College
Middlebury, VT 05753
bhesh bhandari
Dear Bijay,
This is the point I wanted to make. Do you feel that sufferings of lower
caste people is less important than discrimination by Pahadi to Terai
basiz?
Why don't you spend your time to fight against casteism than Pahadi-terai
basiz debate?
Do you know that terai basiz have got better resource and opportunity than
Pahadis? Do you know how difficult is the life in Pahad and Himal where
they have to travel 2hrs up and down to get water? How do you feel if you
were living in those mountains? Do you think terai basiz are more
discriminated?
Do you know that there are not only Aryans living in Pahad? Have you ever
thought about the life of those Sherpas, Magars and Rais?
Voice of teari basiz is getting stronger only because they are better
educated and economically better off because they can approach to better
education and economic opportunity than pahadi and himalis.
Do you know how many people died in Humla very recently because of hunger,
which can never happen in terai? Terai basiz are lucky. Do not you want to
share the difficulty of Pahadis and Himalis? If you are human you will do
it.
Do you think that the discrimination is limited to terai and pahadi? Do you
know that Bahuns and chetteris do not do this to magars or rais? Do you
think Bahun and Chettris do not discriminate againnst Newars? Do you think
Newar do not discriminate against Bahuns and Chetris? Even in bahuns there
are Madesi Bahun, Pahadi Bahun, Jaisi Bahun etc... Our culture is based on
descrimination. Our values are based on discrimination.
If Phadi says teria basiz "madeshe", same thing Bahuns say to other groups
(Tharu! Magar! Bhote! etc..).
If you feel you would like to be proud to be Indian than Nepali, why do not
you migrate to India? Why? You are free to do that. But if you live in
Nepal, you have to think about Nepal but not India. You have to be Nepali.
You have to think about all ethnic groups of Nepal. You have to voice them
all. Then I will aceept you.
What does it mean racism? It could be when you feel that Nepal could be
Bihar. You want to advocate the same thing what Khas group is doing to
other groups. You are no different than them.
It will be never acceptable when you represent only terai basiz. If you do
that you are also racist. Try to represent all groups in Nepal. Fight
against any discrimination among various ethnic groups. Then you are a
great person. Annexing Nepal to India is another idea of domination of
Biharis to other ethnic groups of Nepal. You want to do the same thing.
I am pleased to learn that you belong to lower cast, as I am. I am also
Sarki. We should understand the most unhuman discrimination that exists in
Nepal. If you think so, I am with you. Otherwise you are definitely racist
who wants a domination of India against neighbouring nations.
Do not capitalise the issue looking at corrupt politicians, upper caste and
urban people. Look at 90% of Nepalese population. They are all
discriminated and suppressed by small sections of people. They are not only
pahidis, look at your own community.
I should say we are lucky to be in overseas country even belonging to a
lower caste. Fight for the right thing. Do not try to make all Nepalese
Indian because your mother is Indian.
Believe or not your intention is not very different than Khas and Bahun
Nepalese.
Bijay Raut 99 <ra...@panther.middlebury.edu> wrote in article
<Pine.A41.3.95.980722...@puma.middlebury.edu>...
Ashutosh Tiwari
>Let people not be mislead by "Nepali
>language" and "Nepali". Nepali language is infact a "Khas" language.
Yes, what is today's Nepali-language evolved from what is called
Khas Kura. But Bhandari should visit Nepalis of Doti and other Far Western
Pahadi zilla to decide for himself whether Nepali, as it is spoken
today, is "in fact a 'Khas' language" even today.
>Nepal
>word is
>derived from Newar. "Nepal Bhasa" is a Newari language. Why is it "Nepal
>Bhasa" then?
The word Nepal is NOT derived from Newari Bhasa.
Up to 25 years ago, Kathmandu was widely called "Nepal" by those
living outside of Kathmandu. And the language predominantly spoken
in Kathmandu, (i.e. Newari) was in effect called Nepal Bhasa.
Recently, Newari-language activists in Kathmandu have given
more prominence to the phrase "Nepal Bhasa" thru their activities.
Bhandari either does not know his history well, or simply
has a penchant for reaching silly conclusions from absurd facts,
and passing them off as history.
>Nepali does not mean only those who speak Nepali (Khas) as their first
>language. These people were not long ago called
>Khas. Nepal and Nepali words came later originating from Newari language.
Not true at all. This is simply bad history; that's all. Even within
Newari language, there are significant differences: Newari spoken
in Kathmandu is significantly different from Newari spoken
in Bhaktapur, which differs slighty from Newari spoken in Banepa,
and so forth.
If Bhandari were right, then from WHICH strands of Newari
did "Nepal" and "Nepali" originate? I am curious to know.
>Bijay thought only about his race, not all races existing in Nepal. He is a
>racist.
What a compelling definition of "a racist"? By this definition, anybody
who thinks about all races existing in Nepal is NOT a racist.
Prety simple, isn't it? Apparently the CONTENT of the thinking does NOT
matter. :-)
>He does not realise that he should give equal value to every community in
>Nepal.
Well, why should he or anyone else? I have no problem whether a Newar
man thinks ONLY about his fellow-Newars, and whether a tarai ko manche
thinks ONLY about his fellow tarai ko manche. Nobody in Nepal has the
time, like Bhandari, to think about ALL the races all the time.
Besides, Nepalis are free to pick and choose as to how they want to think
along these racial lines. Some of their ideas may be good, some of their
may be bad, and that's the risk one takes for thinking ideas.
Just as there is this diversity of people in Nepal, it's only logical
that those diverse people would hold diverse opinions, and what's
wrong with holding diverse opinions? There is no law that says
those opinions have to be palatable to Bhesh Bhandari, or else
you will judged as a racist.
Bijay Raut's arguments can be attacked very well, without cheaply
resorting to the R-word. That's all.
>He suggests those northern Nepalese to join India than Tibet. He
>proposed all
>other non-Bihari look people to join India. He is definitely a racist.
>Again, he thought only about his race not other races in Nepal. There is no
>doubt he
>is a racist.
Calling other people "racists" with the flimsiest of definitions is
always easier than spending some time to point out why their ideas
are good or bad.
I am struck that Bhandari is all for respecting the diversity of
people, but NOT for diversity of opinions. If his is not a
narrow-minded nationalit gobbledygook, then what is it?
>Remember, casteism is much more serious issue than racism.
Since Bhandari keeps on referring himself as a Sarki, I am curious
to know how this is so with a last-name like his? I have never
known of a Bhandari-Sarki, but in a diverse country like Nepal,
such thing is entirely possible. Could Bhandari enlighten us
as to WHY/HOW he's a Sarki?
namaste
ashu
Bijay Raut 99
I agree with you that in Nepal every ethnic group discriminates other
either along the lines of race and ethnicity or along the lines of social
status. But what has caught me with surprise is that why do people like
you think me of a racist or casteist just because my arguments lean much
towards the plights of Teraiwasis. I belong to this ethnic group and I
have experienced their plights. That's why I can talk more about this
group than any other group like you can talk more about Sarkis than other
group. But nowhere in my article do I ever imply that it's only Teraiwasis
in Nepal who face discrimination. Teraiwasis is one among several groups
who faces discrimination.
However, the plights of Teraiwasis are different from other groups mainly
for two reasons. First, Teraiwasis face "identity crisis." Although they
hold legal Nepalese citizenship, it is practically impossible to
distinguish them from their Indian counterparts just by looking at their
appearances. That's why Teraiwasis fall victim of racism or
discrimination in Kathmandu or other hilly places from people who fail
to differentiate their fellow Nepali from the foreign Indians. Now tell me
whose fault is that? What should Teraiwasis do then? Should they start
rubbing their skin to make it litte more fair? Or should they put a
sticker on their forehead identifying them as Nepali citizens? See,
problem is not simple. But what have been done in Nepal to find any
solution to this problem? That's why in my last article I raised the
question:What does it mean to be a Nepali? Just ask yourself when the word
Nepali pops up in your mind, who do you immediately think of?
If you go back and re-read my article, you'll find that I am against the
traditional definition of a Nepali in which the characteristics and
identities of the Bahun, Chhetri dominated "Pahari" ethnic group are
equated with the identities of the "Nepali Nationals." I have also
advocated that in an ethnically, linguistically, religiously diverse
country like Nepal, coherent national unity can only be achieved if all
groups adhere to "secular political ideals and mutually accepted sets of
values," rather than to the characteristics of the dominant and powerful
group. I am surprised nobody including you has commented on this
suggestion of mine.
The second reason why the plights of the Teraiwasis are different from
other groups is because it is the only group that doesn't share
"anti-Indian" nationalism or sentiments which is so prevalent among other
groups and is growing at an unprecendent rate. I don't know whether it is
right or wrong to let "anti-Indian" sentiments grow, but I know that
it is certainly not good for the Teraiwasis. Since they look like
Indians, they are the most likely victims of anti-Indian sentiments.
That's why racism or discrimination against Teraiwasis is so differnt and
complex. Anybody who is worried about the growing Indian cultural
influences in Nepal should not forget to take into account the worries of
the Teraiwasis who are the most likely victims of the anti-Indian crusade.
Talking about Casteism in Nepal, I agree with you in many ways. I know
casteim is as big a problem as racism in Nepal, or even bigger in some
cases since Casteism occur within one ethnic group as well as among
different groups. I will certainly like to engage in meaningful
discussions involving caste issues. Please keep me posted with such events
or discussions.
Finally, let me clarify a myth that has misled you. The myth that Terai is
rich and prosperous and Teraiwasis are educated and powerful is not true.
To refer Terai rich, literrate and prosperous is to refer Bihar and UP
the same, since Terai is in one way "natural" extension of the neighboring
Indian states. Terai is as poor, illiterate and underdeveloped as most of
of Nepal (the lives of Mushar, Chammar, Dushad, Dom etc. and
other "lower caste" people are glaring evidences of it). Poverty,
illiteracy and underdevelopment are not only the problems of Terai but
those of whole Nepal. In fact, I think, and many of you will agree, that
all other social and political problems that we have been discussing are
in one way or another rooted in our dire economic conditions. We should be
therefore focusing on our economic plights first than anything else.
Bijay Raut
MC Box 3670
Middlebury College
Middlebury, VT 05753
(802)443-4472
Homepage:http://www.middlebury.edu/~raut
RDAHAL
>Nepali-language evolved from what is called
>Khas Kura. But Bhandari sho
It is true that nepali language evolved from Khas-kura.
Sometime back, someone asked the meaning of Aryan and whether the Nepalis were
Aryans.Since no one has answered, let me give my thoughts.
The word Aryan is derived from samskrit word Arya which means noble.The
traditional
history(European) teaches that a group of people from the region of the Caucus
mountains who called themselves arya migrated east and conquered inhabitants of
Harappa and Mohenjodaro(now in Pakistan)
and drove them southwards.They are believed to be Dravidians and their deity
was proto-Siva/Shakti.The Aryans also formulated the caste system to prevent
the conquered Dravidians from assimilating with the Aryans by way of marriage
and made them the Shudras.
But Bhagwan Gidwani in his book titled"return of the Aryans" says that the
people who inhabited the Sindhu basin were called" Rya "meaning people of the
land.When a group of rya were disillusioned with the corruption and the
political system of that time, they left the land to look for a better
place.Therefore, they were called Arya(like himsa and ahimsa , dharma and
adharma)These Aryas eventually returned unable to find a land which was pure
and holy.
Now coming to question whether Nepalis are
Aryans? It is a stupid question.Nepalis are all kinds of races, including
Mongoloid, Negroid, Aryan and mixture of all the races.All are Nepali.
According to Surya Mani Adhikari( author of the Khasa Kingdom) the Khasa
people were non-Vedic Aryans who migrated from the Caucus region via Iran,
Afghanistan and Kashmir to western Nepal.These Aryans did not worship the Vedic
deities and did not have Vaisya class in their varna system .The migration of
Vedic Aryans from India occurred later.The present day" Parbates" are
descendants of both Khasa(non-vedic) and Indic(vedic) Aryans.
Other opinions invited.
RDahal
migrated eastwards
bhesh bhandari
What does it mean "anti-Indian Nationalism"? Why is it so? Nepalese are not
that foolish just to go against India without any reason. You never
mentioned about occupation of Nepalese land by India. Why so?
You never mentioned about what India does to Nepal. You seem to be having
just opposite- "anti-Nepal" pro-Indian attitude. Your arguement at times
appears just like any hegemonistic Indian.
You think that you look like Bihari. There are many Pahadi Nepalese who
look like Bihari too. In most of the cases migrated pahadi in terai area
also look like you. It may be just your complexity rather than any other
reason.
You get hurt when somebody attacks India. But you do not feel anything when
India attacks Nepal.
If you were nepali, you should not get hurt when Nepalese protest against
Indian attitude towards Nepal.
Please answer me do you have any answer about Indian occupation of Nepalese
terretory? Probably you will answer you do not know about it, it has not
been proved. If so, do you favour if Nepalese land is encroeached by india?
Do you favour if Indian language Hindi is introduced in Nepal to replace
Nepalese which is a native language?
I was personally satisfied that Newari was introduced in KTM municipality
as official language so as Maithali in Terai. I am dead against Hindi what
your leader Tripathi says. I would rather accept Maithali or Bhojpuri or
Newari as national language but not Hindi. Please try to read Pradeep Jha's
statement. I am with him.
Your root cause could be that you feel yourself more Indian than Nepalese.
That is why you may wish Hindi should have been national langauge in Nepal
than Nepalese. It is pity that you never speak a word about your own mother
tongue.
When you feel you are Nepali, then your skin colour does not matter. You
can fight to death to those who says you are an Indian.
If you believe, many people ask me here in australia if I am an Indian.
Proudly I say, no, I am Nepalese. Beacause I feel I am nepalese, does not
matter whatever they say. There will always be an "identity crisis" when
you go against main stream population, particularly when you have a
mentality that you do belong to some other country. Remember, in every
country there are people alike next door neighbours.
You can only be stronger when you feel that you are a Nepali. If not, your
problem will never sort out. Do you know how proudly Pradeep Jha replied
you. He must be looking like you. He is also from terai.
Answer me do you feel as a Nepali or no?
But still welcome to be a Nepali. We will share same nationality and live
together harmoniously.
Nepalese people look like Japanese, Chinese, Indian, Pakistani,
Bengaladeshi, Tibetian, even like latin americans. It is a great country to
have so many ethnisity, diversity in such a small area.
If you live in Himal for 20 years you will forget that you look like
Indian. Your children will be more than Nepali. They will never feel that
they are Indian. It is a question of what influence do you have.
Did you read my article in SCN long ago where I mentioned about
Indianisation of Nepal? Nepalese are slowly Indianising themselves. When
one day they will be completely Indianised, they will not find any
difference between themselves and Indian. They have started saying this
even now.
Wait for that moment, you will not have any problem of identity.
Bijay Raut 99 <ra...@panther.middlebury.edu> wrote in article
<Pine.A41.3.95.980722134954.95312B-100000@tiger>...