Nepal’s new constitution, India, and the truth
Nepal and India are having a face-off over the issue of the new constitution of Nepal. India has voiced its concerns over the rights of certain minority groups of Indian origin, whereas Nepal claims that India has no business in its internal affairs. The majority of Indians do not have an interest in this issue at the moment. News and opinions of so called experts beamed on television and the internet are the source of unquestionable truth for the majority of us. I'll however, urge you to have skepticism towards whatever you hear or read or see on various types of media. In this post I will be presenting my views open to your scrutiny.
No constitution in the world can give or take away our rights. Our rights are natural and inalienable. They come from our intuition of morality and the faculty of reason. It is the very reason that we understand that stealing is wrong. The constitution is formed when a gang of men, who enjoy the support of the majority, write down a set of rules for the ones they will govern. This includes the majority of their supporters who serve as a useful idiots in this political mockery of civilization. This piece of paper, called the constitution, then serves as a holy gospel on which generations and generations will debate and refer to time and again. If you reason and examine constitutional democratic republics across the globe, you will notice that it never keeps the government or criminals from violating our rights. The truth of Nepal's constitution is just like any other constitution of a nation. The constitution is being drafted by a group of elite who desire power to dictate your life, but call themselves your representatives. These representatives never invited you over for meetings to discuss every clause present in the constitution. However, when they reach a point where the constitution can be enforced on you without major conflicts they will go ahead and enforce it. You may not realize but there are several clauses in the constitution that you may not have agreed with. There may be some clauses you wished was there in the constitution but it isn't there. It doesn't matter in democratic decisions if you are happy or unhappy with the whole of it. You will be made to accept it because the majority accepted it. In a way the constitution has been forced upon you without your consent nor your consultation. You're now a party to a so called (social) contract which you did not agree to. Isn't this process of enacting the constitution a violation of your sovereign right from the very beginning? So what's this hoopla all about with the new constitution? Its serves the ruling class and not you.
Now what's India's interest in Nepal's constitution? The so called India is simply a term for its ruling elite. This set of ruling elite needs to safeguard their interest. First and foremost, it doesn't want Nepal to associate with other ruling elite like the Chinese ruling elite. The ruling elites' interest is their own perverted psychotic narcissism. They want the power to control as many resources as much they can and to be praised as great leaders. Neither India, nor China and nor any government you call your own gives a damn about you. They simply want to rule. That's it.
For ruling and gaining support of the governed the ruling elite has to use lies, deceit, sentimental and emotional appeal. Nepal, like India or any other nation state, consists of several individuals with different interests and sentiments. There, individuals will form alliances under the pretense of religion, ethnicity, culture and other such commonalities to bargain power over others which the democratic framework offers. So there will be feminist groups demanding certain power over men, misogynist group demanding power over women, religious groups demanding power over LGBT's, Religious groups trying to belittle other faiths, rich demanding power over the poor, the poor demanding power over the rich etc. This is the nature of democracy and the political system which fragments the society and destroys its fabric.
The constitution of Nepal and the political parties are communist. One significant trait of those who believe in communism is that they evade responsibility and blame everyone and everything else for their plight. Under a political turmoil there is always a tendency for the prices of goods to fluctuate. Many a times leading to extreme shortages. Nepal is facing such crisis here as the ruling elite doesn't wish to take any decision which triggers a revolt against them. The ruling class doesn't like a direct power struggle. When there are blockades of transport routes within the territory of Nepal itself, blaming India for what happens within its territory is unjustified. But there is an Indian ruling class interest in play as well. You may have noticed that border areas have a high population of individuals who can identify themselves with the adjoining neighboring state rather than state under which they and their properties are currently present. These groups are of an interest to the neighboring state's ruling elite to stir conflicts in their neighbor's state. We have seen how one state sponsors rebel groups in another state so that they can invade, annex or have a government of their liking in their neighboring state. India is not sacrosanct either that it ain't playing any mischief.
If there is truth in Nepal Government's claims that India is blocking the trade routes unofficially then it's an act of aggression by India. Blocking of entry and exit routes are like putting someone in jail or house arrest. Blocking access to part of unowned land is also considered aggression under many ethical theories. Sieges are immoral military tactics of aggression to create shortages of goods in order to soften the enemy or make them surrender. Rulers never shy away from such evil practices.
Unfortunately the constitution of Nepal is heavily communist. Its major political party claims to follow Maoism. If anyone has any clue of communism and socialism then they know that it's the road to hell but paved with good intentions. However, if Nepal really wants to prosper, there are certain steps they can take. First and foremost, they have to recognize complete individual rights. If there is no violation of rights then there is no need for government intervention. Property rights are inalienable. The government cannot confiscate anyone's property. Not even under the pretense of public interest. It should do away with all protectionist trade policies. It should allow trade to take place using any form of currency which the individual prefers. The other option is that they should opt for a people's militia as it's a small landlocked country and nation states which surround it have huge standing armies. Nepal should also enter protection treaties with other nations in case it enters into military conflict with its neighbors. As of now I have little hope that the constitution will do any good for Nepal.
