Limited knowledge and limited information is a dangerous thing. This person gives you something to ponder about, with some basis, then he uses that limited information to manipulate your thoughts towards destructive conclusion; this is a dangerous thing.
He is right, Dravya Shah's ancestors came from Rajasthan, or so it is believed (there were few texts contending this but let's assume he is right). But saying Indian ruled Nepal is like saying a Kenyan is ruling USA. At the end when he says where should Madhesis go, he forgot that maybe the madehsis came from India as well.
His analogy of unification is valid; but this is how it used to be done in those days. You cannot put the wars of yesteryears in the context of today. Does he think that all those states would have given up their sovereignty for the unification of Nepal? War was the only way then; this is how pretty much every country was born. Now to use that pretext in a derogatory fashion for Prithvi Narayan is highly unjust.
I do agree about the unjust treatment of every other castes in Nepal, except for the Bahun-thakuri-Newars. Case can be made that they had the direct access to capital and thus enjoyed the perk; but truth is those who ruled made sure their kind ruled over the rest. This had to change and this is changing, there is no point bringing up the old stuff (I guess this is an old video) again and again and create a rift. These are the people who supported division of Nepal by caste and Nepali people have spoken up against this very division. Let it rest.
.png)
