This is for comments on the Column

ahaake bichar aa lekh hamra bahut badhiya lagal.

The last sentence in your "lekh" caught my attention.

"It must be hard to act unjust and rail against injustice"

Very nice sounding, but notably contrary to the record of human behaviour through most of history. In fact, humans -- of the Nepali variety and otherwise -- typically excel in telling others not to practice what they themselves (at a personal level) have practicesd to the point of perfection.

Cases in point:
1) Many African Americans harbor sentiments bordering on racism about other (mainly) Asian immigrants despite being able to recognize and combat institutional and white racism in this country.

2) White males in this country who have benifitted for centuries from a system that oppressed minorities have in the past 3 decades successfully launched a white male backlash against policies designed to make amends for past injustices (affirmative action).

there are countless others...

So in effect, it is not that hard to "act unjust and rail against injustice". In fact, it tends to be the rule rather than the exception in human behavior and interactions.

Because it is premised on such dubious hypotheses, your overall argument is undercut. In fact, it is hard to tell from your piece WHAT your overall argument is. Is it that:

1) Nepali immigrants to the US are not active (enough) against racism?
or that
2) Nepali immigrants tend to be from the upper caste?
or that
3) after immigrating to the US, high caste Nepali immigrants lose the privileges attached to their high caste status and that this disillusions them?

or finally, is it a combination of these points?

In either case, the ideas as expressed in the piece are conflated and not clearly articulated. Perhaps you do have a real good point or two to make about a number of things -- patterns of Nepali immigration to US, perceptions of race and prejudice among immigrants, contradictions within Nepali immigrant communities based on our our own discriminatory histories, etc..

But in this piece these tend to get lost. Perhaps you can use your next column to make a real clear headed restatement of your points.

Lastly, lack of sufficient clarity aside, it is commendable that you and others have opted to borach serious topics online. Keep at it.

Ekadesh:
In either case, the ideas as expressed in the piece are conflated and not clearly articulated. Perhaps you do have a real good point or two to make about a number of things -- patterns of Nepali immigration to US, perceptions of race and prejudice among immigrants, contradictions within Nepali immigrant communities based on our our own discriminatory histories, etc..

--
Nepe wrote in some other thread, this behavior is called "Concessional Syndrome".
IF Someone has one weak point, then, you can throw muds on him in 100 other
issues, by starting the posting with the weakest point. Corolary: I mean if a writer has
one strong point, then, he takes its advantage of throwing 100s of self imaginatory
profanities, because he knows that first strong point will lead him to win.

Well, I suggest to Para., to do some survey (questionnaire survey) rather than
talk based on his experience. After a certain level, we need to know data to
validate your claims. Otherwise, its just a concessional syndrome,
nothing more. One example:

"most just so happen to be Nepali Speaking High Caste Males." This is your
filter that you used to make your whole posting and run other assumptions
(no data: outside personal experience), this line will keep all of your critics
out of sight. As a social scientist (yourself), you should give at least a few data,
or references to validate your claims, otherwise, its a writing like that of
Khagendra Sangroula, read, enjoy it and forget it....

HG

The land of opportunity beckons, and people gather. Of
all the Nepalis in America, from the illegals to the
student and work visa holders, most just so happen to
be Nepali Speaking High Caste Males. Few women, very
few madhesis, few janajatis.

The above paragraph is a perfect example of reverse racism. Mr Bagat claims to be an avid fighter of racism. But does not hesitate to use the race cards when he is down and out. Yearns to have a Madhese primeminister blah blah blah...

Most Nepali men are oblivious to the racism that
hinders them.

Like you maybe ? look in the mirror pal.. you will he your own face in the catagory you yourself are defining.

Instead, laughably, trying to give wind to their
privileged sails of memory from their days in Nepal

Just because you did not get any wind does not mean others cannot. Isn't that what you are trying to do here. Since you feel that you were deprived of your wind in Nepal..you are trying to gain that extra step here ?

And so most resort to deriving pleasure from mentally
counting all those they left behind when they got on
that plane. The relentless talks of desh bikas in
Nepali circles, online and offline, is primarily a
psychological act of self-satisfaction.

And what are you doing here Mr Bhagat ? You are talking down to those discussions but at the same time you thrive on those very discussions you are bitching about( Mr not enough discussions, Mr I want more participation.. I want more interaction).

The biggest reason perhaps why Nepali men largely
refrain from confronting racism might be that the act
might demand some painful introspection, for most who
left Nepal never left behind their prejudices.

And you have Mr Bhagat you definately have. Thats probably why you always play the race card....OHHH POOR ME..POOR ME THOSE GUYS ARE CALLING ME MADHISE.

. And
that, in many ways, their attitudes toward the women,
the madhesis, and the janajatis are today what they
were back then. It must be hard to act unjust and rail
against injustice.

bLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH

A very interesting article indeed. I am curious though why Paramendra singles out our high caste Nepali speaking brothers for what he calls 'refraining from confronting racism'. I think this trend is true for most immigrants - from Colombia to China whether male or female. Nonetheless, he raises the intersting fact that high caste males seem to dominate the ethnic Nepalese landscape in America. Perhaps this is slowly changing, but if you look at immigration in America historically, it has always been the cream of societies (educated, advantaged people ) that have migrated to this country - and Nepal provides no exception here.


And Paramendra, while I agree with you on many social issues, I think many of your writings, appear to be written not with the intent to convince but rather the intent to confront. While such an approach may work to raise awareness, it is unlikely to change people's minds.