There is something in the Nepali character that makes us more divisive and prone to disunity than any other people. Perhaps our shared history is so faint, its symbols so ephemeral, our future so abstract, that it breeds individualism. The "patriotic songs" every morning on radio extol the virtues of the impeyan pheasant, Mt Everest and Lumbini. But they sound like parodies.

Individually, we are proud to be Nepalis, but we can't seem to be collectively proud to be Nepalis. We like Nepal, but can't seem to stand other Nepalis. Especially if they are Nepalis who are doing well for themselves. It is this frog-in-the-well psyche that has kept us from getting ahead-if one frog tries to take a leap, another will drag it down. In fact, there are many examples of Nepalis who have excelled in societies where there are no other Nepalis to pull them back.

It's not for lack of ability that we lag behind. It is not even because we have low self-esteem. A prime minister who has just been sacked told the youth wing of his faction, in all modesty, that he was "the best prime minister Nepal ever had, and will ever have". Well, some prime ministers are born great, others attain greatness, and still others just think they're great.

With misplaced pride on that scale, it is no wonder that we can't work together. Just look at our track record. Communist parties the world over are known for their divisiveness, but even by international standards, our comrades have set world records in disunity. Replicating through binary fission like amoeba, we have more communist factions per capita than any other nation on earth. Doctoral candidates have done their PhDs trying to unravel the sequence, and keep track of the splits.

And it's not just politics. We have two ANFAs, two PABSONs, two mountaineering associations, two film artists' associations, and at last count there were three rival political science associations. One of Nepal's most professional and successful domestic airlines split in two because of sibling rivalry (the smaller airline went by the nickname "Brother Air").

We don't know how bad it is in other countries, but it could be that this is a mentality common to poor countries, where the people are left to quarrel over such small pickings. They end up fighting each other instead of those who are cheating them.

Congress vs Congress vs Congress, UML vs Congress, UML vs ML, ML vs ML, RPP vs RPP, ironically, even the leftist party that called itself "Unity Centre" eventually split. Usually the reasons are not ideological, but personal envy, jealousy and pride. Somehow, the Maoists have not split yet. But give them time. They are Nepalis after all.

"In the west, democracy celebrates differences of opinion. There's a rule, you agree to disagree but with a point and not a person," sociologist Krishna Bhattachan explained to us. "In Nepal, people tend to disagree with the person." And because we take things so personally, we haven't as a nation been able to transform our genuine and deeply-felt sense of national pride into a unity of purpose. We can, and must, override our ingrained cultural individualism to achieve a sense of collective destiny. Otherwise we will just keep on fighting each other until there is nothing left to fight over.