sorry to say but this is one of the worst articles i have read inNT recently...and i would hope rabi dai does not give space to such articles in the future...please.. and this is a RACIST article so hope NT does not want to ignite the racial war..

and what about your 'bhiyas' speaking in hindi in our CA assembly, interviews and your own 'bhaiya' vp saying he does not undestand nepali ???? and the madhesi parties' vaiya's yadavs all running after power ...in the name of madhesi...don't do anythign when they r in governmetn and then use the same 'madeshi agreements' as a cheap bargain to get into coaltions governmetns again and again....

show me one madhesi leader who deserves resepct or has done anythign good to their own ppl vaiya's over the last 20 yrs of democracy...or say after janaandolan  ?????

please don't write if u don't know how to analyze..

This is the best ever article written in NT regarding racism in Nepal. Yes indeed we have racism in Nepal, very deep rooted. We practice racism by different names: Madhesiya, Dhoti, and so on and so forth . I have seen so called pahadiyo kicking bicycle of Nepalese from Terai while they are selling vegetables. It is not related with individual upbringings, it is related with social upbringings. As long as we don't judge people by content of their character, this problem will persists.

Most of the comments which were accusing Mr Acharya of being racists seems to coming from the people who passionately conceit their own race. Every human being should be subjected to same law, with same respect and with same dignity.

There is no business of Mr Acharya defending bhaiya. I think next time on bhaiya should defend himself by saying; " Don't call me Vaiya", Vaiya should assert that he should be called "Sir." Because he is customer of that bus, he should demand that he be treated with respect. Next time anyone does similar thing to anyone else, he or she should boycott or should actually retaliate saying I am not going to move. worset come to worset he should even physically retaliate.

# 13 the new Anil seems to be an ardent admirer of the author.Good luck ! I just want to clear the air for anybody who cares to know that there are two Anils now.

On a more serious note, throwing words like racism around in the context of Nepali society does not help anyone. Racism is a word Europeans brought into practice based on their own history.

It has a theological basis that God made the world just for you and your people (the chosen ones) because of your faith and culture. In this view,people of other faiths as and cultures as well as animals do not have any rights.

It was this theological justification that allowed the Europeans to colonize the world, enslave millions of Africans for labour,plunder and loot America and Asia; it let people like Hitler justify the massacre of millions of Jews and gypsies because they were of a different faith. When Westerners talk about racism it is from this perspective.

Compare this  to all our diverse traditional beliefs where even animals are supposed to have divine consciousness, and it is not hard to discern how differently the European and the East/South Asian societies have evolved over the centuries.

 In the context of Nepal, it is more relevant and helpful to talk about social discrimination(casteism) and communal prejudice against people of other ethnicities. This is not limited to any one particular geographic area or specific communities, but is pervasive throughout the country and exists in many different communities of the hills, Kathmandu valley and the plains.

This is the major problem that all Nepalese need to focus on correcting, rather than racism.

Trying European solutions based on European history will not work for a uniquely Nepali problem, and may actually aggravate matters.

Nepalese need to find their own solutions to Nepali problems,  instead of trying to import them from elsewhere.

Dysfunctional behaviors and immorality are the family heirlooms.

The truth about lies is that they are sometimes aspirational truth.

# 14 Anil

Trying European solutions based on European history will not work for a uniquely Nepali problem, and may actually aggravate matters.

Unfortunately the intellectual elite in Nepal have imbibed uncritically what they have been taught in universities abroad and also the curriculum at higher institutes of learning in Nepal are based on the same curriculum. SO the problem will be with us for a while.� And also the NGOs and INGOs who bring along their own petty �political agendas.

And the political parties who have imported their -isms. We even have a political party which says it is a great and good thing to go around murdering, looting and extorting and our intellectuals say, "Of course, this is revolutionary. We have the saying of this or that foreign luminary to prove it." and everyone applauds.

Although entire land of Madhes was covered in thick forest until 1950, continuous migration enforced by population pressure gradually began cultivation. King Mahendra adopted policy of cultivating Madhes and even invited people of Nepalese origin living in Myanmar and offered them land here. In a short span of forty years, the region overcrowded resulting from the migration both from north (Nepali hills) and south (Indian states of Bihar and UP) . Migration from the South stopped only after the government of Nepal adopted policy of land registration in 1975 on the basis of citizenship. Those who had been able to clear the forest themselves were made the rightful owners of the land they cultivated. Whoever owned land was offered citizenship (for one time) to legalize the living.

The definition of the state border was not always clear with the Hindu kings, scattered in the multiple kingdoms, who sought more tenants in their territorial oversight for more tithes and taxes. Farmers living in a certain area changed their nationalities the way they paid taxes to a particular king. Sometimes a farmer in a remote area paid tax to the king near to him and at times was forced to pay to the other king. It was his tax duty that determined his nationality irrelevant to what territory he lived in. It was more true with the southern plains where people hardly travelled from the hills out of the fear of malaria. Therefore, Nepal's southern border was never demarcated until the the Treaty of Sugauli (1815) was signed between Nepal and British-India. Even though the treaty recognized certain portion of the plain Gangetic land as the part of Nepalese territory, marking of Nepalese southern border didn't take place at one go. According to Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, the border expert of Nepal, it was rather completed through intermittent processes with long intervals beginning from 1815 to 1963. All older maps of Nepal showed tentative borders in the south which both nations had agreed.

The population of Terai is largely mixed. The people who natively speak non-Nepali languages, some sharing indigenous connections with the land of Madhes (Like Tharus of the west and Dhimal, Satar, Meche etc of the east) and many others with remarkable cross -border socio-economic ties with India claim themselves as authentic madhesi although the term broadly means 'the resident of madhes region'. There exists a difference of opinion of the Tharus and other indigenous population over this identity with the middle- terai population that dominates current Madhesi politics.

The history of identity politics in the madhes of Nepal is as old as the region's cultivation. Once Nepal entered the stage of open democracy in 1950, a regional political party, namely Terai Congress, was established. However the party could not show its presence in the elections of 1960; Nepali Congress swept away all constituencies of the region.

After the restoration of democracy in 1990, Gajendra Narayan Singh established another terai based party under the name of "Nepal Sadbhawana Party" and won six seats in the subsequent general election of 1992. But the party soon fell victim of own divisions.

The strongest agitation for the madehsi identity took place in 2007 and 2008. Under the leadership of newly established Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) in the late 2007, the movement initially drew government attention and some grievances were redressed. But the year of 2008, after the Interim Constitution refrained from saying federalism in place of state restructuring, saw a brief but one of the most ruthless uprisings in any period of Nepalese history. A combination of three political parties-- Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF), Terai Madhes Democratic Party (TMDP), Nepal Sadbhawana Party (NSP)-- demanding the Madhesi rights wreaked havoc in the eastern and central Terai region of the country. As many as fifty people lost their lives, hundreds of them lost their properties and many others were injured. Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala signed an eight- point agreement with the Madhesi leaders which explicitly accepted a federal Nepal, reservation for madhesi people in all jobs, and a recognition of the Madhesi identity above all.

However, after the election of the Constituent Assembly (CA), all Madhes-based parties broke into many pieces. MJF is divided in two equal halves. The breakaway faction led by Bijaya Kumar Gachchadar, named MJF- Democratic, joined the government in 2009 and received at least one ministry for 20 of its members out of 28, himself as the powerful Deputy Prime Minister. MJF-D was also split in January 2011 and one of the ministers formed a new party called Madhes Kranti Forum (MKF).

TMDP has recently broken as eleven of its CA members are organized under new faction TMDP-Nepal, which became the 28th party in the CA.

The worst of the splits was in store for NSP. Many of its influential leaders had joined TMDP way back in 2008. Still there are five different NSPs claiming themselves of being the original. The largest group led by Rajendra Mahato has 9 members in the Constituent Assembly.

Owing to the division of the parties, control of high caste Madhesis in the leadership and more obviously the ubiquitous lust for power and money of the Madhesi leaders, the movement has lost its momentum. Among all Madhes- based regional parties, Upendra Yadav's MJF looks stronger.

There is a strong sense of mistrust, among the madhesi constituencies, about the actual political position of the Madhesi parties. The demand of "One Madhes: One Province" was the mainstay of their political agitation in 2008. But they have agreed to have two to three Madhes provinces after the series of dialogues with other stakeholders of state restructuring. The demands of reservations for the entry in government services have been fulfilled but the advantages are largely going to the high caste Madhesis who had already received sizeable share in Kathmandu's so-called establishment. Therefore, the Madhesi backward groups are disillusioned with the sloganeering of madhesi rights, where as other groups of the loose alliance are frustrated at the corruption, division and lust for power of the Madhesi leaders. The indigenous madhesi people are organized under the Tharuhat movement led by Laxaman Tharu, who claims of standing against the monopolistic and feudal character of the Madhesi leaders. Tharuhat movement, through its 2009 agitation, greatly curtailed the sphere of the mainstream madhesi parties contracting it within the five districts of central Terai region (Siraha, Saptari, Dhanusha, Sarlahi, Mahottari), and rendering it severe blow in the west. The districts east of the Koshi river, leaving some parts of Sunsari and Morang in exception, had little impact of the movement in the first place.

However, everyone agrees, notwithstanding the despise towards the Madhesi parties, that federalism in ethnic/regional line offers solution to the existing disparities, despite their ignorance on how the problems may really be solved. The agenda has been planted in the mindset of the people so deep that a backtrack may just work a serious flashpoint to begin yet another agitation.