Kunda Dixit in ("Is Crown Prince Paras mending his ways?", #66) has tried to ingratiate himself in King Gyanendra's favour by making a farcical correlation between Paras' poetry and the positive transformation of a person's character. He has applied this new theory to validate his point (hidden agenda?) that people should now forget and disregard Paras' past criminal activities. His argument is that there is a positive relation between penning poetry and the enhancement of a person's character.
I appreciate the balanced way you have reported on Paras Shah being made Crown Prince. One thing I cannot understand is why "responsible" politicians and journalists are trying to create a state of confusion in the country. If we accept the constitution we have no other option but to accept Paras as crown prince. Paras may not be an ideal crown prince, but he is the only possible candidate under the present constitutional framework. Let's hope time will make him a responsible royal. The monarchy is the symbol of Nepali unity, so politicians and journalists should think twice before raising controversy and creating a negative reputation about our future king.
Is Kunda Dixit a royal chamcha?
Who does Kunda Dixit think he is, giving advice on how Nepal's royal family should choose the successor to the throne? The illustrious Shah dynasty is a symbol of Nepali nationalism and unity, how the succession question is addressed is up to age-old traditions of the royal palace. Media and politicians should keep out of it.
If Nero is believed to have played the flute while Rome burnt, what is so strange in Paras Shah writing poetry that it has to be reported? It's not that Nepalis have doubts about his writing ability, but what awes us is that his being a poet has to be known to us after he is declared crown prince.