Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

tribuneindia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 504 posts

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#491

Post by forkeep »

mothballed wrote: post #40
yieldcrv wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Always have to look deeper either way The Chinese constitution guarantees free speech universally, another part of the constitution is used to control all facets of life in line with the state narrative, and that’s a charitable interpretation when we just pretend that the process of law matters at all, and distinguish when it is just procedural theatre or a real constraint on the state Conflicting parts of constituti…

Appreciate the analysis. Do you think this is the status quo continuing in Nepal, or is the human right situation degrading?

[dead]

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#492

Post by darkwater »

Quarrelsome wrote: post #287
darkwater wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Either you believe in the society you live in, or you don't. This makes GP even more correct. One can believe (and like) part of the society one lives in but not like other parts, or plainly think they are wrong and should be changed at all costs.

GP? > One can believe (and like) part of the society one lives in but not like other parts, or plainly think they are wrong and should be changed at all costs. Sure but I mean in terms of the abstract. The idea that those most successful may have to pay more in taxation, the idea that justice should be blind and that everyone deserves a trial. I guess the tipping point is when your belief in the part of society that…

> GP?

Grand parent, the person you were responding to

> Sure but I mean in terms of the abstract. The idea that those most successful may have to pay more in taxation, the idea that justice should be blind and that everyone deserves a trial. I guess the tipping point is when your belief in the part of society that are wrong are so extreme that you think its ok to undermine society (e.g. steal public money, push infront of queues, etc) in order to combat that "wrong".

There are much more nuances and rules in (today's?) society. Just a quick examples of things that can be considered good but are actually controversial if you stir it a bit: there are concepts considered "rights" almost everywhere, yet you have to pay money to actually enjoy them, and if you don't have money, you lose the "right" (i.e. home). You can be in favor of the right but not of the implementation.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#493

Post by s1artibartfast »

martin-t wrote: post #486
s1artibartfast wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

interesting thesis, but I dont see why you focus on victimhood over every other form of leverage. I dont think victimhood motivates those in power to take action. They care about votes. victimhood is but one of many factors driving votes. Your conclusion supports the relevance of violence (it is always the final currency of power). your conclusion says nothing about victimhood. How can you look around the country or…

Say you're a parent or teacher and see kids fighting. Do you investigate who started it every single time or do you just get fed up and tell them to stop fighting or you'll punish both? Incentivizing victims to behave in certain ways such as not fighting back makes it easier to determine victim and aggressor. I never said victims have power. Just that victimhood is encouraged from a young age. It used to be normal fo…

I dont disagree that people are incentivized to express or misrepresent victimhood for advantage. What I disagree with is that "This means victimhood is the principal currency of power."

It might be one of many local currencies on a playground, but it isn't why the teacher has more power than the student. It isn't a generalizable theory of power.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#494

Post by alchemical_piss »

bombcar wrote: post #361
6LLvveMx2koXfwn wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

re corruption: I was flying from Kathmandu to Bangkok in 2000 and I couldn't book a ticket on the plane until the day it flew as 'half the plane' was reserved for 'Government Officials' 'just in case'. Amusingly they were all on one side of the plane too, the side that can see Mount Everest during the flight.

Honestly that’s kind of polite in a strange way. They could have just bumped anyone when they needed a ticket.

Yeah, just like it’s polite to maim someone when you could have killed them.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#495

Post by jama211 »

paganel wrote: post #210
jama211 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s not pretend the level of ban is equivalent, or the effect it has on people’s lives. More should be done, but there are levels of severity. UK citizens can and do still log on to many services daily that are not accessible in Nepal.

Of course they log in, I never said otherwise, but only if they want to write about stuff that is pretty much inconsequential to their lives, such as sports or celebrity culture.

Also not true? UK Facebook is constant political commentary lol.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#496

Post by selimthegrim »

alephnerd wrote: post #309
selimthegrim wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did the departments at Berkeley, Columbia and Chicago just turn over and capsize?

Their scholars primarily specialize in the history of South Asia, not contemporary foreign relations and strategy in South Asia. IMO, the only American program that has a good program in Contemporary Indian politics and foreign policy is Stanford, as Sumit Ganguly acts as the primary linkage between American and Indian policymakers, and the FSI and Hoover Institution tends to host Indian policymakers and career burea…

I have gone back-and-forth with Christine Fair on Twitter DMs (she had an issue with a translation I wasn’t credited on) and she certainly has her strongly personal point of view, but she’s got a lot of sharp edges. Maybe Michael what’s his name who is always writing op-eds in Dawn would be another option.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#497

Post by martin-t »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #493
martin-t wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say you're a parent or teacher and see kids fighting. Do you investigate who started it every single time or do you just get fed up and tell them to stop fighting or you'll punish both? Incentivizing victims to behave in certain ways such as not fighting back makes it easier to determine victim and aggressor. I never said victims have power. Just that victimhood is encouraged from a young age. It used to be normal fo…

I dont disagree that people are incentivized to express or misrepresent victimhood for advantage. What I disagree with is that "This means victimhood is the principal currency of power." It might be one of many local currencies on a playground, but it isn't why the teacher has more power than the student. It isn't a generalizable theory of power.

As long as the student doesn't record him saying something that could be understood as a sexual remark out of context and/or claim he patted her on the buttocks and a friend who never likes the teacher because of bad grades backs it up.

You might think it's fat fetched but I recall a case where several teenagers conspired to accuse a youtuber of grooming them.

---

Now, you're right about one thing. I overstated the effectiveness of victimhood in the original post. The principal currency of power is always violence because it overrides all other currencies if you have enough of it available to you.

But for more pedestrian use-cases, other currencies are better. And victimhood is a very effective way to use other people's violence for your goals. It never gives true top-level power but it allows directing the levels of power above you against people on the same level as you.

EDIT: And TBH, it works well to direct those on your level against those on your level too. For example, on the nation-state level, every action Ukraine takes in its fight against Russia has to be weighted against the possibility of being seen as too aggressive and not just purely defending itself.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#499

Post by selimthegrim »

selimthegrim wrote: post #496
alephnerd wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their scholars primarily specialize in the history of South Asia, not contemporary foreign relations and strategy in South Asia. IMO, the only American program that has a good program in Contemporary Indian politics and foreign policy is Stanford, as Sumit Ganguly acts as the primary linkage between American and Indian policymakers, and the FSI and Hoover Institution tends to host Indian policymakers and career burea…

I have gone back-and-forth with Christine Fair on Twitter DMs (she had an issue with a translation I wasn’t credited on) and she certainly has her strongly personal point of view, but she’s got a lot of sharp edges. Maybe Michael what’s his name who is always writing op-eds in Dawn would be another option.

Michael Kugelman

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#500

Post by alephnerd »

selimthegrim wrote: post #496
alephnerd wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their scholars primarily specialize in the history of South Asia, not contemporary foreign relations and strategy in South Asia. IMO, the only American program that has a good program in Contemporary Indian politics and foreign policy is Stanford, as Sumit Ganguly acts as the primary linkage between American and Indian policymakers, and the FSI and Hoover Institution tends to host Indian policymakers and career burea…

I have gone back-and-forth with Christine Fair on Twitter DMs (she had an issue with a translation I wasn’t credited on) and she certainly has her strongly personal point of view, but she’s got a lot of sharp edges. Maybe Michael what’s his name who is always writing op-eds in Dawn would be another option.

> she’s got a lot of sharp edges

Understatement of the year.

> Maybe Michael

I've never been impressed by Michael K. He's tends to view South Asia relations from a NatSec only view that is heavily colored by his experiences during the GWOT.

He isn't the most proficient in understanding the ins-and-outs of institutions. And fundamentally, it's institutions - not interests or personas - that set strategy or goals.

I think he is a good source if we want to understand KPK and transnational terrorism, but not really beyond that.

-----------

And this is the fundamental problem with South Asia studies in the US - almost all academics in the space largely entered during the GWOT or the NPT, and their domain experience is largely around either transnational terror or nuclear posture.

There are almost no academics in the US with US citizenship who have significant experience and knowledge about how institutions work within South Asian countries, and those who have that knowledge decide to retain their home country's citizenship becuase they know they can pull a Raghuram Rajan, Aravind Subramaniam, or a Krishnamurthy Subramanian (no relation to Aravind).

Chinese studies faced the same issues before 2017-19 as well, because there were few Chinese born American naturalized academics with a background in Chinese institutions, plus when I was in college (Obama 1/2) the majority of the limited academic funding in Govt/PoliSci was devoted to Russia, Iran, and the Arabic speaking nations. China was largely viewed the same way India is today and India the same way Vietnam or Indonesia are viewed today in American academia.

These academic blind spots are a major reason why American foreign policy keeps failing - there is almost no domain experience outside of Russia/CEE and MidEast studies in the US. We barely built Chinese studies domain experience but a lot of that is ex-USSR scholars pivoting to China for funding.

Post reply on HN