Privilege of privilege

JUN 24 -

Although it disheartens me a little to begin an essay by invoking the ubiquitous Facebook, social media has now become a useful tool for analysing growing social trends among the urban; the latest one being the practice of adding “Nepali” to one’s name, whether as a surname or a prefix or even as a middle name. So on Facebook, I would be: Pranaya Nepali or Nepali Pranaya Rana or Pranaya Nepali Rana. These changes in nomenclature are often accompanied by impassioned pleas to preserve Nepal’s sacred “unity” and veiled threats at the politicians who seem to be carving up the country along ethnic lines, all in order to play yet another game of musical chairs. This assertion of yourself as simply Nepali, and not your ethnicity, is a bold one. Despite fractious ethnic identities, the one common flag that we can all

fly is the Nepali one. This sense of nationalism is what urban Nepalis seem to have latched on to as a defense mechanism against what they see as a wanton and unnecessary splitting of hairs.

I understand the sentiment. These are hard times in a hard land and there are always those who have it harder. Access to a computer and the internet, comfort with the English-language interface of Facebook, the ability to change your last name or take up “Nepali” as a substitute are all emblematic of Nepali privilege. As urban, media-savvy middle-classers, we are constantly looking for a cause. This, I believe, is the eternal plight of the middle class: educated and aware enough to see the problems that plague society and yet, comfortable and content enough to do anything concrete to change those ills. Adding “Nepali” to Facebook can be a quick-fix, easy solution to this growing sense of unease that we all must feel at being inadequate during such grueling times. This is what is called armchair activism: feed the poor by playing a word game, topple a vicious African warlord by updating your Facebook status. When these practices fail, they are seen as harmless middle-class indulgences. In reality, they belie a greater trend of the young middle-class population towards inaction, an oversimplification of vastly complex issues and an overly messianic belief in the power of the internet.

The surname “Nepali” itself is one fraught with political tension. The last name “Nepal” has been the province of Bahuns while “Nepali,” on the other hand, has traditionally been the refuge of Gaines and Dalits. The adoption of this last name for many was an assertion of themselves as belonging to a country that was at best, indifferent and at worst, hostile. This last name was hard fought for. Those on Facebook don’t seem to have considered the privilege of choice. It is this same privilege that affords many Westerners the ability to renounce their material wealth and dedicate their lives to helping the poor and us third-worlders. It is a complicated thing, this privilege of renouncing privilege. In Nepal, it is the prerogative of the middle-class. The lower socio-economic class is too busy fighting to stay alive and the upper class is too obsessed with preserving the status-quo.

This Facebook initiative, although coming from a good place, is myopic and naïve. It is a Nepali example of the Kony2012 problem. It is born out of the middle-class desire to do something, but also hamstrung by that very class’s inability to translate emotion into concrete action. Social media can be a useful tool for coordination and the dissemination of ideas but it is also an easy substitute for any other kind of concrete action. As it stands right now, this “Nepali” movement is no more than an articulation of your own indignation at what you assume is being taken away from you. This kind of moral indignation can only come from a class that has seen Nepal as always and essentially united. What you don’t realise is that you cannot tear apart a country that has never united in the first place. Nepal is exclusively Kathmandu. Kathmandu is the vast, vast plaque in Nepal’s artery, leading it slowly but surely towards a coronary. For those agi tating, a lot of their demands are legitimate. Why allow a callous uncaring government, composed mainly of those who sought always to subjugate you, to rule from afar? Ethnic divisions have always been drawn. Even in Kathmandu, the haven of the

Nepali elite, class boundaries can often turn on ethnic lines when it comes to marriage and other cultural exchanges.

Turning oneself into simply “Nepali” and attempting to divorce yourself from your ethnic identity is not just impossible, it’s boring. Calling yourself “Nepali” does not alleviate the privilege that comes with being middle-class in the Valley. In a country like Nepal, ethnicity is not a matter of choice. Your affiliations have been decided long before you were born and will continue whether you associate with them or not. What is important is what you do with the privilege that you were born into. An acknowledgement of privilege is needed and after that, a dedication to whatever it is that you do. A dedication that is not dependent upon caste, religion, ethnicity or race. Homogeneity is boring. A melting pot is the worst example of a democracy. Democracies need heterogeneity. They need difference and a celebration of that difference. We should not lump everyone under the simple, sterile category of “Nepali” but should celebrate the f act that we are Magars and Gurungs and Shresthas and Shahs and Thapas and Rais and Nepalis. The diversity and difference that this one tiny country shelters is incredibly awe-inspiring. Difference is crucial to development. Differ-ence is where new ideas come from, where compromises are struck and friendships are built. Difference doesn’t always have to come with conflict. It can also end in respect, in appropriation, in celebration.

Nepal doesn’t need everyone to claim Nepali-ness. What Nepal needs is for those of you with the skills and the education to put your money where your mouth is. This is not some call to hold a rally or a banda. We don’t all need to protest. Those of us privileged enough to be reading this (and writing this) need to do whatever we do best. We need honest politicians, but what we need more are creative architects, ethical businessmen, avant-garde artists, skilled surgeons, truthful journalists, progressive judges and sustainable farmers. We need to be different.