4.15.2008

Forecast Gone Wrong. And Right.

I was *so* wrong about the weakening base of the Maoists due to the highhandedness of the YCL when I wrote my column in Nepalnews.com a while ago: http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2008/others/guestcolumn/jan/guest_columns_06.php

Clearly there were some apple-to-orange comparisons there, which many readers have pointed out to me since the publication of the article.

But I got the decline of NC right, especially the embarrassing loss of Sujata Koirala, Mahesh Acharya (who, by the way, is not Girija Prasad Koirala's nephew -- I also erred there; they are only neighbors), Sushil Koirala and Shekhar Koirala. Interestingly, people who got elected from NC are mostly from the Deuba faction. Kudos to the Nepali people for this selective 'cleansing'!

Fifty percent correct forecasting. For someone who considers himself an economist, that's pretty good, I think. And I have not even made a claim for the Nobel Prize yet, like some have done: http://demrepubnepal.blogspot.com/2008/04/nobel-peace-prize-2008-making-case-for.html (I really hope people get the humor here).

And, here's my new forecast: The Maoists are the new UML in town. Minus the rhetoric perhaps. The first sign of this was when Prachanda met with the ambassador from India. Here is the second sign of that (check out the part on economics): http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=143871

9 comments:

योद्धा | Yoddha said...

Thadai Mapai.. uhmmmm.

well about the Nobel Peace prize, I think parmendra ji should get it hands down, else he might go the "Hamiko Bachai Lio" route. we don't want that to happen now do we?

You also got another prediction right... well although you never wrote it on the blog (or anywhere else for that matter) maybe coz it was more of a "wishful thinking" it does not look like the maosists will get the "atyadhik bahumat" ... and yes I can see how the maoists are turning out to be the new UML also... I can also see the old UML turning out to be .. nothing more than a bunch of rats running like hell from the cheese. I wish they would be a little more resistant... only time will tell.

Bhok po lagyo,
jai Bhudi

saatdobato said...

for one thing, UML circa 1996 was not republican, or federalist, or authoritarian either, although they claim to be now. so i don't really see how those two are the same.

योद्धा | Yoddha said...

@सातदोबाटो ... I am failing to understand your reference to the year 1996. Did you mean 1994, when they formed a goverment ? if so, that was a sign of persistence shown by the party which they have lacked for a while now, and that is what I was refering to.

As far as I understand, what yubraj ji meant was that Maoists are toning their "harshness" down and would become the "soft" communists that UML has always been. (Yubraj ji, correct me if I am wrong).

"...what do they claim to be or not to be now ? and what can you not see as being the same??" .. however will remain to be questions that cannot be answered without being rephrased for clarity.

Thank You.

सुजन said...

i believe in evolution, and i do not particularly see anything wrong with

"UML circa 1996 was not republican, or federalist, or authoritarian either, although they claim to be now."

things change, circumstances change :: outlook changes, behavior changes

"i change my opinions when the facts change, sir. do you?"

योद्धा | Yoddha said...

"i change my opinions when the facts change, sir. do you?" I would like to think so:0)

I have believed in evolution ever since the 6th grade :0) ,so I see what you mean, no pun intended.

However, in UML's case being flexible has cost them in several ways throughout the years, so shows the election at least. even though "circumstances change :: outlook changes, behavior changes" a political party's agenda should not be based backing out of responsibilities at the time of necessities. Even though backing out of difficult times might "seem" authentic or the "right thing to do" at times, it sure as hell gives the opposition an edge in the process of decision making. Also, "Claiming" to be something does not mean anything if you cannot back it up with your actions. So many years went by where politicians claimed that they would bring about the changes...you know the rest.

Having said that, I would like to assure you that I am not bashing UML for their actions but venting the frustration about their decision to pull-out of the goverment.

However, the poll results do not look as bad as I though they would initially, I hope the country goes through much needed "changes" to catch on with the world.

feri bhok lagyo,
Jai Bhudi

सुजन said...

war-man (man?):

1. "should" != "is"

2. also, you can't always get what you want. [ok, enough with cliches.]

3. ups and downs are facts of life. [ok, that was the last one, i promise.]

4. there is a possibility (probability?) that UML might survive to contest another election.

5. ah, hell. that's all wuss talk. all that cpnm promised people will be realized. perhaps, people'll get more than they bargained for. [i can't take the cliches anymore, and the only way to do is end my two cents here.]

योद्धा | Yoddha said...

war-man?? "warrior", thank you very much. I guess we will "evolve" to the non-sexist ways by the turn of the century.. hopefully the nepali century.

I hope # 5 turns out to be true.

# 1 either my explanation has failed to convince you or you have chosen not to be convinced either way, I am burying the topic.

#2 & #3 are cliches, you said it the best.

#4. #3 should be(=is) sufficient enough to answer that. I never denied it.

सुजन said...

i'm getting sucked in again. damn, must forsake attachment. must forsake attachment. must forsake attachment.

ah, hell, one last time won't hurt...

>>#4. #3 should be(=is) sufficient enough to answer that. I never denied it.<<

.you did not deny. nor did you state.

.is 3 sufficient for 4?


"(man?)" was meant to raise the possibility of "war-boy" vis-a-vis "war-man". not "war-woman". [that was my bad, totally.]

oh well, maybe we'll evolve out of ageism as well.

योद्धा | Yoddha said...

disintegration of alias(errr...subtle mud slinging?) being politically correct .. ain't that a bitch. ;0).

yes, # 3 is sufficient enough to answer that. At least I think so, corollary to Murphy's law.

".you did not deny. nor did you state."..so what's the point..right?

let's bury the hatchet. This is getting older by the second.

...