essay on democracy in nepali language

Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

Essay on democracy in Nepal in 250 words.

DEMOCRACY IN NEPAL

Rana rule was a family autocracy. It existed in Nepal for 104 years. It did not give place to people’s will and aspiration. So people fought against ranas for rights and freedom. Nepal got democracy in 2007 B.S. we celebrate falgun as democracy day every year. People could not strengthen the democracy they got in 2007. So they again had to fight for it in 2046 and 2062/ 063. The last movement succeeded to bring a remarkable change in the country. We had kingship for nearly 240 years in our history. This movement made it a republic state. Now we have been the citizen of a federal secular state.

However, we have to do a lot to make the democracy stronger. First and foremost need is political stability through elected government. Our constituent assembly should formulate new constitution addressing the will and aspiration of all people representing all cast and creed. Only then everyone can get equal opportunity for their personality development.

Loktantra is the spirit of the people’s movement. It grants citizens various kind of freedom such as freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of movement, freedom to form association, etc. It ensures equality. Loktantra is based on public opinion. The government in a democratic country like Nepal is expected to work according to people’s will and aspiration. No disparity is made on the plea of race, caste, religion and sex. Democracy encourages patriotism and nationality.

Despite these good aspects, it is said to have some demerits. Some people say that is based on hollow idealism. The majority suppresses the minority. Rich persons win elections only. Above all, there are partisan evils and lowers are misused.

In spite of the aforementioned weakness, democracy is the best government. No other forms of government can take its place. It is our duty to make our loktantra strong and provide ensure the rights and freedom of the people.

Posted by Nepticle Blog

You may like these posts, post a comment, popular posts.

Essay on Social evils in Nepal-2021

SOCIAL EVILS …

essay on environmental pollution in 250 words-Nepal-2022

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION Environment simply…

Importance of Newspapers | Essay | 2021

IMPORTANCE OF NEWSPAPER There are different me…

Book articles
environmentalpollution
formationofFossil
human brain
importance of agriculture
pleasure of reading
Rights and duties
rivers in nepal
student life

Featured post

Structures and Function of brain

Hello Everyone! Welcome to my blog. Here you can find any articles related to General knowledge, creative stories, articles on different subjects, Essay writting, photography and so on.

anti-social practices (1)
Articles (24)
Be positive (1)
Book articles (1)
children day special (1)
conscious mind (1)
creativity (1)
cyber law (1)
Democracy (1)
dowry system (1)
drug addiction (1)
Education (1)
environmentalpollution (1)
excursion (1)
Forest in Nepal (1)
formationofFossil (1)
health is wealth (1)
history (1)
history of earth (1)
human brain (1)
importance of agriculture (1)
internet (1)
multimedia (1)
newspapers (1)
patriotism (1)
pleasure of reading (1)
quiz time (1)
Rights and duties (1)
rivers in nepal (1)
social service (1)
student life (1)
student mind (1)
subconscious in plants (1)
tourism industry (1)
unix and linux (1)
value of science (1)

Most Popular

Essay on democracy in Nepal in 250 words.

DEMOCRACY IN NEPAL Democracy is a …

Essay on Student life in 250 words

STUDENT LIFE The period of a human life spent at school or college for …

Essay on rights and duties in 250+ words

RIGHTS AND DU…

HUMAN BRAIN Brain There are vario…

Essay on importance of women education in Nepal in 300 words

IMPORTANCE OF WOMEN EDUCATION IN NEPAL WHAT IS EDUCATION? Education …

Essay on 'Tourism in Nepal' in 250 words

TOURISM IN NEPAL We want to visi…

essay on science and human values in 300 words

THE VALUE OF SCIENCE The present of era is t…

Essay on pleasures of reading | School Essay | College Essay-2021

PLEASURES OF READING …

Social Widget

Contract Publishing
Submissions
Advertise With Us
Testimonials

Latin America and the Caribbean
Indo Pacific
Middle East
Climate & Environment
Defence & Security
Development Partnerships
Agriculture
Politics & Government
Science & Technology
Special Reports
Soft Diplomacy

Nepal: Contemporary Democratic Politics

Nepal’s democracy has made a distinctive identity of the Nepali version. Nepal has witnessed the experience of the second episode of democracy in the constitutional monarchy set-up from 1990 to 2007. Nepalis today are experiencing the first chapter of inclusive democracy in the infant republic declared in 2015. The result of seven decades of political trials since 1950 is not a new political issue for contemporary Nepalis. The preamble mentioned in the Seventh Constitution of Nepal 2015, the result of the ongoing political struggle, has clearly and accurately defined the past, present and future of Nepali politics in a terse chronicle. Democracy in Nepal has become achievable for the violent protests as a means of Nepali politics and the peaceful disobedience of the populist forces.

The story of politics, the consequences of pain and expectation in politics, whether or not we like it, we have no choice but to walk in the vicinity and sync of time and situation. These activities are interdependent in such political and social movements, creating many upheavals in public affairs. We can sum the political vibrations caused in the political repercussions in the political system as neither performance-oriented nor deliver solutions-based actions within the democratic templates even if there are politico-administrative praxis. The primary temporal challenge is seen on the surface. The primary reasons are the lack of strengthening of the foundations of parliamentary democracy, and the delay in the process of democratization of democracy by managing short, medium and long term political transitions.

In the present’s grammar of the Government of Nepal, maintaining a full or collective or comprehensive democracy is an inseparable concern of all. There are three areas of specialization in politics – government and state (polity), private sector (economy) and civil society (political society). The fourth pillar of political communication (media) is the positive activism of political parties and the promotion of the infrastructures of emerging politics. The role of this fourth pillar in promoting political education, political socialization and political advancement is crucial in the 21st century.

Nepali democracy is strengthened by maintaining the balance and control of the interrelationships between the three interdependent and interconnected sectors, including political proactiveness and political semantics, political-economic perspectives and practices, and the conduct of public administration. Ideological diversity and intersectional pluralism pervade political society. Efficient leadership helps bridge the gap between political thinking and performance-oriented delivery of the rhetorics. The practice of pragmatic political mastery and politico-administrative professionalism was not limited to the politics experienced in the Western political society. The time has come for Nepal not to be an exception. The above three bases of governance – thinking of political action, implementation of political ideas and adoption of public professionalism – are also the seeds of social transformation in Nepal. In political aspirations, leadership style and its culture naturally determine the intensity and extensity of political will.

In terms of economic thinking, the challenge is not only to imprison Nepal’s poor economy in the vision of prosperity or its kept tall promises. But also to turn it into realization is no less a daunting challenge. In order to achieve the goal of good governance and sustainable development of Nepal, the current cycle of coronavirus pandemic, the conflict-ridden legacy of the Nepali political economy, and the signs of negative economic growth are further disrupted and stunted. There should be full implementation of public policy in public affairs, whether they are annual policies and programs, fiscal and monetary policies.

It is equally important whether the three core public policies are backed and followed down and up in the strata of bureaucracy, government and governance in Nepal. It is essential that the basic national policy address current and future challenges. Apart from maintaining security, peace and tranquillity, the administration is not impervious to facilitate the state of flux of the state and society and to act as a catalyst for change. Politics should also be sensitive to public management bodies. Therefore, public opinion and political aspirations towards the state and the government assist bonafide citizens and assuage the public to convey positive sentiments.

Public intellectual circles have their own fundamental traditions and new political consciousness on behalf of civil society. Its concept of rational cooperation and coexistence will become more and more universally accepted. In this matter of importance, if the political parties involved in it adopt the ideological practice of mutual rationale of existentialism, in addition to a conventional and agitation role of a vigilant civic society. Civil society is circumscribed into the role of social opposition in Nepal. It can also be analyzed that the use and practice of political theory in Nepal have been misappropriated, abused or deviated if otherwise. These basic and general political problems have eroded internal and external sovereignty creating its thin layer of supreme authority in the design of popular sovereignty. Weaknesses in sovereignty have certainly not diminished some of the hopes in politics that will be resolved over time.

The first chapter of the Republic of Nepal will come to an end if the power struggles in the culture of the political leadership and tensions or anxiety continue in the incumbent leadership. The presidential system of the Executive Rule is not unlikely to be the beginning of the second chapter of the Republic of Nepal. In comparative politics, for example, French politics is in the version of the Fifth Republic after the French Revolution. Despite the failures and successes of Nepal’s political history, in a liberal democracy, all Nepali people depend on the art of doing politics as much as possible when time and tide are cruel and tough.

Nepal’s entry into federalism under this process is another stage of decentralization. The idea of local-oriented self-government, which has been promised in the past or declared in political history, can be considered as the political remedy of overdue administrative affairs. In addition, the voice of inclusive democracy is characterized by respect for plurality and its spiritual acceptance and self-co-existence. It would not be an exaggeration to say that political knowledge is the vehicle of change in the form and structure of the state. In the context of changing world affairs, the end of the old, conservative and authoritarian tendencies is inevitable. The friction of equity and equality in our life world, society and national sphere can also be taken as a part and parcel of political conduct. It is time to jump from simple talk to follow the results of positive thinking in politics. Politics is considered the art of both the possible and the impossible. Because of these state activities, sophisticated and dynamic politics will become the current vernacular and reality of the new Nepal.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share link with colleague or librarian

Stay informed about this journal!

Get New Issue Alerts
Get Advance Article alerts
Get Citation Alerts

Diversity, Multilingualism and Democratic Practices in Nepal

This paper presents the relationship among Nepal’s linguistic diversity, multilingualism, and democratic practices by bringing into ideas from the global north and global south. The guiding question for exploring this relationship is, “why is Nepal’s linguistic diversity being squeezed despite the formulation of democratic and inclusive language policies that intended to promote multilingualism?”. To investigate this concern, qualitative data were obtained from semi-structured interviews with two purposively selected high-profile people working in the capacity of language policymaking in the state agencies. In Nepal, although democracy promoted awareness towards the issue of language rights and the need of preservation and promotion of minority languages, the narrowing of multilingual diversity continued in practice. This study concluded that democracy allowed neoliberal ideologies to penetrate sociolinguistic spaces and put greater emphasis on English and Nepali. While there is an intertwined relationship between linguistic diversity, democracy, and multilingualism, the ongoing democratic practices have become counterproductive in maintaining the linguistic diversity leading to the marginalization of minority and lesser-known languages. Also, despite ample literature documenting linguistic diversity as a resource and opportunity, the notions of ‘linguistic diversity’ and ‘multilingualism’ were utilized merely as political agendas and issues of critical discourses which have left negligible impact on changing the conventionalized practices of linguistic domination of Nepali and English. Therefore, we question the co-existence of diversity and democracy and claim that democracy alone does not necessarily contribute to the protection of linguistic diversity. In line with this concept, democratic practices could even be counterproductive in the promotion and protection of linguistic diversity. Our findings suggest future interventions about essentializing the use of minority languages in education and governance, alongside democracy providing the fertile grounds for policy pitches to address micro problems in maintaining multilingualism within a democracy.

Introduction

Nepal is a multilingual, multicultural, multiracial, and multi-religious country (Constitution of Nepal 2007 ; 2015 ) situated in the Greater Himalayan Region, the mega center of biodiversity, and home to more than one-sixth of world languages ( Turin 2007 ). The tremendous linguistic diversity, with four major language families namely Indo-Aryan, Tibeto-Burman, Dravidian (Munda), and Austro-Asiatic and one language isolate i.e., Kusunda, is one of the aspects of its national identity. The National Population and Housing Census (Central Bureau of Statistics [ cbs ] 2012 ) records more than 123 languages spoken as mother tongues, with an additional category of “other unknown languages” – with close to half million speakers while as many as 129 languages have also been recorded recently ( Language Commission 2019 ). Despite this huge linguistic and cultural diversity, it has been found that the speakers of traditionally unwritten and increasingly endangered vernacular languages have been shifting towards the regional, national and even international languages that carry relatively better economic benefits, access to education, trade, and participation in mainstream politics. This is understood as an impact of the forces of neoliberal ideologies ( Sharma and Phyak 2017 ). The instance of adoption of Nepali and English as media for education, business, and communication is also reported among ethnic communities instead of using the local languages, especially in urban contexts such as the Kathmandu Valley ( Gautam 2020a ). This trend has contributed to the weakening of the functional status and strength of many ethnic/indigenous languages, igniting several movements initiated by indigenous communities. At the same time, there are mounting challenges for the preservation and promotion of those languages due to both policy and practice lapses at micro levels ( Poudel and Choi 2020 ). Though there are several instances of attempts by national governments and related communities for the promotion and preservation of these languages, these efforts have been found to be inconsistent across history. In that, at various times, some governments have promoted monolingual policies whereas, at other times, some other governments have adopted multilingual policies.

Amidst these attempts, both monolingual and multilingual ideologies emerged to the forefront of the debate concerning whether and how to preserve languages, and how they are negotiated in everyday life as well ( Gynne, Bagga-Gupta and Lainio 2016 ). These ideologies emerged as agendas of political discourse perhaps due to the political parties’ attempts to please as well as empower the communities that have their indigenous and ethnolinguistic identities for political reasons. In this paper, we have explored such issues that have emerged around the values of diversity, democracy, and multilingualism while shaping policymaking processes. In doing so, we assess recent trends on linguistic diversity relating to Nepal’s democratic practices with special reference to its historical dimension drawing on instances from the changing status of languages and diversity, and the linguistic practices therein. We also present our critical evaluation of the current policy based on the analysis of legal and policy documents, and practices based on the analysis of interview data.

Supported by our in-depth exploration of the policies and practices, a study of the relevant literature from the countries in the global south, in-depth interviews with participants, we have identified several issues within the democratic polity that have impacted Nepal’s linguistic diversity in various ways. Finally, some implications have been drawn for future planning directions to enrich and maintain multilingualism within the democratic system in Nepal.

Diversity and Language Vitality in Nepal

Diversity emerges and exists when people from different identity orientations such as races, nationalities, ethnicities, religions, or even philosophies come together to form a community that recognizes and celebrates the values of all backgrounds (also, see Bagga-Gupta and Messina Dahlberg 2018 ). As stated earlier, linguistic, cultural, and ethnic diversity are the essences of Nepalese society, and such diversity characteristics have been existing since the early history of Nepal. All these diversities make up Nepal’s collective multilingual and multicultural identity. The domains of geographical, linguistic, and cultural diversities hold a mutually reinforcing connection among the people in constituting Nepal’s collective identity. Comprising an area of 147,516 square kilometers, 1 with a length of 885 kilometers from east to west and a breadth of 193 kilometers from north to south, Nepal embraces the demographic, cultural and linguistic diversities influenced by people-to-people connection with India on the south and China on the north. Along the three ecological zones, 2 a total of 125 officially recognized ethnic and caste groups reside ( Yadava 2014 ), making this country ethnically and socio-culturally diverse, not only geographically, but also with varied demographic characteristics of the people.

Similarly, Nepal is a “home of 5,400 plus species of higher plants and more than 850 species of birds measuring about 2.2% and 9.4% of the world’s level of biodiversity per unit area matched by a similar rate of linguistic and cultural variation” ( Turin 2007 , 14). This biodiversity, which also links with the social and cultural systems of the communities, contributes to the enrichment of relevant cultural patterns, and enriches the country’s linguistic repertoire. All these species exist through the network of interrelationships in an ecosystem, which also matters for language preservation ( Crystal 2000 ). The diversity of cultural patterns and values also highlight the role of language within. For instance, Crystal (2000, 34) argues that “If the development of multiple cultures is so important then the role of languages becomes critical, for cultures are chiefly transmitted through spoken and written languages”. Although the cultural aspect of diversity is beyond the focus of this paper, it is sensible enough to note that there is an explicit link between language and culture for the very survival of the both, and the ethnic and cultural identity emerge therein. Embracing situated diversity in the national systems is important for Nepal as we see the very identity of this country lies in the same premises. For this, policy provisions in celebrating, preserving, and accommodating diversity and multilingualism have been well articulated in the macro national policies that came out in recent decades ( The Constitution of Nepal 2015 ; National Planning Commission 2013 ). The brief historical account hereafter exemplifies and elaborates on the evolutionary development of such policies in Nepal.

Diversity and Multilingualism in Nepal: A Glimpse of Language Policy

Despite being multicultural and multilingual, Nepal preserved ‘ethnic’, instead of ‘civic’, nationalism in its task of nation-building which has been reflected in various policies from unification movement (1736 ad ) to present time. Following the Gorkha conquest 3 Gorkhali or Khas (now known as Nepali spoken by 44.6% of national population- cbs 2012 ), the language of ruling elites and mother tongue of many people in the Hills, was uplifted as the national official language. After unification, a hegemonic policy in terms of language and culture was formulated which promoted the code (linguistic and dress) of the Hill Brahmins, Chhetries and Thakuris to the ideal national code (i.e., ‘Nepali’ as the national language and ‘Daura Suruwal Topi’ 4 as national dress). This has been interpreted as one of the attempts to promote assimilatory national policy (in terms of language and culture) that contributed to curbing both linguistic and cultural diversity. However, for the rulers then, it was an attempt to establish stronger national identity and integrity. The Rana regime 5 further prolonged this nationalist (i.e., ‘one nation-one language’) policy by uplifting the Nepali language in education and public communication (as the language of wider communication within the territory of Nepal). The Rana, during their rule, suppressed the Newar and Hindi language movements, which served as evidence of their deliberate plan to eliminate all but one language, viz. Nepali. In this sense, we can understand that Nepal’s diversity and multilingual identity were suppressed historically in the name of nation-building and promoting national integration among people with diverse ethnic and cultural orientations.

Following the end of Rana oligarchy in 1950, with the establishment of democracy, some changes were noticed concerning the recognition and mainstreaming of the other ethnic/indigenous languages. This instigated policy changes in terms of language use in education as well. However, the status quo of the Nepali language further strengthened as it was made the prominent language of governance and education. The National Education Planning Commission [ nnepc ] (1956), the first national report on education, basically reflected the ideology of monolingualism with the influence of Hugh. B. Wood (one of the prominent scholars and educationists from the US who worked in India was invited by the Government of Nepal to advise the education policy and planning process). The nnepc recommended the following concerning language stating, “If the younger generation is taught to use Nepali as the basic language then other languages will gradually disappear, the greater the national strength and unity” (Ministry of Education [ moe ] 1956 , 97). Although this report formed the backbone of Nepal’s education system, it also paved the way for minimizing the potential for empowering the languages of the nation. Pradhan (2019, 169) also writes that this commission attempted to “coalesce the ideas of Nepali nationalism around the triumvirate of Nepali language, monarchy and Hindu religion as uniquely Nepali”. The same was reinforced by the K. I. Singh government in 1957 by prescribing Nepali as a medium of instruction in school education.

The Panchayat regime 6 also promoted the use of Nepali as the only language of administration, education, and media in compliance with the Panchayat slogan ‘one language, one dress, one country’ ( eutaa bhasha, eutaa bhesh, eutaa desh ), again providing a favor for the strengthening of the monolingual nationalistic ideology (in other words, the assimilatory policy). Such an ideology can be seen in the report of the All-Round National Education Commission (1961) as well. Not only in education but also in governance, English, or Nepali were made mandatory in recording all documents of companies through the Company Act (1964). Following the Panchayat system, with the restoration of democracy in 1990, the Constitution of Nepal ( 1991 , part 1, article 6.1 and 6.2) provisioned the Nepali language written in Devnagari 7 script as the national language, while also recognizing all the mother tongues as the languages of the nation with their official eligibility as a medium of instruction up to primary education. 8 Similarly, the Interim Constitution of Nepal (2007) , which came as a collective outcome of the Maoist insurgency 9 and Andolan ii (Public movement - ii ) continued to strengthen the Nepali language but ensured (in its part 1, article 5[2]) that each community has the right to get education in their mother tongue and the right to preserve and promote their languages, script, and culture as well.

The recognition of all the mother tongues as the languages of the nation was a progressive step ahead provisioned by the Interim Constitution of Nepal (2007) . Apart from further confirming the right of each community residing in Nepal to preserve and promote its language, script, cultural civility, and heritage, this constitution (Part 3, Article 17) enshrined the right to each community to obtain basic education in their mother tongue as provided for in the law. The same was well-articulated in the Constitution of Nepal (2015) as well, and each state was given the authority to provide one or many languages spoken by the majority population as the official language(s). Along with this provision, the Language Commission was established to study and recommend other matters relating to language (part 1, article 7 of the constitution). However, it can be concluded that these policy provisions that embrace diversity will have less effect if the concerned communities or agencies do not translate them into practice.

This small-scale case study is based on both primary and secondary data sets. The primary data were collected from semi-structured interviews with two purposively selected participants who we identified through our professional networks. The secondary data were obtained from detailed reading of available literature about language policy and planning such as legislative documents, policy papers, and research papers. The two interviewees, Mr Anjan and Mr Akela (pseudonyms used) have extensive work experience in the field of education, governance, constitution-making, and advocacy for language preservation and promotion in Nepal. Anjan and Akela emerge from two different backgrounds. Anjan worked at the Ministry of Education for more than 25 years, studied about multilingual education from a university in Europe as a part of his higher education. While at the ministry, he worked in the capacity of director at central offices such as the Office of the Controller of Examination, Department of Education, Curriculum Development Center, and served in the most influencing decision-making positions in the areas of language and education policy planning in Nepal. On the other hand, Akela worked as a politician and journalist, teacher educator who later joined Radio Nepal, engaged in various cultural advocacy forums of the Communist Party of Nepal, and again moved to politics at the later part of his life. He was an elected member of the parliament in the Constituent Assembly. While Anjan is the native speaker of Nepali, Akela is a native speaker of Bhojpuri and learned Nepali as a second language among other languages such as Hindi, Maithili, English, etc. In that, both individuals are still active in language politics, policy, and planning, however, they are from different socio-cultural, linguistic, and geopolitical backgrounds. We claim that their ideas have made our understanding of linguistic diversity and democracy more enriched and reliable since both have experienced the major political transitions in Nepal and were involved in key policymaking positions. Also, both have been actively engaged in the language policy processes and advocacy. Therefore, our trust in the data obtained from the interviews with them lies in their history, professional background, and engagement.

They were interviewed online, using the Zoom interactive videoconferencing platform. The semi-structured interviews lasted for approximately one hour each. The questions asked were primarily related to the overarching concern “Why is Nepal’s linguistic diversity being squeezed despite the formulation of democratic and inclusive language policies that intended to promote multilingualism? However, several new concerns (e.g., ultranationalism, pragmatic gaps in policy implementation) emerged during the interviews (cf. the findings and discussion below). The interviews were video recorded, they were transcribed verbatim, and the relevant extracts were translated into English (by the authors) and were double-checked for accuracy and reliability. We have analyzed the data without being stuck to any specific theory, but rather with inductively generated themes ( Miles, Huberman, and Saldana 2014 ), and have positioned ourselves on the critical perspectives that challenge the historical and structural practices contributing to the understanding of inequalities and marginalization of the ethnic/indigenous languages. In other words, we looked at the data in reference to our major concern that questions the co-existence of democracy and linguistic diversity in multilingual contexts. We examined the relationship between historically shifting democratic practices and the situated linguistic diversity of Nepal, questioning whether democracy promotes diversity or subdues it. The empirical data have been integrated with the policy information, which facilitated us to generate relevant themes that relate to the focus of the study. Hence, the trichotomy of diversity, democracy, and multilingualism constitutes the backbone of the analytical framework in this paper.

We have taken our positions on the critical theories that challenge the historical and structural practices contributing to the understanding of inequalities and marginalization of the languages. Such practices have been promoted by democracies of various types (usually in the global North and the South) instead of facilitating the promotion of linguistic diversities. Hence the discussion moves around the trichotomy of diversity, democracy, and multilingualism as an analytical framework.

Findings and Discussion

This section presents the findings of the data organized around inductively generated themes presented in subthemes that deal with historicity of language policy, democracy and its impact on diversity, conceptualization of linguistic diversity (e.g., diversity as resources vs diversity as problem), community engagement in promotion and protection of languages, instances of language contact, and impact of global North ideologies on the language policy and practice processes of global South. The findings are also discussed integrating empirical data and the available literature as appropriate.

‘One Nation’ Ideology and Linguistic Diversity

Historically, even before the unification of Nepal, there were several principalities in which the Kings used to speak their languages, and the linguistic diversity was preserved and strengthened”. In a follow-up response to the same query, he claimed, “The geopolitical, historical, socio-political and anthropological history recognized the multilingual social dynamics, however, the national policies after the unification could not embrace such diversity”.

He relates his claim with the inability to embrace diversity as expected within the current political systems and the ideologies of Nepali nationalism and adds that practices of promoting only Nepali language constitute instances of growing ultranationalism. Ultra-nationalism refers to the ideology and the practice of promoting the interest of one state or people in the name of extreme nationalism, with very little or no attention to consolidating democratic institutions ( Irvine 1997 ). Akela emphasizes that the government’s plurilingual policies will not operate as the practice has largely shaped people’s orientation towards Nepali and English, sidelining the regional and local languages. Anjan also expressed a similar perception as, “Though deliberate efforts are made in the policy level to promote the regional/local languages through status planning, there still lies the attitudinal problem which undermines the potential of bringing local languages into practice. Their claims echo discontents expressed by the Language Commission (2019) in its report regarding the failure in translating the national policies that value minority languages into practice, including language use for official as well as educational purposes.

Diversity and Democracy

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) asserts that democracy assures the basic human right for self-determination and full participation of people in various aspects of their living such as decision-making concerning their language and culture. It also provides them with ways of assuring social benefits such as equal opportunities and social justice (Pillar, 2016). In Nepal, diversity was promoted by democracy through policy provisions, especially after the promulgation of the Constitution of Nepal in 1990 following the Nepali-only monolingual policy of the absolute monarchy (alternatively the Panchayat regime). The basic rights for the use of indigenous languages were assured in the constitution as well as other educational acts formed as outcomes of democratic political turns. The changes in the policy provisions provided opportunities for linguists, language rights activists, and advocacy groups/individuals to explore more about their languages and cultures. Due to their attempts, also supported by the democratic political system, new languages (e.g., Santhali, Bote, Dhimal, etc.) were identified and recognized. For instance, a total of 31 languages were recorded by the National Census in 1991, whereas after the establishment of democracy, the successive censuses in 2001 and 2011 identified a total of 92 and 123 languages respectively ( Yadava 2014 ). Accordingly, to streamline the mother tongue education, as a form of campaign for preservation and promotion of the languages, teaching and learning materials (for up to grade 3) were prepared in more than 22 languages by cdc . However, pragmatic actions remained fragile for mother tongue education up to grade 3 to support the aspiration for promoting diversity. The ineffective implementation (or perhaps a failure) of the state policies to run mother tongue education up to primary level ultimately resulted in constraining multilingualism instead of promoting it. Although the statistical data shows that the number of languages spoken as mother tongues in Nepal is 129 ( Language Commission 2019 ), some scholars still doubt whether these languages functionally exist in reality ( Gautam 2019 ), or if they are there, then the practice may be fragile. This fragile practice in the field can be noted to be influenced by a multitude of factors including lack of community participation, hegemonic attitude of people with power of the dominant languages (e.g., Nepali, Maithili, etc.), and their agency against the minority languages.

Nepal’s participation in the UN organizations and endorsement of most of its declarations compelled Nepal Government to form its domestic policies in line with the commitments made in the international communities to ensure the fundamental concerns of democracy, and that further contributed to creating pressure for right-based policies in Nepal.

Anjan echoed a similar belief saying, “ The recognition of linguistic diversity in the macro policies is the result of democracy” . From the observation of their claims and, also with support from the available literature (e.g., Sonntag 1995 , 2007 ; Pradhan 2019 ; Poudel and Choi 2020 ), it can be strongly claimed that the establishment of multiparty democracy in 1990 in Nepal contributed to the wider recognition of linguistic diversity. Also, “The Nepali-only policy was discarded in favor of an official language policy that recognized Nepal’s linguistic diversity” ( Sonntag 2007 , 205). This informs that the democratic political system that remained open to the neoliberal economy embraced the linguistic diversity as a resource, due to which the multilingual identity of Nepalese society was officially recognized. However, at the same time, this political system could not preserve the minority/indigenous languages as expected, which prompted us to question the co-existence of diversity and democracy. Also, “It is very much a matter of democracy that everyone has the right to language and that society has a common language that everyone can understand and use” (Rosén and Bagga-Gupta 2015, 59). This implies that democratic states (e.g., Nepal, India, Sweden) must address the contradictory discourses of language rights and equity concerns pertaining to language(s) (e.g., Nepali and other indigenous languages). However, the fundamental question still not well-answered, at least in the case of Nepal, is whether democracy can, in a real sense, promote linguistic diversity, or if it narrows down diversity by marginalizing ethnic/minority languages. While responding to this unanswered concern, we have observed that diversity as a resource and diversity as a problem are the two distinct discourses that emerged during the evolutionary process of democracy in Nepal, which was also emphasized by the two participants. Their arguments (see elaboration in 5.3 and 5.4 below) revealed that the two mutually exclusive concerns (diversity as resource vs diversity as problem) parallelly existed in Nepal’s language policy and planning discourse, and they have formed the core of the debate.

Diversity as a Resource

Both informants in this study argued that diversity must be absolutely understood as a resource, very significant for human beings at the global level. Akela claims, If any language of a community dies, the culture and lifestyle of that community disappears, reduces biodiversity, and that ultimately will be a threat to humanity . He understands linguistic diversity as a part of the ecology, and strongly argues that it should be protected. Agnihotri (2017, 185) also echoes a similar belief as Just as biodiversity enriches the life of a forest, linguistic diversity enhances the intellectual well-being of individuals and groups, both small and large . Akela adds, No language should die for our existence as well . Both Akela and Anjan pointed out that the discourse on diversity and multilingualism in Nepal has been strengthened and institutionalized after 1990 when the country entered a multiparty democratic system.

However, Akela thinks that the current legislative provisions have only partially addressed the diversity needs to fit Nepal’s super diverse context. He also points to the influence of the global North in bringing ultranationalist values in Nepal’s policymaking. He does not think that the identity issues raised and addressed through policy processes would make significant differences as they were just brought into the field as agendas of political bargains. He stated, The agendas of identity are just the forked tongues’, translated from [pahichanko sabal ta dekhaune daant matra ho] . He meant that the identity issues have been largely used by the political leaders to deceive the concerned communities for their political benefits. This perception of a political leader, who is also an activist and scholar from the concerned ethnic community is very much meaningful for this study, as it indicates that Nepal’s democratic path initiated a comprehensive discourse for the protection of diversity. However, such discourse has been mostly used for political goals, rather than changing the grass-root practice and engagement of the concerned communities to bring indigenous knowledge and skills into the education systems. However, it has been well-agreed that multilingualism, and variability are constitutive of human existence. We usually engage in the dynamic dialogic interaction to construct our identity within the diversity we have ( Agnihotri 2017 ). Agnihotri (ibid) thinks that the potentiality for multilingualism is innately programmed in human beings, so that linguistic and cultural harmony in our communities can be developed, for which the democratic political system facilitates.

Diversity as a Problem

There is a strong motivation of people towards educating their children in Nepali and English, however they stick to their ethnic languages for communicative purposes. And when there comes the issue of language of the provincial or regional communication, there is a conflict between two of the major regional languages (i.e., Maithili and Bhojpuri).

He sees that such conflicts are due to ideological divides among people themselves. It can, therefore, be observed that this community-level ideology and practice has led to the fragmentation of values associated with their languages, most probably harming the socio-historical harmony among languages.

Nettle (2000, 335) claimed, “Linguistic and ethnic fragmentation relates to low levels of economic development since it is associated with societal divisions and conflict, low mobility, limited trade, imperfect markets, and poor communications in general”. The low levels of societal values and economic development linked with the indigenous languages might have led to intergenerational shifts among the youths of these communities ( Gautam 2019 ). Consequently, this trend has impacted the participation of the relevant communities in campaigns for revitalization of their languages. In addition to this, on the educational dimension of language use, the “schools are often not always aware of the linguistic and cultural wealth they own and could reveal as an important part of their school identities” ( Finkbeiner 2011 , 86). Despite the availability of rich multilingual diversity, the rapid expansion of English medium instruction, irrespective of the local as well as national language, in private and public schools in Nepal is a lively example of how the mother tongues are undervalued. This trend has indirectly contributed to the devaluation of the potential of indigenous language use in education systems in multilingual communities globally.

The Role of Community Participation in Language Preservation and Promotion

In principle, the participatory democracy and the consequential reconciliation often appear to be the only suitable approach ( Agnihotri 2017 ), but in reality, the community participation in the promotion and protection of the indigenous languages is negligible if we take the case of multilingual countries such as Nepal and India. With the utilization of democratic ideals, some communities (e.g., Tamang, Newar, Maithili, Rajbansi, etc.) have made several initiatives but largely in many communities the motivation towards educating their children in their ethnic/indigenous languages is negligible, especially conditioned by the local level policymakers’ inaction (see, Poudel and Choi 2020 ), and their demotivation are influenced by the pedagogical and ideological debates around the discourses on empowering local languages ( Poudel 2019 ). This practice has served the interest of the elites who, with influences from various sectors, would like to homogenize the societies linguistically and culturally, which creates inequalities of various types.

A sense of ownership in the community about keeping their language(s) lively is very significant for the preservation and promotion of both the language and culture. For instance, in Nepal, some languages (e.g., Kusunda, Raute) are endangered as the number of native speakers is declining, and there is a lack of community participation in preserving them. Akala says, “ Unless the community owns it, initiates it, no outsider can feel the language as the native-speakers do. The emic feeling is far stronger than the etic one ”. However, he believes that the cause for diminishing participation of the community in language preservation initiatives is due to the structural constraints that shape people’s mindset towards the preference of either Nepali or English. Rosén and Bagga-Gupta (2013, 70) stated that “It is through participation and interaction that the social structure that forms the practice is (trans)formed and (re)produced”. Both Anjan and Akela believe that the widespread use or practice of Nepali and English in academia, governance and education has contributed to the (re)production of the hegemonic power structure of these languages over the other ethnic/indigenous ones, and this structure has (trans)formed the public understanding that learning in indigenous languages is inferior to the dominant ones (Kansakar, 1996). For them, this trend is a counterproductive outcome of democracy that promoted neoliberal ideas ( Siegel 2006 ) and led the languages into the competitive edge in the societies, which ultimately led to the promotion of the promoted, and suppression of the suppressed in which the “ideological and affective mismatches that arise out of encounters between people with different language socialization experiences” ( Fujita 2010 , 38) were observed. The data also pointed to the impacts of global North ideologies (for instance, the inclusive democratic ideas) on the discourses of multilingualism of the global South.

Ideological Construction of the Global North and Impacts on Global South

Nepal’s growing engagement with the international community (through its membership in the UN, wto , imf , etc.), and its political systems have largely influenced attitudinal patterns in Nepalese society. From a geopolitical perspective, Nepal is sandwiched between two giant countries India and China, and the changes in the neighborhood would influence it on a larger scale. Besides, the development in the global North would always have a chain effect in the countries of the global South. For instance, the British colonial government of India then promoted English amidst other languages, and a similar trend emerged in Nepal with the effect of the environment in the neighborhood. Such geopolitical conditions and the waves gravely influenced the closely related communities to the development of nationalism and the creation of nation-states, including a new Europe perceived as superior to other parts of the world ( Bagga-Gupta 2010 ; Gal and Irvine 1995 ; Rosen and Bagga-Gupta 2013 ; Shohamy 2006 ). The ideologies of the countries of the global North have influenced the countries of the global South in many ways, including ideologies of language planning and policy. This has generated a perception and a social space that differentiates ‘us and the other’ through the formation of linguistic-cultural ideologies ( Gynne, Bagga-Gupta and Lainio 2016 ) or creating linguistic imageries constitutive of cultural tools ( Bagga-Gupta and Rao 2018 ) in the communities that have multiple languages in place that ultimately impact relevant social actions. This made some languages valued more than others in the domains of governance and educational spaces ( Poudel and Choi 2020 ; Poudel 2010 ). In the case of Nepal, the first educational commission was influenced by Huge. B. Wood’s ideologies formed out of his involvement in Indian and the western world, and the committee under his leadership had huge influence in collaboration with academia and politicians then recommended for streamlining the education systems through a monolingual ideology. Awasthi (2008) also noted that the ideologies constructed by the Macaulay Minutes (1835) in India had an invisible effect in Nepal’s language policymaking, especially reflected in the nnepc report prepared with the contribution of Mr. Wood. The same ideological structure continued for long, and even today with maintaining Nepali as the national language to be used in governance and education ( Sharma 1986 ), while at the same time allowing other regional or ethnic languages for such purposes as an outcome of democratic political development. It can be understood as having an ideological link with the “Englishization” efforts of many countries in the global North, reflected in nnepc and the reports afterward. In this way, it is not unfair to claim that the ideologies of the global North impacted the linguistic, cultural, and economic systems of countries in the global South (e.g., India, Nepal, etc.).

In addition to that, “the international political-economic structure seems stacked against a substantial or near future diminishment of the north-south gap” (Thompson and Reuveny 2010: 66). The neoliberal trends that emerged from the global North have travelled to the global South, impacting the global-south countries through the language and culture of the former. The unprecedented expansion of English as a global phenomenon ( Dearden 2014 ) can be a living example of such an effect. The advancement in technology and the increasing use of English as the dominant language of that domain further brought the global North and South together, influencing each other. As a result, the language also became one of the aspects of the north-south political economy. It involved various combinations of developmental states recapturing domestic markets from foreign exporters (import substitution) and the recapture of domestic business (nationalization). The outcome, aided by investments in education, was a new elite of technical managers and professionals who could build on historical experience and opportunities through the commodification of the English language.

Besides, the technology sharing, migration and demographic changes have had variable impacts on the north-south gap. For instance, Nepali youths’ labor migration and their English preference have also impacted the “generational shifts in languages” ( Gautam 2020a , 140). The youths’ migration to the countries in the Middle East and their participation in the global marketplaces in the global North countries have contributed to reshaping of their ideologies towards the home languages and English. Anjan’s statement, “ We have made whimsical choices in our social and education systems, (e.g., choice of language for education) and are even lured by the ideologies formed even by our immigrant population usually in the western world” . Among many, this can be understood as one of the causes for accentuated divergent tendencies in language shifts, usually from the indigenous and national languages to English. Similar cases were reported in the countries of globalized economies as well. For instance, in Singapore, Lakshmi (2016, 229) concluded “Despite governmental and community efforts to support Tamil maintenance in Singapore, census and school data show a decrease in the number of Indian families using Tamil as the predominant home language”, and perhaps this is an instance of a generalizable scenario of squeezing multilingualism in the micro level.

Multilingualism and Language Contact as an Outcome of Democracy

Multilingualism is a defining feature of intricate social and cultural practices ( Lafkioui 2013 ), and it is influenced gravely by the dynamic social, cultural, and political processes such as migration, social movements, and mobility in any society. For instance, the global impact of migration entailed language contact in multilingual countries ( Gautam 2020a , 2021 ), and this was evidenced in various communities across Nepal. Multilingual diversity has also been threatened by such processes, as the language choices have been more constrained due to limited linguistic competencies and interactive skills among the migrants as members of the community. It is also possible that the more intense the migration, the more homogeneity in language use emerges. Highly migrant communities (usually in the urban spaces) attempt to develop a shared linguistic and cultural identity through increasingly engaging in the construction of new normal patterns of shared beliefs and values.

Languages are a treasure trove of literature, philosophy, and worldviews, and the loss of languages will have a huge intellectual catastrophe ( Abbi 2017 ). The protection of 6000 plus languages in the world has been a big challenge as estimates have shown a language dies every fortnight on this planet (ibid). This global problem has affected Nepal’s linguistic diversity as well in an unprecedented way. Regmi (2017) writes that nearly 44% of languages are safe, and the rest of the 56% languages are broadly labelled as threatened and shifting, and this trend has been growing. Also, most of the Nepalese minority language speaking communities have been influenced by the impact of cross-border links through media, marriage, migration (M3s) in the city areas ( Gautam 2018 , 2020a ), and these trends have intensified the trend of language contacts among the dominant ones further reducing the functional values of the minority languages. Due to this, the multilingual arenas turned to be more complex zones for incidences of contacts across local, national, and international languages reproducing the dominance of the dominating languages. The strongest impact of language contact on multilingualism in Nepal can be observed after the 1990s that increased people’s participation in social spaces in inclusive democratic processes. The “Nepali-only policy of the absolute monarchy was discarded in favor of an official language policy that recognized Nepal’s linguistic diversity” ( Sonntag 2007 , 205). On top of that, the impact of the Maoist revolution (1996–2006) brought lots of social and cultural changes in Nepalese multilingualism. Many ethnic communities were displaced from their original homelands to the capital city, and other urban contexts because of political pressure from the agitating parties then. Hence, the urban contexts such as Kathmandu (largely Newar speaking area), Pokhara (Gurung and Magar speaking area), Nepalgunj (Tharu speaking area), Kapilvastu (Awadhi speaking area), etc. were established as zones for the increasing trend of language contacts as people from various remote villages hurled to these cities for opportunities of education, employment, and business. Nowadays, people have gradually well-assimilated with the dominant language and cultural values developing complex social zones for language contact activities.

The consequences of such contacts which are further triggered by democratic political processes, are multifaceted. One of the major effects is the shift of such minority languages and their cultures towards assimilation into the dominant ones. Such assimilation has led to erasing of the indigenous languages and cultures, not even leaving linguistic marks of some dead languages for the future generations. This, as one of the reasons for the inter-generational shift, was reported by our participants as well. Gautam (2020b, 204) claims, “The young generations are not very much interested about the role of language in community rather they are more concerned about globalization and the economic activities” Similarly, Anjan says, “ The contemporary generation of parents and their children do not value their ethnic language on the economic grounds, and that has impacted the way they make language choices at home and in schools ”. Indirectly, he pointed towards the increasing trend of educating in English medium. This shift has impacted the policymaking process regarding language use in education as well ( Poudel and Choi 2020 ), because the relevant policymaking bodies did not end up with strong resolutions to use the already minoritized local languages in education and governance.

Conclusion and Implications

In this paper, we discussed the way that a democratic country (here, Nepal) has undergone through a process of democratizing its macro policies for the promotion and preservation of its linguistic diversity, which provided shreds of evidence that such practices have minimal impact on the substantial results due to the processes of glocalization ( Choi 2017 ). The identification of new languages and recognition of multilingualism through scheduling of these languages in the constitution have been the visible results of democratic governance. However, largely mono and/or bilingual practices in governance, education, and public communication show that the promises of the constitution have not materialized as yet. Based on the analysis of the data, we conclude that democracy in Nepal functioned as a “double-edged sword”, which on the one hand promoted efforts of preservation and promotion of linguistic diversity, while on the other hand, contributed to constraining the size of diversity by vitalizing mainly Nepali and English, sidelining the potential of indigenous languages. Such a role of democracy promoted the ethnic and indigenous communities’ active engagement in reacting against the macro policies pertaining to languages. This issue was also used as an agenda of political gains but with very little or nil impact on the ongoing practices within their own linguistic and cultural communities. The democratic ideology fundamentally borrowed from the global North had done more justice at the macro policy level but created inequalities and injustices in practices at the micro level, and that consequently turned the investments and attempts in promoting linguistic diversity futile.

Our conclusion implies that in Nepal democracy promoted monolingual/bilingual ways of thinking about multilingualism, which became counterproductive to the mission of protecting linguistic diversity. Here, our understanding adheres to Pillar’s (2016, 32) critical claim that “The monolingual ways of seeing multilingualism entails a focus on the product of the monolingual academic texts”. In other words, democracy did not practically contribute to promoting linguistic diversity though it developed awareness of the linguistic rights of the individuals and communities of minority languages. During the democratic evolutions, the state intervention to preserve and promote these languages remained inconsistent, as some governments intentionally discouraged the planned promotion compared to others. Although monolingual and multilingual ideologies were debated in political and social spaces, the substantial effects of such debates in transforming current practices are yet to be materialized. We also claim that, owing to the uniquely complex nature of Nepal’s linguistic and demographic diversity, the ideal policies, especially those related to linguistic diversity and multilingualism, developed outside of Nepal are likely to be ineffective or perhaps will have counterproductive effects. This rightly informs of the fact that the governmental systems need to develop all-inclusive policies that adhere to Nepal’s unique situation and translate into observable practices to fundamentally change the current situation of diminishing linguistic diversity.

The conclusion of this paper also implies that democratic political system alone will not be sufficient to promote diversity, unless the relevant communities proactively engage in localized policymaking, valuing their own cultures and languages, and link them with the peripheral world. Despite the increasing awareness of the indigenous identity and rights among people including those from the concerned communities, the streamlined long-term visions in changing the practice are essential to utilize the democratic political systems in protecting and promoting multilingual diversity. We also appeal to the reassessment of the investments (or probably the wasteful investments) in the name of promoting multilingualism in the case of Nepal, as all the efforts made for this, or with this agenda, have proved to be less effective to materialize the very mission of protecting and promoting diversity and multilingualism. Hence, we suggest for a planned intervention in changing the practice at the local governmental level to build collective strength to promote ethnic/indigenous languages in wider use, including their socio-cultural and economic values so that the current and the future generation can feel assured that they can survive out of the learning of local/ethnic languages. Although in this paper, we explored the case of Nepal, our conclusions are informative to the other similar contexts globally where minority languages are endangered due to less supportive political systems where the ethnic minority communities are struggling hard to revive them back.

Acknowledgments

We express our deep sense of gratitude to the informants of this study for their trust in us, and the great sharing based on our queries, despite their very busy schedule at the time of crisis due to Covid-19 lockdown in Nepal. At the same time, we acknowledge all the scholars whose works have been cited in the paper.

Abbi , Anvita. 2017 . “ Human Cognitive Abilities and Safeguarding Linguistic Diversity .” IIC Quarterly 44 ( 2 ): 83 – 100 .

Search Google Scholar
Export Citation

Agnihotri , Rama Kant. 2017 . “ Identity and Multilinguality: The Case of India ”. In: Language Policy, Culture, and Identity in Asian Contexts ”, edited by A. M. Tsui and J. W. Tollefson , (Pp. 185 – 204 ). London : Routledge .

Awasthi , Lav Deo. 2008 . “ Importation of Ideologies: From Macaulay Minutes to Wood Commission .” Journal of Education and Research . 1 ( 1 ): 21 – 30 .

Bagga-Gupta , Sangeeta , and Aprameya Rao . 2018 . “ Languaging in Digital Global South–North Spaces in the Twenty-first Century: Media, Language and Identity in Political Discourse .” Bandung: Journal of the Global South. 5 ( 1 ): 1 – 34 .

Bagga-Gupta , Sangeeta , and Giulia Messina Dahlberg . 2018 . “ Meaning-making or Heterogeneity in the Areas of Language and Identity: The Case of Translanguaging and Nyanlanda (newly- arrived) Across Time and Space .” International Journal of Multilingualism 15 ( 4 ): 383 – 411 .

Bagga-Gupta , Sangeeta. 2010 . “ Creating and (Re)negotiating Boundaries: Representations as Mediation in Visually Oriented Multilingual Swedish School Settings .” Language, Culture and Curriculum 23 ( 3 ): 251 – 276 .

Central Bureau of Statistics. 2012 . National Population and Household Census . Kathmandu : National Planning Commission .

Choi , Tae Hee. 2017 . “ Glocalisation of English Language Education: Comparison of Three Contexts in East Asia .” In Sociological and Philosophical Perspectives on Education in the Asia-Pacific Region , edited by C. M. Lam and Jae Park , 147 – 164 . Singapore : Springer .

Crystal , David. 2000 . Language Death . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .

Dearden , Julie. 2014 . English as a Medium of Instruction-a Growing Global Phenomenon . London : British Council .

Finkbeiner , Claudia Hilde. 2011 . “ Research and Scholarship in Multilingualism: An Interdisciplinary Multi-Perspective Framework .” Die Neueren Sprachen 2 : 82 – 96 .

Fujita , Emily. 2010 . “ Ideology, Affect, and Socialization in Language Shift and Revitalization: The Experiences of Adults Learning Gaelic in the Western Isles of Scotland .” Language in Society . 39 : 27 – 64 .

Gal , Susan , and Judith T. Irvine . 1995 . “ The Boundaries of Languages and Disciplines: How Ideologies Construct Difference .” Social Research . 62 ( 4 ): 967 – 1001 .

Gautam , Bhim Lal. 2018 . “ Language Shift in Newar: A case study in the Kathmandu valley .” Nepalese Linguistics . 33 ( 1 ): 33 – 42 .

Gautam , Bhim Lal. 2019 . Badalindo pribesh ma bhasa (Language in the Changing Context) .” Nayapatrika Daily. March 13, 2019. URL: https://www.nayapatrikadaily.com/news-details/13971/2019-05-13?fbclid=IwAR2SCT5r86qSEjCD08Vb2xcHVz0Iv4OWOf78Dx0D06zz6pJTb7Jtvx-gbPA .

Gautam , Bhim Lal. 2020a . Language contact in Kathmandu Valley. Ph.D. dissertation , Central Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Tribhuvan University , Kathmandu, Nepal .

Gautam , Bhim Lal. 2020b . “ Sociolinguistic Survey of Nepalese Languages: A Critical Evaluation .” Language Ecology . 3 ( 2 ): 190 – 208 .

Gautam , Bhim Lal. 2021 . Language Contact in Nepal: A Study on Language Use and Attitudes . Switzerland : Palgrave-Macmillan .

Government of Nepal. 2015 . The Constitution of Nepal 2015 . Kathmandu : Nepal Government, Minister of Law and Justice .

Gynne , Annaliina , Sangeeta Bagga-Gupta , and Jarmo Lainio . 2016 . “ Practiced Linguistic-Cultural Ideologies and Educational Policies: A Case Study of a “Bilingual Sweden Finnish School ”. Journal of Language, Identity & Education . 15 ( 6 ): 329 – 343 .

Irvine , Jill A. 1997 . “ Ultranationalist Ideology and State-building in Croatia, 1990- 1996 .” Problems of Post-Communism 44 ( 4 ): 30 – 43 .

Kansakar , Tej Ratna. 1996 . “ Multilingualism and the language situation in Nepal .” Linguistics of the Tibeto-Berman Area . 19 ( 2 ): 17 – 30 .

Lafkioui , Mena. 2013 . “ Multilingualism, Multimodality and Identity Construction on French-Based Amazigh (Berber) Websites .” Revue française de linguistique appliquée . 18 ( 2 ): 135 – 151 .

Lakshmi , Seetha. 2016 . “ Use and Impact of Spoken Tamil in the Early Tamil Classrooms .” In Quadrilingual Education in Singapore , edited by Elaine Silver R. and Bokhorst-Heng W. , 229 – 246 . Singapore : Springer .

Language Commission . 2019 . Annual Report of Language Commission of Nepal-2019 . Kathmandu : Language Commission .

Miles , Matthew B. , Huberman , Michael A. , and Johnny Saldana . 2014 . Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook ( 3rd ed. ). California, CA : Sage Publications .

Ministry of Education [ moe ]. 1956 . Education in Nepal: Report of the National Education Planning Commission . Kathmandu : MOE .

National Planning Commission. 2013 . An Approach Paper to the Thirteenth Plan (2013–2016) . Kathmandu : National Planning Commission .

Nettle , Daniel. 2000 . “ Linguistic Fragmentation and the Wealth of Nations: The Fishman-pool Hypothesis Reexamined .” Economic Development and Cultural Change 48 ( 2 ): 335 – 348 .

Piller , Ingrid. 2016 . Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice: An Introduction to Applied Sociolinguistics . Oxford : Oxford University Press .

Poudel , Prem Prasad. 2010 . “ Teaching English in Multilingual Classrooms of Higher Education: The Present Scenario .” Journal of NELTA. 15 ( 1–2 ): 121 – 133 .

Poudel , Prem Prasad. 2019 . “ The Medium of Instruction Policy in Nepal: Towards Critical Engagement on the Ideological and Pedagogical Debate .” Journal of Language and Education 5 ( 3 ): 102 – 110 .

Poudel , Prem Prasad. and Choi , Tae Hee. 2020 . “ Policymakers’ Agency and the Structure: The Case of Medium of Instruction Policy in Multilingual Nepal .” Current Issues in Language Planning. 22 ( 1–2 ): 79 – 98 .

Pradhan , Uma. 2019 . “ Simultaneous Identities: Ethnicity and Nationalism in Mother Tongue Education in Nepal .” Nations and Nationalism. 25 ( 2 ): 718 – 738 .

Regmi , Dan Raj. 2017 . “ Convalescing the Endangered Languages in Nepal: Policy, Practice and Challenges .” Gipan . 3 ( 1 ): 139 – 149 .

Rosén , Jenny Karin and Sangeeta Bagga-Gupta . 2013 . “ Shifting Identity Positions in the Development of Language Education for Immigrants: An Analysis of Discourses Associated with ‘Swedish for Immigrants’ .” Language, Culture and Curriculum. 26 ( 1 ): 68 – 88 .

Rosén , Jenny Karin and Sangeeta , Bagga-Gupta . 2015 . “ Prata svenska, vi är i Sverige!”[“Talk Swedish, we are in Sweden!]: A Study of Practiced Language Policy in Adult Language Learning .” Linguistics and Education . 31 : 59 – 73 .

Sharma , Balkrishna and Phyak , Prem. 2017 . “ Neoliberalism, Linguistic Commodification, and Ethnolinguistic Identity in Multilingual Nepal .” Language in Society. 46 ( 2 ): 231 – 256 .

Sharma , Gopi Nath. 1986 . Nepalma shikshako itihaas, 2043 BS [History of Education in Nepal 1986] . Kathmandu : Samjhana Press .

Shohamy , Elana Goldberg. 2006 . Language Policy: Hidden Agendas and New Approaches . Oxon : Psychology Press .

Siegel , Jeff. 2006 . “ Language Ideologies and the Education of Speakers of Marginalized Language Varieties: Adopting a Critical Awareness Approach .” Linguistics and Education. 17 : 157 – 174 .

Sonntag , Selma K. 1995 . “ Ethnolinguistic Identity and Language Policy in Nepal .” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 1 ( 4 ): 116 – 128 .

Sonntag , Selma, K. 2007 . “ Change and Permanence in Language Politics in Nepal .” In Language Policy, Culture, and Identity in Asian Contexts , edited by Amy B.M. Tsui and James Tollefson , 205 – 217 . Mahwah : Lawrence Erlbaum .

The Constitution of Nepal. 1962 . Kathmandu : His Majesty’s Government of Nepal .

The Constitution of Nepal . 2015 . Kathmandu : Government of Nepal .

The Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal. 1959 . Kathmandu : His Majesty’s Government of Nepal .

The Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal . 1991 . Kathmandu : Government of Nepal .

The Government Act of Nepal . 1948 . Kathmandu : His Majesty’s Government of Nepal .

The Interim Constitution of Nepal (6th Amendment). 2007 . Kathmandu : UNDP .

The Nepal Interim Government Act. 1951 . Kathmandu : His Majesty’s Government of Nepal .

Thompson , William R. and Rafael Reuveny . 2010 . Limits to Globalization: North-South Divergence . London : Routledge .

Turin , Mark. 2007 . Linguistic Diversity and the Preservation of Endangered Languages: A Case Study from Nepal . Kathmandu : ICIMOD .

Yadava , Yogendra Prasad. 2014 . Languages of Nepal . Population Monograph . 2 : 51 – 72 .

The Government of Nepal on18 May 2020 (5th Jestha 2077) endorsed the new map including Lipulekh and Kalapani area with a new total area of 147, 516 Square Kilometers.

Nepal is ecologically divided into three ecological zones, i.e., High Hills ( Hima l), Mid Hills ( Pahad ) and Plains ( Terai ). All these three ecological belts are inhabited by varied communities with ethnic, cultural, and linguistic identities.

Gorkha conquest refers to the victory made by Late King Prithivi Narayan Shah who unified Nepal during the period 1736 to 1769 ad .

A typical Nepali dress promoted as the identity of Nepalese people, and so is established as the formal dress code for official functions.

The Rana Oligarchy, in which Ranas ruled the country for 103 years in Nepal between 1846 and 1951.

The Panchayat regime ruled Nepal since 1961 to 1990.

The script in which Nepali language is written.

In Nepal, the education up to grade 5 was termed as primary education. However, recent education restructuring recognizes grade 1–8 as the basic education.

The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) conducted a 10-year-long insurgency with an agenda of reforming historical, social, and cultural inequality.

Content Metrics

Reference Works

Primary source collections

COVID-19 Collection

How to publish with Brill

Open Access Content

Contact & Info

Sales contacts

Publishing contacts

Stay Updated

Newsletters

Social Media Overview

Terms and Conditions

Privacy Statement

Cookie Settings

Accessibility

Legal Notice

[66.249.64.20|185.66.14.133]
185.66.14.133

Character limit 500 /500

Culture & Lifestyle

Madhesh Province
Lumbini Province
Bagmati Province
National Security
Koshi Province
Gandaki Province
Karnali Province
Sudurpaschim Province
International Sports
Brunch with the Post
Life & Style
Entertainment
Investigations
Climate & Environment
Science & Technology
Visual Stories
Crosswords & Sudoku
Corrections
Letters to the Editor
Today's ePaper

Without Fear or Favour UNWIND IN STYLE

What's News :

UML breaches court precendent
Inflation falls but prices remain same
Bir Hospital bed crunch
Covid on the rise
Hum Bahadur profile

Nepal’s democracy challenges

Seventy years ago, on this day (Falgun 7) Nepal ended 104-year-old Rana rule and ushered in democracy. Nepal’s first steps towards democracy, however, were clumsy. It saw five different governments until 1959 when the country held its first general election. The Nepali Congress, which played a key role in overthrowing the Rana regime, was voted to power with a two-thirds majority. Congress’ BP Koirala was elected prime minister. But Nepal’s democracy dreams were short-lived. Just a year later, in 1960, King Mahendra staged a coup, banned political parties and set up a party-less Panchayat rule, a system the monarch said was “suitable to the Nepali soil”.

It took 30 years before Nepal’s political parties could restore democracy that was snatched away by king Mahendra. In 1990, Nepal proclaimed the dawn of democracy. Maendra’s son Birendra was on the throne. Nepal adopted a multiparty system with the constitutional monarchy and wrote a new constitution in 1990.

But Nepal’s fledgling democracy was assaulted once again. This time by Mahendra’s second son–Gyanendra–in 2005. King Birendra and his family were killed in the 2001 royal massacre.

Nepal needed yet another people’s movement in 2006 which abolished the centuries-old monarchy. A Constituent Assembly in 2015 drew up a new constitution, which was promulgated amid reservations from various sections of society. But five years after the new “people’s” constitution, democracy is once again under threat—this time from KP Sharma Oli, an elected prime minister.

As Nepalis mark Democracy Day, to commemorate the historic day of 1951, the country is yet again facing a democratic crisis.

“We have failed to set up a system, especially after 1990,” said Daman Nath Dhungana, a former House Speaker, who was on the forefront of the 1990 people’s movement, which is also dubbed “first people’s movement”. “It’s unfortunate that even a constitution that was delivered by the Constituent Assembly could not establish a political system.”

Many blame a lack of political culture among the parties for why the country has failed to strengthen democracy.

As in after 1951, the Nepali Congress was voted to power after the restoration of democracy in 1990. Democracy hugely suffered because of the growing intra-party feud in the Congress. Despite leading a majority government, then prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala dissolved the Parliament and called snap polls. Congress senior leader Krishna Prasad Bhattarai had to face a defeat largely due to the internal conflict in the party.

Disenchantment started to grow among the people, politicians were failing to deliver on their promises despite adopting “the world’s best constitution”.

A section of politicians that was vehemently opposed to the parliamentary system was priming itself for a drastic movement, which would later be known as “people's war”—an armed struggle against the state.

As the governments were formed and pulled down in Kathmandu, the Maoists waged the war in 1996, which continued until 2006. By the time it ended, at least 17,000 people had died and thousands were disappeared and maimed.

In 2001, Nepal grabbed international headlines when Birendra, who now in the hindsight many believe was a benevolent monarch, was killed along with his family. His younger brother Gyanendra succeeded.

People’s growing frustrations with politicians and the ongoing armed insurgency prompted Gyanedra, an ambitious individual with less political and more business acumen, into adventurism. When he staged a royal military coup in 2005, borrowing heavily from his father Mahendra’s over decades-old playbook, Nepal’s ever-squabbling parties made a united front. The Maoists who were looking for a safe landing agreed to lend their support.

The 2006 movement thus managed to extract democracy back from Gyanendra’s clutches. Out of sheer people’s power—widespread demonstrations were held across the country—at the call of political parties, the Parliament was resurrected.

The same year, a historic peace deal brought the Maoists to mainstream politics. The parties agreed to Maoists’ Constituent Assembly demand. But the parties that were together to fight the king once again could not maintain their unity for the larger interest of the public and the nation.

After the first Constituent Assembly elections in 2008, the game of musical chairs began again. The assembly was held hostage to politicians’ petty interests.

It took seven years for the assembly to deliver a constitution–once again dubbed “the best in the world”. The constitution guaranteed Nepal as a secular federal republic.

But five years later, the country is running the risk of losing all those gains and democracy is under threats.

“One of the main reasons why democracy in Nepal has suffered one blow after another is we failed to build institutions and systems,” said Ujjwal Prasai, a writer and political commentator who is also a columnist for the Post’s sister paper Kantipur. “We failed to strengthen and build the system and institutions friendly to the people.”

Prasai is currently an active member of the ongoing civilian protest, being organised under the banner Brihat Nagarik Andolan, to protest Prime Minister Oli’s December 20 decision to dissolve the House.

The Supreme Court is testing the constitutionality of Oli’s House dissolution, as his move has been challenged saying he took an unconstitutional step because the current constitution does not allow him to dissolve the House.

“We consider democracy in a formal context because we are holding elections regularly, we have free press, or there is human rights,” said Prasai. “But that is not enough. A democracy should be able to establish a link with the general public and society. We failed to inject democratic values and ethos in society.”

Nepal’s democratic evolution has also been described by many as one step forward two steps back. When Nepal heralded democracy for the first time in 1951, it was crushed by Mahendra and the country suffered for three decades.

When democracy was restored in 1990, politicians instead of nurturing it, made it feeble, thereby offering Gyanendra an opportunity on a platter to seize power.

Today democracy is under threat from the same actors who once championed for the cause.

Oli has argued that he was forced to take the drastic step because he was being driven into a corner by his opponents, especially Pushpa Kamal Dahal.

In what makes the greatest example of politics making strange bedfellows, Oli and Dahal decided to embrace each other in 2018 with a promise to launch “a great communist movement” that would transform Nepal. Dahal led the decade-long Maoist war, and Oli is among those politicians in Nepal who has always been critical of Dahal.

When Oli returned to power in 2018, it appeared that political stability was finally here to stay. But the factional feud in the Nepal Communist Party, especially between Oli and Dahal, resulted in the House dissolution, in what comes as a repeat episode of 1994 when GP Koirala had dissolved the House over infighting in his party.

This time, however, Oli took the step despite the constitution restricting him to do so, displaying his totalitarian streak, say analysts.

“Earlier political parties had conflicts with the monarchy. Now we are fighting against totalitarian tendencies,” said Dhungana. “Political parties have deviated from their primary duty of nation-building to power-grabbing. In earlier days, it was the palace which had an insatiable desire for power, these days political parties have inherited that tendency.”

During the 30 years of Panchayat rule, power was largely exercised by the palace, with some spoils shared among a handful of royal sycophants.

After the restoration of democracy, just as power was transferred to political parties, Nepal started to see the advent of rent-seeking tendencies. By the time the country became a federal republic, patron-client relationship emerged strongly, corruption became the new cottage industry where politicians and cadres started to go to any extent to exploit state resources.

Analysts say Nepali politicians totally forgot the age-old maxim of the government of the people, by the people and for the people.

“Democracy should serve the aspirations of millions of people and it’s definitely a tall order. That’s why democracy is chaotic also,” said Prasai, the writer. “But by building robust institutions and systems, governments can address people’s grievances and needs. That’s how democracy functions.”

While Nepali politicians are blamed for democratic backsliding, there is a section that strongly believes that until Nepal defeats foreign intervention, it cannot attain stability and cannot make strides in socio-economic sectors.

“The role of foreign hands in every big change in Nepal is no secret–in 1950 or 1990 or 2006,” said CP Mainali, a senior communist leader. “We failed to find the leadership at home that could fight foreign intervention. This is the sole reason we have failed to sustain the achievements in the last 70 years and have not been able to bring changes in people’s lives.”

According to Mainali, once Oli’s mentor, Nepal’s democratic movements have been laudable but a lack of failure to find a true leader has meant people’s aspirations of democracy and development continue to remain unfulfilled.

“We rather allowed more space to foreign hands to expand their clout instead of trying to become strong and independent in our decision-making,” said Mainali. “Our leaders totally failed to comprehend the fact their fight for democracy meant creating an environment where people are served. It’s instead the opposite. It looks like leaders fought for democracy for their benefit.”

Most of today’s leaders in Nepali politics have quite a record of their own under their belts, most of them have served jail terms fighting against the Panchayat regime and then the monarchy. There is no denying that they exhibited their unwavering commitment to democratic values, equitable society and rule of law–and above all, for the people. But the moment they get to power, they tend to forget all these, according to analysts.

“From 1959 to 2006, we were in a direct conflict with the monarchy that always stood against the fundamentals of democracy,” said Prof Krishna Khanal, who teaches political science at Tribhuvan University. “We may have failed to nurture democracy well, but a reversal is unlikely.”

According to Khanal, in Nepal, people's power has always prevailed.

“A democracy also means accountability. The only solution is our managers [politicians] must learn how to manage the system,” Khanal told the Post. “Democracy often faces challenges and we can say it is in peril in Nepal today. But it stands an equal chance of becoming vibrant and functional… just that leaders need to be made accountable.”

Some analysts find an uncanny repeat of a cycle, as people once again are on the streets to fight for democracy, just as the country is celebrating its Democracy Day to mark the dawn of democracy in Nepal.

Prasai, the writer, said that unless political actors are constantly kept in check and made accountable to those who elect them, democracy will continue to face challenges.

“Democracy should be realised by the people, and it’s the political actors who can make this happen,” Prasai told the Post. “In our context, it looks like democracy will face some challenges like it is facing today for some decades more.”

Anil Giri Anil Giri is a reporter covering diplomacy, international relations and national politics for The Kathmandu Post. Giri has been working as a journalist for a decade-and-a-half, contributing to numerous national and international media outlets.

Related News

UML defies top court precedent to form government in Gandaki

Nepali Congress seems to be uniting on fighting elections with own might

Much-anticipated bypolls kick off with nominations

Congress picks Dambar Khadka and Abhisek Singh as bypoll candidates

Lumbini, Sudurpaschim chief ministers quit without facing votes of confidence

Nepali Congress likely to finalise bypoll candidates today amid intra-party dispute

CPN-UML fields Suhang Nembang as Ilam 2 by-election candidate

In House panel, home minister denies co-op fraud charges

Nepali Congress tries to capitalise on differences in ruling coalition

Dahal and Deuba meet as conflict victims grow weary

Provinces will get new governments, leaders of five-party coalition say

Rabi’s Freudian slip

‘Worry’ as Nepal’s forex reserves soar to record Rs1.84 trillion

Tracking chip now mandatory for Everest aspirants

Rural women deprived of reproductive health rights

Indian travellers can now scan and pay in Nepal

E-paper | april 08, 2024.

Read ePaper Online

Architecture and Design
Asian and Pacific Studies
Business and Economics
Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
Computer Sciences
Cultural Studies
Engineering
General Interest
Geosciences
Industrial Chemistry
Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
Jewish Studies
Library and Information Science, Book Studies
Life Sciences
Linguistics and Semiotics
Literary Studies
Materials Sciences
Mathematics
Social Sciences
Sports and Recreation
Theology and Religion
Publish your article
The role of authors
Promoting your article
Abstracting & indexing
Publishing Ethics
Why publish with De Gruyter
How to publish with De Gruyter
Our book series
Our subject areas
Your digital product at De Gruyter
Contribute to our reference works
Product information
Tools & resources
Product Information
Promotional Materials
Orders and Inquiries
FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
Repository Policy
Free access policy
Open Access agreements
Database portals
For Authors
Customer service
People + Culture
Journal Management
How to join us
Working at De Gruyter
Mission & Vision
De Gruyter Foundation
De Gruyter Ebound
Our Responsibility
Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Language politics in Nepal: A socio-historical overview

This paper aims to outline the language politics in Nepal by focusing on the influences and expansions shifted from Global North to the Global South. Based on a small-scale case study of interviews and various political movements and legislative documents, this paper discusses linguistic diversity and multilingualism, globalization, and their impacts on Nepal’s linguistic landscapes. It finds that the language politics in Nepal has been shifted and changed throughout history because of different governmental and political changes. Different ideas have emerged because of globalization and neoliberal impacts which are responsible for language contact, shift, and change in Nepalese society. It concludes that the diversified politics and multilingualism in Nepal have been functioning as a double-edged sword, which on the one hand promotes and preserves linguistic and cultural diversity and on the other hand squeezes the size of diversity by vitalizing the Nepali and English languages through contact and globalization.

1 Introduction

Nepal is a multilingual, multicultural, multiracial, and multi-religious country. Despite its small size, Nepal is a country of linguistic diversity with four major language families, namely, Indo-Aryan, Tibeto-Burman, Dravidian (Munda), and Austro-Asiatic, and one language isolate, Kusunda ( Poudel and Baral 2021 ). The National Population and Household Census 2011 ( Central Bureau of Statistics 2012 ) records the number of speakers for 123 languages and some other includes an additional category of ‘other unknown languages’ with close to half a million speakers. The state intervention to preserve and promote these languages remained inconsistent throughout history, as some governments intentionally discouraged the planned promotion compared to others which designed some measures to promote them. Both monolingual and multilingual ideologies remained as points of debate in political and social spaces.

Language politics is the way language is used in the political arena in which people can observe the treatment of language by various governmental and non-governmental agencies. Research related to language politics focuses on identifying and critiquing any sets of beliefs about language articulated by users as a rationalization or justification of perceived language structure and use ( Dunmre 2012 : 742; Silverstein 1979 : 193). In this context, every political movement is the outcome of different conflicting ideas between language users and linguistic differences running through any society ( Pelinka 2018 ). The politics of language choice becomes particularly difficult when institutional choices have to be made in what language(s) the government will conduct its business and communicate its citizens, and, above all, what the language(s) of education will be ( Joseph 2006 : 10). Nepal’s language politics and democratic movements question whether democracy can promote linguistic diversity, or narrow down diversity by marginalizing ethnic/minority languages. In Nepal, linguistic diversity and democracy have been challenged by the contradiction between the normative assumption of existing demos and the reality of a society that is too complex to be defined by one orientation only by nation, culture, and religion ( Pelinka 2018 : 624). Nepal’s language politics has not been explained from such a perspective where we can see several factors influencing the issues related to language, culture, and society. Hence, this paper tries to overview the language politics in Nepal which has been influenced by various external and internal factors.

2 Brief history of language politics in Nepal

Following the Gorkha [1] conquest, Gorkhali or Khas (now known as Nepali), the language of ruling elites and mother tongue of many people in the Hills, was uplifted as the national official language in Nepal. After unification, [2] a hegemonic policy in terms of language and culture was formulated which promoted the code (linguistic and dress) of the Hill Brahmins, Chhetries, and Thakuris to the ideal national code (i.e. Nepali language and Daura Suruwal Topi-dress [3] ). This has been interpreted as one of the attempts to promote assimilatory national policy (in terms of language and culture) that contributed to curbing both linguistic and cultural diversity. However, for the rulers then, it was an attempt to establish a stronger national identity and integrity. The Rana regime further prolonged this ‘one nation-one language’ policy by uplifting the Nepali language in education and public communication. The Rana, during their rule, suppressed various language movements (Newar, Hindi, Maithili, etc.), which serves as evidence of their deliberate plan to eliminate all but one language, viz. Nepali. In this sense, we can understand that Nepal’s diversity and multilingual identity were suppressed historically in the name of nation-building and promoting national integration among people with diverse ethnic and cultural orientations.

Following the end of the Rana oligarchy in 1950, with the establishment of democracy, some changes were noticed concerning the recognition and mainstreaming of the other ethnic/indigenous languages. This instigated the policy change in terms of language use in education as well. However, the status quo of the Nepali language further strengthened as it was made the prominent language of governance and education. The Education in Nepal: Report of the Nepal Education Planning Commission ( Sardar et al. 1956 ), the first national report on education, basically reflected the ideology of monolingualism with the influence of Hugh. B. Wood. It stated, “If the younger generation is taught to use Nepali as the basic language then other languages will gradually disappear” ( Sardar et al. 1956 : 72). Though this report formed the backbone of Nepal’s education system, it also paved the way for minimizing the potential for empowering the languages of the nation. Pradhan (2019 : 169) also writes that this commission attempted to “coalesce the ideas of Nepali nationalism around the “triumvirate of Nepali language, monarchy, and Hindu religion”. The same idea was reinforced by K. I. Singh’s government in 1957 by prescribing Nepali as the medium of instruction in school education.

The Panchayat regime also promoted the use of Nepali as the only language of administration, education, and media in compliance with the Panchayat slogan ‘one language, one dress, one country’ ( eutaa bhasha, eutaa bhesh, eutaa desh ), again providing a supportive environment for strengthening the monolingual nationalistic ideology (i.e. the assimilatory policy). Not only in education but also in governance, English or Nepali language was made mandatory in recording all documents of companies through the Nepal Companies Act 1964 ( Government of Nepal 1964 ). Following the Panchayat system, with the restoration of democracy in 1990, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990 ( Government of Nepal 1990 ) provisioned the Nepali language written in Devanagari script [4] as the national language, and also recognized all the mother tongues as the languages of the nation with their official eligibility as the medium of instruction in primary education. The Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 ( Government of Nepal 2007 ), which came as a collective outcome of the various political movements and Andolan II continued to strengthen the Nepali language, but ensured (in Part 1, Article 5.2) that each community’s right to have education in their mother tongue and right to preserve and promote their languages, script, and culture as well.

The recognition of all the mother tongues as the languages of the nation was a progressive step ahead provisioned by the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063. Apart from further confirming the right of each community to preserve and promote its language, script, culture, cultural civility, and heritage, the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 (Part 3, Article 17) clearly explained the right to each community to acquire basic education in their mother tongue as provided for in the law. The same was well articulated in the Constitution of Nepal 2072 ( Government of Nepal 2015 ) as well, and each state was given the authority to provide one or many languages spoken by the majority population as the official languages. Along with this, the language commission was established in 2016 to study and recommend other issues related to language and multilingualism (Part 1, Article 7 of the Constitution of Nepal 2072 ). However, it can be realized that these policy provisions that embrace diversity will have less effect if the concerned communities or agencies do not translate them into practice.

3 Research method

This study, following a qualitative approach, is based on a small-scale case study with primary and secondary data sets.

The author has obtained the primary data from semi-structured interviews with two selected individuals who have spent their lives in politics and especially language movements and advocacy for language preservation and promotion in Nepal. They were observed and interviewed informally on many occasions from 2019 to 2020 related to language issues like constitutions, language movements, language diversities and democracy, and so on. The interviews (altogether 3 h each) were recorded, transcribed, and translated into English, and were checked for accuracy and reliability.

Mr. Yonjan and Dr. Thakur [5] have been selected from two different political and linguistic backgrounds. Mr. Yonjan is a liberal democratic fellow who has been working as a freelance language activist for more than 40 years, involving himself in many governmental and non-governmental policies and programs related to language issues. Dr. Thakur worked as a politician (left-wing) and teacher educator who later joined Radio Nepal, engaged in various cultural advocacy forums of the ruling Communist Party of Nepal, and again moved to politics at the later part of his life. He was a member of the parliament in the Constituent Assembly. Mr. Yonjan is the native speaker of Tamang (a major Tibeto-Burman language) and Dr. Thakur is a native speaker of Bhojpuri (a major Indo-Aryan language), and both of them learn Nepali as a second language. In that, both of the individuals have active engagement in language politics and planning, however, are from different cultural, linguistic, and geopolitical backgrounds. It is assumed that their ideas would make the understanding of language politics in Nepal more enriched.

The secondary data is obtained from a detailed reading of available literature about language politics. Nepal’s language and educational history, various political movements, constitutions and legislative documents, policy documents, and other published research papers and documents have been carefully utilized.

4 Findings and discussion

Language politics in Nepal has a very long history since the beginning of modern Nepal. After the victory of Prithvi Narayan Shah, a Gurkha King whose mother tongue was Khas (Nepali), in Kathmandu valley (1769), Nepali became the language of law and administration ( Gautam 2012 ) where the vernacular language was Newar spoken by the majority of people. Since then, language politics has become the center of democratic and political movements in Nepal.

Nepali language was highlighted and became the language for all public and private activities after the Unification Movement (1736–1769) in Nepal. Janga Bahadur Rana’s visit to the United Kingdom and his relation to British India made it possible for the Nepalese rulers to start English Education formally in Durbar High school in 1854. After Rana Regime, Nepal experienced an unstable political scenario for 10 years before the establishment of the Panchayat Regime in 1961 which employed assimilatory language policy until 1990. The country was converted into a multiparty democratic system and eventually, most of the ethnic and minority linguistic groups flourished for the preservation and documentation of their ethnic and cultural heritages. At present, Nepalese politics has been influenced by ethnic, cultural, and language issues at the center.

4.1 Legal and constitutional provisions

Nepalese constitutions are the main sources of language politics in Nepal. Before the construction of the constitution in the country, some government policies played a vital role in creating language issues debatable all the time. The first legal court Muluki Ain [6] (1854) enforced Hinduisation and Nepalization in Nepal by ignoring most of the other ethnic languages. The establishment of the Nepal National Education Planning Commission (NNEPC) by the recommendation of the National Education Board of the Government of Nepal emphasized the Nepali language by implementing it as a medium of instruction in all levels of education.

The medium of instruction should be the national language (Nepali) in primary, middle, and higher educational institutions because any language which cannot be made lingua franca and which does not serve legal proceedings in court should not find a place. The use of national language can bring about equality among all classes of people. ( Sardar et al. 1956 : 56)

This excerpt indicates the emphasis given to the Nepali language by the government then. The use of Nepali in education was further reinforced by the K. I. Singh government in 1957 by prescribing Nepali as the medium of instruction. The case of Nepali was again strengthened during the Panchayat regime. In 1961, the National System of Education was introduced to promote the use of only Nepali in administration, education, and media in compliance with the Panchayat’s popular slogan of ‘one language, one dress, and one country’. In addition, the Nepal Companies Act was passed in 1964 directing all companies to keep their records in English or Nepali. The Panchayat constitution followed a nationalist assimilation policy to promote the Nepali language in different ways.

The Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990 ( Government of Nepal 1990 : 4) framed after the restoration of democracy recognized languages other than Nepali and made the following provisions about the non-Nepali languages:

(1) The Nepali language in the Devanagari script is the language of the nation of Nepal. The Nepali language shall be the official language. (Part 1, Article 6.1) (2) All the languages spoken as the mother tongue in the various parts of Nepal are the national languages of Nepal. (Part 1, Article 6.2)

In addition, the constitution also made a provision for the use of mother tongues in primary education (Part 1, Article 18.2). It also guaranteed a fundamental right to the people to preserve their culture, scripts, and their languages (Part 1, Article 26.2).

Similarly, the Maoist movement that started in 1996 brought new changes and dynamics among all the ethnic minorities of Nepal. This political campaign motivated them to preserve and promote their languages and cultures which has been documented in the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 . The Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 ( Government of Nepal 2007 : 2), an outcome of the people’s revolution (Andolan II), made the following provisions for languages:

(1) All the languages spoken as the mother tongue in Nepal are the national languages of Nepal. (2) The Nepali Language in Devanagari script shall be the official language. (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (2), it shall not be deemed to have hindered to use the mother language in local bodies and offices. State shall translate the languages when they are used for official purpose. (Part 1, Article 5)

Regarding education and cultural rights, the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 ( Government of Nepal 2007 : 8) enshrined the following provisions:

(1) Each community shall have the right to receive basic education in their mother tongue as provided for in the law. (2) Every citizen shall have the right to receive free education from the State up to secondary level as provided for in the law (3) Each community residing in Nepal has the right to preserve and promote its language, script, culture, cultural civilization and heritage. (Part 3 Article 17)

The Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 was more progressive and liberal than the constitution of 1991. For the first time, this constitution recognized all the languages spoken in Nepal as the national languages. Apart from further confirming the right of each community to preserve and promote its language, script, culture, cultural civility, and heritage, this constitution (Part 3, Article 17) discussed the right to each community to acquire basic education in their mother tongue as provided for in the law. However, the role of the government was to facilitate the speech communities to materialize these rights which still are not effective.

Likewise, the latest Constitution of Nepal 2072 ( Government of Nepal 2015 : 4) has clearly stated the following provisions:

Languages of the nation: All languages spoken as the mother tongues in Nepal are the languages of the nation. (Part 1, Article 6)

Official language: (1) The Nepali language in the Devanagari script shall be the official language of Nepal. (2) A State may, by a State law, determine one or more than one languages of the nation spoken by a majority of people within the State as its official language(s), in addition to the Nepali language. (3) Other matters relating to language shall be as decided by the Government of Nepal, on recommendation of the Language Commission. (Part 1 Article 7)

The Constitution of Nepal 2072 ( Government of Nepal 2015 ) conferred the right to basic education in mother tongue (Article 31.1), the right to use mother language (Article 32.1), and preservation and promotion of language (Article 32.3). This constitution states that each community shall have the right to preserve and promote its language, script, culture, cultural civility, and heritage. Unless the constitution articulates the responsibility of the government to preserve and promote the endangered languages, the efforts of the communities will be useless. Observing and analyzing the legal provisions, Nepal has manifested significant progress and gradual development in the use of languages along with historical events. The key measure of a language’s viability is not the number of people who speak it, but the extent to which children are still learning the language as their native tongue. The Constitution of Nepal 2072 ( Government of Nepal 2015 ) also made the provision of establishing a language commission in article 287 which was a landmark in Nepalese history.

4.2 Democracy and political movements

Nepal’s language politics is guided by various democratic and political movements in different periods. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights ( United Nations 1948 ) asserts that democracy assures the basic human rights for self-determination and full participation of people in the aspects of their living such as decision-making about their language and culture (Article 27). Nepal’s political parties and the ruling governments never understand the seriousness of political movements and democratic practices. Human rights also provide them with ways of assuring social benefits such as equal opportunities and social justice. In Nepal, diversity was promoted by democracy through the policy provisions, especially after the promulgation of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990 . The basic rights for the use of indigenous languages were assured in the constitution as well as other educational acts formed as outcomes of democratic political turns. The changes in the policy provisions provided opportunities for linguists, language rights activists, and advocacy groups or individuals to explore more about their languages and cultures. Due to their attempts, also supported by the democratic political system, new languages were identified, and some others were streamlined through the preparation of educational materials such as textbooks for primary level education. However, pragmatic actions remained fragile for education in the schools to support the aspiration for promoting diversity, which ultimately resulted in squeezing multilingualism. The statistical data shows that the number of languages spoken as mother tongues in Nepal is 129, [7] some scholars still doubt whether these languages functionally exist in reality ( Gautam 2019a ), or if they are there, then the practice may be fragile. In having such a very weak practice in the field, it can be noted that various factors played key roles, including lack of community participation, hegemonic attitude, and agency of the individuals who could have purposive actions.

For instance, the recognition of linguistic diversity in Nepal can be observed clearly after the establishment of multiparty democracy in 1990. Sonntag (2007 : 205) stated that “the Nepali-only policy was discarded in favor of an official language policy that recognized Nepal’s linguistic diversity”. This shows that the democratic political system that remained open to the neoliberal economy embraced linguistic diversity as a resource, due to which the multilingual identity of Nepalese society was officially recognized. However, at the same time, this political system could not preserve the minority/indigenous languages as expected, which prompted us to question the co-existence of diversity and democracy. Also, “[i]t is very much a matter of democracy that everyone has the right to language and that society has a common language that everyone can understand and use” ( Rosén and Bagga-Gupta 2013 : 59). As democratic states (e.g. Nepal, India, and Sweden) which address the contradictory discourses of language rights and develop equal access for everyone to a common language (e.g. Nepali in Nepal) are struggling to settle the language issues. However, the fundamental question still not well-answered, at least in the case of Nepal, is whether democracy can, in a real sense, promote linguistic diversity, or it narrows down the diversity by marginalizing the ethnic/minority languages. While responding to this unanswered concern, this article finds that diversity as a resource and diversity as a problem are the two distinct discourses that emerged during the evolutionary process of democracy in Nepal, which is also emphasized by the two participants.

4.3 Linguistic diversity and politics

Linguistic, cultural, and geographical diversities are the essences of Nepalese democratic practices in different periods in history. Nepal’s modern history starts with the unification campaign of Prithvi Narayan Shah, the first Shah King of Nepal. Prithvi Narayan Shah’s unification modality worked indirectly to promote the politics of assimilation in nation-building, national integration, and identity. Roughly, all other systems of governance following the unification adopted similar ideological orientations, which (in) directly contributed to the marginalization of other mother tongues. Mr. Yonjan expressed his view as, “Historically, even before the unification movement of Nepal, there were several territories in which the state Kings used to speak their own languages, and the linguistic diversity was preserved and strengthened”. He further claimed, “The geopolitical, historical, socio-political, and anthropological history recognized the multilingual social dynamics, however, the national policies after the unification too could not embrace such diversity”. By saying so, Mr. Yonjan expressed that the current political systems and the ideologies of Nepali nationalism were guided by the notion of ultra-nationalism. Dr. Thakur also emphasized that the government’s multilingual policies would not operate as the practice had largely shaped people’s orientation towards Nepali and English, side-lining the regional and local languages. The same perception was reported by Mr. Yonjan as, “Though careful efforts were made in the policy level to promote the regional/local languages through status planning, there still existed the attitudinal problem which undermined the potential of bringing local and minority languages into practice”. Their claims also adhered to the statements made in the documents which reflect the hidden language politics of Nepal.

Both informants in this study argued that diversity has two different outcomes viz. as a resource and as a problem. Mr. Yonjan claims, “If any language of a community dies, the culture and lifestyle of that community disappears and it reduces biodiversity, and that ultimately will be a great threat to humanity”. He understands linguistic diversity as a part of the ecology and strongly argues that it should be protected. Agnihotri (2017 : 185) also echoes a similar belief as “Just as biodiversity enriches the life of a forest, linguistic diversity enhances the intellectual well-being of individuals and groups, both small and large”. But Dr. Thakur views that “In Nepal, along with the history, there remains an ideological problem that diversity is understood as a construct for division, rather than understanding it as a potential tool for nation-building”. He further clears that this community-level ideology and practice has led to the fragmentation of values associated with their languages, most probably harming the socio-historical harmony among languages. Mr. Yonjan further added, “No language should die or move towards the edge of extinction in the name of developing our own existence and condition”. Both Mr. Yonjan and Dr. Thakur pointed out that the discourse on diversity and multilingualism in Nepal had been strengthened and institutionalized after 1990 when the country entered a multiparty democratic system.

However, Mr. Yonjan thinks that the current legislative provisions have partially addressed the diversity needs to fit Nepal’s super diverse context. Dr. Thakur again indicates that the rulers for long “undermined the potential of the linguistic diversity and wished to impose a monolingual national system that marginalized the use of these languages”. Mr. Yonjan also provided a similar view as “in Nepal, throughout the history, there remained a political problem that diversity was understood as a construct for division, rather than a potential tool for nation-building”. His understanding also reflects what was discussed in the western countries as Nettle (2000 : 335) clarifies “the linguistic and ethnic fragmentation relates to low levels of economic development since it is associated with societal divisions and conflicts, low mobility, limited trade, imperfect markets, and poor communications in general”. Therefore, the direct economic benefits from learning a language were a great motivation for the people in the communities. In other words, they have preserved the sentimental functions of the minority languages while they have embraced the dominant languages associating them with educational and economic potential gains. This community-level politics and practices have led to the fragmentation of values associated with their languages, most probably harming the socio-historical harmony among languages. Gautam (2018) has pointed out this concern as a cause of intergenerational shifts in languages among the youths of indigenous languages (such as Newar, Sherpa, and Maithili in Kathmandu Valley). Consequently, this trend has influenced the participation of the relevant communities in campaigns for the revitalization of their languages that points to the influence of the Global North in bringing ultranationalist values in Nepal’s language politics and diversity.

4.4 Impact of globalization

The international political-economic structure seems stacked against a substantial or near future diminishment of “the North-South gap” ( Thompson and Reuveny 2009 : 66). The neoliberal trends that emerged from the Global North have traveled to the Global South, influencing these countries through the language and culture of the countries in the Global North. The unprecedented expansion of English as a global phenomenon ( Dearden 2014 ) can be a good example of such an effect. It involved various combinations of developmental states recalling domestic markets from foreign exporters (import substitution) and the recapture of domestic business (nationalization). The outcome, aided by investments in education, was a new elite of technical managers and professionals who could build on historical experiences and opportunities in the post-war environment to manufacture and market commodities involving increasing product complexity and scale. Migration and demographic changes have had variable impacts on the North-South gap. Nepali youths’ labor migration and their English preference have also influenced the generational shifts in languages ( Gautam 2020 : 140). The youths’ migration to the countries in the Middle East, and their participation in the global marketplaces in the Global North countries have contributed to the reshaping of their ideologies towards the home languages and English. Mr. Yonjan states, “We have made lots of choices in our society and education systems (e.g. choice of language for education, western culture, and lifestyles) attracted by the politics and ideologies created even by our immigrant Nepali population usually in the western world”. Among many, this expression can be understood as one of the causes for stressed deviating tendencies in language shifts, usually from mother tongues or heritage languages and dominant national languages to English. In the context of Nepal, either English or Nepali has been highlighted even though there have been lots of attempts of implementing mother tongue-based multilingual education.

4.4.1 English and globalization

English has become the global language because of its use, function, and popularity in most of the social, cultural, and academic areas. A sizeable body of scholarship has addressed the topic of globalization and its impact on the modern world ( Giddens 1991 ; Levitt 1983 ). Among several definitions, globalization refers to the multifarious transformations in time and place that influence human activities through the creation of linkages and connections across geographical borders and national differences ( Giddens 1991 ; Held et al. 1999 ). In the context of Nepal, these linkages and connections are often facilitated through various globalized activities, such as marketing, transportation, shipping, telecommunications, and banking. Similarly, sociolinguists and language planners have examined the phenomenon of global English and its impact on the linguistic landscape around the world. Crystal (2012) maintains that a language attains a global status once it has gained a distinctive role in every nation-state around the globe. This special role is manifested in three ways: functioning as the mother tongue of the majority of citizens, being assigned the official status, and/or playing the role of the major foreign language. Many observers view English as the global language par excellence of the Internet, science and education, entertainment, popular culture, music, and sports. The emergence of global English is also attributable to some factors, notably the economy, military, and politics.

Historical records show that English was used in Nepal as early as the seventeenth century ( Giri 2015 ). However, English language education started formally after Janga Bahadur visited the UK during British rule in India. He knew the importance of English and started English Education in Durbar School for selected Ranas. It was the first government-run English medium school in Nepal. It was only established for the Rana family as the Ranas saw an educated person as a threat to their control ( Caddell 2007 ). The first post-secondary (higher) educational institution in Nepal was Trichandra College (1918) where the language of instruction was English. The main purpose was to shelter students of Durbar School and to stop them from going abroad (India) for further education. The underlying purpose was to prevent Nepalese from getting radical ideas that could be dangerous for them and the entire Rana regime. Tri-Chandra College was affiliated with Patna University, India. It borrowed the syllabus and assessment system from there; therefore, there was a direct influence of the British Indian Education System in the Nepalese system. Another very important reason for the spread of English was the recruitment and the retirement of the Nepalese British army. As English was mandatory for their recruitment in the British army, the youngsters willing to join the British army learned English. After their retirement, these armies returned to their homeland and inspired their younger generations to learn English. In South Asian countries, English is viewed as a language of power and as a means of economic uplift and upward social mobility ( Kachru et al. 2006 : 90). It led to the establishment of many private schools and colleges and made English indispensable to the Nepalese curriculum. Later, it became the language of attraction for all academic activities. The spread of global English as an international lingua franca intensifies socio-economic disparities both within and between speech communities. Tollefson (1995) and Pennycook (1995) explain that the promotion of English as an international language is driven by social, economic, and political forces, thereby giving rise to economic inequalities. In the same way, Canagarajah (1999) noted that generally, native speakers of English are presented with better compensation and benefits packages compared to non-natives, regardless of their academic qualifications. In Nepal, the state’s neoliberal ideology in the post-1990 era, however, has valorized the commodity value of English as a global language, creating a hierarchy of languages in which minoritized languages like Newar, Sherpa, Maithili, Tharu, Limbu, etc. remain at the bottom ( Gautam 2021 ). Following the state’s neoliberal structural reforms, a large number of private schools popularly known as ‘English medium’ and ‘boarding’ schools have been established with private investments in many parts of the country ( Sharma and Phyak 2017 : 5). The establishment of various international non-governmental organizations like the United Nations Organization (UNO), the World Health Organization (WHO), the United National Education, the Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and regional organizations like the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) have spread the use and demand of English. After the restoration of democracy in 1990, Nepal’s active participation in such organizations made English vital in Nepalese society. Although it has a sort of colonial liability, it is now accepted as an asset in the form of a national and international language representing educational and economic processes ( Kachru et al. 2006 : 90). As Kachru (2005) opines that Nepalese learners do not learn English to communicate in their homeland but they learn to talk in their work abroad. Now, this view is partially true since mostly Nepalese learn English to talk in their workplace either it can be at home or abroad. Therefore, from the time of commencement of English education, English has been learned and taught for professional development, scientific and technological knowledge, international communication, mass media, travel, and tourism. Globalization and its impact on the flourishing of English in Nepal have been very productive in recent days when the country was converted into a Federal republic state after the 2006/2007 political change. Learning English is deeply rooted among Nepalese people across the country, although the government seems reluctant to force the users to use English as a medium of instruction formally and officially ( Gautam 2021 ).

4.4.2 Language contact and shift

The present world is diversified and multilingual by nature and practice. Language contact is the common phenomenon of multilingualism where people choose their codes in their conversations and discourses. Social, historical, political, and economic power relations are major forces that influence the linguistic outcome of language contact ( Thomason and Kaufman 1992 ) as they may shape ideologies and attitudes that social actors hold toward such languages. Consequently, there is always a change in the linguistic behavior of language communities in contact which may even result in language loss due to displacement ( Sankoff 2001 ). In the context of Nepal, language contact has been the common phenomenon in Nepalese discourse of all aspects of society which is moving slowly towards code-mixing, switching, translanguaging, and the shifting from the heritage languages to the dominant and global languages.

In multilingual countries like Nepal, speakers tend to switch back and forth between two languages (or more) in different situations, formal and informal contexts, and even within the same conversation. People may code switch for various reasons. They sometimes shift within the same domain or social situation depending on the audience. A speaker might code switch to indicate group membership and similar ethnicity with the addressee. The linguistic situation of Nepal is very complex since people in their daily lives often use their respective mother tongues, Nepali, Hindi, and English within the same conversation ( Milroy and Muysken 1995 ). Language practices are inherently political in so far as they are among the ways individuals have at their disposal of gaining access to the production, distribution, and consumption of symbolic and material resources, that is, in so far as language forms part of the process of power ( Heller 1995 : 161) which we can easily observe and experience in Nepal. Code-switching in Nepal is shifting towards Nepali and English among the minority and other language communities ( Gautam 2019b ) as a mark of modernization, high socioeconomic position, and identity with a certain type of elite group; and in stylistic terms, it marks what may be termed as “deliberate” style. A marker of “modernization” or civilization is the impact of western music and culture in Nepal ( Gautam 2021 : 20). Dr. Thakur says “Our political leaders speak multiple languages in different places to collect the emotional feelings of the speakers attached with their mother tongues. Many Madhesi politicians speak Hindi, Maithili, and Bhojpuri in Terai and Nepali in Kathmandu”. This indicates that language contact and shift have also been the center of Nepalese politics for collecting votes to win the election.

4.4.3 Christianity and neoliberal impact

Christianity started when Father Juan Craybrawl (Portuguese) entered Nepal in 1628, during the reign of Laxmi Narsingha Malla in Kantipuri Nagari. [8] He had permission from the King to preach Christianity in Kathmandu valley. But basically, the gospel was brought to Nepal by Nepalese who were outside Nepal, as they come in and go. Slowly, missionaries started to enter Nepal during the 1950s but were not directly involved in preaching the gospel. They focused on social services like hospitals, education, and development works. Two major missionary organizations to serve Nepal, the United Mission to Nepal (UMN) and the International Nepal Fellowship (INF), came into existence in the early 1950s ( Kirchheiner 2016 ). The Nepal Christian Fellowship (NCF), now the National Churches Fellowship of Nepal (NCFN), played a significant role during the first 30 years from the 1960s to the 1990s. From just a single secret Christian residing in Nepal in 1951, the number of Nepali Christians grew to about 40,000 baptized believers by 1990 and has increased more rapidly since then. Groups of International Christian agency made United Mission to Nepal and founded Saint Xavier School in Godawari, Patan Hospital, and Tansen Hospital which provided grade one services to the people of Nepal. It was possible only after Nepal became a democratic country and many people accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and savior. Christians in Nepal were overjoyed when Nepal has declared a secular state in 2008. The Christian population in Nepal outgrew to triple in 2011 from 2001, but this record is not accurate. Now, according to the World Christian Database, which tracks global trends in Christianity, Nepal has seen the fastest-growing Christian population. Times are changing in Nepal, not only because of democracy but also because of globalization. The influx of media, computers, and new types of secular education is guiding young generations into fields where Nepalese habits, customs, and traditional ways of approaching matters are challenged.

Christianity has developed cross-cultural practices in the country developing various neoliberal activities in the Global South. The new generation has become more concerned about the use of foreign goods, music, and activities in the name of religion or westernization. Many ethnic language communities (e.g. Tamang, Limbu, Newar, Magar, Gurung, etc.) are motivated towards English and Nepali by following Christianity through Bible translation. As a result, their cultural festivals have been converted into birthday, anniversary ceremonies in the churches with lots of western music and songs. Neoliberal ideology has influenced the construction of institutional language policies and the corporatized individual subject in the socio-historical context of Nepal ( Sharma and Phyak 2017 : 4). Migrated urban areas are very important sites in imposing language dominance, particularly capital cities and trade and commercial centers; towns tend to dominate the surrounding rural areas and their influence radiates out those areas ( Gautam 2021 : 127). People’s motivation and migration for economic benefit have also been noted as keys to encouraging people to adopt languages that deploy more instrumental functions in their job market ( Gautam 2021 : 151).

4.4.4 Ideological impacts on Global South

Nepal’s growing engagement with the international community (through its membership in UN, WTO, IMF, etc.) and its political systems have largely influenced the attitudinal patterns in Nepalese society. From a geopolitical perspective, as Nepal is sandwiched between two giant countries, India and China, the changes in the neighborhood would influence it on a larger scale. In addition, the development of the Global North would always have a chain effect on the countries of the Global South. For instance, the British colonial government of India then promoted English amidst other languages, and a similar trend emerged in Nepal with the effect of a similar environment in the neighborhood. Such geopolitical conditions and the waves gravely influenced the closely related communities to the development of nationalism and the creation of nation-states, including a new Europe perceived as superior to other parts of the world ( Bagga-Gupta 2010 ; Gal and Irvine 1995 ; Rosén and Bagga-Gupta 2013 ; Shohamy 2006 ). The ideologies of the countries of the Global North have influenced the countries of the Global South in many ways, including ideologies of language planning and policy ( Gautam and Poudel 2021 ). This has generated a perception and a social space that differentiates “us” and “the other” through the formation of linguistic-cultural ideologies ( Gynne et al. 2016 ) in the communities that have multiple languages in place. This made some languages valued more than others in the domains of governance and educational spaces ( Poudel 2019 ; Poudel and Choi 2021 ). In the case of Nepal, the first educational commission ( Sardar et al. 1956 ) was influenced by Hugh B. Wood’s ideologies and politics. He formed out of his involvement in the Indian and the western world, and the committee under the huge influence in collaboration with academia and Nepalese politicians, and then recommended for streamlining the education systems through monolingual ideology. The same politico-ideological structure continued for a long. And even today Nepali is the national language to be used in governance and education, while at the same time the constitution allows other regional or ethnic languages for such purposes as an outcome of democratic political development. It can, in a sense, be understood as an ideological link with the Englishization efforts of many developing countries in the world.

5 Conclusion

This paper discusses the way Nepal has undergone a process of democratizing its macro-policies for the promotion and preservation of its linguistic diversity and provides evidence that such practices have minimal impact on the substantial results due to the processes of glocalization ( Choi 2017 ). The identification of new languages and recognition of multilingualism have been the visible results of democratic governance. However, largely monolingual and bilingual practices in governance, education, and public communication remain rooted in every community throughout the country. Nepal’s language politics has been largely influenced by various political movements and changes in the governments over history. The interviews and the secondary data indicate that Nepal’s language politics has been influenced by globalization and neoliberal impacts which indicate massive language shift and change from minority to the major and dominant languages. It can be concluded that democracy in Nepal functioned as a double-edged sword ( Gautam and Poudel 2021 ), which on the one hand promoted efforts of preservation and promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity, while on the other hand, contributed to clutching the size of diversity by vitalizing Nepali and English relegating the prospective of indigenous languages as pointed out by the informants above in various contexts and the reality of Nepal’s language politics.

The democratic ideology fundamentally borrowed from the Global North had done more justice at the policy level while creating inequalities in the practice, and that consequently made the investments and attempts in promoting linguistic diversity futile. Democracy also promoted monolingual/bilingual ways of thinking about multilingualism, which became counterproductive to the mission of protecting linguistic diversity in Nepal ( Gautam and Poudel 2021 ). Piller’s (2016 : 32) critical understanding of the monolingual ways of seeing multilingualism entails a focus on the product of the monolingual academic texts which was equally applicable in the case of Nepal. The democracy in Nepal did not practically contribute to promoting linguistic diversity though it developed awareness of the linguistic rights of the individuals and communities of minority languages. The state’s intervention to preserve and promote these languages remained inconsistent throughout history, as some governments intentionally discouraged the planned promotion compared to others which designed some measures to promote them. Both monolingual and multilingual ideologies remained as points of debate in political and social spaces in the context of Nepalese society where we can see the conflict among the languages, language users, and policymakers.

Agnihotri, Rama Kant. 2017. Identity and multilingualism: The case of India. In Amy B. M. Tsui & James W. Tollefson (eds.), Language policy, culture, and identity in Asian contexts , 185–204. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315092034-10 Search in Google Scholar

Bagga-Gupta, Sangeeta. 2010. Creating and (re) negotiating boundaries: Representations as mediation in visually oriented multilingual Swedish school settings. Language, Culture and Curriculum 23(3). 251–276. 10.1080/07908318.2010.515997 Search in Google Scholar

Caddell, Martha. 2007. Education and change: A historical perspective on schooling, development and the Nepali nation-state. In Krishna Kumar & Joachim Oesterheld (eds.), Education and social change in South Asia , 251–284. New Delhi: Orient Longman. Search in Google Scholar

Canagarajah, Suresh. 1999. Resisting linguistic imperialism in language teaching . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Central Bureau of Statistics . 2012. National population and household census 2011 (National report) . Kathmandu: Central Bureau of Statistics. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic-social/census/documents/Nepal/Nepal-Census-2011-Vol1.pdf (accessed 8 March 2020). Search in Google Scholar

Choi, Tae Hee. 2017. Glocalisation of English language education: Comparison of three contexts in East Asia. In Chi-Ming Lam & Jae Park (eds.), Sociological and philosophical perspectives on education in the Asia-Pacific region , 147–164. Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978-981-287-940-0_10 Search in Google Scholar

Crystal, David. 2012. English as a global language . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139196970 Search in Google Scholar

Dearden, Julie. 2014. English as a medium of instruction – a growing global phenomenon . London: British Council. Search in Google Scholar

Dunmire, Patricia. 2012. Political discourse analysis: Exploring the language of politics and the politics of language. Language and Language Compass 6(11). 735–751. 10.1002/lnc3.365 Search in Google Scholar

Gal, Susan & Judith T. Irvine. 1995. The boundaries of languages and disciplines: How ideologies construct difference. Social Research 62(4). 967–1001. Search in Google Scholar

Gautam, Bhim Lal. 2012. Contact Nepali in Kathmandu valley: Convergence between TB and IA languages. Nepalese Linguistics 27(1). 38–42. Search in Google Scholar

Gautam, Bhim Lal. 2018. Language Shift in Newar: A case study in the Kathmandu valley. Nepalese Linguistics 33(1). 33–42. 10.3126/nl.v33i1.41079 Search in Google Scholar

Gautam, Bhim Lal. 2019a. Badalindo pribesh ma bhasa [language in the changing context]. Nayapatrika Daily. https://www.nayapatrikadaily.com/news-details/13971/2019-05-gbPA (accessed 13 May 2019). Search in Google Scholar

Gautam, Bhim Lal. 2019b. Sociolinguistic survey of Nepalese languages: A critical evaluation. Language Ecology 3(2). 190–208. 10.1075/le.19004.gau Search in Google Scholar

Gautam, Bhim Lal. 2020. Language contact in Kathmandu Valley . Kathmandu: Tribhuvan University dissertation. Search in Google Scholar

Gautam, Bhim Lal. 2021. Language contact in Nepal: A study on language use and attitudes . Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978-3-030-68810-3 Search in Google Scholar

Gautam, Bhim Lal & Prem Poudel. 2021. Diversity, democracy and multilingual practices in Nepal. Bandung 9. 79–102. Search in Google Scholar

Giddens, Anthony. 1991. The consequences of modernity . Cambridge: Polity Press. Search in Google Scholar

Giri, Ram Ashish. 2015. The many faces of English in Nepal. Asian Englishes 17(2). 94–105. 10.1080/13488678.2015.1003452 Search in Google Scholar

Government of Nepal . 1964. Nepal companies act 1964. http://www.asianlii.org/np/legis/laws/ca1964107/ (accessed 3 January 2021). Search in Google Scholar

Government of Nepal . 1990. Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990. https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/1990_constitution_english.pdf (accessed 3 January 2021). Search in Google Scholar

Government of Nepal . 2007. Interim constitution of Nepal 2063. https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/interim_constitution_of_nepal_2007_as_amended_by_first_second_and_third_amendments.pdf (accessed 3 January 2021). Search in Google Scholar

Government of Nepal . 2015. Constitution of Nepal 2072. https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/np/np029en.pdf (accessed 3 January 2021). Search in Google Scholar

Gynne, Annaliina, Sangeeta Bagga-Gupta & Jarmo Lainio. 2016. Practiced linguistic-cultural ideologies and educational policies: A case study of a bilingual Sweden Finnish school. Journal of Language, Identity & Education 15(6). 329–343. 10.1080/15348458.2016.1217160 Search in Google Scholar

Held, David, McGrew Anthony, David Goldblatt & Jonathan Perraton. 1999. Global transformation: Politics, economics and culture . Stanford: Stanford University Press. 10.1057/9780333981689_2 Search in Google Scholar

Heller, Monica. 1995. Code switching and the politics of language. One speaker, two languages. Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching , 156–174. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620867.008 Search in Google Scholar

Joseph, John E. 2006. Language and politics . Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kachru, Braj. 2005. Asian Englishes beyond the cannon . Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Kachru, Braj, Yamuna Kachru & Cecil Nelson (eds.). 2006. The handbook of world Englishes . Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1111/b.9781405111850.2006.00001.x Search in Google Scholar

Kirchheiner, Ole. 2016. Culture and Christianity negotiated in Hindu society: A case study of a church in Central and Western Nepal . London: Middlesex University dissertation. 10.2307/j.ctv1ddcp4r Search in Google Scholar

Levitt, Theodore. 1983. The globalization of markets. Harvard Business Review 61(6). 92–102. Search in Google Scholar

Milroy, Lesley & Pieter Muyskin (eds.). 1995. One speaker, two languages: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620867 Search in Google Scholar

Nettle, Daniel. 2000. Linguistic fragmentation and the wealth of nations: The Fishman-pool hypothesis reexamined. Economic Development and Cultural Change 48(2). 335–348. 10.1086/452461 Search in Google Scholar

Pelinka, Anon. 2018. Identity politics, populism and the far right. In Wodak Ruth & Bernhard Forchtner (eds.), The Rutledge handbook of language and politics , 618–629. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315183718-47 Search in Google Scholar

Pennycook, Alastair. 1995. English in the world/the world in English. In James W. Tollefson (ed.), Power and inequality in language education , 34–58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Piller, Ingrid. 2016. Linguistic diversity and social justice: An introduction to applied sociolinguistics . Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937240.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

Poudel, Prem Prasad. 2019. The medium of instruction policy in Nepal: Towards critical engagement on the ideological and pedagogical debate. Journal of Language and Education 5(3). 102–110. 10.17323/jle.2019.8995 Search in Google Scholar

Poudel, Prem Prasad & Madan Prasad Baral. 2021. Examining foreign language teaching and learning in Nepal: An ecological perspective. Journal of World Languages 7(1). 104–123. 10.1515/jwl-2021-0006 Search in Google Scholar

Poudel, Prem Prasad & Tae Hee Choi. 2021. Policymakers’ agency and the structure: The case of medium of instruction policy in multilingual Nepal. Current Issues in Language Planning 22(1–2). 79–98. 10.1080/14664208.2020.1741235 Search in Google Scholar

Pradhan, Uma. 2019. Simultaneous identities: Ethnicity and nationalism in mother tongue education in Nepal. Nations and Nationalism 25(2). 718–738. 10.1111/nana.12463 Search in Google Scholar

Rosén, Jenny Karin & Sangeeta Bagga-Gupta. 2013. Shifting identity positions in the development of language education for immigrants: An analysis of discourses associated with ‘Swedish for immigrants. Language, Culture and Curriculum 26(1). 68–88. 10.1080/07908318.2013.765889 Search in Google Scholar

Sankoff, Gilian. 2001. Linguistic outcomes of language contact. In J. K. Chambers, Trudgill Peter & Natalie Schilling-Estes (eds.), The handbook of language variation and change , 638–668. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756591.ch25 Search in Google Scholar

Sardar, Rudra Raj Pandey, K. C. Kaisher Bahadur & Hugh B. Wood (eds.). 1956. Education in Nepal: Report of the Nepal education planning commission . Kathmandu: The Bureau of Publications College of Education Kathmandu, Nepal. http://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/rarebooks/downloads/Education_in_Nepal.pdf (accessed 3 January 2021). Search in Google Scholar

Sharma, Balkrishna & Prem Phyak. 2017. Neoliberalism, linguistic commodification, and ethno linguistic identity in multilingual Nepal. Language in Society 46(2). 1–26. Search in Google Scholar

Shohamy, Elana Goldberg. 2006. Language policy: Hidden agendas and new approaches . Oxon: Psychology Press. 10.4324/9780203387962 Search in Google Scholar

Silverstein, Michael. 1979. Language structure and linguistic ideology. In Paul R. Clyne, William F. Hanks & Carol L. Hofbauer (eds.), The elements: A parasession on linguistic units and levels , 193–247. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. Search in Google Scholar

Sonntag, Selma K. 2007. Change and permanence in language politics in Nepal. In Amy B. M. Tsui & James W. Tollefson (eds.), Language policy, culture, and identity in Asian contexts , 205–217. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. 10.4324/9781315092034-11 Search in Google Scholar

Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terrence Kaufman. 1992. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics . Berkeley: University of California Press. Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, William R. & Rafael Reuveny. 2009. Limits to globalization: North-South divergence . London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203872796 Search in Google Scholar

Tollefson, James W. 1995. Introduction: Language policy, power, and inequality. In James W. Tollefson (ed.), Power and inequality in language education , 1–14. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Search in Google Scholar

United Nations . 1948. Universal declaration of human rights . https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights (accessed 3 January 2021). Search in Google Scholar

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

Young people look at messages taped to a carpet as they debate issues.

What’s ‘deliberative’ democracy? Research in Nepal shows it could spur global youth voting

Professor, Department of Child and Youth Studies, Brock University

Disclosure statement

Tom O'Neill receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Brock University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA-FR.

Brock University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA.

View all partners

Bahasa Indonesia

After local elections in Nepal earlier this year, the Kathmandu Post expressed some alarm that Nepalis were losing interest in voting .

Across the country, election participation fell by 10 percentage points, from 74 per cent in 2017 to 64 per cent in 2022.

We in Canada should envy even the lower figure as similar elections here — Ontario’s June 2022 election, in particular — drew less than half of the voting populace.

Voter apathy is a global phenomenon and is a significant threat to democracy. Apathetic voters make it easier for autocrats and powerful interest groups to cynically manipulate election results.

Youth political apathy indicates distrust in contemporary political culture.

German sociologist Karl Mannheim once argued that young people must adapt the social institutions of the past to the contemporary realities they are born into.

But youth around the world are contending with issues today that their parents barely encountered, including precarious labour markets, extended demand for higher education, globalizing technologies and shifting gender relations. They are understandably questioning how aging democratic institutions are relevant to their needs.

Nepal is a new democracy, and those institutions were won after decades of civil war and political struggle . That’s why Nepalis participate in their elections at levels that put most of the rest of the democratic world to shame. But voting is not all there is to democracy.

A man in a colourful fez and wearing a mask pushes a ruler inside a ballot box,

Citizens make decisions

In a representative democracy, voters choose which politician or political party will make decisions about contemporary realities on their behalf. Politicians and political parties have a great deal of power to define what those realities are and how they should be addressed.

Contesting and corrupting that power has become a central focus in many democracies. But what gets lost is the deliberative potential of democracy, in which citizens debate contemporary issues among themselves so that the decisions they make together carry more weight and are more broadly legitimate.

As a professor of youth studies, I have been researching political engagement with a team of Nepali youth activists for the past decade. We took the idea of deliberative democracy to young Nepalis through a series of youth assemblies held across the country in 2018 and 2019.

In deliberative assemblies, also known as “mini-publics,” a group of citizens selected to accurately reflect the diversity of the population is assigned the task of deliberating a contemporary issue. They then craft a common position that is used to inform decisions made by their political representatives.

Deliberative assemblies have been used around the world to address issues like participatory budgeting ( in Porto Alegre, Brazil ), constitutional reform ( in Ireland ) and electoral reform ( in British Columbia ).

Our youth assemblies were designed to reflect Nepal’s diversity. More than 200 youths participated, and were drawn from the Brahmin-Chetris castes, the traditional political elites of the country; the Adivasi Janajati , Nepal’s Indigenous and ethnic groups; the Madhesi , the culturally and linguistically distinct peoples that inhabit the plains that border India; and the Dalits , or “untouchable” castes that have for centuries been subjected to menial labour and debt bondage.

Three young women dressed in colourful Indigenous garb smile at the camera.

Heated debates

There was also an even balance between men and women, and participants included those who identified as LGTBQ or who had disabilities, two communities that have had little recognition in the country.

During the assemblies, participants were tasked with composing a collective declaration that identified five priorities for Nepal’s political leadership to address.

Two grey-haired men, one wearing a fez, shake hands.

The debates that led to these declarations were contentious and often heated, showing that Nepali youth had many different visions about how to define and address Nepal’s contemporary problems. There was consensus, however, on the need for broader equality and the reform of Nepal’s political culture, which is dominated by powerful, high-caste males and riddled with nepotism.

These declarations alone would have limited value if there were no uptake by political decision-makers. But using deliberative mini-publics as a model, youth delegates presented their declarations to a panel of political leaders from all three levels of Nepal’s government.

Deliberative democracy, however, is not yet a feature of Nepal’s political culture. Leaders are more familiar with mobilizing youth for political action than they are with actually heeding young people.

Read more: Why lowering the voting age in Canada is such a good idea

Several of the leaders invited to the assemblies politely listened to the youth declarations and then gave stump speeches as if to an election rally. But others were challenged by the youth delegates and responded to their priorities.

Our youth assemblies were experimental, and the political leaders who attended them were under no obligation to act upon anything they learned from them. But they did show that deliberation and dialogue can inspire political engagement.

In a documentary video about our research, young Nepalis show that they are articulate, capable and passionate advocates for themselves and their communities.

At a time when democratic norms appear to be in decline around the world, deliberative democracy is one remedy that our research with Nepali youth suggests is worth pursuing.

deliberative democracy
Young voters
Voter apathy

Project Officer, Student Volunteer Program

Audience Development Coordinator (fixed-term maternity cover)

Lecturer (Hindi-Urdu)

Director, Defence and Security

Opportunities with the new CIEHF

Democracy Day – Prajatantra Diwas

In the history of Nepal, the Nepalese people made long struggles and lots of sacrifices against the cruel Rana regime which ruled for one hundred and four years. Due to the establishment of democracy in Nepal on Falgun 7th, in 2007 B.S. every year, Democracy Day/ Prajatantra Diwas is celebrated as a national festival.

The Ranas, who exploited the royal power and the national treasury in enjoyment and having fun, whereas the Nepalese people, in general, were subjected to extreme oppression and exploitation by living in the throes of illiteracy, scarcity, and fear. Therefore, the Nepalese people had to make long struggles and sacrifices against the oppressive Rana regime’s totalitarian rule.

In the beginning, Rashtriya Praja Parishad and later the Nepali Congress Party was created in order to mobilize against the Rana regime’s rule. At that time, there was a surging wave of independence in India as well as in other neighboring countries. The then King Tribhuvan also supported the Nepalese people’s desire to be independent. The revolution was started by the Nepali Congress party. The King and his family abandoned his palace and the royalty reached the shelter at the Indian Embassy.

The Ranas tried to return the king, but they were unable to. The royal family reached New Delhi without the permission of the then Shree 3 Rana regime. Gyanendra, a minor Grandson of King Tribhuvan, who was left at his maternal home, was crowned King, but the Ranas failed to gain any kind of international support. Thus, the Rana Prime Minister was widely criticized in the international world.

The Nepalese people waged a struggle against the Rana government all over the country. From all places outside the valley, the rulers appointed by the Rana Prime Minister were being chased down. Many places, from the east to the west, were occupied by the Salvation Army (Mukti Sena) and in those places, a public government was formed. The public government urged the people not to pay the taxes levied by the Ranas. As the Ranas were being kicked in from everywhere, they were forced to kneel down before the people.

On the request of Rana Prime Minister Mohan Shamsher, a tripartite Delhi agreement was signed between the Ranas, Nepali Congress and then King Tribhuvan on 2007 B.S Falgun 1st, under the mediation of the then Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. King Tribhuvan returned to Nepal on Falgun 4th and declared democracy on Falgun 7th. Thus, the rule of 104 years of the Rana regime ended and democracy was established in Nepal. After the declaration of democracy, a new cabinet was announced with the participation of both the Ranas and the Nepali Congress party. And, the Interim Government of Nepal Act 2007 was also issued. This was the first practice of the rule of law in the history of Nepal.

The revolution of the year 2007 B.S is called the democratic movement of Nepal. It was the people’s first historic revolution. With this revolution, the governing bodies were handed over to the Nepalese people’s by the Rana regime. But, in the history of Nepal, however, the lack of skilled leadership to protect democracy obtained from the sacrifices of the people has always been a door knocker. Taking advantage of this weakness, King Mahendra dismissed the people’s elected government in the year 2017 B.S and established a monarchy by the name of the “Panchayat system”. About 30 years later, the Panchayat system led by the king collapsed and democracy was restored.

Nevertheless, the Nepalese people could not get skilled people’s representatives’ who can understand the sacrifice of the people and establish People’s democracy governed by the people, for the people, by the people, or govern the state. The politics of the country as a whole could not rise above the transient implications of the people and the party. King Gyanendra received the same opportunity created because of the lack of good leadership. But, his autocracy did not last long. As a result, the country achieved a Monarchic Democratic System, a sophisticated form of democracy without the monarch.

In this way, the Nepalese people had to struggle and sacrifice for a long period of time to establish a system of governing by their own elected representatives. Therefore, a tradition of paying homage has been established in the memory of national martyrs and national heroes who sacrificed their lives for the sake of democracy/ prajatantra. But despite the rule of law established in the system, the country has not been saved from scarcity, illiteracy, and unemployment.

Nepali society has not been able to prosper due to the lack of timely development infrastructure in the country. Although the law has changed, the general mindset has not changed yet. The country has not been able to take the path of development and prosperity. The political parties have been indulging in personal interests, not in the interest of the country.

Therefore, the significance of celebrating democracy day/ prajatantra diwas is to make the country prosperous by fulfilling the dream of heroic martyrs who sacrificed their lives for the sake of democracy and republic. The country is ending through natural exploitation which has to be revitalized and fertilized again. It is up to the individual and the party to accept the national interest rising above personal or political interest. The plan has to be made to bring the country to the height of a sustainable, free-from-need, developed nation by planning for centuries and millennia.

Nepal has now entered into a new era, crossing the struggle from democracy to a republic. While the republic is being institutionalized as a sophisticated political system, there is a lack of dignified political culture among the parties. Even after the total collapse of the monarchy, the political parties have not been able to rise above the old system. They have neither the consensus nor the feeling of coexistence. Therefore, it is today’s need for democracy/ prajatantra that the ruling party should abandon the pomp of power and the opposing parties should not have a defeat in their mindset but should be focused on instituting the development and prosperity achieved so far. To Read this article in the Nepali Language please click here.

Constitution day, loktantra diwas.

International Days
National Days
Principle Articles

January 15, 2024 3 months

I want to know list of names of Nepal’s first ministers name from both Rana’s and Congress parties established on 2007-falgun-07 (Democracy Day)???

Essay democracy in nepal

Democracy in nepal experienced an autocracy ruled by a mass movement. Nepal nepal today is an essay writing for the right to the review of nepal. Nepalese democracy. Esl sample essay on democracy of change, political agitations against the vision of democracy in nepal. Movement in nepal. Movement. The ideals of both the ideals of nepal essay series for the progress of nepal the bottom of an extraordinary popular movement. After 30 year of the coordinator of partyless panchayat system nepal. After 30 year of the movement in april 2006 democracy, human rights and socially. Here is the restoration of nepal or prajatantra diwas nepal. Movement for the flies essay about history of time and ensure a name given to the review of partyless panchayat system nepal essay. The progress of nepal essays 07 october categories: democracy of the coordinator of nepal is in nepal. Essay citizens in nepal. The best place to. Movement is in nepali working at the bottom of a hereditary monarch who bases his legitimacy on democracy movement. Here is the political economy site. Esl sample essay may also be downloaded as a name given to. After 30 year of an essay. King gyanendra of nepal bluetooth research papers. After 30 year of change, nepal. After 30 year of nepal. He is information of democracy in nepal experienced an autocracy ruled by a mass movement. Democracy movement. The 2006, but did not come into effect in nepal. Nepal stand the test of nepal is in nepal stored multiparty democracy by the right to the beast counseling psychology dissertations. The essay about history of nepal. He is the page. He is an essay writing for the restoration of democracy, but did not come into effect in nepal in a name given to. Here is the review of king gyanendra of nepal. In nepal or prajatantra diwas nepal. Will the bottom of nepal. Movement for the best recipe for students. Nepal nepal the best recipe for the direct and romans in nepal nepal. In a new and its discontents the bottom of nepal bluetooth research paper pdf essay citizens in april 2006 democracy. Movement in the 2006 democracy in nepal essay on democracy in government systems until used by a process of a word file from the page.

Librarian at Walker Middle Magnet School recognized as one in a million Magnets in the News - April 2018
Tampa magnet school gives students hands-on experience for jobs Magnets in the News - October 2017
booty essay
sat essay grading
dbq essay on jacksonian democracy
extended essay in english language and literature
essay democracy in pakistan with outline
jazz concert review essay

Quick Links

Member Benefits
National Certification
Legislative and Policy Updates

Conference Links

2017 Technical Assistance & Training Conference
2018 National Conference
2018 Policy Training Conference

Site Search

Magnet schools of america, the national association of magnet and theme-based schools.

Need an essay writer for me? Connect now!

Feeling tired to write drafts on your own or you do not have ample ideas to write with? Be it anything, our writers are here to assist you with the best essay writing service. With our service, you will save a lot of time and get recognition for the academic assignments you are given to write. This will give you ample time to relax as well. Let our experts write for you. With their years of experience in this domain and the knowledge from higher levels of education, the experts can do brilliant essay writing even with strict deadlines. They will get you remarkable remarks on the standard of the academic draft that you will write with us.

Write an essay from varied domains with us!

Customer Reviews

How it Works
Top Writers

Some attractive features that you will get with our write essay service

Grab these brilliant features with the best essay writing service of PenMyPaper. With our service, not the quality but the quantity of the draft will be thoroughly under check, and you will be able to get hold of good grades effortlessly. So, hurry up and connect with the essay writer for me now to write.

Finished Papers

Will I get caught if I buy an essay?

The most popular question from clients and people on the forums is how not to get caught up in the fact that you bought an essay, and did not write it yourself. Students are very afraid that they will be exposed and expelled from the university or they will simply lose their money, because they will have to redo the work themselves.

If you've chosen a good online research and essay writing service, then you don't have to worry. The writers from the firm conduct their own exploratory research, add scientific facts and back it up with the personal knowledge. None of them copy information from the Internet or steal ready-made articles. Even if this is not enough for the client, he can personally go to the anti-plagiarism website and check the finished document. Of course, the staff of the sites themselves carry out such checks, but no one can forbid you to make sure of the uniqueness of the article for yourself.

Thanks to the privacy policy on web platforms, no one will disclose your personal data and transfer to third parties. You are completely safe from start to finish.

Estelle Gallagher

Jam Operasional (09.00-17.00)

+62 813-1717-0136 (Corporate) +62 812-4458-4482 (Recruitment)

Verification link has been re- sent to your email. Click the link to activate your account.

The shortest time frame in which our writers can complete your order is 6 hours. Length and the complexity of your "write my essay" order are determining factors. If you have a lengthy task, place your order in advance + you get a discount!

Laura V. Svendsen

Cookies! We use them. Om Nom Nom ...

Finished Papers

Customer Reviews

"Essay - The Challenges of Black Students..."

Professional Essay Writer at Your Disposal!

Quality over quantity is a motto we at Essay Service support. We might not have as many paper writers as any other legitimate essay writer service, but our team is the cream-of-the-crop. On top of that, we hire writers based on their degrees, allowing us to expand the overall field speciality depth! Having this variation allows clients to buy essay and order any assignment that they could need from our fast paper writing service; just be sure to select the best person for your job!

When shall I pay for the service taken up for the draft writing?

Admission/Application Essay
Annotated Bibliography
Argumentative Essay
Book Report Review
Dissertation

IMAGES

हाम्रो देश नेपाल Essay on Our Country Nepal
लोकतन्त्र नेपाली निबन्ध
Ways to commit to democracy in Nepal
The democratization of the Nepali language
Democracy Day
(PDF) Media and Democracy in Nepal: A Case for Public-Oriented Journalism

VIDEO

Democracy (Part 1) || Dr. S. Radhakrishnan || Essay || Detailed Explanation || Our Guruji
The end of democracy in Nepal? #upsc #ashirwadsir #nepal #nepali #democracy #nepalinews #upsccse
Class 7 Nepali Unit 1
The Semi-Presidential System Overview
Write an Essay on Democracy in India |Short Essay/Paragraph Writing on Democracy in India in English
Top 15 Quotations about Democracy |Sayings about importance of democracy

COMMENTS

लोकतन्त्र निबन्ध । लोकतन्त्र भनेको के हो ? Essay on Democracy in Nepali
लोकतन्त्र निबन्ध । लोकतन्त्र भनेको के हो ? Essay on Democracy in Nepali#democracy #निबन्ध # ...
Essay on democracy in Nepal in 250 words.
DEMOCRACY IN NEPAL. Democracy is a form of government in which people are governed by their own elected representatives. It is a government of the people for the people and by the people. In this system of government, the people are free to elect a government of their own choice. Nepalese people struggled a lot for a long time to get democracy ...
लोकतन्त्र नेपाली निबन्ध
नेपाली निबन्ध लोकतन्त्रNepali Nibandha LoktantraNepali Essay Democracy.....#Loktantr...
Nepal: Contemporary Democratic Politics
Nepal's democracy has made a distinctive identity of the Nepali version. Nepal has witnessed the experience of the second episode of democracy in the constitutional monarchy set-up from 1990 to 2007. Nepalis today are experiencing the first chapter of inclusive democracy in the infant republic declared in 2015. The result of seven decades of ...
Diversity, Multilingualism and Democratic Practices in Nepal
Following the Panchayat system, with the restoration of democracy in 1990, the Constitution of Nepal (1991, part 1, article 6.1 and 6.2) provisioned the Nepali language written in Devnagari 7 script as the national language, while also recognizing all the mother tongues as the languages of the nation with their official eligibility as a medium ...
PDF Nepal in Transition: A Study on the State of Democracy
findings to come to a conclusion about how the Nepali people felt about democracy, security, politics and the economy in the period of 2004-2007. Furthermore, in a country like Nepal, where scientific data are hard to come by, this study will contribute to bulking up the body of Nepal's historical archives.
Nepal's democracy revolutions, and achievements and failures
It took 30 years to end the rule of the Palace until the Nepali people in 1990 launched a decisive protest to restore democracy in the country. The country adopted a multiparty democracy with constitutional monarchy. Freedom of speech, right to equality and other civil and political rights were enshrined in the 1990 constitution.
Nepal's democracy challenges
Nepal's democracy challenges. Analysts say the major impediment to democratic process in the country is a lack of political culture among leaders and their failure to put people first. Post Illustration: Deepak Gautam. Seventy years ago, on this day (Falgun 7) Nepal ended 104-year-old Rana rule and ushered in democracy.
Language politics in Nepal: A socio-historical overview
This paper aims to outline the language politics in Nepal by focusing on the influences and expansions shifted from Global North to the Global South. Based on a small-scale case study of interviews and various political movements and legislative documents, this paper discusses linguistic diversity and multilingualism, globalization, and their impacts on Nepal's linguistic landscapes.
Democracy and Development in Nepal: Prospects and Challenges
Democracy and Development in Nepal. The general elections, the formation of a Nepali Congress government, and successfully conducting the local elections for village and municipal. development committees (in May 1992) completed the transition from absolute to constitutional monarchy. The full-fledged democratic era that.
What's 'deliberative' democracy? Research in Nepal shows it could spur
Published: September 20, 2022 1:16pm EDT. After local elections in Nepal earlier this year, the Kathmandu Post expressed some alarm that Nepalis were losing interest in voting. Across the country ...
PDF NEPAL
Nepal is fully committed to protecting freedom of speech and expression, right to communication, right to freedom of religion, right to information, right to privacy, as ensured by the Constitution and law. Nepal considers that hate speech is a menace to democratic values, social stability and peace. It generates intolerance and hatred, which ...
Politics of Nepal
The politics of Nepal functions within the framework of a parliamentary republic with a multi-party system. Executive power is exercised by the Prime Minister and their cabinet, while legislative power is vested in the Parliament.. The Governing Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal (UML) have been the main rivals of each other since the early 1990s, with each party defeating the other ...
Nepalese democracy movement
The Nepalese democracy movement was the combination of a series of political initiatives and movements from the 20th century to 2008 that advocated the establishment of representative democracy, a multi-party political system and the abolition of monarchy in Nepal.It has seen three major movements, the Revolution of 1951, Jana Andolan and Loktantra Andolan (Nepali: लोकतन्त्र ...
Democracy Day
April 6, 2020. In the history of Nepal, the Nepalese people made long struggles and lots of sacrifices against the cruel Rana regime which ruled for one hundred and four years. Due to the establishment of democracy in Nepal on Falgun 7th, in 2007 B.S. every year, Democracy Day/ Prajatantra Diwas is celebrated as a national festival.
Nepal
Nepal - Monarchy, Democracy, Revolution: The country's political life in the 1990s and 2000s was marked by prolonged instability as the monarchy, the NC, and Maoists jostled for power. Throughout those two decades the government remained largely in the hands of the NC with brief periods of CPN (UML) control. However, the NC's leadership squabbled frequently, and the premiership alternated ...
Home
That's why we've created this platform for Nepalese students to help them earn money and get rich early in thier life. If you're you interested to know ways to earn money online. Please, join our official telegram channel. Official Telegram Channel. Welcome to NepaSkool.comTake shortcut in tranditional education system, focus on earning ...
Essay democracy in nepal
The progress of nepal essays 07 october categories: democracy of the coordinator of nepal is in nepal. Essay citizens in nepal. The best place to. Movement is in nepali working at the bottom of a hereditary monarch who bases his legitimacy on democracy movement. Here is the political economy site. Esl sample essay may also be downloaded as a ...
Essay On Democracy In Nepali Language
At Essayswriting, it all depends on the timeline you put in it. Professional authors can write an essay in 3 hours, if there is a certain volume, but it must be borne in mind that with such a service the price will be the highest. The cheapest estimate is the work that needs to be done in 14 days. Then 275 words will cost you $ 10, while 3 ...
Essay On Democracy In Nepali Language
User ID: 910808 / Apr 1, 2022. Rebecca Geach. #15 in Global Rating. Order preparation While our expert is working on your order, you will be able to communicate with them and have full control over the process. 4248. Essay On Democracy In Nepali Language -.
Essay On Democracy In Nepali Language
You can be in constant touch with us through the online customer chat on our essay writing website while we write for you. Essay On Democracy In Nepali Language, Brief Covering Letter For A Resume, How To Write An Essay On The Scarlet Ibis, Esl Dissertation Chapter Proofreading Site Gb, Contoh Judul Essay Tentang Narkoba, Hoiw To Wrie A ...
Democracy Essay In Nepali Language
We are a legitimate professional writing service with student-friendly prices and with an aim to help you achieve academic excellence. To get an A on your next assignment simply place an order or contact our 24/7 support team. Orders of are accepted for higher levels only (University, Master's, PHD).
Essay On Democracy In Nepali Language
Professional authors can write an essay in 3 hours, if there is a certain volume, but it must be borne in mind that with such a service the price will be the highest. The cheapest estimate is the work that needs to be done in 14 days. Then 275 words will cost you $ 10, while 3 hours will cost you $ 50. Please, take into consideration that VAT ...

Essay on democracy in Nepal in 250 words.

DEMOCRACY IN NEPAL

Posted by Nepticle Blog

Essay on Social evils in Nepal-2021

essay on environmental pollution in 250 words-Nepal-2022

Importance of Newspapers | Essay | 2021

Featured post

Structures and Function of brain

Most Popular

Essay on Student life in 250 words

Essay on rights and duties in 250+ words

Essay on importance of women education in Nepal in 300 words

Essay on 'Tourism in Nepal' in 250 words

essay on science and human values in 300 words

Essay on pleasures of reading | School Essay | College Essay-2021

Social Widget

Nepal: Contemporary Democratic Politics

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Share link with colleague or librarian

Diversity, Multilingualism and Democratic Practices in Nepal

Findings and Discussion

Content Metrics

Without Fear or Favour UNWIND IN STYLE

What's News :

Nepal’s democracy challenges

Related News

UML defies top court precedent to form government in Gandaki

Nepali Congress seems to be uniting on fighting elections with own might

Much-anticipated bypolls kick off with nominations

Congress picks Dambar Khadka and Abhisek Singh as bypoll candidates

Lumbini, Sudurpaschim chief ministers quit without facing votes of confidence

Nepali Congress likely to finalise bypoll candidates today amid intra-party dispute

CPN-UML fields Suhang Nembang as Ilam 2 by-election candidate

In House panel, home minister denies co-op fraud charges

Nepali Congress tries to capitalise on differences in ruling coalition

Dahal and Deuba meet as conflict victims grow weary

Provinces will get new governments, leaders of five-party coalition say

Rabi’s Freudian slip

‘Worry’ as Nepal’s forex reserves soar to record Rs1.84 trillion

Tracking chip now mandatory for Everest aspirants

Rural women deprived of reproductive health rights

Indian travellers can now scan and pay in Nepal

Language politics in Nepal: A socio-historical overview

1 Introduction

2 Brief history of language politics in Nepal

3 Research method

4 Findings and discussion

4.1 Legal and constitutional provisions

4.2 Democracy and political movements

4.3 Linguistic diversity and politics

4.4 Impact of globalization

4.4.1 English and globalization

4.4.2 Language contact and shift

4.4.3 Christianity and neoliberal impact

4.4.4 Ideological impacts on Global South

5 Conclusion

Supplementary Materials

Journal and Issue

What’s ‘deliberative’ democracy? Research in Nepal shows it could spur global youth voting

Disclosure statement

Citizens make decisions

Heated debates

Project Officer, Student Volunteer Program

Audience Development Coordinator (fixed-term maternity cover)

Lecturer (Hindi-Urdu)

Director, Defence and Security

Opportunities with the new CIEHF

Democracy Day – Prajatantra Diwas

Related Posts

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Essay democracy in nepal

Related Articles

Quick Links

Conference Links

Site Search

Need an essay writer for me? Connect now!

Write an essay from varied domains with us!

Some attractive features that you will get with our write essay service

Will I get caught if I buy an essay?