A few days ago, a program to review inclusive democracy was going on in Lalitpur under the auspices of the Tribal Commission. In which the top level leaders of the political parties in power sharing participated. Shortly after that, the decision was being taken to select officials of the two truth commissions in the cabinet meeting held at the Singha Darbar. In that program, the leaders of all the parties were presenting the example that inclusion was their agenda, and that they and their party were especially committed to it. Coincidentally, some of the leaders who set such a pioneering example were also dominant leaders who climbed the ladder of proportionality and reached the parliament.

By the time I reached home after the program, the 'breaking news' that the Council of Ministers had selected the officers of the Commission had arrived. After some time, the name of the official also started appearing on the TV screen. Looking at the list of office bearers, it seemed that inclusive democracy, which was discussed intensively a few moments ago, was being undermined. In that list, there was no representation of Madheshi and Tharu tribes who have been wandering for decades in the hope of justice and reparation. Ten hill Khasaryas out of ten and all but one from the dominant group were appointed. Hearing that only a moment ago that inclusiveness is not only a beautiful aspect of democracy but a necessary condition gave me a big shock and brain churning all night.

What is Nepali psychology or Chet about inclusiveness? Actually, the understanding about this is divided into two lines. One line has written inclusiveness in the constitution and laws and it is being practiced, so it is seen that it has become a model in the international world. This is the dominant trend, which has been occupying the policy-making and state power since the historical period  has come On the other hand, the provisions of the constitution and the laws are not enough, and even those that are there, have not been substantially implemented. It is a marginalized segment, which has historically been marginalized from policy-making and state power, and is still scrambling for inclusion. The theory, concept and recognition of inclusiveness is pulsing between these two strands of psychology. Sometimes a meso covering the marginal ridge is also formed. The proposed reservation system of the civil service bill presented in the parliament can be taken as an example. 

Marginalized faction is progressive and fighting for its fair share in the state but cannot influence the state power. It is also seen that sometimes the 'frustration' seen in this direction is used by the dominant for their own benefit. An example of this is armed conflict. Due to the conflicting consciousness, a large part of his intellectual capacity is lost in this. And by putting the tag of 'under merit', the advantage of this is also taken by the dominant ones because it is their hand to evaluate the merit. Merit is adopted as a weapon and used as a strategy to demystify and seize opportunities. Amartya Sen has called this practice 'reverse reservation'. Reverse reservation in our country has been enjoyed by the same community since prehistoric times and now it seems that they are trying to preserve it by moving around in the laws being made. 

Merit has also been flouted in the appointment of officials of two commissions related to truth. Even in such a sensitive structure, as appointments are made in political party divisions, party affiliation and leader's benevolence have become the definition of merit. The difference in the understanding of

inclusion 

Lately, not only has there been a difference in the understanding of inclusiveness, but attempts have been made to establish its interpretation in a different way. Our constitution has made it clear that there should be inclusiveness in all mechanisms of the state and its basis is proportionality. In the case of Dalits, special instructions have been given separately (in Article 40). However, the dominant faction in the state has misinterpreted it and narrowed it down to a limited number of reservations. Instead, even in the same limited reservation, it has been proposed that a larger share will fall to the dominant party, which is even more backward than the 2064 system.

Inclusivity emerged with the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s to bring structurally excluded groups or communities into the mainstream. Therefore, there was no question of the dominant group becoming a shareholder. But it is not understood on what principle the proposal was designed so that the dominant Khasaryas would get double and triple opportunities. Similarly, the comment that reservation should be given not on the basis of caste but on the basis of class (economic status) has been created and spread everywhere. In other words, an attempt has been made to reduce the issue of social justice created by a long civil movement as a poverty alleviation program. 

Actually our constitution does not recognize reservation. Although the interim constitution of 2063 ensured proportional inclusion, in the amendment of the civil law of 2064, reservation was avoided by providing limited seats. The current Constitution of Nepal has also provided for the same, and reservation in government services has been continued by allocating a certain number of quotas. In other words, no new laws have been made according to the new constitution. Recently, in the proposal presented in the parliament, the quota has been allocated so that those who are in the upper structure after taking advantage of the structure for ages will have more share. Thus the principle of proportionality itself has been 'misguided'. In this way, it takes centuries for the country to reach parity. Can the marginalized community and the state be patient for so long?  Why does

not wake up sensitivity?

Nowadays, there is no conference, meeting-conference that is not inclusive. This study has also become the subject of research. But policy makers and state power do not mix. Neither does the pain of exclusion burn the heart, nor does the loss of the kingdom touch the heart. Rather, their reactions suggest that these movements are natural.

Not long ago, a law student's statement went viral. She said - 'When a judge belongs to a community that has been doing injustice for ages, how can he know the pain of injustice and render justice in favor of the victims?' It was an exclamation of the pain of being. Studies have also shown the same in different areas. 

Recently 'Dignity Initiative' has analyzed the five-year budget of Lumbini Province. This is an important study in itself. In the analysis, it was pointed out that only 3% of the budget was allocated to the programs targeted at marginalized communities, which constitute 72% of the population. It is only 0.1 percent for Dalit targeted programs. The expenditure status of the allocated budget is even lower. And how are these communities strong and capable?

'Colonized Mindset'

We have never been subjugated or colonized by anyone. But were we really independent? 

The information written on the Ashoka pillar buried in Lumbini in 249 BC by Emperor Ashoka of Magadha shows that Lumbini was under the Magadha Empire at that time. This is also proved by the fact that the notice giving agricultural tax exemption to the people here is engraved on the pillar as it is the place where Buddha was born. At the end of E.P. the Licchavis who came from Vaishali in India surrendered to the Raithane Kirat ruler here. Similarly, the Sens, who are known as the descendants of the Rajputs of Chittoor and Sisodia in India, V.S. They entered Nepal around 1000. 

The Senavanshi rulers also expanded their kingdoms in alliance with the emperors of the Indian subcontinent. It is also said that they used to pay taxes to British India. That they actually played the role of 'Mahasamanta' is evident from the fact that after the fall of Simraungadh, the Mughal Emperor Akbar entrusted Mahesh Thakur with the task of tax collection in that area. Around the eleventh century, the Aryans from western India entered the western mountainous region of Nepal and took over the local power operating there. They were the ones who divided the local people into different castes and castes and imposed Brahminism. This caste system was growing and a single caste dictatorship was taking root in the state power. 

At the time of unification, Prithvi Narayan Shah established the system of 'Tharghar' and the Civil Act of 1910 gave it legal form. Even during the time of British India, even though the Nepalese army had won some battles, they had to lose a large part of Greater Nepal in the settlement. Nepalese rulers and people should always be in fear of their attack. The territory of today's Nepal has been saved due to the understanding of different times. However, some border sites are still disputed. 

The 104-year Jahanian Rana rule and monodynastic monarchy maintained the continuity of the Hindu varna system even more rigidly, alienating large numbers of followers of other cultures. Therefore, it is said that internal colonization was maintained in Nepal for a long time. Thus a 'colonized mindset' was developed in our society and governance. 

Even today, while we are claiming that we are never dependent, we should not forget that more than 80 percent of our daily consumption materials have to be brought from outside. Even now, our society and government seem to be in colonial mood. Colonial mentality is a state of mind in which the ambition is to become part of the state at any cost. For that, he has the talent to keep busy in the job of the main ruler and keep the common people subordinate. For that, the common people are divided into different groups on the basis of caste and are made powerless and they create a 'repressed psychology' that has to take their orders no matter what.