The ongoing political agitation has found a common punching bag: the elites. Agitators blame the Kathmandu-based elite for their woes, arguing these people have monopolized resources and power. But who exactly are these elites? How did they come into being? What distinguishes them from the rest of the population? Are they a homogenous entity?
Elites are those who monopolize the political and economic power in a given society and in turn influence the value systems therein. This category of people are at once ‘role models’ and inspirations for many in their society and, at the same time, a source of envy for others. Nepali society has seen various elites come into being. The most dominant of them are the landed gentry, who, in collusion with the ruling dynasties, have shaped the political, cultural and economic ways of life of the Nepalis for the last 200 years.
These people, a product of an indigenous process, have reshaped the Nepali life in many ways; the most prominent manifestations being the usage of language, food habits, dress patterns, and aesthetics. But the yearning to ‘modernize’ has had a larger impact whereby more and more people are aping the elites.
These desires are ever more manifest in the neo-elites who have come into being in the relative opening of the polity post-1990. There has been a huge in-migration in the cities and the metropolises. These new migrants try their best to live up to the expectations of their new domicile. In Kathmandu, the parents—mostly the migrants—are pushing for the admission of their children in ‘English-medium’ schools where their wards are expected to magically learn English to the extent of being able to converse in it almost overnight. This is reflected in their preferences for St Xavier or St Mary’s or other branded schools. They would like to visit places and eat things that make them part of the ‘in thing’. This has added to the consumer culture where flashing expensive gadgets, imported household appliances and spending on gas-guzzlers have become the norm.
The burgeoning army of neo-elites along with their traditional counterparts has been at the center stage of Nepal’s political economy. Every other policy—from subsidies in petroleum products to Kathmandu-centered development paradigm—is there to quench the insatiable thirst of the elites. Failing to satisfy them may lead to major alteration in power structure as they penetrate different strata of the state. What is however disturbing is the increasing presence of the comprador class among these categories. Backed by state policies of not prioritizing entrepreneurship, new class of elites have emerged who have made it big through land transactions or acting as contractors.
This has reinforced the ideology of rent-seeking class, which has historically shaped the policies of the state. What happens next is interesting. These rent-seeking elites, along with other neo-elites and the traditional power wielders establish cultural norms such as the flashy private hospitals, shopping centers and recreational facilities.
While traditional elites were formed around land, this entity found expression in the new dispensation as well. In the post-liberalization period there were hordes of new aspiring city denizens who made it big by selling their ancestral land, a prime source of prestige in the agrarian set up. Other important ways of elite formation was to have access to state through bureaucracy or control the economy in the neo-liberal set up by becoming a business person—often relying on imports and thereby furthering dependency.
Many of today’s conflicts are the result of clash between the traditional and neo-elites, a case in point being the ongoing Madheshi agitation. The Madhesh-centric parties are a product of struggle coupled with parliamentary politics. They also want to have a share in the state pie. But their approach challenges the status quo set by the traditional political actors including long-time parliamentary parties such as Nepali Congress and CPN-UML. But both sides agree that they have a common stake and they show camaraderie in sharing resources.
While much could be said of the neo-elites and their inkling to be part of the center, established elites themselves crave to be like those in the West. They don’t trust the state’s institutions such as medical facilities and frequently travel abroad, and desire American or British/Australian degree for their children.
But this is not a new phenomenon. The likes of Bhimsen Thapa and Jung Bahadur tried to do the same. Both ‘nationalists’ had a penchant for Western culture both, material and otherwise. The periods of these historical figures saw huge surge in imports of Western consumer items by the elites of the day as they wanted to be liked by their European counterparts.
The authors are assistant professors at Kathmandu School of Law
Related story
