युथफोर्स

युथफोर्समा यथास्थितिवादी, नोकरशाह र दलालहरू छन्, उनीहरू हतियारभन्दा पनि खतरा हुन्छन् । अहिले लुकिछिपी भइरहेको हत्या, बालबच्चा अपहरण, चन्दा, फिरौती, ठेक्कापट्टामा गुन्डाको प्रयोगलगायतका आपराधिक काममा युथफोर्सका कार्यकर्ता लागेका छन् ।- गणेशमान पुन, अध्यक्ष, वाइसिएल वाइसिएलसँग बन्दुक छ । वाइसिएलले आफ्ना गुन्डा पालेर राखेका छन् । - महेश बस्नेत अध्यक्ष, युथफोर्स


एक समय यस्तो थियो, यिनीहरूको खबर नभएको कुनै अखबार फेलापर्दैन'थ्यो । जनता यिनीहरूसँग त्राहिमाम थिए । यिनीहरूको डर, धम्की, सान्, रबाफ र फुर्तीका अघि कसैको केही लाग्दैनथ्यो । अहिले त्यसमा केही कमी मात्र आएको हो । कहिले उनीहरू क्याम्पसमा नांगा खुकुरी देखाएर विद्यार्थी लखेट्छन् । कहिले अरूको खुट्टै काटिदिन्छन् । एकले अर्कालाई मार्न पनि यिनीहरू पछि परेका छैनन् । कहिले कसको खुट्टो काटिन्छ, कहाँ झडप हुन्छ त्यो उनीहरू आफैँ पनि अनुमान लाउन सक्दैनन् । सान, फुर्ती, दादागिरी जे छ देशमा अचेल यिनीहरूकै छ ।

दुवै संगठनका माउहरूलाई यहाँ दादागिरी थाहा छ । मान्छे कसरी ठीक पार्ने, थाहा छ । मान्छेलाई कसरी तह लगाउने, त्यो थाहा छ । मुक्का, लठ्ठी, डन्डी वा यस्तै अरू कुराको तीव्र स्पर्स कसरी गराउने त्यो थाहा छ । आउनूस्, देशको यति शक्तिशाली यी दुई संगठनका माउलाई भेटौँ । कस्ता छन् र के गर्दै छन् अचेल ? के भन्छन् ? के चाहन्छन् ?


बागबजारको उत्तरी कुनो । नजिकैको टुँडिखेलमा माओवादीको नागरिक सर्वोच्चताको मागको नाराले नाघेको नाघेकै छ आकाश । लाग्छ, उनीहरूको आवाज जति नै माथि पुगे पनि त्यसले निर्धा मनको हुर्मत भने सधैँ लिइरहेकै छ । सधैँ बागबजार चोकमा जुत्ता टल्काएरै बस्ने दोलखाका गोरेबहादुर सार्की सधैँभरि त्यही चोकमा उसैगरी बसेका भेटिन्छन् । जनजीविकाबारे बोल्ने स्वप्नद्रष्टाका चखिला भाषण उनले बिर्सेका छैनन् । पसिना चुहिन्छ घरी-घरी । ती सबलाई थाति राख्छन् उनी । सडकमै जोडिएको यो जुत्ता टल्काउने पसलसाथ प्रजातन्त्रको युद्धमा आफूलाई उत्सर्ग गर्न पनि बिर्सेनन् उनले ।

गोरेबहादुरको पसलसँगैको ठूलो होटलमा भेटिए महेश बस्नेत । अर्थात् युथफोर्सका अध्यक्ष । उनी यति शान्त, भद्र र सामान्य थिए जसमा उनी वाइसिएलसँग प्रतिरक्षामा उत्रेका युवादस्ताको मुख्य मान्छेजस्तो लाग्ने कुनै पनि चिह्न थिएन । युथफोर्सले जनतालाई कति दुःख दिन सकेको ? मेरो पहिलो प्रश्न थियो । 'हामीले कहाँ दुःख दिनु ? हामीले दुःख दिएका छैनौँ । हामीसँग बद्मास, चोर, डाँका, फटाहा, जाली, तस्करहरू मात्रै आत्तिएका हुन्,' एक चिसो दिन युथफोर्स अध्यक्ष बोल्छन्, 'वाइसिएल आत्तिएको छ हामीसँग । जनता आत्तिएका छैनन् । जनताले त युथफोर्सलाई आफ्नै मुटुमा राखेका छन् । हामीले कसैलाई दुःख दिएका छौँ भने अराजक गुन्डालाई मात्र ।'

वाइसिएलको गुन्डागर्दी र आतंक साह्रै बढेपछि त्यसलाई मत्थर पार्न युथफोर्स गठन भएको माउ पार्टी एमालेले बताएको थियो । पछिल्लो एक वर्षमा के छ त प्रगतिविवरण ? वाइसिएल तह लागे त ? 'बितेको एक वर्षमा वाइसिएलको आतंक पूरै घटेको छ,' ०६५ जेठ २१ गते युथफोर्स गठन भएपछिका आफूले गरेको प्रगतिविवरण सुनाउँछन् उनी, 'उनीहरूले आफूलाई सच्याएका त होइनन् । युथफोर्सदेखि काँपेका हुन् । माओवादीलाई युवा हाम्रा मात्र छन् भन्ने भ्रम थियो । हामीले देखायौँ युवा हाम्रा पनि छन् । अझ उनीहरूभन्दा धेरै छन्, हामीसँग ।'

अन्तर्वार्ताका लागि नयाँ पत्रिका कार्यालयमै आइपुगेका गणेशमान पुन पनि उत्तिकै भद्र, सामान्य छन् । 'असामान्य चर्चा पाइरहेको युवादस्ता -वाइसिएल) का प्रमुख' जस्तो लाग्दैनन् उनी । होचो कद र सामान्य लवाइखवाइमा भेटिएका उनलाई पनि लाग्छ, वाइसिएलले जनताको सेवा नै गरिरहेको छ । 'जनता हामीसँग निकै खुसी छन् । हामीसँग अराजक गुन्डा र अपराधी पो डराउँछन् त । जनताले त हामीलाई मनैमा राखेका छन्,' उनले सुनाए, 'कुन्डले, मन्डले, चोर, डाँकाहरू पो हामीसँग डराएका छन् त । युथफोर्समा सामन्त, तस्कर, फटाहा, जाली मात्र छन् । त्यसैले उनीहरू हामीसँग डराएका हुन् ।' दुवै संगठनका माउहरूको उस्तै जवाफ थियो ।

त्यसोभए वाइसिएलले के अर्थ राख्छ जनतालाई ? 'वाइसिएल शक्ति हो जनताको । प्रतिगामी चरित्रलाई परास्त गर्न बनेको हो हाम्रो संगठन । जुनैवेला पनि जनताका लागि लड्छौँ, हामी । रगत, पसिना बगाउनेहरूको विरुद्ध लाग्नेलाई छाड्दैनौँ,' उनको जवाफ थियो । वाइसिएल अध्यक्षलाई के लाग्छ, कस्ता छन् युथफोर्सहरू ? 'हामीलाई परास्त गर्न युथफोर्स गठन भएको हो । युथफोर्समा पेसेवर गुन्डा मात्रै छन्, जनतालाई दुःख दिनेहरू छन् । संविधानसभा चुनावअघि दुलोमा बसेर खानेहरूले पछि त्यो दस्ता निर्माण गरे । अग्रगमनलाई सिध्याउने लक्ष्य हो युथफोर्सको,' उनले सुनाए, 'युथफोर्स भनेको वाइसिएलको डाहाले जन्मिएको हो । उनीहरू आतंक मच्चाउन र पेसेवर गुन्डाको ग्याङ मात्र भेला भएका हुन् ।'

आतंक त वाइसिएलले पनि मच्चाउँछन् । मान्छे वाइसिएलले पनि कुट्छन । गुन्डाजस्ता लाग्ने मान्छेहरू वाइसिएलमा पनि छन् । के फरक छ, वाइसिएल र युथफोर्समा ? 'वाइसिएल परिर्वतनको वहाव हो । हामी त परिवर्तन चाहने शक्ति हो । युथफोर्सचाहिँ झगडा गर्न मात्रै जन्मेको हो । हामी अग्रगामी चेतनासहित लड्छौँ । युथफोर्स अग्रगामी शक्तिको विरुद्ध लड्छ,' पुन भन्छन्, 'वाइसिएललाई जनताले मुटुमै ठाउँ दिएका छन् । युथफोर्सलाई छीःछी र दुरदुर गर्छन् जनता ।' युथफोर्स अध्यक्षको आँखामा उनीहरू दुईबीचको फरक यस्ता छन्, 'युथफोर्स कानुनी राज्यको विद्रोही होइन । हामीले वाइसिएलजस्तो दादागिरी देखाएनौँ । हामीले कहिले पनि जनतालाई दुःख दिएनौँ । उनीहरूजस्तो हातहतियार प्रदर्शन गरेनाँै । क्रान्तिका नाममा चन्दा संकलन गरेनौँ । हामी उनीहरूभन्दा विल्कुलै भिन्न रूपमा प्रस्तुत भयौँ ।'

युथफोर्स अध्यक्षलाई वाइसिएल कस्तो लाग्छ ? 'उनीहरू जनतालाई दुःख दिन जन्मेका हुन् । उनीहरूले खुब कुटे जनता । धेरै त्रसित भए । उनीहरूले प्रतिगामी चरित्रलाई सहयोग गर्छन् । हाम्रो संगठन गठन भएपछि उनीहरूले आतंक मच्चाउन पाएका छैनन्,' महेशले सुनाए । गणेशमान हेरीकन महेशले वाइसिएललाई उत्ति गाली गरेनन् । कुराकानीमा पनि महेश निकै भद्र देखिए ।

'युथफोर्सले वाइसिएलको खुब रिस गर्‍यो' भन्ने गणेशमान र 'फेरि झडप नहोस् भन्नाका खातिर वाइसिएलसँग लडेका हौँ' भन्ने महेशबीच भेटघाट, चिनजान वा एकअर्कामा बोलचाल छ कि छैन होला ? 'उनीहरू नसुधि्रएसम्म हामी नजिक पर्दैनौँ,' गणेशमानको उत्तर थियो । यता महेश भन्दै थिए, 'केही कार्यक्रममा देखेको छु । केहीपटक हात पनि मिलाएको छु ।' पछि थाहा लाग्यो, उनीहरूबीच अहिले बोलचाल पनि रहेनछ ।

उनीहरूलाई कोही मान्छे 'खराब' लाग्यो भने, 'बद्मास' लाग्यो वा 'बद्मास' भनेर उजुरी पर्‍यो भने उसले जीवनभरि 'कम्युनिस्ट' नामधारी केटाहरूसँग तर्सिरहनुपर्छ होइन र ? 'कोही खराब लाग्यो वा कसैविरुद्ध उजुरी पर्‍यो भने पनि हामी भौतिक कारबाही गर्दैनौँ । राज्यको निकायमा लैजान्छौँ । आफैँ आक्रमण गर्दैनौँ । राज्यलाई कारबाही गर्न सहयोग गर्छौं,' महेश बस्नेतको उत्तर थियो । उही प्रश्न थियो, गणेशमान पुनलाई । के भन्छन् उनी ? 'कोही मान्छे खराब लाग्दैमा कुटिहालिँदैन । त्यसको यथार्थ चित्र के हो त्यो बुझन्िछ । पुलिस, प्रशासनलाई खबर गछौर्ं, बुझाउँछौँ । सक्रियतापूर्वक कानुनलाई बुझाउने काम गर्छौं ।'

त्यसोभए यत्तिका मान्छेले वाइसिएल, युथफोर्सको कारण दुःख पाएको के त ? के यिनीहरूका आँखाले जनताले आफ्ना कारणले पाएको दुःख देखेका छैनन् ? 'कहीँ-कहीँ हाम्रा कारणले पनि दुःख पाएका हुन सक्छन् । हामी सच्याउँदै छौँ,' युथफोर्सका महेशको उत्तर थियो । 'हाम्रा कारणले कतै दुःख पाएका छन् भन्ने म मान्दिनँ । हामीले अहिलेसम्म कसैलाई दुःख दिएका छैनौँ,' गणेशमान पुनले भने ।

िि

िउनीहरूले आफ्नो र अरूको संगठनबारे जे-जस्तो भने पनि एउटा समानता छ, त्यो के भने उनीहरू दुवै कम्युनिस्ट हुन् । दुवैजना निम्नमध्यमवर्गीय किसानका छोरा । आफ्नो संगठनका सदस्य संख्या पनि दुवै बराबर भएको दाबी गर्छन्-आठ/दस लाख । दुवैजना सुधारवादी गीत रुचाउँछन् । दुवैको रुचि पनि लगभग मिल्छ । दैनिकी पनि उस्तै छ । बिहान उठ्ने समय उही, काम गर्ने तरिका उही । फरक के छ ? 'हामीसँग विचार र एकता छ,' महेशले भने, 'वाइसिएलले बन्दुक लुकाएका छन् । लाठी र अरू हतियार त कति-कति ।'

झन् वाइसिएलसँग त हतियार छ भन्ने आरोप नै लागेको छ । कति छन् कमरेड हतियार ? 'कहाँ, हामीसँग हतियार छ र ? लडाकु मिलिसियाहरू शिविरमै छन् । हाम्रो पूरै पार्टी नै जनयुद्धमा लागेकाले हाम्रा कमरेडहरूसँग युद्ध सीप हुनु स्वाभाविक हो । यत्तिकै भरमा लडाकु भन्न मिल्दैन । अब तिनलाई विकास निर्माणको काममा लगाइन्छ । युथफोर्सले हतियार नराखे पनि कुन्डले, मन्डले पालेको छ । पेसेवर गुन्डाको ग्याङै भएपछि किन हतियार राख्नुपर्‍यो ?' गणेशमानले भने, 'युथफोर्स यथास्थितिवादी, नोकरशाह र दलालहरू हुन्, उनीहरू हतियारभन्दा पनि खतरा हुन्छन् ।' अझ गणेशमानले त अहिले समाजमा भइरहेका विभिन्न अपराधका काममा युथफोर्सकै कार्यकर्ता मजैसँगले लागेको आरोप लगाए । 'अहिले लुकिछिपी भइरहेको हत्या, बालबच्चा अपहरण, चन्दा, फिरौती, ठेक्कापट्टामा गुन्डाको प्रयोगलगायतका आपराधिक काममा युथफोर्सका कार्यकर्ता लागेका छन् ।' महेशले गणेशमान पुन र वाइसिएल संगठनलाई नै त्यस्ता जघन्य आरोप त लगाएनन्, तर भने, 'वाइसिएलले आफ्ना गुन्डा पालेर राखेका छन् ।'

एकअर्काले दुवैको संगठनमा गरेको सबैभन्दा ज्यादतिपूर्ण काम के होलान् ? 'वाइसिएलले हाम्रा कार्यकर्ता निर्मल, पुष्करलाई जिउँदै पुर्‍यो । विवेक देवकोटाको एउटा खुट्टा छिनालिदियो,' महेश आफूविरुद्ध वाइसिएलको ज्यादति सुनाउँदै थिए, 'सुशील महर्जनको हात काट्यो । सामान्य अपराध त कति गर्‍यो कति ? भनिसाध्ये छैन ।' गणेशमान भने महेशको केही पनि आरोप स्विकार्न तयार छैनन् । 'हामीले उनीहरूका कार्यकर्ताको हात काटेको, खुट्टा काटेको र जिउँदै पुरेको भन्ने आरोप सबै निराधार हुन् । हामी कसैलाई पनि त्यसो गर्न सक्दैनौँ,' गणेशमानले सुनाए, 'युथफोर्सले त झन् धेरै अपराध गरेका छन् । भनिसाध्ये, सम्झिसाध्ये छैन ।'


अहिले वाइसिएल र युथफोर्सको झडप निकै कम हुन थालेको छ । एक समयका कुकुर, बिरालैजस्ता देखिने उनीहरू अहिले सुधि्रएकै हुन् त ? 'हामी त पहिले पनि ठीकै थियौँ । अहिले पनि ठीक छौँ । सुधि्रनुपर्दैन । झडपमा अग्रसर हुँदैनथ्यौँ । झडप हाम्रो रहरको कुरा होइन । यो त आइपर्ने बाध्यता हो,' गणेशमान पुन भन्दै थिए, 'बाध्यतामा त हामीले बन्दुकनै उठायौँ नि ! हामी झगडा नगर्ने भनेर पछाडि हट्दा पनि युथफोर्सले लगातार आक्रमण गरे । उनीहरूसँग विचार थिएन । ती विचार नहुनेहरूले हामी विचारका धनीलाई आक्रमण गरेर मात्र हामीले जवाफ फर्काएका हौँ । कोही लड्न आउँछ भने हामी किन पछि हट्ने ?'

युथफोर्स अध्यक्ष भने यो मान्न तयार छैनन् । 'पहिले वाइसिएलसँग प्रतिरोधका लागि दस्ता नहुँदा उनीहरूले हामीलाई निकै आक्रमण गरे । एमाले भन्नेबित्तिकै उनीहरू आक्रमणमा ओर्लिहाल्थे,' महेश भन्छन्, 'उनीहरूको दैनिक आक्रमण सहन गर्न नसकेर हामीले प्रतिरक्षा शक्ति खोलेका हौँ । उनीहरूको आक्रमणपछि मात्रै हामीले जवाफ फर्काउँथ्यौँ । पहिले नै हामी कहिल्यै आक्रमणमा ओर्लिर्एनौँ । हाम्रा साथीका नाक फुटाउने, सख्त घाइते बनाउने उनीहरूको कामपछि हामीले प्रतिरक्षा मात्र गर्ने हो । हामी सुधि्रनुपर्ने आवश्यकता छैन । उनीहरूले आक्रमण गरे भने हामी अहिले पनि प्रतिरक्षाका लागि तयार छौँ । अहिले हामीमाथि उनीहरूको आक्रमण केही कम भए पनि गरिरहेकै छन्, तर्साइरहेकै छन् हाम्रा साथीहरूलाई ।'


महेश र गणेशमानको राजनीतिक जीवनमा ठूलो फरक के छ भने गणेश भूमिगत जीवन बाँचिरहँदा, आज कि भोलि मरिन्छ भन्दै भागिरहँदा महेशले शान्तिपूर्ण जीवन बाँचे । भक्तपुरको गुन्डुमा ०३१ मा जन्मेका उनले दुःख के हो भोग्नुपरेन । दुःखको रंग कस्तो हुन्छ जान्नुपरेन । प्रवेशिका परीक्षा उत्तीर्ण गरी ल कलेज भर्ना भएपछि उनको जीवनले राजनीति जान्यो । 'राजनीति त गजबकै कुरा रहेछ' भन्ने त्यतिवेला लाग्यो ।

यता गणेश ०२८ सालमा पहिलोपटक यस संसारमा 'च्याँ' गरेर रोए । १३ वर्षसम्म उनी रुकुमको गाईगोठमा घाँस, दाउरा गरेर, भैँसीगोठालो भएरै रहे । उमेरले १४ टेक्नै लाग्दा पहिलोपटक उनी डेढ घन्टा परको स्कुल भर्ना भए । 'स्कुल जानुुअघि बिहान एक भारी घाँस काट्नैपर्ने, भैँसी दुहुनैपर्ने । नत्र त उही हो स्कुल जान पाइन्नथ्यो,' गणेशमानको स्मृतिमा बाल्यकाल आयो । गणेशमानलाई जीवनमा यति दुःख लेखिएको थियो कि विधाताले कहिल्यै पनि सुखको सास फेर्न लेखिदिएकी रहिनछिन् भन्ने लाग्थ्यो । घाँस-दाउरा गरेरै पनि उनी 'स्कुल टप' हुन्थे । उनको परिवार त कांग्रेस थियो । हजुरबालाई कांग्रेसको भूत यसरी सवार रहेछ कि उनलाई मनपर्ने नेता गणेशमान मात्र रहेछन् । त्यसैले आफ्नो नाम गणेशमान रहन गहेको उनले सुनाए । पारिवारिक चंगुलबाट फुत्त बाहिर निस्केर उनी त कम्युनिस्ट पो भएछन् । त्यो रंग जीवनमा अब कहिल्यै नमेटिनेगरी बसिसकेको थियो । निकै दुःख व्यहोरेर ०४६ मा उनले एसएलसी पास गरे ।

रुकुमको आठबिसकोटमा जनयुद्धको पहिलो कारबाही हुँदा चौकी आक्रमणको कमान्डर थिए, गणेशमान । उनका आँखाअगाडि आफ्ना धेरै साथी सहिद भएका छन् । अघिल्लो रात आफूसँगै आँखामा अनेक सपना सजाएर सुतेका साथीका छाती सेनाको गोलीले चाल्नु भएको उनी अहिले पनि सम्झन्छन् । 'त्यो सम्झनाले अहिले पनि छाती पोल्छ,' गणेशमान भन्छन् । त्यसो त गणेशमानका हातले पनि थुप्रै सेनालाई मारेका छन् । ती सेनाका पनि त आँखामा सजिएका सपना एकाएक मरेका छन् नि ? तिनको सम्झना आउँदैन ? 'आउँछ नि सम्झना त ! ती सहिदलाई सम्झँदा सम्मान जागेर आउँछ । तर, युद्धमा सबै जायज हुँदोरहेछ,' उनले सुनाए ।

यता, गणेशमान भूमिगत हुँदा र जेल पर्दा महेश स्थानीय चुनावमा गाविस अध्यक्ष भए । महेश सम्झन्छन्, '०५४ मा भएको त्यो चुनावमा म देशकै कान्छो अध्यक्ष भएको थिएँ ।' अध्यक्ष भएपछिका महेशका दिन झन् सुखमय हुँदै गए । उनी आफैँ कुटो-कोदालो बोकेर बाटो खन्न निस्कन्थे, श्रमदानमा जान्थे । अरूलाई पनि जुटाउँथे । त्यसवेला सडक, स्वास्थ्यचौकी, पुल, सामुदायिक वनलगायतका विकासका कुरामा गुन्डु निकै अगाडि बढ्यो ।

राजनीति गर्नुअघि उनीहरू दुवैको सपनामा खासै अन्तर थिएन । 'म कलाकार वा पत्रकार बन्न चाहन्थँे,' महेश आफ्नो सपना सम्झन्छन् । 'मचाहिँ शिक्षक बन्ने सोच्थेँ,' गणेशमानले भने । गणेशमानको किसानजिन्दगी निकै संघर्षपूर्ण थियो । उनी बारीमा हलो जोत्थे । दाङदेखि नुनको भारी बोकेर गाउँ पुग्थे । एकदिन नुन बोकिरहेका वेला जीवनमै पहिलोपटक उनले ०४४ मा मोटरगाडी देखे । 'चित्रमा देखेको थिएँ, गाडी,' उनी सम्झन्छन्, 'त्यो त साँच्चैको फरक थियो । तीन वर्षपछि मात्रै चढ्न पाएँ ।' त्यसवेला गाडी देखेर छक्क पर्ने केटो अहिले पजेरो चढेर यो सहर चहार्छ । 'मैले चढ्ने गाडी मेरो होइन । ठूलो रहर पनि होइन, चढ्ने । कामविशेषले मात्रै चढ्ने हो,' गणेशमान भन्छन् । उनकी जीवनसंगी कमला रोका सभासद् हुन् जो जनयुद्धका सुरुका दिन गणेशमानकै कमान्डरीमा प्रहरी चौकी आक्रमण गर्न गएकी थिइन् । उनीहरूले आफूहरू भूमिगत नहुँदै १५ वर्षअघि बिहे गरे । छोरा 'आजाद' भने युद्धकालीन समय अर्थात् ०५९ सालमा जन्मियो । गणेशमानले १३ दिनपछि मात्रै 'म बाबु बनेँ' भनेर चाल पाए । बाल्यकालमा गणेशमानले पढ्न नपाए पनि अहिले उनको छोरा राजधानीको महँगो र नाम चलेको बोर्डिङमा पढ्छ ।

महेश सधैँ चर्चामै रहँदा गणेशमानको नाम थिएन । थियो त जनयुद्ध गर्नेहरूले मात्रै चिन्थे, उनलाई । गणेशमान बर्दिया, बाँके र रुकुमको जेलमा पालैपालो यातनामय जीवन गुजारिरहेका थिए । जेलजीवन र भूमिगत जीवन गुजारिरहेकै वेला उनकी आमा तेजकुमारीले ०५९ चैतमा यस संसारबाट सधैँका लागि आँखा चिम्लिन् । त्यसवेला गणेशमान म्याग्दी आक्रमणमा खटिएका थिए । र, उनले आमाको अन्तिम अनुहार पनि देख्न पाएनन् । उनका बाबु दिलबहादुरलाई ०५२ फागुन २९ गते घरैमा पुगेर प्रहरीले गोली हानेको उनी कहिल्यै बिर्संदैनन् । नीलकाँडा जसरी त्यो दिन मनमा बसेकै छ ।

यी दुई संगठनका माउ कहिल्यै मिल्न सकेनन् । यद्यपि, दुवै कम्युनिस्ट हुन् । एउटा उग्र कम्युनिस्ट, अर्को नरम । के अब यी दुई आफ्नो छातीमा हात राखेर 'अब हामी जनतालाई दुःख दिँदैनौँ, समस्या थप्दैनौँ, झडपमा उत्रिँदैनाँै' भन्न सक्छन् होला ? 'समस्या त आउँछ । युथफोर्समा लागेकाहरूले गल्ती नै गर्दैनन् भन्न म सक्दिनँ,' महेश बस्नेतले सुनाए, 'हाम्रा गल्ती-कमजोरी सच्याउँछौँ । घटनालाई निरुत्साहित गर्छौं ।' गणेशमान पुन भने वाइसिएलले 'गल्ती नै नगरेको' बताउँछन् । 'हामीले जनतालाई दुःख दिएका, गल्ती गरेका छैनौँ । हामी त परिवर्तन चाहने शक्ति हो,' छुट्नेवेला गणेशमानले सुनाए, 'हामी अग्रगामी चेतनासहित रचनात्मक कामका लाग्छौँ । हामी युथफोर्सलाई परास्त गर्छा ।'

कुवेतको जेलमा नेपालीहरुका ब्यथाहरु

सजिलो काम अनि राम्रो पारिश्रमिकको आशामा आफ्नो आर्थिक दायित्वलाई पुरा गर्दै आफ्नो परिवार अनी समाज प्रतिको दायित्व पुरा गर्न जस्तो सुकै दु:ख गर्न पनि पछी नहट्ने साहासका साथ केही समय भए पनि कुवेतको मरुभुमिमा काम गरी केही पैसा कामाउने चाहनाका साथ यहाँ पहिला देखिनै नेपाली कामदारहरु आउने क्रम जारी छ। खास गरेर नेपाली महिला घरेलु कामदारको संख्या धेरै भएता पनि अन्य क्षेत्रमा पनि नेपाली महिला अनि पुरुष कामदारहरुको पनि घुईचो नै लागेको आजकाल कुवेतमा। एकातिर आबश्यक ज्ञान, सिप अनी शिक्षाको कमिका कारण धेरै नेपालीहरुले कम पारिश्रमिकमा जोखिमपूर्ण काम त गर्नु परिरहेकै छ भने अर्को तिर नेपालको सरकारी निकायहरुको सुन्यताको कारण पनि कुवेतमा धेरै नेपालीहरुले कठिनाई भोग्नु परिरहेको छ। यसै सन्दर्भमा कुवेतमा धेरै नेपालीहरु जेलमा रहेको सर्बबिचीतै छ। धेरै पहिला मृत्‍युडन्डको सजाय पाएकी डोल्मा शेर्पा मात्र होइन अरु धेरै नेपाली दाजुभाइ-दिदीबहिनिहरुले पनि कुवेतको जेलको अन्धकारमा आफ्नो जिबन गुजारा गर्न बाध्य छन।खास भन्ने हो भने आर्थिक कमजोरि, भाषा समस्या अनि आफ्नो तर्फ बाट वकालत गरिदिने उपयुक्त वकिलको अबाभमा सानो-तिनो मुद्दामा पनि लामो समय सम्म कुवेतको जेलमा बस्न बाध्य छन्।यता उनिहरुको परिवारमा पनि पैसा कमाउन गएको आफ्नो मान्छे संपर्कबिहिन हुदाँ वा बिदेशमा जेल परेको कुरा थाहा पाउदा कति नरमाईलो लाग्दो हो सायद शब्दमा ब्यक्त गर्न सकिन्न होला। यसै सन्दर्भमा कुवेतमा रहेर लामो समय देखि इस्लामीक प्रिजेन्टेशन कमिटीमा सहायक शिक्षकका रुपमा कार्यरत केदारनाथ खरेलको सहयोगमा कुवेतको जेलमा भएका केहि नेपाली दाजुभाई-दिदीबहिनिहरुको कथा-ब्यथा अनि बेदनालाई यहाँ प्रस्तुत गर्ने जमर्को गरेको छु। सुन्दरपुर-६ मोरङ घर भएका केदार थापा कुवेतको सुईडीस कम्पनीमा लामो समयदेखि कार्यरत हुनु हुन्थ्यो। आफु घर जान लाग्दा समयमा घर जान नदिएकाले सुन अफिसमा गएर केष गरेर नेपाल जानु भयो।घरबाट आएपछी सिधै अर्को अल-मुल्ला कम्पनीमा काम गरेको हुनाले इलिगलको अवस्थामा पुलिस चेकिङमा पक्राउ परेर हाल १५ महीना देखी कुवेतको जेलमा परेका छन।नेपालमा घरयासी अवस्था एकदम नाजुक भएको कारण आफु कुवेत पुन: आउनुपरेको तर आफु लामो समय देखि जेल पर्दा पनि छुट्न गार्हो परेकोले अति चिन्तित रहेका उनको भनाइ थियो अब कहिले फर्कने होला घर”नेपालमा जान पाए त पाखुरा बजारेर खान त पाइन्थ्यो” ,उता चितवन जिल्ला, खैरहनी गा.वि.स.-८ का नरेश महतो (पासपोर्ट नं २८४११२९०२२१७) को पनि आफ्नै सानो गल्तिका कारण कुवेतको जेलमा बस्नु पर्दा सार्है मन रोएको छ। उहाँ कुवेतको मङगाफमा रहेर के.जी.एल. ट्रान्सपोर्ट कम्पनीमा कार्यरत हुनुहुन्थ्यो। उहाँ लिगल भएर पनि १७-अप्रिल २००९ मा रक्सि पिएको आरोपमा पक्राउ पर्नु भएको हो। उता ईराक गई अलि धेरै पैंसा कमाउने रुपन्देही जिल्ला रुद्रपुर -८ का कृष्ण बहादुर थापामगर (पासपोर्ट नं-३०६१९६२) को सबै सपना चकनाचुर भएको छ। उहाँलाई नेपाली दलालले कुवेत हुँदै ईराक लैजानको लागि यहा ल्याएको थियो तर कुवेतमै अलपत्र अबस्थामा पक्राउ पर्दा अहिले कुवेतको जेलमा परिवारको सम्झनामा तडपिनु परेको छ।त्यस्तै सुनसरि घरभएका देव बहादुर मेहता (पासपोर्ट नं-४२५३०१८) कुवेतको ग्रीन भन्ने ठाऊँमा काम गर्दथे। घरमा काम गर्न कठीन भएको हुनाले घर जान खोज्दा पासपोर्ट नदिएको हुनाले घरबाट भागेर एयरपोर्ट पुग्दा त्यहीबाट पक्राउ परेर जेल पर्नु भएको हो। अब कहिले अनि कसरि आफ्नो घर पुग्ने भन्ने त्रासले सताई रहेको उनको भनाई छ। राज बहादुर भाट क्षेत्री हवालीमा काल्देन मार्केटमा काम गर्नु हुन्थ्यो। के कारण र कुन अवस्थामा पक्राउ पर्नु भयो भन्ने पूर्ण जानकारी प्राप्त भएको छैन।किरण के.सी., योग राई, जीतेन्द्र थापा, अशोक राना र ज्ञान बहादुर मगर वहाँहरुको नेपालको ठेगाना खुलाईएको छैन। वहाँहरु सबैजाना ईशा अल-मसाब कम्पनीमा कार्यरत हुनुहुन्थ्यो। वहाँहरु कसैको बहकाउमा लागेर रक्सी बेच्न थाल्दा पक्राउ परेर १३ महीना देखी जेल परेको गुनासो गर्नुहुन्छ। त्यसो त कुवेतमा नेपाली दुताबास तथा नेपालीहरुको हक-हितको लागि बोलिदिने कोहि नभएकोले होला जानकारि बिना कुवेतको जेलमा आफ्नो अमुल्य समया आफन्तको सम्झनामा बिताउन धेरै नेपाली बाध्य छन।कति जनालाई त आफु कुवेतको जेलमा रहेको कुरा न आफ्नो परिवारलाई थाहा छ न त आफ्नो साथिहरुलाई नै? किन कि कुवेतको पुलिसले कहाँबाट कसरि समात्छ कसैलाई जानकारि नै हुन्न।कुनै मिडियामा पनि दिईन्न अनि कसैलाई भेट्न पनि हप्तामा आइतबार मात्र जानु पर्ने र आधिकारीक व्यक्ति हुनुपर्ने नियम भएको हुनाले पनि सबै नेपालिहरुको ब्यथा आफैमा बिलाएको छ। केहि महिना पहिले कुवेत टाइम्सबाटमा फोटो सहित नेपाली युबति ड्र्क्स कान्डमा अनि केहि हप्ता अगाडि नेपाली युबतिले बंगाली युबकसंग यौनसम्पर्क राखेको खबर बाहेकका केहि खबरहरु कसैलाई पनि थाहा नहुने हुनाले पनि यकिनका साथ यति संख्यामा नेपालीहरु कुवेतको जेलमा छ्न भन्न त सकिन्न तर भर्खरै मात्र एक कुवेती अधिकारिले दिएको जानकारि अनुसार कुवेतको जेलमा २०६ जना नेपाली महिलाहरु रहेका र जसमा २१ जना बच्चा सहित रहेको जानकारि प्राप्त भएको छ। हालै मात्र कुवेत सरकारले एक फिलिपिनो कामदारको हत्या अभियोगमा कुवेतको केन्द्रिय कारागारमा सजाय बेहोरिरहेकी नेपाली युवती सिन्धुपाल्चोक की डोल्मा शेर्पा सन् २०१२ को जुन १९ मा कारगार मुक्त हुने कुरा जनाएको छ। चाहे जो नेपाली दिदीबहिनी वा दाजुभाईहरु जे मुद्दाको अभियोगमा कुवेतको जेलमा बस्न बाध्य भएपनि उनिहरुको मन मस्तिष्कमा कसले कसरि अनि कस्तो हिसाबले सहयोग गरेमा चाडैं मुद्दाको किनारा लागि आफु जेलमुक्त हुन पाइन्छ भन्ने मात्र रहि रहेको प्रष्ट हुन्छ। आशा गरौं नेपाल सरकार अनि सरोकार वाला सबैले कुवेतको जेलमा बस्न बाध्य नेपालीहरुको ब्यथालाई भुझि छिटैनै जेल मुक्त गर्ने छ। हाम्रो पनि यहि कामना छ”सबै नेपालीहरुले छिट्टै जेल मुक्त भई आफ्नो जन्मभुमिमा फर्कन पाउन”!!

होटलमा बास बसेकी महिलामाथि सामूहिक बलात्कार

होटेलमा बास बसेकी एक महिला मध्यरात कोठाभित्रै सामूहिक बलात्कारको सिकार भएकी छिन् । तीन सन्तानकी आमा कमला (नाम परिवर्तन) लाई राति १२ बजे झ्यालबाट कोठाभित्र प्रवेश गरी बलात्कार गरेको पीडित महिलाले उजुरी दिएपछि प्रहरीले जबर्जस्ती करणी गर्ने चारजना र मिलोमतोको आशंकामा होटलमालिकलाई पक्राउ गरेको छ । बुटवल नगरपालिका वडा नं ८ ट्राफिकचोकस्थित जयभुँडी होटल एन्ड लजमा बास बस्न आएकी २९ वर्षिया ती महिलालाई होटल सञ्चालक जयराम भट्टराईको मिलोमतोमा चारजना युवाले बलात्कार गरेको इलाका प्रहरी कार्यालय, बुटवलले जनाएको छ । कार्यालयप्रमुख प्रहरी नायब उपरीक्षक ठाकुर ज्ञवालीले पक्राउ परेकाहरूले प्रारम्भिक बयानमा बलात्कार गरेको स्विकारेको जानकारी दिए ।
२० असोजको राति उक्त होटलमा एक सन्तानसहित बास बसेकी महिलालाई सामूहिक रूपमा बलात्कार गरेको आरोपमा प्रहरीले रूपन्देही करहिया-८ का कपिल खरेल, करहिया-१० का विवेक कुँवर, बुटवल नगरपालिका-९ का अमित गुरुङ र नवीन गुरुङलाई पक्राउ गरेको छ । होटलमा कोठा लिएर बसेकी ती महिलालाई आरोपी युवाले साँझदेखि जिस्क्याएको पीडित महिलाले प्रहरीसमक्ष बताएकी छिन् । उनीहरूको शंकास्पद गतिविधिबारे ती महिलाले मालिकलाई बताएकी थिइन् । राति करिब १२ बजे होटलको सिँढीतर्फको भ्यालबाट कोठामा छिरी उनीहरूले सामूहिक बलात्कार गरेको पीडित महिलाले प्रहरीसमक्ष बताएकी छिन् । राति नै आफू बलात्कार भएको भन्दै ती महिलाले प्रहरीमा उजुरी दिएपछि प्रहरीले होटलमालिकसहित चारैजना युवालाई बुधबार पक्राउ गरेको हो ।
बुटवलकै एक होटलमा काम गर्ने ती महिलालाई आफन्त पर्ने एक व्यक्तिले उक्त लजमा राखेर गएका थिए । घटनाबारे राति नै होटलमालिकलाई जानकारी दिँदा उनले वास्ता नगरेपछि घटना होटलमालिक भट्टराईको मिलोमतोमा भएको पीडित महिलाले उजरीमा दाबी गरेकी छिन् । प्रहरीले पक्राउ परेका पाँचैजनालाई जबर्जस्ती करणी गरेको अभियोगमा कारबाही अगाडि बढाउने जनाएको छ । प्रनाउ ज्ञवालीका अनुसार घटनाबारे अनुसन्धान प्रक्रिया अगाडि बढाइएको छ ।

नम्रताको सेक्स भिडियोको रहस्य

मोडलिङबाट नायिका बनेकी नम्रता श्रेष्ठको चर्चा व्यापक नै थियो। उनको स्वभाव र सौन्दर्यको तारिफ गरेर थाक्दैनथे उनका प्रशंसकहरू। नायिका हुनु त यस्ती ? स्वभाव यति राम्रो अनि पढाइ पनि उत्ति नै बलियो । यस्ता थुपै्र शब्द ओइरिन्थे उनीमाथि।
तर, यतिबेला भने नम्रताको साख गिरेको छ। उनको प्रशंसा गरेर नथाक्नेहरू उल्टै आज उनलाई गाली गर्न थालेका छन्, ’सुन्दर खोलभित्र विकृतिजन्य क्रियाकलापकी खेलाडी पो रहिछिन् नम्रता।’ उनका बारेमा यस्तै कुरा बजारमा छ्यापछ्याप्ती सुनिन थालिएको छ। नम्रताको बारेमा यसरी नकारात्मक प्रभाव पर्नुमा कारण उनी नै बन्न पुगिन्। नम्रताले शारीरिक सम्पर्कका समयमा गरेको आपत्तिजनक क्रियाकलाप नै उनलाई दर्शकहरू माझ गलत रूपमा उभ्याउने कडी सावित हुन पुग्यो। बाहिर देख्दा सभ्य, नम्र अनि भद्र लाग्ने नम्रताको यस्तो क्रियाकलापका दृश्यहरू इन्टरनेट हुँदै उनका प्रशंसकहरूको मोबाइलमा पुगेपछि आफूलाई नम्रताका फ्यान भनेर चिनाउँदा गर्व गर्नेहरूको मन कुँडिएको छ अनि भाँचिएको छ।
डीजे तान्त्रिकसँगको नम्रताको शारीरिक सम्पर्कको सो भिडियो हेर्दा लाग्छ कि यस्तो क्रियाकलापमा उनीहरू लामो समयदेखि आबद्ध थिए र नम्रता त्यो भिडियोमा एउटी पेसेवर युवतीजस्तै गरेर प्रस्तुत भएकी छिन्। जानकारीमा आएअनुसार उक्त नर्मता र डीजे तान्त्रिकबीचको आपत्तिजनक अवस्थाको भिडियो भने तान्त्रिककै श्रीमतीले प्रचारप्रसारमा ल्याएकी थिइन्। भिडियो हेर्दा लाग्छ कि तान्त्रिक र नम्रताको सहमतिमा नै भिडियो खिचिएको थियो। जानकारीमा आएअनुसार यी दुईबीचको यो अवस्थालाई नम्रता र तान्त्रिकले प्रायः मोबाइलबाट खिच्दथे र दुवैले हेरेपछि मेटाउने गर्दथे। तर त्यो दिन दुवै मदिराबाट चुर भएका कारण त्यस्तो दृश्य मेटाउन बिर्सिएपछि अन्ततः तान्त्रिक मोबाइल लिएर घर पुगेपछि उनकी श्रीमतीको हातमा त्यो मोबाइल पुगेको थियो। आफ्नै श्रीमान् अर्कै युवतीसँग लिप्त भएको दृश्य कसका श्रीमतीले हेर्न सक्छन् र? त्यै भयो तान्त्रिककी श्रीमतीलाई पनि र त्यो दृश्य एक कान दुई कान हुँदै मैदान भएको थियो।
हुन त डीजे तान्त्रिक, नम्रता र तान्त्रिककी श्रीमतीबीच माइती नेपालमा अबदेखि यस्तो ’क्रियाकलाप’ नगर्ने, तान्त्रिक र नम्रताबीचको सम्बन्ध पनि अन्त्य गर्ने सहमति भएको थियो। तर, पछि एक्कासि यो दृश्यले कसरी व्यापकता पायो ? चर्चाको विषय बनेको छ।
नेपाली म्युजिक भिडियोहरूको मोडलिङको क्षेत्रमा थोरै समयमा नम्रताले नाम र दाम कमाएकी थिइन्। त्यही दामकै कारण नम्रताले केही लगानी गरेर साथीहरूसँग मिलेर दरबारमार्गमा एउटा ’कफी शप’ पनि खोलेकी छिन्। धरानकी नम्रतालाई बढी नै च्यापेर आफ्नो भिडियोमा खेलाउनेहरू पनि यतिबेला तीनछक्क परेका छन् उनको क्रियाकलाप देखेर। आफूलाई महँगी नायिका र मोडल भन्न रुचाउने नम्रता नेपाली सिनेमाका नायिकाहरूलाई कहिल्यै पनि राम्रो व्यवहार नगर्ने कलाकारमा पर्छिन्। ’आफूलाई अन्य नायिकाहरूभन्दा राम्री, इज्जतदार अनि पढेलेखेकी भनेर अरू कलाकारलाई गन्दै नगन्नेको क्रियाकलाप पनि हेरियो,’ एक चलचित्र निर्माताले भने। उनका अनुसार हाल छायाङ्कन सकिएको एक सिनेमामा नायिकाको रूपमा अफर गर्दा नम्रताले डेढ लाख मागेकी थिइन्। त्यतिबेला उनले भनेकी थिइन् कि, ’म अरूजस्तै झारे नायिका होइन, मोडलिङबाट आएकी हुँ। हामी अन्य नायिकाजस्तो कममा खेल्दैनौँ।’ नम्रताको यस्तो रुखो व्यवहारबाट दिक्क भएका ती निर्माता अहिले यसो भन्न थालेका छन्, ’बालबाल बचिएछ।
अब त मोडलहरूलाई फिल्म लाइनमा ल्याउनैहुन्न। यिनीहरूले विकृति फैलाउँछन्।’ नेपाली चलचित्र त तल्लोस्तरका दर्शकहरूले मात्र हेर्छन् भनेर सधैं नेपाली चलचित्र र प्राविधिकहरूको अवहेलना गर्न अनि सीमित चलचित्रकर्मी र म्युजिक भिडियो निर्देशकहरूको वरिपरि सीमित रहने नम्रताको यतिबेलाको हैसियत कहाँ पुग्यो ? उनी आफैं बताउन सक्दिनन्।
नम्रताको चलचित्र बहिष्कारनेपाली कलाकारको इज्जत र हैसियतमा नै आँच पुग्ने गरी आपत्तिजनक क्रियाकलापको नम्रताको भिडियो बजारमा आएपछि यतिबेला उनको चलचित्र र म्युजिक भिडियोलाई दर्शकहरू बहिष्कार गर्ने तयारीमा लागेका छन्। आफ्नो इज्जत र मानमा बस्न नसक्ने कलाकारहरूको चलचित्र नहेर्ने भनेर पोखराका नेपाली चलचित्रपे्रमी दर्शकहरूले नम्रताको चलचित्र बहिष्कार गर्ने कुरा बताएका छन् भने स्थानीय केबुल टेलिभिजनको उनको म्युजिक भिडियो प्रसारण बन्द गरिसकेका छन्। यसैगरी चितवन र धरानका युवा�युवतीहरूले पनि पोखरेली दर्शकहरूलाई साथ दिने भएका छन्।
यसैबीच नम्रताले आइतबार रिपोर्टर्स क्लबमा यसबारे स्पष्ट पार्ने कुरा बताएकी थिइन् तर उनले पत्रकार सामुन्ने उपस्थित हुने आँटै गरिनन् र पत्रकार सम्मेलनको आयोजना पनि रद्द गरिन्। उच्छृङ्खल क्रियाकलापको दृश्य सार्वजनिक भएपछि कान्तिपुर एफएममा कार्यरत नम्रता त्यहाँबाट निलम्बनमा परेकी छिन् भने उनले खेलेको स्पि्रङ उडको पेपर विज्ञापनबाट पनि नम्रता आउट भएकी छिन्। नम्रताको यो काण्डले फेरि एकपटक समग्र नेपाली मोडलिङमा लाग्नेहरूको शिर निहुरिन पुगेको छ। यसअघि पनि केही मोडलहरू यस्तै काण्डमा मुछिएका थिए। नेपाली सिनेमामा कलाकार र नायिकालाई गन्दै नगन्ने र आफूलाई फरक रूपमा उभ्याउन खोज्ने यस्ता मोडलहरूले अब कुन नाकले गाली गर्न सक्लान् नेपाली चलचित्रकर्मीहरूलाई?

BEING A MEMBER

Youth Initiative membership is open to interested young people between 15-29 years of age. To apply for members, first interested youths have to attend a pre-orientation meeting. The Pre-Orientation meeting is organized monthly or bi-monthly (depending on the need) from August to April. Youth Initiative does not gives membership during May to July.
The recent Orientation Session for new/potential members of Youth Initiative has taken place at Youth Initiative Office in Shantinagar on Saturday June 16, 2007 from 2 - 4 pm.If you are interested in being a member and you want to attend the upcoming orientation, or if you need any further information about the membership please contact Youth Initiative.

GENERAL POSITION DESCRIPTION:

The Initiative for Cultural Advocacy and Mobilization is a three-year project designed to mobilize a strong and vocal youth constituency in support of honest sex education and other sexual health services at the national and state levels. The project is composed of three interrelated objectives: 1) to use new media strategies and youth activism to propel sex education and other sexual health needs of young people onto the progressive political agenda (cultural advocacy); 2) to assist state coalitions to advocate for the elimination of abstinence-only funding and to promote comprehensive sex education policy; and 3) to build a strong and vocal youth activist constituency that will safeguard sex education and other adolescent sexual health services in five target states and at the federal level.

ORGANIZATIONAL DESCRIPTION:

Advocates for Youth is dedicated to creating programs and promoting policies that help young people make informed and responsible decisions about their sexual health. Since 1980, Advocates has been providing information, training, and advocacy to youth, youth-serving organizations, policy makers, and the media in the United States and internationally. Advocates’ philosophy of Rights.Respect.Responsibility.® informs all its work. The organization promotes youth rights to sexual health information and services, models youth-adult partnerships in all its efforts, and holds society responsible for its role in providing youth with the tools they need to make responsible decisions about their sexual health.
g

Battle of Arras

The Battle of Arras was a British offensive during World War I. From 9 April to 16 May, 1917, British, Canadian, and Australian troops attacked German trenches near the French city of Arras on the Western Front. The Arras offensive was conceived as part of a plan to break through the German defences into the open ground beyond and engage the numerically inferior German army in a war of movement. It was planned in conjunction with the French High Command, who were simultaneously embarking on a massive attack (the Nivelle Offensive) about eighty kilometres to the south. The stated aim of this combined operation was to end the war in forty-eight hours. At Arras, the British Empire's immediate objectives were more modest: to draw German troops away from the ground chosen for the French attack and to take the German-held high ground that dominated the plain of Douai. After considerable bombardment, Canadian troops advancing in the north were able to capture the strategically significant Vimy Ridge. Only in the south, where British and Australian forces were frustrated by the elastic defence, were the attackers held to minimal gains. Although these battles were generally successful in achieving limited aims, many of them resulted in relatively large numbers of casualties.

Cultural anthropology

Cultural anthropology is one of four or five fields of anthropology (the holistic study of humanity). It is the branch of anthropology that examines culture as a meaningful scientific concept.
Cultural anthropologists study cultural variation among humans, collect observations, usually through participant observation called fieldwork and examine the impact of global economic and political processes on local cultural realities. One of the earliest articulations of the anthropological meaning of the term "culture" came from Sir Edward Tylor who writes on the first page of his 1897 book: “Culture, or civilization, taken in its broad, ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.” The term "civilization" later gave way to definitions by V. Gordon Childe, with culture forming an umbrella term and civilization becoming a particular kind of culture.

The anthropological concept of "culture" reflects in part a reaction against earlier Western discourses based on an opposition between "culture" and "nature", according to which some human beings lived in a "state of nature".[citation needed] Anthropologists have argued that culture is "human nature," and that all people have a capacity to classify experiences, encode classifications symbolically (i.e. in language), and teach such abstractions to others.
Since humans acquire culture through the learning processes of enculturation and socialization, people living in different places or different circumstances develop different cultures. Anthropologists have also pointed out that through culture people can adapt to their environment in non-genetic ways, so people living in different environments will often have different cultures. Much of anthropological theory has originated in an appreciation of and interest in the tension between the local (particular cultures) and the global (a universal human nature, or the web of connections between people in distinct places/circumstances).[citation needed]
The rise of cultural anthropology occurred within the context of the late 19th century, when questions regarding which cultures were "primitive" and which were "civilized" occupied the minds of not only Marx and Freud, but many others. Colonialism and its processes increasingly brought European thinkers in contact, directly or indirectly with "primitive others."The relative status of various humans, some of whom had modern advanced cultures that included engines and telegraphs, while others lacked anything but face-to-face communication techniques and still lived a Paleolithic lifestyle, was of interest to the first generation of cultural anthropologists.
Parallel with the rise of cultural anthropology in the United States, social anthropology, in which sociality is the central concept and which focuses on the study of social statuses and roles, groups, institutions, and the relations among them, developed as an academic discipline in Britain. An umbrella term socio-cultural anthropology makes reference to both cultural and social anthropology traditions.

Cultural Studies in the 21st Century

Though a young discipline, cultural studies has established a firm footing in many universities around the globe. With steadily rising enrollments, expanding numbers of departments, and a robust publishing field, cultural studies steps into the 21st century as a young yet successful discipline.[citation needed] The "discipline," if it can be called that (and there is considerable debate among scholars[who?] to this effect) is filled with discussions about its future directions, methods, and purposes.
Sociologist Scott Lash has recently put forth the idea that cultural studies is entering a new phase. Arguing that the political and economic milieu has fundamentally altered from that of the 1970s, he writes, "I want to suggest that power now... is largely post-hegemonic... Hegemony was the concept that de facto crystallized cultural studies as a discipline. Hegemony means domination through consent as much as coercion. It has meant domination through ideology or discourse..." [7] He writes that the flow of power is becoming more internalized, that there has been "a shift in power from the hegemonic mode of 'power over' to an intensive notion of power from within (including domination from within) and power as a generative force."[8] Resistance to power, in other words, becomes complicated when power and domination are increasingly (re)produced within oneself, within subaltern groups, within exploited people.
In response, however, Richard Johnson argues that Lash appears to have misunderstood the most basic concept of the discipline.[9] 'Hegemony', even in the writings of Antonio Gramsci, is not understood as a mode of domination at all, but as a form of political leadership which involves a complex set of relationships between various groups and individuals and which always proceeds from the immanence of power to all social relations. This complex understanding has been taken much further in the work of Stuart Hall and that of political theorist Ernesto Laclau, who has had some influence on Cultural Studies. It is therefore unclear as to why Lash claims that Cultural Studies has understood hegemony as a form of domination, or where the originality of his theory of power is actually thought to lie.
This illustrates the extent to which Cultural Studies remains a highly contested field of intellectual debate and self-revision.
Institutionally, the discipline has undergone major shifts. The Department of Cultural Studies at the University of Birmingham, which was descended from the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, closed in 2002, although by this time the intellectual centre of gravity of the discipline had long since shifted to other universities throughout the world. Strong cultural studies programs can be found in the United Kingdom, North and South America, Europe, Australia, and Asia, and there are a host of journals and conferences where cultural studies research is published and presented.
[edit] Founding Works

Additional anthropology

In an anthropological sense, culture is society based on the values and ideas without influence of the material world (Radcliffe-Brown). “The cultural system is the cognitive and symbolic matrix for the central values system” (Parsons).
Culture is like the shell of a lobster. Human nature is the organism living inside of that shell. The shell, culture, identifies the organism, or human nature. Culture is what sets human nature apart, and helps direct the life of human nature.

Claude Lévi-Strauss

Lévi-Strauss, based, at the same time, on the sociological and anthropological positivism of Durkheim, Mauss, Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown, on the economic and sociological marxism, on freudian and Gestalt psychology and on structural linguistics of Saussure and Jakobson, realized great studies on areas myth, kinship, religion, ritual, simbolism, magic, ideology (souvage pensée), knowledge, art and aesthetics, appling the methodological structuralism on his investigations. He searched the universal principals of human thought as a form of explaining social behaviors and structures.

Marcel Mauss

Marcel Mauss made many comparative studies on religion, magic, law and morality of occidental and non-occidental societies, and developed the concept of total social fact, and argued that the reciprocity is the universal logic of the cultural interaction.

Alfred Reginald Radcliffe-Brown

Radcliffe-Brown put himself in the culture of the Andaman Islanders. His research showed that group solidification among the islanders is based on music and kinship, and the rituals that involve the use of those activities. In the words of Radcliffe-Brown, “Ritual fortifies Society”. Radcliffe-Brown's observations also followed the research of that found by Durkheim.

Bronislaw Malinowski

Malinowski collected data from the Trobriand Islands. Descent groups across the island claim parts of the land, and to back up those claims, they tell myths of how an ancestress started a clan and how the clan descends from that ancestress. Malinowski's observations followed the research of that found by Durkheim.

Anthropology

Anthropologists lay claim to the establishment of modern uses of the culture concept as defined by Edward Burnett Tylor in the mid-19th century. Some of the 20th century scholars include Malinowski, Radcliffe-Brown, and Mauss.

Georg Simmel

For Simmel, culture refers to 'the cultivation of individuals through the agency of external forms which have been objectified in the course of history'. Simmel presented his analyses within a context of 'form' and 'content'.

Max Weber

Weber innovated the idea of a status group as a certain type of subculture. Status groups are based on things such as: race, ethnicity, religion, region, occupation, gender, sexual preference, etc. These groups live a certain lifestyle based on different values and norms. They are a culture within a culture, hence the label subculture. Weber also had the idea that people were motivated by their material and ideal interests, which include things such as preventing one from going to hell. Weber also explains that people use symbols to express their spirituality, and that symbols are used to express the spiritual side of real events, and that ideal interests are derived from symbols.

Émile Durkheim

Durkheim had the belief that culture has many relationships to society which include:
Logical- Power over individuals belong to certain cultural categories, and beliefs such as God.
Functional- Certain rites and myths create build social order up more by having people create strong beliefs, the more people who believe in these myths will strengthen social order.
Historical- Culture had its origins in society, and from those experiences came evolution into things such as classification systems.

Karl Marx

As a major contributor to the Conflict Theory, Marx's ideas also dealt with culture. Marx's belief of culture is that the most powerful members of a society are those who live in the ruling class. These members set up the culture of a society in order to provide the best interests to that society. He has also talked about how a society's economic status determines their values and ideologies.

Early researchers and development of cultural sociology

The sociology of culture grew from the intersection between sociology, as shaped by early theorists like Marx, Durkheim, and Weber, and with the growing discipline of anthropology where researchers pioneered ethnographic strategies for describing and analyzing a variety of cultures around the world. Part of the legacy of the early development of the field is still felt in the methods (much of cultural sociological research is qualitative) in the theories (a variety of critical approaches to sociology are central to current research communities) and substantive focus of the field. For instance, relationships between popular culture, political control, and social class were early and lasting concerns in the field.

culture

Sociology of culture, or cultural sociology, is one of the most popular fields of sociology, particularly in the United States. Cultural sociology is a methodology that incorporates cultural analysis into interpretations of social life. Cultural sociologists are influenced by many social and cultural theories. More than other fields of sociology, cultural sociologists tend to explore interdisciplinary social and cultural theories including, but not limited to, postmodern and poststructural theory. Scientific investigation and the production of empirically verifiable analysis (especially in terms of testable theories) is considered taboo among many, but not all self proclaimed cultural sociologists.
Culture includes the ideas, norms, artifacts, and symbols of societies and emphasizes the meanings of these things. Sociology of culture studies cultural impacts on societies and of social interaction. Sociology of culture is incredibly varied with many different approaches and emphases.
While some fields of sociology are defined by their object of inquiry or dependent variable (for example, sociologists of law study of the variation in law), cultural sociology is a cluster of paradigms. The American Sociological Association section for the sociology of culture states that the sociology of culture is a "perspective" that "considers material products, ideas, and symbolic means and their relation to social behavior." As a perspective on social life, those that practice cultural sociology study all aspects of social life, including diverse topics such as racism, fascism, love, and family life. Whereas cultural sociology is popular in the United States, the British establishment of cultural studies means the latter is often taught as a loosely-distinct discipline in the UK.

Following the 2004 annual meeting of the American Sociological Association at which public sociology was introduced and subsequently discussed, there has continued to be interest in the topic. In the last couple of years, three books have appeared in public sociology: The Public Sociologies Reader, edited by Judith Blau and Keri Iyall Smith; Public Sociology: The Contemporary Debate, edited by Larry Nichols; and Public Sociology: Fifteen Eminent Sociologists Debate Politics and the Profession in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Dan Clawson, et al. The ASA meeting in New York City in 2007 likewise contained many facets of public sociology.

Criticism

Criticism
Not all those who practice sociology either as public intellectuals or as academic professionals subscribe to the specific version of "public sociology" defended by Michael Burawoy or to any version of "public sociology" at all. And in the wake of Burawoy's 2004 Presidency of the American Sociological Association, which put the theme of public sociology in the limelight, the project of public sociology has been vigorously debated on the web, in conversations among sociologists, and in a variety of academic journals.
Specifically, Burawoy's vision of public sociology has been critiqued both by "critical" sociologists and by representatives of These various discussions of public sociology have been included in forums devoted to the subject in academic such as Social Problems, Social Forces, Critical Sociology, and the British Journal of Sociology. These debates have produced both more interest in public sociology and more disagreement over what public sociology is and what its goals ought to be.
One of the most outspoken critics of public sociology was sociologist of the . Deflem argued that public sociology “is neither public nor sociology. Public sociology is not a plea to make sociology more relevant to the many publics in society nor to connect sociology democratically to political activity. Of course sociologists should be public intellectuals. But they should be and can only be public intellectuals as practitioners of the science they practice, not as activists left or right. Yet public sociology instead is a quest to subsume sociology under politics, a politics of a specific kind, not in order to foster sociological activism but to narrow down the sociological discipline to activist sociology.” . In opposition to the advent of public sociology, Deflem also privately maintained Applied sociology

Applied sociology

"Applied sociology" and "sociological practice" has come to refer to intervention using sociological knowledge in an applied setting. Applied sociologists work in a wide variety of settings including universities, government, and private practice, using sociological methods to help communities solve everyday problems, such as improving community policing and crime prevention, evaluating and improving drug courts, assessing the needs of inner city neighborhoods, developing the capacity of an educational system, or promoting the development of housing and related resources for aging populations.
Sociological practice is different from pure academic sociology in which sociologists work in an academic setting such as a university with a teaching and pure research orientation. Although there are some common origins, sociological practice is entirely distinct from social work.[5] An increasing number of universities are attempting to gear curricula toward practical sociology in this way. Clinical sociology courses give students the skills to be able to work effectively with clients, teach basic counseling skills, give knowledge that is useful for careers such as victims assisting and drug rehabilitation, and teach the student how to integrate sociological knowledge with other fields they may go into such as marriage and family therapy, and clinical social work.

Public sociology today

While there is no one definition of "public sociology" on which all sociologists agree, the term has come to be widely associated with Burawoy's promotion of it. Burawoy's personal statement for the ASA elections provides a succinct summary of his position: "As mirror and conscience of society, sociology must define, promote and inform public debate about deepening class and racial inequalities, new gender regimes, environmental degradation, market fundamentalism, state and non-state violence. I believe that the world needs public sociology - a sociology that transcends the academy - more than ever. Our potential publics are multiple, ranging from media audiences to policy makers, from silenced minorities to social movements. They are local, global, and national. As public sociology stimulates debate in all these contexts, it inspires and revitalizes our discipline. In return, theory and research give legitimacy, direction, and substance to public sociology. Teaching is equally central to public sociology: students are our first public for they carry sociology into all walks of life. Finally, the critical imagination, exposing the gap between what is and what could be, infuses values into public sociology to remind us that the world could be different."[1]
Elsewhere, Burawoy has articulated a vision of public sociology that is consonant with the pursuit of democratic socialism. In Critical Sociology, Burawoy writes: "We might say that critical engagement with real utopias is today an integral part of the project of sociological socialism. It is a vision of socialism that places human society, or social humanity at its organizing center, a vision that was central to Marx but that was too often lost before it was again picked up by Gramsci and Polanyi (Burawoy, 2003b). If public sociology is to have a progressive impact it will have to hold itself continuously accountable to some such vision of democratic socialism."[2]
In a slightly different vein, Burawoy and Jonathan VanAntwerpen of the University of California, Berkeley write that their departmental focus on public sociology aims to "turn, as C. Wright Mills would say, private concerns into public issues" . The public sociology produced at Berkeley is an attempt to intervene in ongoing public debates over issues such as class and gender disparities and global inequality. Some of this work consists of attempts to refute high profile public scholarship in other fields (such as Herrnstein and Murray's The Bell Curve) and reclaim from non-sociologists the debate and explanation of sociological problems.
Likewise, the sociology department at the University of Minnesota also advocates claiming a larger role in public life: "Although good sociological research is often difficult to reduce to a sound-bite, sociologists have an important part to play in providing useful, accurate, and scientifically rigorous information to policy makers and community leaders."[3]
Indeed, sociologists have not been alone in debating the "public role" of social science. Similar debates have occurred recently in the disciplines of economics, political science, anthropology, geography and history, and various subdisciplines including political ecology. In an effort to move these various disciplines "toward a more public social science," Craig Calhoun, the President of the Social Science Research Council, has encouraged sociologists and other social scientists to "ask better social science questions about what encourages scientific innovation, what makes knowledge useful, and how to pursue both these agendas, with attention to both immediate needs and longterm capacities [1]. Calhoun has also entered the debate about public sociology, critically evaluating the project of public sociology while acknowledging its specific "promise," and arguing that "how sociology matters in the public sphere is vital to the future of the field"[citation needed].
In the 2004 American Sociological Association Presidential Address for public sociology Burawoy stipulates that the original passions such as, social justice, economic equality, human rights, political freedom or simply a better world to live in; that drives so many of us toward the discipline of sociology, is actually channelled into the pursuit of academic credentials. Also in this work, Burawoy maps out why he feels the appeal of public sociology is so important at this time. He feels that over the last half of the century the political stance of Sociology has drifted inone critical direction whilst the world it studies has moved in the opposite direction. Burawoy proposes that the radicalism of the 1960s diffused itself through the profession and consequently in however dilute form resulted in the increased presence and participation of racial minorities and women. This marked a significant drift in the 1960s that is felt to be echoed in the content of sociology at that time. Thus through this Burawoy marks some examples of this shift in the nature of the way sociology was being approached.
There are many examples of this shift for Burawoy, the study of the sociology of work had turned from processes of adaptation to the study of domination and labour movements. Also in a more general sense the concepts of stratification theory had shifted from the study of mobility within a hierarchy of occupational prestige to the examination of changing structures of social and economic inequality-class, race and gender. Race theory moved from theories of assimilation to the political economy to the study of racial formations. Social theory had allowed, and introduced more radical interpretations of main figurehead writers such as Weber and Durkheim, and also the incorporation of Marx's theory had become a feature; from this standpoint it was also felt that feminism had a both substantial and dramatic impact in certain fields of the subject.
This interpretation of the changes in ideology where sociology is concerned is said to be pulling in the opposite direction in terms of the world changing according to Burawoy. Whilst sociologists reiterate their jargon concerning the ever deepening crisis of inequality and domination; we as the public are flooded with the influx of rhetoric promoting equality and freedom. Burawoy highlights the concerns of a significant drift between the agenda of sociology and the progression of society itself when he acknowledges that over the last 25 years there may well have been gains in economic security and civil rights. However these gains have been heavily counter-acted and reversed by huge market expansion. From this perspective it is felt that the combination of market and state has served to be wielded as a mechanism working against humanity in the shape of what we should term neoliberalism.
There is the criticism that sociologists have become much more sensitive in their approach and focused negatively sometimes, although however, much of the evidence collected does suggest a certain amount of regression in several arenas. Much of these ideas are to be held together by the fabric and fundamental ethos that is hostile towards the idea of 'society'. This idea has antisociological implications in its self. A picture of public sociology versus privatisation begins to emerge through this discourse. Is the market the only solution? Burawoy's fundamental drive is fuelled by his desire to see the concept of public reignited in some way, and not allowed to be another casualty in the storm that has become progression. So for Burawoy the political era of the 1960s saw a shift in direction for the subject of sociology that was to conflict that of the changing nature of the world. Globalization and Privatisation seemed to play a key role in sociology losing its public voice. Burawoy wanted young academics taking on sociology as an interest, or in the shape of academia to use it in their everyday lives; thus fulfilling a certain criteria of pushing sociology's boundaries into the public realm. Burawoy has resonance of talking about public sociology that could be used a revolutionary force for understanding social change.
References. Burawoy, M. 2004 American Sociological Association Presidential address: For public sociology. 2005 Volume 56, Issue 2.

Public sociology

Public sociology is an approach to the discipline which seeks to transcend the academy and engage wider audiences. Rather than being defined by a particular method, theory, or set of political values, public sociology may be seen as a style of sociology, a way of writing and a form of intellectual engagement. Michael Burawoy has contrasted it with professional sociology, a form of academic sociology that is concerned primarily with addressing other professional sociologists.
Burawoy and other promoters of public sociology have sought to encourage the discipline to engage in explicitly public and political ways with issues stimulated by debates over public policy, political activism, the purposes of social movements, and the institutions of civil society. If there has been a "movement" associated with public sociology, then, it is one that has sought to revitalize the discipline of sociology by leveraging its empirical methods and theoretical insights to engage in debates not just about what is or what has been in society, but about what society might yet be. Thus, many versions of public sociology have had an undeniably normative and political character.