Last week, a peaceful protest started by Gen-G (the 13 to 27-year-old generation) suddenly turned violent, causing not only the destruction of personal and public property, but also the most talked about world politics.

It is said that many people felt like a dream when the protest, which was called for two days ago through social media, lasted from Monday afternoon until the next day (Tuesday) evening.

The violent activity of about one and a half days had subsided by the third day, it took another day to institutionalize the rebellion and form a government, and on the fourth or sixth day after the movement started, life seemed normal. In the meantime, it was seen how the people calling for the movement, Gen-Ji, have been communicating their ideas to the public in both difficult and easy situations, to what extent they have been handling the anger after the peaceful call turned into violence, and how they have been expressing their anger.

What level of understanding Nepali youth have about politics and the various systemic realities within it has also been shown by their press conferences, discussions in meetings and social media. 

Every event has two parts. The positive aspect of last week's youth rebellion, which succeeded in facilitating the parliamentary coup d'état of almost two-thirds, is that these groups, who were understood and explained by many as 'politics is a dirty game', got a chance to understand and think that politics is a subject to be known, and that every component of it will affect their daily lives and that of the society.

A five-pronged power to make the idea that 'not only the political leadership, but the system is bad, the system and the system should end along with the leader' is prepared with the resources and techniques to incite the youth everywhere, but they not only managed to hold a close discussion with those who are in the movement and those who are watching from the outside, but also reached a stand in a short time on what is good and what is bad according to the situation of the country.

that was commendable. There are many lessons for Nepali society to learn from this. There is a part of moral education that is needed from childhood. Another is objective knowledge of various components of the country and society. But this article focuses on the current debate about the demands raised during the movement and the ways to address them when the Gen-G movement is getting easier.

movement was against the political system?

Gen-G's demands were not directed against the political system but against the people who operated the system and their methods. In every big party, the same person remained in the leadership for years, and the leadership of those three parties continued to move around in governance. There was a tendency to share commitments like making the sky fall when he was in the opposition or when he started the government, and while working, he neither remembered the commitment nor did it according to people's expectations.

is not good in every part of the state, even though they have done the work of keeping their people, instead of the correct implementation of the political system, where there are weak holes, they have been playing from there and weakening the system as a whole. For example, even if only a system of forming a government under the leadership of the first party within the coalition was able to be formed according to the dignity of the parliamentary system, the vicious cycle of Netatraya's musical chair within the tripartite circle would not have been so strong. To create a

government, there would have been a reduction in the work that was going on and irregularity. It was not possible for them to repeatedly speak against each other and try to make a comment that nothing has happened in the society. On the face of it, it looks like fierce opposition, it will increase the frustration among the people, but internally, the situation like an unannounced collusion did not even give the impression that the main three parties have an opposition.

Because everyone worked in turn in the government, after the involvement of one or the other of the three parties was found in all the disorder and irregularity, the corruption was rampant due to the fact that most of the time, no questions were raised. As corruption became rampant, widespread involvement and political bureaucratic nexus was seen, from high-level officials, security officials to politicians.

As a result, although the country's material development has progressed well, those in power and those around it are getting richer and more comfortable, and the class of their families and children is changing, from the schools they attend to the restaurants they eat, the clothes brands they wear, the places they travel to, or even the countries, and a class gap started to appear in the society.

The other category is the situation of being deprived of every opportunity. It seems that the conscious among the youth generation have come up with the concept of 'Nepo Baby' after analyzing the opportunities and living conditions of the youth according to the principle of 'Relative Deprivation' used in sociology.

Some people say that whether or not they will remain in the leadership of the party is not only in the will of the leader, but also in the will of the Jamaat that formed them, so one cannot become a leader and leave the leadership if he wants to. Similarly, it is also heard that 'what happens to the interest of outsiders in who is the leader of someone's party and as long as those who are there agree'. Although that statement seems close to reality, it is not true, it is only technical.

This leader is in the leadership only because of the stranglehold and the structure created by the leadership, i.e. the situation where the leadership revolves around one or a few people is directly related to the leadership selection process of the parties. Regarding the question of democracy within the party, it is a little different, i.e. Congress, which is a soft party, also has a structural framework that cannot be lost by the establishment because the leadership and its close factions have a place to play in the active membership.

In the recent days, there is a situation within the two communist parties that should be worried about whether they will be taken action for contesting the election by giving candidature within the party. There, the situation of those who disagree with the establishment is more dire.

The situation of KP Sharma Oli who returned to Baluwatar after revising the party constitution in his favor through a significant vote of the legislative session the day before and resigning in front of such and such power the next day shows that those who become slaves or slaves in the party rather than accepting the activities within the party wholeheartedly have remained there without protesting to see if it would help them to make something in that structure.

Otherwise, even if the army and the police do not protect the leader of the party, which has the data of millions of workers, organized members and active members, and youth squads with various names, shouldn't those workers be protected and kept in their security circle? But no one came to save the leader and his abode, even the party office, which is tireless as its ideal. Instead, in some places, the members of the party themselves became the leaders of the fire, suddenly they were busy writing the declaration of desertion. 

Political System: Directly Elected or Parliamentary? 

The political system of democratic Nepal is a parliamentary system as it is today or a parliamentary system with a directly elected prime minister or president? What kind of electoral system in parliamentary elections? While the discussion was going on, it was heard that this agenda had a place in the Discord meeting attended by thousands of Gen-G.

As mentioned above, those who are trying to incite the youth that both this system and leadership are correct have given many alternatives to the current parliamentary system. From the monarchy suggested by the undemocratic camp, the military regime as democratic, to the democratic dictator, i.e. the 'volunteer dictator', and the executive head directly elected by the voters, the 'menu' can be seen in today's political market.

Looking at this, political commitment, honesty and leadership ability of the party and leader are the most important things because the political system itself is abstract and the leadership gives it concreteness. However, due to the existing social and geopolitical reality, there is a debate on which system to call for here.

Looking at the past, the agenda of the directly elected executive seems to have the support of most of the Communist Party, including Gagan Thapa, the late Pradeep Giri and Narahari Acharya and Upendra Yadav of the Madhesh-centric party within the Congress. Due to the lack of intensive study and discussion, the supporters including Congress and UML went forward by agreeing on the reformed parliamentary system in the last Constituent Assembly. But now the scholars who have raised the issue have come to the conclusion that the system will not work in Nepali reality. 

The reason behind that conclusion is related to the political culture of us Nepalis. That is, people who talk about democracy but never adopt the culture demanded by democracy, i.e. do not become democratic.

Looking at the leaders of the party pointed out by the youth movement and understanding why and how those leaders have been able to stay in office for years without anyone else and influence the overall party politics, those scholars who are directly elected executives yesterday have come to the conclusion that 'that will not work in Nepal'.

In the past, if the directly elected executive had gone to the election, the person who would have won around 2064 would have been Pushpa Kamal Dahal, and after 2072, KP Oli with nationalist slogans. And, seeing that he won the election twice with huge votes, the last successful person in this race will be Ravi Lamichhane.

But the people are not unfamiliar with the method and process of running the organization of these three characters and it can be said in essence, yesterday all the three people who had potential spent all their time on how to concentrate power and prohibit different opinions while remaining in power and power. It can be said here that the character, the culture he adopts and the consciousness of the society are more important than the system.

The geopolitical and social environment Nepal is in, the debate about what kind of political system and the directly elected executive, there are other scary parts to it. It cannot be said that the practice of nepotism, nepotism and wealth bargaining will not increase as it is now, after such an executive is not bound to appoint cabinet members from within the parliament.

Similarly, there is a possibility of overshadowing or rendering ineffective the issues of marginalized communities from the cabinet to other structures of the state in order to make them agile and efficient. The leaders who are seen and seen in the leadership without developing democratic culture and thinking have been limited to the political parties till date and when the parliament has curbed them when they go to the government, the democracy has to face question marks again and again. Looking back at the

movement and the two days after that until the formation of the interim government, when the civilian government was alienated for a few hours, the society suddenly remembered the constitution made by the people and said that all changes should be based on the constitution, saying that 'ifs' and 'buts' are not acceptable.

As the debate about the constitutional or unconstitutional path went on, he sought the face and visible role of the president for a smooth landing of the movement. If the elected Prime Minister Oli, who was in a coma due to the cries of the youth movement who wanted peace and democracy, and the pressure of the reactionaries who tried to turn it into violent defiance, within a few hours of his resignation, the leader of the parliamentary party of the main party had been changed and only proposed a small cabinet of those who had the guts and intelligence to communicate and discuss with the protesting youth from within the parliament, perhaps the situation would have been a little different. As told by

, it was not possible because one level of leadership was separated from communication services including mobile for security reasons. What can be gleaned from what has been seen is that the pressure to 'make the President public' became stronger within a few hours after getting a feeling that the civilian government was about to weaken, it sent a clear message that there is no resounding of any kind of dictatorship and undemocratic system in Nepal.

This slogan was so powerful that the peaceful movement of young people who came to the streets demanding a stronger democracy than the current one with the expectation of freedom of thought and expression, corruption-free and inclusive society suddenly left the field.  Staying the Constitution of

results, keeping the election government, the President has been fixed on the date of elections in 2082, 2008. In the one hand, this period is very important to the ages that, much improvement is possible only from parliamentary perimeter.