Is this suffering of democracy? Even in the remote countryside, common people's conversation starts and ends around this question. Democracy has been attacked in many forms and ways. History is a witness - Nepalis brought democracy by fighting against kings. Again, in his elusive conspiracy, the attack on democracy starts from different angles. At this time, the attack has been announced again.

The attack on the Republic is an attack on the public consciousness of the people of Nepal. What did the republic give to whom? What did the republic get from whom? The Republic gave shape to the renewable energy that existed deep in the public consciousness. Public consciousness is the lifeblood of a republic.

The republican movement was not limited to a change of power. The basis of sovereignty in a republic is popular approval. Power lasts only as long as the people accept it. From the day the people decide that they no longer accept your authority, the people's republic will establish its sovereignty.

There is no divided consciousness within the perimeter of the republic. Concerns about power divide the public mind. The natural consequence of the attack on the Republic was that the public consciousness that filled with pride during the mass movement was lost in slumber and the individual consciousness in the form of the market came to dominate the collective consciousness.

Right now, there are two types of opposition to Gyanendra Shah's activities. One is the main party that has been participating in the government in a democratic environment. Another group is those who, as individuals, adhere to certain social ideas and values. Because of these values, they have stood up for the Republic. People who are committed to values ​​such as social justice, true nationalism, anti-fascism, socialism, federalism and inclusiveness disagree with the monarchy.

Monarchy aims to establish a feudal social order as well as a fascist state system. Semi-fascist, ultra-regionalist, ultra-racist political forces are found to be supporters of monarchist thinking. As the past has shown, similar footsteps are heard in the near future. This group knows how to use pseudo-nationalism and pseudo-nationalism. 

But in the midst of all the contradictions, an ideology of 'monarchy' has been developed, the boundaries of which have been drawn by the opponents of that idea. In a sense, it is a victory for the 'monarchy', which his opponents were not ready to accept as an ideology, today they are laying great stress on the interpretation of its form.

The authentic text of the 'monarchy' ideology is being written by those who have different opinions from it. But the 'monarchy' ideologue does not seek to define any character or ideological narrative of its own. They have the advantage that when they cannot survive in the political space, they move to the cultural space. If they are not able to settle there, they will fall towards the religious area.

It's not the first time narrow-mindedness has been rewarded and liberalism frowned upon in our society. It is constant friction. It is completely wrong to interpret the history of Nepal, full of upheaval and reconstruction of the last three centuries, as a royal history. But that is their secret to success.

The 'royalization' of Nepaliness is an increasing step towards the dissolution of Nepaliness. Undoubtedly, this is the result of democratic failure. In the past, diversity was dispersed into diversity due to autocratic centralizing tendencies. Despite all this, it is a fact that even without any logical basis and fundamental change, they are full of confidence to sing the glory of 'Rajashahi', they are walking with the approval of Dhap on their backs. On the other hand, those who live in concepts such as renaissance, federalism, inclusiveness, and universalism are feeling uneasy. 

The spokesmen of 'monarchy' have been showing their readiness to formulate the vacancy, omission and confusion of the party that has been raging in the republican Nepal. The exponents of 'monarchy' cannot freely choose their leaders, nor can they set goals and programs. Because his reins are not in their hands. Therefore, they are pure abode pathgami. For those who do this kind of politics, camouflage and makhundo are of special importance and this is also their strategy.  The more aggressive the

activity, the less open it is. The politics of 'monarchy' is the politics of aggressive nationalism, because of which it tries to advance towards its real objective behind various covers.

Bhupi Sherchan's country is still busy today. Krishnalal, who wrote about the cultivation of maize, is not only calling on the hills, but also in Madhesh, against the red-headed and black-headed insects. The creation and desire to weave this country with amazing diversity, fierce contradictions and tremendous potential into a single thread and create a bright image of the country has not gone away. 

'Monarchy' has never been the mainstream of this country. Being a ruler is a different thing. This tapka was always on the edge. However, they have always been forced to be called mainstream. Despite this, this country has been rolling out the red carpet for new interpretations, innovations that can keep people strong, awake. Durgananda who was excited to shoot but did not want to kill Satya.

A Santhal youth who met in Jhapa Gourigunj with the same intention was saying - 'I am ashamed, I could not protect your sacrifice! This republic is not at the mercy of anyone. It has been brought by the blood of thousands of young people like Lakshminarayans, by making the arms of thousands of mothers empty.

The modern democratic system does not give divine power to the democratically elected leader, but it certainly gives him the opportunity to become autocratic. Now this living society is feeling uncomfortable to accept their numbers game. Those who think like this have no choice but to stand on the streets. The road remains empty, it becomes a space for many kinds of hypocritical games. There is an illusion that those who descend on the streets, whatever slogans are resounding - that is the origin. In this case, the road should be occupied by the public without any disturbance.

Will the road be an open market for traders who make slaves, earners, farmers and internal colonizers, or will it be a place of sacrifice for conscious, belligerent and interventionist citizens? The future history of Nepal will be drawn from this. It is sure that the road will lead the internal politics and geopolitics. 

Now it is necessary to raise a voice for the country. It's the rest of the summer. The famous Hindi poet Ramdhari Singh Dinkar's line is memorable - 'Samar shesh hai, nahi papa ka bhagi kewal vyadh - those who are neutral, time will write their crimes too.' 

How to explain the crowd of people welcoming Gyanendra Shah at Kathmandu Airport? Was it a terrible incident towards the current politics in republican Nepal or a collective forgetfulness of the past? It is the people who make the country lively, not some dynastic leader? 

In the year 2046, there was a change, it was said - this victory belongs to everyone. However, the Mahapanchas soon rose to executive positions. A second mass movement took place, again the royalists were favored to enter the administration. This is the beauty of democracy, where no one is left behind. This is everyone's arrangement. This system is like a mother, who continues to suck milk with affection even when the child hits her chest with a kick. But a democratic republic is a system that gives everyone an opportunity to get to know their strengths. This is the reason - common people are the ones who sacrifice for democracy.

As long as democracy prevailed in Nepal, its light reached its roots. And when there is an attack on democracy, the struggle for it is glorified as 'when the people are awake'. This is the toleration of the republic, where even former monarchs who wish to hang this system are given government protection and facilities.

The problem is not about the king or the royal devotees. The crisis is in the dictatorship, which has tried to attach the wrong components to the republican constitution. That is why it was heard in Jhapa - 'This has become a republic stuck in the wrong shape.' It is not that the republic is not becoming institutionalized slowly. The royalist or any plaintiff's nappy is getting loose, that is, everyone's truth is being revealed to the people.