Nepal is a diverse country. Diversity means accepting differences, disagreements, different identities. It is not just a sense of tolerance. Diversity can only be understood when there is a quality of mutual respect. Definitely, Nepal is a country of many customs, languages, cultures, social systems.

Nepal is often known as the land of festivals, festivals and pilgrimages. Diversity is the specialty here. Festivals, festivals, fairs are symbols of Nepal's integrity, dominance and social harmony.

Through these socio-cultural opportunities, not only religious faith is honored, it also teaches the importance of human relationships. It has been a symbol of unity and prosperity in our society. On such occasions, the cultural depth of each community and its cultural ideals can also be observed. A part of the religious celebrations is the mass demonstration in the streets.

While writing the above, some interesting aspects also come forward. Especially during the last few years in Madhesh, during such public festival demonstrations, there is a special vigilance in the police administration, concern among the public and a lot of pressure on the organizers. Somewhere the weak decision-making ability of political parties is reflected.

In some places there is an old tradition of such celebrations, in some places many new rituals have started to be seen. The number of such public mass demonstrations is increasing, along with the participation. Indeed, many such festivals have created a rich heritage and tradition of local originality.

After all, why is community tension and fear widespread in a particular place during various religious processions and processions? Why do people become frightened by public displays of sacred sentiments such as prayer, heritage-singing, assembly of devotees, immersion of idols?

Why should special security arrangements be made for religious festivals? Are such celebrations a source of violence? Is the reason why? How long will the rest of the social map of Nepal remain neutral when such tension is seen at one point? What has been changing in the nature and character of these so-called religious collective celebrations? 

Somewhere in religious activities, there is no violence against 'the essence of religion'? When do collective actions called religious become a challenge to the rule of law? Isn't our collective thinking system getting infected? Why are these questions not openly discussed? It has been avoided to talk openly about the problems that have been solved.

Isn't this trend just making the tension grow? Where are we going wrong? Where is society heading? We should analyze and solve the problem in an honest and comprehensive way, considering all the questions without saying one side or the other.

The places where the tension unfolds are not sudden. The background of the place, the socio-political structure, hidden aspirations and interests, the movements of external players are affected. Polarizing and divisive statements from before the festival, ambiguity in stances, pseudo-preparations about procession routes and ending locations, choice of pomp and circumstance lead to deadlock. A

is the choice of a symbol, slogan, gesture or path that deliberately provokes the other side. It is more important why they are doing this than which side started it first. What kind of comments and counter-comments are there during that period on social networks.

It contains hatred, prohibition and contempt for others. Revenge or the psychology of 'showing up' to the other side is reflected. In some places, inciting the religious procession to divert from the designated route, creating uncontrollable noise and agitation by DJs, open display of weapons, gathering in front of other religious-cultural places, shouting, shouting slogans, turning the atmosphere towards aggression rather than devotion, throwing stones at the other party, attacking other people's symbols, spreading wrong information or intruders cause chaos.

These tensions recur when the other party keeps long-term memories of small clashes or flashes of excitement. Due to the negative competition, another aspect of the psychology of preparing such processions is also evident. Similarly, when another community harbors intolerance, tries to create discord or tries to change the old reed, the fire of chaff is ignited.

In some places, due to political interests, religious processions are seen on the cover, but Khichdi is brewing inside. Some cover such opportunities as political stunts to make the community equation in their favor in the upcoming elections, to develop new vote banks, to neutralize the elected people's representatives. Some are also seen as political maneuvers where they want to heat the fire for immediate gain. Some see it as an opportunity for leadership to flourish.

Who-how are the leaders of any party? How to believe that what he expresses is the common opinion of the whole community? How to accept the claim that someone is making a statement on behalf of someone? When the mainstream political forces are silent, isn't the desire to claim representatives in the name of religious communities increased? What is the trend of those who want to mix the chemistry of hysteria in the political world? What is site-specific sensitivity? Why does tension persist in certain areas? Are these tensions only a matter of peace and security or something else?  A certain share of

political polarization is evident. Religious polarization is difficult and risky to distinguish, understand, analyze its boundaries. How is the formation of ideas at the local level? What attracts communities of different identities? Whatever idea is being 'injected', is it helping to create a liberal, tolerant and fair democratic society or not?

What is being expressed as a whole through religious festivals? This is a matter of very sensitive concern. Leaving aside the burning issues associated with the youth wing, where is it being pushed? What kind of personality is being developed by whatever slogans and flags are being carried, whatever is being presented to the public? Where is the difference between bigotry and commitment slow? When the same problem is repeated again and again in a place, one has to think that the society is getting sick.

Police-administration becomes necessary only when civic efforts begin to look weak. Deploying a large number of security personnel for the protection of such festivals simply means that the fabric of community relations is being torn apart. Neither are good men in the minority in any community, nor are all participants in processions priests of conflict. This is obvious.

The constitution has given exemptions to religious freedom. The result of good people being silent is that only noise is heard. Some spare parts. Only a small group, recruited through rumors, seems ready for violence. 

No sane person wants to set fire to their neighborhood's house, Dawanal doesn't spare anyone's house. Many things are coming up after going into the structure of many. But why do local tensions continue to intensify in particular provinces and what is the specific reason for this? What forces want to translate the tension into political energy? From a democratic point of view, who is responsible for such worrying, terrible and chaotic conditions? What a paradox it is that Nepali weak democracy is held responsible for this. 

When an issue is pushed out of public discourse, it starts to explode. Elsewhere, the communal elements become widespread due to their strength, but in Nepal, it seems that the radical side is growing due to the vacancy, weakness or 'ignore' of the democratic space. After all, there is a limit to the stress that any society can digest. That 'boiling pot' of tension cannot always remain. This is the transitional period of implementation of the Constitution. The economics are burning questions, and cannot withstand further radicalization.