In the election theater of Nepal, farce is more prevalent than serious discussion. At this time, personal attacks, character assassination and defamation of political opponents have become commonplace. Citizens rarely get to hear deep and meaningful debates about public policy-making ideas or the complex mechanisms of governance.

Instead, public meetings, ephemeral videos of Tiktok and television interviews are full of insulting sarcasm, sarcastic speech . To some, this may seem like a natural upheaval of democratic competition, but this constant style of swearing tells us that the state of our public discourse is alarming, distorted and ugly. In the perspective that the by-elections have been announced in Rupandehi in the coming Kattik, this article will try to think about why both new and old aspirants prefer to expose each other in the overall election environment .

The spectacle of anger

Elections in a democratic system are a competition of visions that strengthen democracy and a noble battle of political thinking, where political parties present their roadmaps for the progress of the entire society and convince the people through rational debate. However, in many other countries including Nepal, India and America, political programs are transformed into vulgar art during elections. These are the places where only the ugly spectacle of anger is visible . The rhetoric of election contestants is not meant to attract the public, it is only to erode each other's personality through public agitation. And, this is the most powerful work of the process - the deliberate creation of a corrupt, dangerous, hollow, 'other' (other) i.e. infamous opponent .

Over the past few decades, the use of insults and profanity has evolved from spontaneous expressions to well-planned strategies. From the Nepali perspective, the new political parties are trying to differentiate themselves from the established parties. The latest in this trend is the National Independent Party. Rather than through detailed policy blueprints or serious deliberations, he gained public sympathy by constantly attacking the established political system or the character of leaders or certain institutions of the state, and he got excited by the unnatural arithmetic of the election . For the most part, their dialogue with the public still remains limited to labeling the old party as corrupt, incompetent and bankrupt. This is not only their commentary, the old ones are also the same, like, who can insult anyone who criticizes him with such intense hatred as KP Oli, using many similes! Whether new or old, the words, voice and music of the election pageant are the same all over the world . This is the group's way of simplifying the complex story of society into good and bad and making the opponent a 'scapegoat' by saying that they are the epitome of all social evils and capturing the anger boiling inside the frustrated and desperate voters!

Only a few years ago, CK Raut's Janmat Party also entered the mainstream electoral politics in the wake of popular discontent in Madhesh. What began as a serious critique of Madhesh's historical marginalization and exclusion turned into a confrontation with often imaginary enemies in the electoral arena . Moreover, Raut also tried to spread the incitement to divide the country . There was no permanent way to easily address the real grievances and problems of the people, so such social and political grievances were limited to the narrative of oppressors and the oppressed. 

Balen Shah also earned widespread praise by suddenly emerging as a leader in Kathmandu in a very dignified manner. He who refused to wear the garland of victory without solving the problem of garbage in Kathmandu, when will he wear that 'garland of victory'? After leaving many jobs, he is now engrossed in a fight with his administrative officer. Instead of challenging his critics with rational rebuttals, they dismissed them as status quo and reveled in the silent mystery . Such populists have a clear comment, some say 'with us or against us'.

Populists need enemies

The trend of populism has become the signature of popular politics. This trend tends to favor the convenient task of creating ambivalence rather than the difficult task of consensus-building, and makes the commentary 'innocent public' vs 'corrupt elite' or 'victim' vs 'villain'. It is often referred to as 'We Versus Them'. In this distorted political thinking, insulting the opponent is not only acceptable, it is almost mandatory. The imagined 'picture' is the main responsible of that story - which gives direction to the campaign, unites the workers and plays the role that a positive ideology should do. 

This style of populism is not limited to Nepal, it is widespread in South Asia and elsewhere. In India, for example, Narendra Modi's rhetoric has often relied on the art of mocking his opponent, from deriding the Congress party as elitist to using subtle and indirect remarks against religious minorities . On the other hand, the Congress party continues to make fun of Modi's family situation and negative comments from the floor. Such a struggle strengthens its base by showing who is the common enemy among the people .

Deep disillusionment with the old parties in Nepal – the Congress, UML and Maoists – created fertile ground for similar populist voices in the post-conflict democratic transition. A deep sense of betrayal and inconsistency had to be channeled into creating an alternative, coherent policy framework. But that energy, emotionally stirring and morally decadent story-building turned into a . In such an environment, insulting the opponent is not just a linguistic attack but a kind of political ritual . The one who points the thief finger at the enemy and signals to the supporters, 'Look! We are not them, we are real public servants .''This style may be effective in raising public opinion in the short term, but its effect is long-term and contagious .

From discussion to condemnation: the erosion of the public sphere

Democracy is the apple of the eye, it is the bed of shared ideas . Its core is a commitment to open debate - where the priorities of various members of society are discussed and agreed upon, what are the values and beliefs, and what institutions should be built for the public good. But when this space is filled with anger, mockery and abuse, then the basic function of democracy is undermined and the participants of reasoned dialogue are ultimately reduced to useless spectators of endless personal rants!

This downfall of democracy has become catastrophic in the flood of social media, where the desire to go viral continues to reward extremism and superficiality. Nepal's digital public sphere is full of such farces, where insulting speeches spread more than parliamentary debates or budget complications. Jürgen Habermas has warned for a long time, if "strategic action" prevails instead of "communicative action" in the path of democracy, there will be a deep erosion of democracy. Because 'strategic action' is goal-oriented, the purpose of which is to influence or control others in an opaque way to achieve desired results . In contrast, 'communicative action' is aimed at achieving mutual understanding and agreement and involves seeking agreement through reasoned debate and dialogue. Therefore, low-level swearing in politics is not merely a joke or a verbal embellishment, but a serious symptom of the decay of democracy, a philosophical deviation from the path of rational or critical discussion .

Defacement and scapegoating

To understand the trend of populism discussed here, it is necessary to consider the emotional chemistry of abuse. In a society like Nepal, which is plagued by deep inequality, pervasive mistrust and a mirage justice system, a symbolic victory has a profound effect of psychological comfort . When a leader speaks publicly in a way that seems to 'put someone in their place', it gives the public a momentary sense of strength and relief at a time when real, systemic change seems impossible. It is precisely at this point that political slurs become a (false) outlet for frustration and a representative of common sentiments.

René Girard's theory of the scapegoat has sociological insights. In societies in deep crisis, people grappling with internal tensions and anxieties often instinctively seek to blame external enemies. Political leaders, instead of confronting and solving underlying structural crises, offer convenient 'scapegoats', including rival parties, specific ethnic groups or regional populations . This strategic divergence helps maintain group cohesion through shared resentment and collective hostility towards a designated 'other'. While this strategy provides temporary unity, it inevitably leads to a perpetual cycle of conflict, where today's acclaimed hero is sure to become tomorrow's infamous villain and he is locked in an eternal rivalry .

The reimagining of democratic speech

Nepal's democracy is in its infancy, its institutions are fragile and its political culture is still in the process of being built. We have yet to mature politically, whether as leaders or people. The emergence of new political forces in recent years has dealt a major blow to the old—a necessary and welcome change. But along with this, some dangerous tendencies have also been born. If every election is won through the dangerous weapons of insults and insults, not through clear vision and reasoned debate, democracy is in danger of being reduced to a bitter war of words.