China, South East Asia, India have progressed due to political changes and organized planning. Poverty has been eradicated in China as well. There seems to be a leap in education. This confirms that something can be done if the society decides.

While fighting for democracy, socialism, nationalism, egalitarian society, people's sovereignty, many people of the previous generation had to go into exile. Had to stay in jail for years. Despite the continuous desire for development and prosperity, it has not been fulfilled as expected. Now the system that we imagined has been questioned.

For 70 years, we have searched for the Nepali state, society and system. We wanted democratic system and development. Theoretically, we sought equality and freedom. It is said that there is widespread dissatisfaction with the current system and leadership, the freedom to express that is probably given by the system that we have fought till today.

Now all the democratic elements are visible in Nepali society. But we are lagging behind in terms of combining and moving it forward. It might be because of the managerial problems we have. Couldn't we specify the arrangement we brought in the right direction!

Society does not move forward by taking a sudden path. Historicity plays a role.

During the revolution of 2007, we sought an elected and accountable government. After King Tribhuvan returned from Delhi, he announced that there would be a Constituent Assembly in Nepal. The Congress also claimed the king's legitimate heroism. But the king does not have to stay forever. At that time, the sovereignty of the people was sought in the legitimate heroism of the king. The popular movement of 2062/63 demonstrated that. Now Nepali people are the owner of Nepali state. There is no one above and greater than the people. The people are the creators of the destiny of the Nepalese state. It is to be ruled by people who come from a system that we have chosen and chosen. People govern themselves by building various institutions.

Constituent Assembly came after the people's movement of 2062/63. It gave us the idea of an inclusive society. It is a belief that society should always be inclusive in democracy. But the language of inclusiveness came soon after the people understood it.

At some point I felt that the time for federalism in Nepal has passed. While writing the history of Nepal, Maheshchandra Regmi called it 'Gorkhali Empire'. We could have gone to federalism from that empire. But we turned into a unitary state. Going from a unitary state to a federal state required a formal discussion and decision. From a political-historical point of view, federalism may have been necessary, but to implement it and arrange the components, we discussed the construction of the constitution. That is why Nepal's federalism is thought, remembered, known, understood. No one has been misled. One society cannot be misled for eight or eight years.

is another fundamental character of Nepali state and society. A political theory that accepts that is pluralism. Some may be few or many in number, may be politically weak or strong. All of them can be balanced only by a pluralistic democratic system. In order for society to be tolerant, diversity must be accepted.

Similarly, we went from a hereditary monarchy to a republic. Until then, although there was a discussion about the king strategically, the theoretical question was - in whom is the state power vested? The then King Gyanendra gave the message that the political power was inherent in him in his speech when he took over the power. How was the political power embedded in them? Political power is conferred by the constitution. No one is born with such a right. Nepali people have such rights. It is used through organizations created by the people.

Nepal has always had a theoretical debate about the sovereignty of the king and the sovereignty of the people. Political parties do not seem to discuss it well even in the republican movement. In the context of Nepal's political transformation, the People's Movement of 2062/63 clearly established the sovereignty of the people. That was the end of the monarchy. This is a big change. This issue goes hand in hand with democracy. Because, it establishes the principle of equality. No one will be great in this country because of birth, caste, religion or gender. Having said that, our society is a male dominated society. There is still inequality here. There is casteism in social behavior. That is why, politically, we made a firm decision in the constitution - we will build an egalitarian society. The end of the monarchy was the first condition for that.

The essential condition of equality in Nepal is the creation of an inclusive and pluralistic society and the establishment of a republic for that. Children of the people Dr. Ramvaran Yadav, Vidya Bhandari and Ramchandra Paudel also reached the highest post of the nation. Whether they can maintain the dignity of their position or not, it is their matter. But we were able to place the children of the people in the highest position. This is a big change.

The purpose of doing all this was to find our clear destination.

We call the year 2007 the revolution and the rest the movement. Because, the year 2007 fundamentally changed social relations. Seven decades ago, ethnicities, castes, national language, unity of the country and rule by the people were very big issues. Now we don't feel like anything.

2062/63 is also a continuation of 2007.

There is now a generation where the present is important, history is nothing. Because his concern is with the future, he does not want to look at history. There is no sense in whose legacy we came here. But it is not appropriate for a person who imagines a beautiful future to forget the journey of the past.

Some people call the Maoist struggle a people's war, some call it violence, some call it conflict. I do not agree with that kind of politics at that time. But that is also a period of my history. Prachanda is also my prime minister, but I do not agree with him. KP Oli is also my prime minister, I don't agree with him either. Sushil Koirala is my prime minister, but there is no agreement on his attempt to become the prime minister again after the promulgation of the constitution. But this is all my history. Earthquakes are also my history. Untouchability in Nepal, killings due to being a Dalit are all a reflection of my society. I can't run away from this. I cannot 'pick and choose' history or the present. Even if you can individually, you should take responsibility collectively. By not taking this sense of responsibility, we are getting confused in our vision of the future. It is my history by choice, it cannot be said that it is not. We have also seen people kill their own people by going to a party together in the house, family, friends. We have seen that the king is a man who stole the rights. We have seen the internet shut down. We have seen the destruction of our brothers. We have seen them go to jail.

We have become 'selective'. Therefore, we are talking about the issue of national unity and Nepali unity. We are talking about the flag, Mount Everest, national animal. But we tend to forget the relationship between citizens and the socio-historical environment when such relationship is formed. For me, the relationship, brotherhood, trust and distrust of every Nepali people is the building of my character, not by the colors of the flag. They are images. A comprehensive discussion on what is the depth of Nepali society is mandatory.

We should also look at the essence of political change. We have equality, representative system, acceptance of each other. Federalism has also come in the environment of accepting each other. All these are the basic elements of our transformation.

We built the arrangement. We are working now. Even if we can't work now, can we maintain the determination that we can later? This question is important. We fought, we fought. We made the constitution. However, it seems that everyone's acceptance towards this is still weak. Everyone should feel that if this country sinks, we all sink.

Political parties are also responsible for things not being what we expected. They are in the mindset that they must win the election at any cost.

Despite the formation of parties in Nepal around 2007, they fought for democracy for a long time. There is no weakness in the parties when it comes to fighting. If someone's rights are taken away tomorrow, the parties will be at the forefront. Fighting for democracy and building democracy are different things. Because, what is the character of the society, it should be clear for whom to do politics.

is an episode. The 2015 election was taking place. BP Koirala's only sister Vijayalakshmi Koirala got married to Akram Zaki, a Pakistani citizen (he was in the Pakistan Foreign Service). There is a love affair between them. When the elections were about to come, it was discussed that BP's sister was going to marry a Muslim. Vijayalakshmi asked BP - "Let's postpone the marriage for a little while" but BP said "If I lose the election because of the choice of someone from my family, I will lose". This is the price. One of the reasons why democracy has survived so far is that once upon a time we had a leadership that spoke on the basis of values.

Similarly, it was heard some time ago that Sher Bahadur Deuba stopped the then Prime Minister from discussing in a meeting that he should be arrested when Balen Shah, the mayor of Kathmandu, wrote that he would set fire to the Lion Palace. That is Deuba's 'commitment'. Leadership sometimes comes with such discretion.

Therefore, there is a silver lining in the black cloud in favor of freedom and justice.

The relationship between the parties is also changing. There seems to be a broad political consensus mainly regarding the system. So basically there is no crisis in the system. However, the possibility of a reversal cannot be ruled out. It is in its place.

Now you are saying that only two parties will amend the constitution. I do not believe that people with such weak political will that they cannot complete the work of general infrastructure on time will destroy the constitution and make another one. Constitution develops through practice and daily politics. It is not enough to sit down and say that we will tear apart the constitution and sew it back together.

Our political parties have also fought against the state. But they also think that the state is the source of all power. At the center of our thinking is the state. So the tension between individual freedom and the ability of the state to act is at issue. A person is always free. It is the state that restrains him. It seems that the state is more aware of the responsibility it has taken on itself. For example, even though women are said to be equal, the issue of giving citizenship in the name of women is questioned by linking it with national security. Individual freedom is intertwined with national security. In this way, even the political parties who fought for independence will carry the same thinking as the state after coming to power. It is not necessary to speak in favor of the state, but in favor of Nepal. The kingdom may or may not be mine. The state always speaks of a controlled environment, the individual of freedom.

Now information technology has evolved. Through this, the freedom of the individual is being attacked. If someone says something on social media, it will spread quickly. It cannot be controlled. That is why people are afraid of information technology. We are not an information technology manufacturing society. We are just consumers. We do not understand why and how it came.

I see confusion about what is my society, what is my depth, what is the social dignity that I have built, what is the dignity that I have to destroy.

Indian Congress leader Rahul Gandhi said while walking from Kanyakumari to Kashmir - I am looking for the values of the Indian freedom movement. The kind of caste, religious division that we are talking about now, the value of the Indian freedom movement  They were not subject to

recognition. Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru didn't think of Hindus and Muslims, to discriminate against minorities.

How deep is the philosophical ground of Nepali society? What is the moral ground and value of our political movement? What are the values given by the revolution of 2007 and the movement of 2046 and 2062/63? We only looked at those movements in isolation. I call the movement of 2046 liberal democratic change. It ensured personal freedom, economic freedom, political freedom and human rights. 2062/63 meant the establishment of an inclusive state. There were agendas like federalism and secularism. It spoke of collectivism. Both of these should be connected. And only then the series is complete.

Nowadays, people going out are very much talked about. But how many people went out in proportion to the Nepali population during the First and Second World War? People have been moving out of Gaddachouki or Jhulaghat for years. He has reached from Bombay to Poona. But by showing a photo of an international airport in the country, we are saying that everyone is a foreigner. People were leaving this country every time. The Nepalese race itself is dynamic. In the course of civilization, it moved from the Hind Kush mountains to Assam, Meghalaya and Burma. All our races and clans have moved from west to east.

Similarly, it is said that people who have the potential to do something in their own country try to go abroad. What does a person who has studied till class 12 do? What is his 'education level'? Has many brothers and sisters in Malaysia, Qatar and Dubai. What are you doing there? We should also take care of this aspect.

We have come out of the culture of being lazy. We are proud to go out. But yesterday's Lahure used to go back to the village, nowadays they don't go back. Instead it gets stuck in Kathmandu, Pokhara or Itahari. The pressure of students in Birtamod, Hetauda, Chitwan, Butbal, Dhangadhi campuses does not confirm that all have gone out. It is natural for people to decrease in villages. A husband who has gone abroad asks his wife to go to the headquarters or the side of the highway to educate the children. There has been an awareness that teaching should be done.

When we were kids, it was fun to go home on Dasain. We used to dig the road. When the state started joining in the name of development, we went to say that the work of digging roads belongs to the ward. Elections had to be won in order to use the resources of the state. After becoming a mayor, deputy mayor or ward president, even if you serve the people with your mouth, the purpose is to exploit the resources of the state. I remember, after 2046, many people had to be managed in Baluwatar. People came with many jobs including employment. Opportunities were just opening up in the private sector at that time. But many wanted a position in a government office, not there for employment. Because, there was access to the resources of the state. If nothing else, even if it was a government bicycle, you could ride it.

A society that is more dependent on the state cannot progress. Hence the state was conceived not as a 'facilitator' or balance of power but as a center of power. That is why it was considered that the election must be won at any cost and resources must be exploited. And how does the country progress?

Although there are problems with the current system and parties, it does not establish the legitimacy of a monarchy. Because, based on the principle of equality, that institution is not proper. Voters should be asked – do you want to see your representative as hereditary or not? If a candidate says that I will sit in the same position for the rest of my life, will I vote for it or not? We have not 'reversed' the 'public conversation'.

Looking for other people's holes in small things and not looking for anything of your Lord? No one has asked this question to the current generation. Among the students of the same class, because of the caste, because of the clan, one person gets to be the king. Or will you become a king who should not throw someone? Do you have that right? What does he say when asked? People are not able to ask such questions in political parties, public education, debates. Those who say it was right when the king was there yesterday do not talk about accountability. Therefore, the debate that the old system is right is being expanded by a small group.

There is now a slight voice in favor of the monarchy. My anger, say or expectation, is towards political parties. After the departure of the king, they came to rule as kings themselves. It is their responsibility to explain why they threw away the monarchy. Now the voice is being raised in favor of the monarchy, it must be said that the parties should also answer it. They should answer why we have reached the situation of throwing away the monarchy through political dialogue and various programs. As analysts, it is not enough for us to speak. Yes, we should also speak, but only when we have to go on the road. In the current situation, the political parties should speak. They should answer.

What to do now?

Parliament should consider how much work our government institutions have done and how much they have not done in ten years. There every year the report of those organizations goes to the Parliament. Let there be a debate in the parliament about where reforms and changes should be made. Parliamentary Committees should not tell themselves that we have gone wrong here. Because Parliament is a self-improving institution. But he himself is deprived of his role. Therefore, if the current political leadership brings a white paper with an account of the work done for ten years, then the voice of the road that brings the king will disappear. The process of improvement begins.