Nepali politics has been in a cycle of regime change since 2007. After the revolution of 2007, it was said that peace would come, but 2017 came. After that, regime change was once again established as a natural issue. Again, a large section was said that peace would come after the change of 2046.

But the new system also failed to deliver. There were wars and movements again. After the king left and the new constitution came into being, there was hope of peace, but it did not happen. Due to circumstances and compulsion, the Gen-G rebellion took place. Now, there is a debate about a directly elected president again on the surface. Let's say, with such a president, everything will be fine. There is also a debate about full proportional representation. The leaders corrupted the current proportional representation system. They made it a means of protecting factions, making relatives MPs, and selling MP positions to businessmen. Instead of making the National Assembly a place for experts, it turned it into a courtyard for cronies and election losers.

The leaders have also disturbed good things. I still remember what Ganeshman said to his loved ones in Chaksibari before the 2046 BS movement. Ganeshman had said – ‘Democracy is coming. The Congress is in crisis. After democracy comes, milk will not flow in the Bagmati. Ten maunds of rice will not grow in a field that is four maunds. And, Kisunji's marriage will not happen. What will democracy do?' I remembered this statement of Ganeshman a lot after the Gen-G movement. I myself was also confused.

After the king left, after the constitution came in the form of federalism, something might happen. But discontent and rebellion were born. Therefore, now the question of party, leadership and ideology should be considered bigger than the issue of changing the system. The system is a tool. The use of the tool depends on the discretion of the leadership. It is up to the party to fill the tool with which ideas. No matter how much the system is changed, if the ideas, strategies and culture are weak, it will not have a big positive impact. People are now with the leadership that is scared.

People's differences with the culture of the leader

The current leadership style is not understood by the citizens. In the Central Committee meeting after the Gen-G movement, Oli was given a separate and big chair. Why did he have to be given one? Does Oli become great by sitting on a big chair? Aren't all comrades equal in the Central Committee meeting? Why did Oli have to be so special?

If the army had not saved him within five minutes while he was the Prime Minister, his life would have been in danger. Even after saving his life like that, a big chair again? People are angry with those big and special chairs. However, such an Oli trend is present in all parties. There is no citizenship among leaders. Now, if leaders do not make themselves citizens and seek security through special chairs, then only complacency will result. This is also a kind of inferiority complex. A big chair does not establish one in society. 

Why did leaders have to wear masks while walking. What does a mask do? Because, the security arrangements for leaders have been seen during the Gen-G movement. The leaders presented themselves in a special way through masks, garlands and food. When the people themselves are angry, such specialness has no meaning. Rather, the mask prevents the leader from interacting with the people. It does not allow the leader and the people to communicate.

When leaders are separated from the mask, they cannot understand the psychology of the people. As a result, we had to face Bhadra 23 and 24 at the same time. In political science, it is said that a leader should smell the happiness and sorrow of the people. On that basis, policies, programs and plans are made. But the distance between the leader and the people has become so long that the people have stopped smelling it.

A leader should have faith in the citizens. But the citizens have no faith at all. A leader who has lost faith in the citizens is only a technician. Now, the technicalization of leaders has increased. Leaders who are confident that they have captured the authority, police, and courts understand that even if they capture everything, if they are left out of the citizens, Bhadra 23 and 24 may come on different dates. This is not a reference to the history read in the book, it is an incident from two months ago.

The sycophants of every party have made the leader a god. Now the leaders should step away from the sycophants a little. But the leaders like the sycophants. Due to which the leaders are not in touch with different views. This is the new culture sought by the Gen-G rebellion. A new culture is sought in the party, the leader and the state system. Now, without cultural transformation, neither the old parties nor the new ones have a future. New parties are also in search of heroes rather than a new culture.

The transformation of the state will not happen in a magical and mysterious way. It will happen through gradual reforms, transformation in culture and newness in thinking. Nepali citizens have also come to the illusion that a hero will come from the sky and that there will be order when they wake up the next morning. The current wave of populism is trying to establish such an illusion as the truth.

The relationship between leaders, parties and families

There is a difficulty in Nepal for parties that came from the movement. Let's not take our children with us in the movement and educate them, it is said - educate our children and lead others in the movement. Baburam Bhattarai made this accusation throughout the People's War. After participating in the movement, our children also organize and create a level of political space, it is said that they are the children of so and so. If that is the case, what should we do? This is where the leader has to sacrifice, taking our children with us throughout the movement, when we get close to state power, we leave our children to fend for themselves. Leaders do not care much about their children.

Sher Bahadur's son and Prachanda's daughter could also eat as other Nepalis have eaten. Children should be given freedom. But Nepali politics has been plunged into scandals because of excessive love for children. The sacrifices of leaders in the past have been overshadowed by the scandal of children. If the children of the world have worked and ate on their own, what metal are the children of leaders made of, who need immense wealth? Our leaders have not been able to treat their children who are in the party like children at home and like workers in the party.

A leader is also a father, a companion, a son-in-law, and someone's friend. Leaders have become leaders by breaking all those relationships. Children do not see their fathers at home, they see their leaders. At least they would have been their children's fathers. Sometimes they would have cooked and washed the dishes. Sometimes they would have gone to buy vegetables. They would have known how expensive vegetables are. Sometimes they would have planted vegetables in the vegetable garden, they would have done the farming.

He would have done the same things as other citizens without calling the media or playing tricks. Sometimes he would have gone to take his grandchildren to school like other citizens. He would have taught his children in community schools. He would have gone to community schools and discussed their problems. But, not as a leader, but as a parent. Sometimes he would have chatted with the vegetable vendor, or chatted with an ordinary citizen in a tea shop and had tea. First, he would have been a citizen and a leader. But, leaders are not like citizens, they are only leaders. It is as if they have thrown away their citizenship, leaders.

We all know that US President Obama did not meet anyone after 8 pm and would be in the kitchen. America was running, his party was also running. However, our leaders could not escape the chaos of factions, conspiracies, and commissions from morning to evening. In fact, leaders do not meet people at home. They make the party office a place to meet. By doing so, the meetings also become transparent. 

Leaders have also given up the fascination of big houses and settled down at a young age. They have bought houses looking after their families, and unnecessary big houses have also created discontent among the workers. After all, after the Gen-G rebellion, everyone except Oli has settled down at a young age. They sometimes study at home without meeting. When leaders study, there is no harm in the country. Studying is not just about knowing proverbs, it is also about having a deep theoretical horizon. It had to be analyzed by linking it to Nepali society. On that basis, a program had to be made.

The main direction of current politics is inclusiveness. If you go to any party office, there are no employees of Madhesi origin. How can a Madhesh person feel that it is his party when he comes to a party office. If a person from the Jyapu community in Kathmandu goes to any party office, he does not see people from his community. Everyone's party offices are under the control of a single person.

In the canteen of the party office, lunch popular among the Madhesh, Janajati, Tharu, and Newar communities is served from time to time. At least in the party offices, it would be announced that we only eat and feed Nepali products. Imports would be discouraged to some extent. The self-confidence of farmers would increase. The health of party workers would also be better if they ate Nepali and organic food. On the other hand, our party is not paying attention. They are pressed by big issues. Small and improveable work is not a priority.

Whatever cannot be done, communists love it even more. Whatever can be done, communists find it right-wing and revisionist. When the fight against imperialism is going on, they do not take time to talk about organic food.

The party office itself can be made according to Nepali diversity and culture. Why did the house have to be made of the same type of cement, rods, and sticks? Karnali, Madhesh, and Bhaktapure model houses are built within the premises of the party office. Where diversity is seen accepted and different cultures are seen, then the community takes ownership through its culture. The essence of federalism is also the acceptance of diversity.

In fact, the parties themselves have not been federalized in Nepal. The main leader of the party decides who will be the chairman of a rural municipality, there is no system of decision-making by the lower committee. Whereas, it would have been easier for the leaders at the higher level if the lower committee had made a decision and finalized it. There was no need to take offense. There is debate in the party, discussion, and it happens at the bottom. In a federal system, the party is facing difficulties when it does not embrace the federal culture.

The system is federal, culture and behavior are central. This is a big contradiction. The practice of the center deciding to give tickets to municipalities, to overthrow and form the provincial government has led to instability and centralization within federalism. The federal MPs also remained in the hands of the main leaders of the party. The parliament also failed to play its role.

The airy talk of restoring the parliament

A dissolved parliament that could not give the impression to the common citizen that my issue was being debated. A farmer never thought that my problems were being discussed in parliament. A worker never realized that discussions were being held in parliament to bring my welfare. An unemployed person never thought that the parliament was debating to end unemployment.

The common citizen is harassed by the employees, but it never occurred to the parliament that there was work or debate on making the employees people-oriented. Who wants a restored parliament? A parliament that could not bring the education bill, could not bring the civil service bill, that is, did not work on the law, did nothing other than toppling and forming the government.