An old Irish playwright and political thinker, George Bernard Shaw, once said, "Voters in elections do not choose saviors, they choose representatives of the people." However, the interests of Nepali voters, who are always looking for a 'hero', are perhaps a little different.

Even today, it is difficult to tell who is a real representative of the people and who is a character disguised as a 'savior'. Three years ago, in the 2079 elections, voters were in a different state of despair. Their challenge was, to choose the lesser of the evils? This time, the challenge has been added, to choose a real representative of the people or to find a messiah? 

The sudden election of 2082 is just around the corner. Unless there is any sudden misfortune in the meantime, the election is in ten days. As the election fever increases with the temperature, various candidates from various parties have entered the election fray with sweet dreams, dressed as messiahs and saviors. All have made romantic promises to bring development and prosperity to the country and change the country. 

Some of the commitments made public by the main competing parties through the election manifestos are capable of being fulfilled if they have the political will, while many of the promises are guided by the intention of luring voters. Whatever the resolution, promise, promise or commitment, the manifestos of the parties are in essence very ambitious and inspired by popular sentiment. 

What are the manifestos of the main competing parties? Let's take a brief look at them. 

The Nepali Congress, a party with a historical political background that changed its leadership from a special general convention to the electoral front, has put forward a roadmap for the country's development through a two-hundred-page manifesto. The new leadership of the Congress is appealing to the voters, 'We have changed, now vote for the Congress to change the country.' 

It has placed corruption control, institutional reform and digital good governance at the center of the manifesto. Discouraging party/leadership system, it has stated in the manifesto that it will end party appointments and emphasize strengthening constitutional institutions. It has given priority to the issues of employment, education, health and a production-oriented economy, term limits for executive positions, reduction in the number of ministries and reform of the electoral system. It has given special emphasis on free health. Chairman Gagan Thapa has assured, ‘After the Congress government is formed, we will ensure that citizens do not have to pay a single rupee from their pockets when going to the hospital.’ 

The CPN-UML has become a little more defensive compared to the previous elections. The direct dialogue with the voters of the UML, which considers its organized base to be strong, has been relatively weak. However, in this election too, it has made national independence, political stability, development and prosperity the main issues, as before. 

Chairman KP Sharma Oli did not give up the issue of ‘zero tolerance’ against corruption while he was in power, but the country never breathed good governance. Even now, he has included zero tolerance against corruption, high economic growth rate, infrastructure development and poverty eradication in the commitment letter. He has reiterated the slogan of ‘Prosperous Nepal and Happy Nepalis’ by putting forward commitments such as free internet data for youth, interest-free loans for students, expansion of social security, digital infrastructure, technology-friendly surveillance, modern agriculture, etc. 

The coordinator of the Nepali Communist Party (NCP), which is made up of various communist components, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda), is not as defensive as Oli, but he does not appear to be as 'assertive' either. He is calling his party new and is seeking votes by presenting himself as a carrier of change in the federal republic. Prachanda, who is trying to find a balance between power experience and the carrier of change, is under double pressure to protect old voters and convince new ones. To that end, he has put forward a proposal for amendments to the form of government, electoral system and federal structure in his commitment letter and has made many ambitious announcements, including high economic growth, reducing poverty by ten percent, and increasing employment.

The Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSWP), which emerged as the fourth largest political force in the 2079 elections, has increased both its attractiveness and confidence. He claims that 'the old parties have been tested and failed.' This time, it is our turn to be tested.’ The Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) has presented a hundred-point pledge of political, administrative, and economic reforms to the voters, urging them to give a majority to form a stable government as an alternative force. It has prioritized issues such as a directly elected executive, a fully proportional parliament, non-partisan local governments, and an investigation into the assets of those who have held public positions since 2046. 

The Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) seems to be in a dilemma after not being able to fully participate in the elections. Should it carry the issue of former King Gyanendra, who needs to build a national consensus before the elections, or should it seek its presence in parliament again through the elections? This party is in a dilemma. 

The RPP faced a crisis of faith after former King Gyanendra gave a congratulatory message on the eve of Democracy Day on Falgun 20 and urged them to go to the elections only after forming a new national consensus. It immediately held a street demonstration with the aim of pressuring them to find a political consensus before the elections. However, the country has already entered the election and the RPP has also made its manifesto public. In the manifesto, it has again put forward the guardian role of the monarchy, the abolition of the Hindu nation and the provinces as the main issues. Similarly, the formation of a citizen commission for property investigation, high economic growth rate, free education/health, non-partisan local levels, infrastructure development and other issues have been included in the manifesto. 

Similarly, the Madhesh-centric parties have emphasized a proportional parliament, a directly elected executive, and federal restructuring with identity. The Shram Sanskriti Party, which has emerged as a new alternative party in the election front, has talked about the mandatory promotion of labor culture, while Ujjain Nepal has emphasized structural reforms and good governance. 

In essence, the promises announced by the parties seem ambitious, including high economic growth rate, providing employment to millions, while free health/education, loan facilities, etc. are influenced by the purpose of luring voters. Even if the government or electoral system is blamed, there is no serious self-criticism in the manifestos on the qualifications and working style of the leadership. 

Will voters make the manifesto the main basis of voting? There is more interest in the question of who will have a bigger lead in the election than in the manifestos. From social media to tea shops, many predictions of victory and defeat are being made. Media 'discourses' have also been made with the intention of influencing the psychology of voters. In other words, the hour of testing the conscience of the voters is approaching. 

US President Abraham Lincoln used to say, 'The ballot is mightier than a bullet.' Now let's guess, how much power will the voters who vote on that ballot have? The opportunity has come to exercise that power once again before the Nepali voters by exercising their sovereign rights. 

The conscience of the Nepali voters in this election will be tested mainly by what their role will be in two questions. 

First, new or old? This question has been raised with great urgency at this time. Based on social media and media reports, it has been said that many voters are in favor of new and alternative parties. Parties such as the National Independence Party, the Labor Culture Party, the Ujjaya Nepal Party and many candidates have called themselves new and alternative parties. Among these, claims of a wave of people in favor of the Rashtriya Swatantra Party are heard here and there. The role of voters will be here. Are all the new ones capable and qualified? Are all the old ones incompetent and incompetent? Is the criterion of qualification only new faces? Of course, the civil society is dissatisfied with the old parties and some leaders who have been in power for a long time. However, can anger and dissatisfaction alone be the basis for new choices? Will the new ones reach the same level as the old ones more quickly? Aren't they cultivating opportunism in the land of despair? Voters should objectively formulate these questions before voting and open their conscience. 

Second, status quo or change? This is a complementary question to the discourse of new and old. However, here another question arises, who is the changemaker and who is the status quoist? The communists, who were once known as a changemaker after being in power for a long time, have become weaker in terms of internal democracy, have become increasingly disconnected from the new generation, and have failed on the issue of good governance. There are initial speculations that the communist parties, which have reached a defensive state, may become even weaker in this election. But are the committed voters of the communist party really expressing their rejection of this political idea in this election? Or are they expressing anger over the failed practice of the communist party leadership? The answer to these questions will now be determined by the conscience of the voters. 

And is the Congress also a status quoist? The level of transformation that the Congress achieved in the party by rebelling against the entrenched leadership? Isn't the Congress a changemaker? This is another important question that has arisen before the general voters. On the one hand, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has emerged on the ground of widespread dissatisfaction and anger in society. Which calls itself a changemaker. On the other hand, there is the Congress, which is creating a new political culture and discourse by rebelling within the party. Who among these two parties that claim to be in favor of change can set the future political guidelines? Or should they? This question has also been raised among voters. 

More symbolically, there have been debates comparing whether Congress President Gagan Thapa or senior leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) Balen Shah is the symbol of change. Both these parties have put forward Thapa and Shah as their candidates for Prime Minister. In fact, Shah is facing off against Chairman Oli, who was put forward by the UML. Jhapa Constituency No. 5 is also the main 'epicenter' of this election. This constituency has attracted national attention after outgoing Mayor Shah announced that he will contest the election against Oli, who has been Prime Minister four times. 

Will Balen defeat Oli in the election? Or will Oli be able to secure his stronghold? It is not that the general public is not interested in this question. However, this is the central question of the election, who will address the aspirations for change? And, Gagan and Balen are the two faces of hope to address the aspirations of change in the election field. 

On the one hand, Gagan, who has grown up by reforming the Congress and resolving to build the country, and on the other hand, Balen, who has grown up by challenging the big parties. These two characters have become symbols of change in Nepali politics at this time. Balen is an expression of frustration and anger against the old political parties and the leadership system that grew up in them, while Gagan is a character who has been able to inspire hope and aspirations for reform within the party system. The choice between Gagan, who inspires hope for institutional reform in politics on the one hand, and Balen, who carries a dissatisfied voice on the other, will test the maturity of the voters. 

Balen, who has a background in rap singing, became the 'city father' of Kathmandu Metropolitan City three years ago, beating the candidates of the big political parties. How much reform did he bring to the metropolis? There has been no objective evaluation of that. People have not questioned Balen much, who left the responsibility of the metropolis midway and joined the ambitious race for the Prime Minister without completing his term, but rather, they think that he made the metropolis a place worth living in. Many people think that his style of going into 'action' will improve the situation brought about by the party and the leadership. That is probably why there is a unique fascination and attraction in the civic circle towards Balen, who has a mysterious image and speaks very little. This character, who stands out in the crowd for a few moments in the style of a hero, gives a short 'performance' and then fades away, is considered by a section of the citizens as a 'carrier' of change.