There is no global uniformity in the definition of development and poverty . Various research and studies have confirmed that it is a matter of time, environment, state policy, social structure and individual perspective . The assets of the ministers of the newly formed government have recently been made public and many have commented on it .

In particular, women's control over sexuality and lack of recognition of work, i.e. the work they do is not connected to production, are the causes of violence and poverty . Especially when the details of several tolas of gold and silver, land, shares and assets worth crores of rupees are revealed, it confirms that the limited citizens of a country known as poor like ours have immense resources . There is another analysis that no matter how corrupt and disorderly the state's governance system is, it does not make much difference to those with access .  

Access to resources is a political issue . The key in this is who, why and how.  According to socialist economist Karl Marx, ‘The ideas of the ruling class are the ruling ideas in every era.’ This means that those who control economic resources (land, industry, capital) also control politics, media, and ideology. This helps them maintain their rule.

However, recently, Home Minister Sudhan Gurung, in refuting the public criticism of his wealth, said, ‘It is not your fault to be born poor, it is your fault to die poor.’ When he made such a statement, it became clear that he does not have the political-sociological awareness due to poverty and its inherent nature. Due to the failure of the state to be people-oriented, the access of the consuming class to resources has been established. On the other hand, due to the lack of access of the poor, they have always had to live in poverty. Such a situation was a mistake in the language of the Home Minister.

It is difficult to avoid the two-fifths of the workers who have been hit by the increase in fuel prices. For the Home Minister, it is their fault that they cannot become rich like him. When the workers who are forced to work in foreign lands are shocked by the debt, and the bodies of the deceased workers are waiting for the government to take the initiative to return to their own country, it must be the mistake made by the workers in the expertise of the Home Minister. Is the expression that blames the poor for being poor the official concept of the Home Minister? If so, what is the perspective of this government towards the poor and the disadvantaged?

According to feminist Naila Kabir, gender inequality and poverty are deeply intertwined. Historically, women's access to resources has been limited. In particular, women's control over sexuality and the lack of recognition of their work, i.e. the work they do is not linked to production, are the causes of violence and poverty.

According to a data from the Women's Rehabilitation Center (WRC), the women most affected by violence are those involved in agriculture and domestic work. The society and state system, which is plagued by the tendency not to see women as farmers and the patriarchal mindset that does not consider domestic work as work, keep women poor from before birth to after death. This structure exists before us.

How can we discuss development and prosperity while forgetting the root gender inequality that creates a situation of women-oriented poverty? Similarly, the Dalit community in Nepal has historically suffered high rates of poverty due to caste discrimination, social exclusion, and limited access to resources. The poverty of Dalits and other backward communities is not only economic but also social, political, and structural. The Home Minister's statement, which is far from reality or pretends not to understand it, has once again placed the blame for oppression on the oppressed. This is a feudal and capitalist trend.

According to philosopher Noam Chomsky, the concentration of wealth also centralizes political power. When a few individuals or groups have a lot of wealth, they also have political power, policymaking is in their favor, and this increases poverty and inequality. The youth opposed this tendency of the old rulers.

Analyzing the truth that big companies and the wealthy class influence the government, policies are often made in favor of business and the powerful class, and this encourages corruption, the rebellion was born for good governance and development. Of course, the definition of that development was not limited to roads and buildings. That development was also human development. It also had a political address by analyzing the causes of poverty. The poor were not told, 'You are the reason why you are poor.'

There was also a political address to analyze the causes of poverty. The poor were not told, "You are the reason why you are poor." About 20.27 percent of the population in Nepal is poor. This means that about 1 in every 5 Nepalis is living below the national poverty line. This number has come down from the previous decades. Millions of people were born poor and died in poverty. Thousands of this class shed blood and sweat against inequality for their own and others' liberation.

Many were killed by the state before they could dream of prosperity with equality. However, this class, rich in ideas and analysis, left a ray of change and hope. The struggle to overthrow feudal autocracy in the past and the Gen-G rebellion are vivid examples of this.

Today, the Home Minister has come to power on the back of the struggle and sacrifice of those same poor people (who, in his words, forgot to be rich and made mistakes). What is the understanding of those who are currently at the center of governance (who have access to resources, power, and authority) on this issue?

The ‘victim blaming’ approach, which interprets poverty as a weakness or failure of the individual and blames the affected, has ignored the structural causes of poverty. Such an approach creates the impression that ‘poverty is due to the lack of effort of the individual’. It hides the real causes such as caste discrimination, gender inequality, landlessness and unequal access to opportunities.

The UNDP has said that poverty is linked to ‘not only lack of income but also lack of opportunities and capabilities’. Therefore, the ‘victim blaming’ approach deepens the problem without addressing the root causes of poverty – structural inequality, social discrimination and policy weaknesses.