Nepal is experiencing crises, setbacks, and advances in the democratization of institutionalized power, in which the forms of representative democracy and participatory democracy are inscribed. Representative democracy is considered an indirect democracy in which the people do not govern because it is the citizens who elect the representatives who govern and represent them. The representatives decide the policies and legislative acts of the people. However, this type of democracy is directly and specifically linked to participatory democracy, which then leads us to generate real representative democracy. This representative democracy leads to participatory democracy.

Everything that is directed against that system will be unjust, create terror, destabilizing, revolutionary, detestable and undemocratic.The parties that represent 55% of the voters will continually give legitimacy to the system because, winners or losers, they all take out a succulent piece of the pie of power.

After all, representative democracy is nothing more than the well-planned and disguised dictatorship of the representatives. It is easier to consider legitimate resistance against a dictatorship than against a supposed democracy. Representative democracy is the disguise of the dictatorship of the private interests of the representatives. It is of utmost importance to remove that disguise among all.

It has a deficiency that would be caused by the lack of sufficient receptivity on the part of the representatives. There is a need to reinforce the line of communication between citizens and their representatives, as this communication is an essential pillar of democracy. Nationalism and the democratic system are two different realities. One is based on the passionate defense of one’s own and the other on the rational negotiation of differences.

It is very difficult for nationalism to understand the relationship between democracy and the constitution since it considers that the Fundamental Rule can do nothing when it comes to containing the will of the nation unequivocally expressed by any procedures that may take place.

Our democracy is caught between nationalism and federalism. On the other hand, populism and nationalism threaten democracy. Our representative democracy no longer represents the people. In reality, democracy in Nepal does not exist, neither as a value, nor as a spirit, or as a social necessity. BP Koirala was correct in his time but his ideology was never evolved. It is high time we ditch representative democracy and move forward to direct democracy.

Undoubtedly, democracy is the best model of political organization humanity has found. However, as it was introduced within the context of capitalist productive relations, it lives in permanent crisis. By their own internal logic, such relations produce social inequalities and exclusions that corrode the very idea of democracy. If participatory democracy gains ground, the institutions of representative government could lose part of their power in favor of the new participatory sphere.

Based on a reflection on the limitations faced by democracy in the context of current globalization, we have to analyze the possibilities of a new relationship between people, collectives and state institutions. This serious evil affects not only the democracy in our country but also many other latitudes, where the possibility to recycle the groups and interests of society could be sacrificed. This possibility is the basis of democracy itself.

The question of the viability of democracy becomes very complex when the structures of power and domination cannot be given the minimum example of probity, good sense and balance in decisions. This puts the long-term objectives before the conjuncture. These objectives allow building a fair society, with development options for citizens.

Do we have a healthier democracy in Nepal because its citizens are ready to mobilize for what they believe is right? Or is it because of their concerns and interests? Or is politics on the street a signal ofeverything that does not work well?

Freedom and democracy cannot just be an ideological duty.Those who care for democracy and freedom should not use democracy and freedom to divert discredited policies. Democracy and freedom are not a gerontocratic system. It is a system of constant change of people in power. It is a system in which people need to offer alternatives, future, new look and new people.

It has not become a government of the people and for the people, but a tool by which power dominates the people. It can be said that democratic institutions, such as elections, serve as a mechanism to ensure the persistence of the authoritarian system and the effectiveness of its action on society. In principle, the separation of power between the judiciary (the court), the legislature (parliament), and the administration (government) is a fundamental principle of democracy.

In Nepal, we hardly see athe separation between these three powers. People live in poverty and enormous oppression. Journalists and politicians talk about democracy. The true form of government is, of course, completely oligarchic. The most basic physical problem of democracy is that no one is ever responsible. Voters make their choice but their choice is limited in advance. Their choices remain secret and they will not face the consequences of their choice alone. A voter travels in wagons to vote and everyone blames each other for the outcome. It encourages corrupt voting behavior by destroying accountability. The cost of any measure is shared by society as a whole, which encourages the more wealthy to vote for the absurd costs that can be transferred to others. The other burden will only become heavier.

No matter what people vote for, how smart they are, or whether they are good humans or not, they will eventually become accustomed to ineffectiveness and consider life as a gamble rather than a meaningful achievement of the goals. They give up the information and rely on opinions, and then exclude all competing views. Because honesty is a bad investment, they become passive-aggressive manipulators, which tell us about corruption and fish voters with guilt, sense of humor, shame, pity, and fear.

Our representative democracy no longer represents the people. We are facing a serious problem when it comes to leadership. Personalities play an important role in every aspect of our lives. It is more than obvious that there is a lack of strong personality in politics. A strong personality is required to develop strong and diverse political leaders.

Freedom and democracy cannot be an ideological duty. In reality, democracy in Nepal does not exist as a value, or a spirit, and neither as a social necessity.

Natural disasters have always existed although we have seen them increase in number and destructive power lately. Nepal is a disaster-prone country. In Nepal, we have frequent natural calamities such as floods, storms, and landslides that become real disasters due to the lack of adequate risk management and preparedness.  Whenever disaster strikes, nature is blamed and it is stated by the authorities that nothing can be done against these happenings.

The earthquake trail is still visible in parts of the country, where debris still lies strewn in the streets and where some partially destroyed buildings are still standing in places like Kathmandu, the capital of the country.

In eleven districts, due to the heavy floods and mudslides caused by the torrential rains, 132 people died, more than 50 went missing and thousands of people, who lost their homes, have been forced to move due to flooding. Many people are adversely affected by the government’s delay in distributing aid. This very issue should not be a political topic.

Political elites who are in constant competition are prone not to leave any stone unturned when it comes to making political capital. Natural disasters are becoming a social media tool for publicity seekers.  Sometimes they fight over who will distribute the relief aid.

Mobilizing the political party volunteers to the affected area is a part of the political mobilization for political benefits. Damage in one area is much less than another but the relief fund goes to the lesser damaged area for political benefits. It’s not new to us, our ministers and representatives moving relief aid to their respective constituencies rather than the areas where it is needed regardless of the extent of the damage.

Crises are a determining factor in the construction of the narrative of politicians. In the circumstances of crisis, what politician does or says adds value to their political career because of the emotional factor.

In these situations, there is no social divide, there is no politics, no ideology. Natural disasters can boost a politician’s image positively and it cannot hurt them.  In other words, natural disasters can be a boon for politics, but also an opportunity for political leadership.

When all the parties should have focused on doing the relief work together, the leaders of the ruling party and opposition were fighting on nonsensical issues. These leaders are trying to get the political mileage from natural disasters while thousands of people were waiting for relief for several days under the open sky, under harsh rain and the sun. It was necessary to leave behind all other things to save the people first.

It is certain that there was a hunger for political gains. Every leader wanted to present himself as a true philanthropist. Time and time again, we see the price tag of any man is nothing more than just one vote. It’s time for us to understand whether our status in this country is just equivalent to a vote or more than that.

Most of the time humanitarian help and aid comes quickly and with great publicity. Then the aid will begin to be delayed by bureaucratic procedures in order to find a suitable way get to the disaster area. Meanwhile, many perishable provisions will be damaged. Another form of corruption is in distributions based on partisan preferences rather than the need of those affected.  People who truly need help will not receive it. However, politicians and their cliques will have the cream of that help for themselves.

We do not have good experiences in reconstruction because when aid arrives, corruption arrives. However, the frequent disasters are not directly proportional to the number of lessons learned to improve the disaster management system.

A picture is worth a thousand words, especially when it is authentic and genuine. Citizens like to see their elected representative with sleeves rolled up to the elbows and boots full of mud collecting debris and helping victims. It does not only add great value, it is a sincere, inspiring moment that generates the sense of hope and social cohesion to the victims and their families.

Our government is still struggling with immediate relief to save people where our disaster management mechanism is quite confused. There are lapses in every disaster.  Politics seems to be derailing relief efforts. There should be no agenda other than to help the people. Political parties and NGO’s are capitalizing on disasters like vultures feeding on carnage.

In times of natural disaster, like in every other country, people of Nepal also look up to the government for solutions but most of the time our politicians use disasters to further their political career for their vested interest.

We have no comprehensive risk management, much less well-organized disaster alert systems or emergency plans. That is why when some catastrophe happens, we begin to improvise in the measures that are taken. This results in innumerable problems such as slow decision-making, delay in helping victims (food, drinking water, clothing, medicines), lack of places with adequate sanitary conditions to accommodate large numbers of people, there is no preparation to face collateral effects such as health risk from possible epidemics or rescue of injured people.

Logistical problems also arise, and in many cases cannot be efficient in receiving donations and help. All this generates even more sufferings for the victims. People are assisted very little by the state and only receive some credit or materials to rebuild their homes, although in many cases receive nothing.

The destruction of the housing may have other major long-term impacts on a society. Health problems have short and long term consequences. Human society is being stressed by growing destructive or altering events of their quality of life, whether by causes of natural origin or created by human action.

Regardless of all these measures by the government, awareness for effective disaster management is the first condition, in which relief agencies can be brought to the affected areas immediately. If people are not aware of disasters, then terrible destruction becomes the biggest obstacle in the way of relief. By providing the basic information needed to rescue people from the disaster areas, the damage caused by disasters can be reduced as much as possible. Proper communication, honest and effective leadership, planning and coordination, etc. are very important for disaster management.

Unclear coordination between agencies dealing with disasters can open up opportunities for corruption. Due to poor coordination, no one knows which areas have received assistance and which have not, especially if the delivery and receipt of assistance is not accompanied by proof of delivery and acceptance. This type of aid is very vulnerable to leakages and under the table issues, especially in the form of cash and the type of aid that can be cashed in the future. At the policy level, coordination issues can lead to overlapping policies, including policy goals. Disaster projects can be vulnerable to manipulation when the same project with different budgetary sources is implemented in the same target area.

We cannot avoid natural disasters but we can reduce the toll.  What we have is not a natural disaster, it is a political disaster. The country does not have a real and funded plan to adapt to natural disasters because powerful economic interests prevent it.

Blaming others is not accepting your responsibility so pointing a finger at others is not the solution to your problems. The disaster must be faced, prevented, and minimized. There should be no other agenda than to help the people but political parties and NGO’s are capitalizing on disaster. The political parties think natural disaster is a time for their politicians to shine. The politics behind natural disasters has gone too far. Let’s not do politics with natural disasters. These disasters are a signal, telling us that there is still a higher force that controls us.

For the last 30 years, Nepal has become a political laboratory for many political experiments. Each experiment has failed to provide the real basic needs and people are still fighting for the basic needs of humanity.

The birth and death of short-term political equations, such as government changes, is not new to Nepal, which has seen 26 governments in 27 years, since 2046. The latest political polarization, for almost all parties, is all about demanding or grabbing more power in Nepal. The main goal of the moment for them is to win elections.

The behavior of the average Nepali voter has not changed in the past 30 years. Since we have a democracy, the two main parties have not seen their base evolve. The more time passes, the more voters express their deep dissatisfaction with traditional government parties, the more they plan to give a chance to those who propose radical solutions.

Governments have been unable to protect low-skilled jobs from the consequences of globalization and technological change. Neither mass education, nor progressive economic reform, nor social transfers has prevented the growth of inequalities.

Partial systems are an important part of democratic political systems and a criterion that sometimes values democracy itself. Certain parameters of the party system and their stability can be considered as favorable factors in general for ensuring the stability and efficiency of the whole political process.  In features such as high fragmentation, frequent significant party movements, constantly changing competing blocks, the party system can be one of the main causes of wider political instability (eg, frequent collapse of governments), or even the ineffective solution to economic problems.

The party system is the cornerstone of democracy. Ironically, this is the paradox of Nepali democracy, where various political parties contest elections based on their policies and make turmoil with the political party promoting ethnicity, regionalism, and communalism.

Political parties and their actions have an essential effect on the degree of social cooperation and social trust of a society, which means that parties can make societies more or less harmonious from the conflict than the parties themselves propitiate and generate.

There are undoubtedly positive and negative points related to this transformation in society, but what matters here is to recognize its inevitability and the fact that existing political systems have not yet figured out how to react to what is happening.There is a gap between government and society that is exposed to every political process, every protest, every decision by the established powers, who are unable to understand the voices and complexities of public opinion. This incapacity also manifests itself in the balancing of these voices with the habitual dynamics of the exercise of power, and with the play of forces represented by it.

The strange thing is most illiterate people of this country also vote on political ideology, driven by religion, caste and communal sentiment. The political parties here have adopted the politics of convenience. In such a situation, the polarization of political forces only remains a mental upheaval.

When it comes to political polarization in Nepal, it is summed up in the phrase “you are with me or you are against me”.  Our political parties are probably forgetting that the youth of this country are in a decisive position in terms of number and capacity for which issues related to higher education, employment and development are far more important.

The fragility of democracy translates into a lack of confidence in democratic institutions on the part of citizens, and their general dissatisfaction with the democratic system is considered to be the outcome of the worst form of government.

Social cooperation is an essential element in the functioning of societies and democracy. This cooperation depends to a large extent on the degree to which citizens trust each other for all kinds of activities, which affects good economic, social and political performance.

Polarization is worthless when core values such as democracy or the market economy are at stake. The future of polarization of political parties in Nepal is bright, if different political parties are ready for unification based on the principles and economic policies, then the day is not far when true political polarization is possible in Nepal that will serve the need of the people.

There will be a tough fight for grabbing power in the coalitions. The political wind is blowing strongly. All we can do at this moment is to expect that the people of Nepal will give a mandate for political stability. Nepal’s politics must have a maturity if this does not happen then a new era of instability will start in Nepal. Then the question will arise again what did Nepal get after the revolution? For the pursuit of unity, their superficial homogeneity, hidden conflicts, and ethnic character are much more dangerous for people of different opinions and new ideas.

The real losers of this remote-controlled political polarization are the Nepali citizens. Without a long-term logic in politics, we will lose both our own democracy and the rule of law. Because people are less and less trusted in those parties that provide democratic practices and the rule of law, I think, there are many arguments against this “all-in-one” approach and “forget what the different groups want,” because I only know what people want and I represent them.