June 19, 2006
Who argue for monarchy are fundamentally anti-democratic and anti-people- Gagan Thapa
Filed under: Article
Perhaps no one had anticipated that King Gyanendra’s far right autocracy would fizzle out so soon. The people’s movement has proved that the king, his army and guns were no match against people power. However, it must not be overlooked that if it were not for the crucial role played by the Maoists and active participation of the civil society, the king’s assertive rule would not have been ended for several years.
In fact, under King Gyanendra, Nepal experienced intensified militarisation, brutal repressions and horrible violence. While mainstream theories of democracy assume that high levels of wealth and education enhance a country’s chances for democratic rule, the demise of royal rule has had an immense impact on public perceptions — it has created new space for public discussions and has terminated the dialogue for partnership with the monarchy. This political change, no doubt, is a great shift.
The monarchy has now been widely considered as a regressive force that has no relevance in real terms to most Nepalis today. Hence, it makes no sense to protect it in any form. In that sense, those who argue for monarchy are fundamentally anti-democratic and anti-people in terms of their ideology and aims. More importantly, as long as we allow the monarchy to continue, not only would traditional challenges to democratic aspirations persist but also much of the progress made during the recent wave of democratisation might prove fragile, tentative and reversible. It is unreasonable to think that any political regime, including monarchy, would last for ever when history has shown otherwise. If a backlash against democratisation is anticipated, then a declared republic would be strong enough to protect public interests from patrimonial proprietorship. The neo-liberal wave has failed because modern societies need a strong state.
Transition to democracy is a complex process in which the expectations of the society are often in contradiction with the government discourse. But it would be a mistake to fail to take the opportunity for creating a truly secure Nepal. The transition from a monarchy-dominated system to the one where democratic forces have control over the governance provides a good opportunity to examine the prevalent attitudes. Democratic exercise can be frustrating Read more


From- http://focus.blogsome.com/2006/06/19/who-argue-for-monarchy-are-fundamentally-anti-democratic-and-anti-people-gagan-thapa/#more-85