Why Do People Want Back Monarchy in Nepal?
Introduction
Nepal, a country rich in history and culture, transitioned from a monarchy to a federal democratic republic in 2008. After centuries of kingship, the abolition of the monarchy was seen as a step toward modern governance. However, in recent years, a section of Nepalese society has been advocating for the return of the monarchy. Various factors, including political instability, economic downturns, and nostalgia for the past, have contributed to this sentiment.
Political Instability and Discontent with Democracy
One of the main reasons behind the growing support for the monarchy is the widespread political instability in Nepal. Since the transition to democracy, Nepal has seen frequent changes in government, with more than a dozen prime ministers in just over a decade. Many citizens feel that this political turmoil has hindered development and economic progress.
Additionally, corruption has remained a persistent issue. People have lost trust in political parties due to allegations of nepotism, favoritism, and lack of accountability. In contrast, the monarchy was perceived as a stable institution that provided long-term governance. Supporters argue that a constitutional monarchy, similar to those in countries like the UK and Japan, could bring much-needed stability to Nepal’s political landscape.
Economic Challenges and Rising Unemployment
The economic downturn in Nepal has further fueled dissatisfaction with the current system. The country has been grappling with high unemployment rates, slow economic growth, and increasing inflation. Many Nepalese, especially the youth, are migrating abroad in search of better opportunities.
Supporters of the monarchy argue that under King Mahendra and King Birendra, Nepal saw a period of relative economic stability. The development of major infrastructure projects, agriculture policies, and industrial growth during their reigns are often cited as examples of a more prosperous era compared to today’s struggles. Some believe that a monarch could act as a unifying figure to guide the country toward economic progress.
Cultural and National Identity
For many Nepalese, the monarchy was not just a political system but a symbol of national unity and cultural heritage. The Shah Kings were traditionally regarded as protectors of Nepal’s sovereignty and Hindu identity. With the monarchy gone, some people feel that Nepal has lost an essential part of its identity.
Moreover, the monarchy was historically linked to the promotion of Hinduism, which remains the dominant religion in Nepal. Some religious groups argue that the shift to secularism has weakened Nepal’s traditional values. As a result, royalists advocate for the restoration of the monarchy to preserve cultural traditions and religious sentiments.
Nostalgia and Emotional Attachment
Many older generations of Nepalese recall the monarchical period as a time of law and order, disciplined governance, and national pride. While the monarchy was not without its flaws, people remember past kings like King Birendra as benevolent rulers who worked for the welfare of the nation.
The tragic Royal Palace Massacre of 2001, which wiped out most of the royal family, remains a deeply emotional event for many Nepalese. Some believe that Nepal lost its moral and political direction after the death of King Birendra. As a result, there is a sentimental push for the return of the monarchy as a way to restore the lost dignity of the nation.
Influence of Royalist Movements
Royalist parties and organizations, such as the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) and other pro-monarchy groups, have been vocal about reinstating the monarchy. They have organized protests, rallies, and campaigns across the country, capitalizing on the frustrations of the public.
With social media, royalist movements have gained wider reach and influence. Platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter have become tools for spreading pro-monarchy narratives, especially among the younger generation who did not experience the monarchical rule firsthand but are disillusioned with the current system.
Feasibility of Restoring the Monarchy
Despite the increasing calls for the return of the monarchy, bringing back a king is a complex and highly debated issue. Nepal’s current constitution defines it as a secular republic, and any attempt to reinstate the monarchy would require major political reforms and public consensus.
Many political leaders and scholars argue that the problem is not democracy itself, but the way it has been implemented in Nepal. They believe that instead of reverting to monarchy, Nepal should focus on strengthening democratic institutions, improving governance, and eliminating corruption.
Conclusion
The demand for the return of the monarchy in Nepal is rooted in political instability, economic hardships, cultural sentiments, and nostalgia. While some believe that restoring the monarchy could bring stability and national unity, others argue that democracy, if properly managed, remains the best system for Nepal’s future.
Ultimately, whether Nepal reinstates the monarchy or continues on its democratic path will depend on the will of the people and the ability of the country’s leaders to address the grievances that have fueled this debate. Regardless of the outcome, it is clear that the question of monarchy in Nepal remains a significant and emotionally charged topic in the national discourse.
Cryptocurrency: A Future of Hegemony?
Introduction
The rise of cryptocurrency has sparked intense debates about its potential to reshape the global financial system. With decentralized technology challenging traditional financial institutions, some argue that cryptocurrency could become a new form of hegemony, dictating economic power in the digital age. But does cryptocurrency truly have the potential to establish dominance, or is it merely an alternative financial system with limitations?
The Rise of Cryptocurrency
Cryptocurrency emerged in 2009 with the launch of Bitcoin, a digital currency designed to function without central authority. Over the years, thousands of cryptocurrencies have been created, with Ethereum, Binance Coin, and Solana becoming major players. The appeal lies in decentralization, security, and accessibility, allowing users to transact without relying on banks or governments.
The rise of blockchain technology has also driven interest in decentralized finance (DeFi), smart contracts, and non-fungible tokens (NFTs), further reinforcing the belief that cryptocurrency could dominate future financial systems.
Decentralization vs. Hegemony
A core principle of cryptocurrency is decentralization—eliminating the need for centralized control. However, this raises the question: Can something decentralized become hegemonic? Traditional financial hegemony is based on control by powerful nations and institutions like the U.S. Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). These institutions set monetary policies that influence global economies.
If cryptocurrency were to replace traditional finance, a new form of hegemony could emerge. Large crypto exchanges, mining pools, and institutional investors could wield disproportionate control over transactions, network governance, and liquidity. Companies like Binance and Coinbase, along with Bitcoin miners in China and the U.S., already hold significant influence over the crypto landscape.
The Role of Governments and Regulation
Despite its promise of financial freedom, cryptocurrency faces increasing scrutiny from governments worldwide. Nations such as China have banned crypto transactions, while the U.S. and European Union are tightening regulations. Governments fear that cryptocurrencies could weaken their control over monetary policies, facilitate illicit activities, and cause financial instability.
If cryptocurrency is to achieve true dominance, it must either work alongside traditional finance or replace it entirely. However, major economies are unlikely to relinquish control easily. This has led to the emergence of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs)—state-controlled digital currencies designed to offer the benefits of crypto while maintaining government authority.
Institutional Adoption and Economic Impact
Major financial institutions, including JPMorgan, BlackRock, and Tesla, have begun integrating cryptocurrency into their business models. This growing institutional acceptance fuels the belief that cryptocurrency could dominate future economies. However, volatility remains a significant barrier to mainstream adoption.
The 2021 bull run saw Bitcoin reaching an all-time high of $69,000 before crashing by more than 50% within months. Such instability prevents cryptocurrencies from being widely accepted as a store of value or medium of exchange on a global scale.
The Challenge of Scalability and Sustainability
For cryptocurrency to dominate global finance, it must address key challenges like scalability and energy consumption. Bitcoin’s proof-of-work (PoW) mechanism, while secure, requires vast amounts of energy, leading to environmental concerns. Ethereum has transitioned to a more sustainable proof-of-stake (PoS) system, but widespread adoption still depends on improving transaction speeds and lowering fees.
Additionally, scalability remains an issue. Networks like Bitcoin and Ethereum struggle with transaction congestion, leading to high fees and slow processing times. Solutions like Layer 2 scaling (e.g., Lightning Network) and alternative blockchains (e.g., Solana, Avalanche) aim to address these issues, but mainstream adoption is still in progress.
The Future: Dominance or Coexistence?
While cryptocurrency has the potential to challenge traditional finance, achieving global hegemony is complex. Governments, institutional investors, and economic powerhouses will not easily relinquish control over financial systems. Instead, the future may lie in coexistence, where cryptocurrency and traditional finance operate in parallel.
Stablecoins, CBDCs, and regulated digital assets could bridge the gap between crypto and fiat currencies, providing the benefits of blockchain technology while maintaining economic stability. Hybrid financial models, combining decentralized finance with regulatory oversight, may be the key to mass adoption.
Conclusion
Cryptocurrency has undoubtedly revolutionized finance, offering an alternative to centralized control. However, whether it will establish global hegemony remains uncertain. The interplay between regulation, institutional adoption, and technological advancements will determine its future. Rather than outright dominance, cryptocurrency is more likely to evolve into a powerful financial force that coexists with traditional systems, shaping the digital economy of tomorrow.
RPP Protests Escalate as Leaders Remain Detained
Kathmandu, April 1, 2025 – The political atmosphere in Nepal is heating up as the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) intensifies its nationwide protests, demanding the immediate release of its detained leaders. Senior Vice Chairman Rabindra Mishra and General Secretary Dhawal Shamsher Rana were arrested on March 28 following large-scale demonstrations advocating for the reinstatement of Nepal’s monarchy. Their detention has sparked public outrage among royalist supporters and RPP members, who accuse the government of suppressing political dissent through arbitrary arrests.
Growing Public Unrest
Since the arrests, RPP supporters have taken to the streets in various cities, including Kathmandu, Pokhara, and Biratnagar, demanding justice. Protesters are seen carrying banners, chanting slogans, and confronting police forces in some areas. Clashes have erupted between security personnel and demonstrators, leading to several injuries and multiple arrests.
RPP leaders have condemned the government’s actions, calling them an abuse of power and a threat to democratic values. They argue that the arrests were politically motivated, aimed at weakening the party’s momentum as it gains widespread support for the restoration of monarchy. “The government is using force to silence the people’s voice. This is unacceptable in a democratic country,” said an RPP spokesperson.
Government’s Stand on the Issue
Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli’s administration has defended the arrests, stating that they were necessary to maintain law and order. The government alleges that the protests had turned violent, endangering public safety and damaging property. Officials have also accused former King Gyanendra Shah of indirectly influencing the movement and fueling unrest.
In response to the growing protests, authorities have heightened security measures across major cities, deploying additional police forces and imposing restrictions in sensitive areas. Government officials have warned of strict actions against those found violating the law, emphasizing that maintaining stability is their top priority.
International Reactions and Political Implications
The situation has drawn the attention of international organizations and human rights groups, some of which have called on the Nepali government to respect political freedoms and the right to peaceful assembly. Diplomatic observers believe that prolonged unrest could destabilize the country’s fragile political landscape and impact upcoming elections.
Political analysts suggest that the recent events may strengthen the RPP’s position, as public sympathy grows for their cause. “The government’s crackdown could backfire, leading to a surge in support for the RPP and the monarchy movement,” noted a political expert.
What Lies Ahead?
With tensions running high, it remains unclear how the situation will unfold. The RPP has vowed to continue protests until their demands are met, while the government shows no signs of backing down. As both sides remain firm in their positions, Nepal braces for more demonstrations in the days ahead.
Observers warn that unless a political dialogue is initiated, the conflict may escalate further, potentially leading to greater unrest and economic instability. For now, the eyes of the nation remain fixed on the unfolding developments, as the struggle between the government and the monarchy supporters takes center stage in Nepal’s political landscape.
What does India intend about Monarchy in Nepal
What Does India Intend About Monarchy in Nepal?
The political landscape of Nepal has witnessed significant transformations over the past decades, particularly with the abolition of its monarchy in 2008. The shift from a Hindu monarchy to a secular federal republic was a historic move that redefined Nepal’s governance system. However, recent political developments have sparked renewed debates about the potential restoration of monarchy, leading many to speculate about India’s stance on the matter. Given Nepal’s geographical proximity and deep historical ties with India, understanding India’s position on Nepal’s monarchy is crucial.
Historical Context: India-Nepal Relations and the Monarchy
Nepal and India share centuries-old ties based on cultural, economic, and religious affinities. Historically, the monarchy in Nepal maintained close relations with India, particularly after the signing of the 1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship. India played a significant role in mediating political transitions in Nepal, including the shift to a multiparty democracy in 1990 and later the abolition of the monarchy in 2008. The rise of the Maoist movement and increasing political instability led India to support a republican system in Nepal, aligning with global democratic trends and Nepal’s internal demands for change.
India’s Strategic Interests in Nepal
India’s foreign policy towards Nepal is largely driven by security, economic, and geopolitical considerations. Nepal serves as a strategic buffer state between India and China, and political stability in Nepal is crucial for India’s security. During the monarchy, India enjoyed significant influence over Nepal’s policies, but this influence has been challenged by Nepal’s increasing engagement with China in recent years.
Given this background, India’s current stance on Nepal’s monarchy remains a subject of debate. While some believe that India may favor a return to monarchy as a means to counterbalance China’s growing influence, others argue that India prefers a stable democratic system that aligns with its own governance model.
The Resurgence of Monarchist Sentiment in Nepal
In recent years, there has been a growing public demand for the restoration of monarchy in Nepal. Political instability, corruption, and economic challenges have led some sections of the Nepalese population to believe that the monarchy could provide a stable alternative to the current system. Rallies and demonstrations supporting the former king, Gyanendra Shah, have been observed across Nepal, with calls for a referendum on monarchy.
However, India has not made any official statement in favor of or against these developments. This silence suggests that India is carefully monitoring the situation without taking an explicit stance, possibly to avoid straining relations with Nepal’s republican government.
Does India Support the Restoration of Monarchy?
India’s approach to Nepal’s internal affairs is largely pragmatic. While there may be factions within India that view monarchy as a stabilizing factor, the official position of the Indian government appears to favor a democratic and republican Nepal. India has historically supported democracy as a key pillar of its foreign policy, and a sudden shift to backing the monarchy could undermine its credibility.
However, if Nepal’s internal political climate drastically shifts towards monarchy through democratic means, India may adjust its position accordingly. India’s main concern is ensuring that Nepal remains stable and does not fall further into China’s sphere of influence. If monarchy is seen as a means to achieve this stability, India might adopt a more flexible stance.
Conclusion
While India has not openly expressed support for the restoration of monarchy in Nepal, it remains a key stakeholder in Nepal’s political future. India’s strategic interests lie in maintaining a stable and friendly Nepal, regardless of its governance system. The growing monarchist sentiment in Nepal is an internal matter, but India’s response will likely be guided by its broader geopolitical interests, particularly in countering China’s influence. Whether Nepal remains a republic or reverts to monarchy, India will continue to shape its policies based on stability, economic cooperation, and security concerns.