Seven years ago, millions of Nepalis
participated in a non-violent protest against their government structure at the
time. The protest lasted for 19 days and was meant to not only resolve conflict
within the nation, but also lead the country in transition to a more democratic
style of government. The hope for this movement was to create a more stable and
long-lasting authority and allow for more advancement in Nepal. I have mixed
feelings about this shift because it seems that although many nations have
decided that democratic forms of government are most beneficial and effective
for a society, there are also societies that take opposing stances to
democracy.
Seven years after this movement,
the Constituent Assembly dwindled down to ultimately nonexistence and the
democratic election style looks to be volatile as well. Although improvements have
been made to Nepal, there is more work do in terms of political organization
and citizen involvement. More than anything, a nation needs a stable authority
to guide and govern them. There is some debate though as to the freedoms and
rights that should be granted to citizens and how large a role those that are
governed should have in their government. It seems just to create a government
by the people and for the people, but interpreting and implementing that may be
different to individuals.
The transition to a different style
of government in Nepal is taking a toll on its citizens. The temporary
arrangement seems unstable, as it is not meant to last, which doesn’t help to
provide the citizens with a sense of security. Hopefully a more lasting
arrangement can be made to create a more stable and secure government.
MM
No comments:
Post a Comment