ISO, We seem to more or less agree that Panchayat was filled with deep inadequacies of it's own. I cannot agree with you more when you say we must give credit to Panchayat for instilling in us Nepalis a feeling of nationalism. However, I must ask nationalism towards what? I would be surprised if you insist that Panchayati nationalism was directed towards Nepali nation, or Napali people. As I see it, Panchayat, in the name of Nepali nationalism, only tried to coerce Nepalis' loyalty to the throne. Instead of Nepali janata and Nepali nationhood being the centerpiece of nationalism, it put Maharajdhiraj ra sarkaar kaa Rajpariwar at the helm of our system, and demanded utmost loyalty to the crown. Without having any doubts that Panchayat was an autocratic rule, one can only suppose how civil liberties were curtailed during the era btween 1960 and 1990. And the effect? We, as people became hopelessly dependent on "higher authority," truly sadly unable to be free thinkers, and miserably incapable of looking beyond the small shell that we were forced to live in. Therefore, when the supposed "democracy" came in 1990, the people were hopelessly unprepared for what democracy stood for. The products of Panchayat, including all the political leaders post 1990, were utterly inept in freeing their minds from the shell, so they tried to do business ONLY the way they thought was right, laden with old style inefficiencies. Massive snowball effect of corruption due to tyranny (I have explained this above) was not easy at all to get rid of. Hence, the chaos. Do not take me wrong and get the idea that I don't think 1990's were prosperous and problem-free. However, I personally believe that all the massive problems of the 1990's were the direct result of inadequacies of 30 years of Panchayat rule. Now, having determined that the problems of modern Nepal, including the last decade or so, were rooted in the hierarchical discriminaroty system promoted by the Ranas and the Panchayat, all I am saying is that it is now simply absurd to resort back to the same autocratic rule in the name of svaing the country from further chaos. If KingG is to take Nepal back to the 1960's, without a steadfast committment to GENUINE DEMOCRACY, despite it's massive problems, I do not foresee ANY solution to Nepali problems ever. I still would like to give KingG the benefit of the doubt and would like to believe he has genuine desire to uplift the country from the chaos and do well for Nepalis. However, I vehemently attest to my belief that he is mis-guided, mis-informed, and his tactics are sure to fail, even if only becuase tyrannies ALWAYS fail, regardless of the benovelent dreams of the dictators. The ONLY way forward in correcting mistakes of democracy is further clinging on to democracy more steadfastly. ISO, I am not even demanding elections here. I frankly don't know where you got the idea I am for elections, when I have not even mentioned the word once. Yes, I agree with you totally that elections at times of crisis, specially when people are hungry, dazed, and afraid, is meaningless. In this regard, in this context, I too believe elections serve little or purpose of democracy. What I want right now is for ALL Nepalis to be able to think freely and to to be able to express those thoughts openly, without the fear of reprisals. Unimpeded flow of free thoughts, the very BASIC tenet of democracy, is what I demand, for along with food, shelter and security, freedom to think and express is the most fundamental rights of all human beings. ISO, it sure is easy to support ANY alternative, be it the worst form of tyranny too, at times of utter frustration. Dictators do take advantage of that too to come to power. However, in the long run, ultimately, as human beings, what we all desire, what Nepali business people to gothaalos, houswives to gha(n)sinis, s to bhariyas, bank managers to riksha waalas yearn for is freedom to be able to run their own lives without the undue pressure from the political leader or the king. I remember three years ago when KingG first assumed executive powers, all his supporters were gloating over what they thought was going to be a panacea to all of Nepal's ills. Three years have passed, have we seen even a BIT of improvement as per security and poverty alleviation? NO! As for the Asian Tigers, you keep saying ALL of them flourished under dictatorships. I think you cannot, and should not, dispute the fact that Hong Kong was never a dictatorship. I still fimmly stand by my belief that the four Asian Tigers flourished not because of the kinds of governments they had, but merely because of the fact that they happened to at the right place at the right time. Their stratragic geographic location in the midst of booming trade between Asia and North America contributed vastly to their economic success, and they would have done so with or without the dictators.