PSC, On media, I will leave it to more qualified people to reply to your advocacy for a state controlled media for Nepal. For me, that is simply out of question. On necessity of the monarch as a binding power, guardian, umpire etc. If you are talking about "active" monarch, the verifiable reality is that it can bind hardly 1% of the population. Several dozens bhai-bhardars, several thousands soldiers of RNA and a small percentage of population disillusioned with "democracy", that's all. If you were talking about inactive monarch (pre-October 2002 type), there is no way to know in terms of %tage, simply due to lack of the test like Feb 1, however, the Maoist insurgency and it's continuation proved beyond any doubt that the all encompassing binding power of the inactive monarch was a false myth. The binding of all Nepalis together throughout the modern history of Nepal, therefore, was most likely through the STATE, people's livelihood (ghar, khet-bari, jyaladari, jaagir) and the soil. Since these things are not going to change when the monarch becomes an ordinary citizen in republic Nepal, Nepal is not likely to disintegrate. As for ethnical, religious, cultural and geographical integrity, political parties and all the aware citizens are talking about and are committed to inclusive and liberal democracy, devolution, secularism and all those failsafe tools of modern democracy. In modern times, that is what works to keep a nation-state intact and thriving. You think future king Paras bir bikram Shahdev is what will keep Nepalis united instead (our kings are longevity-challenged, so we should expect Paras to be the king soon) ??????? An elected president of the republic Nepal will be a better guardian than King Paras of the kingdom of Nepal. And supreme judiciary institutions like Supreme Court is the Umpire for everything disputed. You think King Paras will give better judgment than the Supreme Court can ? So, PSCji, the problem with your otherwise very reasonable arguments is that when you talk about the monarchy, you talk like as if you are talking about an imaginary country with and imaginary King and people. And since it is an imaginary King, you have actually many different kings in your mind, each fulfilling different functions perfectly. That's what is leading you to totally self ?contradicting conclusion and what not. Please keep the picture of King Paras in front of you when you talk about the future kingdom of Nepal. Only then your arguments and conclusions will correspond. I do hope you agree. अहिलेलाई यत्ति मात्र सकें । Have a nice weekend ! Nepe