Hmm.."the king was down and out and people had the power?" The condition of Nepal didn't change a bit, but worsened after the so-called democracy. Many middle class members of parliament begun to afford to buy pajero/prado. The betterment of MPs and handful of thula badas is NOT the power to the people. If one is little aware about political scenario in Nepal, Maoist did raise their voice before raising the arms. They were the third largest political party in parliament. It certainly is a great courage to sacrifice the parliament seats and consequently chance to become a minister (maybe in a khichadi sarkar), but to stood and be the the voice of deprived people. Maoist raised the arms because the then government didn't address the people's problem. There is no such a thing called "perfect war." People are killed in the revolution and bad things happen, but it will bring the change. The so-called leaders that were never ready for the constituent assembly, thus to let Nepali people decide their fate. Why would it be Maoist who wanted CA from a long time, but not the parties? And, to be emotionally weak and becoming a leader of revolution can go concurrently.