Every age has experimented with several types of political systems. While it has been argued that certain systems are more conducive to different times, we have to see that no absolute answer has been forthcoming. If one particular system of political economy was perfect then there would be no clash between ideologies and systems of political thought. What we need is a more nuanced understanding of historical processes. It is quiet facile to simply go back to history, pick up one ruler, and represent him as an evil villain from movies as done by Dr. Ramesh Khatry in his article Monarchy and myths (The Kathmandu Post, 21 Dec, 2007). On the other hand, simply considering kings as the harbingers of prosperity and stability are problematic, as Kamal Thapa has attempted to do so in his article Monarchy: Reality versus myth in the same newspaper(25 Dec 2007).

The use of historical figures for simply putting across points of ideology is specious. For scholars and thinker like Dr. Khatry, it is not becoming to use such superficial tactics. He could easily put across his points much more strongly by locating his argument in the present context. If historical figures must be used then there has to be a more well rounded understanding of the examples themselves. In the past, the Raja was more a symbolic figure around which, the idea of socio-political framework was constructed in form of a dhunga (stone). Within this dhunga there were desas (countries) mostly villages, and again there were some Rajas of political formations who had accepted the subordinate status under the Shah Raja of Nepal- the Kathmandu valley, which was the centre of the dhunga. Scholars have constructed the image of Prithvinarayan Shah as all-powerful king, and his role in unifying Nepal has been exaggerated. What is to be borne is that more than half of the area comprising modern Nepal was conquered after the death of Prithvinarayan Shah. Few persons wielded power at the centre mostly with the help of sword, and there were local leaders and persons in different regions who had political, socio-religious and economic power. If the Rajas were dictators, and were simply rapists and keen to sell the country for paltry sums as Dr Khatry seems to indicate, the people would surely have risen decades ago, moreover it also means that Nepal’s neighbours were extremely stupid to have let go of such brilliant opportunities to take over Nepal, repeatedly.

Kamala Thapa endeavors to show the importance of monarchy for Nepal; however, his views are shaped by his location vis-à-vis the monarchy. It has to be strongly pointed out that stability is not in itself the final goal. Stability can also be a by-product of suppression. The strikes, and the community movements such as Janajati, Madhesi and Dalit, etc, do not necessarily hark back to the age of Rajas but rather expose the deafening silence of poverty, oppression, underdevelopment, and hunger of the masses, for which the few powerful persons belonging to certain families have been mainly responsible.

The language of the present political debate has a few holy motifs such as democracy, secularism and the like. Certainly, these primarily western ideas cannot simply be imported into Nepal without problems. Equality before the law does not necessarily translate into equality of opportunity. Meanwhile the King of England is not Catholic, as Kamal Thapa considers him to be, that was the whole point of the reformation. The King of England broke away from Rome and set up an independent Church called the Church of England, because he wanted to get married a second time - not for politics but for love. The Monarchy in England has a long history and its powers are now well defined based on conventions and an unwritten constitution. Such a tradition of restraint cannot be invented in a day, it was with this realization that India chose to establish a republic. While we debate on these pressing questions we have to remain aware of the Nepali context and the history of Nepal’s political system, with its coups, bloodshed and other problems.

Another significant point has been of culture and religion. To understand the King as the lynchpin of both religion and culture is extremely problematic. Many countries do not have kings but they are of a strong religious orientation especially Islamic countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh. The US is religious to some extend but it is a republic. Many European countries have preserved their culture without the need for monarchies, Germany and France being significant. Societies and cultures need to adapt with time and changing contexts, we have to accept not only new ideas but also newer influences on society. Nepal has to construct an identity, which will negotiate between tradition and modernity - this the people will do themselves and no amount of restraint or pedagogy is going to alter it. Societies have interesting ways to negotiate with circumstances; simply trying to cling to the past or obliterate it completely can only lead to oppression of the people. It is perhaps too overbearing of intellectuals to imagine that they can think for the larger society, people make decisions based not on ideology but their particular contexts.

The present political circumstances of Nepal are not necessarily an indicator of perfect democratic rule of the people. Nepalis are surely on the throes of a transition. The form of which is uncertain- contingent on many social, economic, political and global factors. In this context, they need their intellectuals, scholars, students, and the public at large to think creatively rather than simply counterpose (supposedly) diametrically opposed political systems. The people of Nepal need to draw the best elements that are present in Nepali society; however, in the name of change, they do not want a dictatorship of any kind. An eminent Nepali historian, M. C. Regmi once wrote with a hope that Nepal would ‘learn from the history of Gorkhali Empire and shape its future in the interests of the people themselves, rather than in the interests of its kings and political leaders.’