So, what about nuisances such as BANDHS? They have acted as good learning experiences for Nepalis. When they first started, perhaps, fewer people, the likes of you and I, loathed them; now, because of their obvious negative effects, many more wish we could do away with BANDHS altogether. Eventually, as people become better educated through democratic experience, there will come a point when enough people will loathe them that they will have no place in Nepali political process. Same goes for other social ills that plagues our country. For instance, corruption cannot be tackled properly unless there is a pratice of greater transparency, which can only be made possible through an open society; narrow and suppressed conditions, which are inevitable under autocratic rule, only exasperates the problem of less transparency, hence unsovable problem of corruption. I agree we have had terrible experience with what was a weak and incomplete democracy in Nepal after the fall of Panchayat. However, at least that weak democracy held the basic mantras of freedom as it's principles, albeit some of them in paper only. At least we had a base on which we could argue, vibrantly debate, therefore help people become critical and independent thinkers, all of which is not going to happen under authoritarian rule. Simply put, KingG's move is, or any notion of a "guided democracy" would be, a huge step backwards. Poltical parties ko dysfunctional process ma, at least if you went and asked an ordinary gaamle what he thought of the situation, he could have answered, "Khai baa, aafulai ta ke? Jun jogi aayeni kaanai chireko!" Ahile ko awastha ma kosaile yo jogi ko kaan chireko bhanos ta! Lagera thundela, pitdela, maardela bhanne dar! I am sure some of you might be thinking what about "guided democracy" in Singapore, or someplace else. I have written enough for now, and have a lot more to do with regards to other obligations, so I will respond to those questions if and when they are raised.