Political parties do NOT represent the people, let alone the poor people. They represent themselves and their own classes. Better yet, they represent the netas, the former "village-elites", who, in the last 15 years, have become "urban elites", with a house or two in Kathmandu, and with sons and daughters either in fancy schools in KTM or overseas. Most of these guys are corrupt. Some are not. But you know the type: the Chiranjibi Wagles, the Govinda raj Joshi, the Ram Sharan Mahats, and so on. They are fighting NOT so much for free speech for all, a fresh beginning for all, and bolder political and economic reforms that widen opportunities for ALL Nepalis. They are fighting for their share of the cake, which they feel has been snatched away from their hands. Since they are fighting for their own share, they are NOT likely to change themselves to put the interests of the people they supposedly represent above their own petty interests. Hence, expect no change in the line-up of their netas. To get what they want, they'll hold hands with anyone and everyone. It's as simple as that. The royal establishment does NOT represent the people either, let alone the poor people. It represents the panchayati netas, the former "urban-elites", who, in the last 15 years, could not believe how they were pushed to the sidelines by the riff-raff from the villages. Through the sheer ineptitude of quarrelling political netas, these ex-Panchayatis are now back with a vengeance in this game of power. Sharad Chandra Shah, for instance, loves delivering a kick in the groin of those who, well, burnt his house in 1990. His type of people have NOTHING to do with the poor. They are back to defend their lost honor, and they are even willing to cut off their nose to save their face! The Maoists too are NOT for the poor. They just know how to use the poor. They have long discovered that the poor, especially the poor Magars, are expendable foot soldiers. One way or the other, the Maoists want to control the country, and they want to cause many people's deaths to get what they want. And the result? The parties keep silent when Maoists kill Nepalis because parties see such killings as being favorable to their larger interests. The royal establishment keeps quiet because, well, it has never claimed that it represents the poor. The Maoists, of course, kill poor people because, unlike for Nepali journalists, there is NO some sort of a World Federation of Poor People that could be breathing down the Maoists' neck if they kill the poor. So, killing the poor remains the cheapest, most effective and hassle-free way to signal to others that the Maoists are very much alive, and are not some lost power. It's like a political (and NOT ethnic) Yugoslavia really: each side looking out for its own short-term political gains, and then tearing at one another to get what they want even while the number of causalities goes up. oohi ashu