Bathroom Coffee - No matter whether I disagree with you (which is sometimes) or agree with you (which is quite a bit of the times), it is always a pleasure to read what you have to say. I say that in all earnest. There is one thing you do better than any one else I have come across on Sajha: expose what you see as hypocrisy. You have done it of the Maoists, of the Royalist and of SPA-ists. And as for your style, man, it is classic. That said, allow me to chime in on a few things: (1) The economy has declined in some areas no doubt but the King is not positioned any better to steward it in my opinion. Unless we can fix the political anomalies in Nepal, the economy will continue to chug along at a slow rate. Political stability is the key to economic prosperity and the political landscape has been so lopsided in Nepal that the artificial peace that some people saw during the Kings rule was bound to give way sooner or later. I think it is a miracle the economy is still doing decently thanks to remittances. The poverty rate has increased since the 70s and 80s but seems to be holding steady in recent years. Also be mindful the country has experienced a population explosion in the same period.Something that is most likely to have contributed to Jan Andolans I and II. Our population pyramid is heavy towards the bottom. Something like 60% of our population is under 30 ( dont have the exact number but it is in that range). Such societies are prone to revolution. Examples, Iran, Afghanistan, Romania and as historians are now beginning to uncover many other country during their revolutions. Who knows if we had stayed a democracy since 1960, we might as a society developed the tools to better harness the energy and anger of young people instead of wasting time fighting for our rights. Therefore I find the argument that the King was a better steward a bit feeble. The King was as inept as the parties have been in stewarding the economy. (2) Prachanda and Girija may or may not be better than King Gyanendra or Price Paras, but lest anyone forget, there is a process for removing them. If you dont like Girija, then dont vote for him or his party in the elections. But what is the option if you dont like Gyanendra or Paras? Suck it up? Girija may personally not be better than Gyanendra but the political system that he seeks is better equipped to handle Nepal's problems than the one Gyanendra sought. (3) As for a plan, I think we discussed this once before, right around the time when we first exchanged ideas, that there is a road map layed down by the SPA that whether you accept it or not, believe it or not, is moving along. An interim government seems inevitable and CA elections have a good chance of happening either at the expected time or shortly thereafter. Whether it takes a few months (most likely) or a year, every body in Nepal, from Maoists to Monarchists (the moderate ones at least), seem to think this is the way forward. (4) On the question of republicans in the SPA serving as enablers of Maoism, that can be argued both ways. Without such voices, the King would prolly not have bowed down. I am not a Maoist, but for god's sake, the country has just seen the end of a civil war and I dont see any other way forward but to include the Maoists. Yes, unregistered arms are still an issue, but that is exactly what the government and parties are focussed on right now. Also, Prachanda has for all intents and purposes, although he has not said this in so many words, realized Maoism in its classical sense is a pipe dream. Maoists need to be kept in check and I laud Ambassador Moriarty and PM Koirala on this account, but without the comrades in the political process there cannot be a meaningful or lasting solution to the current problems. In light of this, I think Ganatantra is inevitable, whether we like it or not. It is a word we need to start getting used to because that's where Nepal is headed. Short of the Hrideyandra card (some would argue in spite of) it is inevitable. My 2 cents ... have a good one.