Now for revolution, not to throw a stone with health, the trick is necessary to make viral on the right platform
The tradition of democratic opposition in the context of Nepal and South Asia is old. From time to time, the public has been coming out on the streets here. It has played an important role in deciding the direction of democracy. It is clear in my own experience and observation that democratic consciousness in our society has been relatively strong. This is the reason that repeatedly we see the voice of movements and anti -people here.
If you look at the series of Nepal’s movements, then there is an active participation of youth in every decade. The 1990 movement was based on peace and it was carried forward by political parties. The socialist and leftist stream came together and gave a new direction to democracy. The Maoist movement, which began in 1996, was violent, but its impact eventually reached the 2006 public movement II. That movement was also led by political parties and changed Nepal’s politics. The difference between these two movements was that the first was relatively peaceful and the second ended the violent phase and led democracy to stability.
When Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was killed in Pakistan in 1979, the youth in Nepal also took a protest on the streets. This protest also turned violent because the power of that time tried to suppress it hardly. As a result, the then Panchayati rule had to give the option to the then Panchayati regime that either this system should continue or multi -party democracy should be implemented. After that, the referendum took place but democracy was declared defeated and the same system continued for a decade.
It is clear here that the youth showed the strength to get on the road automatically with the active mobilization of any political party. This movement started completely by the youth. This included different types of concerns, complaints, dissatisfaction and anger. Various issues together prepared a common voice. This diversity became his strength. The youth gave him impetus and on seeing it, it spread throughout the country.
Now the question is how the nature of these movements has become in the digital age. Earlier when we protested, the means of spreading information were limited. Today technology has changed the situation. Now a hashtag or a viral video on social media adds the whole society immediately. Social media has become a platform for the youth where they can share their displeasure and anger immediately. In the old times, the movement took time to take shape.
The technique has led to another change. Digital mediums have made the lives of leaders transparent. Leaders say at the time of elections that they are for the service of the public, but the public immediately sees which schools their children study, which vehicles drive, which bags run.
The youth compare these pictures with their socio-economic reality. They see that on the one hand there is poverty and unemployment in the country, while the leaders are living a life of asho-comfort. The contradiction between this transparency and social inequality further provokes the anger of the youth. This is what happened in Nepal.
Talking about South Asia, there is still a feudal mindset here. Large vehicles, security personnel and luxurious houses are considered a symbol of power. But the new generation is not familiar with this mentality. They compare Western societies, where feudalism has become history. That is why their anger increases further. Nevertheless, digital reference should be considered only a means. The soul of the movement remains the same, just changes the medium of expressing it. The restlessness of the youth involved in the movement in the 1990s and the restlessness of today’s youth is no different. The only difference is that today they have technology in their hands. The character of the protest of youth in Nepal shows that they do not depend only on political parties. When they are dissatisfied, they come down on the road themselves. This is their strength. ,
Opposition to youth often becomes more intense and sometimes violent. The reason for this is their anger and impatience. They want change immediately and when power tries to suppress them, the response becomes even more furious. This energy eventually causes political changes.
Nepal’s democratic visit is proof that the power of the youth cannot be ignored. They have been at the center of protest and change in every round. In the coming time, as long as there will be dissatisfaction and complaints, this tradition will continue. Just the medium will continue to change, but the voice and energy of the youth will always have the ability to move the society.
(The author is an expert and political sociologist of Indo-Nepal relations. Thoughts are private.)
