Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Changes are always for the better and hence should be a matter of welcome indeed. If such changes have happened in the political domain, it becomes all the more important and hence entire efforts aimed at maintaining it for a long time should be carried out by all more so by those who made the change to happen.

Nevertheless, prevailing theories of natural sciences, which are concurrently backed by both of the pronouncements that emanate from the domains of political and social sciences, reveal that any change that comes into existence does inevitably carry with it the seeds of yet another change. It might take long for the seeds to grow but the fact is that the seeds after attaining a sort of maturity does show signs of further changes that aims at negating the gains of the previous changes brought with so much vigor and valor and sacrifices even.

Political scientists converge to agree on the theory that every revolution or for that matter the movement possessed three basic elements.

The first element deals with the matters pertaining to the need for the sustainment of such a change for better results. Let's understand it in another words. This element in effect wants to give a permanent shape to the gains or prefers to make the gains stable for a long time to come. This element in essence concentrates its efforts in devising schemes and measures on how to sustain the gains from the freshly gained movement or for that matter the revolution.

Secondly; the second element concludes that the results of the movement be made further progressive in order to bag some more tangible gains that were in the larger and broader interest of the society and ultimately the nation. Thus the second element gears its actions towards making the first success of the movement as a step towards the next step and that too very swiftly.

The third element is related with the presumption that any such change thus freshly brought into effect comes only after victimizing certain sections of the society. This element, say political scientists of repute, in a disturbed mood might forge some sort of alliances with those rest of the victims who have been victimized by the just brought changes. The supposition is thast the victims of the recent past might unite for a common cause and wish to destabilize the previous gains dawned by the fresh movement or for that matter the revolution.

A glaring example has been right inside our own country of what has been said earlier that only strengthens the ideas pushed by the scientists the theoreticians.

For example, majority of the population took the 1990 changes to have been the final one. But it was not what some had presumed then. Societal anomalies and other shortcomings prevailed which could not be addressed by the then changes and hence there was the need for yet another change.

And look the tryst of destiny! The Maoists emanated from this soil that in effect became the seeds of a somewhat more dynamic change that the country is having at the moment. Certainly this change is one step forwards to what changes had been bagged in the 90s.

However, fortunately enough, till today we have no such any symptoms for the much-publicized seed of yet another change in sight and thus the stage wherein the country is today could well be taken as a "constipated stage". But to conclude that the present change was a final one will only be a self-defeating attitude and nothing more than that. If the scientists and theoreticians are so much confident on their findings gained after having engaged themselves in the domain of the studies of the evolution of the societies then we must remain prepared to watch as to in which and what form the seed yet in its embryonic stage perhaps takes a formal shape. Should this mean that yet another changes, sooner or later, were in the offing? It is time that the present day leaders including those housed in the Maoists camp should envision such a change and act accordingly so that the seed of change, if any, could not in any manner take a formal shape and plunge the nation into yet another tragedy. The Maoists must look into the matter seriously and address each and every issue confronting the nation for the redress of which they have had to travel such a long distance, which was not an easy task. Mind it that no sector remains untouched from this change. Take note of each and every sector that has so far remained neglected and rejected by the society and bring them to the national mainstream so that they too can enjoy the fruits of democracy or what is now being called as Lok Tantra. If it were so we can imagine that a new era in Nepal is about to dawn. If not then we are back square to one.