A Pretender, A Jester and A Fool
Fresh soil for another populist leadership?
What has Prime Minister Deuba done during his time in office to gain the confidence of the general population? It seemed his predecessor Oli had outdone his previous notorious political decisions with the handling of the pandemic, sparking social and political malaise; but by dissolving the parliament, not just once, Oli simply invited the fury of the people. However, it was only after a valiant decision influenced by what seemed to be public sentiment that prompted the Supreme Court to dismiss sitting totalitarian Oli and coronate Deuba.
Deuba paid off by taking three months to form a full cabinet. And the heroic judicial decision turned out to be Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher’s political ploy to establish influence in the new cabinet. The question certainly arises whether Deuba could have double-crossed the judicial head and deny him the ministerial portfolio promised. It would have been a sweet realist maneuver. The wee hours of his leadership would have been fared better if the government started delivering from day one and formed that cabinet sooner instead of taking debated decisions such as appointing businessman Umesh Shrestha as state minister for health especially after the former government was accused of corruption, mixing business interests with vaccine procurement. The public sentiment was against Oli(of course not counting the hanumans) towards the end of his days in Baluwatar. Deuba and Nepali Congress could have capitalized on the opportunity to gain confidence of the general population. On a road laid with roses, it would take a fool to step only on thorns.
I am not neglecting the opportunity of change the appointment of a diverse set of ministers and the myriads of corresponding cognitive frameworks might posit. Neither am I dismissing the importance of how the judges of the supreme court react to the chief justice’s political stunts. Regardless of the result of these two significant events, the length of Deuba’s tenure remains unchanged; it is not a negotiable agreement. The social and political malaise and the growth of anti-political sentiments is visible in the general public at this point, often translated to social media and popular discourses.
Fact: The Nepali Congress has presided as the ruling party of Nepal for about half of the duration of Nepal’s multiparty democratic system.
It should not invite objections to claim that after the Rana regime and with it the oligarchy overthrown in 1951, the Nepali Congress has been the establishment party in Nepal, constituting and forming the elite class. In saying so, I also state that the Marxist and Maoist revolutions have been against this establishment. In some ways, the liberation-seeking leaders have now integrated into the elites. I am not denying that Nepali Congress liberated Nepali people from Rana oligarchy, it is just fitting to assume that the oppressed become the oppressor after ascending to power. The reinstatement of the old elites by the court coupled with the political unease in the civil society due to their inefficiencies provides a fertile soil for populism.
Similar to his prior run for office in 2017, supreme comic K P Sharma Oli would seemingly hoard slogans of anti-establishment and anti-pluralism, which also happen two political stances often connected to populism.
Wait for a second.
Everyone was against Oli only a few months ago. I know, I know. The man dissolved the house of representatives twice, essentially instating himself as supreme leader. His words fare in the realms beyond logic and his claims are centered on his miniscule world outlook. For heaven’s sake, the man claimed that Rhinos should be called gaida(Nepali translation of Rhino). Does the concept of language penetrate his logic or should everyone else speak Nepali for his convenience? Don’t label me as an anti-nationalist, I am proud of my mother tongue but there is also an overarching reality of this world.
However peculiarly funny his claims are, Oli and his party still has a not easily negligible position in the national politics. I would compare his presence in domestic politics with that of Donald Trump but Trump has the popularity advantage of being a leader of the only alternative party to the establishment. In both cases, however, these leaders’ successors have not been able to deliver the results promised, fueling angst in people, making them more readily susceptible to consume the populist propagandas. Some cheap slogans with agendas of prosperity and greatness could again find place in people’s discontent for the leadership.
Another point of similarity between Trump and Oli which is characteristic of populist leaders is the use of new media to directly appeal to the people, cutting off the censorship of establishment media. With a commanding presence in Twitter where he has a follower count of over 750 thousand, Oli has a media savvy helping him to claim himself to be an integral part of the people. On the social media platform, he still shares accomplishments of his government and lashes out on the failures of the current government spreading political mistrust and mood of disengagement, all characteristic of populist leaders. Trump is at a slight disadvantage in this aspect in the current scenario. He was a face of Twitter while he was in office, his tweets connected him directly with the spirit of his supporters, but now he is banned from the social media.
One other property often associated with populist leaders is their charisma. Modi commands hordes of bhakts, Trump has his middle-class conservative support base and his popularized controversial statements and decisions. Oli merely makes confounding claims. Most of what he claims are deeply self-biased or disturbingly awful making it funny in some contexts. As my friend Nikesh claimed once, the first celebrity must have been a clown. A laugh-clad clown jokes around, makes everyone else laugh with such a charisma that people would be curious about the his lifestyle. I am not arguing for Nikesh’s entire claim but it is certain that jesters possess somewhat of a charisma.
While we discuss populism and establishment, Nepal’s foundational establishment and most appealing elite class of the Shah Dynasty cannot be missed. After constitutional monarchy was overthrown in 2007, former monarch Gyandendra BB Shah, who for ease of reference will be called BB henceforth, has not remained entirely silent. The case for legitimacy of monarchy will live as long as the Rastriya Prajatantra Party(RPP) or the Hindu wave in India exists. Vehemently Hindu leader Kamal Thapa will always find a godly figure in either BB or any of his descendants. So will many of his party henchmen and some portion of the general population. Many people in the remote still haven’t come in full terms agreement with the fact that monarchy has been overthrown, for foreseeable future. Some former supporters have found voice amongst the political failure since abolition of the monarchial system, other former opponents have joined in, imagining a prosperous monarchy as an alternative to the current system.
Combine with this BB’s digital political influence and he might actually have a fighting chance to be a key player in the upcoming elections. It is widely debated whether any of the various handles across social medias is actually managed by BB himself or his staff, but it cannot be contested that whatever content is generated by these handles added with his routinely interviews and news-making appearances enhances his popularity on a tremendous scale. People who have started lamenting the federal democratic republic system now seek refuge in the elegant and precise comforting words of BB on Twitter.
For BB and his monarchial populism(seems like an oxymoron), the establishment is the political system in place since 2008. The very political parties that came in power bannering against monarchy are now opponents to BB. The very opponent whose political inefficiencies and failures is adding up to the public frustration helping BB’s cause.
The political system of monarchy is only legitimized by religion. I dare you to imagine a kingdom of atheists.
No one can deny the potential mob support the Hindu religious community can provide to BB. BB is supposed to the avatar of Lord Vishnu, the preserver according to Hindu scriptures. Whenever he visits temples or attends Hindu festive events, there is a mob of supporters surrounding him. Since BB’s greatest grandaddy Prithvi Narayan Shah’s time and before, kings claimed the popular support, political legitimacy and sovereignty through assertion of faith leaders. But conditions are different now as leader’s face setbacks from political minorities if they only stand for the majority. The landscape of inter-religious tolerance has advanced as well. BB faces a complex religious political grounds.
BB has found an unexpected ally in the Hindutva leaders and mob in India. If the wave of Hinduism were to echo into Nepal from India, BB would certainly find himself in the best situation along with Kamal Thapa and his henchmen. And BB has given it his best shot to appease more political support from the south, even attending that scandalous massive gathering of self-proclaimed Hindu kings. BB’s such antics, however, also invites another set of reaction from the general public. Such strong tendency to favor a religion to another would not seem so “kingly” in Nepal. To my knowledge, no king of Nepal has ever incited religious violence. The path BB has chosen leads nowhere other than those uncharted waters; an easy path to self-destruction only the false pretender takes.
