essay about politics of nepal

Political Instability And Uncertainty Loom Large In Nepal

By  gaurab shumsher thapa, in south asia.

• February 16, 2021

This article was originally published in South Asian Voices.

Nepal’s domestic politics have been undergoing a turbulent and significant shift. On December 20, 2020, at the recommendation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, President Bidya Devi Bhandari  dissolved  the House of Representatives, calling for snap elections in April and May 2021. Oli’s move was a result of a serious internal rift within the ruling Nepal Communist Party (NCP) that threatened to depose him from power. Opposition parties and other civil society stakeholders have condemned the move as unconstitutional and several writs have been  filed  against the move at the Supreme Court (SC) with hearings underway. Massive  protests  have taken place condemning the prime minister’s move. If the SC reinstates the parliament, Oli is in course to lose the moral authority to govern and could be subject to a vote of no-confidence. If the SC validates his move, it is unclear if he would be able to return to power with a majority.

The formation of a strong government after decades of political instability was expected to lead to a socioeconomic transformation of Nepal. Regardless of the SC’s decision, the country is likely to see an escalation of political tensions in the days ahead. The internal rift that led to the December parliamentary dissolution and the political dimensions of the current predicament along with the domestic and geopolitical implications of internal political instability will lead to a serious and long-term weakening of Nepal’s democratic fabric.

Power Sharing and Legitimacy in the NCP

Differences between NCP chairs Oli and former Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal have largely premised on a power-sharing arrangement, leading to a vertical division in the party. In the December 2017 parliamentary elections, a coalition between the Oli-led Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist or UML) and the Dahal-led Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Center or MC)  won  nearly two-thirds of the seats. In May 2018, both parties merged to  form  the NCP. However, internal politics weakened this merger. While both the factions claim to represent the authentic party, the Election Commission has sought clarifications from both factions before deciding on the matter. According to the  Political Party Act , the faction that can substantiate its claim by providing signatures of at least 40 percent of its central committee members is eligible to get recognized as the official party. The faction that is officially recognized will get the privilege of retaining the party and election symbol, while the unrecognized faction will have to register as a new party which can hamper its future electoral prospects. A faction led by Dahal and former Prime Minister Madahav Kumar Nepal, was planning to initiate a vote of no-confidence motion against Oli but, sensing an imminent threat to his position, Oli decided to motion for the dissolution of the parliament.

Internal Party Dynamics

Several internal political dynamics have led to the current state of turmoil within the NCP. Dahal has accused Oli of disregarding the power-sharing arrangement agreed upon during the formation of NCP according to which Oli was  supposed  to hand over either the premiership or the executive chairmanship of the party to Dahal. In September 2020, both the leaders reached an  agreement  under which Oli would serve the remainder of his term as prime minister and Dahal would act as the executive chair of the party. Yet, Oli  failed  to demonstrate any intention to relinquish either post, increasing friction within the party. Additionally, Oli made unilateral appointments to several cabinet and government positions, further consolidating his individual authority over the newly formed NCP. He also  sidelined  the senior leader of the NCP and former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal, leading Nepal to side with Dahal over Oli. Consequently, Oli chose to dissolve the parliament and seek a fresh mandate rather than face a vote of no-confidence. Importantly, party unity between the Marxist-Leninist CPN (UML) and the Maoist CPN (MC) did not lead to expected ideological unification.

Domestic Politics and Geopolitics

Geopolitical factors and external actors have historically impacted Nepal’s domestic political landscape. Recently, in a bid to cement his authority over the NCP, Oli has attempted to improve ties with India—lately strained due to Nepal’s  inclusion  of disputed territories in its new political map—resulting in recent  high-level visits  from both countries. India has also  provided  Nepal with one million doses of COVID-19 vaccines as part of its vaccine diplomacy efforts in the region. However, while India has previously  interfered  in Nepal’s  domestic politics , it has described the current power struggle as an “ internal matter ” to prevent backlash from Nepali policymakers and to avoid a potential spillover of political unrest.

However, India’s traditionally dominant influence in Nepal has been challenged by China’s ascendancy in recent years. Due to  fears  of Tibetans potentially using Nepal’s soil to conduct anti-China activities, China considers Nepal important to its national security strategy. Beijing has traditionally maintained a non-interventionist approach to foreign policy; however, this approach is gradually changing as is evident from the Chinese ambassador to Nepal’s  proactive efforts  to  address  current crises within the NCP. Nepal’s media  speculates  that China is in favor of keeping the NCP intact as the ideological affinity between the NCP and the Communist Party of China could help China exert its political and economic influence over Nepal.

Although China is aware of India’s traditionally influential role in Nepal, it is also  skeptical  of growing U.S. interest in the Himalayan state; especially considering Oli’s push for parliamentary approval of the USD $500 million Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) grant assistance from the United States to finance the construction of electrical transmission lines in Nepal. In contrast, Dahal has opposed the MCC and has described it as part of the U.S.-led Indo-Pacific Strategy to contain China. Given Nepal is a signatory to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing might prefer development projects under the BRI framework and could lobby the Nepali government to delay or reject U.S.-led projects.

Implications for Future Governance

After the political  changes  of 2006 which ended Nepal’s decade-long armed conflict, it was expected that political stability would usher in economic development to the country. Moreover, a strong majority government under Oli raised hopes of achieving modernization. Sadly, ruling party leaders have instead engaged in a bitter power struggle, and government  corruption scandals  have undermined trust in the administration.

Amidst the current turmoil within the NCP, the main opposition party, Nepali Congress (NC), is hoping that an NCP division will raise its prospects of coming to power in the future. Although the NC has  denounced  Oli’s move for snap elections as unconstitutional, it has also stated that it will not shy away from elections if the SC decides to dissolve the lower house. Sensing increasing instability, several royalist parties and groups have accused the government of  corruption  and protested on the streets for the reinstatement of the Hindu state and constitutional monarchy to reinvent and stabilize Nepal’s image and identity.

The last parliamentary elections had provided a  mandate  of five years for the NCP to govern the country. However, Oli  decided  to seek a fresh mandate, claiming that the Dahal-Nepal faction obstructed the smooth functioning of the government. Unfortunately, domestic political instability has resurfaced as the result of an internal personality rift within the party. This worsening democratic situation will not benefit either India or China—both want to circumvent potential spillover effects. Even if the SC validates Oli’s move, elections in April are not confirmed. If elections were not held within six months from the date of dissolution, a constitutional crisis could occur. If the Supreme Court overturns Oli’s decision, he could lose his position as both the prime minister and the NCP chair. Regardless of the outcome, Nepali politics is bound to face deepening uncertainty in the days ahead.

This article was originally published in  South Asian Voices.

Recent & Related

About Stimson

Transparency.

• 202.223.5956
• 1211 Connecticut Ave NW, 8th Floor, Washington, DC 20036
• Fax: 202.238.9604
• 202.478.3437
• Caiti Goodman
• Communications Dept.
• News & Announcements

Copyright The Henry L. Stimson Center

Privacy Policy

Subscription Options

Research areas trade & technology security & strategy human security & governance climate & natural resources pivotal places.

• Asia & the Indo-Pacific
• Middle East & North Africa

Publications & Project Lists South Asia Voices Publication Highlights Global Governance Innovation Network Updates Mekong Dam Monitor: Weekly Alerts and Advisories Middle East Voices Updates 38 North: News and Analysis on North Korea

• All News & Analysis (Approx Weekly)
• 38 North Today (Frequently)
• Only Breaking News (Occasional)

United States Institute of Peace

Home ▶ Publications

In Nepal, Post-Election Politicking Takes Precedence Over Governance

The latest bout of coalition politics glosses over the country’s troubling drift toward further political instability.

Wednesday, February 8, 2023 / By: Deborah Healy;  Sneha Moktan

Publication Type: Analysis

This past November, Nepalis participated in the second federal and provincial election since its current constitution came into effect in 2015. With 61 percent voter turnout , notably 10 percent lower than the 2017 general elections, the polls featured a strong showing from independent candidates.

Almost half of the incumbent members of parliament — even former premiers, cabinet ministers and party leaders — lost their seats to independents or new political rivals. Amid the political instability that has wracked Nepal over the past several years, including a near constitutional crisis in 2021, the electorate appeared to be holding political leaders accountable at the ballot box for putting politicking above governing. 

A Surprising Coalition in Parliament

However, what followed election day has dampened hopes for political reform or renewal. Spurred by public resentment toward the established parties, no single party or existing coalition secured a parliamentary majority. Most expected that the outgoing government, led by the Nepali Congress party, would form a new majority following a brief period of negotiation. However, talks between the Nepali Congress’ outgoing Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and Pushpa Kamal Dahal, leader of Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist Centre (CPN-MC), broke down when the two failed to agree on who would hold the post of prime minister.

After talks with the Nepali Congress ended, Dahal, who is often known by his nom-de-guerre “Prachanda” from his time leading insurgent forces during Nepal’s decade-long civil war from 1996-2006, swiftly brokered a new alliance with his sometime rival, sometime ally KP Sharma Oli and the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML). The two men agreed they would rotate the prime minister’s office between them, with Prachanda serving as prime minister first. With this agreement in hand, Prachanda was sworn in as prime minister on December 26.

Two weeks later, Prachanda was constitutionally obligated to face parliament for a confidence vote. In a surprising reversal, the Nepali Congress and other parties in the opposition announced that they, too, would support the new governing coalition — giving Prachanda a unanimous vote of confidence.

Some analysts suggest this was an attempt by the Nepali Congress to undermine Prachanda’s alliance from the outset by giving Prachanda and the CPN-MC a back-up coalition partner-in-waiting should their pact with the CPN-UML fall through. This would weaken Oli and the CPN-UML’s negotiating power in the new government. The move also dilutes parliamentary checks and balances and calls into question the opposition’s ability to independently scrutinize the actions of a prime minister and government that it helped put in place.

The unanimous vote of confidence creates issues for Prachanda as well, as he must now manage a multi-party coalition representing a spectrum from Marxists to monarchists. Meanwhile, Nepali citizens once again are frustrated and disappointed to see a government formed by parties that have lost a significant number of electoral seats acquire the lion’s share of cabinet positions.

Ongoing Struggle to Implement Federalism

Nepal’s political theme for the last decade has been precarity, and this latest political theater comes amid some worrying trends. Governments rarely run full terms and politicians have played musical chairs with political appointments. Meanwhile, closed-door power-grabs have undermined the electorate’s will. In the seven years since Nepal became a federal state, any initial optimism for the success of federalism has largely waned.

In 2021, only 32 percent of Nepalese said they were satisfied with provincial governments, and chief ministers have complained about the federal government’s reluctance to implement federalism. Provincial assemblies have received limited funding, resources and capacity building support to enable them to be an effective tier of government.

With the outcomes of the 2022 general elections, federalism will continue to face challenges. The governing coalition’s inclusion of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), which served as an umbrella party for the election’s independent candidates, will likely disrupt decisions affecting provincial governments. The RSP are anti-federalism — they did not field any candidates for the provincial government elections, and there were incidents on election day where their supporters visibly rejected Provincial Assembly ballot papers.

With such divergent views within the government, it remains to be seen whether provincial governments will get the support they need to provide effective governance or whether federalism will be able to plant stronger roots in the governance system of Nepal.

Walking a Geopolitical Tightrope

Nepal is wedged between China and India, meaning the country must maintain a delicate balancing act to keep amiable relationships with both powers. While the “left-leaning” parties such as CPN-UML and CPN-MC, who have traditionally been seen as being close to China, seek to strengthen those ties, Nepal has deep historical, cultural and religious ties to India.

However, in recent years, the relationship between Nepal and India has at times been fractious — especially when communist parties have occupied the prime minister's office in Nepal and the right-leaning Modi has occupied the prime minister's office in Delhi.

When Nepal was reeling from devastating earthquakes in 2015, there was an unofficial Indian blockade at the border later that year, which soured India-Nepal relations and saw Oli look to Beijing for support. And in 2019-2020, nationalistic sentiment both in Delhi and Kathmandu — when Oli was prime minister — came to the fore over disputed territories along the border, with both governments re-drawing the demarcations set out in the Sugauli Treaty of 1816. 

While accusations of foreign interference in domestic politics have increased over recent years, the domestic political flux has actually made it difficult for foreign powers to negotiate, influence or broker power dynamics in a sustained manner. With fluid alliances and an average of just under one prime minister per year for the past 15 years in Nepal, neither China nor India seems to be able to pull geopolitical strings in the country for a sustained period.

The rollercoaster fate of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact further emphasizes this point. The MCC agreement provides $500 million in U.S. grants to support programs to improve electricity and transportation in Nepal. And while the previous Nepali Congress-led government got MCC ratification over the line, it was only after months of protests against the MCC that were fuelled largely by misformation. Now that the MCC is ratified, high-level U.S. officials have been visiting Nepal in quick succession .

While Prachanda’s political victory was welcomed by media outlets in Beijing, given the diverse political ideologies among the coalition, foreign powers near and far will likely struggle to identify true power brokers and influence national politics. On the other hand, this diplomatic uncertainty also makes it harder to build long-term sustained international relations.

Disinformation Continues to Fuel Conflict

In addition to Nepal’s political instability and diplomatic balancing act, social media has been rife with false information on various issues over the past few years, most notably the MCC. Disinformation around the MCC stoked concerns around Nepal’s sovereignty and fuelled several protests in Nepal in 2022.

The elections saw an uptick in this misinformation and disinformation, with doctored images, forged documents and false claims regarding various political leaders, as well as the former U.S. ambassador to Nepal, circulating over social media. This only served to stoke further allegations of U.S. interference in Nepal’s politics. Should this narrative be allowed to continue, it has the potential to fuel further anti-American sentiment in Nepal.

As political parties, politicians and allegedly foreign actors continue to utilize social media to control or twist narratives, senior journalists fear that the worst is yet to come for Nepal in terms of organized disinformation campaigns. In a country where political dissatisfaction has been simmering for decades, and with the government preoccupied with smoothing over the differences in the coalition, such campaigns could trigger political unrest and violence.

The Lack of Women on the Ballot

Nepal’s parliamentary electoral system is split: Voters are asked to choose from a list of candidates  for their district’s parliamentary seat as well as for a political party in the country’s proportional representation (PR) system. 165 members of parliament are directly elected to parliament, while the remaining 110 seats are filled based on parties’ vote share in PR list results.

Out of the 4,611 candidates who directly contested seats in the federal parliament, only 225 (9.3 percent) were women. Of this number, only 25 were fielded by the main political parties. The lack of female candidates on the ballot resulted in only nine being directly elected in the country’s first-past-the-post system — only three more than in 2017.

To meet the constitutionally mandated one-third female representation rule, political parties fielded more female candidates under the PR list system. The PR list system was meant to provide electoral opportunities to women and candidates from marginalized and indigenous communities — but members of parliament can only serve one term through the PR list. The intent was to give these underrepresented groups a chance to build experience, after which they could contest a directly elected seat.

Instead, Nepal’s major political parties have repeatedly taken the easy option of nominating new female candidates to the PR list system to ensure they meet the one-third quota rather than nominate experienced women for directly elected seats.

While the parties are fulfilling the constitutional obligations by meeting the quota, there seems to be little long-term investment in developing women leaders. Going forward, the parties need to do more to increase female and marginalized community representation and promote a more representative and inclusive parliament that reflects the spirit of the constitution — not one dominated by the same figures who wish to maintain the status quo. 

Where Does Nepal Go from Here?

The past two decades have yielded significant transitions for Nepal: a peaceful resolution to the decade-long Maoist conflict, as well as the end of monarchy and the promulgation of a new constitution that upheld secularism, inclusion and federalism.

But this positive momentum seems to now be staggering, with the same actors from several decades ago largely interested in maintaining a status quo while inflation steadily rises and federalism struggles.

While political forecasting in Nepal continues to be as accurate as reading tea leaves, there continues to be concerns about prolonged political instability — as can be seen by the fragility of the current coalition, which is already in danger of collapsing with the withdrawal of RSP, the third largest coalition partner.

Throw in the upcoming and contentious question of which party gets to nominate the president, and the Nepali people are once again left to witness blatant politicking at the expense of timely attention to economic and governance challenges.

Meanwhile, the Finance Ministry has warned that funding to provincial and local governments could be cut as a result of economic concerns. The entire federal system will be undermined if governments cannot deliver on services and development. Federalism was envisaged as a vehicle for economic development and if it flounders, it could have an impact on Nepal’s graduation to a lower middle-income country in 2026 based on the World Bank’s projections .

Still, the U.S. government sees Nepal as one of two places in Asia with an excellent opportunity for inclusion in the Partnership for Democratic Development. And with high-profile visits from U.S. government officials and scheduled high-profile visits from European governments on the way, there is an opportunity for the international community to urge Nepal’s government to stop politicking and start governing so that Nepal can flourish as a truly democratic nation that respects the rights of the many and not the few.     

Deborah Healy is the senior country director for Nepal at the National Democratic Institute.

Sneha Moktan is the program director for Asia-Pacific at the National Democratic Institute.

Related Publications

China’s Engagement with Smaller South Asian Countries

Wednesday, April 10, 2019

By: Nilanthi Samaranayake

When the government of Sri Lanka struggled to repay loans used to build the Hambantota port, it agreed to lease the port back to China for 99 years. Some commentators have suggested that Sri Lanka, as well as other South Asian nations that have funded major infrastructure projects through China’s Belt and Road Initiative, are victims of “China’s debt-trap diplomacy.” This report finds that the reality is...

Type: Special Report

Environment ;  Economics

Nonformal Dialogues in National Peacemaking

Wednesday, October 18, 2017

By: Derek Brown

Nonformal dialogues offer complementary approaches to formal dialogues in national peacemaking efforts in contexts of conflict. As exemplified by the nonformal dialogues in Myanmar, Lebanon, and Nepal examined in this report, nonformal dialogues are able to...

Type: Peaceworks

Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue ;  Peace Processes

Connecting Civil Resistance and Conflict Resolution

Thursday, August 10, 2017

By: Maria J. Stephan

In 2011, the world watched millions of Egyptians rally peacefully to force the resignation of their authoritarian president, Hosni Mubarak. “When Mubarak stepped down … we realized we actually had power,"...

Nonviolent Action ;  Mediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

Reconciliation and Transitional Justice in Nepal: A Slow Path

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

In 2006, the government of Nepal and Maoist insurgents brokered the end of a ten-year civil war that had killed thousands and displaced hundreds of thousands. The ensuing Comprehensive Peace Agreement laid out a path to peace and ushered in a coalition government. Nepal’s people were eager to see the fighting end. Their political leaders, however...

Type: Peace Brief

Reconciliation ;  Justice, Security & Rule of Law

• Culture & Lifestyle

• Madhesh Province
• Lumbini Province
• Bagmati Province
• National Security
• Koshi Province
• Gandaki Province
• Karnali Province
• Sudurpaschim Province
• International Sports
• Brunch with the Post
• Life & Style
• Entertainment
• Investigations
• Climate & Environment
• Science & Technology
• Visual Stories
• Crosswords & Sudoku
• Corrections
• Letters to the Editor
• Today's ePaper

Without Fear or Favour UNWIND IN STYLE

What's News :

• BRI implementation plan
• New provincial leaderships
• Red panda protection
• Faecal coliform in drinking water
• Nepal's request for soft loans

Insights into the modern political history of Nepal

Deepak Adhikari

Author and geopolitical analyst Sanjay Upadhya explores Nepal’s complex political landscape in his most recent book, ‘Democracy in Turns: A Political Account of Nepal . ’ This is Upadhya’s fifth book. In his earlier works, he tackled Nepal’s political transformation after the end of the Maoist insurgency and the rivalry between China and India in Nepal and wrote about how India adopted British colonial policies vis-à-vis Nepal after its independence from the empire.

A year ago, through the publication of ‘Empowered and Imperiled: Nepal’s Peace Puzzle in Bits and Pieces,’ Upadhya exposed himself as the pseudonymous blogger behind sharp takes on Nepali politics that were published in the popular blog Nepali Netbook , where he wrote under ‘Maila Baje’.

Upadhya attempts to give readers a thorough overview of modern Nepali history, focusing on the political transformation beginning in the 1990s. And like most authors who write about Nepal’s modern history, he begins with the conquest of petty kingdoms by Prithvi Narayan Shah and his armies. When you begin at this historical juncture, you have to narrate the court intrigues and massacres in the palace until the end of the Rana autocracy. The author dutifully paints the period with short brushes.

One admirable quality of ‘Democracy in Turns’ is Upadhya’s presentation of a survey of modern Nepali history, allowing readers to grasp an overview of the country’s political landscape. The title chapter at the end provides a summary of the preceding chapters. The book ends with the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the parliament dissolution recommended by the Oli government on February 23, 2021. Upadhya has crammed all the significant events of the country’s modern history into 280 pages.

Such an ambitious project is bound to face challenges. Rather than providing new insights or original analysis, the book primarily recycles recent history. While some readers may appreciate the brevity and clarity of the writing style, others might yearn for a more in-depth exploration of the last 30 years of Nepali history.

Upadhya assumes a certain level of familiarity with the inside accounts of recent Nepali history, making it a challenging read for those less versed in the country’s political context. ‘Democracy in Turns’ demands prior knowledge or additional research about these events. Explaining historical events is just as important as chronicling them. The book fails to do this adequately.

One aspect that may disappoint readers is the author’s heavy reliance on international sources such as The New York Times, Time, and The Washington Post. Although these sources provide valuable perspectives, a more extensive inclusion of Nepali language publications would have offered more significant insights. The book may neglect the nuances and complexities of Nepal’s political landscape as experienced by Nepalis because it mostly draws from foreign and English sources. One book that comes to mind for its focus on local sources is ‘ People, Politics and Ideology: Democracy and Social Change in Nepal ’, which covers the two pro-democracy revolutions of 1950 and 1990.

Nevertheless, ‘Democracy in Turns’ does offer insightful commentary in certain instances. An example is when the author exposes the political parties’ deception: “Most parties acknowledged the political, social and economic grievances behind the movement while in opposition. Once in power, they relied on the reinforcement of police units.” The book captures the fast-paced political transformation during the period between the launch of the Maoist insurgency and the subsequent peace process. This roller-coaster period in Nepal’s recent history deserves a book of its own, given the intensity of the events that unfolded over the decade.

The book occasionally suffers from disjointed sentences that fail to build narrative tension—a common pitfall when attempting to condense a lengthy history into concise passages. Some sections present weighty sentences about consequential moves without adequately explaining their implications.

For example, the book talks about the transition from an autocratic Panchayat regime to constitutional monarchy and multi-party democracy in the 1990s: “[Prime Minister Krishna Prasad] Bhattarai then turned to dismantle the structure of the Panchayat regime to facilitate the functioning of the interim government.” The book provides no further elaboration on this, swiftly describing Bhattarai’s subsequent challenges of holding elections and drafting a constitution. The book also seems to display a bias in favour of the Shah monarchy, portraying it as benign while blaming its demise on the political parties and their dysfunction.

The book highlights the Maoist duplicity during the war and their dexterity at playing off power centres in Kathmandu and New Delhi. In contrast, the portrayal of King Gyanendra’s unconstitutional move is watered down, failing to adequately demonstrate the implications of what Indian journalist Siddharth Varadarajan defined as a “monumental folly.”

Here is what happened: The Royal Takeover led to a crackdown on civil spaces, including news media. Gyandendra eschewed anti-corruption agencies such as CIAA and set up an unconstitutional body, appointing his henchmen. The goal was not to crack down on corruption but to weaken the pro-democracy movement. He relied on a coterie of outdated politicians (like Tulsi Giri) who weren’t in sync with changing times.

Despite its limitations, ‘Democracy in Turns’ is a valuable primer on Nepal’s recent political history. It offers readers a starting point from which they can explore and deepen their understanding of the country’s democratic journey. Upadhya gives readers a foundation on which to build further knowledge by summarising the important events.

Democracy in Turns: A Political Account of Nepal

Author: Sanjay Upadhya

Publisher: FinePrint

Deepak Adhikari Adhikari is a freelance journalist based in Kathmandu.

Related News

Learning should reflect on behaviour

Books make me feel less lonely

The forgotten hero

Without reading, artists will be limited in their expressions

I am committed to writing about women’s empowerment

Examining power, casteism and change in Nepal

Most read from books.

Editor's Picks

Rabi’s Freudian slip

‘Worry’ as Nepal’s forex reserves soar to record Rs1.84 trillion

Tracking chip now mandatory for Everest aspirants

Rural women deprived of reproductive health rights

Indian travellers can now scan and pay in Nepal

E-paper | march 27, 2024.

• Read ePaper Online

Explainer: Key issues in Nepal's national elections

SLOWING ECONOMY AND HIGH INFLATION

Election promises, political stability, main contestants, china, india interest.

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

Reporting by Gopal Sharma; Writing by Manoj Kumar; Editing by Miral Fahmy

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Baltimore bridge collapse: What happened and what is the death toll so far?

Baltimore's Francis Scott Key Bridge collapsed on Tuesday after a container ship smashed into a pylon, with the six people missing presumed dead after falling into the frigid water below. Authorities stopped people from using the bridge after the ship sent out a mayday call, saving lives.

Russia carried out two air strikes on a residential area in the city of Kharkiv in northeastern Ukraine on Wednesday, killing at least one person and wounding 12, local officials said.

Spanish military planes air dropped 26 tonnes of humanitarian aid to Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip on Wednesday and Madrid called on Israel to open land border crossings to prevent a famine, the Foreign Ministry said.

Britain said it sanctioned two individuals for providing financial support to a media network which the government said supports the Palestinian Hamas militant group and promotes terrorism.

Prospects of Youth Participation in Political Landscape in Nepal

The representation of young people in political leadership positions still remains disproportionate. in nepal, youth continue to be utilized as assets that support and assist political movements and institutions instead of regarding them as active political leaders., by krisha shakya | december 5, 2022, youth empowerment, 6 minute read.

A 2020 report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) states that 53% of OECD countries that have active youth involvement and participation experience more democratic and sustainable policies being implemented. The report further expands on the role of youth groups and their potential to be harbingers of change, steering the country in a new direction. According to the Youth Vision 2025 , a segment in Nepal’s ten-year strategic plan (2020/21-2030/31), and the Constitution of Nepal, youths are defined as being between the ages of 16 and 40 years. Even with a wide age group, the representation of youths in the Nepali parliament remains low at only 5%, while the global average representation of youths in politics stands at 13.5%. Furthermore, the legal age to contest in local-level elections is 21 years of age and to contest in provincial and federal elections, the individual must be 25 years old. These provisions further discourage youth from participating significantly in formal politics.

Back in 2008, when Nepal became a Federal Democratic Republic, Nepali youth’s participation was monumental in carrying out campaigns, resistance movements and demonstrations . The ‘People’s War’, the Madheshi and Adivasi Janajati movements , to name a few, witnessed impactful political activeness of the youth. These historic integrations of youth and politics in Nepal reflect the potential and intention of the youth as being key agents of change and nation-building. In fact, many of these movements were platforms for young Nepalis to build the current generation of political leaders. However, the representation of young people in political leadership positions still remains disproportionate. They continue to be utilized as assets that support and assist political movements and institutions instead of regarding them as active political leaders.

Although the policies guiding youth participation are still weak and political parties’ reluctance to formally engage youth is common in Nepal, the recent Nepal local-level elections, held in May 2022, saw a surge in youth involvement. The 2022 federal and provincial level elections too saw an increase in youth participation with 31% of the total candidates falling in the youth category. These paradigmatic instances have shown that the youth have the potential to drive change and bring new ideas to the table. However, it is crucial to understand the challenges that prevent them from taking on a more active role.

Youth Participation in the 2022 elections

During the local, provincial and federal elections in 2022, over 3 million young Nepalis were eligible to vote. During the local level election held on 13 May, the Election Commission of Nepal (ECN) stated that a gradual increase of over 41% of people’s representatives at the local levels or, 14,442 youths in total, were contesting from between 21 to 40 years of age group. The ECN also stated that from the youth category, 37 mayors, 95 deputy mayors, 106 rural municipality chairs and 234 vice-chairpersons were elected in the same election. Similarly, 2,312 youth ward chairs were elected in total.

In the same local elections, after experiencing the victory of independent candidate Balendra Shah for Kathmandu’s mayor, several youth-led campaigns marched the streets to encourage the public to vote for independent candidates instead of dominant parties.

Post the local elections, the federal and provincial elections of 20 November, revealed that there’s been an increase in youth participation by 32% and 31%, respectively as compared to the 2017 elections . Due to new, young politicians like Harka Raj Sampang Rai, Rabi Lamichhane, Dr Toshima Karki, and Sobita Gautam, the interests of the youth have been captured with the hope of restructuring the old institutions. Compared to previous polls, the number of youths filing candidacies for mayoral positions and ward positions increased by 3% and 4%, respectively. Instances like these were impossible in the past elections but due to the youth’s collective movement, the future of Nepal might see more young candidates emerging.

Currently, the percentage of youth in Nepal stands at 40.68%, which means that the Nepali population has a youth bulge . A youthful population is regarded as a force of change and a source of innovation, and in Nepal, the youth has catalysed critical movements, systems and opportunities. Despite this bulge, the Nepali youth has been consistently met with employment obstacles and political discrimination that hinder their prospects to contribute and flourish. Some of the reasons are as follows –

Lack of employment opportunities

According to a 2015 report by International Labour Organization (ILO), the unemployment rate for Nepali youth is 19.2% compared to 2.7% for the entire whole population . Youth migrating abroad for work, education, and health facilities are some of the most notable reasons for the low participation of youth in formal politics. According to a 2014 report by the National Population and Housing Census , 1,475,692 youth (nearly 14% of the total youth) are abroad for employment and education. The reasons for this brain drain in Nepal is because of the lack of job opportunities, political instability, and the low salary system. Due to the mass exodus of youth leaving the country, Nepal is losing its highly-skilled workers and professionals to developed nations, in turn creating human capital flight .

Reluctance to integrate young politicians

An unwillingness of political leaders to hand over leadership and management roles to the younger ones has also been observed as a critical challenge. As of now, Nepal is being ruled by leaders who are in their 60s and 70s . Due to a lack of experience and professional guidance, young candidates often struggle early in their political careers. Across the world, the youth are given incentives and encouragement to participate in political and legal processes. For instance, the Lebanon government offers a Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean Internship to graduates to partake in understanding public policy and learn about law-making. Similar immersive learning opportunities are offered in India , the UK and other countries that aim to integrate youth into legislative literacy and research. Nepal can draw learnings from such initiatives and extend the prospects of youth in the Nepali political landscape.

Tricky constitutional and legal provisions

Restrictive protocols in the legislation of Nepal prevent youths from contesting elections. A person must be 25 years old to contest in provincial and federal elections. The legal provisions of the country state that a person should be at least 45 years old or over to be a part of a constitutional committee. Since Nepal defines youth as an age group between 16-40 years, such a provision of only decreeing individuals to be over 45 years is discouraging and restraining, which needs to be restructured. Bureaucracy and legal provisions act as a barrier to youth representation from bringing new energy, ideas and visions into the policy discourse.

Exploring the full potential

The increasing number of youths in the second round of elections since the implementation of the 2015 Constitution shows changing dynamics within the Nepali political scenario. To ensure increased youth participation, a supportive environment with legal frameworks and plans for various electoral and parliamentary processes must be enabled so that the youth become equipped with decision-making and leadership skills. Similarly, youth policies and documents like the National Youth Policy need to clearly define youth and should consist of detailed and feasible action plans, timelines, and budgets for effective implementation. To utilize the full potential of Nepali youth, it is imperative to consider the youth population as active agents of change and vision leaders.

Krisha Shakya holds an MSc in International Affairs & Global Enterprise from the University of Utah and a MA in Development Studies from Kathmandu University. She is also the recipient of the Nepal Bidhya Bhusan Padak Award 2018. Her interests include international relations, economic development, sustainability, research, analysis, and information management. Currently, she is working as a Program Coordinator at NEF.

<NEFTakes

• Reveel Protocol Potential Airdrop Backed by Binance
• KiloEX Confirmed Airdrop Invested By Binance Labs
• Chance of Getting Two Potential Airdrop | Backed by Polychain, BinanceLabs and Others
• Caldera Potential Airdrop Invested $9M By Sequoia Capital And Dragonfly
• Polyhedra Network Potential Airdrop biggest Investors are Binance Labs, Animoca Brand, Polychain

Greetinglines

Best Greetings For Loved Ones

Essay on My Country Nepal For Students

If there is a country’s flag that stands out among all other countries it is the flag of Nepal . Our flag is very unique and cannot be compared to other countries’ flags due to its shape. It also has a hidden meaning behind it which represents the country’s peace-loving and friendly nature, bravery, and immortal history.

My country Nepal is situated between two countries, India and China. Although it is sandwiched between international powers, conflicts have not happened between any, and peace remains. Nepal is a country of various castes and cultures. In other words, it is like a beautiful garden of flowers with people of different ethnicities and backgrounds.

My country Nepal is not only unique for its flag but also its geographical terrain, the variety of castes and cultures you can find, and the rich history of it. It is the land of various great places and important figures that people know far and wide. The temperature here spans from cool to hot and is a heaven for residing in.

There are about 126 castes in Nepal each with its own rich history and culture which makes Nepal a rich place for culture. Some dating back to the millenniums. Not only that, our country is very rich in its geographical terrain. From the lowest point of just 70 Meters from sea level to the world’s highest peak Mt. Everest (8848.86 meters) , we have temperature scales that vary from place to place. It is divided into three regions, Terai, Hilly, and Himalayas each according to their altitude and geographical differences.

Himalayan regions have high and mighty Himalayas that are breathtaking to look at. Out of the world’s top 10 highest peaks, 8 of them fall in my country. It is already a great pride to have come from such a country. The diverse flora and fauna, beautiful landscapes, lush and green jungles, historical and religious places in Nepal are enough to gather the attention of foreigners and locals too. People from all over the world pay thousands of dollars just to see our country’s snow-capped mountains, rivers, cliffs, waterfalls, other beautiful landscapes, the rich flora and fauna, and sites of great religious and historical importance. It just doesn’t end there.

📌 Read –   Essay on the Importance of English Language

Our country ranks in the top 5 for the richest in water resources. With just a small country with an area of 1,47,181 sq kilometers, it has the potential to fuel hydropower worth 2% of the entire world. It may look small in number but taking our country’s small area in context, it is a potential incomparable to all. The Terai region holds fertile land and smooth flowing waters that are excellent for farming and cultivating.

Nepal is also known as an agricultural country where 60% of the people here follow agriculture as their work. Our country also has huge historical importance. Gautama Buddha the founder and preacher of Buddhism which is practiced worldwide was also born in Nepal. Buddhism is known to preach peace and non-violence and to love everyone. King Janak is also an important figure who holds great importance to communities in Nepal.

Other personalities include Bhrikuti, Araniko, etc. Our country is also known for its bravery. Our country never has to celebrate Independence day as we were never under the rule of any other. We stood and fought against the Britans and other Mongol countries. Brave Gorkhalis were united after a long struggle and fought their way to preserve their country. The courage and bravery of Nepali people are also know world wide. Many brave Gorkhalis went to fight under countries in world wars and won various colors and medals. This brought our country so much respect that we even enjoy it for granted to date.

Although our country’s history, culture, terrains, and achievements make anyone feel proud, the power struggle for the politicians, previous kings, and presidents have made the country weak and fall in the developing country category. Our rich natural resources have not been utilized and we have fallen way behind. Corruption is widely prevalent in our country and the loans we have taken from other countries are in a large number. The amount of food and other materialistic consumption has made Nepal import more and export less.

Our country is poor but the people here are rich. This is because of the corruption and the illegal working/trading that has been done. The government has not made significant progress and the people aren’t responsible. Although I feel proud to be A Nepali, the condition of my country makes me feel bad. People should feel responsible and carry out their duties and not just complain about the government.

The government too should implement proper policies and rules and enforce them accordingly. Utilization of our natural resources should be done in an effective way and social evils such as discrimination according to castes and genders, other superstitions should be slowly removed. Centralized development should stop and we should control the people moving out to other countries with their skills that are wasted abroad. This way we can slowly develop our country.

Essays on Other Topics

• Essay on Mother – 800+ Words Paragraph 
• Essay on Pollution | 800+ Words Paragraph on Pollution
• Essay on Importance of Discipline 
• Essay on Globalization | 800+ Words Paragraph on Globalization

If you love our posts the consider following us on our social media channels  Twitter @ GreetingLines  and  Facebook @ GreetingLines , our you can directly reach us via  Contact Page .

You May Also Like

Essay on Christmas | 600+ Words Christmas Paragraph for Students

Essay on Friendship | 800+ Words Paragraph on Friendship

Essay on Globalization | 600+ Words Paragraph on Globalization

28 thoughts on “ essay on my country nepal for students ”.

Thank you so much sir for helpful essay.

Thanks a lot sir .😊👨 its give to get new ideas😊

It’s my humble request to you.that plz write an essay on my country,my paradise.🙏

Thankyou for your essay. It really helped me.

Thank you so much sir for helpful essay.Actually I was searching for essay on my country and luckily found ….

░░░░░░▄████▄ ░░░░░▐▌░░░░▐▌ ░░▄▀▀█▀░░░░▐▌ ░░▄░▐▄░░░░░▐▌▀▀▄ ▐▀░▄▄░▀▌░▄▀▀░▀▄░▀ ▐░▀██▀░▌▐░▄██▄░▌ ░▀▄░▄▄▀░▐░░▀▀░░▌ ░░░░█░░░░▀▄▄░▄▀ ░░░░█░█░░░░█░▐ ░░░░█░█░░░▐▌░█ ░░░░█░█░░░▐▌░█ ░░░░▐▌▐▌░░░█░█ ░░░░▐▌░█▄░▐▌░█ ░░░░░█░░▀▀▀░░▐▌ ░░░░░▐▌░░░░░░█ ░░░░░░█▄░░░░▄█ ░░░░░░░▀████▀

░░░░░░▄████▄ ░░░░░▐▌░░░░▐▌ ░░▄▀▀█▀░░░░▐▌ ░░▄░▐▄░░░░░▐▌▀▀▄ ▐▀░▄▄░▀▌░▄▀▀░▀▄░▀ -: ▐░▀██▀░▌▐░▄██▄░▌ ░▀▄░▄▄▀░▐░░▀▀░░▌ ░░░░█░░░░▀▄▄░▄▀ ░░░░█░█░░░░█░▐ ░░░░█░█░░░▐▌░█ ░░░░█░█░░░▐▌░█ ░░░░▐▌▐▌░░░█░█ ░░░░▐▌░█▄░▐▌░█ ░░░░░█░░▀▀▀░░▐▌ ░░░░░▐▌░░░░░░█ ░░░░░░█▄░░░░▄█ ░░░░░░░▀████▀

You are great sir 😚✌️🤞🙏

I really like your essay it helps me to get new ideas and thoughts 😃💕💕💕💕 Thanks for your nice essay.

Thank for your kind words we appreciate it 😉

Hi I am new user

Thank you Alot sir ❤

Your Welcome 😉

Thank yuh sir. For the great essay. This helps us for getting ideas to write an essay

Thank you so much for such amazing compliment 😊

Am proud to be nepali ❤️❤️❤️🇳🇵🇳🇵🇳🇵🇳🇵 so I knew about the history of our country it’s like a story ❤️❤️🇳🇵🇳🇵🇳🇵

Ya it’s really good to visit in Nepal. Nepal has most beautiful place to look.

Thanku sir for such a helpful and true essay which is outstanding💕💕💕

Thanku sir for your such a helpful and true essay which is outstanding💕💕💕

we are glad that you liked it 😉

Hello there! This post couldn’t be written any better!

Reading this post reminds me of my old room mate! He always kept chatting about this. I will forward this article to him. Fairly certain he will have a good read. Thanks for sharing!

I love what you guys are up too. This kind of clever work and exposure! Keep up the superb works guys I’ve incorporated you guys to my blogroll.

Wonderful blog! I found it while searching on Yahoo News. Do you have any tips on how to get listed in Yahoo News? I’ve been trying for a while but I never seem to get there! Thank you

Hey There. I found your blog using msn. This is a very well written article. I will be sure to bookmark it and return to read more of your useful info.

Thanks for the post. I will certainly return.

Hello! Do you know if they make any plugins to help with Search Engine Optimization? I’m trying to get my blog to rank for some targeted keywords but I’m not seeing very good results. If you know of any please share. Many thanks!

You can Use rank math or Yoast SEO they are very good you can try both but I would suggest you to use Rankmath cause it is more user friendly but in the end, it depends on you;)

This colours has navigated right into my heart.

This post is so insightful and well-written! I love how you presented the information in a clear and engaging manner. Keep up the great work

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

share this!

March 26, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

Essays on democracy draw attention to critical threats, explore safeguards ahead of Jan. 6

by Tracy DeStazio, University of Notre Dame

Following the events of Jan. 6, 2021—when a violent mob stormed the U.S. Capitol building in an effort to interrupt the certification process of the 2020 presidential election—experts began to question how to protect the next presidential election from a similar threat. To that end, University of Notre Dame political scientists have partnered with preeminent scholars of democracy from across the country to produce a set of recommendations to strengthen and safeguard democracy in America.

The University's Rooney Center for the Study of American Democracy established the January 6th, 2025, Project in an effort to understand the social, political, psychological and demographic factors that led to that troublesome day in the capital.

By pursuing research, teaching and public engagement , the project offers insight into how American democracy got to this point and how to strengthen and protect it, while emphasizing how to prepare for a similar attack many deem imminent on Jan. 6, 2025, when Congress seeks to certify the 2024 presidential election results. The project includes 34 members who represent various disciplines and leading universities—10 of whom hail from Notre Dame's faculty.

Matthew E.K. Hall, director of the Rooney Center, said one of the project's first goals was to create a collection of essays written by its members to be included in a special issue of The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , which was published this month. These essays aim to draw attention to the vulnerabilities in our democratic system and the threats building against it, and to create consensus on ways to remedy both problems.

The authors set out to tackle the following tough questions, but from different perspectives: How serious are the threats to our democracy, how did we get to this point, and what can we do to fix the situation? The 14 essays are broken down into categories, falling under the headings of "'Us' Versus 'Them,'" "Dangerous Ideas" and "Undermining Democratic Institutions." With most pieces being co-authored by faculty from multiple institutions, the collection offers a collaborative approach to evaluating what led America to this crisis and how to avert it.

David Campbell, director of the Notre Dame Democracy Initiative and the Packey J. Dee Professor of American Democracy in the Department of Political Science, described the project as "an example of how Notre Dame can be a national leader on the issue of preserving American democracy. Not only do we have top scholars working on the issue, but we can provide a forum for a community of scholars across many leading universities. Maintaining democracy will require all hands on deck."

In the collection's introduction, Hall explained the backdrop of what led America to this point and why these essays help acknowledge the challenges we are facing as a nation.

"We are basically living through a revival of fascist politics in the U.S.," Hall wrote, "where politicians are using divisive rhetoric to separate us into an 'us' versus 'them' paradigm—left versus right, white versus Black, rich versus poor, urban versus rural, religious versus secular—the divisions go on and on."

Hall estimated that between 25 and 30% of Americans have consistently endorsed some fascist ideas such as racial oppression, conspiracy theories and authoritarianism. "Ordinarily, this consistent minority is held in check by the democratic process," Hall explained.

"These candidates don't even get nominated for major political positions because their co-partisan allies don't want to lose the general election.

"But when our politics become this intensely polarized, most partisans will support their party no matter who is nominated," he continued. "As a result, politicians pushing these fascist ideas can gain power by taking over one political party and then exploiting the polarization to win elections. Once taking power, they will likely manipulate the electoral process to remain in power."

Consequently, Hall said, fascist leaders are able to exploit these social divisions to break down basic social norms and shared understandings about American politics. This pushes huge swaths of society toward accepting dangerous ideas that would normally be rejected, such as expanded executive power, intense animosity toward political opponents, a wavering support for free speech, and political candidates who deny election losses.

This weakened support for democratic norms enables attacks on our democratic institutions, such as ignoring court rulings, enacting voter suppression laws and—most shockingly (as in the case of Jan. 6)—openly subverting elections.

With the political situation as dire as many feel it to be, the January 6th, 2025, Project's essays outline a few practical steps that can be taken to strengthen and safeguard democracy in America.

For example, Hall said, as the nation moves forward into this next election year, American voters have to stay focused on the "deliberate denial of reality" on the part of some politicians so that they can discern the difference between lies, truths and just plain distractions.

"The more we lose touch with basic facts and accept misinformation, conspiracies and contradictory claims as the norm in our society," he said, "the more vulnerable we are to losing our democracy.

"Even more importantly, we have to be willing to sacrifice short-term political gains in order to preserve the long-term stability of our democracy. That might mean holding your nose to vote for candidates that you would not otherwise support."

Hall added that Americans must redouble their devotion to democratic principles such as open elections and free speech, and states should adopt institutional reforms that remove partisans from the electoral process (for example, employing nonpartisan election commissions). He also noted the importance of paying close attention to efforts that divide groups of Americans, especially those that portray outgroup members as evil or less than human.

The members of the project hope that by honestly acknowledging the challenges our nation is facing, understanding the mistakes that were made and recognizing the vulnerabilities in our system that led us to this situation—and by resolving to fix these issues—we can pull our country's political system back from the edge of the cliff before it's too late.

"The public needs to take these critical threats seriously and we're hoping that these essays draw attention to them, and help to build consensus about the underlying problems in our politics and potential remedies," Hall concluded.

Democracy is one of several University-wide initiatives emerging from Notre Dame's recently released Strategic Framework . The Democracy Initiative will further establish Notre Dame as a global leader in the study of democracy, a convenor for conversations about and actions to preserve democracy, and a model for the formation of civically engaged citizens and public servants.

Provided by University of Notre Dame

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Researchers identify microbes that help plants thwart parasite

20 minutes ago

Atomic-scale semiconductor process technology and clean hydrogen technology join hands

26 minutes ago

Sounds emanating from coral reefs found to change as the moon rises and sets

42 minutes ago

New design for a small, highly sensitive gravimeter that can operate stably at room temperature

Scientists discover endoparasitic marine tapeworm trapped in Cretaceous amber

51 minutes ago

Researchers discover ultra-low velocity zone beneath the Himalayas

New research could help honeybees fight off their worst enemy

Research uncovers the neural pathways for primate reciprocity, social support, and empathy

New enzymatic cocktail can kill tuberculosis-causing mycobacteria

2 hours ago

Astronomers unveil strong magnetic fields spiraling at the edge of Milky Way's central black hole

Relevant physicsforums posts, metal, rock, instrumental rock and fusion.

Mar 26, 2024

Interesting anecdotes in the history of physics?

Who should have been the 4th laureate in the nobel prize in physics.

Mar 25, 2024

Cover songs versus the original track, which ones are better?

Mar 22, 2024

For WW2 buffs!

Who is your favorite jazz musician and what is your favorite song.

Mar 20, 2024

More from Art, Music, History, and Linguistics

Related Stories

Political rhetoric changes views on democratic principles, study finds

Oct 25, 2023

'On the brink of a new civil war': Survey highlights fragility of American democracy, stark partisan divides

Nov 3, 2022

The majority of Americans do not support anti-democratic behavior, even when elected officials do: Study

Mar 18, 2024

Preventing another 'Jan. 6' starts by changing how elections are certified, experts say

Report: Political violence threatens health of US democracy

Nov 7, 2023

Democratic backslide a threat to free elections globally: Report

Mar 7, 2024

Recommended for you

New study suggests that while social media changes over decades, conversation dynamics stay the same

World Happiness Report: Why we might be measuring happiness wrong

Advanced statistical analysis highlights the role of interaction between US Supreme Court judges

Standing together against hate: A collective responsibility

Mar 6, 2024

Although trust in science remains high, the public questions scientists' adherence to science's norms

Mar 4, 2024

Let us know if there is a problem with our content

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

• Newsletters
• Account Activating this button will toggle the display of additional content Account Sign out

Even the Supreme Court’s Conservatives Are Fed Up With the Garbage Coming Out of the 5th Circuit

What happens when a lawless judge and a terrible appeals court embrace the dopiest First Amendment claim you’ve ever heard out of pure spite toward a Democratic president? That would be Murthy v. Missouri , a brain-meltingly dumb case that the Supreme Court was unfortunate enough to hear oral arguments in on Monday. Murthy poses a question so asinine that to ask it is to answer it: Can government officials encourage social media companies to moderate certain content that they deem harmful—most importantly, disinformation about COVID-19 in the middle of the pandemic?

Yes, of course they can: The First Amendment does not gag public officials from urging Facebook or the Washington Post or anyone else to publish or not publish certain information, especially when it contains dangerous lies about a once-in-a-century pandemic that could exacerbate the crisis. The First Amendment bars government censorship, not government persuasion, and the Biden administration planted itself on the latter side of that bright line. At least six justices grasped this basic constitutional principle on Monday. Several of them used arguments to highlight how this inane case illustrates so much of what’s wrong with the judiciary today, and hinted at the dangers it could pose to American democracy in the future. That we should pay attention to. The rest was an unfortunate sideshow.

Like so many Supreme Court cases these days, Murthy is built atop a heap of fake facts. The case began when Missouri and Louisiana sued agencies and officials across the Biden administration, falsely accusing them of coercing social media companies into censoring their residents’ free speech. (These states later added a handful of fringe anti-vaxxers to the suit.) They filed their complaint in the Monroe Division of the Western District of Louisiana, where—surprise!—they were guaranteed to draw a Trump appointee, Terry Doughty, the one judge hearing cases in that division. Judge Doughty has a record of issuing nationwide injunctions against the Biden administration on the basis of dubious legal and factual analysis. Most notably, he issued a nationwide bar against Biden’s vaccine mandate for health care workers in an opinion riddled with anti-vax nonsense (which the Supreme Court reversed ).

Doughty, in other words, was certain to rule against Biden in the social media case. Even still, the opinion he handed down on July 4, 2023, was a humiliating mess of contradictions, fabrications , and (ironically) misinformation . Doughty adopted the plaintiffs’ theory that the administration “coerced” social media companies into removing “conservative” speech about COVID, including posts promoting hydroxychloroquine and rejecting the efficacy of vaccines. He accused government officials of launching a “coordinated campaign” to silence conservatives by forcing private companies to take down anti-vax content, as well as false claims about election fraud. And he issued one of the most sweeping injunctions in the history of the American legal system, prohibiting any employee—including Homeland Security, the State Department, the Department of Justice, and the FBI—from “engaging in any communication of any kind with social-media companies” encouraging content moderation.

Doughty, it turns out, grievously butchered the record to reach his conclusion. An exhaustive analysis by Mike Masnick proves that Doughty consistently misrepresented testimony and other evidence in the record to construct a conspiracy theory with zero basis in reality. He distorted emails and other exchanges to make them look coercive when they were nothing of the sort, cherry-picking and rearranging quotations to put them in a censorious light. Yet the hard-right U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5 th Circuit, where law goes to die , affirmed Doughty’s conclusions and upheld much of his injunction (while narrowing it in part). That move sent the administration racing to the Supreme Court for an emergency stay, which it granted in October, over the dissents of Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Clarence Thomas. Monday’s arguments confirmed that a majority is prepared to side with Biden on the merits.

The justices did not sound happy to have the case before them. Justice Sonia Sotomayor scolded Louisiana Solicitor General Benjamin Aguiñaga (a former Alito clerk) for his lack of candor. “I have such a problem with your brief,” she told him. “You omit information that changes the context of some of your claims. You attribute things to people who it didn’t happen to.” Aguiñaga was unable to defend Doughty’s more extreme deceptions. So he had to fall back on what Justice Elena Kagan called an “extremely expansive” argument: the notion that “encouraging people to suppress their own speech” violates the First Amendment, even if it isn’t coercive. Kagan drew upon her past work in the executive branch to explain that, actually, government officials do this all the time . “I’ve had some experience encouraging press to suppress their own speech,” Kagan told Aguiñaga. Example: “You just wrote a bad editorial. Here are the five reasons you shouldn’t write another one.” Is that really unconstitutional?

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a former White House staff secretary, also provided a real-world perspective after Alito fumed that officials had been too mean to the platforms and would never treat the traditional press so sharply. Kavanaugh gave Alito a reality check: “I’d assumed, thought, [and] experienced government press people throughout the federal government who regularly call up the media and berate them,” he told Deputy Solicitor General Brian Fletcher, who defended the administration. “You said the anger was unusual. I wasn’t entirely clear on that from my own experience.” Translation: Government employees yell at members of the media all the time. The media can accept or reject their requests. That is how it works .

But did Biden officials berate social media employees? Only on a few rare occasions. Here’s what really happened: The platforms in question, most prominently Facebook and Twitter, invited the government to help them identify and remove the most toxic disinformation. At the time, as Fletcher explained, these companies were eager to present themselves as “partners” with the administration in its push for COVID vaccination. Officials could “flag” questionable content, but the platforms made their own judgment calls, without any demonstrable fear of retaliation. Everyone agrees that the government violates free speech when it explicitly coerces companies into censoring expression under the threat of punishment. But, Fletcher persuasively argued, no such thing happened here.

That left Aguiñaga to lean on the theory that the government contravenes the First Amendment when it merely “encourages” specific content moderation. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a stickler for legible rules, sounded borderline aghast at this baggy, boundless standard; she lobbed a series of hypotheticals at Aguiñaga that showed he was pushing a meaningless and impracticable test. Chief Justice John Roberts tried to help Aguiñaga understand that multiple agencies with competing agendas may pressure platforms in contradictory directions; doesn’t that “dilute the concept of coercion significantly?” (Aguiñaga just sounded confused.) Kavanaugh pointed out that the plaintiffs’ position could prevent officials from urging the press to safeguard national security by, for instance, asserting that a forthcoming article might imperil the troops.

Even Gorsuch, who started out sympathetic to Aguiñaga, was exasperated by the end, complaining that Doughty’s “universal injunction” was part of the “epidemic” that had to be stopped. Only Alito and Thomas sounded like surefire votes for the plaintiffs after nearly two hours of arguments, and Thomas’ heart was not fully in it. Alito stood alone in his increasingly uncontrolled and seething aggrievement .

The pandemic may be over, but Murthy remains a hugely relevant case. Perhaps most obviously, it is a cautionary tale about the extremism of Trump judges like Doughty, who keep issuing these lawless injunctions at the behest of red-state politicians, and the 5 th Circuit, which keeps upholding them. A disproportionate number of the Supreme Court’s cases this term emerge from the 5 th Circuit, which keeps appeasing the Trump-appointed zealots attempting to seize unimaginable amounts of power from the democratic branches. The chief justice is attempting to crack down on the kind of judge-shopping that occurred here, but the fight is just beginning. The evident frustration of Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and even Gorsuch on Monday suggests that a majority of the court is fed up with this political manipulation of the judiciary by rogue judges with undisguised partisan loyalties.

So, yes, SCOTUS is likely to reach the right result in Murthy . Alarmingly, though, so much damage has already been done. In light of Doughty’s injunction, the federal government shut down all of its efforts to combat disinformation, fearful of judicial sanctions. Bad actors have exploited this development to flood the internet with lies about the upcoming 2024 election. If foreign entities attempt to interfere with the election via social media, the Biden administration will have few tools left to fight them. It is just too late to revive the various task forces that worked with platforms before Doughty disbanded them last year. For the Murthy plaintiffs, then, a Supreme Court defeat may not matter much. They have already done immense damage to truth and transparency on the internet. And at this late date, the worst of it cannot be undone.

What UFO Cultists Can Teach Us About Political Paranoia Today

A s the psychologist Leon Festinger wrote in 1956, “A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.” Why is that? Because, as Festinger explained in depth in A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance and other books , when a deeply held conviction comes into conflict with reality, its holder experiences a “cognitive dissonance” that is so uncomfortable that he or she is driven to reduce or resolve it, either by revising the belief to bring it into consonance with reality, or, if it is too deeply rooted to change, by editing their view of reality to conform with their conviction. A smoker may convince themselves that they’re right to ignore their doctor’s advice to quit because the weight they might gain would jeopardize their health even more than smoking does. Or, they may simply avoid visiting the doctor.

Cognitive dissonance avoidance accounts for why liberals prefer to watch MSNBC and conservatives Fox News, and why we prefer to socialize with people who share our biases. More broadly, it accounts for why some of us stubbornly believe the unbelievable—and disbelieve what we cannot rationally deny.

Read More: Why Does the QAnon Conspiracy Thrive Despite All its Unfulfilled Prophecies?

Festinger designed a number of ingenious laboratory experiments to demonstrate cognitive dissonance reduction and avoidance in action. But when the Seekers, a tiny Chicago-based UFO cult, announced that the world would end on December 21, 1954, Festinger saw an opportunity to carry out a natural experiment. The Seekers, he predicted, would handle the inevitable “disconfirmation” of their prophecy in three possible ways: The least-committed would either reject the new belief system they’d adopted and return to their lives, or alter it to accommodate its disconfirmation, concluding, perhaps, that they’d misinterpreted the prophecy. Maybe they’d gotten the date wrong, they’d say, or taken literally what they should have construed metaphorically. But the most zealous apostles, the ones who had invested the most in the movement, he predicted, would more than likely take a leap into the absurd and redouble their proselytizing in an attempt to create a community of believers that was large enough to cancel out the refutation of their belief. Because, as Festinger put it, “if everyone in the whole world believed something there would be no question at all as to the validity of this belief.”

Festinger sent some of his graduate students to infiltrate the Seekers and take notes. The result was When Prophecy Fails , an ethnographic study that reads at times like the scenario for one of Christopher Guest’s deadpan mockumentaries, though its authors (Festinger co-wrote it with Henry W. Riecken and Stanley Schachter, two of his colleagues at the Laboratory for Research in Social Relations at the University of Minnesota) never stooped to outright ridicule or condescension. As they noted in its opening pages, history is replete with cases of messianic movements that survived the public failures of their prophecies, at least for a time. Montanus, a Christian of the Second century, received a revelation that Christ was about to return to the Phrygian town of Pepuza, which would become the New Jerusalem. Though nothing of the sort happened, Pepuza enjoyed a population boom in anticipation of its changed status and Montanism carried on as a heretical sect there for another 400 years.

Sabbatai Zevi, a Jewish mystic from Smyrna, prophesized that the Messiah would come to earth in 1648. When 1648 came and went, he revised the date to 1666. In 1665, he announced that he himself was the Messiah, and set out to Constantinople to depose the Sultan. Some of his followers fell away when he was arrested and imprisoned, but others reasoned that the fact that the Sultan hadn’t killed him confirmed that he was the Messiah. The Sultan, then, told Zevi to choose between martyrdom and conversion, and Zevi agreed to convert to Islam. That was a bridge too far for most, but not all, of the Sabbateans; the hardest-core of true-believers presumed Zevi’s conversion had been a part of his plan all along and followed him into apostasy.

The Seekers had none of Zevi’s mass appeal; they never numbered more than a few dozen. Their spiritual leader was Dorothy Martin (Festinger and his co-authors called her Mrs. Marian Keech in the book), a 50-something housewife who’d attended theosophy lectures; read the literature of the quasi-fascist “I AM” movement; studied Oahspe, the Faithist Bible that was channeled to the American dentist John Ballou Newbrough in 1882; and dabbled in the freshly minted religion of Scientology. At some point, she’d begun to receive communications from other planes of existence. The first messages she transcribed were from her dead father. Then, spiritual beings from the planets Clarion and Cerus made contact with her. The most important of them, Sananda, told her that he was the latest incarnation of Jesus Christ. In time, he warned her about the tribulations that would usher in the New Age.

Not only would Lake Michigan inundate Chicago, Sananda said, in his quasi-Biblical diction, but “the east of the country of the U.S.A. is that it is to break in twain.” “The great tilting of the land of the U.S. to the East will throw up mountains along the Central States,” he said. “The new mountain range shall be called the Argone Range, which will signify the ones who have been there are gone.” Worldwide, the Egyptian deserts would bloom, the lost continent of Lemuria would rise out of the Pacific, and France, England, and Russia would sink beneath the waves.

As the countdown to December 21, 1954 began, the media camped out in Martin’s neighborhood. Things quickly took a farcical turn. When one of Festinger’s researchers appeared at her house, Martin and the Seekers mistook him for a messenger from Sananda and pressed him to give them a sign. One of the members channeled a message that promised a miracle—Martin’s husband would die that same night and be resurrected. Three times, members checked on Mr. Martin in his bedroom, and three times, they found him peacefully asleep. After the third time, the messenger lamely explained that the miracle had already happened—he’d died and been resurrected when no one was watching.

When Sananda told Martin that a flying saucer would pick them up at 4 p.m. on December 17 th and transport them to a place of safety, the Seekers stripped all the metal off their clothes in preparation (for reasons that were not specified, metal and flying saucers were understood to be a fatal mix). The saucer didn’t come that afternoon, and it didn’t come that night, though they waited in the bitter cold in Martin’s back yard until 3 a.m. the next morning.

Dr. Charles Laughead (Festinger and company called him Dr. Armstrong) was one of the Seekers’ most ardent members. A medical doctor and college professor, he had done missionary work in Egypt with his wife, with whom he shared a deep interest in the occult and flying saucers. In the early hours of December 21, as the Seekers stood vigil for the last time, Laughead bucked up one of Festinger’s secret observers (though it’s not unreasonable to surmise that he was shoring up his own faltering faith, as well):

I’ve given up just about everything. I’ve cut every tie: I’ve burned every bridge. I’ve turned my back on the world. I can’t afford to doubt. I have to believe. And there isn’t any other truth.… I won’t doubt even if we have to make an announcement to the press tomorrow and admit we were wrong. You’re having your period of doubt now, but hang on, boy, hang on. This is a tough time but we know that the boys upstairs are taking care of us. They’ve given us their promise.

Martin and the Seekers ultimately explained her prophecy’s failure as the proof of its success: the announcement they made to the press the next day was not that she had been wrong, but that the Seekers’ steadfastness had been rewarded with the divine decision to postpone the Day of Judgment.

True to Festinger’s predictions, while the group’s more casual members did drift back into their old lives, its core members doubled down on both their belief and their proselytizing. But only for a time; within a matter of weeks, as Festinger and his co-authors dryly put it, “an unfriendly world finally forced the small band of Lake City believers into diaspora.” Still, they concluded, “It is interesting to speculate….on what they might have made of their opportunities had they been more effective apostles…. disconfirmation might have portended the beginning, not the end.” Martin herself continued to channel otherworldly messages and write New Age books for the rest of her long life.

The need to reduce or avoid cognitive dissonance can’t account for the contents of strange beliefs, whether they are in the realm of religion, flying saucers, or politics. But it goes a long way to explain their stickiness. Reasoning with a true believer—a Stalinist who continued to believe that Russia was a beacon of freedom and fairness even after the show trials, the purges, and the Gulags became widely known; a QAnon follower in the weeks and months after Biden’s inauguration failed to bring about the cleansing storm that had been promised—can be exactly as useful as reasoning with someone who is in love with the wrong person.

There were only a few dozen Seekers, and QAnon is hardly in the political mainstream. But as our political culture grows ever more toxic and polarized, our deep need to deny and distort whatever clashes with what we choose to believe has come to play an even more vital role in our national psyche than ever before.

Adapted from: The Politics of Fear: The Peculiar Persistence of American Paranoia by Arthur Goldwag. Copyright © 2024 by Arthur Goldwag. Published by arrangement with Vintage Books, a division of Penguin Random House LLC .

More From TIME

More must-reads from time.

• Jane Fonda Champions Climate Action for Every Generation
• Biden’s Campaign Is In Trouble. Will the Turnaround Plan Work?
• Why We're Spending So Much Money Now
• The Financial Influencers Women Actually Want to Listen To
• Breaker Sunny Choi Is Heading to Paris
• Why TV Can’t Stop Making Silly Shows About Lady Journalists
• The Case for Wearing Shoes in the House
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

What to know about the crisis of violence, politics and hunger engulfing Haiti

A long-simmering crisis over Haiti’s ability to govern itself, particularly after a series of natural disasters and an increasingly dire humanitarian emergency, has come to a head in the Caribbean nation, as its de facto president remains stranded in Puerto Rico and its people starve and live in fear of rampant violence. 

The chaos engulfing the country has been bubbling for more than a year, only for it to spill over on the global stage on Monday night, as Haiti’s unpopular prime minister, Ariel Henry, agreed to resign once a transitional government is brokered by other Caribbean nations and parties, including the U.S.

But the very idea of a transitional government brokered not by Haitians but by outsiders is one of the main reasons Haiti, a nation of 11 million, is on the brink, according to humanitarian workers and residents who have called for Haitian-led solutions. 

“What we’re seeing in Haiti has been building since the 2010 earthquake,” said Greg Beckett, an associate professor of anthropology at Western University in Canada. 

What is happening in Haiti and why?

In the power vacuum that followed the assassination of democratically elected President Jovenel Moïse in 2021, Henry, who was prime minister under Moïse, assumed power, with the support of several nations, including the U.S. 

When Haiti failed to hold elections multiple times — Henry said it was due to logistical problems or violence — protests rang out against him. By the time Henry announced last year that elections would be postponed again, to 2025, armed groups that were already active in Port-au-Prince, the capital, dialed up the violence.

Even before Moïse’s assassination, these militias and armed groups existed alongside politicians who used them to do their bidding, including everything from intimidating the opposition to collecting votes . With the dwindling of the country’s elected officials, though, many of these rebel forces have engaged in excessively violent acts, and have taken control of at least 80% of the capital, according to a United Nations estimate. 

Those groups, which include paramilitary and former police officers who pose as community leaders, have been responsible for the increase in killings, kidnappings and rapes since Moïse’s death, according to the Uppsala Conflict Data Program at Uppsala University in Sweden. According to a report from the U.N . released in January, more than 8,400 people were killed, injured or kidnapped in 2023, an increase of 122% increase from 2022.

“January and February have been the most violent months in the recent crisis, with thousands of people killed, or injured, or raped,” Beckett said.

Armed groups who had been calling for Henry’s resignation have already attacked airports, police stations, sea ports, the Central Bank and the country’s national soccer stadium. The situation reached critical mass earlier this month when the country’s two main prisons were raided , leading to the escape of about 4,000 prisoners. The beleaguered government called a 72-hour state of emergency, including a night-time curfew — but its authority had evaporated by then.

Aside from human-made catastrophes, Haiti still has not fully recovered from the devastating earthquake in 2010 that killed about 220,000 people and left 1.5 million homeless, many of them living in poorly built and exposed housing. More earthquakes, hurricanes and floods have followed, exacerbating efforts to rebuild infrastructure and a sense of national unity.

Since the earthquake, “there have been groups in Haiti trying to control that reconstruction process and the funding, the billions of dollars coming into the country to rebuild it,” said Beckett, who specializes in the Caribbean, particularly Haiti. 

Beckett said that control initially came from politicians and subsequently from armed groups supported by those politicians. Political “parties that controlled the government used the government for corruption to steal that money. We’re seeing the fallout from that.”

Many armed groups have formed in recent years claiming to be community groups carrying out essential work in underprivileged neighborhoods, but they have instead been accused of violence, even murder . One of the two main groups, G-9, is led by a former elite police officer, Jimmy Chérizier — also known as “Barbecue” — who has become the public face of the unrest and claimed credit for various attacks on public institutions. He has openly called for Henry to step down and called his campaign an “armed revolution.”

But caught in the crossfire are the residents of Haiti. In just one week, 15,000 people have been displaced from Port-au-Prince, according to a U.N. estimate. But people have been trying to flee the capital for well over a year, with one woman telling NBC News that she is currently hiding in a church with her three children and another family with eight children. The U.N. said about 160,000 people have left Port-au-Prince because of the swell of violence in the last several months. 

Deep poverty and famine are also a serious danger. Gangs have cut off access to the country’s largest port, Autorité Portuaire Nationale, and food could soon become scarce.

Haiti's uncertain future

A new transitional government may dismay the Haitians and their supporters who call for Haitian-led solutions to the crisis. 

But the creation of such a government would come after years of democratic disruption and the crumbling of Haiti’s political leadership. The country hasn’t held an election in eight years. 

Haitian advocates and scholars like Jemima Pierre, a professor at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, say foreign intervention, including from the U.S., is partially to blame for Haiti’s turmoil. The U.S. has routinely sent thousands of troops to Haiti , intervened in its government and supported unpopular leaders like Henry.

“What you have over the last 20 years is the consistent dismantling of the Haitian state,” Pierre said. “What intervention means for Haiti, what it has always meant, is death and destruction.”

In fact, the country’s situation was so dire that Henry was forced to travel abroad in the hope of securing a U.N. peacekeeping deal. He went to Kenya, which agreed to send 1,000 troops to coordinate an East African and U.N.-backed alliance to help restore order in Haiti, but the plan is now on hold . Kenya agreed last October to send a U.N.-sanctioned security force to Haiti, but Kenya’s courts decided it was unconstitutional. The result has been Haiti fending for itself. 

“A force like Kenya, they don’t speak Kreyòl, they don’t speak French,” Pierre said. “The Kenyan police are known for human rights abuses . So what does it tell us as Haitians that the only thing that you see that we deserve are not schools, not reparations for the cholera the U.N. brought , but more military with the mandate to use all kinds of force on our population? That is unacceptable.”  

Henry was forced to announce his planned resignation from Puerto Rico, as threats of violence — and armed groups taking over the airports — have prevented him from returning to his country.  

Now that Henry is to stand down, it is far from clear what the armed groups will do or demand next, aside from the right to govern. 

“It’s the Haitian people who know what they’re going through. It’s the Haitian people who are going to take destiny into their own hands. Haitian people will choose who will govern them,” Chérizier said recently, according to The Associated Press .

Haitians and their supporters have put forth their own solutions over the years, holding that foreign intervention routinely ignores the voices and desires of Haitians. 

In 2021, both Haitian and non-Haitian church leaders, women’s rights groups, lawyers, humanitarian workers, the Voodoo Sector and more created the Commission to Search for a Haitian Solution to the Crisis . The commission has proposed the “ Montana Accord ,” outlining a two-year interim government with oversight committees tasked with restoring order, eradicating corruption and establishing fair elections. 

For more from NBC BLK, sign up for our weekly newsletter .

CORRECTION (March 15, 2024, 9:58 a.m. ET): An earlier version of this article misstated which university Jemima Pierre is affiliated with. She is a professor at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, not the University of California, Los Angeles, (or Columbia University, as an earlier correction misstated).

Patrick Smith is a London-based editor and reporter for NBC News Digital.

Char Adams is a reporter for NBC BLK who writes about race.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

The One Idea That Could Save American Democracy

By Astra Taylor and Leah Hunt-Hendrix

Ms. Taylor and Ms. Hunt-Hendrix are political organizers and the authors of the book “Solidarity: The Past, Present, and Future of a World-Changing Idea.”

These days, we often hear that democracy is on the ballot. And there’s a truth to that: Winning elections is critical, especially as liberal and progressive forces try to fend off radical right-wing movements. But the democratic crisis that our society faces will not be solved by voting alone. We need to do more than defeat Donald Trump and his allies — we need to make cultivating solidarity a national priority.

For years, solidarity’s strongest associations have been with the left and the labor movement — a term invoked at protests and on picket lines. But its roots are much deeper, and its potential implications far more profound, than we typically assume. Though we rarely speak about it as such, solidarity is a concept as fundamental to democracy as its better-known cousins: equality, freedom and justice. Solidarity is simultaneously a bond that holds society together and a force that propels it forward. After all, when people feel connected, they are more willing to work together, to share resources and to have one another’s backs. Solidarity weaves us into a larger and more resilient “we” through the precious and powerful sense that even though we are different, our lives and our fates are connected.

We have both spent years working as organizers and activists . If our experience has taught us anything, it is that a sense of connection and mutualism is rarely spontaneous. It must be nurtured and sustained. Without robust and effective organizations and institutions to cultivate and maintain solidarity, it weakens and democracy falters. We become more atomized and isolated, suspicious and susceptible to misinformation, more disengaged and cynical, and easily pitted against one another.

Democracy’s opponents know this. That’s why they invest huge amounts of energy and resources to sabotage transformative, democratic solidarity and to nurture exclusionary and reactionary forms of group identity. Enraged at a decade of social movements and the long-overdue revival of organized labor, right-wing strategists and their corporate backers have redoubled their efforts to divide and conquer the American public, inflaming group resentments in order to restore traditional social hierarchies and ensure that plutocrats maintain their hold on wealth and power. In white papers, stump speeches and podcasts, conservative ideologues have laid out their vision for capturing the state and using it as a tool to remake our country in their image.

If we do not prioritize solidarity, this dangerous and anti-democratic project will succeed. Far more than just a slogan or hashtag, solidarity can orient us toward a future worth fighting for, providing the basis of a credible and galvanizing plan for democratic renewal. Instead of the 20th-century ideal of a welfare state, we should try to imagine a solidarity state.

We urgently need a countervision of what government can and should be, and how public resources and infrastructure can be deployed to foster social connection and repair the social fabric so that democracy can have a chance not just to limp along, but to flourish. Solidarity, here, is both a goal worth reaching toward and the method of building the power to achieve it. It is both means and ends, the forging of social bonds so that we can become strong enough to shift policy together.

Historically, the question of solidarity has been raised during volatile junctures like the one we are living through. Contemporary conceptions of solidarity first took form after the democratic revolutions of the 18th century and over the course of the Industrial Revolution. As kings were deposed and the church’s role as a moral authority waned, philosophers and citizens wondered how society could cohere without a monarch or god. What could bind people in a secular, pluralistic age?

The 19th-century thinkers who began seriously contemplating and writing about the idea of solidarity often used the image of the human body, where different parts work in tandem. Most famously, the French sociologist Émile Durkheim put solidarity at the center of his inquiry, arguing that as society increased in complexity, social bonds between people would strengthen, each person playing a specialized role while connected to a larger whole. Solidarity and social cohesion, he argued, would be the natural result of increasing social and economic interdependence. But as Durkheim himself would eventually recognize, the industrial economy that he initially imagined would generate solidarity would actually serve to weaken its fragile ties, fostering what he called anomie, the corrosive hopelessness that accompanied growing inequality.

In the United States, solidarity never achieved the same intellectual cachet as in Europe. Since this nation’s founding, the concept has generally been neglected, and the practice actively suppressed and even criminalized. Attempts to forge cross-racial solidarity have met with violent suppression time and again, and labor organizing, effectively outlawed until the New Deal era, still occupies hostile legal ground. Decades of market-friendly policies, promoted by Republicans and Democrats alike, have undermined solidarity in ways both subtle and overt, from encouraging us to see ourselves as individual consumers rather than citizens to fostering individualism and competition over collectivity and cooperation.

As our profit-driven economy has made us more insecure and atomized — and more susceptible to authoritarian appeals — the far right has seized its opportunity. A furious backlash now rises to cut down the shoots of solidarity that sprung up as a result of recent movements pushing for economic, racial, environmental and gender justice. In response, programs that encourage diversity and inclusion are being targeted by billionaire investors, while small acts of solidarity — like helping someone get an abortion or bailing protesters out of jail — have been criminalized.

Awaiting the return of Mr. Trump, the Heritage Foundation has mapped out a plan to remake government and society, using the full power of the state to roll back what it calls “the Great Awokening” and restore a Judeo-Christian, capitalist “culture of life” and “blessedness.” “Woke” has been turned into a pejorative so that the word can be wielded to tarnish and break the solidarity that people have only just begun to experience.

Our vision of a solidarity state offers a pointed rejoinder to this project. Social democrats and socialists have been right to emphasize the need for redistribution and robust public investment in goods and services. We must restructure our economy so that it works for the many and not the few. But unlike conservatives — think, for example, of Margaret Thatcher, the prime minister of Britain who in 1981 said, “Economics are the method; the object is to change the heart and soul” — liberals and leftists have tended to downplay the role of policy in shaping public sensibilities. This is a mistake.

Laws and social programs not only shape material outcomes; they also shape us, informing public perceptions and preferences, and generating what scholars call policy feedback loops. There is no neutral state to aspire to. Policies can either foster solidarity and help repair the divides that separate us or deepen the fissures.

Today, the American welfare state too often does the latter. As sociologists including Suzanne Mettler and Matthew Desmond have detailed, lower-income people tend to be stigmatized for needing assistance, while more-affluent citizens reap a range of benefits that are comparatively invisible, mainly through tax credits and tax breaks. Both arrangements — the highly visible and stigmatized aid to the poor and the more invisible and socially acceptable aid to the affluent — serve to foster resentment and obscure how we are all dependent on the state in various ways.

Instead of treating citizens as passive and isolated recipients of services delivered from on high, a solidarity state would experiment with creative ways of fostering connection and participation at every opportunity for more Americans. What if we had basic guarantees that were universal rather than means-tested programs that distinguish between the deserving and undeserving, stigmatizing some and setting groups apart? What if, following the model of a widely admired program in Canada, the government aided groups of private citizens who want to sponsor and subsidize migrants and refugees? What if public schools, post offices, transit systems, parks, public utilities and jobs programs were explicitly designed to facilitate social connection and solidarity in addition to providing essential support and services?

We’ll get there only if we take up the challenge of building solidarity from wherever we happen to sit. Both means and end, solidarity can be a source of power, built through the day-to-day work of organizing, and our shared purpose. Solidarity is the essential and too often missing ingredient of today’s most important political project: not just saving democracy but creating an egalitarian, multiracial society that can guarantee each of us a dignified life.

Astra Taylor and Leah Hunt-Hendrix are political organizers and the authors of the book “Solidarity: The Past, Present, and Future of a World-Changing Idea.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• March Madness
• AP Top 25 Poll
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

Judge clears way for Trump to appeal ruling keeping Fani Willis on Georgia 2020 election case

A special prosecutor who had a romantic relationship with Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has withdrawn from the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis looks on during a hearing on the Georgia election interference case, Friday, March, 1, 2024, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Alex Slitz, Pool, File)

• Copy Link copied

FILE- Fulton County Superior Judge Scott McAfee presides over a hearing is to determine whether Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should be removed from the case because of a relationship with Nathan Wade, special prosecutor she hired in the election interference case against former President Donald Trump, Friday, March, 1, 2024, in Atlanta. An attorney for Donald Trump says he’s optimistic an appellate review will lead to the Georgia 2020 election interference case against him being dismissed and Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis being disqualified. (AP Photo/Alex Slitz, Pool, File)

FILE - Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally, March 9, 2024, in Rome Ga. An attorney for Donald Trump says he’s optimistic an appellate review will lead to the Georgia 2020 election interference case against him being dismissed and Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis being disqualified. (AP Photo/Mike Stewart, File)

ATLANTA (AP) — The judge overseeing the Georgia 2020 election interference case cleared the way Wednesday for Donald Trump and other defendants to appeal a ruling allowing Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to remain on the prosecution.

Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee’s ruling means defense attorneys can ask the Georgia Court of Appeals to review the judge’s decision not to disqualify Willis or dismiss the indictment over her romantic relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade. It will be up to the appeals court to decide whether to hear the matter.

The judge said he would continue working to get the case ready for trial by addressing other matters in the meantime.

But while Willis had made clear her determination to turn the page from weeks of embarrassing headlines, the judge’s decision to green-light the appeal allows defense attorneys to keep at the forefront allegations of impropriety that threaten to damage the public’s perception of the prosecution.

McAfee last week said Willis can remain on the most sprawling of four criminal cases against the former president as long as Wade resigns, which Wade did on Friday.

Willis’ romantic relationship with Wade has roiled the case for weeks, overshadowing the allegations charging Trump and 18 others with trying to illegally overturn his narrow loss to Democrat Joe Biden in 2020 in Georgia in a desperate bid to remain in power. Among the acts listed in the indictment was a Jan. 2, 2021, phone call in which Trump urged fellow Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to help him “find” the 11,780 votes needed to beat Biden.

While the judge did not find Willis’ relationship with Wade created a conflict of interest that should force her off the case, he said an “appearance of impropriety” infected the prosecution team. The judge rebuked Willis for her “tremendous” lapse in judgment and questioned the truthfulness of Wade’s and her testimony about the timing of their relationship.

Attorneys for Trump and the other defendants said in court papers on Monday that Wade’s resignation was not enough to correct the appearance of impropriety the judge found. Defense lawyers say a failure to remove Willis could imperil any convictions and force a retrial if an appeals court later finds it was warranted.

Trump attorney Steve Sadow called the judge’s decision to allow the appeal “highly significant.”

“The defense is optimistic that appellate review will lead to the case being dismissed and the DA being disqualified,” Sadow said in an email.

Jeff DiSantis, a spokesman for the district attorney’s office, noted in a text message that the case had not been put on hold, adding that prosecutors will “work to move it forward to trial as quickly as possible.” The district attorney’s office will only comment on the appeal in court filings, he said.

Trump has pleaded not guilty and has denied doing anything wrong. The presumptive Republican nominee for the 2024 presidential election has characterized all the criminal cases against him as an effort to hurt his bid to reclaim the White House in November.

Defense attorneys alleged that Willis paid Wade large sums for his work and then improperly benefited from the prosecution of the case when Wade used his earnings to pay for vacations for the two of them.

Willis and Wade acknowledged they engaged in a romantic relationship, but they rejected the idea that Willis improperly benefited from it. Willis and Wade insisted they didn’t begin dating until after he became special prosecutor and the relationship ended in the summer of 2023. They both said that Willis either paid for things herself or used cash to reimburse Wade for travel expenses.

Wade offered his resignation in a letter to Willis on Friday, saying he was doing so “in the interest of democracy, in dedication to the American public and to move this case forward as quickly as possible.”

“I will always remember — and will remind everyone — that you were brave enough to step forward and take on the investigation and prosecution of the allegations that the defendants in this case engaged in a conspiracy to overturn Georgia’s 2020 Presidential Election,” Willis wrote in a letter accepting his resignation.

The case is separate from the 2020 election interference case brought by special counsel Jack Smith in Washington’s federal court. That case is currently on hold while the U.S. Supreme Court weighs Trump’s claims of presidential immunity, with oral arguments scheduled for next month.

Richer reported from Boston.