Nepali politics has begun to take more emotional swings than the ideological and political projections that guided earlier discussions and actions. Judging from the performance of some of the major characters, if not all, we can see the following.

The overplayed bravado seems to be the character of some political leaders of the major parties. Though the leaders sound emotional and superbly ideological in their party-related speeches, they are torn between dreams and realities as never before. The sense of futurity and the dream plans for the country of some intelligent political leaders are mired in their narratives of conduct and misguided ambitions. Their intellectual and policy documents are few and far between. Evoking fear, emotion and threat appears to be the common style. However, it would be wrong to conclude that the entire political system and the modus operandi of all the political leaders possess this character.

I would like to mention some occasions to enter the subject, which is the changing character of Nepali politics on some important scores. Political scientists and historians have been writing on this.

History says Nepali political parties came into existence by choosing certain political ideologies as the guiding principles. The broad division line was between the social democratic principles and communist ideology. The political parties did lay down their programmes and principles regarding the economy’s management, the structure of political organisations, and the nature of the constitution. I remember raising slogans as a school student supporting a political party and repeating its complex economic and political programmes. People from different walks of life repeated the slogans like a mantra. The parties drew from the ideologies propounded by scholars, philosophers and leaders like Karl Marx, Mahatma Gandhi, Mao Zedong and others. We grew with the ideological foregrounding dominating the organisations of the political parties. But later, such ideological foregrounding lost its earlier attraction.

The party leaders travel to different parts of the country for what they call consciousness-raising. However, the basic mode of party propaganda and schooling is dominated by oral discourses, rhetorics and interactions, not the teaching of hard-core ideologies. I understand political parties do not prioritise elaborating or explaining the ideological part, since it has lost its original attraction. What we have now is a post-ideological situation, created by the Nepali political parties, especially the communists. This becomes important, if we consider the major transformations and experiments that Nepal’s communists have made in their ideological options.

Maoist leader Lokendra Bista Magar ‘Abhyas’ met me at my working table at Himalayan Java Coffee House in Thamel over a decade ago. A huge tome running 800 pages titled Nepali Communist Andolan ra Janakrantika Aitihasik Dastabejharu (2070 BS) or "The historical documents of the Nepali Communist Movements and People's Revolution" accompanied him. He wanted me to review the book. I tried to convince him that I was not the right person. However, Bista said, "We want a non-partisan literary person to review this." His remarks struck me, and I decided to write and publish the book review in Kantipur (May 19, 2014). The book begins with the first pamphlet published after the establishment of the Nepal Communist Party on September 15, 1945, and includes documents about the breaking and coming together of different communist groups. Overall, the tome is a vast single self-review of the Nepali communists.

The swings in the communist parties are noteworthy. Take the Maoist movement, the party's armed insurgency and the grand peace agreement they signed with the other seven parliamentary parties on November 21, 2006, as examples. The latest big party, organised around the so-called ideology and the name of Mao, did not put a premium on the tremendous production of ideological propaganda. However, as the bibliographies show, there is a massive body of work written about the Maoist movement, and the Maoists separately and systematically elaborated the party's ideology as a project. This is an interesting subject of study. The Maoist armed movement naturally had an impact on Nepali politics. They shunned the path after the agreement.

It is significant how the political leaders, especially the communists who have carved out the history of Nepal, find the Bangladesh uprising an eloquent example to evoke fear of disruption and uprising in the country. As a senior responsible leader, this is a natural warning from Pushpa Kamal Dahal, the erstwhile prime minister. However, his other remarks do not give credence to that. Similarly, the CPN-UML, instead of uniting parties on addressing the country’s important issues, has chosen to stoke the fire by rubbing the word himsa or violence that they see as the sole character of the Maoists. But this is a mere semantic luxury to rub on the word himsa and enjoy seeing the Maoist leaders shout in opposition, promising to stall the parliamentary proceedings.

Nepali Congress lives on with BP Koirala and his ideals. Koirala did not write great theoretical works; instead, he chose to write great literary works. He saw immense power in the inner dynamics of his characters' psyche; he decided to keep that separate from his politics. Koirala had a clear conscience about political matters. He made a famous declaration that he was an anarchist in literature and a socialist in politics. Other parties come with similar packages of dreams, ideologies, and disillusionments.

I was asked to comment on the book launch of Prachanda: The Unknown Revolutionary (2008), written about Dahal by Anirban Roy, a Hindustan Times journalist and published by Mandala Book Point. The event was held at the Himalaya Hotel. The people invited to the dais were the then Chairman of the Constituent Assembly, Subas Chandra Nembang, Dahal’s father, Muktinath Dahal, and me. That was Dahal’s first stint as prime minister, yet he could not attend the programme. Dahal’s father signed a book for me and said, among other things, “Honesty is the greatest strength of a political leader.” Whenever I see the wavy signature of this simple and inspiring farmer, I feel that political leaders are slowly abandoning the path of honesty.