Just four months ago, on April 5, 2025, an article titled “Explaining Nepal's Crisis: Bloated at the Top, Hollow at the Core [Part 1]” issued a warning about the impending crisis (see below). Yet, even in the aftermath of the crises in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, along with numerous warnings from all corners from within the country both inside and the outside of the party, the top leaders in Nepal became increasingly complacent, focusing exclusively on the aspirant game (the rotational PM game). This situation is akin to fighting over rooms while the house is on fire.

The article in April argued, “The unbridled elite overproduction across state and non-state apparatuses, coupled with the resulting immiseration (widespread disenchantment) under current collusive politics, affects democracy and the republic itself.”

Explaining how elite overproduction can lead to uprising, the article warned, “Unlike the traditional game of musical chairs, where the number of chairs decreases each round, this ‘aspirant game’ involves adding ‘new players’ after every round. This dynamic results in elite overproduction, causing social instability as those left out feel aggrieved and disenfranchised by a select few, potentially tipping them toward uprisings.”

Furthermore, any democracy built on extractive policies and practices that lead to elite overproduction is bound to fail like a house of cards. This should serve as a lesson for everyone—the new players as well as the old. Consider how Kathmandu was once touted as the seminar capital of the world, with its lifestyle sustained by the sweat of migrant workers. The resulting wealth-pump model—which takes from the bottom to sustain the elite's lifestyle, with no tangible reinvestment—further contributes to this tipping point.

In the face of crisis, there exists an opportunity for renewal. While the current instability may seem overwhelming, it also opens the door for a collective commitment to rebuild our democratic values and establish a non-collusive liberal democracy. So remember: as Winston Churchill once said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried.”

Let’s keep this in mind as we strive to chart a new course for the country.

We all recognize the reasons behind the concerning direction in which our nation is heading. Whenever a viable opposition disappears from a democratic system, it is inevitably replaced by something else—in this case, the fervent emotions of the people, especially the youth of Gen Z. This leaderless yet organic movement seems to have channeled the cooped sentiments and grievances of the general populace.

However, the unfortunate reality is that movements can become tainted by violent elements, leading to tragic consequences. The destruction and damage to lives and property that result from this unrest demand stern action from those in power. It is crucial for leaders to address these issues decisively, not only to restore order but also to acknowledge the underlying frustrations that prompted the youth to rise in the first place.

Only through a combination of accountability and constructive dialogue can we hope to navigate this tumultuous period and work toward a more equitable future for all. At this moment, the Army and the President have to act swiftly. In crisis like this, timing is everything.

******************

April 5, 2025

Explaining Nepal's Crisis: Bloated at the Top, Hollow at the Core [Part 1]

Preamble: This is the first part of a three-part series that focuses on how unbridled elite overproduction across state and non-state apparatuses, along with the resulting immiseration (widespread disenchantment) under the current collusive politics, affects democracy and the republic itself.

The Aspirant Game: Unlike the traditional game of musical chairs, where the number of chairs decreases each round, this aspirant game involves adding “new players” after every round. This dynamic leads to elite overproduction, resulting in social instability as those left out feel aggrieved and immiserated by a select few, potentially tipping them toward uprisings. (Peter Turchin --Cliodynamics)

***
​Abstract: This article seeks to unpack the evolving socio-economic and political landscape of Nepal amid rising public disillusionment with its democratic institutions. Despite decades of struggle for representative governance, a stark divide has emerged between an expanding elite class—a phenomenon known as elite overproduction—and a majority population mired in economic hardship and social stagnation, referred to as popular immiseration. Why does this happen in a democracy? Drawing on insights from complexity theory and cliodynamics—a field that studies the cyclical forces behind social unrest and political decay—this piece explores how Nepal’s current paradoxes—unrests and uprisings amidst democracy—are not anomalies but symptoms of deeply flawed structural patterns that may be repeating over time.

In essence, Nepal’s problems and aspirations are well known, but the “whys” and “hows” are often missing; this article seeks to fill that gap using the framework of cleodynamics.

Introduction

"These are not normal times in our nation, and they should not be treated as such..." These words, spoken during a recent 25-hour historic speech by a U.S. Senator, should resonate with the leadership of Nepal.

​Nepal has experienced significant political instability, undergoing three upheavals and adopting two constitutions, with current chorus for a third revision. The frequent formation and dissolution of governments have become almost routine, highlighting the nation's fragile political environment. This instability is particularly concerning given Nepal's impoverished population, complex ethno-linguistic diversity, and strategic location between two of the world's most populous and ambitious nations: China and India. ​

Examples from the Middle East show what can happen when a nation's vulnerabilities are left unaddressed: chaos, extremism, implosion, and even takeover by external forces. Two significant political upheavals and collapse in the neighborhood—Bangladesh and Sri Lanka—are still quite fresh. Nepal’s leaders seem oblivious to the possibility that the country may be sliding toward a similar tipping point. This article explores these dynamics through the lens of complexity and emergence science, particularly the emerging discipline of cliodynamics—a field focused on identifying patterns and cycles in societal phenomena, such as the rise, decline, and collapse of regimes.

In conclusion, I will also attempt to draw a loose parallel between Nepal’s recent political turmoil and the rise of Donald Trump in the United States—the very context that prompted the Senator’s historic speech. First, I will explain the mechanism behind elite overproduction and define who qualifies as an elite.

The Aspirant Game and the Elite Overproduction

At the heart of this system lie two interwoven maladies: the overproduction of elites and popular immiseration. The latter refers to a growing sense of hopelessness, despair, misery, and betrayal among the general population—emotions that often manifest as anger and violent social or political tribalism. The elites, on the other hand, are those who control resources and wield power over the vast majority through various means: coercion, economic influence, administrative control, and soft persuasion. They include individuals occupying the upper echelons of society, whether in business, politics, bureaucracy, the security apparatus, or as public opinion-makers and intellectuals. For example, in Nepal, thousands of cooperative operators and their corrupt political bosses and regulators and millions of debt-ridden citizens exemplify the elite overproduction and the marginalized populations (population immiseration), respectively. A glimpse of the counter-cyclical effect of elite overproduction on general welfare is shown in the following plot. (Source: PeterTurchin.com)

These maladies stem from a political maneuver best described as the Elite Aspirant Game. In a traditional game of musical chairs, each round eliminates one chair until only one remains. However, in this elite version, more and more players are added in each round. This results in elite overproduction—a surplus of political, business, and administrative aspirants competing for a limited pool of opportunities. An over-bloated bureaucracy, thousands of NGOs, and a lucrative consulting market are also just some examples that contribute to the ever-widening pool of elites.

These elites exert their influence over society through various mechanisms:

Coercion: Exercising control through army generals, police, and security forces.

Economic Power: Dominating business sectors through corporations, CEOs, bankers, NGOs, INGOs & consultants.

Administrative Authority: Governing through bureaucrats, ministers, and state officials.

Persuasion: Shaping public perception via mass media, TV personalities, and intellectuals.

For the political class and their associates all the way down to the local levels, rapid wealth accumulation through business contracts and bribes serves as an additional motivation. This growing imbalance—too many elites siphoning off every Rupees for themselves—inevitably fuels instability, factionalism, and political decay. When widespread public discontent merges with an expanding pool of elite aspirants, it creates a highly volatile combination that pushes the system further toward crisis.
​
For example, in Nepal, it's observed that the country's elite often rely on remittances to sustain their lifestyles, including financing private education for their children. Simultaneously, they utilize foreign currency reserves—hard-earned by the sweat and labor of migrant workers—to fund their children's education abroad, thereby building human capital and wealth overseas.

Thus, it is not farfetched to imagine that similar dynamics may have played a role in what happened in both Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, where the twin forces of elitism and mass frustration ultimately pushed them over the brink. A similar scenario in Nepal cannot be ruled out with absolute certainty. ​With the conceptual framework of cliodynamics explained in this section, I now turn to Nepal’s case, beginning with the emerging landscape of frustration and dissatisfaction, joined by those bearing unresolved grievances.

Background

A major source of discontent in Nepal today stems from widespread frustration among the general public over the government’s repeated failure to deliver on its promises. This growing dissatisfaction—fueled by widespread corruption, lack of accountability, and political instability—is not confined to any one group. It has begun to cut across ideological lines and socio-economic classes, creating a climate of generalized unrest and a deepening loss of trust in the political parties and its leadership.

​ Simultaneously, pro-monarchists have seized the opportunity to elevate their voices, adding to the frustration not only with governance failures but also with the perceived unceremonious abolition of the monarchy and, according to them, the unmandated declaration of Nepal as a secular state—their main agenda behind their demand for constitutional reform. These sentiments have been visibly articulated through rallies and social media campaigns, with their influence allegedly bolstered by ideological and emotional support from Hindu nationalist circles across the border, including segments of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). One such rally organized by this group in Tin Kune recently culminated in clashes with the police, resulting in property damage, fires, and even deaths. There is a growing demand for an independent investigation of this incident for just accountability and punishment for those responsible.

Even though there is much to understand how it is all going to play out, Nepal now appears to be entering a third phase of political crisis, surprisingly, within just three decades of embracing democratic rule:

The first phase was defined by the people's struggle for democracy and the dismantling of the Panchayat system and absolute monarchy.

The second phase unfolded as a violent Maoist insurgency demanding federalism, inclusion, and minority rights—culminating in the end of the monarchy and the birth of a secular federal republic.

Yet, these transformative changes failed to bring lasting stability, as evidenced by over two dozen governmental changes within three decades. Many argue that promises of inclusion, accountability, and reform remain unfulfilled or entirely neglected. Discontent continues to simmer over secularism, the perceived erosion of national identity, federalism's inefficiencies, and unchecked corruption and political self-interest.

This third phase, now rapidly unfolding, is not merely a continuation of earlier struggles. It feels different—more fragmented, more emotionally charged, and more vulnerable to manipulation, both internal and external. While groups like the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) have amplified specific demands, such as restoring the constitutional monarchy and re-declaring Nepal a Sanatani Hindu state, these calls represent only one facet of a broader wave of frustration. Many are beginning to question the very foundations of the current political order—marked by collusive practices and a parliament lacking effective opposition, not to mention the myriad of unsettled corruption cases.

In this context, the words spoken by U.S. Senator Cory Booker during a historic 25-hour speech—“These are not normal times in our nation, and they should not be treated as such…”— should have a sobering relevance for Nepal.

So, Nepal is not in normal times, and these moments cannot be met with business-as-usual politics or a complacent shrug. The signs of slow unraveling toward social fragility are clear: widespread apathy toward elections, coalition governments, the rise of fringe rhetoric, the return of nostalgia-driven narratives, judicial overreach, security force’s heavy handedness, mounting scandals, and a creeping acceptance of political instability as the new normal. If this trend continues, the question is not “how” but “when” it will reach the tipping point.
 

Liberal Democracy Still Remains Nepal’s Best Hope

We must recognize that democracies—especially fragile, young ones— do not collapse overnight. They unravel gradually, often through a combination of the erosion of public trust, the hijacking of institutions by a few, and the abandonment of principles. ​In Nepal's case, all of these precursors appear to have been met or exceeded. Left unaddressed, however, these warning signs can push a nation closer to a tipping point—an irreversible moment when implosion, extremism, or external manipulation may end up becoming probable. This is the emergent aspect of the socio-economic and political dynamical system that can evolve, carrying with it its own momentum, leading to unintended consequences. We may not be there yet, but social forces seem to show the concerning signs.

And yet, even amid this uncertainty, one truth stands: for all its messiness, frustrations, and imperfections, a liberal democracy remains Nepal’s best hope.

As Winston Churchill reminded the world in the aftermath of global war and ruin:

“Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time…”
—Winston S. Churchill, November 11, 1947

And even more pointedly, a lesser-known but deeply relevant reminder comes from Benjamin Franklin, at the very birth of the American republic:

“A republic—if you can keep it.”
—Benjamin Franklin, in response to Elizabeth Willing Powel’s question, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” (September 17, 1787)

Nepal’s leaders—and its citizens—must now wrestle with the same timeless challenge: not just creating democracy, but keeping it.

Federalism and the Expansion of Rent-Seeking Networks

The introduction of federalism in Nepal—a proposition this writer had advocated early on more than two decades ago—was rooted in ideals of inclusion, decentralization, and local autonomy. Ironically, however, it ended up facilitating a massive expansion of elite positions across all seven provinces. Rather than delivering efficient, responsive local governance, the federal structure gave rise to multiple layers of political and administrative posts: provincial assemblies, ministries, commissions, advisors, secretariats, and an ever-growing bureaucracy.

While decentralization in principle brings governance closer to the people, in practice, it often mirrored the same collusive patterns seen at the center. Provincial governments became miniaturized versions of the federal elite networks—complete with their own forms of power-sharing deals (bhagbanda), corruption, and patronage systems. These provincial governments have emerged and dissolved amid the musical chairs of power struggles at the center. This situation stands in stark contrast to the principles of federalism, which aim to protect provincial governance from overreach and undue influence by the central government

Further, the ballooning of the political class and accompanying administrative costs have placed a significant burden on national resources. Critics of federalism—particularly those aligned with monarchist or centralist forces like the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) and others—have seized upon this dysfunction as evidence that federalism is fiscally unsustainable and politically hollow. Whether one agrees or not, the perception of federalism as elite overgrowth is gaining traction, including among the disillusioned youth and many media personalities and some politicians. At a minimum, serious attention is needed to streamline the provincial structure, enhance cost-effectiveness, and empower local governance, as many voices are raised against the bloated budgets yielding minimal results—a costly aspect of the elite overproduction phenomenon.

While the Elites Feast, the Nation Empties

Amid this elite expansion and resource capture, a staggering one-third of Nepal’s population now lives abroad—as labor migrants, students, or permanent migrants. In just the past five years, nearly three million Nepalis have left the country in search of basic livelihood opportunities, sending home remittances that now make up around a quarter of the national GDP. This heavy reliance on remittances is not the hallmark of a healthy economy—it is a symptom of a system that can no longer provide for its own people.

At the same time, over 100,000 students leave Nepal each year to pursue education abroad, draining both financial and human capital. These are often the most capable, driven, and ambitious youth—many of whom do not return. As agricultural lands lie fallow and villages empty out, the countryside is growing older and increasingly depopulated; local development is grinding to a halt.

In essence, Nepal is exporting its most productive citizens, while those who remain are left to navigate a broken system of patronage, low-quality public services, and crony capitalism. It is no exaggeration to say that the republic—born with so much promise—has become an exclusive playground for elite competition, bankrolled by the sweat and sacrifice of its overseas migrant workers.

The state has become a paradox: bloated at the top, hollow at the core.

From a cliodynamic perspective, this situation exemplifies classic elite overproduction coupled with mass immiseration—​a structural mismatch where a surplus of elites competes for limited state resources, while the broader population endures economic and emotional hardships; in Nepal's case, many flee the country. As this feedback loop intensifies, the system becomes increasingly fragile and susceptible to social unrest, regime change, or institutional collapse.

Conclusion: A Warning from History, A Call for Renewal

Peter Turchin’s cliodynamics teaches us that history doesn’t just repeat—it rhymes, driven by deep structural forces such as elite overproduction and popular immiseration. The U.S. saw this play out in the rise of Trump, as neglected working-class frustrations collided with elite indifference, reshaping the political landscape with the reelection of Trump. Nepal is no different in its trajectory, but it is far more vulnerable. As its institutions corrode under the weight of political patronage, federal overreach, and rent-seeking elites, and as millions of its youth are pushed abroad, the country risks losing both its democratic potential and its demographic dividend. The solution is not to abandon democracy, but to deepen it—by dismantling elite monopolies, fostering internal party democracy, and investing in civic education. Only a liberal, accountable democracy—not a theatrical one—can keep Nepal from becoming yet another cautionary tale in the history books of collapsing republics.

A caution is in order regarding the definition of elites in the US compared to those in Nepal, as the contexts and characteristics of these groups can differ significantly. While the elites in the US may be viewed as defenders of pluralism and democracy, the same cannot be assumed for the elites in Nepal, whose influence and actions or even inactions often come under fire for being partisan. It’s also worth noticing that the context of usage of the word “elitism” matters. For example, in the US, conservatives often use the term “woke” derogatorily to describe progressive ideas as elitist. This includes various issues such as the use of pronouns, transgender athletes' rights and their bathroom usage, and the call to defund the police, just to name a few. [See addendum section below for more clarification.]

As Nepal faces uncertainty, it is important for all parties—the King and the three leaders, Deuba, Prachanda, and Oli—to put aside their personal interests and think about the future. If the country keeps being pushed into chaos for short-term gain, it could have serious consequences. If this instability continues, they might end up losing the very things they are trying to protect and build for themselves and the nation.

​If the King truly “loves Nepal” and its long-standing sovereignty—the oldest in South Asia—he must rise above personal interests and act for the nation's benefit, which includes refraining from any proactive political engagements or even the slightest hint of them. The people have spoken and will not compromise on their hard-fought freedom, liberty, and political pluralism.

Likewise, political leaders should remember Benjamin Franklin's warning: "A republic, if you can keep it." To preserve Nepal's republic, they must change their behavior and work for the country's welfare, not their own gain by exclusively focusing on electoral wins. There is more to democracy than elections. Most importantly, it's time to pave the way for a younger generation to lead, ensuring the nation's true progress. Nepalese voters have shown a growing preference for younger leaders, indicating a desire for fresh perspectives in governance.

Moving forward, we cannot deny that the coming months in Nepal depend on all four key figures—the King and the political leaders –Oli, Deuba, and Prachand. They must rise above personal interests and break free from the perilous situation they've created for Nepal. ​History has shown that when leaders become entrenched in their positions, the country ends up suffering, a lesson underscored by the tragic loss of over 17,000 lives during Nepal's decade-long Maoist insurgency. The country cannot afford to endure another polarization, violent confrontation and the ensuing chaos again. This time, a far worse fate may await Nepal.

Addendum: The definition of 'elite' does not have to be uniform across time and space. For example, back in the slavery era of the United States (1619 - 1865), landlords and slaveholders, along with their political representatives, were focused on opposing legislative measures that they feared were designed to cut their access to cheap (free) labor. They were the elites for that time period. A finer distinction in the current period is presented by Professor McNown in the comment section.

Acknowledgment: I would like to thank Mr. Naresh Koirala for his insightful comments. Mr. Koirala is a retired engineering consultant and political observer. All errors are mine alone.

@ Alok K. Bohara from Nepal Unplugged