Finally the King in Nepal sensibly agreed to the demands of the Seven-Party Alliance and gave up his hold. I wonder how naive he could have been when he thought that he could rule Nepal when he seized power in 2005.
That brings us to one basic question.. Can monarchs run countries as efficiently as an elected democracy?
This is my opinion.. pure monarchy nowadays has no place in any country.. at best it can exist only to satisfy the monarchs and their heirs of a title.. They really cant run a country until they shake off their authoritarian attitude and respect the people of their country and ensure development.. which I feel is out of the question in most cases since a monarch is not a representative of the people, like an assembly is.. Monarchs have absolute control, hence no fear.. It takes a revolution of the sort that happened in Nepal to bring fear..
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
Need not be. Most of the countries in Middle east are princely and the people are happy. It all depends on the mindset,population and occupation of the natives.
A state like Qatar with more than half their population with immigrants never strikes back the government. They are happy because the King is broad minded and listens to his subjects not like Gyanendra.
Post a Comment