- Kabita Neupane
The recent US election has resulted in what is being called the ‘Vidyadhanam Sarvadhanam Pratham’. The fact that wisdom is greater than money has been reflected in the US election. The arrogance that one can buy a post after having money has been proved false. Former Vice President and Democratic nominee Jay Biden does not have even one percent of the wealth of Wahalwala, the presidential and Republican candidate Donald Trump. But Biden won the election, setting a new record for popularity. Votes were exchanged with honesty and not with money. The right people are appreciated. Votes were not sold on meat and alcohol.
This result must have taught a lesson to the leaders of Nepal who like to say that money can be bought by the people. It seems that the time of the cadres selling swords, guns, alcohol, and money is running out. What is democracy called by Nepali people? It’s not just a matter of learning from the American people.
The main reason why democracy has not paid off in Nepal is the lack of public access. The leadership of the parties is in the hands of the upper class and those who have amassed wealth through corruption. Nepal’s election cannot be contested by the poor. It costs Rs 8-10 crore to buy a ticket and the same amount has to be spent on publicity and influence of the voters. That is why Nepal’s democracy has been bought and sold with money. No matter how good a person is, even if he is educated, if he is financially poor, he will not get a ticket. In a multi-party system, winning an election as an independent candidate does not make much sense. But those who cannot spend crores cannot win the election as independent candidates. If not, then the parties already have an organization, they have cadres, they have the resources to influence the voters. Parties can be tempting, But for independent candidates, such opportunities are extremely rare. Will those who get the post by spending money use that post in the service of the country and the people? Ready to return your financial investment? Of course, they return the financial investment and go to great lengths to raise funds for the next election. It is through corruption that politicians mobilize financial resources. Not another option.
As long as the turbid water comes from the root, it is not easy to make it cold. Our source is bad. If democracy is to be people-oriented, the people themselves must end the practice of voting based on personal greed. Leaders are made fat by the meeting of the people. If the people do not vote, they will enter Dula like a mouse tomorrow. People had to understand that money is not everything. If you want to win a good candidate by boycotting the candidate who is trying to win the election on the strength of money, then the political parties have stopped selling tickets since the last election and started looking for a good candidate.
For example, Tikaram Panthi, who did his Ph.D. in Bhandagaun, Gulmi, came to Kathmandu and started teaching at the university after he was defeated. He was the first person to do a doctorate in grammar. Looking at his context, is the pen big? The sword is big? Or is knowledge great? Big money May also be the subject of controversy. In the case of Nepal, Lupus Two and Minus Two can also be discussed. If Plus Two has no money, Minus Two has money, who will win the election? In the current situation, only minus two will win the election. Currently running Nepal is minus two.
Here, plus two means those who have studied at least above 12th class, while minus two means those who have failed the 8th-9th class. Many leaders in Nepal are minus two. Those who are educated are not in a position to survive in politics. They have fled not only from politics but also from the country.
The foreign exchange received from remittances is reaching to buy petroleum products, medicines, and iron. Leaders did not have to worry much.
The US election is a shining example. Money alone does not work in the United States. If money had worked that Biden would not have won, billionaire Donald Trump would have easily won the election. But Trump’s money didn’t work. Because the American system is such that income and expenditure must be completely transparent. What did it cost? All accounts should be submitted to the state. No matter how many candidates he has, he cannot influence the voters with his money. Trump has won elections in the past for technical reasons. Her rival, Hillary Clinton, did not get more than 2.4 million votes, but Trump won the election. Because most of the members of the Electoral College were elected by the Democratic Party. Electoral colleges in each state are determined not only based on population but also based on geography, It has been determined based on development index and other criteria. Due to which, those who get popular votes will lose and those who get less will win. It was confirmed at this time that the leader who won in such a way could not satisfy the people. The process of electing a president for a second term was broken this time. This time, Wyden did not just win the election. Received the most popular vote ever.
The fact that the United States is a country made up of people from all continents did not enter Trump’s mind. But Jay Wyden was well aware of this. The slogan of extremist nationalism alone does not get votes. You have to do a good job to get votes.
The US election results have sent a new message to the world. Money and swords have been defeated, Pen and knowledge have won. The Nepali people should learn from this. The lid of the wisdom of the Nepali people must be opened. Similarly, the US election is not without its flaws. For example, in the current election, there were about 1,000 independent candidates for the presidency. But the competition was only between the candidates of the two major parties. This happens not only now but always. The main reason is the economy. People do not have time to go to meetings and rallies. People will know the candidate based on news and advertisements in the media. Apart from these two major parties, other parties cannot field candidates for electoral colleges in all the states. There was nothing that independent could do. Parties and individuals who are unable to field candidates for the Electoral College are unlikely to win the election. Such candidates are ignored by the media. If you are looking for the media yourself It is very expensive. Billions are spent. Who will spend billions of rupees in an election where defeat is certain? So other candidates are just names. These two parties have dominated American politics for a very long time. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of the presidential candidate from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But candidates are less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump created an atmosphere in his favor by influencing some media owners. Should Billions be spent? Who will spend billions of rupees in an election where defeat is certain? So other candidates are just names. These two parties have dominated American politics for a very long time. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of the presidential candidate from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But candidates are less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump created an atmosphere in his favor by influencing some media owners. Should Billions be spent? Who will spend billions of rupees in an election where defeat is certain? So other candidates are just names. These two parties have dominated American politics for a very long time. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of the presidential candidate from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But candidates are less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump created an atmosphere in his favor by influencing some media owners. Who will spend billions of rupees in an election where defeat is certain? So other candidates are just names. These two parties have dominated American politics for a very long time. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of the presidential candidate from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But candidates are less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump created an atmosphere in his favor by influencing some media owners. Who will spend billions of rupees in an election where defeat is certain? So other candidates are just names. These two parties have dominated American politics for a very long time. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of the presidential candidate from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But candidates are less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump influenced some media owners to create an atmosphere in his favor. Rupees? So other candidates are just names. These two parties have dominated American politics for a very long time. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of presidential candidates from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But the candidate is less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump influenced some media owners to create an atmosphere in his favor. Rupees? So other candidates are just names. These two parties have dominated American politics for a very long time. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of the presidential candidate from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But candidates are less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump influenced some media owners and created an atmosphere in his favor. The party dominates. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of the presidential candidate from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But the candidate is less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump influenced some media owners and created an atmosphere in his favor. The party dominates. But there is maximum transparency in the selection of presidential candidates from these two parties. Initially, the party invites aspiring candidates. From among the aspirants, the party’s listed cadres select the candidate through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But the candidate is less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump influenced some media owners to create an atmosphere in his favor. Activists select candidates through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But candidates are less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump created an atmosphere in his favor by influencing some media owners. Activists choose candidates through elections. The Election Commission selects the candidates on behalf of the party. For that reason, there is no scope to spend money to become a candidate. After becoming a candidate, the media campaigns. But candidates are less likely to influence media owners. In the last election, Trump created an atmosphere in his favor by influencing some media owners.
