Experiences of a common man!

Category: Politics Page 1 of 3

Divisive Party Politics

Party Politics: Terrifying Divisions

In the ever-illusory modern democracy, party politics plays a significant role in organizing people, speaking for the well-being and development of the country, and raising voices against tyranny. However, parties often delve into demagoguery. And while the intraparty unity keeps cadres together (at times, to the level of sycophancy), interparty rivalries can sow divisions among the citizens even in issues related to humanity or national interests. Schisms have deepened so much that even families are fragmenting. Individuals have been atomized so much that the partiesтАФthe purveyors of democracyтАФhave become authoritarian.

How Political Parties Create Divisions

Because there are individuals and groups that think differently about how politics should be conducted, many ideologies have developed over time. A political party sets its goals and the means of achieving goals according to the ideology it adopts. Ideology also allows parties to adopt the form of governance, such as autocracy, democracy, or theocracy, and the economic system, like capitalism, socialism, communism, and so on. These economic systems have also come to be defined as political ideologies on their own.

In most countries, political ideologies adopted by parties can be divided into left-wing and right-wing. The terminologies originated during the French Revolution in 1789. The supporters of traditional values and hierarchy sat to the right of the king in the National Assembly, whereas the revolutionaries demanding radical changes sat to his left. Eventually, right-wing politics adopted conservative philosophy, advocating limited government, free market capitalism, and strict immigration policies. Similarly, the left wing took up liberal philosophy, demanding equality, government market intervention, and more open immigration policies.

However, despite the relevance of the left-right framework as an analytical tool for understanding political competition, it simplifies a more complex reality. In some contexts, parties combine elements from both traditions; others may shift positions over time in response to social change.

Political parties may also be defined by the strategies they use to forward their ideologies and actions. They may be populists, where a single charismatic leader guides or directs followers, or issue-based, seeking to solve various issues even in the absence of a charming leader. Most parties flock around one or a few leaders and also carry issues that need to be solved.

In Nepal, a new kind of division has emerged in the recent decade. There are the older parties that stick to positions of power and are seen as corrupt. In the opposite spectrum are the newer parties that are cleaner, less experienced alternatives. This assortment is a result of generational conflict stemming from the indifference of the older generations to the voice of the younger citizens.

Even though the ideologies, philosophies, and strategies are often blurry, political parties present themselves as strictly adhering to a certain ideology, philosophy, or strategy. These are etched in the intraparty laws, policy papers, various publications, and eventually, in the minds of the followers. Parties may not explicitly say they are divisive, but the ideas become so indelible that they cannot accept the other spectrum. Party politics most often radicalize followers so much that they become their defenders even at the cost of their lives.

Depth of the Schisms

As if the vertical divisions of left- and right-wing politics were insufficient, political parties have now promoted horizontal divisions between generations. Radicalization of party followers and cadres has driven deep wedges between individuals, families, society, and even nations.

Politicization has reached such a serious state that no individual can be trusted. Opposing ideas are bashed immediatelyтАФonline masks aggravating the issue even more. Fathers and sons, mothers and daughters, and brothers and sisters have petty fights in support of their political parties and ideologies. Moreover, political paradigms have turned into identities of societies and nations, sowing a deep sense of betrayal against those who oppose the views.

Consequences

The divisive party politics affects individuals, families, societies, and nations at different levels, ranging from discussions that can be solved easily to complexities resulting in wars involving different nations.

1. Solvable differences

Ideological differences can create intense debates. However, some of them can be solved by identifying common grounds and interests. Spectrums of ideas exist within the extreme ends of left and right. While extremities tend to dehumanize issues, the ideas in the middle are more humane and achievable. Solving differences between ideologies also leads to improved relations between the political actors.

2. Passionate rows and rivalries

Humans tend to cooperate to fulfill their interest, but more often, they love to maintain rivalry with those who have opposing views. Party politics enjoys maintaining rivalries because they (1) divide and rule, (2) have their ego inflated when they are proven correct, and (3) win elections when the opposing ideologies fail.

3. Ad hominem attacks

Disputes don’t always get solved, though. And parties don’t always involve ideologies. Ad hominem attacks, or personal slanders, are becoming increasingly common in political speeches. Because of the rising popularity of a leader and lack of impunity, rivalries become personal. As such, ideologies become obsolete, and cults develop around the leader. Loyal henchmen, in coordination of cabals, surround their cult leader.

4. Dishonesty/Moral corruption

Cults separate political leadership from the actual political realities. Obsequious henchmen inflate the ego. The leader and his party start believing that they are invincible. Corruption prevails. Rule of law is thrown out of the window. Dishonesty and immoral behaviours become the norm. Citizens become more divided.

5. Mob violence

Divisions sown by political parties, coupled with corruption, give rise to violence in societies. As impunity prevails, crimes get normalized. Cadres and supporters of political parties turn increasingly violent against rivals. Mob justice becomes the norm.

6. National disruption

Crowd psychology is different from that of the individuals in isolation. The increased intensity of mob violence can result in disruptions at national levels. If the parties who are in power suppress the dissent, they turn more authoritative. If they are displaced, the new forces are called revolutionaries. But if a revolution brings destruction and little to no hope, is it really a revolution?

7. Foreign Interference and Proxy Conflicts

Extreme polarization from party politics makes a nation vulnerable to foreign interference. When domestic parties prioritize defeating their rivals over national interest, they often seek external alliances to gain an upper hand. Consequently, the nation becomes a chessboard for larger geopolitical powers. By openly aligning with foreign regimes or accepting outside backing, domestic political parties act as proxies. This not only compromises the country’s sovereignty but can also drag citizens into prolonged, devastating proxy conflicts that serve foreign interests rather than local needs.

8. International Wars

Partisan politics does not remain confined within national borders. When political ideologies become rigid and moralizedтАФportraying opponents not merely as rivals but as existential threatsтАФsuch polarization can extend into foreign policy. States governed by highly ideological parties may begin to interpret international relations through the same lens of division that shapes domestic politics.

The twentieth century offers a significant illustration. The prolonged confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War was rooted not only in geopolitical competition but also in ideological antagonism between liberal capitalism and communism. Although it did not escalate into direct large-scale war between the two superpowers, it generated proxy conflicts across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Domestic political rhetoric in both countries reinforced the perception that compromise was weakness and coexistence was morally suspect.

Countering the Political Divide

Supporting a political ideology and debating against rivals can feel satisfying, but as we saw, dissent can spiral down to a dangerous territory. We should thus be careful not to allow party politics to disrupt the well-being of individuals, societies, and nations. Following are the suggestions to promote healthy discussions and debates.

1. Empathy

Ideological debates without empathy can easily turn into ad hominem attacks. If you understand why a person follows certain ideas about politics, you can agree with them on common matters. Even if you don’t, you can gracefully acknowledge their shortcomings. Such debates and discussions also help identify common ground.

2. Educating yourself about various ideologies

Political thoughts and actions don’t originate and arise in a vacuum. They are rooted in the conditions of society and their aspirations. When you learn about political ideologies, you know their origin, the goals they want to achieve, and the means to support them. As a result, you build empathy. You may also develop a new ideology from the analysis of shortcomings of the existing ideologies and expectations of your society.

3. Dissociation from party politics

Sometimes taking sides can be difficult. In such cases, if you dissociate from the ways parties think and operate, you can see the bigger picture. Thinking beyond the established rhetoric helps you identify the issues at hand, the stance taken by the parties, and their strengths and shortcomings. Such an analysis ultimately helps strengthen the rule of law and democracy.

4. Unity in humanitarian or national issues

If you are debating for or against a party or ideology, even in cases against dignified living, human rights, and national issues, take a break to think about how party politics has divided the people. Take measures to bridge gaps with the opposition and solve problems empathetically. If your party or ideology is not allowing you to take selfless actions, you will be doomed.

Conclusion

Political parties are indispensable to democratic governance. They organize representation, structure public debate, and provide mechanisms for accountability. Yet when loyalty to party eclipses commitment to constitutional principles, human dignity, and the rule of law, democratic competition can deteriorate into polarization and exclusion. Ideologies, which are meant to guide collective aspirations, may instead harden into identities that promote divisions and resist dialogue and compromise.

Unchecked party politics narrows the space for reasoned deliberation. It encourages citizens to perceive opponents as adversaries rather than fellow participants in a shared political community. Over time, such attitudes weaken social trust and strain the institutional foundations of democracy itself.

Countering this trajectory requires conscious civic effort. Empathy, intellectual openness, and a willingness to engage ideas critically rather than defensively can help preserve pluralism. Democratic societies thrive not in the absence of disagreement, but in their ability to manage disagreement constructively.

If citizens remain attentive to shared constitutional values and humanitarian principles beyond party lines, political competition need not become social fragmentation. The challenge is not to eliminate party politics, but to prevent it from eroding the very democratic culture it is meant to sustain.

Smash & Grab: Annexation of SikkimтАФA Review

How does a country merge with another? Does a referendum held within 72 hours have legal validity? How do foreigners play in domestic issues? Indian journalist and editor Sunanda K. Dutta-Ray, who was close to the Chogyal of Sikkim (Sukhim/Denzong), explores these issues in detail in Smash & Grab: Annexation of Sikkim.

Book Cover of Smash & Grab: Annexation of Sikkim by Sunanda K. Datta-Ray

A Brief History of Sikkim

Independent Existence and British Shadows

Sikkim had an independent existence even before the Treaty of Sugauli between Nepal and the British East India Company in 1815. In 1642, Phuntsog Namgyal had become the first Chogyal of Sikkim. The term Chogyal is derived from Tibetan, which means ‘the gyalpo (king) who defends the chho (Dharma). After the Treaty of Tumlong in 1861, Sikkim, which was a British protectorate, became a protectorate of India when India became independent.

Plights as the Protectorate of India

Ever since India became independent from the British, the feeling that a republic should not have a monarchical protectorate had developed in the Indian administration. Nehru did not consider it a big deal. But in 1951, China established complete control over Tibet. After the Tibetan uprising in 1959 and the war with China in 1962, India became suspicious. Due to the religious-cultural ties between Lhasa and Gangtok, fearing that China might also take over Sikkim, India came to the side of annexing Sikkim.

However, since it had a democratic image and had helped Bangladesh gain independence, it was not possible for India to launch a direct military attack. Similarly, India controlled the communications, foreign affairs, and resources necessary for the development of Sikkim. The British colonial period also continued to interfere internally through political officials and chief executives.

Shifting Demographics, Politics, and Indian Interests

After the British protection, Nepali-speaking traders entered Sikkim, which was created by the Bhutia-Lepchas, in large numbers. By the 1970s, the Bhutia-Lepchas were only 25 per cent, i.e., a minority in their own country. However, since the power was with them, the majority Nepali-speaking people were afraid that something would happen. There were Kazis of all castes, but their power was waning as the Chhogyals had limited authority. During the power struggle, they began to seek democratic rights.

Lendup Dorji was one such Kazi. He did not have a good relationship with the Chogyal Palden Thondup Namgyal, who was based in Kalingpong. The rift between them widened after the Chogyal married Hope Cook and the Kazi married Elisa Marie. The Chogyal, who was trying to make Sikkim independent, lost popularity due to the Indians and their propaganda. A dictatorial rakshyah became his public image. On the other hand, leaders like the Kazi, Nar Bahadur Khatiwada, and Ramchandra Paudyal, who were trying to establish democracy, became widely praised.

With the involvement of Indian political officials, diplomats, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and the intelligence agency RAW, the Chogyal was constantly weakened, and after the 1973 movement, the Kazi was gradually made powerful. Ashok Raina’s ‘Inside RAW’ says that this movement was run by RAW. However, the real power lies with the Indian Chief Executive. B.S. Das starts working above Chogyal. After him, B.B. Lal becomes the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly and even assumes the powers of the Chief Justice.

The Referendum for Annexation of Sikkim

On April 14, 1975, he proposes the merger of Sikkim with India after the referendum. But Dutta-Ray makes a big question mark about the plebiscite being announced on the 10th, the voting on the 14th, and the results coming out overnight from remote places. Most people did not understand what the voting was for. Most of them thought it had been done to remove Chogyal as the head of the nation. Even journalists were not given proper access during the polls. Nar Bahadur Khatiwada later sent a memorandum to Morarji Desai, the Prime Minister after Indira Gandhi, saying that they were deceived. Former Prime Minister of Nepal Bishweshwor Prasad Koirala said that there was no referendum in Sikkim.

My Feelings on the book Smash & Grab: Annexation of Sikkim

Reading about how the simple-minded Chogyal and leaders of Sikkim were manipulated by clever Indians, I felt love for Sikkim and anger towards Indians. The Chogyal also seems to be at fault for not understanding the geopolitical pressures. Moreover, he could not reconcile with Lhendup Dorji on common national interests. Dorji, too, was so blinded by the prospect of gaining power over the Chogyal that he did not understand that he was only a pawn in the grand chessboard of geopolitics.

Datta-Ray weaves movie-like stories of characters, some of which are extremely moving, especially at the beginning. The ending, however, is abrupt. Since the book was first published in 1984, nine years after the annexation, the aftermath of the annexation could have been included, but it is not there. Moreover, the book has a high level of vocabulary, which slowed my reading.

One problem I have realised in reading the history of Sikkim is that there are several points of view. Smash & Grab: Annexation of Sikkim is biased towards Chogyal in the book. Angles from the “revolutionaries” in Sikkim, Indian bureaucrats, diplomats, and RAW agents portray different pictures. I will be back with those perspectives as soon as possible.

An infographic about Nepal's current constitutional crisis

Nepal’s Constitutional Crisis: When a 27-Hour Protest Rewrites the Rules of Power

Constitution Study #14:┬аClash of the Constitutional Mandate and Popular Uprising

A Nation at a Constitutional Crossroads

In a move that has shaken Nepal’s political foundations, the Gen Z-led anti-corruption movement on September 8-9 swept the KP Sharma Oli government from power. In the ensuing political vacuum, President Ramchandra Paudel executed an unprecedented solution: the September 12 appointment of former chief justice Sushila Karki as interim Prime Minister. This decision, followed by the dissolution of the House of Representatives, was hailed by some as a necessary response to the popular will but has plunged the nation into its most profound constitutional crisis yet.

An infographic about Nepal's current constitutional crisis

This is more than a mere political debate; it is a fundamental stress test of NepalтАЩs young constitution. The appointment has ignited a fierce legal battle, pitting the raw power of popular sovereignty against the established bulwarks of judicial precedent and the separation of powers. As ten petitions challenging the governmentтАЩs legitimacy land at the Supreme Court, Nepal is forced to confront a question that will define its democratic future: Are the rules that govern the state absolute, or can they be rewritten by the force of a people’s movement?

1. The Blueprint for Power: How Nepal’s Executive is Supposed to Work

The current crisis is unintelligible without a firm grasp of NepalтАЩs constitutional blueprint for executive power, specifically the procedures laid out in Part-7 of the Constitution. Article 74 establishes a “multi-party competitive federal democratic republican parliamentary form of governance.” This framework is not merely a suggestion; it is the binding charter for political legitimacy.

At its core, Article 76 provides a clear, step-by-step process for appointing a Prime Minister. The President is to appoint the leader of the parliamentary party that commands a majority in the House of Representatives. Recognizing the complexities of coalition politics, the article also provides a sequence of fallback options in clauses (2), (3), and (5) for scenarios where no single party holds a majority. This constitutional playbook is the only established path to forming a government, which the recent political rupture cast aside.

2. The Political Rupture: A Protest, a President, and an Unprecedented Appointment

The crisis unfolded with breathtaking speed. Following the ousting of the KP Sharma Oli government by a massive Gen Z-led anti-corruption movement on September 8-9, the nationтАЩs political order was upended. On September 12, President Ramchandra Paudel, acting on the recommendation of movement representatives, appointed former chief justice Sushila Karki to lead an interim government. On Prime Minister KarkiтАЩs recommendation, the President then dissolved the House of Representatives and gave the new government a six-month mandate to conduct parliamentary elections, scheduled for March 5. This rapid sequence of events, occurring over just a few days, bypassed the established constitutional process and triggered an immediate judicial backlash in the form of ten petitions filed in the Supreme Court.

These petitions challenge two distinct but deeply intertwined actions: the formation of KarkiтАЩs government and her subsequent recommendation to dissolve the House. The challenge to Karki’s appointment is therefore foundational; if her premiership is deemed unconstitutional, then her recommendation to dissolve the HouseтАФthe second major point of contentionтАФis invalid from the start.

3. The Core of the Controversy: Can a Former Chief Justice Become Prime Minister?

The petitioners’ case against Sushila Karki’s premiership hinges on a direct, literal reading of a single constitutional clause designed to safeguard judicial independence. They argue that her appointment as Prime Minister is an unambiguous breach of Article 132 (2), which is intended to prevent the politicization of the judiciary. The article states:

“No person who has once held the office of Chief Justice or a Justice of the Supreme Court shall be eligible for appointment to any government office, except as otherwise provided for in this Constitution.”

However, a sophisticated counter-argument has emerged, positing that this clause does not apply to the prime ministership. Ram Lohani, Associate Professor, Tribhuvan University first argues that the Prime Minister’s post is not an office that the President “assigns” someone to work in. Whereas the President has discretion in other appointments, Article 76 obligates the President to appoint any person who meets the constitutional criteria, such as commanding a majority. The Prime Minister is therefore not “put to work” by the President but rather assumes an office by constitutional right.

This leads to the second, crucial distinction: the difference between a “government office” and a “political post“. Lohani argues that Article 132’s prohibition applies only to the former. He notes that other constitutional articles, such as 238(8) and 240(8), explicitly permit former members of constitutional commissions to hold “political posts” while barring them from other “government service.” This distinction, he argues, implies that political roles like Prime Minister fall outside the scope of the prohibition placed on former justices. This clash between a literal interpretation and a nuanced, structural one lies at the heart of the legal controversy.

4. A Dissolved House: Constitutional Move or a Breach of Precedent?

The second constitutional challenge targets the dissolution of the House of Representatives, an act petitioners claim is both unconstitutional and a direct repudiation of the Supreme Court’s own landmark rulings. The argument carries significant weight, as:

“The court had reinstated the House of Representatives twice after it was dissolved by the then Oli-led government in 2020 and 2021. It had ruled that the constitution envisions a full five-year term for the lower house.”

Petitioners contend that in endorsing the dissolution, President Paudel violated his primary duty under Article 61: “to abide by and protect the Constitution.”

In response, supporters of the move, including some constitutional experts, frame the dissolution not as a legal breach but as a “political solution to a political problem.” They argue that the extraordinary circumstances, born from a popular uprising against a failing political class, demand a departure from rigid legalism. This perspective is articulated forcefully by senior advocate Dinesh Tripathi:

“In the changed context, decisions should be made accordingly by the court. This is the change brought about by a political movement.”

This viewpoint asks the court to prioritize the perceived spirit of political change over its own carefully constructed precedent, presenting a direct challenge to the court’s role as the ultimate arbiter of constitutional text.

Conclusion: Law, Spirit, and the Path Forward

Nepal now stands at a precipice, forced to reconcile the rigid text of its Constitution with the undeniable force of a popular movement demanding a political reset. The creation of an extra-parliamentary government and the dissolution of the House represent a profound departure from the constitutional order, justified by its architects as a necessary response to an existential crisis of governance.

The Supreme CourtтАЩs impending decision will be its most consequential to date. The verdict will not only determine the legality of Karki’s government but, more importantly, will define the very nature of NepalтАЩs constitutional democracy. At stake is a fundamental question:

Is this a singular, emergency-driven deviation from the rules, or does it set a precedent for a new, extra-constitutional pathway to power that could be abused in the future?

The courtтАЩs ruling will determine whether NepalтАЩs democratic institutions are resilient enough to withstand political storms or fragile enough to break under the weight of popular pressure.

Democracy symbols

Why Modern Democracy is an Illusion

By means of ever more effective methods of mind-manipulation, the democracies will change their nature; the quaint old formsтАФelections, parliaments, Supreme Courts and all the restтАФwill remain. The underlying substance will be a new kind of non-violent totalitarianism.

– Aldous Huxley (Brave New World Revisited, 1958)

Democracy in modern times is an illusion. It is a doublespeak for elites who ask for our votes while legitimising their control. We are living in a system that calls us free while we are imprisoned by emotions shaped by algorithms, propaganda, and continuous surveillance.

Athenian Democracy

Most historians agree that democracy originated from Athens. The people in Athens, a Greek city-state, developed democracy to conduct public affairs. The concept was simple. The citizens gathered in the Agora for Assembly (Ekklesia) to vote on laws, declare war or peace, decide foreign policy, and oversee public spending. Participation was a civic duty, not a choice.

There were no elections in Athens, though. They believed that elections could be rigged by the wealthy, the eloquent, or the well-connected. Because elections could give rise to oligarchy, they used lottery to select their representatives. Although fateful, they thought the random choice was more democratic as everyone had equal opportunity. They had also invented the kleroterion, an allotment machine to prevent rigging of the lottery.

One of the biggest problems of the Athenian Democracy was that it included citizens only, which included men born in the city. Women, slaves, merchants, and foreigners were excluded from voting. Even the original democracy was not fully democratic.

Plato’s Democracy

In the Republic, Plato discusses five kinds of regimes:

  • Aristocracy: Rule by the wise philosopher king who is benevolent and not tyrannical,
  • Timocracy: Rule by honour-driven soldiers. Ancient Sparta is an example.
  • Oligarchy: Rule by the wealthy landowners who put money above all increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. A capitalist state gives rise to oligarchy.
  • Democracy: Rule by the many after revolution against the oligarchs. Democracy can descend into mob rule and then into tyranny.
  • Tyranny: Rule of the “protector” of the people who crushes his enemies and develops a system to protect himself. By the time people recognize the tyrant, they are already under his control.

Plato believed that not everyone was able to lead and had to eventually give in to the desire of the public. Pacifying the people the sole objective of a democratic ruler and this would eventually lead to anarchy and tyranny.

Representative Democracy and the American Discussion

The Athenian Democracy ensured everyone’s direct participation. However, applying it to a state with large population or geographic barriers is extremely difficult. There is also a possibility of mob rule, as Plato feared, where wrong decisions and actions can also be approved by the crowd. Democracy was not a favoured form of regime.

In most of the places, representatives of an estate, clan or group ruled over the people. These were often unelected. Even when elected, like in the Roman Republic, they used to come from elite families. The Magistratus, the Senate, and the Comitia heavily favoured the oligarchs. Similar arrangements were made in the parliaments of the mediaeval period.

The concept of elected representatives became more popular after the promulgation of the Constitution of the U.S.A. and the success of the French Revolution. They were inspired by the ideas of John Locke, Charles Montesquieu, and the debates of the American Founding Fathers regarding democracy and republic.

John Locke argued for representative institutions that safeguard people’s rights in Two Treatises of Government (1689). Similarly, in The Spirit of the Laws (1748), Montesquieu detailed the idea of separation of powers. James Madison, one of the Founding Fathers of the U.S.A., strongly preferred republic over democracy:

Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contentionтАж and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
тАФ Federalist No. 10 (1787)

Thomas Jefferson favoured broader democratic participation, argued for more trust in the тАЬcommon manтАЭ, and pushed for expanding suffrage, but did not support direct democracy.

The idea of representative democracy was not uncontested, however. Rousseau, for instance, argued that true sovereignty rests with the people directly and that representation is a form of slavery:

тАЬThe moment a people gives itself representatives, it is no longer free.тАЭ
тАФ The Social Contract (1762)

Nepal’s Practice of Democracy

Nepal became a democratic state in 1951. There have also been protests in 1990 and 2006 to restore democracy. However, many indigenous peoples in Nepal have been practicing democracy since antiquity, for instance:

The Guthi System (Newar Communities)

The guthi is not only a land trust but also a self-governing social institution where decisions are taken collectively by lineage members. The leader is called thakali (not to be confused with the ethnic people, Thakali from Thak Khola area of Mustang, whose system is described in the next section).

Some of its features are:

  • Leadership rotation
  • Collective labour
  • Social accountability mechanisms
  • Participation by household, not just by individual тАЬcitizensтАЭ
  • Decisions often made through consensus, not simple majority rule
  • Certain guthi (especially diguthi) allow women significant authority

Guthis also call for collective action. Changes about to be brought by the Guthi bill were opposed in 2019.

The Thakali System

Thakali governance traditionally involves:

  • The Thakali Council (Thakali Tewa)
  • Female inheritance in some clans
  • Matriarchal features in household authority
  • A trading-network-based social order where economic cooperation required inclusive decision-making
  • Ritual and community functions coordinated by collective assemblies

The Panchayat System

King Mahendra introduced the Panchayat System in 1962. He believed partisan democracy did not suit Nepal and introduced a democratic system that valued local governance. A Panchayat at the local level included five representatives who looked after the basic needs and small judicial proceedings among the people. Although it was replaced by multi-party democracy in 1990, the system still influences the villages in Nepal and also shapes the modern local governance at the ward level.

Multi-Party Democracy with Constitutional Monarchy

In 1990, Nepal adopted a new constitution, and with it restored multi-party democracy with the constitutional monarch as the protector. Some communist groups who were unsatisfied, started an armed revolution against the government. Parties, especially Nepali Congress and CPN-UML, busy with their internal politics and unserious about the issue, let the movement grow. They also wanted to use excessive force using the Royal Nepal Army, whose deployment required the King’s permission.

After the Royal Massacre of King Birendra’s family in the Narayanhiti Palace premises, the Maoists declared monarchy was dead. King Gyanendra could not gain support from the people and he had to give up his throne paving way for democratic republican system.

Multi-Party Democratic Republic

Nepal adopted the republican system on the first meeting of the First Constituent Assembly in 2008. The Second Constituent Assembly gave Nepal its current constitution which adopts competitive multi-party democratic republic. However, competition is limited by fragile coalitions, shifting loyalties, and undemocratic practices within the parties.

Democracy in Modern Times

Oligarchic Elections and Tyrannical Tendencies

In modern times, “democracy” and “republic” are often used interchangeably. Whether it is the parliamentary democracy of India, the presidential republic of the USA or the democratic republic of Nepal, people’s participation is ensured through periodic elections. Constitutions, laws, and institutions prevent the tyranny of the majority. Institutions have become more inclusive as voting and candidacy rights prevent discrimination on any grounds.

The problem, however, is that democracies have become mechanical. Elections are announced, political parties or individuals participate, people vote, and the representatives make laws or execute them according to the set principles. The actual voice of people is often lost, as they have little say in the nomination of political parties and candidates and the laws and policies the representatives endorse. This is because modern democracy is actually an oligarchy with popular legitimacy.

In an oligarchy, authority is in the hands of a select few, often distinguished by wealth, family ties, military power, or intellectual influence. Robert MichelsтАЩ “iron law of oligarchy” argues that even democratic organisations tend to concentrate power in a few hands due to organisational necessities.

The political parties and their leaders are often like oligarchs. They tend to concentrate power to themselves, depriving the general people from even the basic rights. The collective knowledge on denial of rights, political oppression, and ideological slavery is driving protests all over the world. Bangladesh’s July 2024 Uprising, Nepal’s September 2025 Protests, and uprisings in Indonesia, Philippines, and Madagascar.

There is also the danger of elected tyrants. Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Vladimir Putin suppressed opposition and undermined democracy even though they themselves contested elections. These leaders are villains to people who follow democratic ideals. But there is also a curious case of Lee Kwan Yew, the beloved Founding Father of Singapore. He and his PAP did bring up many reforms that upscaled industries in Singapore and improved people’s lives, but he also brutally suppressed the communists.

Mind Manipulation

The villainization of some and heroization of others is the result of interest-based mind manipulation or propaganda through the use of media. Although both Putin and Yew suppressed their rivals, Putin is a villain to the West because he does not accept the Western agenda and aggressively counters them. Yew, on the other hand, is a hero because he acted to safeguard the Western interests. The US intervention in other countries is an act of peace, whereas the Russian invasion of Ukraine is imperialism. Change the news sources to Russia or Putin-supporting Russians, Putin is the hero, and the Western leaders are the villains. Truth in global politics is mediated by geopolitical interests, not universal moral standards.

Proliferation of social media has become a fuel for propaganda as explained by P.W. Singer and Emeron T. Brooking in their book, LikeWar. Politics is now a game of algorithm. If you “like”, “follow” or “subscribe” to a certain belief, you get bombarded with content that support it. Opposing political ideas become intolerable. You are fed sponsored political campaigns involving provocative statements from leaders and electoral candidates, endorsements from “influencers” who chase clout, and identity-based mobilization that hate on “others”. With unfiltered opinionated people catering to algorithm-filtered content on social media, populism is on the rise.

Populism and Celebrity Leadership

Representative Democracy inherently is a game of convincing people to elect candidates to an office. The game of throne is that of lies, and the one who can lie the most effectively is the winner. Successful is the one who either belongs to a political party with strong grassroots movements, promises to change the status quo through effective campaigning, or has made a name in the community in the past. No candidate can win elections in vacuum.

Political parties with strong grassroots movements are often the best in practicing democracy. Candidates from such parties are also the favourites. However, there is no denying that political parties and candidates are often used by the rich and the powerful to further the policies they want. The candidates also promise to provide basic infrastructures like roads and drinking water even if may be against the existing laws and policies or undermine sustainability.

Candidates working among the people for some time have a good understanding of the problems. If they already are members of political parties, they have the best chance. If they don’t belong to political parties, they may sweep the election as underdogs. However, they also must cater to people’s desire to solve the existing problems even if the solutions are illogical or problematic.

Effective campaigning, however, trumps everything else. You may belong to a political party or have good relations with the people, if you have no campaigning, you can’t win. Candidates use the rally of supporters, go to each household, meet each voter, and ask for a vote. All these have been eased by social media. And who has the best chance of succeeding in social media? Celebrities!

Ronald Reagan was an actor before he stepped into politics and became the President of the US. Donald Trump too came from entertainment industry. Nepal has also seen TV presenters and singers such as Rabi Lamichhane, Komal Oli, and Balen Shah have turned into leaders. Except Komal Oli, the existing fans of these celebrities have helped push forward their narratives, even when they are apolitical.

When leaders always cater to the emotions of the people, they eliminate opponents and gradually overreach to perpetuate their rule.

Continuation of Institutions

Democratic tyrannical leaders, unlike those like Ibrahim Traor├й, need democratic institutions to legitimize their rule. Political scientists Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way describe modern states that maintain elections and courts but undermine real accountability as competitive authoritarian regimes. This is because power is most stable when people believe it is legitimate, and legitimacy is most easily maintained when people feel they are in control and believe they choose their leaders. A system seeking to control citizens without violence must therefore keep the appearance of democracy. They also need the facade for international legitimacy.

The continuation of institutions also comforts the general public. Most people stability and predictability over revolution and chaos. Keeping them provides emotional reassurance, even while policymakers, media, or interest groups subtly control outcomes behind the scenes. Moreover, the “democracy” needs to manufacture consent for self-legitimacy. The reign continues even though there the outcomes are predetermined by algorithmic control, agenda-setting, media manipulation, and financial influence. In fact, the participation itself generates consent.

War Politics

The Democratic Peace Theory (DPT) argues that democracies don’t go to war. The reality is different. Except communist dictatorships like North Korea and absolute monarchists like Saudi Arabia, almost every country claims to be democratic, hold elections, and support peace. Everyone is at war, though. From direct confrontations to proxy wars, the world is reeling with futile wars that only strengthen the elites.

Conclusion

The original Athenian Democracy included the voice of people, but it excluded women, slaves, and merchant. Compared to that, Nepal’s indigenous institutions are more democratic. Modern Democracy is different. It is representative and inclusive, but it is a rhetoric for mass control with manufactured consent. It is a system that depends on lies, propaganda, and emotional manipulation to legitimize itself. As Huxley says, the political institutions and structures remain “democratic. However, they are weak and corrupt and invoke fear and terror instead of respect and peace. Modern Democracy is an illusion that promotes hate over love, and divided identities over unity of humanity.

What’s the solution then? The solution, I think, is to give up the notion that each individual has power over the matters of the country. I don’t. Neither does the elected representative. Everyone in the society should be conscious enough to know that leadership is a heavy burden. From such a society emerge leaders who can balance practicalities with philosophy that best serves humanity. We need a grassroots movement that reinforces morality, truthfulness, and conscience. It will turn hatred into love and replace divisions with unity.

A more practical approach would be to improve civic education, strengthen institutions, and safeguard transparency mechanisms. Political parties should be made more democratic through internal debates and periodic elections of the leaders.

For Nepal, the path forward is not simply imitation of Western models but the creation of a contextual, home-grown, critical democracy that:

  • connects technological opportunity (digital participation) with local realities;
  • draws on NepalтАЩs traditional community governance like the guthi system, inclusive practices among multiple ethnicities and castes;
  • recognises that participation must include real agency, not just elections; and
  • safeguards against elite capture, algorithmic manipulation and institutional stagnation.
A megaphone symbolizing How To Speak in an Oppressive Political Environment

How To Speak in an Oppressive Political Environment

тАЬYou may speak, but can you speak wisely?тАЭ
тАЬYou may protest, but can you do so without giving them an excuse to silence you?тАЭ

Article 17 of the Constitution of Nepal guarantees Freedom of Expression. It also introduces reasonable restrictions, which of course, can be misused. About two weeks ago, a popular YouTube channel, In-Depth Story (IDS) had to close its merchandise store IDS Wears for selling T-shirts with the slogan Kera Ganatantra (Banana Republic) for “disturbing the sovereignty, national unity, and dignity of the country, and so on.The slogan was provocative and somewhat double meaning. But did it have to be banned? I don’t think so.

Around a month back, Rama Basnet from Khotang was arrested for expressing her frustration towards politicians in few TikTok videos. The words she chose mocked a politician’s disability. However, she got support from the opposition party because of the way she was arrested.

These examples speak volumes about the awareness of the constitution and laws we have as citizen. We know we can speak, but we often don’t know how to speak. We’ve heard of rights, but rarely do we hear about the restrictions that come along with them. And that’s when we trip over.

LetтАЩs get straight to it. Here are a few principles that might save our voice and case, while upholding the law.

1. Say Less. Mean More.

Power doesnтАЩt like being called out, but artists and writers use often use metaphors, satire, and symbolism to mock it.

George Orwell’s Animal Farm is truly metaphoric and symbolic. Using pigs, horses, and other farm animals, Orwell mocks Soviet Communism and warns how an ideal can become exploitative.

Another symbolism I vividly remember is that of a new politician in Sanjeev Upreti’s Ghanachakkar. When there is an announcement that a flawless leader has arrived in Kathmandu, the narrator goes to see him. However, in no time, the leader turns into an onion. The multi-layered towering onion is a metaphor for secrecy, corruption, and inflated ego of politicians in Nepal.

So, our best bet is to be poetic and ambiguous. Let the reader add two and two.

But can satire backfire?

Did you notice the word “bet”? Actually, I am reminded of Krishna Lal Adhikari’s story. He was a Nayab Subba during the rule of Chandra Shamsher. His duties in the field of agriculture gave him a lot of knowledge on maize plantation and published a scientific book titled, “Makai ko Kheti.” Some sycophants, however, saw it as a mockery against Chandra Shamsher and his generals. Although Adhikari never meant to satire, he was tried and imprisoned for nine years until he died of tuberculosis.

So, yeah. We still need to be careful while using symbols and metaphors.

2. Displace the Target

We donтАЩt talk about todayтАЩs leaders directly. Talking about a character or an imaginary village or a tyrannical ruler from history will work. Readers will connect the dots. Not everything needs to be spelled out.

But we still need to remember Krishna Lal Adhikari and be cautious.

3. Borrow Their Language

The safest thing we can do is use the Constitution, parliamentary and other recorded speeches. We can quote government slogans back at them. When the system tries to silence you, reply with its own words. Just like the leaders and stooges owned the insult of Jhole as a treasure, we should own up the laws and use them to our advantage. ItтАЩs hard to arrest someone for saying whatтАЩs written or in accordance with the law.

We should use your rights and stand tall before the law. But power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We should be careful not to assume the state will honour them fairly.

4. Protest Creatively, Not Predictably

Instead of shouting in front of microphones, we can try standing silently with a placard. Ujjwal Thapa and his party did it successfully. We can also post an ironic meme or writing a childrenтАЩs story (like Orwell) that says what the editorial canтАЩt.

From Occupy Baluwatar to Jayatu Sanskritam, peaceful creativity has always been harder to crush than violent slogans.

5. Build a Chorus

One person speaking is a complaint. Ten thousand people speaking is a movement. If you’re afraid of being targeted, amplify othersтАФand let them amplify you. Even whisper campaigns can be effective when they echo.

But ItтАЩs Still Dangerous

Today, we can be investigated for a Facebook post, dragged into court over a short story, and even labelled a traitor for asking questions. IтАЩve felt the chill myself while writing. I wonder at times: Is this going too far? Will this get me in trouble?

This Isn’t Fair!

Yes, nobody should have to think this hard before speaking. But when expression is policed, speech must become strategy.

This isnтАЩt a call for cowardice. ItтАЩs a call for craft.
This isnтАЩt about avoiding the truth. ItтАЩs about delivering it smartly enough to survive.

Speak. Silence protects no one. But speak like you know someone powerful is listening. And looking for an excuse to catch you.

And yet, here I am.

Because whatтАЩs the alternative? Silence? Cynicism? ThatтАЩs not living. ThatтАЩs waiting.

To Speak Is to Build Justice

The truth is: oppression isnтАЩt just about silencing people. It’s about systemic injustice. ItтАЩs about making them believe that speech doesnтАЩt matter. That it wonтАЩt change anything. But it does. It always has.

Change begins with someone saying, This is wrong.
It grows when someone else says, I agree.
And it becomes unstoppable when people say it together even if they just have to whisper.

рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓реАрд╣рд░реВрд▓рд╛рдИ рдмреЛрд▓реНрди рд░реЛрдХ рд▓рдЧрд╛рдЗрдПрдХреЛ рд╕рд╛рдЩреНрдХреЗрддрд┐рдХ рдЪрд┐рддреНрд░

рдмреЛрд▓реНрди рдкрд╛рдЗрдиреНрдЫ ?

рдмреЛрд▓реНрдирд▓рд╛рдИ рдмреЛрд▓реНрди рдд рдкрд╛рдЗрдиреНрдЫ
рдмреЛрд▓реНрдиреЗ рдкрдирд┐ рддрд░рд┐рдХрд╛ рдЪрд╛рд╣рд┐рдиреНрдЫ


рд╕реНрд╡рдкреНрди рд╕реБрдорди рд░ рдЕрднрд┐рдЬреНрдЮрд╛ рдШрд┐рдорд┐рд░реЗрдХреЛ рдЧреАрдд рд╕реБрдиреНрджреИ рдлреЗрд╕рдмреБрдХ рд╕реНрдХреНрд░реЛрд▓ рдЧрд░реНрджреИ рдерд┐рдПрдБ ред рд╕рдорд╛рдЪрд╛рд░ рджреЗрдЦрд┐рдпреЛ – рд░рд╡рд┐ рд▓рд╛рдорд┐рдЫрд╛рдиреЗрд▓рд╛рдИ рд╕рдорд░реНрдерди рдЧрд░реНрджреИ рдкреНрд░рдзрд╛рдирдордиреНрддреНрд░реАрдХреЛ рдЖрд▓реЛрдЪрдирд╛ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рднрдиреНрджреИ рдПрдХ рдорд╣рд┐рд▓рд╛ рдкрдХреНрд░рд╛рдЙ ред рдЕрд╕реНрддрд┐рддрд┐рд░ рджрд┐рд▓рднреВрд╖рдг рдкрд╛рдардХрд▓рд╛рдИ рд╣рд┐рд▓реНрдЯрди рд╣реЛрдЯрд▓рдХрд╛ рдмрд╛рд░реЗрдорд╛ рд╕рдорд╛рдЪрд╛рд░ рдмрдирд╛рдПрдкрдЫрд┐ рдкрдХреНрд░рд╛рдЙ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рдЦрдмрд░ рдЖрдПрдХреЛ рдерд┐рдпреЛ ред рдЕрд▓рд┐ рдЕрдШрд┐ рд╕рд┐рдзрд╛рдХреБрд░рд╛рд▓реЗ рдореБрджреНрджрд╛ рдорд╛рдорд┐рд▓рд╛рдорд╛ рд╣реБрдиреЗ рд▓реЗрдирджреЗрдирдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрдорд╛ рд╕рд╛рд░реНрд╡рдЬрдирд┐рдХ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рдбрд╛рд░реНрдХ рдлрд╛рдЗрд▓реНрд╕ рдЕрджрд╛рд▓рддрдХреЛ рдЕрдирд╛рджрд░ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рднрдиреНрджреИ рдЙрдХреНрдд рд╕рд╛рдордЧреНрд░реА рд╣рдЯрд╛рдЙрди рд▓рдЧрд╛рдЗрдПрдХреЛ рдерд┐рдпреЛ ред рдкрдЫрд┐ рд╕рд╛рдордЧреНрд░реА рдиреИ рдлреЗрдХ рд╣реЛ рднрдиреЗрд░ рддреАрдирдЬрдирд╛рд▓рд╛рдИ рдХрд╛рд░рдмрд╛рд╣реА рднрдПрдХреЛ рдерд┐рдпреЛ ред рдЕрдЭреИ рдЕрдЧрд╛рдбрд┐ рд╕рд░рдХрд╛рд░рд▓реЗ рд╕рд╛рдорд╛рдЬрд┐рдХ рд╕рджреНрднрд╛рд╡ рдмрд┐рдЧрд╛рд░реЗрдХреЛ рднрдиреНрджреИ рдЯрд┐рдХрдЯрдХрд▓рд╛рдИ рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рдмрдиреНрдз рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рдерд┐рдпреЛ ред рдЭрдиреНрдбреИ рдПрдХ рд╡рд░реНрд╖рдкрдЫрд┐ рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рдмрдиреНрдз рдлреБрдХреБрд╡рд╛ рднрдпреЛ ред

рдпреА рдШрдЯрдирд╛рд╣рд░реВ рдХреЗрд▓рд╛рдЙрдБрджрд╛ рд▓реЛрдХрддрдиреНрддреНрд░, рдЧрдгрддрдиреНрддреНрд░рдорд╛ рдмреЛрд▓реНрди рдкрд╛рдЗрдиреНрдЫ рднрдиреНрдиреЗрд╣рд░реВ рдЕрд╣рд┐рд▓реЗ рдЖрдлреИрдБ рд╡рд┐рд░реЛрдзрдХреЛ рдЕрд╡рд╛рдЬ рдмрдиреНрдж рдЧрд░реНрди рддрд▓реНрд▓реАрди рджреЗрдЦрд┐рдиреНрдЫрдиреН ред рдЕрднрд┐рд╡реНрдпрдХреНрддрд┐рдХреЛ рд╕реНрд╡рддрдиреНрддреНрд░рддрд╛ рд╕рдВрд╡рд┐рдзрд╛рдирдХреЛ рдзрд╛рд░рд╛ резрен рджреНрд╡рд╛рд░рд╛ рдкреНрд░рджрддреНрдд рдЕрдзрд┐рдХрд╛рд░ рд╣реЛ ред рдпрд╕рд▓реЗ рдХреБрдиреИ рд╡рд┐рдЪрд╛рд░рд▓рд╛рдИ рдирд┐рд╖реЗрдз рдЧрд░реНрди рдирдкрд╛рдЗрдиреЗ рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рдЫ ред рддреНрдпрд╕реНрддреИ, рдзрд╛рд░рд╛ резреп рд▓реЗ рдХреБрдиреИ рдкреНрд░рд╕рд╛рд░рдг рдорд╛рдзреНрдпрдордорд╛ рдкреНрд░рдХрд╛рд╢рд┐рдд рд╕рд╛рдордЧреНрд░реАрдХреИ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рдХрд╕реИрд▓рд╛рдИ рдкрдХреНрд░рд╛рдЙ рдирдЧрд░рд┐рдиреЗ рдХреБрд░рд╛ рд╕реБрдирд┐рд╢реНрдЪрд┐рдд рдЫ ред

рддрд░ рд╕рдВрд╡рд┐рдзрд╛рдирд▓реЗ рдиреИ рд╕рд╛рд░реНрд╡рднреМрдорд╕рддреНрддрд╛ рд░ рдЕрдЦрдгреНрдбрддрд╛рдХреЛ рд░рдХреНрд╖рд╛, рд╡реНрдпрдХреНрддрд┐рдЧрдд рдЧреЛрдкрдиреАрдпрддрд╛ рд░ рдорд░реНрдпрд╛рджрд╛рдХреЛ рд╕рдореНрдорд╛рдирдЬрд╕реНрддрд╛ рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрдорд╛ рдордирд╛рд╕рд┐рдм рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рдмрдиреНрдз рд▓рдЧрд╛рдЙрди рдкрд╛рдЗрдиреЗ рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛ рдкрдирд┐ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рдЫ ред рд░ рдпрд╕рдХреИ рджреБрд░реБрдкрдпреЛрдЧ рдЧрд░реЗрд░ рд╕рддреНрддрд╛ рд░ рд╕рддреНрддрд╛рдХреЛ рдирдЬрд┐рдХ рд╣реБрдиреЗрд▓реЗ рдЖрдлреНрдирд╛ рд╡рд┐рд░реЛрдзрдорд╛ рдЖрдЙрдиреЗ рдЖрд╡рд╛рдЬ рджрдмрд╛рдЙрди рдерд╛рд▓реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред рдЕрдЭ рдЕрдирд▓рд╛рдЗрдирдорд╛ рдкреНрд░рдХрд╛рд╢рди рд╣реБрдиреЗ рд╕рд╛рдордЧреНрд░реАрдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрдорд╛ рдХрд╛рдиреВрдирдорд╛ рднрдПрдХреЛ рд▓реБрдкрд╣реЛрд▓ рдкреНрд░рдпреЛрдЧ рдЧрд░реЗрд░ рджреБ:рдЦ рдкрдирд┐ рдмрдвреА рдиреИ рджрд┐рди рдерд╛рд▓реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред

рдпрд╕реНрддреЛ рдХрд┐рди рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ ? рд╕реНрд╡рддрдиреНрддреНрд░рддрд╛ рд╕рдЩреНрдЧреНрд░рд╛рдо рдХрдерд╛рдорд╛ рд▓реЗрдЦреЗрдХреЛ рдЫреБ :

рд╕рддреНрддрд╛ рд╕рдзреИрдБ рдкреНрд░рд╢рдВрд╕рд╛рдХреЛ рднреЛрдХреЛ рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ ред рдереЛрд░реИ рдЖрд▓реЛрдЪрдирд╛ рдкрдирд┐ рдЙрд╕рд▓рд╛рдИ рдмрд┐рдЭреНрдЫ ред

рддрд░ рдЖрд▓реЛрдЪрдирд╛ рд╕рд╣рди рдирд╕рдХреНрдиреЗ рд╕рддреНрддрд╛рдзрд╛рд░реАрд▓рд╛рдИ рдареАрдХ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдиреЗ рдмреНрд░рд╣реНрдорд╛рд╕реНрддреНрд░ рдЦрд░реЛ рдЖрд▓реЛрдЪрдирд╛ рдиреИ рд╣реЛ ред рдмреНрд░рд╛рдпрди рдорд╛рд░реНрдЯрд┐рди рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХ рдЗрдиреНрдлрд░реНрдореЗрд╕рди рд▓рд┐рдмрд░реЗрд╕рдирдорд╛ рд▓реЗрдЦреНрдЫрдиреН,

“рдЖрд▓реЛрдЪрдирд╛ рдЧрд░реНрджрд╛ рдирд┐рд╖реНрдХрд░реНрд╖ рджрд┐рдиреЗ рднрдиреНрджрд╛ рдкрдирд┐ рддрдереНрдпрд╣рд░реВ рдкреНрд░рд╕реНрддреБрдд рдЧрд░рд┐рджрд┐рдиреБрд╕реН ред рд╕рд╣реА рдЧрд▓рддрдХреЛ рдирд┐рд░реНрдгрдп рдкрд╛рдардХ/рд╢реНрд░реЛрддрд╛рд▓реЗ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗрдЫрдиреН ред”

рдЙрдиреА рдердкреНрдЫрдиреН,

“рдХреБрдиреИ рдиреЗрддрд╛рд▓реЗ рднреНрд░рд╖реНрдЯрд╛рдЪрд╛рд░реА рд╣реЛ рднрдиреНрдиреБрднрдиреНрджрд╛ рдЙрд╕рд▓рд╛рдИ рдпреЛ рдХрдореНрдкрдиреАрд▓реЗ рдпрддрд┐ рд░рдХрдо рдмреБрдЭрд╛рдпреЛ рднрдирд┐рджрд┐рдиреБрд╕реН ред”

рд░

“рдЬреБрди рдХреБрд░рд╛ рднрдиреНрдиреБрд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ рддреНрдпрд╕рдХреЛ рдареЛрд╕ рдкреНрд░рдорд╛рдг рд╕рдЩреНрдХрд▓рди рдЧрд░реНрдиреБрд╕реН рдЕрдирд┐ рдЖрдлреНрдирд╛ рд╕рд╛рдереАрднрд╛рдЗ рд░ рдЕрд░реВрд╣рд░реВрд▓рд╛рдИ рдкрдард╛рдЙрдиреБрд╕реН ред”

рдЕрд╣рд┐рд▓реЗрдХреЛ рдкрд░рд┐рд╕реНрдерд┐рддрд┐рдорд╛ рдмреЛрд▓реНрди рдЧрд╛рд╣реНрд░реЛ рдЫ ред рдмреЛрд▓реНрди рднрдиреЗ рдЫрд╛рдбрд┐рдиреНрди ред рддреНрдпрд╕реИрд▓реЗ рдЬреЗ рдмреЛрд▓рд┐рдиреНрдЫ, рддрдереНрдп рд╕рд╣рд┐рдд рдмреЛрд▓реНрдиреБрдкрд░реНрдиреЗ рдЫ ред рд░ рдд :

рдмреЛрд▓реНрдирд▓рд╛рдИ рдмреЛрд▓реНрди рдд рдкрд╛рдЗрдиреНрдЫ
рдмреЛрд▓реНрдиреЗ рдкрдирд┐ рддрд░рд┐рдХрд╛ рдЪрд╛рд╣рд┐рдиреНрдЫ

A hand with closed fist breaking out of chained handcuff symbolising the right to freedom

Freedom in Nepal: Constitutional Guarantees, Legal Limits, and the Danger of Silencing Dissent

Constitution Study #6: How Free Are We?

FreedomтАФa term we instinctively link with democracy. We think of freedom in Nepal as the right to speak, to question, to move, to protest, and to live with dignity within its territory. Article 17 of the Constitution of Nepal boldly declares this right for every citizen. And yet, in the lived experience of many Nepalis, freedom feels conditional, fragile, and at times, dangerous.

So, what does the Constitution really say about freedom? Where does it draw the line? And how can the very right meant to empower citizens be used to suppress dissent?

What Does Article 17 Say?

Article 17 of the Constitution enshrines the Right to Freedom under six broad categories:

  1. Freedom of opinion and expression
  2. Freedom to assemble peacefully
  3. Freedom to form political parties
  4. Freedom to form unions and associations
  5. Freedom to move and reside anywhere in Nepal
  6. Freedom to practice any profession or business

At first glance, this seems an expansive and a robust shield for democracy. But behind this promise lie several restrictions, some of which are reasonable and others, potentially oppressive.

The Catch: тАЬReasonable RestrictionsтАЭ

Each of these freedoms comes with legal qualifiers. The Constitution allows laws to curtail freedoms to protect:

  • Sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national independence
  • Public morality and decency
  • Harmonious relations between communities
  • Security, law and order
  • National secrecy and integrity
  • Reputation, judicial authority, and professional standards

On paper, these restrictions aim to prevent chaos. In reality, they can, and have been, used to silence criticism and criminalize dissent. LetтАЩs explore these restrictions in practice.

NepalтАЩs Constitution establishes constitutional sovereignty, where power flows through constitutional institutions, not directly from the people. Article 2 declares that sovereignty lies with the people, but only as exercised through the Constitution. (See my earlier article: Can Nepal Restore Monarchy?)

HereтАЩs the paradox:

  • Popular sovereignty suggests the people can question, challenge, and even revise the system.
  • But constitutional sovereignty sets limits тАФ including on what people may say or do in the name of reform.

This tension becomes visible when:

  • Protesters are arrested for demanding structural change.
  • Critics are charged with contempt for questioning judicial decisions. In Chapter 6 of the book, Information Liberation, Brian Martin explains how defamation laws can curtail free speech.
  • Political parties are threatened with bans for pushing ideas seen as тАЬanti-sovereign.тАЭ

The question is: Who defines sovereignty тАФ and in whose interest?

Freedom and the Fear of Dissent

Over the years, weтАЩve seen numerous cases, in Nepal as well as around the globe, where government has used vague terms like тАЬmorality,тАЭ тАЬnationality,тАЭ and тАЬsovereigntyтАЭ to stifle dissent.

In these cases, freedom seems to protect the powerful, not a sword for justice.

Why This Matters

As citizens, we must ask:

  • Who defines тАЬmoralityтАЭ and тАЬnational interestтАЭ?
  • Are the laws protecting people, or protecting power?
  • Is the Constitution a living reflection of the people’s will, or a mechanism to control it?

Freedom cannot flourish in a society where criticism is feared, and where laws are used as weapons to silence those without power.

Exercising Freedom Responsibly

Freedom is not just a right тАФ itтАЩs a responsibility. We must exercise it with:

  • Respect for othersтАЩ rights
  • Honesty and courage
  • Awareness of consequences

But responsibility does not mean silence. True responsibility means using your voice to speak for truth, justice, and the dignity of all тАФ even when itтАЩs uncomfortable.

Final Reflection

The Right to Freedom in Nepal is both a constitutional guarantee and a battleground. We must defend it, not just on paper, but in practice тАФ through protest, art, speech, storytelling, and solidarity.

Definitions of betrayal and treason raise urgent questions. Is it treason to question authority, or is it more treacherous to quietly erode the sovereignty of the people through corruption, abuse of power, and fear?

тАЬTo question your nation is not to betray it. To silence those questions is.тАЭ

For us to truly thrive, we must embrace the idea that sovereignty belongs to the people, not to political elites, not to closed institutions. ItтАЩs time we rise together to make that truth real, with our words, our actions, and our unwavering courage.

State and Nation Building

State and Nation in the Constitution of Nepal

Constitution Study #3: Between promises and practices of state- and nation-building

State and Nation Building
State and Nation Building (Generated using AI)

Reading the Constitution of Nepal can be frustrating when similar words represent different meanings. For instance, the words “state” and “nation” interchangeably in casual conversations and articles, and at times, even in political discourses. The Constitution, however, formally defines them as different concepts and dreams of a just, inclusive, and united Nepal. But, as anyone who has walked through a village neglected by development or spoken with someone whose language isnтАЩt recognized in state institutions knows, dreams donтАЩt always unfold as promised.

In this article, I explore the definitions and distinctions of the concepts of “state” and “nation” and critically examine the ongoing projects of state-building and nation-building within Nepal’s constitutional and socio-political context.

1. Constitutional Definitions of State and Nation

i. State:

Article 4 defines Nepal as an:

“… independent, indivisible, sovereign, secular, inclusive, democratic, socialism-oriented, federal democratic republican state.”

The State is thus, a legal and political construct designed to exercise authority, ensure rights, and deliver governance. It represents the political system, power separation and division of political units.

The Nepal State is constituted by its independence, constitutional and popular sovereignty (Articles 1 and 2), and democratic and federal institutions (federal, provincial, local).

ii. Nation:

Article 3 declares:

All the Nepali people, with multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, multi-religious, multicultural characteristics and in geographical diversities, and having common aspirations and being united by a bond of allegiance to national independence, territorial integrity, national interest and prosperity of Nepal, collectively constitute the nation.

The definition of Nation says that it is a socio-cultural construct based on shared historical experiences and collective aspirations. It is the culmination of the Nepali peopleтАФfrom Olangchung Gola, Taplejung to Chandani-Dodhara, Kailali to Limpiyadhura, Darchula to Kechana, JhapaтАФin their diverse identities, cultures, and their interests, desire for independence and territorial integrity. A nation is, therefore, upheld by its people, united by common goals in spite of differences among themselves.

The Preamble of the Constitution also emphasizes the sovereignty of the people and unity in diversity.

2. State-building: Structures and Challenges

i. Structures Created

The Constitution has created a three-tiered federal system with a complex web of institutions and governance structures. The primary aim of federalism is for decentralization of power and resources, while enhancing accessibility to basic services among common people.

ii. Challenges:

Despite the Constitutional promise, federalism in Nepal has faced several challenges, including, but not limited to,

  • Capacity gaps and coordination issues between levels of government.
  • Insufficient and complicated legal provisions, for example, provincial laws on civil service came out before the federal law, creating confusion and chaos.
  • Weak implementation of laws and fiscal federalism.
  • Political instability affecting Federal and Provincial levels.
  • Patronage-driven bureaucracy.
  • Public disillusionment due to unmet expectations.

The current state of state-building in Nepal is seen not only in frustrated youths going abroad but also in leaders who won elections believing they could bring some change. The frustration is slowly converting to rage, displayed through protests, riots, and extra-constitutional demands of monarchy. What comes out of it will depend on various factors, prominent among them, popular sovereignty, discussed in this article.

3. Nation-building: Identity, Inclusion, and Discord

i. Efforts:

Nation-building encourages the feeling of ownership among all the Nepali people irrespective of their origin, languages, cultures, and traditions. The Constitution commits proportional inclusion and participation. It legally recognises indigenous nationalities, languages, and cultures. It also sets up affirmative actions in civil service, education, and representation.

While constitutional provisions for inclusion are commendable, true nation-building demands more than legal recognition. It requires a reconciliation with past injustices, the crafting of shared national narratives that embrace all Nepalis, and reforms in education that foster empathy, dignity, and mutual respect. Without these cultural and psychological foundations, legal measures risk becoming hollow gestures.

Several civil servants and schoolteachers are in their positions today because of these provisions, and the strengthening of commissions like the Public Service Commission (PSC). The change is palpable. These changes demonstrate the Constitution’s strength and make me hopeful, but the gaps in implementation are hurting the sentiments of the constitution.

ii. Gaps and Tensions: From Constitutional Promise to Political Reality

Despite constitutional guarantees, there are some grave areas of concern surrounding nation-building. For instance,

  • The Sixteenth Plan (2024/25тАУ2028/29) continues the language of justice, prosperity, and inclusion, but acknowledges structural weaknesses in governance, economic equity, and service delivery.
  • The unfulfilled promises of transitional justice continue to alienate conflict victims. Without formal reconciliation, the wounds of the past hinder a shared future.
  • Despite impressive gains in literacy, infrastructure, and legal frameworks, the gap between constitutional vision and lived reality remains significant.
  • Economic Survey 2080/81 highlights both progress and persistent disparities in income, access, and human development.

Weaknesses in governance brought about by lawlessness, injustice, and corruption makes people lose hope. They feel abandoned by the government and set up their own ecosystem outside the constitution and laws for survival. The result could be a rise in outlaws or militants, risking increase instability and violent resistance in marginalized regions.

For nation-building to thrive, Nepal needs shared narratives that recognize Madhesi heroes, Janajati resistance, and Muslim contributions alongside more mainstream histories. Without such narrative parity, inclusion remains symbolic.

Similarly, education remains one of the most underutilized instruments in NepalтАЩs nation-building project. A curriculum that genuinely reflects NepalтАЩs ethnic, linguistic, and regional diversityтАФnot just tokenistic mentionsтАФcan nurture empathy and unity among the next generation.

Conclusion

Nepal’s Constitution lays a bold foundation for a democratic, inclusive, and sovereign state that celebrates its multi-ethnic national character. However, the transition from textual commitment to substantive transformation demands deeper reforms, robust implementation, and sincere political will. The absence of political will not only hampers the implementation of constitution but also raises distrust among the people. True nation-building must go beyond symbolic inclusion to embrace structural change, social justice, and a reimagined civic unity that respects diversity.

Uprising in Nepal

Can Nepal Restore Monarchy?

Constitution Study #2: Reflections on Sovereignty, Monarchy, and NepalтАЩs Living Constitution

When I first set out to read the Constitution of Nepal in its entirety, I expected a legal documentтАФdry, technical, full of jargon. What I encountered instead was a mirror, not just of law and governance, but of ourselves, our hopes, our betrayals, our fragilities. Somewhere along the journey, an unsettling question surfaced:

If the power of the State is vested in the Nepali people, and if they want to restore monarchy, would the Constitution still be valid? Can Nepal restore monarchy?

This question did not come in isolation. It arrived during a time of national anxiety. Pro-monarchist rallies were clashing with the governmentтАФvoices rising from corners of frustration, nostalgia, and desperation. The very legitimacy of NepalтАЩs republicanism was being questioned on the streets.

Uprising in Nepal
A Protest in Nepal. Source: https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/nepal-can-democracy-recover-in-the-himalayan-nation

So, I asked. And I explored.

What the Constitution Says

Article 2 of the Constitution of Nepal lays out the provision for popular sovereignty:

тАЬThe sovereignty and State power of Nepal shall be vested in the Nepali people. It shall be exercised in accordance with the provisions set forth in this Constitution.тАЭ

This clause is both empowering and limiting. It declares that sovereignty lies with the people. But it must be exercised within the Constitution. This means constitutional sovereignty overrides popular sovereignty. And here lies the contradiction:

What happens when the people’s will itself wants to go beyond the current Constitution?

Can the Monarchy Be Reinstated?

Theoretically, yes. Practically, it’s a bit complicated. And yes, not without undoing the Constitution itself.

Nepal is currently a federal democratic republican state, as defined in Article 4(1). This identity is not decorative. It is woven into the ConstitutionтАЩs foundation.

Reinstating the monarchy, may be possible through:

  • A two-thirds amendment in the Federal Parliament (Article 274),
  • A popular movement,
  • A referendum, or
  • A drafting of a new Constitution.

It’s not like we say, “We want the King back,” and poof! we get the King in an instant. It is a structural, existential shift. And it would legally nullify the current Constitution’s core.

What About the Constitution of 2047 (1990)?

The Constitution of 2047 (1990) was built upon constitutional monarchy. It was not perfect. It embodied a compromise between the king and the political parties after the Jana Andolan of 2046 (1990). Interestingly, even though the executive worked under the name of the king, it explicitly stated in Article 3:

тАЬThe sovereignty of Nepal is vested in the Nepalese people and shall be exercised in accordance with this constitution.”

Reinstating that Constitution would mean people still reigning supreme. However, the actions of king could not be challenged in court. He could declare an unfit heir, and people would have to accept him. He could choose anyone to head the Raj Parishad in his absence, undermining democratic representation. These provisions are both legally contradictory and philosophically paradoxical, which eventually resulted in extra-constitutional actions by the king, the political parties, and the reinstated parliament.

And yes, while the actions of the reinstated parliament bypassed formal legal channels, they were largely legitimized by the momentum of Jana Andolan II of (2063) 2006, a movement that many believed restored, rather than subverted, the peopleтАЩs sovereignty.

But is it possible for Nepal to reinstate monarchy?

Maybe. The answer is in world history.

CambodiaтАЩs Restoration: A Comparative LensIn exploring NepalтАЩs possible paths, I looked outward тАФ to Cambodia.

  • In 1970, King Sihanouk was overthrown.
  • After a tragic chapter of genocide and communist rule, Cambodia returned to monarchy in 1993, not by reviving the old constitution, but by drafting a new one.
  • The new monarchy was symbolic, ceremonial, and constitutional. The real power remained with elected representatives.

CambodiaтАЩs case shows us: Monarchy can return, but it must adapt to the times.

A Personal Reckoning

As I studied these questions of sovereignty, legitimacy, and revolution, the streets outside were turbulent. The clashes between monarchists and police, the chants for the crown, the counter-chants for the republicтАж they werenтАЩt just noise.

They were echoes of something deeper: a broken trust.

The Constitution promises much: dignity, equality, justice. But the political system built atop it has failed too many, too often.
During those weeks, I saw not just a legal text, but a document under siege, not by mobs, but by neglect, by elite capture, by empty promises.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Theoretically, Nepal could become a monarchy again. But it would not be the same monarchy. Nor should it be.
Just as this republic must evolve or die, any future system must serve the people, not rule them.

As I often reminded myself:
A Constitution is not a crown. It is a contract.
It lives only if we believe in it, and act on it.

Final Thoughts

This journey left me emotionally raw, politically awakened, and intellectually humbled.

I donтАЩt support monarchy. But I understand why some people now do. It is not because they all love the idea of kings. Maybe some do.
But it is mostly because they feel abandoned by the republic.

The Constitution of Nepal is still our greatest hope, but only if we make it real in the lives of the people it was meant to serve. Otherwise, it too will be remembered as yet another broken promise in the footnotes of history.

Why Nations Fail

рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░ рдХрд┐рди рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓ рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫрдиреН – рд╕рдореАрдХреНрд╖рд╛ Why Nations Fail

рд╕рдиреН реирежрезрез рдорд╛ рдЕрд░рдм рд╕реНрдкреНрд░рд┐рдЩреНрдЧ рднрдЗрд░рд╣рдБрджрд╛ рдЗрдЬрд┐рдкреНрд╕рд┐рдпрдирд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рднрдиреЗрдХрд╛ рдпреА рдХреБрд░рд╛ рд╣рд╛рдореА рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдорд╛ рдкрдирд┐ рднрдирд┐рд░рд╣рдиреНрдЫреМрдБ —

тАЬWe are suffering from corruption, oppression and bad education. We are living amid a corrupt system which has to change.тАЭ


рдЕрд░реНрдерд╛рддреН, “рд╣рд╛рдореА рднреНрд░рд╖реНрдЯрд╛рдЪрд╛рд░, рджрдорди рд░ рдХреБрд╢рд┐рдХреНрд╖рд╛рд▓реЗ рдкреАрдбрд┐рдд рдЫреМрдБ ред рд╣рд╛рдореА рдпрд╕реНрддреЛ рднреНрд░рд╖реНрдЯ рдкреНрд░рдгрд╛рд▓реАрдорд╛ рдЫреМрдБ рдЬреБрди рдкрд░рд┐рд╡рд░реНрддрди рд╣реБрдиреИ рдкрд░реНрдЫ ред”

рднреНрд░рд╖реНрдЯ рдкреНрд░рдгрд╛рд▓реАрдорд╛ рд╣рд╛рдореА рдХрд╕рд░реА рдкреБрдЧреНрдЫреМрдБ ? рдХрд╕рд░реА рддреНрдпрд╕реНрддреЛ рдкреНрд░рдгрд╛рд▓реАрд▓реЗ рджреЗрд╢рд▓рд╛рдИ рдиреИ рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓ рдмрдирд╛рдЙрдБрдЫ ? рдХреЗ рднреНрд░рд╖реНрдЯрд╛рдЪрд╛рд░ рд░ рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓рддрд╛рдХреЛ рджреБрд╖реНрдЪрдХреНрд░рдмрд╛рдЯ рдЙрдореНрдХрд┐рди рд╕рдХрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ? рд╕рдХрд┐рдиреНрдЫ рднрдиреЗ рдХрд╕рд░реА ? рдпрд╕реНрддреИ рдкреНрд░рд╢реНрдирдХрд╛ рдЙрддреНрддрд░ рдбреНрдпрд╛рд░реЛрди рдПрд╕реЗрдореЛрд▓реБ рд░ рдЬреЗрдореНрд╕ рд░рдмрд┐рдиреНрд╕рдирд▓реЗ Why Nations Fail рдХрд┐рддрд╛рдмрдорд╛рд░реНрдлрддреН рджрд┐рдиреЗ рдкреНрд░рдпрд╛рд╕ рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред

рдпрд╕ рд▓реЗрдЦрдорд╛…

рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрдорд╛ рд╕рдореЗрдЯрд┐рдПрдХрд╛ рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрд╣рд░реВ

рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрдХреЛ рдореБрдЦреНрдп рдереЗрд╕рд┐рд╕

рдПрд╕реЗрдореЛрд▓реБ рд░ рд░рдмрд┐рдиреНрд╕рди рдЖрдлреНрдиреЛ рддрд░реНрдХ рдпрд╕рд░реА рд░рд╛рдЦреНрдЫрдиреН–рдХреБрдиреИ рдкрдирд┐ рджреЗрд╢рдХреЛ рдЙрдиреНрдирддрд┐ рддрдм рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ рдЬрдм рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рдХреЗрдиреНрджреНрд░реАрдХреГрдд рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ рд░ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рддрдерд╛ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдирд┐рд░реНрдорд╛рдг рдЧрд░реНрдЫ ред

рдпрд╣рд╛рдБ рдХреЗрдиреНрджреНрд░реАрдХреГрдд рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рднрдиреНрдирд╛рд▓реЗ рдирд┐рд░рдЩреНрдХреБрд╢рддрд╛ рдирднрдИ рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрднрд┐рддреНрд░ рд╕рдХреНрд╖рдо рд░ рд╕рдмрд▓ рдХрд╛рдиреВрдиреА рд╢рд╛рд╕рдирдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рддреНрдпрд╛рднреВрддрд┐ рд╣реЛ ред рддреНрдпрд╕реНрддреИ, рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢рд┐рддрд╛рдХреЛ рдЕрд░реНрде рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрдХрд╛ рд╕рдореНрдкреВрд░реНрдг рдкрдХреНрд╖рдХреЛ рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрдорд╛ рдЕрд░реНрдердкреВрд░реНрдг рд╕рд╣рднрд╛рдЧрд┐рддрд╛ рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рдмреБрдЭрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред рдпрджрд┐ рдХреЗрдиреНрджреНрд░реАрдХреГрдд рд╢рд╛рд╕рди, рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд░ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВ рдордзреНрдпреЗ рдХреБрдиреИ рдПрдХрдХреЛ рдорд╛рддреНрд░реИ рдХрдореА рднрдпреЛ рднрдиреЗ рдкрдирд┐ рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдп рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓рддрд╛рддрд░реНрдл рдЙрдиреНрдореБрдЦ рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ ред рддреАрдирд╡рдЯреИ рдЕрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛ рднрдПрдирдиреН рднрдиреЗ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░ рдкреВрд░реНрдгрддрдГ рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓ рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ ред

рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдп рд▓рд┐рдПрдХрд╛ рд╕рд╕рд╛рдирд╛ рдиреАрддрд┐рд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡ рд╡рд┐рд╢реЗрд╖ рдкрд░рд┐рд╕реНрдерд┐рддрд┐ (Critical juncture) рдорд╛ рдЕрдЭреИ рдЧрд╣рд┐рд░реЛ рдЧрд░рд┐ рджреЗрдЦрд╛рдкрд░реНрдЫ ред рдЬрд╕реНрддреИ, рдпреБрд░реЛрдкрдорд╛ рдмреНрд▓реНрдпрд╛рдХ рдбреЗрдерд▓реЗ рдЬрдирд╕рдЩреНрдЦреНрдпрд╛рдорд╛ рдЕрд╕рд░ рдкрд╛рд░реНрджрд╛ рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддрдорд╛ рдореНрдпрд╛рдЧреНрдирд╛ рдХрд╛рд░реНрдЯрд╛рдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡рд▓реЗ рджрд╛рд╕рддреНрд╡рдХреЛ рдЕрдиреНрддреНрдп рднрдпреЛ рддрд░ рдкреВрд░реНрд╡реА рдпреБрд░реЛрдкрдорд╛ рджрд╛рд╕рддреНрд╡ рдЭрдиреИ рдмрдвреНрдпреЛ ред рдореНрдпрд╛рдЧреНрдирд╛ рдХрд╛рд░реНрдЯрд╛ рд░ рджрд╛рд╕рддреНрд╡ рдЙрдиреНрдореБрд▓рдирд▓реЗ рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддрдорд╛ рд▓реНрдпрд╛рдПрдХрд╛ рдкрд░рд┐рд╡рд░реНрддрдирд▓реЗ рдФрджреНрдпреЛрдЧрд┐рдХ рдХреНрд░рд╛рдиреНрддрд┐рд▓рд╛рдИ рдЯреЗрд╡рд╛ рджрд┐рдпреЛ рд░ рд╡рд┐рд╢реНрд╡рдХреЛ рд╕рдмреИрднрдиреНрджрд╛ рдзрдиреА рд░ рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐рд╢рд╛рд▓реА рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░ рдмрдиреНрди рд╕рдХреНрдпреЛ ред

рднреВрдЧреЛрд▓, рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдХреГрддрд┐ рд░ рд░реЛрдЧрдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡

рдПрд╕реЗрдореЛрд▓реБ рд░ рд░рдмрд┐рдиреНрд╕рдирд▓реЗ рдЖрдлреНрдиреЛ рддрд░реНрдХ рдкреНрд░рд╕реНрддреБрдд рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рдХреНрд░рдордорд╛ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рдХреЛ рд╕рдлрд▓рддрд╛рдорд╛ рднреВрдЧреЛрд▓, рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдХрд╛рд░, рд░ рд░реЛрдЧрдХреЛ рдЦрд╛рд╕реИ рднреВрдорд┐рдХрд╛ рдирд╣реБрдиреЗ рдХреБрд░рд╛ рдЙрд▓реНрд▓реЗрдЦ рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред рдпрд╕рдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдкреНрд░рд╕реНрддреБрдд рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдХреЗрд╣реА рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдг рд╣реБрдиреН: рдПрд░рд┐рдЬреЛрдирд╛, рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛ рд░ рдореЗрдХреНрд╕рд┐рдХреЛрдХрд╛ рд╕реАрдорд╛рд▓реЗ рдЫреБрдЯреНрдпрд╛рдПрдХреЛ рдПрдЙрдЯреИ рдИрддрд┐рд╣рд╛рд╕, рднреВрдмрдиреЛрдЯ рд░ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдХреГрддрд┐ рднрдПрдХрд╛ рджреБрдИ рдиреЛрдЧреЗрд▓реНрд╕ рд╢рд╣рд░, рдЙрддреНрддрд░ рд░ рджрдХреНрд╖рд┐рдг рдХреЛрд░рд┐рдпрд╛, рдмреЛрдЯреНрд╕реНрд╡рд╛рдирд╛ рд░ рдЙрд╕рдХрд╛ рдЫрд┐рдореЗрдХреА рдореБрд▓реБрдХрд╣рд░реВ рдЖрджрд┐ ред рдЙрд╕реНрддреИ рднреВрдЧреЛрд▓ рд░ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдХреГрддрд┐ рднрдП рдкрдирд┐ рдпреА рдард╛рдЙрдБрдорд╛ рд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрд┐рдд рдлрд░рдХрдлрд░рдХ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд░ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд╕рдВрд░рдЪрдирд╛рд▓реЗ рдЬрдирддрд╛рдХреЛ рдЬреАрд╡рдирдорд╛ рднрд┐рдиреНрдирднрд┐рдиреНрди рддрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рд▓реЗ рдЕрд╕рд░ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдиреЗ рддрд░реНрдХ рд▓реЗрдЦрдХрд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдЫ ред

рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рдорд╛рдерд┐ рдЦрддрд░рд╛

рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ-рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рдЕрд╕рдорд╛рдирддрд╛рдХрд╛ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВ (inclusive institutions) рдкрдирд┐ рдмрд┐рд╕реНрддрд╛рд░реИ рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ (extractive) рдмрдиреНрди рд╕рдХреНрдиреЗрддрд░реНрдл рдкрдирд┐ рд▓реЗрдЦрдХрджреНрд╡рдпрд▓реЗ рд╕рдВрд╢рдп рд╡реНрдпрдХреНрдд рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред рдпрд╕рдХреЛ рдореБрдЦреНрдп рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдгрдХрд╛ рд░реВрдкрдорд╛ рд░реЛрдорди рд╕рд╛рдореНрд░рд╛рдЬреНрдп рд░ рддреНрдпрд╕рдХреЛ рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓рддрд╛рдмрд╛рдЯ рдирд┐рд╕реНрдХрд┐рдПрдХреЛ рд░реЛрдорди рдЧрдгрддрдиреНрддреНрд░ рд░ рднреЗрдирд┐рд╕рд▓рд╛рдИ рдкреНрд░рд╕реНрддреБрдд рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред рддреНрдпрд╣рд╛рдБ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд░ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рд╕реАрдорд┐рдд рд╡реНрдпрдХреНрддрд┐рд╣рд░реВрдорд╛ рдкреБрдЧреЗрдкрдЫрд┐ рдирд╡рдкреНрд░рд╡рд░реНрддрди рд░реЛрдХрд┐рдПрдХреЛ рд░ рдорд╛рдирд┐рд╕рд╣рд░реВ рдирдпрд╛рдБ рд╕рд╣рдЬ рдард╛рдЙрдБрдорд╛ рдмрд╕рд╛рдЗрдБрд╕рд░рд╛рдЗ рд░ рд╡реНрдпрд╛рдкрд╛рд░ рдЧрд░реНрди рдерд╛рд▓реЗрдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрд▓реЗ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВ рдХрддрд┐ рд╕рдВрд╡реЗрджрдирд╢реАрд▓ рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫрдиреН рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рдерд╛рд╣рд╛ рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ ред рдЕрд╣рд┐рд▓реЗ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рд░ рд╕рдлрд▓ рднрдирд┐рдПрдХреЛ рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддрдорд╛ рд╕рдиреН резреирезрел рдорд╛ рдореНрдпрд╛рдЧреНрдирд╛ рдХрд╛рд░реНрдЯрд╛рдХреЛ рдШреЛрд╖рдгрд╛ рд░ рд╕рдиреН резремреорео рдорд╛ рдЧреМрд░рд╡рдордп рдХреНрд░рд╛рдиреНрддрд┐ (Glorious Revolution) рдХреЛ рдмрд┐рдЪрдорд╛ рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдп рдЦрд╛рд╕реИ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рдирднрдПрдХреЛ рд░ рдЬрдирддрд╛рдХреЛ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд╡рд┐рдХрд╛рд╕ рдЧрд░реНрди рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдп рддреНрдпрддрд┐ рд╕рдлрд▓ рдирднрдПрдХреЛ рдЗрддрд┐рд╣рд╛рд╕ рдкрдирд┐ рдкреНрд░рд╕реНрддреБрдд рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред

рд╢рд╛рд╕рдХ рд░ рдирд╡рдкреНрд░рд╡рд░реНрддрди

рд╢рд╛рд╕рдХрд╣рд░реВ рдирд╡рдкреНрд░рд╡рд░реНрддрди рд░ рдкреНрд░рд╡рд┐рдзрд┐ рдЕрдкрдирд╛рдЙрди рдХрд┐рди рдЪрд╛рд╣рдБрджреИрдирдиреН ? рдХреЗ рдЙрдиреАрд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдкреНрд░рд╡рд┐рдзрд┐ рдирдмреБрдЭреЗрд░ рддреНрдпрд╕реЛ рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рд╣реБрдиреН ? рдПрд╕реЗрдореЛрд▓реБ рд░ рд░рдмрд┐рдиреНрд╕рди рднрдиреНрдЫрдиреН–рд╢рд╛рд╕рди рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рд╣реБрдиреЗрд╣рд░реВрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдирд╡рдкреНрд░рд╡рд░реНрддрди рд░ рдкреНрд░рд╡рд┐рдзрд┐ рдЪреБрдиреМрддреА рд╣реБрдиреН рдЙрдиреАрд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ рдкреНрд░рдгрд╛рд▓реА рд╡рд┐рд░реБрджреНрдз ред рдЙрдиреАрд╣рд░реВ рдЬреБрди рдкреНрд░рд╡рд┐рдзрд┐ рд░ рдкреНрд░рд╛рд╡рд┐рдзрд┐рдХрд▓реЗ рдЖрдлреНрдиреЛ рдлрд╛рдЗрджрд╛ рдирд╣реБрдиреЗ рджреЗрдЦреНрдЫрдиреН, рддрд┐рдирд▓рд╛рдИ рдирд╖реНрдЯ рдЧрд░рд┐рджрд┐рдиреНрдЫрдиреН ред рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддрдорд╛ резремреорео рдХреЛ рдЧреМрд░рд╡рдордп рдХреНрд░рд╛рдиреНрддрд┐рдкреВрд░реНрд╡ рд░рд╛рдЬрд╛ рд░ рд░рд╛рдиреАрд▓реЗ рдереБрдкреНрд░реИ рдкреНрд░рд╡рд┐рдзрд┐ рд░реЛрдХреЗрдХрд╛ рд░рд╣реЗрдЫрдиреН ред резремреорео рдкрдЫрд┐ рднрдиреЗ рдЙрдкрдирд┐рд╡реЗрд╢рдмрд╛рдЯ рдХрдорд╛рдПрд░ рдзрдиреА рднрдПрдХрд╛ рд╡реНрдпрд╛рдкрд╛рд░реА рд░ рд╡реИрдЬреНрдЮрд╛рдирд┐рдХрд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдЖрд╡рд╛рдЬ рд╕рд╢рдХреНрдд рд╣реБрдБрджреИ рдЧрдПрдХреЛ рджреЗрдЦрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред

рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрдд, рдЙрдкрдирд┐рд╡реЗрд╢, рд░ рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рд╣рд░реВ

рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрдд рд░ рдЙрд╕рдХрд╛ рдЙрдкрдирд┐рд╡реЗрд╢рд╣рд░реВрдорд╛ рднрдиреЗ рджреНрд╡реИрдзрддрд╛ рджреЗрдЦрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрдд рднрд┐рддреНрд░ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВ рдХреНрд░рдорд╢рдГ рд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрдирд╛ рднрдЗрд░рд╣рдБрджрд╛ рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддреАрд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдЙрдкрдирд┐рд╡реЗрд╢рд╣рд░реВрдорд╛ рднрдиреЗ рд╕реНрд░реЛрдд рджреЛрд╣рдирдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рд╢реЛрд╖рдХреА рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВ рд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрдирд╛ рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдерд┐рдП ред рдЕрдлреНрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рдорд╛ рджрд╛рд╕рд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдХрд┐рдирдмреЗрдЪ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗрдорд╛ рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддреАрд╣рд░реВ рдкреНрд░рдореБрдЦ рдерд┐рдП ред рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддрдорд╛ рд╡рд┐рд░реЛрдз рдмрдвреНрджреИ рдЬрд╛рдБрджрд╛ рджрд╛рд╕рддреНрд╡ рдЧреИрд░рдХрд╛рдиреБрдиреА рдд рднрдпреЛ рддрд░ рдЕрдлреНрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рдХрд╛ рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрд╣рд░реВ рджрд╛рд╕рддреНрд╡рдмрд╛рдЯ рдЯрд╛рдврд┐рдПрдирдиреН ред рдЕрд░реНрдХреЛрддрд┐рд░ рд╕реНрд░реЛрдд рд░ рд░реИрдерд╛рдиреЗрд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдЕрднрд╛рд╡ рднрдПрдХрд╛ рдард╛рдЙрдБрдорд╛ (рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛, рдХреНрдпрд╛рдирдбрд╛, рдЕрд╕реНрдЯреНрд░реЗрд▓рд┐рдпрд╛) рднрдиреЗ рдирдЪрд╛рд╣рдБрджрд╛ рдирдЪрд╛рд╣рдБрджреИ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рдХрд┐рд╕рд┐рдордХрд╛ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛ рд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрд┐рдд рд╣реБрдБрджреИ рдЧрдП ред рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрдХреЛ рдиреАрддрд┐ рд░ рдЖрд╡рд╢реНрдпрдХрддрд╛ рдЕрдиреБрд╕рд╛рд░ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВ рдирд┐рд░реНрдорд╛рдг рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫрдиреН рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рдпрд╣рд╛рдБрдмрд╛рдЯ рдмреБрдЭрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддреАрдмрд╛рд╣реЗрдХ рджрдХреНрд╖рд┐рдг рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рдорд╛ рд╕реНрдкреЗрдиреА рд░ рдкреЛрд░реНрдЪреБрдЧрд┐рдЬ рдЕрдирд┐ рджрдХреНрд╖рд┐рдг рдкреВрд░реНрд╡реА рдПрд╕рд┐рдпрд╛ рдбрдЪрд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЖрддрддрд╛рдпреА рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╣рд╛рд░рдХреЛ рдИрддрд┐рд╣рд╛рд╕ рдкрдирд┐ рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрдорд╛ рд╕рдореЗрдЯрд┐рдПрдХреЛ рдЫ ред

рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрдорд╛ рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдкрдирд┐ рдЪрд░реНрдЪрд╛ рдЫ ред рддреАрдордзреНрдпреЗ рдореБрдЦреНрдпрддрдГ рд╕реЛрдорд╛рд▓рд┐рдпрд╛ рд╣реЛ ред рддреНрдпрд╣рд╛рдБ рдХреЗрдиреНрджреНрд░реАрдХреГрдд рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рдирд╣реБрдБрджрд╛ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд╡рд┐рдХрд╛рд╕ рд╣реБрдиреИ рд╕рдХреЗрди ред рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рдореБрджреНрджрд╛рд╣рд░реВ рдкрдирд┐ рдХрд╣рд┐рд▓реЗ рдкрдирд┐ рдЙрдареЗрдирдиреН ред рдлрд▓рд╕реНрд╡рд░реВрдк, рдорд▓рд┐рд▓реЛ рдорд╛рдЯреЛ рд░ рд╕рдореБрджреНрд░рдорд╛ рдкрд╣реБрдБрдЪ рднрдПрд░ рдкрдирд┐ рд╕реЛрдорд╛рд▓рд┐рдпрд╛ рдЕрд╕реНрдерд┐рд░рддрд╛, рджреНрд╡рдиреНрджреНрд╡ рд░ рдЪрд░рдо рдЧрд░реАрдмреАрдХреЛ рд╢рд┐рдХрд╛рд░ рднрдПрдХреЛ рдЫ ред

рдЗрддрд┐рд╣рд╛рд╕рдХреЛ рдЕрдирд┐рд╢реНрдЪрд┐рддрддрд╛

рдЗрддрд┐рд╣рд╛рд╕ рдареНрдпрд╛рдХреНрдХреИ рдпрд╣реА рджрд┐рд╢рд╛рдорд╛ рдЬрд╛рдиреНрдЫ рднрдиреНрди рд╕рдХрд┐рдБрджреИрди рд░ рдХреБрдиреИрдмреЗрд▓рд╛ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рднрдирд┐рдПрдХрд╛ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░ рдкрдЫрд┐ рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ рдкрдирд┐ рдмрдиреНрди рд╕рдХреНрдЫрдиреН рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рддрд░реНрдХ Why Nations Fail рднрд┐рддреНрд░ рднреЗрдЯрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред рддрд┐рдирд▓рд╛рдИ рд╕рд░рдХрд╛рд░рд▓реЗ рдирд┐рдпрдиреНрддреНрд░рдг рдЧрд░реНрди рд╕рдХреНрдЫ рдХрд┐ рд╕рдХреНрджреИрди рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рдХреБрд░рд╛рд▓реЗ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рдХреЛ рднрд╡рд┐рд╕реНрдп рдирд┐рд░реНрдзрд╛рд░рдг рдЧрд░реНрдЫ ред рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдгрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рдорд╛ резрепрдФрдВ рд╢рддрд╛рдмреНрджреАрдорд╛ рдЙрджрд╛рдПрдХрд╛ рд▓реБрдЯреЗрд░рд╛ рдмреНрдпрд╛рд░реЛрдирд╣рд░реВ (Robber Barons) рд▓рд╛рдИ рд▓рд┐рди рд╕рдХрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред рддреНрдпрд╕ рд╕рдордп рдереЛрд░реИ рдкреБрдБрдЬреАрдмрд╛рдЯ рдареВрд▓рд╛ рдЙрджреНрдпреЛрдЧреА рдмрдиреЗрдХрд╛рд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдЖрдлреНрдиреЛ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡ рдмрдврд╛рдЙрди рд╕рд╛рдирд╛ рдЙрджреНрдпреЛрдЧрд▓рд╛рдИ рдзрд░рд╛рд╢рд╛рдпреА рдмрдирд╛рдЙрдиреЗ, рдЖрдлреВрднрд┐рддреНрд░ рдЧрд╛рднреНрдиреЗ рд░ рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рд╕реНрдкрд░реНрдзрд╛ рдирд┐рд╖реНрддреЗрдЬ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рдХрд╛рдо рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдерд┐рдП ред рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдгрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдПрдиреНрдбреНрд░реНрдпреБ рдХрд╛рд░реНрдиреЗрдЧреАрд▓реЗ рд╕реНрдЯреАрд▓, рдЬреЛрди рдбреА. рд░рдХрдлреЗрд▓рд░рд▓реЗ рдкреЗрдЯреНрд░реЛрд▓рд┐рдпрдо рд░ рдЬреЗ. рдкреА. рдореЛрд░реНрдЧрдирд▓реЗ рдмреИрдЩреНрдХрд┐рдЩ рдХреНрд╖реЗрддреНрд░рдорд╛ рдореЛрдиреЛрдкреЛрд▓реА рдмрдирд╛рдПрдХрд╛ рдерд┐рдП ред рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХреА рдХрдЩреНрдЧреНрд░реЗрд╕рдорд╛ рдкрдирд┐ рдЙрдиреАрд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдмрд▓рд┐рдпреЛ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡ рдерд┐рдпреЛ ред рдпрджреНрдпрдкрд┐ рдмреАрд╕реМрдБ рд╢рддрд╛рдмреНрджреАрдХреЛ рд╕реБрд░реБрд╡рд╛рддрдорд╛ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рдкрддрд┐ рдмрдиреЗрдХрд╛ рдерд┐рдпреЛрдбреЛрд░ рд░реВрдЬрд╡реЗрд▓реНрдЯрд▓реЗ рдореЛрдиреЛрдкреЛрд▓реАрд╣рд░реВ рдмрдиреНрдж рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рдмрджреНрдзрддрд╛ рдЧрд░реЗ рд░ рдЙрдиреА рдкрдЫрд┐ рдЖрдПрдХрд╛ рд╡рд┐рд▓рд┐рдпрдо рдЯрд╛рдлреНрдЯ рд░ рдЙрдбреНрд░реЛ рд╡рд┐рд▓реНрд╕рдирд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдореЛрдиреЛрдкреЛрд▓реАрд╣рд░реВрд▓рд╛рдИ рдЯреБрдХреНрд░реНрдпрд╛рдПрд░ рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рд╕реНрдкрд░реНрдзрд╛рд▓рд╛рдИ рдкреНрд░реЛрддреНрд╕рд╛рд╣рди рдЧрд░реЗ ред рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рд╕реНрдкрд░реНрдзрд╛рдХреИ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛ рдирдпрд╛рдБ рд▓рдЧрд╛рдиреАрдХреЛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдЖрдХрд░реНрд╖рдХ рд╣реБрди рдерд╛рд▓реНрдпреЛ рд░ рдмрд┐рд▓ рдЧреЗрдЯреНрд╕рдЬрд╕реНрддрд╛ рдзрдирд╛рдбреНрдп рдЖрдЙрди рд╕рдХреЗ ред рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рд╕реНрдкрд░реНрдзрд╛рд▓рд╛рдИ рдкреНрд░реЛрддреНрд╕рд╛рд╣рди рдЧрд░реНрди рдирд╕рдХреЗрдХреЛ рднрдП рдореЗрдХреНрд╕рд┐рдХреЛрдорд╛ рдЬрд╕реНрддреЛ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд░ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡рдХреЛ рдЖрдзрд╛рд░рдорд╛ рдЙрджреНрдпреЛрдЧ рд╕рдЮреНрдЪрд╛рд▓рди рдЧрд░реНрдиреБрдкрд░реНрдиреЗ рд╣реБрди рд╕рдХреНрдереНрдпреЛ рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рддрд░реНрдХ рдПрд╕реЗрдореЛрд▓реБ рд░ рд░рдмрд┐рдиреНрд╕рдирд▓реЗ рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред

рд╕реБрдЪрдХреНрд░ (Virtuous Cycle)

рдЙрджрд╛рд░ рд░ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░рд▓реЗ рддреНрдпрд╕реНрддреИ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐ рдорд╛рдЧ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рд░ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рд▓реЗ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░рд▓рд╛рдИ рдкреНрд░реЛрддреНрд╕рд╛рд╣рди рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рдЪрдХреНрд░ рдиреИ рд╕реБрдЪрдХреНрд░ рд╣реЛ ред рдпрд╕реНрддреЛ рдЪрдХреНрд░ рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддрдорд╛ рдЧреМрд░рд╡рдордп рдХреНрд░рд╛рдиреНрддрд┐рдкрдЫрд┐ рд░ рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рдорд╛ рд╕реНрд╡рддрдиреНрддреНрд░рддрд╛рдХреЛ рдШреЛрд╖рдгрд╛рдкрдЫрд┐ рджреЗрдЦреНрди рд╕рдХрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред рдЕрдШрд┐рд▓реНрд▓реЛ рдЦрдгреНрдбрдорд╛ рдЙрд▓реНрд▓рд┐рдЦрд┐рдд рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХреА рдореЛрдиреЛрдкреЛрд▓реАрд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдЕрд╡рд╕рд╛рди рд╕реБрдЪрдХреНрд░рдХреЛ рдПрдЙрдЯрд╛ рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдг рд╣реЛ ред рдЕрд░реНрдХреЛ рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдг рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рдореИ рдлреНрд░рдпрд╛рдЩреНрдХреНрд▓рд┐рди рдбреА. рд░реВрдЬрд╡реЗрд▓реНрдЯрд▓реЗ рд╕рд░реНрд╡реЛрдЪреНрдЪ рдЕрджрд╛рд▓рддрдХреЛ рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рд╕реАрдорд┐рдд рдЧрд░реНрди рдЪрд╛рд╣реЗрдХреЛ рддрд░ рд╕рдВрд╕рджрд▓реЗ рдЕрд╕реНрд╡реАрдХрд╛рд░ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рд╕рдЩреНрдЧ рдкрдирд┐ рд╣реЛ ред

рджреБрд╖реНрдЪрдХреНрд░ (Vicious Cycle)

рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рд▓реЗ рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░рд▓рд╛рдИ рдЖрдлреНрдиреЛ рд╕реНрд╡рд╛рд░реНрдердХреЛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдкреНрд░рдпреЛрдЧ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рд░ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХрд░реВрдкрдорд╛ рд╕рдмрд▓ рднрдПрдХрд╛рд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдЖрдлреНрдиреЛ рдкрдХреНрд╖рдорд╛ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рд╢рд┐рд▓рд╢рд┐рд▓рд╛рд▓рд╛рдИ рджреБрд╖реНрдЪрдХреНрд░ рднрдиреНрди рд╕рдХрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред рдзреЗрд░реИрдЬрд╕реЛ рдЕрдлреНрд░рд┐рдХреА, рджрдХреНрд╖рд┐рдг рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХреА рд░ рдПрд╕рд┐рдпрд╛рд▓реА рджреЗрд╢рд╣рд░реВ рдпрд╕реНрддреЛ рдЪрдХреНрд░рдорд╛ рдлрд╕реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред рд╕реЛрдорд╛рд▓рд┐рдпрд╛, рдЕрд░реНрдЬреЗрдиреНрдЯрд┐рдирд╛, рд░ рдЙрддреНрддрд░ рдХреЛрд░рд┐рдпрд╛рд▓рд╛рдИ рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдгрдХрд╛ рд░реВрдкрдорд╛ рд▓рд┐рди рд╕рдХрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред

рджреБрд╖реНрдЪрдХреНрд░рдмрд╛рдЯ рдЙрдиреНрдореБрдХреНрддрд┐

рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐ рд░ рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░рдХреЛ рджреБрд╖реНрдЪрдХреНрд░рдмрд╛рдЯ рдЙрдореНрдХрд┐рди рд╕рдореНрднрд╡ рдЫ ред рдпрд╕рдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐ рд░ рдмрдЬрд╛рд░ рджреБрд╡реИ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рдмрдиреНрджреИ рдЬрд╛рдиреБрдкрд░реНрдЫ ред рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдгрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рджрдХреНрд╖рд┐рдг рдХреЛрд░рд┐рдпрд╛рдорд╛ резрепремреж рдХреЛ рджрд╢рдХрдорд╛ рдЬрдирд░рд▓ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдХ рдЪреБрдЩ рд╣реА рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рдкрддрд┐ рдмрдиреЗ ред рдЙрдирд▓реЗ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд░реВрдкрдорд╛ рдЕрдзрд┐рдирд╛рдпрдХ рд╢реИрд▓реА рд▓рд┐рдП рдкрдирд┐ рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░рдорд╛ рднрдиреЗ рдирд┐рдХреИ рд╕реБрдзрд╛рд░ рдЧрд░реЗ ред рдЙрдирдХреЛ рд╣рддреНрдпрд╛рдкрдЫрд┐ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рдкрддрд┐ рдмрдиреЗрдХрд╛ рдЪреБрди рдбреБ-рд╣реНрд╡рд╛рди рдЭрдиреИ рдХреНрд░реВрд░ рдмрдиреНрди рдерд╛рд▓реЗ ред рддрд░ рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░рдХреЛ рд░ рдЪреЗрддрдирд╛рдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рдХрд╛рд╕рд▓реЗ рдЙрдХреНрдд рд╢рд╛рд╕рди рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛рд▓рд╛рдИ рдЪреБрдиреМрддреА рджрд┐рдиреЗ рд╕рд╛рд╣рд╕ рджрдХреНрд╖рд┐рдг рдХреЛрд░рд┐рдпрд╛рд▓реАрд╣рд░реВрд▓рд╛рдИ рджрд┐рдпреЛ ред рдлрд▓рд╕реНрд╡рд░реВрдк рджрдХреНрд╖рд┐рдг рдХреЛрд░рд┐рдпрд╛рдорд╛ резрепрепрен рджреЗрдЦрд┐ рд▓реЛрдХрддрд╛рдиреНрддреНрд░рд┐рдХ рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛ рдХрд╛рдпрдо рднрдпреЛ ред

рдЕрд╕реНрдерд┐рд░ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рдкреНрд░рдЧрддрд┐

рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐ рднрдПрдХрд╛ рдард╛рдЙрдБрдорд╛ рдкрдирд┐ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд╡реГрджреНрдзрд┐ рд╕рдореНрднрд╡ рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ рдХрд┐рдирдХрд┐ рд╢рд╛рд╕рдХрд╣рд░реВ рдЙрдХреНрдд рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд╡реГрджреНрдзрд┐рдХреЛ рд▓рд╛рдн рд▓рд┐рди рдкрд╛рдЙрдБрдЫрдиреН ред рддреНрдпрд╕реНрддреЛ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд╡реГрджреНрдзрд┐рд▓реЗ рдЬрдирддрд╛рдХреЛ рдЬреАрд╡рдирдорд╛ рднрдиреЗ рдЦрд╛рд╕реИ рд╕рдХрд╛рд░рд╛рддреНрдордХ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡ рдкрд╛рд░реНрди рд╕рдХреНрджреИрди ред рдкрд╛рд░рд┐рд╣рд╛рд▓реЗ рдкрдирд┐ рддреНрдпрд╕реНрддреЛ рд╡реГрджреНрдзрд┐ рджрд┐рдЧреЛ рд╣реБрди рд╕рдХреНрджреИрди ред рдпрд╕рдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рд▓реЗрдЦрдХрджреНрд╡рдпрд▓реЗ рд╕реНрдЯрд╛рд▓рд┐рдирдХрд╛рд▓реАрди рд╕реЛрднрд┐рдпрдд рд╕рдВрдШ рд░ рд╣рд╛рд▓рдХреЛ рдЪреАрдирд▓рд╛рдИ рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдгрдХрд╛ рд░реВрдкрдорд╛ рдкреНрд░рд╕реНрддреБрдд рдЧрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫрдиреН ред рд╕реНрдЯрд╛рд▓рд┐рдирд▓реЗ рд▓рд┐рдПрдХрд╛ рдиреАрддрд┐рд▓реЗ рд╕реЛрднрд┐рдпрдд рд╕рдВрдШрд▓рд╛рдИ рд╕реИрдиреНрдп рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рдд рджрд┐рдпреЛ рддрд░ рдХрд╛рд▓рд╛рдиреНрддрд░рдорд╛ рдЦрдгреНрдбрд┐рдд рдЧрд░рд┐рджрд┐рдпреЛ ред рдЪреАрдирд▓реЗ рд╕рдорд╛рд╡реЗрд╢реА рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рдХрд╛рд╕ рдирдЧрд░реЗрдорд╛ рддреНрдпрд╣рд╛рдБрдХреЛ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд╡рд┐рдХрд╛рд╕ рджрд┐рдЧреЛ рдирд╣реБрдиреЗ рд░ рднрд╡рд┐рд╕реНрдпрдорд╛ рд▓реЛрдХрддрд╛рдиреНрддреНрд░рд┐рдХ рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛рддрд░реНрдл рдЕрдШрд┐ рдмрдвреНрдиреЗ рд╕рдореНрднрд╛рд╡рдирд╛ рджреЗрдЦрд┐рдиреНрдЫ, рдХрд┐рддрд╛рдмрд▓реЗ рднрдиреНрдЫ ред

рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрдорд╛ рд░рд╣реЗрдХрд╛ рдХреЗрд╣реА рд╕рдорд╕реНрдпрд╛рд╣рд░реВ

Why Nations Fail рдорд╛ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рднрд┐рддреНрд░рдХрд╛ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВ рдмрд╛рд╣реЗрдХ рдЕрд░реВ рдкрдХреНрд╖рд╣рд░реВрд▓рд╛рдИ рдирдХрд╛рд░рд┐рдПрдХреЛ рдЫ ред рднреВрдЧреЛрд▓ рд░ рднреВрд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡рдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрдорд╛ рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрдорд╛ рдЪрд░реНрдЪрд╛ рдЫреИрди ред рдЕрдиреНрддрд░реНрд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рд┐рдп рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡рдХрд╛ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рджреЗрд╢рд▓реЗ рд▓рд┐рдиреЗ рдиреАрддрд┐рдХрд╛ рд╡рд┐рд╖рдпрдорд╛ рдкрдирд┐ рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХ рдореМрди рдЫ ред рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдгрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рдорд╛ рд╕рдиреН резрепрейреж рдХреЛ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рдордиреНрджреА (The Great Depression) рдкрдЫрд┐ рд▓реЛрдХрддрд╛рдиреНрддреНрд░рд┐рдХ рд╕рдорд╛рдЬрд╡рд╛рджрдорд╛ рдЖрдзрд╛рд░рд┐рдд рдХрд┐рдиреНрд╕реАрдпрди рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░ рд▓рд╛рдЧреВ рднрдпреЛ ред рддреНрдпрд╕реИрдХреЛ рд╕рд┐рдХреЛ рдпреБрд░реЛрдкрд▓реЗ рдкрдирд┐ рдЧрд░реНтАНрдпреЛ ред рддреНрдпрд╕реНрддреИ, рд╕рдиреН резрепрекрек рдХреЛ рдмреНрд░реЗрдЯреНрдЯрди рдЙрдбреНрд╕ рд╕рдореНрдореЗрд▓рди, рджреЛрд╕реНрд░реЛ рд╡рд┐рд╢реНрд╡рдпреБрджреНрдзрдкрдЫрд┐ рдпреБрд░реЛрдкрдХреЛ рдкреБрдирд░реНрдирд┐рд░реНрдорд╛рдгрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдЕрдкрдирд╛рдЗрдПрдХреЛ рдорд╛рд░реНрд╢рд▓ рдкреНрд▓рд╛рди, рд░рд┐рдЪрд░реНрдб рдирд┐рдХреНрд╕рдирджреНрд╡рд╛рд░рд╛ рдЧрд░рд┐рдПрдХреЛ рдЧреЛрд▓реНрдб рд╕реНрдЯрд╛рдиреНрдбрд░реНрдбрдХреЛ рдЕрдиреНрддреНрдп, рд╕рдиреН резрепреореж рдкрдЫрд┐ рдЕрдореЗрд░рд┐рдХрд╛рдорд╛ рд░реЛрдирд╛рд▓реНрдб рд░реЗрдЧрди рд░ рдмреЗрд▓рд╛рдпрддрдорд╛ рдорд╛рд░реНрдЧрд╛рд░реЗрдЯ рдереНрдпрд╛рдЪрд░рдХреЛ рд╕рд╣рдорддрд┐рдкрдЫрд┐ рдЙрджрд╛рдПрдХреЛ рдирд╡рдЙрджрд╛рд░рд╡рд╛рдж, рддреНрдпрд╕рдорд╛ рдЖрдзрд╛рд░рд┐рдд IMF рд░ World Bank рдХрд╛ рдЧрддрд┐рд╡рд┐рдзрд┐, Washington Consensus рд░ рддрд┐рдирд▓реЗ рднреВрд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдорд╛ рдкрд╛рд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдкреНрд░рднрд╛рд╡рд▓рд╛рдИ рдкреВрд░реИ рдмреЗрд╡рд╛рд╕реНрддрд╛ рдЧрд░рд┐рдПрдХреЛ рдЫ ред рддреНрдпрд╕реИрдЧрд░реА рдкрд╢реНрдЪрд┐рдорд╛ рдЧреБрдкреНрддрдЪрд░ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рд╢рд╛рд╕рди рдкрд░рд┐рд╡рд░реНрддрди, рдЙрджреАрдпрдорд╛рди рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░рдорд╛ рдзрдХреНрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧреНрдиреЗ рдЧрд░реА “рд╕рдлрд▓ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░”рд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рд▓рд┐рдиреЗ рдиреАрддрд┐рд▓рдЧрд╛рдпрддрдХрд╛ рд╡рд┐рд╖рдп рдкрдирд┐ рдпрд╕ рдореЛрдбрд▓рдорд╛ рдЕрдЯреЗрдХрд╛ рдЫреИрдирдиреН ред

рдкреНрд░рд╛рдЪреАрди рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдЕрд╕рдлрд▓рддрд╛рдХрд╛ рдмрд╛рд░реЗрдорд╛ рд▓реЗрдЦрд┐рдПрдХрд╛ рдХреБрд░рд╛рд╣рд░реВ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рдорд╛ рдЖрдзрд╛рд░рд┐рдд рдерд┐рдП рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рдХреБрд░рд╛ рдЕрд▓рд┐ рдЕрдорд┐рд▓реНрджреЛ рд▓рд╛рдЧреНрдЫ ред рдирд╛рдЯреБрдлрд┐рдпрди рд╕рднреНрдпрддрд╛рдХреЛ рдЕрдиреНрддреНрдп рд╢реЛрд╖рдгрдХрд╛ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рднрдПрдХреЛ рд╣реЛ рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рддрд░реНрдХрд▓рд╛рдИ рдкреБрд╖реНрдЯрд┐ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рдкрд░реНрдпрд╛рдкреНрдд рдЖрдзрд╛рд░ рд░рд╣реЗрдирдЫрдиреН ред рд╢рд┐рдХрд╛рд░реА рдиреИ рднрдП рдкрдирд┐ рд╡рд╛рд╕рд╕реНрдерд╛рди рдмрдирд╛рдПрд░ рдмрд╕реНрди рдерд╛рд▓реЗрдХрд╛ рдЙрдиреАрд╣рд░реВ рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрдХрд╛ рд░реВрдкрдорд╛ рд╕рдВрдЧрдард┐рдд рдерд┐рдП рднрдиреНрди рд╕рдХрд┐рдБрджреИрди ред рдмрд░реВ рдЗрдЬрд┐рдкреНрд╕рд┐рдпрди рд░ рд╕реБрдореЗрд░рд┐рдпрди рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрдХрд╛ рд╢реЛрд╖рдгрдХрд╛ рдЕрдирдЧрд┐рдиреНрддреА рдкреНрд░рдорд╛рдг рднреЗрдЯрд┐рдиреЗ рд░рд╣реЗрдЫрдиреН ред рддреНрдпрд╕реНрддреИ, рдорд╛рдпрд╛ рд╕рднреНрдпрддрд╛рдХреЛ рдЕрдиреНрддреНрдп рд╢реЛрд╖рдгрдХреИ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рднрдПрдХреЛ рднрдиреНрди рд╕рдХрд┐рдиреЗ рдкреНрд░рдорд╛рдг рдкреБрдЧреНрджреИрди ред

рд╕рд┐рдЩреНрдЧрд╛рдкреБрд░рдХреЛ рдПрдХрджрд▓реАрдп рд╢рд╛рд╕рди рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛ (рд▓реЛрдХрддрд╛рдиреНрддреНрд░рд┐рдХ рднрдирд┐рдП рдкрдирд┐) рд░ рддреНрдпрд╣рд╛рдБ рднрдПрдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рдХрд╛рд╕ рд╕рдореЗрдЯрд┐рдПрдХреЛ рдЫреИрди ред рдЪреАрдирдХрд╛ рд╕рдиреНрджрд░реНрднрдорд╛ рд╕реА рдЪреАрди рдлрд┐рдЩрд▓реЗ рддреЗрд╕реНрд░реЛ рдХрд╛рд░реНрдпрдХрд╛рд▓рдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рд╕рдВрд╡рд┐рдзрд╛рди рд╕рдВрд╢реЛрдзрдирд▓реЗ рдЪрд┐рдирд┐рдпрд╛рдБ рдХрдореНрдпреБрдирд┐рд╕реНрдЯ рдкрд╛рд░реНрдЯреАрдХреЛ рд╢рд╛рд╕рдирд▓рд╛рдИ рдЕрдЭреИ рдмрд▓рд┐рдпреЛ рдмрдирд╛рдЙрдиреЗ рджреЗрдЦрд┐рдПрдХреЛ рдЫ ред

рд▓реЗрдЦрдХрд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдЖрдлреНрдиреЛ рдореВрд▓ рдереЗрд╕рд┐рд╕ рдХрд┐рддрд╛рдмрднрд░реА рджреЛрд╣реЛрд░рд╛рдЗрд░рд╣рдиреНрдЫрдиреН ред рдпрд╕реНрддреЛ рд▓рд╛рдЧреНрдЫ рдХрд┐ рдкрдЯрдХрдкрдЯрдХ рдПрдЙрдЯреИ рдХреБрд░рд╛ рднрдиреЗрд░ рдпрд╣реА рдПрдЙрдЯрд╛ рддрд░реНрдХ рдиреИ рд╕рдореНрдкреВрд░реНрдг рд╕рддреНрдп рд╣реЛ рднрдиреНрдиреЗ рджреЗрдЦрд╛рдЙрди рдЦреЛрдЬреЗрдХрд╛ рд╣реБрдиреН ред рдПрдЙрдЯреИ рдХреБрд░рд╛ рджреЛрд╣реЛрд░рд┐рд░рд╣рдБрджрд╛ рдХреЗрд╣реА рдЭрд┐рдБрдЭреЛ рдкрдирд┐ рд▓рд╛рдЧреНрдЫ ред рдпрджреНрдпрдкрд┐, рд╡рд┐рд╢реЗрд╖ рдкрд░рд┐рд╕реНрдерд┐рддрд┐рдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рд╢реНрд▓реЗрд╖рдг рд░ рдЗрддрд┐рд╣рд╛рд╕рдХреЛ рдЕрдирд┐рд╢реНрдЪрд┐рддрддрд╛рдХрд╛ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рдПрд╕реЗрдореЛрд▓реБ рд░ рд░рдмрд┐рдиреНрд╕рдирдХреЛ рдореЛрдбрд▓рдорд╛ рдкреВрд░реНрд╡рд╛рдиреБрдорд╛рди рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рдХреНрд╖рдорддрд╛ (predictability) рдХреЛ рдХрдореА рдЫ ред рднрдЗрд╕рдХреЗрдХрд╛ рдШрдЯрдирд╛рдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рд╢реНрд▓реЗрд╖рдгрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рднрдиреЗ рдХреЗрд╣реА рдорджреНрджрдд рдЕрд╡рд╢реНрдп рдЧрд░реНрдЫ рддрд░ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВрд▓рд╛рдИ рдорд╛рддреНрд░реИ рдкреНрд░рд╛рдердорд┐рдХрддрд╛ рджрд┐рдиреЗ рд╣реЛ рднрдиреЗ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд░ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рдкрд░рд┐рд╡рд░реНрддрдирдХрд╛ рдЕрдиреНрдп рдЖрдпрд╛рдорд▓рд╛рдИ рдХреЗрд▓рд╛рдЙрди рд╕рдХрд┐рдБрджреИрди ред

рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдХреЛ рд╕рдиреНрджрд░реНрдн

рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрдорд╛ рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдХреЛ рдирд╛рдо рдХреЗрд╣реА рдард╛рдЙрдБрдорд╛ рднреЗрдЯрд┐рдиреБрдмрд╛рд╣реЗрдХ рд╡рд┐рд╕реНрддреГрдд рдЪрд░реНрдЪрд╛ рдЫреИрди ред рдпрджреНрдпрдкрд┐, рдПрд╕реЗрдореЛрд▓реБ рд░ рд░рдмрд┐рдиреНрд╕рдирдХреЛ рдореЛрдбрд▓рднрд┐рддреНрд░ рд░рд╛рдЦреНрджрд╛ рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдорд╛ рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛рд▓реЗ рдЪрд▓рд╛рдПрдХреЛ рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рдкреНрд░рдгрд╛рд▓реАрдХрд╛ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рд╣рд╛рдореА рджреБрд╖реНрдЪрдХреНрд░рдорд╛ рдкрд░реЗрдХрд╛ рдЫреМрдБ рднрдиреНрди рд╕рдХрд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред

рдЖрдзреБрдирд┐рдХ рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдХреЛ рд╕реБрд░реБрд╡рд╛рдд рдкреГрдереНрд╡реАрдирд╛рд░рд╛рдпрдг рд╢рд╛рд╣рд▓реЗ рд╡рд┐. рд╕рдВ. резреореирел рдорд╛ рдХрд╛рдиреНрддрд┐рдкреБрд░рд▓рд╛рдИ рд╣рд░рд╛рдПрдкрдЫрд┐ рднрдПрдХреЛ рдорд╛рдиреНрдиреЗ рдЧрд░рд┐рдиреНрдЫ ред рддреНрдпрд╕ рд╕рдордпрдорд╛ рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдп рд╡рд┐рд╕реНрддрд╛рд░рдорд╛ рд╕рд╣рд╛рдпрддрд╛ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рднрд╛рдЗрднрд╛рд░рджрд╛рд░рдорд╛ рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рдХреЗрдиреНрджреНрд░реАрдд рдерд┐рдпреЛ ред рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдп рд╡рд┐рд╕реНрддрд╛рд░ рд╣реБрдБрджреИ рдЧрд░реНрджрд╛ рднреМрдЧреЛрд▓рд┐рдХ рдПрдХреАрдХрд░рдг рднрдП рдкрдирд┐ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рдПрдХреАрдХрд░рдг рд╣реБрди рд╕рдХреЗрди ред рдЕрдЩреНрдЧреНрд░реЗрдЬрд╕рдБрдЧ рдорд╣рдХрд╛рд▓реАрдкрд╛рд░рд┐ рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рд▓реЗ рд╣рд╛рд░реНрдиреБрдХреЛ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рддреНрдпрд╣рд╛рдБ рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдХреЛ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд░ рд╕реИрдиреНрдп рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐рдХреЛ рдХрдордЬреЛрд░ рдЙрдкрд╕реНрдерд┐рддрд┐ рдкрдирд┐ рдерд┐рдпреЛ ред рдЕрдЭреИ рдкрдирд┐ рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдХрд╛ рдХрддрд┐рдкрдп рдард╛рдЙрдБрдорд╛ рд░рд╛рдЬреНрдпрдХреЛ рдЙрдкрд╕реНрдерд┐рддрд┐ рдЫреИрди рдЬрд╕рд▓реЗ рдЧрд░реНрджрд╛ рдХрд╛рдиреБрдиреА рд╢рд╛рд╕рдирдХреЛ рдЕрднрд╛рд╡ рдЫ рд░ рд╕реАрдорд┐рдд рд╡реНрдпрдХреНрддрд┐рд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рд╢реЛрд╖рдг рдЧрд░рд┐рд░рд╣реЗрдХреИ рдЫрдиреН ред

рд░рд╛рдгрд╛рдХрд╛рд▓рдорд╛ рджреЗрд╢рдорд╛ рдмрд▓рд┐рдпреЛ рд╢рд╛рд╕рди рдд рдЖрдпреЛ рддрд░ рддреНрдпреЛ рдкрдирд┐ рднрд╛рдЗрднрд╛рд░рд╛рджрд╛рд░рдХреИ рдорд┐рд▓реЗрдорддреЛрдорд╛ рд╕реАрдорд┐рдд рдерд┐рдпреЛ ред рд░рд╛рдгрд╛ рд░ рдкрд╣реБрдБрдЪрд╡рд╛рд▓рд╛рдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдорд╛рддреНрд░реИ рд╢рд┐рдХреНрд╖рд╛рдХреЛ рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛ рдЧрд░реНрдиреЗ рддрд░ рдХреЗрд╣реА рдирдпрд╛рдБ рдЧрд░реНрди рдЦреЛрдЬреНрджрд╛ рдЦреЗрджреНрдиреЗ рдЪрд▓рди рд░рд╛рдгрд╛рд╣рд░реВрд▓реЗ рдиреИ рдЪрд▓рд╛рдП ред рд╢рд┐рдХреНрд╖рд╛ рд░ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдорд╛ рд╕реБрдзрд╛рд░ рд▓реНрдпрд╛рдЙрди рдЪрд╛рд╣реЗрдиреЗ рджреЗрд╡ рд░ рдкрджреНрдо рд╕рдорд╢реЗрд░рд╣рд░реВ рд▓рдЦреЗрдЯрд┐рдП ред рдЧреЗрд╣реЗрдиреНрджреНрд░рд▓реЗ рд╡реАрд░ рдЧрди рдмрдирд╛рдПрд░ рд╣рддрд┐рдпрд╛рд░ рдХрд╛рд░рдЦрд╛рдирд╛ рдЪрд▓рд╛рдЙрдБрджрд╛ рдЪрдиреНрджреНрд░рд▓реЗ рднрд╛рдБрдЬреЛ рд╣рд╛рд▓реЗ ред рдЪрдиреНрджреНрд░рд▓реЗ рд╕рддреА рдкреНрд░рдерд╛ рд░ рджрд╛рд╕рддреНрд╡рдХреЛ рдЕрдиреНрддреНрдп рдЧрд░реЗ рд░ рддреНрд░рд┐рдЪрдиреНрджреНрд░ рдХрд▓реЗрдЬрдХреЛ рд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрдирд╛ рдкрдирд┐ рдЧрд░реЗ ред рдпрджреНрдпрдкрд┐ рдХрд▓реЗрдЬрдорд╛ рдЬреЛрдХреЛрд╣реАрдХреЛ рдкрд╣реБрдБрдЪ рдерд┐рдПрди ред

реирежрежрен рд╕рд╛рд▓рдорд╛ рдкреНрд░рдЬрд╛рддрдиреНрддреНрд░ рд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрдирд╛ рднрдП рдкрдирд┐ рд╢рд╛рд╕рди рдХреЗрд╣реА рд╕рдореНрднреНрд░рд╛рдиреНрддрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рдорд╛рддреНрд░реИ рд╕реАрдорд┐рдд рднрдпреЛ ред рдкрд╣рд┐рд▓реЛ рдЖрдо рдирд┐рд░реНрд╡рд╛рдЪрдирдмрдЯ рдмрдиреЗрдХреЛ рд╕рдВрд╕рдж рд░ рд╕рд░рдХрд╛рд░рд▓реЗ рдкрдирд┐ рдЬрдирдЬреАрд╡рдирдорд╛ рдЦрд╛рд╕реИ рдкрд░рд┐рд╡рд░реНрддрди рд▓реНрдпрд╛рдЙрди рд╕рдХреЗрди ред рддреНрдпрд╕рдкрдЫрд┐ рд░рд╛рдЬрд╛ рдорд╣реЗрдиреНрджреНрд░рд▓реЗ рд╕реБрд░реБ рдЧрд░реЗрдХреЛ рдкрдЮреНрдЪрд╛рдпрдд рд╡реНрдпрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛рд▓реЗ рд╕рдбрдХ рд╕рдЮреНрдЬрд╛рд▓ рд╡рд┐рд╕реНрддрд╛рд░ рд░ рдЙрджреНрдпреЛрдЧрд╣рд░реВ рд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрдирд╛ рдЧрд░реНтАНрдпреЛ рддрд░ рдЬрдирддрд╛рдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рддреНрдпрдХреНрд╖ рд╕рд╣рднрд╛рдЧрд┐рддрд╛ рд╕реБрдирд┐рд╢реНрдЪрд┐рдд рдЧрд░реНрди рд╕рдХреЗрди ред рдХреЗрд╣реА рд╕рдореНрднреНрд░рд╛рдиреНрддрдХреЛ рдкрдХрдб (elite capture) рдкрдЮреНрдЪрд╛рдпрддрдорд╛ рджреЗрдЦрд┐рдпреЛ ред

рддрд░ рдЬреБрди рдкрдХрдбрдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рд░реБрджреНрдзрдорд╛ рдкреНрд░рдЬрд╛рддрдиреНрддреНрд░рдХреЛ рдкреБрдирдГрд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрдирд╛, рд▓реЛрдХрддрд╛рдиреНрддреНрд░рд┐рдХ рдЖрдиреНрджреЛрд▓рди рд░ рдЧрдгрддрдиреНрддреНрд░рдХреЛ рд╕реНрдерд╛рдкрдирд╛ рднрдпреЛ, рддреНрдпрд╕рд▓рд╛рдИ рдкрд░рд╛рдЬрд┐рдд рдЧрд░реНрди рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓ рдЕрдЭреИ рд╕рдХреНрд╖рдо рднрдПрдХреЛ рдЫреИрди ред рд╕реАрдорд┐рдд рд╕реНрд░реЛрдд рд░ рдЕрд░реНрдерддрдиреНрддреНрд░ рдкрдирд┐ рд╕реАрдорд┐рдд рд╡реНрдпрдХреНрддрд┐рдорд╛ рдХреЗрдиреНрджреНрд░реАрдд рднрдПрдХрд╛рд▓реЗ рдЧрдгрддрдиреНрддреНрд░рдкреНрд░рддрд┐ рдкрдирд┐ рдЬрдирддрд╛рдорд╛ рд╡рд┐рддреГрд╖реНрдгрд╛ рдЙрдмреНрдЬрд┐рди рдерд╛рд▓реЗрдХреЛ рдЫ ред рдХреЗрд╣реА рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ-рд╕рд╛рдорд╛рдЬрд┐рдХ рд╕реВрдЪрдХрд╣рд░реВрдорд╛ рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдХреЛ рдкреНрд░рдЧрддрд┐ рдд рджреЗрдЦрд┐рдПрдХреЛ рдЫ рддрд░ рд╕реБрд╢рд╛рд╕рди рдХрдордЬреЛрд░ рд╣реБрдБрджрд╛ рдЬрдирддрд╛рд▓реЗ рджреЗрдЦреНрдиреЗ рдЧрд░реА рджреЗрд╢рдХреЛ рд╡рд┐рдХрд╛рд╕ рд╣реБрди рд╕рдХреЗрдХреЛ рдЫреИрди ред

рдиреЗрдкрд╛рд▓рдХреЛ рдЕрд╡рд╕реНрдерд╛ рдлреЗрд░реНрди рдирд╡рдкреНрд░рд╡рд░реНрддрдирд▓рд╛рдИ рдкреНрд░рд╛рдердорд┐рдХрддрд╛ рджрд┐рдБрджреИ рдкреНрд░рддрд┐рд╕реНрдкрд░реНрдзрд╛рддреНрдордХ рдФрджреНрдпреЛрдЧрд┐рдХреАрдХрд░рдг рдЧрд░реНрдиреБрдкрд░реНрдиреЗ рдЖрд╡рд╢реНрдпрдХрддрд╛ рдЫ ред рддрдерд╛рдкрд┐ рддреНрдпрд╕реЛ рдЧрд░реЗрдорд╛ рдЬрдирддрд╛ рд╕рдХреНрд╖рдо рд╣реБрдиреЗ рд░ рдЖрдлреНрдиреЛ рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рд╢рдХреНрддрд┐ рдХрдордЬреЛрд░ рднрдИ рд╕рддреНрддрд╛рдмрд╛рдЯ рдмрд╛рд╣рд┐рд░рд┐рдиреБрдкрд░реНрдиреЗ рдбрд░рдХрд╛ рдХрд╛рд░рдг рд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рдиреЗрддреГрддреНрд╡ рдЭрдиреНрдЭрдиреН рд╢реЛрд╖рдХ рдмрдиреНрджреИ рдЧрдПрдХреЛ рдЫ ред

рдЕрдиреНрддреНрдпрдорд╛,

рдбреНрдпрд╛рд░реЛрди рдПрд╕реЗрдореЛрд▓реБ рд░ рдЬреЗрдореНрд╕ рд░рдмрд┐рдиреНрд╕рдирдХреЛ Why Nations Fail рдЖрд░реНрдерд┐рдХ рд╡рд┐рдХрд╛рд╕ рд░ рд╕рдореГрджреНрдзрд┐рдорд╛ рд░рд╛рд╖реНрдЯреНрд░рдХрд╛ рдЖрдиреНрддрд░рд┐рдХ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рд╣рд░реВрдХреЛ рдорд╣рддреНрддреНрд╡рдХрд╛ рдмрд╛рд░реЗрдорд╛ рдмреБрдЭреНрди рдЙрдкрдпреЛрдЧреА рдЫ ред рдпрджреНрдпрдкрд┐ рдпрд╕рдорд╛ рдЕрдиреНрдп рднреВрд░рд╛рдЬрдиреАрддрд┐рдХ рдкрдХреНрд╖рд▓рд╛рдИ рд╕реНрдерд╛рди рдирджрд┐рдПрдХреЛ рд╣реБрдБрджрд╛ рдпрд╕рдХреЛ рдереЗрд╕рд┐рд╕ рд╕реАрдорд┐рдд рдЫ ред рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрдорд╛ рджрд┐рдЗрдПрдХрд╛ рдЙрджрд╛рд╣рд░рдгрд▓рд╛рдИ рдЬрд╕реНрддрд╛рдХреЛ рддрд╕реНрддреИ рдЧреНрд░рд╣рдг рдЧрд░реНрдиреБрднрдиреНрджрд╛ рдЕрдиреНрдп рдкрдХреНрд╖рд▓рд╛рдИ рдкрдирд┐ рд╡рд┐рдЪрд╛рд░ рдЧрд░реНрджреИ рдкрдвреНрдиреБрдкрд░реНрдиреЗ рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ ред рдЧрд╣рди рдЕрдзреНрдпрдпрди рдЧрд░реНрди рдирд╕рдХреНрдиреЗ рдкрд╛рдардХрдХрд╛ рд▓рд╛рдЧрд┐ рд╕рдВрд╕реНрдерд╛рдХреЛ рдорд╣рддреНрддреНрд╡ рдорд╛рддреНрд░реИ рдорд╣рддреНрддреНрд╡рдкреВрд░реНрдг рд▓рд╛рдЧреНрди рд╕рдХреНрдиреЗ рд╣реБрдБрджрд╛ рдпрд╕ рдкреБрд╕реНрддрдХрд▓рд╛рдИ рд╕рд╛рд╡рдзрд╛рдиреАрдкреВрд░реНрд╡рдХ рдкрдвреНрдиреБ рдЙрдЪрд┐рдд рд╣реБрдиреНрдЫ ред

Page 1 of 3

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén