Spread the love

By Our Political Analyst

The Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), has long been calling for restoring monarchy and declaring Nepal a Hindu state. But its latest public articulation shows a careful shift in tone and method. By insisting that monarchy can return only through broad national consensus and not a referendum, the party is trying to reposition itself from a protest driven force to a claimant of political maturity.

RPP believes that a referendum on monarchy or the Hindu state may divide the population, thus far, a consensus should be developed for restoration of a Hindu kingdom. The republican system, despite its many failures, still commands numerical support in Parliament and among major parties. A referendum would expose the weakness of pro monarchist numbers and could shut the door on the issue for years. By rejecting that route, RPP reframes the monarchy not as a vote-based choice but as a shared national symbol that stands above electoral equation and arithmetic. The use of consensus over referendum helps the party in keeping the issue alive without facing an immediate test.

Although the party’s argument that national institutions should not be shaped by majority vote raises questions because a multi-party parliamentary system function on numbers of people’s representatives and their votes, yet the latest call for broader consensus serves RPP’s goal. It believes that the current political order as fragile as it was imposed by some anti-national elements. RPP presents monarchy as a stabilizing force that needs acceptance across social and political lines.

Meanwhile, the rift with Durga Prasain over strategy is another sign of this calculated move. Prasain’s demand for a referendum appears to be a confrontational tactic. RPP prefers distance from such tactics that could provoke state backlash or expose limited public backing. Even after launching a joint movement earlier this year, the party now wants to be seen as distinct from street level populism such as that of Prasain. This separation helps RPP appear responsible to conservative voters, sections of the bureaucracy and even parts of the business community who are frustrated with current politics.

RPP’s reading of the September Gen Z unrest fits neatly into this narrative. By calling it an eruption born out of corruption, unemployment and political exclusion, the party links public anger to the failure of post 1990 leadership. It avoids endorsing violence but uses the episode to question the strength of the constitution and the republican framework. The message is subtle but clear: if institutions collapsed so easily, the system itself lacks roots. Monarchy is offered as an anchor, not as a return to royal rule but as a symbolic correction to decades of misrule.

Yet the party stops short of explaining how a constitutional king would actually address youth unemployment, migration, education failures or governance decay. The leap from public frustration to monarchy restoration remains largely emotional. RPP relies on cultural identity and religious continuity. Its parallel push for a Hindu state follows the same logic. It speaks to identity anxiety in a fast-changing society.

Internal discipline, seen in the expulsion of Kanchan Bichchha for defying party orders, shows that RPP wants to project coherence. It wants to look serious about rules while accusing larger parties of current frustrating situation in the nation. This helps its claim that it offers an alternative political culture, even as it operates within the same power structure it criticizes.