Why sajha and bibeksheel did not win the election

I am reading Nassim taleb’s skin in the game and enjoying it quite a lot. The idea of skin in the game sounds like common sense, but its implications are interesting and sometimes surprising. First let’s understand what skin in the game means. A person who has skin in the game takes risk. They face the consequences of their decisions. A person with skin in the game is ready to accept both the upside and downside of his actions. (Google skin in the game. above defination sounds insufficent and unclear)

In almost all Interviews, politicians of Nepal speak of the many occasions they spent in Jail or (in case of Maoist) ,of the times they spent in the Jungle. All of them are signalling one thing, that they had skin in the game. In the game of politics,most of them risked their lives by going against the system.Their decisions and actions cost them their freedom,health and youthful years. Though I have always been a critic of communism, and also not a fan of the maoist revolution, the fact that Baburam Bhattarai and Prachanda put their lives in danger for the idea of the revolution cannot be denied. And for this very reason, both of them will remain relevant in nepali politics for a long time(possibly, till the end). The same goes for nepali congress and ex-UML leaders. The reason they get votes, despite their incompetence and corruption is because they seem like the only hope, they seem like real people.

Conversely, why did the sajha and bibeksheel party get dismal votes despite the social media hypes and the utter incompetence of the incumbent ? Because these leaders, in the eye of the public, lacked skin in the game. The figures in the party included Journalists, academics,professional bureaucrats and expats who earned their livings somewhere else (with relative comfort and low risk), which they publicize as their merit(but has been counterproductive.)

Citizens of Nepal are so sick of the politicians in power, there is plenty of space for new figures, leaders and parties to rise. But most have failed because in the eye of the public, they aren’t any more trustworthy with their superfluous words and no evidence of action than the current ones. We are not even sure they will not fly to some developed countries if things get really bad here in Nepal.

Then, Is there no hope of alternatives? Or a better leadership? Now, that there is no revolution, or a king throwing you to jail, how will the public choose its new set of leaders? The next generation of leaders will not be people who return back from the developed nations,having earned enough for oneself and one’s family. Neither will they be youths in their 20s (having finished their bachelors), now ready to change the country. Most of them will be people who stayed back in their country, who have been serving the people directly despite financial uncertainty. Such people are good candidates for being the leaders because of the common fact that :they put their skin in the game by staying in Nepal and serving the country (they might be unfit on some other grounds). Similarly, from the pool of businessmen, entrepreneurs, teachers, some leaders may rise in politics.

Concluding, there is hope of better people rising from existing political parties as well (as old retire and new enroll) , new rising parties should include people who have taken some kind of risk for the country. The ones already there should prove their commitment to the nation by actions rather than words, and the ones who are in their 20s should get a job or start a business before becoming a full time politician.