Paper short abstract:

This paper uses these student activists’ experience as a case study to examine what happens when the future for which people have fought does not actualize as they hoped. I question whether the experience of waiting corresponds with the progressive undertones of the post-conflict agenda.

Paper long abstract:

During Nepal's Movement against Regression (2003-2006) and the 2nd People's Movement (2006), the political demands of student activists were particularly future orientated. The students' involvement in party activism was partially motivated by their struggle to shape a livable present in Nepal's uncertain socio-economic climate. Activism allowed them to postpone their economic and social aspirations toward a future when they might be realized, intertwining their personal aspirations with the political aspirations of the democratic movement. Being actively involved in shaping the course of their country gave them hope. They expected their envisioned future would materialize if a cease-fire were brokered, the democratically elected government was reinstituted, the monarchy was ousted, and a secular, democratic republic was established. This has all been achieved. But yet, little of their aspirations nor the publics' expectations have been realized in the last seven years of state reconstruction. This paper uses these student activists' experience as a case study to examine what happens when the future for which people have fought does not actualize as they hoped. What does it mean for a population to continue in a suspended state of waiting when their political demands are continually deferred? How does postponing shape their subjective experience of post-conflict? How is the affective mode of their temporal orientation altered when it is no longer a proactive strategy? I question whether the experience of waiting, with little opportunity to affect the political outcome, corresponds with the progressive undertones of the post-conflict agenda being promoted by multi-lateral agencies.