Politics, for those of us who believe it, is an intrinsic part of how individuals interact with one another. In other words, it exists in all spheres of life and by extension has consequences. These consequences tend to repeat themselves over time, as this opinion exemplifies, the consequences can be unforgiving. 

Nepal 

We are reminded of the youth of Nepal who at 20.9% unemployment spearheaded a revolution, physically removing those in power. Sparked by high levels of unemployment, social media bans, and the killing of youth at the frontline of protests where police used live ammunition to neutralise protesters. This, however, has not deterred protesters from turning out in the numbers at an unprecedented rate for Nepal. In the end protesters neutralised the defence force, burned parliament buildings, primary residences of incumbent ministers, many of whom had to flee. The youth of Nepal succeeded to physically remove those who led them in an effort many would term the destruction of consciously ingrained power structures in their society. 

In Nepal youth faced high levels of unemployment, many had no option but to go fight in war [alongside Russia in Ukraine] which offered handsome payment for this service. When Nepal Democratised after its monarch in 2008, a few leaders rotated power in the new dispensation since then, which facilitated years of destabilising corruption. What infuriated the youth of Nepal more as the children, young people like them, of incumbent government leaders were boasting with expensive designer items, restaurants, and vacations on platforms like tiktok and Instagram. This saw the rise in hashtags like #nepobaby and #nepokidd. In the end the youth of Nepal successfully removed the corrupt government, restored order in society and through a digital poll elected Sushila Karki as its new leader. 

Brazil 

Former Brazilian President, Jair Bolsonaro, was sentenced to 27 years in prison last week. This comes after he was accused of inciting violence and insurrection leading to thousands of Bolsonaro supporters storming Congress, the Supreme Court, and the presidential palace in Brasilia (8 January 2023). It was later alleged, through official police investigation, that Bolsonaro discussed imposing a state of emergency with military leaders to overturn the election of the victor, Lula Da Silva. However, two of the three military chiefs refused to partake. 

Bolsonaro was to some, seen as the leader of divisive politics in Brazil and to others, a saviour of note. Bolsonaro, nonetheless was often challenged regarding his covid-19 policies which caused the death of thousands. The level of covid denial by Bolsonaro’s government was so bad that gangs in Brazil started organising their own covid regulations in the areas they occupied. Bolsonaro has also made many hateful comments towards members of the LGBTQI+, women, and was ordered this week to pay damages for racial slurs used in office. Bolsonaro was caught riding on the politics of hatred and division. 

United States of America 

In an incident that shook the fabric of American political society, the assasination of Charlie Kirk, was broadcast the world over and left many unanswered questions. The overt answer seems to lay in Kirk’s politics. The late Kirk was a conservative, devout Christian, and often found himself berated for his comments and beliefs. 

Kirk was known for a series of highly controversial remarks and positions. He defended the Second Amendment even at the cost of gun deaths, dismissed empathy as harmful, and made repeated racially charged statements about Black Americans and Black women. Kirk also opposed abortion in extreme cases, equated transgender identity to “woman face,” spread misinformation about George Floyd’s death, and openly criticised feminism and LGBTQ+ rights. He frequently attacked diversity efforts, questioned the qualifications of Black pilots, and argued against retirement as “unbiblical.” Together, these positions built a public persona that mixed staunch conservative principles with provocative and often inflammatory rhetoric.

No individual should die the way in which Kirk has. Freedom of speech needs to be protected at all costs, provided it does not incite and cause harm to other groups and peoples. Many may argue that the latter is exactly what Kirk had done. In an interview on the matter, Barack Obama has stated: “..that it is possible for us to disagree while abiding by a basic code of how we should engage in public debate.” He added that calling those we disagree with “vermin” and “enemies” is destructive. 

Across these examples, a common theme emerges: politics has real, tangible consequences that can topple governments, send former leaders to prison, or even cost lives. When leaders disregard democratic norms or exploit divisions, they risk igniting public anger and destabilising their societies. Conversely, when citizens lose faith in political systems, they may take extraordinary steps to reclaim power or reset the rules. These moments remind us that politics is neither abstract nor harmless, it is the arena where collective futures are negotiated, and where accountability, empathy and responsible leadership are paramount.