Recently, an op-ed article published in a reputed national daily initiated a debate whether the traditional intellectual community is perturbed with Prime Minister (PM) Balendra Shah's unconventional leadership style or have some prominent intellectuals shifted their allegiance towards the ruling faction. As of yet, several articles for and against these narratives have been published in print and online media. In the aforementioned article, the scribe recounts his experiences in Paris and Amsterdam, portraying a positive image of Nepal and the Nepali passport. However, the strength of a passport is not measured in a random café in Paris but at the international immigrations. The Henley Passport Index shows that Nepal's passport ranking has slightly improved in 2026, but this cannot be exclusively attributed to the Gen-Z movement or to the current government's efforts. The slight improvement of passport ranking is consistent with the fluctuating trend observed over recent years. In reality, Nepal's passport still remains one of the weakest documents at international immigrations. The overwhelming electoral triumph of Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) is clearly an outcome of the inefficiency of the leaders of the established political parties and bad governance of previous governments. In addition, a perception was made that the RSP is a beneficiary of the Gen-Z movement. It was obvious that the leaders and supporters of RSP had morally and physically supported the movement. PM Shah's indirect involvement – as the Mayor of Kathmandu Metropolitan City – was clearly evident during the Gen-Z movement. A section of the intellectual community seems to have shifted its loyalty towards the current government and is ignoring the violent background on which the current government is formed. The KP Sharma Oli-led government is to be blamed for the casualty of September 8, but the stakeholders of the Gen-Z movement should take the responsibility of the casualty and devastation caused on September 9. This is supported by the recently published report of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) that categorically alleges several RSP leaders, including 17 parliamentarians, being directly/indirectly involved in the violent activities on September 9. Ignoring this fact, the faction of the intellectual community that has shifted its loyalty seems to be a repetition of the trend that was observed after the Maoist insurgents joined mainstream politics. The violent activities of the Maoist insurgency were glorified by this intellectual faction, and the everyday activities of their leaders were glorified as discontinuation of traditional practices. Staying in that line, recent activities of PM Shah showing sheer disrespect for the sovereign Parliament, and his arrogance are being deceptively applauded as the discontinuation of conventional parliamentary proceedings by the pro-government intellectual community and RSP loyalists. Anyone familiar with global parliamentary proceedings should be aware that PM Shah's disregard for the parliament is entirely an unparliamentary action. The RSP and its lawmakers are treating these issues too lightly, ignoring the fact that the parliament is not merely a gathering of political parties, but a representation of the nation's citizens. Hence, PM Shah's impertinence towards the parliament is not just his ignorance towards the opposition parties but a grave contempt of the people's verdict. Global examples have shown that a section of the so-called intellectual community always aligns with the ruling faction irrespective of its merits and demerits. This shift among intellectuals – moving away from traditional principles to align with whoever holds power – has accompanied every regime change in Nepal that has destabilised the political landscape of the country and triggered frequent government and/or regime changes. Ideally, the intellectual community should act as a watchdog and not the lapdog of the government to deliver constructive criticism to the rulers. As governments are formed to perform, the intellectual community is expected to support the government by raising issues where the government is off tracking. In contrast, the aforementioned article sugarcoats the misdoings of the present government and PM Shah as discontinuation of conventional practices. In addition, the scribe, in a television interview, claims that he is responsible only for the narration he had conveyed. However, an op-ed article not only conveys the literal message that is written but it also has a deep unwritten message between the lines. Hence, the article does not address and analyse the current government's dubious actions, including the mishandling of landless squatters, the controversy surrounding breach of seniority provision in appointment of the Chief Justice, the appointment of an allegedly inept Attorney General, and the ongoing spree of arbitrary arrests. Over that, disrespect of PM Shah towards the parliament has been glorified as discontinuation of conventional practices. This has encouraged the PM to go a step ahead and declare from the rostrum of the parliament that Nepal has encroached Indian land in several place – a totally bogus acceptance from a head of government. The RSP parliamentarians being mum on this issue is understandable as they have been converted into mere mute muse of the PM, it is disgusting to witness a large number of the so-called intellectuals supporting the PM on this objectionable remark. Nepal's political landscape is at a critical juncture at the moment. Constructive criticism of the intellectual community is crucial in bringing the government on the right track. In contrast, the blanket support of the government's every action, just or unjust, will motivate the government to follow authoritarianism that will ultimately bring collapse to the democratic system. Dr Joshi is a senior scientist and independent opinion maker based in Germany