by Ramesh Sharma (from The Next Front)
The present discourse is focused to the implementation of M-L-M in the Nepalese state of affairs, particularly to the tactics and deeds undertaken by the self-certified revolutionary party, UCPN(Maoist).
It is well known fact that the communist principle commenced by the declaration of communist manifesto in 1848 with the objective of establishing communism all over the world has traveled through Marxism, Leninism and Maoism till now. However, its development processes have been hindered at times. The hindrances have mainly been observed with the establishment of Paris Commune in France and after the demise of com. Stalin in USSR and that of com. Mao in China. Responsibility of the failure of Paris Commune went to the immaturity in the then leadership whereas, the obstacles experienced in USSR and China is attributable to the blossom of revisionism disguised in the cloak of Marxism. It is widely known that the Khruschevite revisionism emerged after com. Stalin’s death in USSR, is responsible for the retardation of Soviet society from transforming towards communism whereas, Deng’s revisionism came out after Mao’s death, is blameworthy to obstruct the Chinese society from entering into the phase of socialism. It is therefore, believed that the international communist movement have been hurdled either by the immaturity in the leadership of the communist party or by the implementation of revisionism voluntarily by them. Now, the only reason to vulgarize M-L-M is the development of revisionism. Apprehending all these facts, Marx, Lenin and Mao have strengthened Marxism to fight against revisionism. Mao’s conceptual two strategic contributions for the completion of revolution and for the restraining revisionism at present, have to be regarded infallible. The first strategy is the “Protracted People’s War” as a means of struggle for the completion of proletarian revolution and the second one is the “Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution” to fight against the hurdles or revisionism that comes in the process of carrying out the society up to the ultimate end of communism. Comprehensive appraisal of the development of principles of M-L-M and its counterpart, revisionism shows that the sufficient theoretical weapons, more specifically two propositions mentioned above, are sufficient to triumph over revisionism.
Nepalese Edition of Revisionism:
The pioneering leader for introducing revisionism in Nepal was late Manmohan Adhikari. The credit for its new and revised edition goes mainly to the leaders namely, Kesharjung Raymajhi, Mohanbikram Singh, Nirmal Lama and Madan Bhandari. Mr. Prachanda is the most recent name added to the list, who introduced revisionism in 2006 with a new layout which is being adopted by UCPN(Maoist) till the day. This revised edition possibly, is quite new one for the revisionist leaders of the international communist movement. Mr. Prachanda himself is boasting his so called new doctrine as the only way to be followed by the communists of the world. It seems quite mockery statement. A prudent person can’t remain silent ignoring his traitorous deeds imposed against the sacrifices of energetic youths, farmers, labourers, intellectuals and entire oppressed Nepalese people. A few points mentioned below tries to spell out newly introduced revisionism in Nepal in brief.
1. Introducing ‘Prachanda Path’ as a guiding principle:
It is simply a petty bourgeois impatience to hold the initiation of people’s war high up to the level of guiding principle in the course of assimilation of the rebellion cadres among the masses. The tendency to enjoy on boasting, deserting the task of completing the revolution, doesn’t comply with the norms of Marxism. It is also an attribute of right-deviation to hold himself high up to the status of Marx, Lenin and Mao by over-evaluating the initiation of people’s war in a new territory. Notwithstanding, emergence of a new principle is not obligatory even after the completion of revolution.
2. Declaration of concluding people’s war:
Mr. Prachanda, in alliance with Mr. Girija, nakedly implemented revisionism in the Nepalese communist movement by the proclamation of terminating people’s war. The only recognized way of struggle today to seize the state power is the ‘protracted people’s war’ in the international proletarian movement. The notion is already agreed to be applicable for both developing as well as for developed countries. It is quite an absurd act to replace people’s war with constitution assembly on behalf of the proletariat.
3. Combining two into one:
‘One divides into two’ is the principle of Marxism. It signifies the fact that the revolutionaries and counter-revolutionaries are being polarized in their respective poles, and ultimately the growing revolutionary force will win the reactionaries over. Contrary to such a notion, Mr. Prachanda assimilated both revolutionaries and counter-revolutionaries in his party, UCPN(Maoist) in such a way that created a situation to make revolution impossible.
4. Reversing the process of unity-struggle-transformation:
According to the principle of M-L-M, a revolutionary party should organize theoretical discourse as well as practical struggles within and outside the party unceasingly to transform the cadres and masses towards the evolutionary pole. Contrary to it, at the outset Mr. Prachanda did party unity with the well known revisionist, and is trying continuously to transform the revolutionary cadres of the party to parliamentarist and pluralist pole. The leaders of UCPN(Maoist) nowadays are reciting the formula of unity-struggle-transformation concealing their revisionist direction of transformation.
5. Implementation of anarchism in the cloak of rebel:
This is quite a new form of revisionism adopted by Mr. Prachanda. In the various gatherings, like the meetings of the places, Balaju, Kharipati, Palungtar etc. where, remarkable revolutionary cadres, masses were present, Mr. Prachanda tried to show himself revolutionary by dramatic physical performance as well as by agreeing rebellion political line, but in paper. He knows very well that the revolutionary document itself can do nothing unless it is supported by working plan with revolutionary vanguard consisting principled and disciplined cadres and leaders. He wants to bypass these necessary aspects of revolution and has adopted indirect methods to fulfill his interest like, making the party loose, economically corrupt, having no plan and programme, formation of cliques to get personal benefits and making the party a crowd of anarchist persons etc. Contrary to the M-L-M’s proposition that ‘implement Marxism, not revisionism’, Mr. Prachanda implemented revisionism in practice in the cloak of so called revolutionary line of ‘rebel’. He might have comprehended that his master plan would lead to a point of time when everyone would have to accept unsuitable subjective condition for rebel. Mr. Prachanda at present has shifted himself from the political line of ‘rebel’ to that of ‘peace and constitution’ in accordance with his far-reaching plan of action. His newly introduced method of transforming a communist party into the reactionary one can be stated as, “Marxism or revolution in speech and parliamentarism or revisionism in practice”.
6. Trustworthy to the enemies and fraud to the people:
Mr. Prachanda himself has started to be unclothed. Formerly, he tried to show himself revolutionary and attempted to convince the cadres for perceiving the agreements signed by him with the reactionaries, simply as a tactical matter. He has now disclosed that his concepts, plan, physical life etc. had been protected by Mr. Girija Koirala, whom the Nepalese people regard as a most notorious leader. Pointing out to the party’s devoted comrades, he said that his companions of the period of people’s war were trying to murder him either physically or conceptually. Notwithstanding, Mr. Girija Koirala in the Nepalese history, is the most traitorous prime minister on the part of Nepalese people, who turned the nation down to the ditch of misery by converting the entire state machinery into smuggling in 1991. Nevertheless, Mr. Girija as an elected prime minister had missed a golden opportunity voluntarily, to lead the nation towards prosperity after the restoration of multi-party system in 1990. It is therefore, clear that Mr. Prachanda had had a nexus with the chief of the reactionaries and he was skilful in his dramatic action to create illusion among the general masses.
7. Aristocratic arrogance:
Mr. Prachanda is now fostering nobility and hypocrisy instead of the feeling of equality, fraternity, collectivity developed during the period of people’s war. The relationships established on the basis of equality are being demolished and new capitalistic consumptive relationships are being set up instead. Contrary to the communists’ simplicity, Mr. Prachanda has tried to conceal his pompous use of most expensive vehicles, dresses, buildings, securities etc. by providing some sort of luxuries to the members of constitution assembly and to the high ranking leaders of the party. In this way, he is trying to turn the party leaders into noble class detaching them from the general people. This is his another move to make revisionist line permanent.
8. Leadership for both revolution as well as for counter-revolution:
Nepalese communist movement was rotating round the vicious circle of revisionism for a long period of time. UCPN(Maoist) was the vanguard party then, led by Mr. Prachanda to make the ice break, and now the party has been down turned to revisionism by the same leader. During the launch of people’s war, power was centralized to the party headquarter or at the command of Mr. Prachanda and now he applied it to implement revisionism in the party easily. The reason why he undertook counter-revolutionary leap at the time when people’s war in Nepal was heading forward successfully, except a few damage, is still unresolved.
Intense discourse on the principles of M-L-M had been carried out within and outside the party before and after the initiation of people’s war in Nepal. It is difficult to imagine that whether such a high level theoretical interaction in the entire rank and file of the party had undertaken during the period of Chinese revolution. It enriched the revolutionary theoretical understanding of the leaders of the Maoist party. Maoist leaders now are using the intellectual exercise of the war period simply as an intellectualism. They are utilizing their knowledge simply for their livelihood neglecting proletarian revolution, just like a teacher in the bourgeois educational system uses his academic degree for his livelihood, without being aware of scientific education. Maoist leaders are sellable amongst the general masses mainly due to the lower level of philosophical and political consciousness among the leaders of Nepali Congress and UML. Proletarian revolution in Nepal is being put to the stage that may never commence.
UCPN(Maoist) on the whole, is paying lip service to M-L-M and implementing revisionism in practice in Nepal. Moreover, revisionism will undoubtedly be influential within the party, so long as the commander of the party headquarters, Mr. Prachanda himself stands as a revisionist leader. The concept of Maoism had already been accepted unanimously after the intense discussion within the party long before, but it is being treated controversial now. Likewise, party had already stood against privatization in education and against the role of NGO and INGO about 20 years back, but it has been slide down to the agenda of discourse. All these events are directed at the aim of converting UCPN(Maoist) to the party of bourgeoisie. Not a single person or a party can be revolutionary in practice, which has undergone a deviation in principle. This scientific notion of Marxism has been rightly proved by the downturn of UCPN(Maoist). It has been reconfirmed that Marxism is not simply a high sounding empty drum, but a concrete scientific theory.
It is an encouraging event that a section of members emerged from the recently held central committee meeting of UCPN(Maoist) itself in the course of challenging the porter of the new edition of revisionism, Mr. Prachanda. However, not much can be expected from the issues of challenge to Mr. Prachanda. Out of the issues, the main issue is related to the decentralization of power that was concentrated at the hands of Mr. Prachanda in the midst of launching people’s war. The issue is dubious one and may imply double standard. On the one hand, it may indicate the fair allocation of share of fund obtained from the state machinery on the part of the party, UCPN(Maoist) and on the other hand, it may signify bearing responsibility in the course of safeguarding the party from sliding it down to the ditch of revisionism and for giving revolutionary turn to it. Let’s hope, they intend the later one.
Apprehending the issues, it is apparent that Mr. Prachanda has published new edition of revisionism nakedly. No benefit of doubt is required to give him. However, the decision may be hasty to conclude with respect to the political line of so called revolutionary section of UCPN(Maoist). It is still a stage of wait and see for some time, if leaders and cadres of so called revolutionary section of UCPN(Maoist) will walk behind the bourgeois power sharing path or will pursue the line of spadework for revolution. It can now be concluded that the revolutionary section of the party mustn’t immediately hold high the ambition attained during the launch of the people’s war, because Mr. Prachanda has put entire rank and file of the party in the sunlounger surrounded by the reactionaries. The minimum task thus, to be done at present is to replace the architect of revisionism from the leadership of UCPN(Maoist) and to bring the party back to the stage of 1994 with the objective of undertaking revolutionary steps.