PROBLEMS & PROSPECTS OF REVOLUTION IN NEPAL
[A Collection of Articles by Com. Prachanda and Other Leaders of the CPN (Maoist)]

Down with Parliamentarism ! Long Live New Democracy !!
Com. Prachanda
1. Introduction

 Nepal has become the poorest country in the world today. The rule that laid stress on heavy slogans of democracy, peace and development is also approaching 50 years in Nepal. Nepalese society in this course has entertained many elections and the governments of different names and forms under the slogan of democracy and development. Before completing five years the third parliamentary election is going to take place, under the constitutional monarchy and multiparty system that was brought about after 1990. Several impoverished countries of the world have succeeded to establish new records of development in the last 50 years. But, compared to other countries, Nepal has slid further down from the position of 50 years before. History is a witness that each of the new government that was formed with attractive slogans has pulled back the country to more worsening situation than before. Holding of yearly elections by spending tens of millions of property collected from the blood and sweat of the people has only lead to a government that renders additional expenditure, insecurity and national betrayal.

 Like a Nepali saying “All the hermits are alike with pierced ears” all the Panchas, Congress and UML contributed to escalating economic dependency, political anarchy and cultural perversion in the country. They competed to serve feudalism and its main representative the monarchy, which is in compliance with the interest of Indian expansionist ruling classes and western imperialism, and conspired to suppress the struggling and forward-looking people by providing sugar-coated words of petty reforms and pushed the Nepalese society to the darkness of crisis from all directions. Today, the UML, overtaking the Panchas and Congress in such tasks, is becoming successful to confuse the people and gain trust of the king and foreign exploiters. To declare mid-term poll by the king upon UML’s demand and to bid in serving the domestic and foreign enemies of the people by killing their struggling spirit through sugar-coated bullets are the evidences of this fact.

 What  the people have understood from the history of all over the world and also from Nepal is that resolution of the problem is not possible by casting vote in the parliamentary election. The fact that casting of vote in the parliamentary election in real sense is to provide national betrayer and anti-people elements the right to perpetrate unjust, atrocity, exploitation and repression upon people has been established at the lowest level of the masses too. There is no other way for the Nepalese people than to jump into the struggle that makes them the sole master of their destiny. In this orientation, consciousness of Nepalese people who have gone through different forms of struggles has advanced ahead. But, in order to fulfill their reactionary and opportunist interest the people’s enemies and the opportunist political groups that don’t have confidence in the people have been conspiring to entrap the people.

 In this context, Nepalese petty bourgeois class, and that too, mainly a big section of intellectuals that have embraced an attitude of selling their principle and morality for their personal petty interest is helping to a great extent sustain the reactionary system that is on the verge of death. What contemptible task can there be other than to help sustain this system despite knowing theoretically that parliamentary system is the curtain of big money-bags, which is full of fallacy, pretension, hypocrisy and immorality? Exhibiting that vileness today, a big section of so-called well-educated personalities is helping reactionary and opportunist groups, the defenders of feudalism and imperialism, to confuse and deceive the masses. But, with everlasting confidence upon the people, deep faith and conviction towards principle and being cautious to the past history, today, our Party the CPN (Maoist), expressing its determination to devote for the real emancipation of the people with intense hatred towards reactionaries and opportunists, has established a front against all sorts of retrogressive trends. In order to march ahead along the great perspective of people’s liberation, our Party has now decided to boycott the mid-term poll, full of hypocrisy and conspiracy, under the slogan of “New Democratic republic, the only alternative of monarchical parliamentary system”.

Today, the entire reactionary and opportunist elements opposing our boycott policy are using their might to pull back people into the dirty sewerage of parliamentary election and to defend this worthless parliamentary system. In this situation, it has been urgent to understand and make others understand the retrogressive character of parliamentary system, election and parties and the boycott of election and revolutionary struggle as the only correct way for people’s liberation.

2. General Concept on State Power and Parliamentary System

 What the conscious representatives of the reactionary class have been trying to create confusion among the masses is that the state power and the parliamentary system are the same. The representatives of bourgeois class don’t lag behind to put forward a logic that the parliamentary system exists so long as the state power does. Furthermore, they have been making efforts to show the parliamentary system as the one that goes to infinity as a perpetual system. There has been considerable effect in the petty bourgeois class from this type of propaganda of the bourgeoisie.

Ignorance and lack of scientific conception has created here a very complex situation on the dialectical, dynamic and ever changing characteristics of the state power and governing system in the course of development of the society.

 What is the reality? Nature, society and the human conscience are in a dynamic motion of constant change. Nothing is endless and perpetual. According to that, the state power emerged in a certain state of development of history and its death is inevitable in the another stage of its development. Because, anything that takes birth also ceases definitely to exist. The retrogressive elements of the society have always been disagreeing with this scientific truth. To fulfill one’s vested interest by imposing superstition in place of scientific conscience has been the stress of retrogressive section of the society since quite long. Whereas, the reality is exactly opposite to it. Is the state power a thing that existed forever and goes to infinity? No. On it, it will be appropriate here to pay attention to the following statement of Engels, “State power did not exist forever. There was such a society, which used to run its work without it, in which there was no concept of the state and the state power. In a certain situation of economic development, which was necessarily associated with the class division of the society necessitated a state. Now we are heading towards such a situation of rapid development of production, where the existence of these classes is not necessary, rather has become direct obstruction to the production. Along with the classes the state will inevitably fall. Society, which will reorganize production on the basis of a free and equal association of the producers, will put the whole machinery of state where it will then belong: into the museum of antiquity, by the side of the spinning-wheel and the bronze axe." (Quote not original)

Today, the reactionaries and revisionists are pursuing in evil efforts of distorting this great and scientific conclusion of Marxism the world over. In the initial period of the society there existed no class division, therefore, there was no state power too. When the state power emerged, since then the institutions like police, army, bureaucracy, jail, court etc. started developing. According to Marx, “The state power is the existence of class hegemony, is a weapon of oppressing one class by another, is the creation of such a “system”, which by weakening the class conflict, legalizes oppression and strengthens it”. (Quote not original) But, the reactionaries and opportunists, emphasizing always in class collaboration, trying to weaken class conflict, are working to strengthen the oppressive system in the society. Whereas, the social scientists assert that the primary duty of Marxists is to constantly strive for rooting out the oppression by intensifying class conflict.
 Another thing that needs to pay attention and understand is that the state power and the ruling system is not the same and has never been so in the history. Since the emergence of state power, different forms of ruling system have been taking birth and vanishing with the development of society. No ruling system under the state power has been eternal nor can be so. The world knows that, under the state power, the form of ruling system in the slave society was slave mastership, absolute monarchy remained as the form of ruling system in the feudal society and parliamentary system came forward as the form of ruling system in the bourgeois society. In today’s semi-feudal and semi-colonial society a kind of hotchpotch of absolute monarchy and parliamentary system has been the form of ruling system. Likewise, the proletarian democracy takes the form of ruling system in the socialist society. In this way, what is clear is that the state power and the ruling system are not the same thing. The state power exists so long as the class division exists in the society but the form of ruling system goes on changing according to the situation of development of class struggle. Again, at the new stage of development of class struggle, where class division no longer exists, the state power too vanishes automatically.

 Not only the old and declared reactionary elements in Nepal, the revisionist renegades, who claim to be Marxists, have been intensifying their task of distorting these basic understandings of the social science. To talk of class collaboration by sacrificing class struggle, to strangle the throat of revolution in tune with the music of reform and to worship constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system according to the interest of feudal monarchy and monopoly capitalists, are the models of extreme distortion of revisionist renegades.

 It is clear that the parliamentary ruling system is linked with inevitable necessity of the capitalist society. The parliamentary system had definitely played a progressive role in the course of historical battle of capitalism against feudalism. But, with the development of monopolistic character inherent in capitalism, a huge army of modern proletarian class came into being in the international arena. Today, the history’s last class, the proletariat, in the course of world-shaking class struggles against the bourgeois class, has equipped itself with a scientific and revolutionary weapon of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the pinnacle of human knowledge. Owing to the inherent contradiction in capitalism and the development of proletariat, the bourgeois class transformed into an extreme regressive one. When, the bourgeois class took to this condition, then their parliamentary system also transformed automatically into a regressive and hypocrite one. Parliament turned into a gossiping theatre for bourgeoisie. It remained only a screen for maintaining reign of loot by throwing dust into people’s eyes. The election that takes place in the interval of certain years became a tool to decide which member of the ruling class from the parliament to deceive people and divide crumbs of loot. Not only that, the parliament left doing work of the state power. Rather, the huge permanent army and the bureaucracy that capitalism developed started doing that task. “Take any parliamentary country, from America to Switzerland, from France to England, Norway and so forth -- in these countries the real business of "state" is performed behind the scenes and is carried on by the departments, chancelleries and General Staffs. Parliament itself is given up to talk for the special purpose of fooling the ‘common people." This saying of Lenin has brilliantly exposed the essence of the parliamentary system. The fact that the task of parliament is only to fool people has been clear through five years’ activities in Nepal, too. What has Lenin clarified further in it is that “To decide once every few years which member of the ruling class is to repress and crush the people through parliament -- such is the real essence of bourgeois parliamentarism, not only in parliamentary-constitutional monarchies, but also in the most democratic republics”. Such is the Marxist concept on parliamentarism. But the revisionists in Nepal and the world over have been doing evil-deeds of worshipping the parliamentary system to lick up the remains of the reactionary power’s trash by kicking off these great and scientific propositions of Marxism.

3. Parliamentary System in the New Phase of Worldwide Crisis

 Today, the parliamentary system is passing through a new type of serious worldwide crisis. The imperialist economy that was seen stable for a brief period after the Second World War entered into a course of new overall crisis since the 70s and while arriving at the 90s it has been trapped into an extreme crises. As a means for the imperialist countries to survive from this economic crisis it has become obligatory for them to mercilessly plunder the people of the third world further. In addition to this, competition among the imperialist groups is intensifying to re-divide the world. On the one hand, imperialist robber groups have agreed upon the “GATT” agreement to maintain more monopoly over industry, commerce, agriculture and intellectual property, and on the other, are pursuing in the task of increasing armed strength to expand their influence, intensifying regional and national wars and preparing world war. For that, the imperialists are pursuing in conspiracy to openly subjugate third world countries by forcing them to implement the policies of economic liberalization and privatization, and on the other, are using their utmost force to repress the national liberation, democratic and socialist movements rising up all over the world. Even then, the principal contradiction of the world is further sharpening. Imperialism has been confronting with strong movements of the people of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Because of it’s own monopolistic character and continuously accelerating people’s struggle, the imperialist world order has been entrapped in an inescapable crisis. A new wave of the world revolution is emerging in the horizon. New sparks of people’s fury have started to rise up in the imperialist countries, too. The expression of aforesaid type of economic crisis has now been nakedly witnessed in the parliamentary system, the political mask of imperialism. People’s mistrust towards parliamentary system and election is increasing; the result of all the parliamentary elections in the world including America, Japan, France, Germany and India is clarifying this fact. Sleep of the imperialist and reactionary ruling classes that used to enjoy in the heaven of loot by confusing people, talking about stability from the parliament is being disturbed. The wave of people’s discontent, fury and rebellion is spreading in all the countries. What has been the peculiarity is that the old declared reactionary parties are failing to confuse people even with a little of parliamentary illusion; the revisionist renegades, who take the name of Marx, are shouldering to buttress the enfeebled parliamentary system about to fall.

 What constant effort has to be made to clarify people today about the revisionist groups that have taken responsibility of defending parliament in the name of communism is that they are the new servants purchased by the feudal and capitalists. Their “victory” in the parliamentary election is the victory of feudal and capitalists protecting the system, which is about to fall. There can be no bigger stupidity than to see them a little progressive. What is necessary here to understand is that, as Lenin said, in order to fulfill “the demand of the era of revolutionary activity” one should transform into a revolutionary organization; “but this transformation can only be accomplished by depreciating and eliminating the old Party and leaders who strangle the throat of revolutionary energy”.

4. The Struggle Between Revolutionary Marxism and Revisionism on Parliamentarism

 In relation to the parliamentary system and parliamentarism, there have been life and death struggles in the international communist movement since the birth of Marxism. After the theoretical victory of Marxism, the revisionism with the cover of Marxism itself is pushing forward the same old revisionist essence. The revisionism in innumerable forms has been advocating parliamentarism and deceiving people. In its essence, the main difference between revolutionary Marxism and revisionism lies in the rejection and acceptance of parliamentarism. In this way, the struggle between Marxism and revisionism has in reality become the struggle between revolution and counterrevolution. This fact today has been manifested in the degeneration of the revisionist UML group into counterrevolutionary and the struggle of Maoists against it. What the UML group is talking about parliamentarism today is nothing new but it is the developed form of those renegades of the history against whom the contemporary Marxists had to wage life and death struggle. The UML in Nepal is nakedly and shamefully following the counter-revolutionary tradition of Bernstein, Kautsky, Khrushchev, Gorvachov, Liu Shaochi and Teng, whereas our Party, in relation to this, is determined to pushing forward the revolutionary heritage of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao.

 Let us look at now in short the historical process of the struggle Bernstein said, “Capitalism transforms peacefully into socialism”. Saying that the parliamentary system of the bourgeois class should not be destroyed rather should be developed further, he propagated, “now, through the methods of voting, demonstration and pressure we can bring about reforms for which a violent revolution was necessary hundred years ago”. At that time he had said, “That day will come when the (working class) will numerically be so strong and so important for the entire society that, no need to mention, then the palaces will be incapable to face its pressure and will spontaneously collapse.” Great Lenin had ridiculed the reactionary essence of this type of nonsense of Bernstein. The history has brilliantly justified this fact. But, dear readers! Is there any doubt in the fact that the revisionist renegades, including the UML are putting forward the same ideas of Bernstein by decorating it with a veneer of creativity? Does the UML have the least right to pronounce the name of Marxism-Leninism? No. They are misusing that great name to repress people and the revolution.
 Let us see further ahead, the renegade Kautsky of the Second International presented himself nakedly with the same counter-revolutionary tradition of Bernstein by saying, “Our goal of political struggle is to win the state power by changing parliament to the master of government through a majority in it”. Advocating openly the parliamentary system of English type Kautsky betrayed the interest of the proletariat. He proved himself a mean servant of the bourgeois class. Lenin enriched the reserve of Marxist-Leninist literature in the course of refuting this type of counter-revolutionary character of Kautsky. Lenin, against this parliamentarism of Kautsky, said, “Only the swindlers and stupid can think that the proletariat should acquire majority in the election, which is conducted under the dictatorship of the bourgeois or under the yoke of wage slavery, then only should attain power. It is to replace class struggle and the revolution by the election that is conducted under the old system and under the old power.” (Lenin, Collected Works, Russian Edition, 1950, Vol. 30, p. 40). (Quote not original) In this context, Stalin has said, “To think that such a revolution can be carried out peacefully, within the framework of bourgeois democracy, which is adapted to the rule of the bourgeoisie, means that one has either gone out of one's mind and lost normal human understanding, or has grossly and openly repudiated the proletarian revolution”.

 Why should not one call them “mad” or betrayers of proletarian revolution to those revisionists including the UML that are raising slogan of forming a government through majority vote in the parliament under the feudal monarchy in Nepal today? What can there be other than to deceive oneself and the people to think even the least, of these immoral and cheaters, who conduct in the tradition of Bernstein and Kautsky taking names of Marx and Lenin, are genuine?

 Khruschev, the leader of modern revisionism, pushed forward exactly the same tradition of Bernstein and Kautsky. He also talked of “transforming parliament into people’s power by acquiring majority in it”. 40 years ago he talked of peaceful struggle. All of Khruschev, Breznev and Gorbachev opposed violent revolution. It is still fresh in the world opinion that the result of this has been transformed into the fascism of Yeltsin in Russia, today. Mao Tsetung initiated another historical struggle against Khruschevite revisionism that advocated building up of socialism through majority in the parliament and shattered it completely. Mao, propelling ahead the Marxist tradition of struggle against revisionism, put forward openly and sharply the scientific truth, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” and said -- “Experience in the class struggle in the era of imperialism teaches us that it is only by the power of the gun that the working class and the laboring masses can defeat the armed bourgeoisie and landlords; in this sense we may say that only with guns can the whole world be transformed.”

 What to say to those, who pretend to have observed creative Marxism in the revisionists including UML that babbles of “favoring” people by acquiring majority in the parliament, while one witness the experience of aforesaid kinds of enough struggles between revolutionary Marxism and revisionism on parliamentarism? Right at this time, what we can suggest to the “left” intellectuals of the petty bourgeois class is do not hurry up to blemish oneself by bowing to the enemies of the people and revolution. Be protected from being blind though with eyes, deaf though with ears and silly though with brain. Keep away oneself from the stupid prattle of the agents of imperialism and feudalism. Do not take up the abominable task of selling morality blindly for the momentary interest. Otherwise, the powerful hands of history will not keep out anyone.

5. On the Parliamentary Election and Communist Tactics

 After Marxism-Leninism-Maoism exposed the aforementioned types of parliamentarism another kind of neo-revisionism has also emerged in the pretext of tactics to expose parliamentarism. It is also equally necessary to identify, understand and expose. This Marxism-Leninism-Maoism has stated that the question of revolutionary utilization of the election or the boycott of it is a matter of tactics to expose parliamentarism because both can be applied in the given situation. In this context, two opinions prevail in the international communist movement in which the rightist revisionism advocates to participate forever in election in the name of tactics and the other trend argues that in no circumstances can the election be utilized and so should be strategically boycotted. Of these two trends, the right extremism that participates continuously in the election has been more harmful in today’s communist movement.

 The main thing that needs to understand here is that mainly two kinds of countries exist in today’s world. They are industrially developed capitalist countries, on one hand, and the semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries dominated by peasants, on the other. It has historically been proved that the strategies of seizing power by the proletariat are different in these two types of countries. In the developed countries, the proletariat adopts the line of seizing big cities first under the strategy of insurrection and extensive countryside followed by it. Paris Commune in France and mainly the Great October Russian Socialist Revolution under the leadership of Lenin was accomplished according to this strategy. In the countries, which are under-developed semi-feudal and semi-colonial, it is necessary to adopt the path of seizing countryside first and the cities later according to the line of protracted People’s War. Chinese revolution under the leadership of Mao and those of several other countries have achieved victory by adopting this line.

 Tactics cannot be identical under two different strategies that are adopted to accomplish revolution in two different types of aforesaid countries. Trying to adopt the tactics of election, to which the proletariat adopted under the strategy of armed insurrection, as a prototype under the strategy of protracted People’s War is not Marxism, but it becomes only the blind mechanical imitation of it. This kind of mechanical thinking helps in no circumstance advance revolution. In addition to this, taking into account of the parliamentary system and the process of heightening fascistization of parties in the stage of imperialism after the Second World War and also the experience of the Great Proletariat Cultural Revolution, and, paying attention to the situation in which the possibility of revolutionary utilization of election in the capitalist countries, too, has practically ended, the tactical value of utilizing election seems to have terminated. It has become a serious question and its theorization has become urgent.

 In this situation, the seriousness of the mistake that tries to take up those tactics under the strategy of protracted People’s War subjecting to the strategy of armed insurrection is further augmenting. A right opportunist trend that urges to apply tactics related to parliamentary election by ignoring the nature of revolution and strategy of war has been dominant in the Nepalese communist movement. There is no worth of such elements that talk of New Democracy, Mao Thought and armed struggle and even sometimes protracted People’s War too. To talk of New Democracy by adopting the tactics of armed insurrection, resembles to as the proverb goes, “To follow the route of Kuti (i.e. China) to go to Kashi (i.e. India).” Those who, keeping their eyes closed, adopt the tactics of utilization of elections are in fact exhibiting mechanical thinking by making election the question of strategy. There is nothing other than a rightist essence behind their charge of dogmatism, mechanical thinking and revolutionary phrase-mongering to the revolutionary parties that adopt the line of election boycott according to the line of protracted People’s War to accomplish the New Democratic revolution. What is our saying is that to talk of utilization of election by ignoring the nature of war, in the name of tactics, is identical to putting on shoes on the head in the name that it is a wearing thing. In this way, the main representatives of putting on shoes on the head, in Nepal, are the elements of MB-Lama trends. In other word, to confuse people by taking a route to Kuti to go to Kashi is the essence of their tactics.

 Liquidation of those elements that have dreamt of succeeding to power by holding the tail of UML group, which has attained the reactionary power by holding the tail of the King and Congress as the model, is inevitable. In these days, they are displaying their naked form of neo-revisionism by standing in queue of the reactionary and revisionists against the struggling masses and the revolutionary Party. Existence of such groups has become like that of “neither at home nor at crematorium”, for their centrist thinking that tries to play between revolution and counterrevolution. What is necessary here to pay attention is that the experience from all over the world and our country too have clarified that the end result of such groups trapped in electoral fascination is the reaction. “Naked opportunism, which engenders immediate hatred among the working masses is not that horrible and harmful compared to the theory of middle class that makes use of Marxist formulae to justify their opportunist practice and tries to prove with force of different logic that the revolutionary activity is untimely” and so on. (Quote not original). These sayings of Lenin agree completely with the people of MB-Lama trend in Nepal.

 What we can say in conclusion is that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism takes up the question of election as a tactics of the proletariat in which it has more strength to influence strategy than the generally does. It is necessary, in such types of countries, to handle the entire activities of struggles and organizations centering on war from the very beginning, for it is inevitable to follow the path of protracted People’s War to accomplish the New Democratic revolution  . Looking at from this viewpoint, the tactics of election boycott, not that of utilization does have dominant significance. The tactics of utilization can be applied only as an exception of particular situation in such countries. The trend of Mohan Bikram and Lama that tries to explain and apply the tactics of election utilization as a preparation for armed insurrection is neo-revisionism orienting towards reaction, of which no relation exists with Maoists and the New Democratic revolution  .
 
6. Historical Background of Nepal and Today’s Parliamentary System

 The constitutional monarchy and the multiparty system set up recently in Nepal is not the outcome of historic necessity of the development of Nepalese society but it is the result of alliance and conspiracy of domestic and foreign reactionaries to confuse the masses and defend their rule. Historical necessity of the development of the Nepalese society is the new type of bourgeois democratic revolution, which is called New Democratic revolution  . There is a great importance of understanding this fact correctly. Here the entire reactionaries and revisionists have always propagated by distorting the history of Nepal and necessity, sentiment and struggle of the Nepalese people according to their interests. Whereas, it does not at all accord with the reality.

 In this question our attention should pinpoint around two kinds of contradictions prevailing in the Nepalese society. First, the contradiction of Nepalese people with feudalism and imperialism and second, the inner contradiction among the different groups of reactionaries that exists as the contradiction among feudal, comprador and bureaucratic capitalism. As a result of the first contradiction, Nepalese people have been struggling in different forms against feudalism and imperialism since long. This trend of real struggle of the people is advancing but the repression, conspiracy and deception of domestic and foreign enemies have very often hampering it. Crossing over a curved line of quantitative development it is now approaching ahead to a qualitative leap. The second contradiction creates a situation that necessitates time and again to dividing power among the reactionaries and it is taking place, too. Different sections of the reactionary power have always been utilizing people’s struggle to arrive at compromise and to confuse people in order to mitigate this conflict of power division. It is known to all that the Nepalese state power today represents the interest of feudal, comprador and bureaucrat capitalist class. It does not mean that there exists single, identical and equal interest of all these three sections forever and in each question. Emphasis of feudal elements goes towards absolute monarchy for a bigger share of power for it; emphasis of bureaucrat capitalists, according to the development of the situation goes towards maintaining collaboration between feudal and imperialist elements and in trying to find a bigger share as an exchange for it; whereas that of comprador bourgeoisie is to ensure bigger share in the power by representing directly the imperialist interests, showing the mask of parliamentary democracy and running fascist rule. But, according to the specificity of imperialism and proletarian revolution, there always exists uniformity in the basic interest among them.

 We should understand the course of development of Nepalese society and today’s situation by centering on the aforesaid contradictions. Politically, when the king yells about nationalism in fact he demands feudal autocracy; when the Congress talks of democracy in reality it represents imperialist agents; when the question comes of coordinating nationalism and democracy it in fact represents bureaucrat capitalism. If one looks at deeply the course of events since 1949 here the role of bureaucratic capitalist has been principal and decisive. This type of role of bureaucratic capitalism that has emerged through coupling of feudalism and imperialism is in general found in all the oppressed countries of the world. The key of the leadership rests with in understanding the regressive character of bureaucratic capitalism and finding correctly its course of development and crisis in order for leading, developing and driving the Nepalese revolution to victory. Unfortunately, the right opportunism that is dominant in the Nepalese communist movement has been trailing behind the king when the question of nationalism comes up, the Congress when the question of democracy arises and helping the bureaucratic capitalism when the question of coordination between both appears. Consequently, the repeated current of people’s struggles, being deprived of the correct leadership, has been forced to terminate in conspiracy and deception. As the climax of that right opportunism the UML coterie is now representing the interest of bureaucratic capitalism. Today, the extreme crisis and uncertainty that are being discussed in the national politics, is in fact the manifestation of the crisis of bureaucratic capitalism. Plainly, it means that both the feudalism and imperialism are in extreme crisis in Nepal. It is clear from this the Nepalese society is standing at the threshold of a radical change. There exist no other way to save the Nepalese society from being liquidated than to make revolution. In this context what is our claim is that this conclusion which comes out when looked at the development process of Nepalese society on the basis of historical materialism of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is of great revolutionary significance. It is also our claim that this conclusion has opened up door to fulfill the proletarian responsibility of leading revolution by decisively attacking upon right opportunism of the Nepalese communist movement that relishes in petty reforms and conspiracies carried out to hold off crisis of the reactionary power.

 Let us now try to inspect history in brief on the basis of aforesaid viewpoint.

 The establishment of centralized feudal state power by unifying the tiny Baise, Chaubise states that had been obstructive to the necessities of people’s business, increasing economic activities and security needs, and its augmenting expansionist activities as well had obviously become intolerable for the British imperialism, which was going forward to establish unopposed colony by swallowing hundreds of feudal kings in India. Apart from this, it was further necessary for the British to bring Nepal in their track, also for the reason that the feudal state established in Nepal was automatically and obviously anti-British in the initial period of its founding.

 The feudal kings in Nepal since the formation of feudal state started enjoying luxurious life, merry making and accumulating property for their future generations, whereas the dreadful incidents of conspiracies and murders went on intensifying among the palatial officials for post, prestige and possession. In this background war situation developed between Nepal and the British.

Unprecedented heroism, devotion, sacrifice and valor that the Nepalese people demonstrated in the war against the several times more powerful Britishers has established glory of Nepalese people in the world. But, it was not possible for the feudal power to fight a war of protracted nature against the powerful British colonialism. Consequently, in the situation of the then power balance, it was obvious for the Nepalese to be defeated in the positional war. Finally, despite opposition of patriotic Nepalese and several of erstwhile officials the feudal king and officials agreed to the shameful Sugauli Treaty even by abandoning a big part of land.

 Natural pace of development of Nepal has been obstructed since the Sugauli Treaty. Since this time, Nepal came to be a near direct colony. Since this time, the process of open  intervention started in each of the internal affairs of Nepal. Since this time, Nepalese feudal rulers started working as slaves of imperialism. In other words, since this time, dual exploitation of feudalism and imperialism has been victimizing the Nepalese people. Despite there having been a lot of political changes and ups and downs from Sugauli Treaty onwards till the foundation of social-economic structures that the treaty had established at that time is still prevalent. Today’s Nepal, which is victim of economic dependency, political uncertainty and cultural distortion, has its root in the same economic and political structures established at that time. Whatever name and form of the system and government come into being no development of independent economy, politics and culture can take place within this structure. It has been proved by history that one party, multi party, party-less, Congress, Pancha or UML whoever ascends to power the future of the country and people will go on being darkened. To destroy this structure means to destroy feudalism and imperialism. In today’s reality, to destroy this structure means to accomplish New Democratic revolution.

 When the erstwhile patriots including Bhimsen Thanpa, who were feeling humiliated from this Treaty, were trying to build up a united front with Afghanistan, Punjab and also China against the British robbers to fight another war, the capitulationist feudal king of Nepal and other elements, hatching various conspiracies, murdered Bhimsen Thapa and others. After this, an unopposed rule of totally British agents started running in the palace. In this course, the emergence of Janga Bahadur fulfilled the necessity of a powerful representative that pushed the alliance of feudalism and imperialism in Nepal forward. Since then, the feudal rulers have been suppressing totally the patriotic sentiment of the Nepalese people.

 Following the role of rising proletariat in the international political arena, worldwide message of the Great Proletarian Socialist Revolution in Russia, successfully advancing New Democratic revolutions in China and other countries and defeat of the fascists in World War II originated an unprecedented wave of mass-awakening among the oppressed masses of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Flame of mass struggle against the British flared up in India. Finally such a situation developed in India in which British could not stay in an old fashion. The British were compelled to depart from India by arranging to maintain its semi colony in place of a direct colony. But the class character of the new government that was established in India remained that of feudal, comprador and bureaucratic capitalism. Indian faces, running reactionary rule with the British blessing succeeded to stop the flame of mass struggle by giving illusion of independence.

 Nepal also could not remain untouched from the influence of aforesaid international political environment. Consequently, people’s fury started being expressed in Nepal against the atrocity conducted under the coalition of feudal Kings and Ranas. The new rulers in India wanted their own direct agents in Nepal not those of the British. The Indian rulers, who were misguiding peoples in the name of democracy, succeeded step by step to develop Nepali Congress as an honest servant to fulfill that necessity.

 Meanwhile, struggles of the Nepalese people were advancing in different forms against feudal brutality. In order to suppress it the King and Rana unitedly started killing cruelly the heroic sons and daughters of the Nepalese people. In this context, one must not forget that the erstwhile King Tribhuwan himself had agreed to and approved of the assassination of Gangalal. What can there be a bigger hypocrisy and joke on the people other than to propagate the King, who approved of killing the promising youths fighting against Rana’s despotism as the father of democracy? This kind of totalitarian repression and murder further intensified fury of the people. The reactionary forces in and outside of the country were becoming active to utilize people’s anger in favor of their interest. The Communist Party, which was a mere baby organized a short while ago, was unable practically to lead people’s anger. Consequently, the Nepali Congress that used to plead democracy and operate under the gesture of Indian expansionist ruling classes succeeded in the then situation to impart illusion of being democratic among the peoples to a great extent.

 The King, who was watching at the events closely, tried at that occasion acquiring a part of the power, which was transferred into  Ranas’ hands. This task was impossible without the help of Indian new rulers and the slogan of democracy was required to obtain assistance from them. Also it was necessary to be prepared for showing sympathy towards people and shedding crocodile tears.
 All of these dramas were over, and in order to decide the destiny of Nepalese people’s struggle and aspiration of being liberated from the feudal tyranny, a infamous  tripartite Delhi Agreement took place at Delhi palace among the King, the Ranas and the Nepali Congress under the guardianship of India. This Agreement accomplished the task of confusing people by using the political too of “democracy” and concluded a new division of power among feudal, comprador and bureaucratic capitalist classes in accordance with the changed world situation. Nepalese people’s necessity and aspiration were trampled upon.

 In order to confuse the masses and cool down people’s fury, the feudal king, becoming a messiah of democracy declared to elect the “constituent assembly” and rule in accordance with the constitution adopted by it. But he never initiated to execute it. Why? For, the king wanted to impose autocracy upon the people. Ultimately, the King imposed his totalitarian rule upon the people by staging different kinds of dramas from 1950 to 1960.  From 1960 to 1990, the King enforced his absolute power of loot by raising attractive slogans like, “revolutionary land reform”, “new civil code”, “back to village”, and “zone of peace“ and ”Asian standard”. During this period, the Nepalese people went on struggling one after another against such deception and conspiracy of the King. Thousands of brave sons and daughters of Nepalese people attained martyrdom during this period. Finally, the Nepalese people in 1990 encircled the palace with the slogan of end to monarchy. Another conspiracy was hatched in the palace against the aspiration, slogan and feeling expressed in the mass struggle. Alliance took place among the King, the Congress and the so-called left front. The reactionaries succeeded to disorient people’s struggle by declaring multiparty under monarchy and by introducing some reforms in the reactionary state power. Again, taking into account of the changed world situation, heightening consciousness of the Nepalese people and the situation of struggle, a new division of power took place among feudal, comprador and bureaucratic capitalism. A little of autocracy of feudal elements was snatched, a little of power was stretched out to comprador bourgeoisie and the bureaucratic capitalism, by playing a decisive role of coordinating between these two according to the situation, strengthened its position in the power further. The constitutional monarchy and multiparty system, in a country like ours, is nothing other than the system of compromise between feudalism and imperialism. The multiparty system is assumed to be one step forward only for the reason that more opportunity is available to intensify class struggle within this compared to the Panchayati period. It is not for the reason that it does not resolve even the least of basic problems of the country and people, what it can do is to make those problems further dreadful and horrible. The activities of the past six years have practically clarified this fact before us.

 Exactly at this point, what confusion the reactionaries and revisionists are trying to impart upon people is that the comprador and bureaucratic capitalism is national capitalism and the constitutional monarchy and multiparty system is identical to anti-feudal bourgeois republican system of the period of European bourgeois revolution developing national capital. The fact they exercise to hide is that, firstly, the parliamentary system has been completely regressive and fascist system in today’s world. This system has already become a hypocritical one that puts seals to legalize genocide and loot of the imperialists. Secondly, in a backward country like Nepal, the parliamentary system today is a hybrid and artificial system that operates in the service of imperialism and maintains coalition with feudalism. They completely hide the historical fact that the capitalism has developed to the state of monopoly capitalism, i.e. imperialism, and that the bourgeois democratic revolution cannot take place in an old fashion in the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution. In a country like ours, meaning of supporting the constitutional monarchy and multiparty system in any form means only to deceive the people and serve feudalism and imperialism. The entire reactionaries, revisionists and opportunists are forcefully emphasizing to cover up this reality.

 What is our conclusion in this context is that, first, the semi-feudal and semi-colonial political structure, which was established since Sugauli Treaty, is still prevalent. This structure has been completely rotten. Problems of nationalism, democracy and people’s livelihood have become aggravated because of this rotten structure. Second, the bureaucratic capitalism of which the seed was sown from Sugauli Treaty and had been developing intensively since 1950 is passing through a state of serious crisis today. It is maturing objective condition for the revolution. Third, the Nepalese parliamentary system is coming up as the imperialist conspiracy of confusing and frustrating the people’s rising consciousness and struggle not as an obvious necessity of development of Nepalese society. Fourth, the reactionary, revisionist and opportunist political groups are helping directly or indirectly to imperialist conspiracy and are working as their pawn of it. Fifth, a deep repulsion is developing among the Nepalese people towards the monarchial parliamentary system and its electoral drama. And the necessity, desire and consciousness for the radical change is intensively increasing. Sixth, in the course of long ideological and class struggle our Party C. P. N. (Maoist) that represents the necessity, desire and consciousness of Nepalese people has been developed.