"Correctness or otherwise of the ideological and political line decides everything. If it is correct, everything is gained, but if it wrong, everything is lost." -Mao Tse-tung
With its originality and grandeur, the People's War has completed its five memorable years and is entering the sixth. Through its rapid development process, it is entering an entirely new and higher stage of achievements and challenges during this period. The ideological synthesis of the experiences of those five years on the basis of universal principles of invincible Marxism-Leninism-Maoism has been necessary for the continuation and further development of the Nepalese revolution and to serve the world revolution as well. Needless to say, this synthesis shall be based on lofty objectives of furthering the world revolution in the 21st century, learning lessons from both world communist movement and Nepalese communist movement. Moreover, it shall be the synthesis of achievements gained through initiatives and active participation of millions of Masses in the historical and great process of People's War. Lastly, it shall be the rehearsal of the great leap forward. This National Conference held amidst the People's War shall, in keeping with the gravity and broadness of the question, draw correct conclusions through broad and serious discussion in a fully democratic environment, and, ultimately, be indisputably successful.
Hearty Homage to the Great and Immortal Martyr
The toiling masses have been forging ahead the struggles for thousands of years in various forms and levels against all kinds of discrimination, exploitation, oppression and atrocities by men on men. The human society has reached the capitalist era from slave and feudal era in course of incessant process of class struggle, struggle for production and scientific experiment. As an inevitable consequence, modem proletarian class emerged together with the capitalist era. The emergence of this last and revolutionary class of history produced Marxism, which is, in fact, the supreme synthesis of the knowledge and experiences of the human beings and ideology of the proletariat. For the first time in history, Marxism consciously established the right of the proletariat and toiling masses to rebel against the right of exploiting classes to exploit, which they had been enjoying for thousands of years. Besides, it drew a scientific conclusion that the ultimate result of this rebellion shall be the founding of communism in the world.
Together with Marxism as an historical invention of the proletariat, the class struggle began shaking the whole earth. In the process of the class struggle, the proletariat developed its ideology from Marxism to the level of Marxism- Leninism-Maoism. During the turbulent years of class struggle, the proletariat and working people have set unparalleled records of dedication and sacrifice for the achievement of lofty goals of communist ideals. And they are still on their voyage to reach their ultimate destination, synthesizing the triumphs and defeats of the class struggles.
As an inseparable part of world proletarian revolution, the People's War led by Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), a vanguard of the Nepalese proletarian class, has been going on in Nepal for the last 5 years. Hundreds of Nepalese heroes and heroines have shed their blood in order to bring the great process of achieving the great ideals of communism to this height. In particular, more than 1,500 people including the Alternate Politburo Member of Central Committee of our Party, Com. Suresh Wagle (Basu), first child martyr Dil Bahadur Ramtel, Tirtha Gautam, Bijaya Ghale, Lali Roka, Kamla Bhatta etc. have sacrificed their invaluable lives in this context. This Second National Conference pays hearty homage to all the martyrs of the People's War and resolutely expresses its commitments to fight till the end against the enemies in order to materialize their dreams. Moreover, the Conference pays tributes to Chiniya Kaji, Bhim Datta Pant, Kami Budha, the martyrs of Harre-Barre, Jugedi and Jutpani, and Rishi Devkota "Ajad", Rambrikshya Yadav, the martyrs of Jhapa revolt, and all known and unknown martyrs of historical mass movements of 1980 and 1990 who sacrificed their lives in the fight against feudalism and imperialism before the People's War was initiated in Nepal.
With full commitment to and solidarity with proletarian internationalism, the Second National Conference of the Party pays tributes to all the martyrs of Peru, India, the Philippines, Turkey, Iran, Columbia, Bangladesh and others who gave their lives in order to advance the world revolution.
International Communist Movement and its Historical Lessons
Born together with capitalism, the proletariat is the last, revolutionary and international class of history. In Europe, its emergence and struggle against capitalism paved the way for founding of Marxism. Of extraordinary talent, Karl Marx along with his very intimate friend, Frederick Engels, discovered the world outlook of the proletariat - the dialectical and historical materialism. Known as Marxism, this scientific discovery was nothing but in essence a supreme synthesis of the experience and knowledge the mankind achieved in thousands of years. This science synthesized with a revolutionary objective of transforming the world, and not merely explaining it, brought an unprecedented revolution in the thinking of mankind, and provided a scientific device to understand and transform the world, and to fight against all kinds of dogmas, superstitions & evils of the society.
Marxism proved irrefutably how a particular production relation is established among the people with the development of productive forces in the process of production and reproduction for fulfillment of material needs, and how total development of history after the stage of primitive communism is the history of class struggle as determined by definite scientific laws. This is the allegation of historical materialism against total history.
Exposing the real cause of capitalist exploitation and accumulation of capital in the hands of a handful of capitalists in society, Marx put forward the great theory of surplus value. Also, Marxism made it clear how capitalism has created a vicious circle of exploitation by turning the human labor into a non-living thing in order to make more profits, and, at the same time, how it is developing huge army of modern proletarian class and is ultimately digging its own grave.
Considering the unprecedented development of productive forces and the contradiction between socialization of production process and private appropriation of production, Marxism explained the coming into existence of the responsibility for social revolution on the shoulder of the proletariat and put forward a scientific ideal of golden communist society by demolishing the classes and states and ending all kinds of exploitation of men by men. Marx and Engels laid foundation of basic principles relating to the strategy of the proletariat to be pursued for the achievement of great ideals of communist society. In sum, fundamental views on the dictatorship of proletariat and socialist state as an inevitable need for the transitional period from capitalism to communism, need of violent revolution, need of the destruction of the old capitalist state, concept of development of armed masses, were presented. In his whole life, Engels fought vigorously against the bourgeois trends appearing in the worker's movement to establish this scientific view.
Against the concept of bourgeois nationalism developed for security and need of the market, Marxism upheld the banner of proletarian internationalism. Chanting the slogan "Workers of all countries, unite!" loudly, the first Communist International was founded with initiative of and under the leadership of Marx and Engels. It spread the scientific ideas of' “Communist Manifesto" among the workers and, simultaneously, fought vigorously against various opportunist trends appearing in the International Communist Movement. It is in this context that in Paris (France), the proletariat, for the first time in history, seized the state through armed revolt. Renowned as "Paris Commune" all over the world, this historical revolt not only justified the basic principles of Marxism but also helped Marx and Engels to refine it with the synthesis of the experiences. Though lasting for a short period of only 72 days due to its inherent mistakes, Marx and Engels declared that its experiences would live forever.
It is particularity remarkable that the views of Marx and Engels on the Paris Commune have been working as a historical inspiration even today to identify and fight against revisionism and opportunism in the communist movement. Due to the defeat of Paris Commune and conspiracy of opportunists within, the First Communist International was dissolved. However, after the death of Marx and as per need of new situation, the Second Communist International was formed again under the leadership of Engels in 1889, which played a significant role in disseminating Marxism in the primary stage. But after Engel’s death, the leaders of the Second International, mainly Karl Kautsky, knelt before the bourgeois parliamentarism and betrayed revolutionary principles of Marxism. In course of the hard struggle against reformism and parliamentarism a Bolshevik Party and revolutionary struggle of a new type developed under the leadership of Lenin and socialist revolution was completed in Russia in 1917. During the life and death struggle against revisionism for the defense of its scientific and revolutionary teachings, Marxism developed into Marxism-Leninism. Lenin highly stressed that there can be no struggle against reaction unless it is linked with that against opportunism. He elevated the philosophy of dialectical materialism to a new height. The fact that the principle of unity and struggle of opposites is the only fundamental principle of dialectics was further explained. By analyzing and researching on the characteristics of imperialism, Lenin contributed qualitatively in the field of political economy and defined the new era as the "era of imperialism and proletarian revolution" which made a great contribution in devising the strategy and tactics of revolution. His analyses, which were well justified by later events, are equally correct even today. Lenin not only enriched Marxism on total aspects of scientific socialism including the concept of a new party, strategy of socialist revolution, struggle against revisionism, uniting peasants for revolution in the backward countries and significance of full democratic revolution, proletarian view on right of nations to self- determination, proletarian revolution to lead the national liberation movement in the eastern countries, development and struggle of the workers and masses in capitalist countries developed into the imperialist stage, but also elevated it to a new height of development.
The success of Great October Socialist Revolution created unprecedented waves in the world. The masses oppressed for centuries felt that they had found out a new way to real liberation. Fiercely resisting the outlook of the imperialists and reactionaries, the Third International was formed with the initiative and under the leadership of Lenin in 1919 in order to forge ahead the world revolution in an organized way. Taking Soviet socialist state founded in a very large part of the earth as a base area, he gave emphasis on advancing the world revolution. The revolution of Germany among the developed countries and the issue of the same in the countries like India, China among the undeveloped countries was seriously thought over. Declaring that the proletarian revolution in backward countries with a majority of peasants is "very hard and great," he emphasized on applying general principles of communism in accordance with concrete situation of the country concerned. Eventually, a concept of "National Democratic Revolution" was put forward as it required to fight against colonial and semi-colonial exploitation, too, in such countries. However, Lenin emphasized that communist revolutionaries of the countries concerned must work out and develop the strategy of revolution themselves. At this juncture, particular attention must be paid to the stress given by Comintern led by Lenin on the significance of creative application of general principles of proletarian internationalism and Marxism in accordance with the national characteristics of such countries.
At a time, when the struggles are still needed in the international communist movement against the trend which, even today, represents, on the one hand, sectarian nationalism on the pretext of national characteristics, and, on the other, the Trotskyist trend which undermines national characteristics on the pretext of internationalism, its significance is evident.
After the death of Lenin, Stalin led the international communist movement. He served proletarian movement by undertaking historical tasks such as defeating the right liquidationism which emerged in the form of so-called permanent revolution of Zenoviev, Kamenov and, mainly, Trotsky; establishing Leninism; strengthening Soviet Union by collective farming and planned economic development; knocking the Hitlerian fascism to the ground in the Second World War; synthesizing the experiences of Soviet economic development, and leading the whole international communist movement for about three decades.
Nevertheless, the fact that many serious weaknesses prevailed in Stalin and eventually, they caused some serious problems should not go unheeded. While doing so, our starting point should be, of course Stalin's evaluation made by Mao, in which he has divided his thoughts and works into two aspects and declared 70 percent of them correct and 30 percent wrong.
Advancing on the basis of general guideline about revolution in the colonial and semi-colonial countries of pre-capitalist stage as put forward by Lenin during the initial period of Third International and greatly influencing the international power balance, the New Democratic revolution was completed successfully in China. The successful revolution in a huge area with the largest population in the world through struggles of decades, presented a new model for revolution in the semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries of pre-capitalist stage. As Lenin had called for, Communist Party of China led by Mao undertook the "great and difficult" task of revolution in an eastern country by creatively applying the universal principles of Marxism-Leninism in their own specificities. In this context, Communist Party of China led by Mao enriched and developed the Marxist science. The theory and knowledge of contradiction in philosophy, analysis of bureaucratic capitalism in political economy, development of strategy for New Democratic revolution and universal principle of People's War, concrete concept of Party, army and united front, clearly show the enrichment of Marxism-Leninism.
During the process of revolution, Mao had to fight hard against right and 'left' opportunism of various kinds and the elements who wanted to mechanically copy the foreign experiences, such as Li Li San, Wang Ming, Chang Kuo -Tao etc. When pondered deeply , Mao's struggle against Li Li San, Wang Ming etc., seems, in essence, to be related to the struggle against many mechanical materialist thinking and working styles of Stalin and Comintern, though he never disclosed it. Mao had called upon the people to be alert against the threat of mechanical materialist and metaphysical thinking that existed in the Communist Party of China and international communist movement not only through his policy of unity and struggle worked out in the case of united front but also through his great works like " On Contradictions", "On Practice", "Reform Your Studies", "Rectify Working Style", "On New Democracy" etc.
In the international communist movement, Mao defined the Party as a unity of opposites, and not as a monolithic and homogenous unity, and clarified that two-line struggle inside the Party is, in deed, always the motivating force for the Party life. In addition, clarifying the inter-relation between class struggle in society and two-line struggle in the Party, he presented scientific explanation about the fact that as long as classes are there, the Party exists and as long as the Party exists, ideological struggle prevails. He declared the concept of monolithic unity as anti-dialectical and flatly rejected it. His view on Party added a new dimension to the Leninist view of militant Party of a new type. According to Mao, a struggle between the right and wrong ideas always runs inside the Party and at a certain stage, wrong ideas appear as revisionism and take in turn into a hostile struggle with the revolutionaries. If non-proletarian ideas prevail in the Party, the whole Party changes its colour. Therefore, the revolutionaries should continuously revolutionize the Party through two-line struggles.
Thus, the Chinese revolution based on Marxist-Leninist thoughts goaded millions of workers and peasants to be the masters of their own destiny. Communist Party of China led by Mao put forward a programme for socialist revolution right after the success of New Democratic Revolution under the leadership of the proletariat. In this historical process of socialist revolution, the contradictions between the revolutionaries and the people who had been influenced by the bourgeois character of New Democratic Revolution and joined the revolution, intensified. Right at that period, Stalin died in Soviet Union. The Khruschovite revisionism seized the leadership in the 20th Congress in a counter-revolutionary coup in the Soviet Union, and capitalism was restored. The Khruschov clique was successful to overturn socialism and dictatorship of the proletariat in the pretext of struggle against personality cult of Stalin. This event shocked the revolutionaries all over the world. Terrorizing with nuclear arms the clique rejected the decisive role of the people in the making of history. The renegade Khruschovite clique advocated class conciliation instead of class struggle in the name of “three peacefuls". He cloaked his blatant advocacy of bourgeois parliamentarism with the possibility arisen from the changed world situation. Encouraged by the restoration of capitalism in Russia, the Chinese rightists intensified their attack on the proletarian revolutionaries in the Party. The Peng Teh-hui event is a concrete example of this.
In the face of the complex situation, Mao seriously thought over the class struggle in socialism and upheld the banner of struggle against modem revisionism of Khrushchov outside the country and right opportunism inside the Party. During the fierce struggle, Mao put forward, with a scientific analysis of class struggle in socialism, a concept of continuous revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat as the principle to prevent restoration of capitalism and led the Great Proletariat Cultural Revolution, which is considered as an unprecedented mass-revolution in the whole history of mankind. With this earth-shaking revolution, Mao armed the proletarian class with a new weapon to prevent the restoration of capitalism in the socialist society. This great contribution established Mao as the propounder of a new, third and higher stage of Marxism, i.e. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. This great revolution prevented restoration of capitalism in China for 10 years. Notwithstanding the success of capitalist- roaders to restore capitalism in China through counter-revolutionary plots due to various national and international reasons after Mao's death, the significance of the principle he developed has not declined at all, but, instead, it has grown as a beacon for future revolutions.
What is notable here is that Mao, after the Khruschov clique succeeded in restoring capitalism in the Soviet Union without any serious resistance, fought, on the one hand, to safeguard the achievements of the first socialist state of the world, and on the other, persevered seriously in studying the weaknesses which caused such an irreparable loss, It is in this context that we must understand his defense of Stalin against the attack of Khrushchov clique, and explanation of various mistakes and weaknesses of him. Mao's evaluation of Stalin stands apart against both rightist revisionism that negates him completely, and sectarian dogmatist revisionism that accepts even his mistakes and weaknesses. In the international communist movement, the former trend is led by Trotsky, Tito, Khruschev etc., while, the latter trend is led by Enver Hoxa, etc. Another important point to note is that the Euro-Communism, on the pretext of opposing Stalin's concept of monolithic unity and bureaucracy, began opposing unified dialectical materialist science of Marxism itself from bourgeois anarchist pluralist angle.
When the debate was going on in the international communist movement and Khruschov, the ring-leader of modern revisionism, along with imperialism was simultaneously defaming Stalin from counter-revolutionary angle, it was but necessary to defend Stalin emphasizing his essentially correct and positive aspects. Doing so did not mean defending him alone but also the whole communist movement, socialism, and in all, Marxism-Leninism itself. But today things have changed greatly; the Khruschov revisionism, later turning into social imperialism, has fallen completely with the dissolving of the Soviet Union. In China, the Chinese Khruschovites have usurped power through a counter-revolutionary coup and restored capitalism after Com. Mao's death. Today there isn't even a single socialist state in the world.
At this moment, the revolutionaries all over the world are free, without any political pressure, to draw the essence of the experiences of history, and a great responsibility bas been laid on their shoulder, to fulfill which they must work hard, no doubt. In this context, we must go into the depth of what has been mentioned in the very beginning of the letter entitled " The Question of Stalin" during the Great Debate launched by the Communist Party of China led by Mao against the Khruschov revisionism. It states, "The question of Stalin is one of world-wide importance which has had repercussions among all classes in every country and which is still a subject of much discussion today, with different classes and their political parties and groups taking different views. It is likely that no final verdict can be reached on this question in the present century". The century as stated by the Communist Party of China led by Mao has ended and twenty-first century has already started. We must focus our attention on defending Stalin's 70 percent positive contributions and drawing lessons from his 30 percent errors. As elsewhere stated in the same article, "It would be beneficial if the errors of Stalin, which were only secondary, are taken as historical lessons so that... the Communists might take warning and avoid repeating those errors or commit fewer errors". Another important point is that his errors contain two aspects - the errors committed inevitably due to lack of experience of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the errors caused by ideological mistakes. It was not possible to prevent the former errors but the latter ones could be.
Listing the errors of Stalin, it is stated in the same article of Great Debate, "In his way of thinking, Stalin departed from dialectical materialism and fell into metaphysics and subjectivism on certain questions and consequently he was sometimes divorced from reality and from the masses. In struggles inside as well as outside the Party, on certain occasions and on certain questions he confused two types of contradictions, which are different in nature, contraction between the enemy and us and contractions among the people, and also confused the different methods needed in handling them. In the work led by Stalin of suppressing the counter-revolution, many counter- revolutionaries deserving punishment were duly punished, but at the same time there were innocent people who were wrongly convicted; and in 1937 and 1938 there occurred the error of enlarging the scope of the suppression of counter- revolutionaries. In the matter of Party and government organization, he did not fully apply proletarian democratic centralism and, to some extent, violated it. In handing relations with fraternal Parties and countries he made some mistakes. He also gave some bad counsel in the international communist movement. These mistakes caused some losses to the Soviet Union and the international communist movement".
In the background of experiences of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, Maoism and contemporary international communist movement, what is evident today is the fact that although he was a great Marxist-Leninist, Stalin's ideological mistakes have substantially influenced the world communist movement subjectively. Categorically speaking, he had some weaknesses in his thinking of understanding and dealing with fundamental principles of dialectics, the unity and struggle of opposite. Taking the Communist Party as a monolithic unity, instead of unity of opposites, led him to errors in identifying the nature, relations and ways of dealing of two-line struggle inside the Party. As a result, it was declared, on the ground of rapid economic growth through elimination of private ownership, collective farming and industrialization, that there was no hostile class- contradiction in the Soviet society, which violated basic principles of Marxism- Leninism. Such analysis made Stalin think one-sidedly that threat to the Soviet society may occur from external intervention and conspiracy only. The emphasis on possibility of counter-revolution from external intervention and conspiracy, instead of paying adequate attention on how new capitalism is produced within the Communist Party itself in the Soviet society and how to control them, violated at times Lenin's basic postulates on the relation between building of socialism in one country and the development of world revolution, developed at the initial period of the Comintern. Though there was no ill intention at all, the emphasis on safeguarding the Soviet society from external threat virtually undermined internationalism and exaggerated Russian nationalism, which created a lot of confusions about understanding and advancing the world revolution and functioning of the Comintern. It is to be remembered that Lenin, while forming the Comintern, had stressed the concept of world revolution and world Communist Party and everything would be subsumed under it, but under the leadership of Stalin, the world revolution was considered as a part of Soviet society, instead of vice versa. This is what Mao has pointed out as wrong advice of Stalin on the international communist movement.
Stalin took collective farming, industrialization and rapid development of production and productive forces due to centralized planning in the economic field as enough grounds for the guarantee of the success of socialism and kept on stressing on it one-sidedly. It undermined the importance of resolving differences prevailing in the society and revolutionizing the production relations. This helped in developing a new bourgeois class, which was represented later by counter-revolutionary Khrushchovite clique from inside the Party and thus established the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie by overturning that of the proletariat.
Drawing lessons from the errors of Stalin due to historical limitations and ideological weaknesses, Mao studied seriously the economic policy and pointed out its positive and negative aspects to elevate the Marxist-Leninist principles regarding the class-struggle in a socialist society to a new height in order to prevent restoration of capitalism and presented a new model of socialist economy that required one to be red and expert and to walk with two legs, etc. Collective ownership of production alone does not guarantee the success of socialism because many kinds of differences such as mental and physical labour, city & village, capitalist stage of the production of commodities, etc., still exist in the society which continue to provide material ground for growth of new capitalist class. Therefore, Mao made it clear that characteristics of both communism and capitalism exist in socialism and there remains the danger of capitalist restoration. He aptly presented the scientific truth that march towards communism is possible by regulating capitalism through the process of continuous revolution after the proletariat sizes the political state power.
On the basis of this principle he led the people to exercise the right to rebel against the capitalist- roaders of the Party who advocated the Khrushovite line, which claimed that it was good to be rich. He drew a clear demarcation line between the Marxist revolutionaries and revisionists with the principle of 3 Dos and Don'ts: 'Practice Marxism, not revisionism; Unite, do not split; Be open and above board, do not conspire and intrigue'. With the slogan, "Bombard the bourgeois headquarter," he called upon the people to invade the fort of the revisionists. During the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, through the struggle against the renegades Liu Shao-chi, Lin Piao, and Teng Hsiao-ping, he further developed the dialectical method of achieving new unity on a new basis in the Party through a process of unity-struggle-transformation and emphasized the need to form Party committees according to the principle of 3 in 1 with olds, adults and youths in order to transfuse new blood in the Party. However, it was not possible to sweep away all the rightists who had reached higher echelons in the Party and government, because of several negative impacts of international communist movement, historical limitation of class struggle and since it had been virtually late in exposing them. But it has enhanced the importance of the principle developed. Some people do not realize the complexity of the Cultural Revolution period and blame Mao for a number of compromises in the later period, which is completely wrong. He had been promoting the rise of revolutionaries including Chiang Ching, Chiang Chun- chiao as a revolutionary core in the Party. He was in fact, leading the so-called Gang of Four and was the most farsighted.
In this regard, an important question may be raised: why didn't he take any initiative for building a new Communist International, though he had experience of waging historical struggle against Khrushchovite revisionism and conducting the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution? In reply, several negative experiences of the Comintern in the latest period might be put forward but that simply can't be the major factor. As a matter of fact, Mao had been ideologically leading the international communist movement by waging struggle against Khrushchovite revisionism and leading the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, and by supporting, co-operating with and disseminating the national liberation, New Democratic and socialist revolutions all over the world. But objectively there were some serious practical difficulties in giving them an organized form. Among the visible ones were dogmatist revisionist, centrist and chauvinist Communist Parties of Albania, Vietnam and North Korea etc. who would reject the universal contributions of Mao. And it was not possible to form the Communist International by ignoring all of them at that time. But today the situation has changed greatly. There is not even a single socialist state in the world. Genuine revolutionaries have upheld Maoism as higher stage of Marxism-Leninism. New wave of revolution appears in the horizon. Now, Marxism- Leninism-Maoism is there as an ideological foundation for the creation of a new Communist International. All the communist revolutionaries need to march forward seriously to give it an organized form through class and ideological struggle. Today RIM has already emerged as an embryo of. Everybody has to attempt to refine and develop it. Special attention must be paid to conduct discussions and interactions with revolutionaries outside the RIM and uniting them in the movement.
While doing so, the communist revolutionaries should seriously look into the experiences of the Comintern and try to resolve the issues of evaluation of 7th Congress of Comintern, Second World War and dissolving of Comintern, suggestions given to the Communist Parties of several countries to form government with anti-fascist bourgeoisie and Lenin's criticism of Millerandism, the position of Communist Parties of Greece, Italy, France, Spain, India, China etc. and Stalin's role, etc. These questions lie in front of the international communist movement as challenges. Maoism has already provided the scientific basis for the answers to these questions. Therefore, the communist revolutionaries of the world need to accelerate the initiative to learn from the positive and negative experiences of the past by applying Maoism.
Some Fundamental Characteristics of the International Situation
The analysis of basic characteristics of imperialism made by Lenin just before the great Russian October Revolution is still correct. Accordingly, the world is in the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution even today. In today's world, there are four kinds of basic contradictions: the contradiction between bourgeois and proletariat, the inter-imperialist contradiction for profit and plunder, the contradiction between imperialism and oppressed countries and people, and the contradiction between the capitalist system and socialist system. Among them, the fourth is not in the surface now but as per the past experience and for future guarantee, we must take it into account continuously The socialist revolution comes out of the first contradiction and that is its solution. The second contradiction leads to world war for re-division of the world but is not permanently resolved. As Mao has said, the proletariat should attempt to prevent the world war as far as possible, but if unsuccessful, they should work out the policy to turn the world war into world revolution. The third contradiction leads to the national liberation movements and the contradiction ends with its success.
Among them, the contradiction between imperialism and oppressed countries and people is the principal world contradiction today The Party should be clear about some important ideological and political questions as regards to deciding about the principal world contradiction, because a wrong trend to undermine and neglect the historical significance of national liberation movement and label it as a sectarian nationalism has been prevailing in the international communist movement. Moreover, the Trotskyist and, chiefly, Khruschovite revisionism has influenced it to a great extent. The first thing to note here is that, in the course of development of the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution while founding of Russian socialism and forming the Comintern in order to advance the world revolution and formulation of its strategies, Lenin had stated that the proletarian revolution and national liberation movement should fuse into each other and the fusion would be a historically important task. Imperialism has been blocking socialist revolution by creating an aristocratic class even within the working class with a portion of their unaccountable profits extracted through merciless exploitation and plunder of the masses of colonial and semi-colonial countries of the world. Therefore, Lenin, paying due attention to the importance of incorporating national liberation movement within the proletarian movement, forwarded the slogan, "Workers and oppressed people of the world, unite!" He concentrated maximum attention on the national liberation movements of the oppressed countries including India, China. On the basis of this analysis of Lenin, Mao developed in the world proletarian movement a total concept of the significance and the question of leadership of the national liberation movement.
Imperialism has been maximizing the exploitation, oppression and political suppression of the people of oppressed countries by using their reactionary ruling classes. It has been reducing the people poorer and poorer by making use of the economy of the oppressed countries as its own integral part and drawing excessive profits through cheap labour and raw materials. That is exactly what has made the situation mature for New Democratic revolution in Asia, Africa and Latin America. This is why Mao declared these regions as storm centres of world revolution and asserted revolution as being the basic trend of the world. He proclaimed the contradiction between imperialism and oppressed nations as the principal contradiction of the world. Grasping the historical truth that national liberation movement had become the integral part of world proletarian movement, Mao developed the strategic method of establishing proletarian leadership over it. In spite of important changes in the form, Mao's analysis stands correct in essence even today. During the cold war, the Russian social imperialism and U.S. imperialism spent huge amount of money in arms for the expansion of their influence and eventually turned into superpowers. They imposed various kinds of regional wars on the oppressed countries and another world war appeared very close. But the Russian social imperialism could not maintain its old form due to the imperialist crisis and collapsed politically and economically. Ironically, the western imperialism propagated this collapse as the collapse of communism and celebrated joyously its unipolar hegemony.
This event definitely enabled the US imperialism more opportunity for direct plunder, exploitation and intervention in the "third world" and the entire world. This accelerated the unhindered mobilization of finance capital in the worldwide scale. This is what has been hailed by imperialism as 'globalization'. Through this 'globalization' imperialism has entrapped the whole economy of the oppressed countries and has been dictating and pressurizing the reactionary ruling classes of those countries to pursue the policy of liberalization in order to speed up the flow of capital. Through the economic giants like World Bank, IMF etc., imperialism has created the environment to play the role of director and controller of economic affairs of the oppressed countries. Mainly the U.S. imperialism grew more and more encouraged to amass unlimited profits by combining the unprecedented progress in science and technology, including electronics, with the cheap labour of the third world.
After all, what has been the ultimate objective result of the imperialist campaign of 'unipolar world', 'globalization' and 'liberalization' ? The experience of the last ten years has already shown the truth. This is intensifying the contradictions between different classes and between rich and poor countries. Even according to the data prepared by the imperialists (which is best manipulated to suit the interests of the authority concerned) the rich countries with only 25 percent population of the world own 80 percent of the world’s wealth, meanwhile 85 percent have only 15 percent of wealth in their hands. Today 2.5 billion people are extremely poor, 1 billion people are living their extremely miserable life below the absolute poverty line. 80 million people of the third world are forced to leave their country for their livelihood every year. More than 20 million children are forced to labour. Class contradiction is intensifying even in the imperialist countries. Even in the USA, the number one bully of the world, more than 20 million people are suffering from absolute poverty. Racial discrimination, inequality, unemployment, homelessness, social insecurity, women's oppression etc. are growing day-by-day. They bring out the resentment of the people from time to time, to suppress which the ruling classes are compelled to use special military force and devise new strategy. In Western Europe, unemployment has been institutionalized and people resort to street struggles because of shortage and inflation. Suppression, terror and religious and communal riots against people's resentment, national liberation movement and socialist movement developing everywhere in the third world countries, have been the daily routine of the imperialists and reactionaries.
The fact that their political cover bearing the signboard of parliamentary democracy has been torn to pieces has been splendidly brought about by the world events and the recently conducted drama of U.S. presidential elections. If a country advocates even a little of economic and political freedom, the imperialists take no time in imposing economic sanction against them, resorting to political pressure, and military intervention and genocide. Their intervention in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Palestine, Mexico along with other Asian, African and Latin American countries, verify this.
Imperialism has built a gigantic mechanism of military force and strategy in order to maintain the new ' world order'. The U.S. imperialism has developed military strategy 'to keep up' its global economic plunder and hegemony. According to the data of their defense budget, the U.S imperialism has allocated $262 billions in the defense alone that is almost half of that of the world. When the defense budgets of its alliance partners like NATO countries, Japan, Israel, South Korea, also are included, it exceeds 80 percent of the world. Today the USA has become the main center for arms smuggling. The US imperialism, through its military - industrial complex, has been successfully looting the world and fooling their people by parting with a small portion of its loots. It has put on alert a huge military force in the Gulf and Korean Peninsula to fight against Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, North Korea and Cuba whose total defense budget amounts to $15 billion only. As Lenin has stated about imperialism, the USA has been giving priority to its military force to continue its political and military hegemony over its alliances, and is intensifying the activities with its global military hegemony in the countries like India, China in order to capture the huge reserve of cheap labour and raw materials. On top of this its strategic alliance with the Indian expansionism has been rapidly growing and dark clouds of massive plunder and genocide in South Asia are looming larger. The opening of a FBI branch in Delhi is its evidence. These facts show the importance of Mao's concept of three worlds in the immediate tactical sense.
However, the facts have also indicated that objectively the imperialists, mainly the Yankee imperialism, have been getting fully entangled in the contradictions with the oppressed countries and people. Though there is no contention between the super-powers at present, following the end of cold war, the so-called unipolar dream is what can never come true as shown by open and disguised clashes and conflicts of economic and political interests between the USA, European community, Japan and Russia. With this crisis the possibility of revolt by millions of masses has seen intensified day-by-day.
We must pay our serious attention to the following specific situation, though created by imperialism with an evil intention of grabbing the profits in the present world. Firstly, it has guaranteed the acceleration of People's consciousness to move from the realm of necessity to that of freedom by linking high technology with cheap labour of the huge population of the masses. Secondly, with the process of globalization to grab profits, the unprecedented development in the field of information technology, mainly electronics, has narrowed down the world just to a small rural unit. Therefore, it is very likely that an event of any place will have a great positive or negative impact on the whole world and vice versa. Thirdly, the worldwide system of imperialism of producing and distributing the arms has been indirectly playing the role for technical preparation for the People's War in a worldwide scale. Fourthly, the unlimited production and globalization of the social production process has unwittingly built a material ground in a rapid way for the communist principle of work according to the capacity and distribution according to the need. Fifthly, and mainly, imperialism has been preparing a revolutionary objective situation for 80 percent people of the world by intensifying the class struggle, principally the contradiction between imperialism and oppressed countries and people to the maximum.
The objective situation of the internal contradictions of the imperialists and unequal development and distribution as per the inherent character of capitalism, will lead to the revolution in any country in Asia, Africa and Latin America, and its international importance is just evident. It magnificently justifies Mao's analysis that Asia, Africa and Latin America shall be the storm centres of revolution. These characteristics clearly indicate that 21st century shall be the century of People's Wars, and the triumph of the world socialist system. Apart from this, it also shows that there has been a significant change in the prevailing concept of model of revolution after the 1980s. Today a new fusion of the strategies of armed insurrection into the protracted People's War and that of protracted People’s War into the armed insurrection has been imperative. Without such a fusion, a genuine revolution is impossible in any country of the world today.
The historical need of today is to advance the world revolution through the means of People's War in accordance with particular characteristics of each country by developing genuine Communist Parties on the basis of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to lead the masses in different countries. This historical responsibility can't be borne until the universality of Mao's contributions for the world revolution is upheld and Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is established as its ideological commander.
The new situation has been preparing ideological and material ground for the formation of a new Communist International to advance the world revolution by learning lessons from the past experiences. RIM (Revolutionary Internationalist Movement), constituted on the principles of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to co-ordinate revolutionary movements of various countries and to advance the world revolution, is a significant step in this direction. It has been developing through experiences of revolutionary movements and ideological struggles of various countries. Serious challenges are posed before the RIM for the development of a new International, like developing an integrated understanding through scientific synthesis of the world communist movement, mainly, Comintern, second world war and Stalin's role; struggling against ultra- internationalist Trotskyist deviation that minimizes the national liberation movement, on the one hand, and ultra-nationalist deviation that undermines proletarian internationalism, on the other; co-operating to develop the genuine Maoist Parties in various countries; and uniting with all existing revolutionary Parties through struggles, etc. Facing these challenges successfully, all genuinely proletarian revolutionaries need to accelerate their initiatives for the development of a new International. What is most important is to correctly grasp the nature of contradiction between imperialism and oppressed countries and people, and establishing proletarian internationalism as the leader of national liberation movements. A world revolution isolated from the struggle to establish the worldwide significance of revolution developed in any backward country of Asia, Africa and Latin America is just impossible.
Finally, it is crystal clear from the analysis of the world situation that the world order of the imperialists is the rotten, barbarian and terrorizing system, which is but a curse for the whole mankind. Material condition for the establishment of the great ideals of communism with complete elimination of exploitation and oppression of man by man has been growing more and more mature and the political parties of the proletariat need to take initiatives from new heights in order to courageously advance the world revolution. Twenty-first century shall be the century of world revolution. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism shall be its ideological leader.
On the Situation in South Asia
South Asia, with 20 percent of the world's population, has suffered greatly from poverty, scarcity, illiteracy and unemployment due to feudal and imperialist suppression. The people of this region have been making for years a series of dedication and sacrifices in the national liberation and democratic movements for their progress and liberation. It should be comprehended that both the feudal and imperialist suppression and the just straggle of the people against it are reaching to a climax and are heading toward the decisive collision. The more the revolutionary struggle of the people intensifies, the more the reactionary ruling classes of Nepal, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh kneel down before imperialism, increase the exploitation and suppression of the people and heighten the state terror. Ruling classes of each country of this region are facing severe contradictions with the needs and aspirations of the masses. Armed national liberation movements, democratic movements and People's War are shaking the whole region. Another positive aspect of this region is the advancing Maoist revolutionary movement by posing grave challenges to the reactionary classes and presenting a concrete alternative for the masses.
The Indian monopoly capitalist ruling class, the true successor of British imperialism, has been pursuing the expansionist policy of pressure, intervention and sabotage against the national aspirations of the people and neighboring countries. It has been endeavoring to quell with guns and state terror the aspirations of the people of Kashmir and North -Eastern states and New Democratic movements in Andhra, Bihar, and intensifying pressure, sabotage and provocative activities under the strategy of making Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka as new a Sikkim. With an intention to isolate Pakistan after the end of the Cold War and fulfill its desire for regional hegemony, the Indian ruling classes have knelt down before US imperialism and have opened the door for them for merciless exploitation of the people of this region in the pretext of liberalization. The Indian ruling class has been abetting the imperialist master plan to encircle China and make it capitulate completely by taking India in its grip. It has been making blatant interventions in the internal affairs of neighboring countries in order to enthrone its agents and advance the process of 'Sikkimization'. It has been harboring plots to link the People's War in Nepal going on for five years with Pakistan, China and smugglers and thereby misleading the Indian people.
It has been the characteristic of the Indian ruling class to conspire to use the common aspirations of national democratic revolution against the semi-feudal and semi-colonial condition, distinct nature of geo-political position and economic, political, religious and cultural relations established among the people since history, to fulfill its regional hegemonistic aspirations. The Indian ruling class and its aspirations have been working behind the similar policy and nature of suppression and terrorist intrigues practiced by ruling classes of all the countries of this region. This distinct condition provides a unique nature to the need, possibility and importance of unity in the just struggle of the people of all countries of this region. Theoretically, the possibility of direct fusion of national liberation movement and proletarian movement, as stated by Lenin, can also be witnessed here. Due to the particularities of economic, political, cultural and geographical condition and the unchallenged hold of Indian monopoly capitalism, it will be very difficult for any single country of this region to successfully complete the new national democratic revolution and even if it succeeds following the distinct contradictions, it will be almost impossible for it to survive. The revolutionaries need to seriously concentrate on the fact that a particular country or a particular territory of a country shall be liberated through the force of common and joint struggle of the people of this region following the unequal stage of development, and that can play only a particular role of base-area for the revolution in the whole region.
Right here, all the revolutionaries of the region should pay their attention to Lenin's effort to generalize the great Russian October Revolution of 1917, founding of Soviet Union and their experiences. It is clear that real liberation is impossible unless it becomes a part of or serves the world revolution on the basis of proletarian internationalism. This is the peculiarity of the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution. The workers have no country and the slogan " Workers of the world, unite" has been always making the proletarian revolutionaries cautious about their international responsibility. The challenge of applying the universal principles of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in the particularity of the national liberation and democratic movements of this region under the guidance of the great idea and aspiration of proletarian internationalism, remains formidable. The unification of the struggles for right of nations to self-determination and the proletarian movement alone can meet this challenge. To grasp this properly, we should seriously ponder over the concept of national democratic revolution put forward by Lenin after founding the Soviet Union and in the initial period of Comintern, and the concept of New Democratic revolution put forward by Mao.
When we think over this, because of the distinct condition of this region it becomes clear that it is inevitable for the communist revolutionaries to devise an integrated strategy against the Indian ruling classes of monopoly bourgeoisie and their agents in various countries. This inevitability has knocked the door of the necessity of turning the region into a new Soviet federation of twenty- first century. Therefore, the Maoist revolutionaries of various countries of this region are required to debate from this height and to work out a unified understanding, integrated strategy, organizational structure of a distinct kind, and long-term and short-term plans of struggle.
Apart from the economic, political, cultural and geographical peculiarities, from the perspective of the growth of communist movement the region-wide influence of Naxalbari movement led by Charu Majumdar against modem revisionism, fraternal relations and exchange of ideas and technical co-operation growing among the Maoist revolutionaries, and common programmes at the people's level, etc., have been preparing concrete basis for the fulfillment of this historical need. It is clear that the more the revolutionary struggle develops, the more intensifies the counter-revolutionary conspiracy, and therefore, there is need to develop integrated efforts among the revolutionaries .
The process of applying the universal principles of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in the regional peculiarity will play an effective role in waging struggle against the conspiracy of U.S. imperialism in this region, mainly in India. Thus, the unified initiative of this region as an integral part of world revolution will make important contribution to the world revolution. Hence, the co-operation of mainly the RIM and other revolutionary internationalist forces is essential in order to advance this process in a natural and scientific way. However, the important thing is the responsible initiative of the revolutionaries of the region themselves. The road is difficult and challenging, but the future is bright; the victory of proletarian internationalism and that of the masses of the people is guaranteed.
On National Situation
General Review of History
Though formally considered sovereign, Nepal is, indeed undergoing in a state of semi-colonialism for about 200 years. This state of Nepal caused by the notorious Sugauli Treaty with the British blocked the natural development from feudalism to capitalism. The self-reliant economy with agriculture, trade, exchange etc. began collapsing from the time when the foreign capital made its intrusion into the Nepalese society. When some small industries were established to meet the interest of foreign capital, Nepal gradually transformed into a semi-feudal stage from feudal stage. Thus, Nepal is still in semi-feudal and semi -colonial state.
It is necessary to understand this situation of present Nepal from the historical background. Before the growth of centralized state, Nepal was divided into many small kingdoms, principalities and tribal republican states. At that time, the form of monarchy and state was not as it is today. The fact that Manjushree and Ne-muni, representing attempts from the north and south respectively to lay the foundation for patriarchal society from matriarchal one, had pursued the process of unanimous selection of the king prove that by 'king' it was meant nothing other than a "tribal leader." The Nepalese society has undergone a long historical process of changing the king according to the need, looking for, selecting, and punishing and sentencing the king to death in case he committed crimes. This helps to understand the very psychology of the Nepalese society.
Moreover, the fact that the process of inner-struggle, interaction and fusion with the people coming from north and, mainly, from south with high skill and technology of production system and war skill have greatly influenced the progress and psychological set-up of the Nepalese society, should be taken into account. The process has contributed to struggles and compromises between several feudal kings and tribal republics just before the emergence of the centralized feudal state. With the growth of class-division in the society, some relatively powerful feudal kings began identifying themselves as incarnation of god. The king who was not more than a tribal hero chosen by the people gradually established himself as the incarnation of god. With the development of divine theory about king and state, the theory of full right of king over land is found to be established. In course of time, the previous status of the tribal hero has been changed into feudal, then to 'Great Feudal’ from 'Feudal, to 'King' from 'Great Feudal, to 'Great King' from 'King', to 'Emperor' from 'Great King', and to 'Human God' from 'Emperor'. (Pushpa Lal Shrestha, "The Origin of Monarchy in Nepal")
The need of new production system as required by the general progress of productive forces made tiny kingdoms, principalities and tribal republics unnecessary .The objective necessity gave rise to a single strongly centralized feudal state in course of time. The success of feudal state-expansion of Prithivi Narayan Shah of Gorkha, though a new and weak state at that time, is nothing but the consequence of this objective need, and to undermine this fact would not be historical materialism. It is notable here that the Nepalese process of development of feudal autocratic monarchy tallies with Engel’s research and analysis as described in his book "Origin of Family, Private Property and State".
Thus the monarchy bore a fully autocratic character with the development of a centralized feudal state in Nepal. Economic, political, administrative and all powers were centralized in the palace. With this centralization a series of clashes, violence and counter-violence started to occur among various feudal warlords inside the palace for power and property. It developed big feudal landlords families, on the one hand, and violent clashes for power inside the palace, on the other. For example, the families like Pandey, Thapa, Kunwar, etc. and their conflicts and clashes. Along with this, lingual, religious, cultural, economic, political and all other rights of the peoples were gradually snatched away. The state established Hindu feudal 'high'-caste chauvinism through the policy of reward and punishment.
Another important point to note is that when the centralized feudal state-expansion was going on in Nepal, expansion campaign of the British bourgeois class was also going on to its climax in India. They had been succeeding in founding their colonial empire by splitting hundreds of feudal kingdoms and invading them. As such, it was but natural that they would inevitably clash with each other at last. The Nepalese campaign, which had been marching forward by expanding itself to Tista River in the east, Kangra in the west, and Lucknow and Gorakhpur in the south, had been posing a great threat to British India. In such a situation, the British rulers declared war against Nepal with their superiority in capital, technology and military force. Fierce war broke out between the two sides. In several fronts Nepal defeated the modem army of the British. In the wars, the elders, women, and youths set historic records of dedication, sacrifice and bravery for the country but ultimately, Nepal was defeated and it signed a shameful Treaty.
One thing to be synthesized here is that supremacy of capital, technology and military force alone was not what defeated Nepal. The real and principal factor was the violation of people's rights and endless series of violent clashes among the feudal royal courtiers for the power and luxury developed in the palace with the growth of centralized feudal state. If, at least, Prthivi Narayan Shah's tactics of surprise, way of mobilizing the people and strategy of protracted people's war had been pursued, Nepal would not have to be shamefully defeated. On the contrary, as per the king's whim and palatial conspiracy they attacked all the patriots including Bhimsen Thapa who was relatively more patriot and envisaged a united front at the Asian level against the British. At last, the Jang Bahadur Kunwar dynasty, the puppet of British India, was victorious in the palace and their autocratic rule lasted for 104 years in Nepal. This whole period was the blackest one from the point of view of democratic rights. Nevertheless, while discussing the history of Nepal, what should not be forgotten is a strong sense of patriotism and resistance that existed amongst the people and even in a section of the ruling class, along with the war against British India and the shameful defeat. Even today the strong feeling of national self-esteem against the external intervention, mainly expansionist intervention of Indian monopoly bourgeoisie, is linked with that sequence of history. This patriotic current amongst the people should be specially taken into consideration in connection with strategy and tactics of national democratic revolution against feudalism and imperialism. In fact, this historical inheritance has played an important role in the soft attitude of several persons of the reactionary classes towards people's revolution against Indian expansionism and its agents.
The force of national integration had been weakened in the initial stage by curbing economic and political rights and destroying the language, religion, culture of people of various caste and community, internally, and later by capitulating to the British India, externally. When we talk about genuine national integration today, it directly means in the present context, internally, nothing but restoration of the rights usurped yesterday and externally, opposition to the national capitulationism.
During the later period of Rana regime the world had entered the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution. Mankind had witnessed the grave consequences of First and Second world wars and powerful undercurrents of national liberation movements and socialist movement. In India, anti-British movement was marching toward the climax. In this historical context, political activities grew up against the Rana regime in Nepal, too. The bureaucratic and comprador bourgeois class growing within the feudal state, while working simultaneously as agents for the British imperialism, also began demanding its 'proper' share m the state. Together with the historical wave of national freedom and revolution, the Communist Party, which truly represented the people, was also formed during this period. One should understand the political struggle of 1950 in this context.
Actually in 1950, the desires of the king-compelled by the Ranas to act as their puppet for 104 years-to be the real ruler, of the Indian monopoly bourgeois class-which was an heir to the British-to have for their own agents an 'appropriate' position in the state power of Nepal for the hegemony of the comprador class, and of the Nepalese people for the liberation from feudalism and imperialism, had been expressed simultaneously against the Rana regime. When the people's struggle was likely to develop directly against feudal, bureaucratic and comrprador bourgeois classes, the notorious Delhi Compromise was signed as a conspiracy against the necessity of history and sentiment of the people. In fact, the Delhi Compromise, which was signed by the King, the Ranas and the (Nepali) Congress under the direction of India, was in essence, a compromise between feudal, and bureaucratic and comprador bourgeois classes for share in the state-power in the interest of monopoly capitalism. That was a serious deception and betrayal to genuine need and aspirations of the people.
In order to understand the reason behind this compromise we must theoretically go to the characteristics of the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution. With the development of this era, the capitalist class lost its progressive role whatever was left and turned totally reactionary. Politically, its regression was expressed in compromising even with medieval feudalism against the aspirations of the people for bourgeois democratic revolution. Basically, there is no difference in the nature of treaties signed by British India with the Rana regime and new Indian rulers with the King, the Ranas and the Congress. Today what the modem revisionism has been trying to confuse the masses about is inherent in the dissemination of bourgeois form of parliamentary 'democracy', separating the imperialist reactionary essence from it. Today parliamentarism has been like a torn piece of rags of the reactionary imperialists, and it has been the daily routine of the revisionists to serve the feudal, bureaucratic and comprador bourgeois class for the fascist oppression on the people, covering this blatant historical truth with empty rhetoric.
The Party must be clear about the fact that feudal, and bureaucratic and comprador bourgeois classes are not the same. Feudal and landlord classes are very conservative and they advocate medieval feudalism and the comprador bourgeoisie serves the interests of imperialism. The bureaucratic capitalist class acts as a bridge to combine these contrasting trends into a single thread. That is why bureaucratic capitalism which emerged together with the development of the era of proletarian revolution, is called the 'hybrid' produced by the unholy alliance of feudalism and imperialism. In fact, the analysis of bureaucratic capitalism is the great contribution of Maoism in the context of revolution in third world countries. It should not be forgotten that today a feudal is a 'landlord', an 'industrialist’, and can be even a high level bureaucrat of the state at the same time. Similarly, a comprador or a bureaucratic capitalist also may be all the three at the same time. But the partial difference between the interests of a landlord and a comprador can't be eliminated completely. Therefore, the 'struggle' goes on between the representatives of the same class for particular share in the state and various imperialist and expansionist groups keep on intensifying it for their own interests.
In Nepal, whatever changes have occurred in the system of management of reactionary state-power from 1950 till now, they are, in essence, only the changes in the shares of partnership of the state-power between the feudal, bureaucratic and comprador classes. Feudalism uses the label of 'nationalism' and imperialism that of 'democracy' in order to deceive the masses. The characteristics of the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution and the experience of Nepal have made it clear that imperialism and feudalism do not go against each other. In this situation, it is important to understand that the genuine communist policy is that which, strategically, develops independent revolutionary struggle by freeing the masses of the illusion of 'nationalism' spread by feudalism and that of 'democracy' spread by imperialism, and, tactically, concentrates the struggle against the one which has seized the state-power and has been directly exploiting and suppressing the people, whether in the pretext of nationalism or democracy. In Nepal, this is what has caused serious deviations in the communist movement. The biggest plague of the Nepalese communist movement of talking about utilizing the contradictions of enemies without strategically developing independent revolutionary struggle or of declaring the slogans of nationalism or democracy of enemies relatively progressive and advocating it, has been creating grave problems for the success of the revolution even today.
There is no difference between the revisionism of today which endeavors to protect the country-selling fascism and corruption of the Nepali Congress government against the country and people in the pretext of the danger of revivalism, and the revisionism of yesterday which would attempt to safeguard the corruption and state-terror of the autocratic Panchayat regime on the pretext of threat of Indian expansionism. The Party should understand the importance of enlightening the people about it.
Only on the basis of this can it be scientifically understood the political development of 1950 onwards. Incessant struggle for nationalism, democracy and people's livelihood has been the characteristic of the people who have set lofty examples of dedication, devotion and sacrifice in the peaceful and violent struggles for their progress and liberation. But due to lack of correct political leadership (which could lead this stream of the masses to the struggle to achieving class state power), the feudalism and imperialism, mainly Indian expansionism in our particular context, have been always successfully using or rather misusing them for the benefit of feudal and comprador and bureaucratic capitalist classes. The Nepalese people were exploited from 1950 to 1960 in the name of 'democracy', though the masses had been vigorously resisting against Delhi Agreement to the Gandak Agreement, and against feudal land relations to corrupt bureaucrats. Its height can be witnessed in the martyrdom of Chiniya Kaji to Bhim Datta Pant, who led the armed struggle in western Nepal, and peasants’ struggle in the Terai region to countrywide resistance against the Gandak Agreement.
On the pretext of nationalism, a notorious coup was staged in 1960 by the feudals in order to utilize the great process of people's resistance for consolidating their own hold over the state power. The feudal elements succeeded in imposing autocratic monarchical Panchayat dictatorship on people in the cover of 'nationalism'. Shortly the cover was unmasked and people's resistance advanced in various ways and reached the movement of 1990, setting several records of dedication, devotion and sacrifice. Feudalism and imperialism were once again successful to betray the aspirations of the people and need for total change, as they ended up with a compromise for sharing the state-power between various groups of reactionary classes. The fact that the 1990 compromise concluded in the palace was, in essence, nothing but a repetition of the notorious 1950 Delhi Compromise has been verified by the later events. Reactionaries have turned back the clock of history and taken it to between 1950 and l960.
However, the people may be fooled for once, twice or thrice but not for ever. Reactionaries attempt to resolve the problem by pushing back the clock of history, but nobody has been able to do so, nor will ever be. The reactionary elements may turn back for their own interest for power, but can never turn the people back from their experience and consciousness they have gained during the struggle. Historical experience clearly shows that the people do not trust anything other than the new revolutionary options. The Nepalese people have gathered long experience of waging struggle against the trend of imposing fascist rule by chanting hollow slogans of 'democracy' and 'nationalism'. The thunderous launching of protracted People's War under the leadership of Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) on 13 February 1996 against feudalism and imperialism for founding a New Democratic system in Nepal was virtually the centralized and synthesized manifestation of this new awaking. The height it has gained during these 5 years stands on the base of the experiences of long struggles of the masses. It is essential to focus our attentions on the following historical conclusions:
A. The analysis of the reactionaries that the king and monarchy are deep-rooted in the Nepalese society is not true. It has been already mentioned elsewhere that before the emergence of centralized feudal state, democratic system of tribal type prevailed and had a great influence in Nepal, and the tradition of electing, changing and sentencing the king to death, if required, shows that by king it was meant nothing at all other than a 'tribal hero or leader' at that time. Therefore, the tradition of the Nepalese society has not been monarchist but democratic and autonomy-oriented. It was only after the emergence of the centralized feudal state in a certain stage of development of class division that attempts had been made to unnaturally impose the king and monarchism through the practices of the system of reward-and-punishment and divine theory.
B. The shameful defeat in the war with British-India and nature of the treaty signed indicate the contradiction and alliance of feudalism and imperialism. Though Nepal became semi-colonial, the war played an important role in exposing the national capitulationist character of feudal ruling classes and developing patriotic and national feeling of modern sense amongst the people. The contradiction of that time between the Bhimsen Thapa trend that did not want to kneel down to the British, and the king and Jang Bahadur trend that acted as their stooges, can still be found among the Nepalese ruling classes today. At a time when contradiction between imperialism and oppressed countries is the principle one, it is of great importance that the proletarian class correctly understands the historical contradictions and deals with them for the cause of democratic revolution.
C. The centralized feudal state has imposed Hindu feudal and Brahmanist ethnic chauvinism on lingual, ethnic, religious, cultural and traditional rights of people of various communities, nationalities and religions of Nepal and thereby hindered the natural development of genuine national unity and power. Therefore, the New Democratic revolution needs to lay the foundation of a consolidated national unity on the basis of equality and freedom in accordance with the right of nations to self-determination.
D. Following the denial of minimum political rights to information and activities by the Rana regime for a long time, and very delicate and fragile economic base of other classes, except the feudal and bureaucratic and comprador classes, the class-base and identity of political parties have not been very strong and mature. This is what has caused the formation of and disappearance of many political parties from 1950 onwards and trend of making drastic changes even in the basic policies now and then. Political difference between the Party of the proletariat and the elements that represent the feudal and comprador and bureaucratic capitalist classes is evident. Political fluidity resulting from the fluidity of economic class base does not only exist in a Party of the proletariat but also poses a great threat to it. Therefore, the Party should always make efforts and struggle to be flexible with due consideration to the fluidity of other political groups and to protect itself from its influence.
E. The major subjective factor behind the failure in making due political advancement even after the continuous struggle of the Nepalese people since around 1950 and their dedication, devotion and sacrifices displayed in them, is nothing but the reformism and revisionism dominant in the Nepalese communist movement. The main characteristic of the Nepalese revisionism has been the deviation from the historical need of leadership of the proletariat in the bourgeois democratic revolution. It always harped on the policy of following various groups of reactionary classes, instead of developing independent revolutionary struggle for the workers and peasants under the leadership of the proletariat with the question of seizing state power in command. Eventually, the reactionaries have always been successful to betray the people. After the launching of People's War led by Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), things have changed qualitatively.
On the Synthesis of the Nepalese Communist Movement
We have been incessantly discussing and making evaluations of the development process of the Nepalese communist movement. Our sole objective in doing so is to overcome revisionism by scientifically synthesizing the history with Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and the new consciousness of class struggle and to guarantee the victory of revolution by accelerating the process of revolutionary polarization. For this we have been stressing on making ideological and political line the basis for the evaluation, because we consider our starting point the scientific conclusion that ideological and political line determines everything. Because of new consciousness that goes on synthesizing together with the growth of the revolutionary movement and the need of acceleration of the movement, we need to make such observations repeatedly.
We have regarded the founding of Communist Party of Nepal, which was inspired by international and national contemporary revolutionary movements, as an historical event of far-reaching significance. Also, we consider the preliminary declaration, policy and programme of the Party on democratic revolution against feudalism and imperialism basically correct. But later, the Party leadership deviated from its basic principles of its declaration, policy and programmes. The main factor for this has been the nonproletarian petty-bourgeois thinking of the leadership, as stated by the Party. Emerging in the First Congress of the Party in 1953 and getting well-organized and come into open in 1955, this petty-bourgeois reformism remained dominant in the Nepalese communist movement for decades as tailism. Giving up the necessity of developing independent revolutionary struggle on the basis of the leadership of the proletariat and unity of the workers and peasants in the bourgeois democratic revolution, has been the main characteristic of the Nepalese revisionism. It violated fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism on proletarian leadership in the bourgeois democratic revolution and the characteristics of the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution. As a consequence, the Party changed into a device to make reforms and fulfill the strategic objectives of various reactionary groups.
The impact of international communist movement, mainly that of India, may be taken as another reason for this. It is notable that Communist Party of India had decided, on the advice of Stalin, to withdraw the historic Telangana armed struggle. A revisionist thinking of regarding protracted People's War as an 'ultra-leftism' had developed among the leaders of the Party. Communist movement is an international movement. So it is but natural that ups and downs in the international movement influence the Communist Party of every country. On top of it we should not forget the influence to be generated by continuous relations between the communists of India and Nepal.
Thus, when the Party leadership was entrapped in tailism abandoning the necessity of proletarian leadership in the democratic movement, the Khruschovian revisionism emerged in Russia as modem revisionism with parliamentary theory of peaceful transition in the international communist movement. As expected, it had a serious impact on the Communist Parties all over the world. This dreadful international revisionism helped the revisionism developing in the Party leadership in Nepal to grow more blatantly and rapidly. It is then that the Rayamajhi trend emerged as naked capitulationism. When the Communist Party of China led by Mao upheld the banner of struggle against Khruschovian revisionism, debate on ideological and political line began in Nepal, too. The international communist movement was clearly seen divided into two camps: the Khruschovian revisionist trend and Maoist revolutionary trend. In the beginning, Com. Pushpa Lal Shrestha played an important role for an organized and systematic dissemination of the Maoist revolutionary political trend. (Please note that he had been opposing the revisionism developed within Rayamajhi, Manmohan, etc. right from the First Congress but he lacked strategic and tactical clarity required to break off decisively with revisionism and lead the revolutionary movement). Shortly thereafter, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution against the bourgeois revisionists was launched in China under the leadership of Mao shaking the whole world. Naturally, the great revolution had its direct influence in Nepal, too. It played an important role in generating waves of zeal among the youths, students and revolutionaries.
Actually, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and Mao's struggles against Khruschovian revisionism had provided a solid ground for reorganizing the Party in Nepal on the basis of a revolutionary line. Right then, attempts for the same were made from various angles. Among them, the attempts made by Pushpa Lal through Gorakhpur Conference, by the Central Nucleus in 1970 and by young revolutionaries through Jhapa revolt, are the most important ones. All these three attempts carried similar basic principles in them, like accepting Marxism-Leninism and Mao Thought as guiding principles, supporting Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and opposing Khrushchovian revisionism, completing New Democratic revolution under the leadership of the proletariat against feudalism and imperialism, necessity of armed struggle to make the revolution a success, and, therefore, that period of history particularly draws the attention of all revolutionary communists today. The principal question we should specially pay our attention to is: in spite of the great international environment of Mao and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China, and ideological similarities in all the three attempts mentioned above, why could not there be a single united Party?
On the basis of our present experience and thinking, we firmly opine that a single united Party could be formed at that time and should have been. If it had been so, the condition of the Nepalese communist movement and people's revolution would certainly have been in a higher stage. Hence, it becomes the duty of sincere communists of the country to endeavor to seriously think over and study that period of history, and link the disconnected chains. We, as a Party that has been leading the great People's War, are committed to make the most responsible initiatives to discharge our duty. At the same time, we appeal to all sincere and genuine communists scattered in various groups to deeply ponder over the issue and create new waves of polarization.
As far as the question relating to the main hurdle in the Party unity at that time is concerned, we should look for it in the ideological and political line and working style of the then leadership concerned. Thus, despite lacking in experience and containing some element of mechanicalism in thinking, the Co-ordination Centre emerged together with the Jhapa revolt was much more correct and superior to others in the ideological and political line, mainly in revolutionary spirit. It had upheld the banner of revolt, in accordance with the spirit of GPCR, against revisionism that was dominant in the Party since 1953. It had been striking at veiled revisionism, that is, revolutionary in words but revisionist in practice. Therefore, the Jhapa revolt has occupied a historical place of pride in the Nepalese communist movement. The Jhapa revolt had, in essence, played the same role in the Nepalese communist movement as what the Naxalite revolt had done to expose revisionism in the Indian communist movement and establish the universal contributions of Mao. Therefore, the Jhapa revolt can't be accused of splittism. In fact, it had provided a ground for unity of the revolutionaries.
From the perspective of ideology, political line and commitment to the goal, the efforts of Puspa Lal in reorganizing the Party also had been positive. Indeed, the ideas and political line of Pushpa Lal have helped, in totality, the revolutionaries, and not the revisionists. Pulling him to the revisionist camp by the revisionists is nothing but sheer dishonor to him. His works and contributions such as the dissemination of Marxism, historical leading role in founding the Communist Party, view on the proletarian leadership in the bourgeois democratic revolution, devising preliminary manifesto, policy and programme, emphasis on revolutionary peasants struggle, continuous stand for republican system, view on protracted People's War, opposition to modem revisionism and support to universal contributions of Mao, dedication for revolution throughout his life, genuine effort to materialistically explain the history of Nepal, etc. prove the fact that Pushpa Lal Shrestha was a sincere communist leader of the Nepalese communist movement. Since the communist revolutionaries have degraded him as a rightist, the revisionists could dare to distort his contributions and thereby use them for their own vested interests. Definitely, he suffered from some ideological and some circumstantial weaknesses. Of them, a liberalist weakness in practical implementation of political line, mechanical materialist weakness in the analysis of class character of Nepali Congress, lack of seriousness about total planning for the development of armed struggle and people's army are the major ones. But these mistakes alone do not suffice to label him as a rightist in the relative context of that time. In comparison to his total contributions, his errors stand far below and, in all, in spite of some weaknesses, he was a sincere communist leader. Therefore, the communist revolutionaries of today should firmly struggle against the revisionism of various forms, but with the same essence, which either uses his personality for lowly parliamentary interests, or defaces him by declaring him as an agent, renegade and rightist, and, must honor Com. Pushpa Lal without any hesitation.
At that time, the Central Nucleus was ideologically in the most ambiguous and disputable state. Firstly and most importantly, the Nucleus was completely unclear about the Russian model of general armed insurrection and the Chinese model of protracted People's War in regard to the New Democratic Revolution and armed struggle and this represented eclecticism. Secondly, it declared the New Democratic Revolution as the maximum programme and presented the Government of Patriotic and Democratic Forces as the minimum programme as regards to the principal political line and, thereby, displayed a kind of neo-revisionism. Thirdly, at that time, it assailed, theoretically, Pushpa Lal and Jhapa rebels, and practically, Nepali Congress and thereby, helped autocratic monarchy and the then Panchayat dictatorship. Fourthly, as regards to the principal contradiction, it declared equal contradiction of the Nepalese people with both domestic reaction and Indian expansionism, and, thereby, indirectly, blunted the struggle against the Panchayat autocracy. In totality, the thinking of Manmohan and Mohan Bikram at that time would ideologically represent eclecticism, neo-revisionism and pro-king line in the Nucleus. It is to be remembered that Manmohan played main role in turning the Party towards the revisionist and pro-king direction right from the First Congress. Besides, Mohan Bikram also would advocate in favour of the king. If they talked about Mao and armed struggle, it was merely a cover to conceal their revisionism. But later, Manmohan disliked even that cover, exhibited naked revisionism and pro-king thinking and turned completely passive. But, Mohan Bikram actively embellished this eclectic neo-revisionism with revolutionary phrases and institutionalized it through the Fourth Congress. It created an enormous ideological confusion in the Nepalese communist movement for over a decade. The only positive aspect of the Fourth Congress was the correct analysis of the class character of Nepali Congress. But it should not be forgotten that in doing so, the then leadership of the Fourth Congress was motivated by the objective of opposing the revolutionaries and not by any revolutionary objective. It is evident in Mohan Bikram's policy and conduct towards parliamentarism and Congress fascism today1.
The above mentioned state of ideological and political line and working style make it clear that what struck at the possibility of formation of a unified Party on the basis of revolutionary political line developed by the influence of the GPCR in China was none but the eclectic neo-revisionist line institutionalized by Manmohan, Mohan Bikram and, principally, the Fourth Congress led by Mohan Bikram. This is the most splittist line of the Nepalese communist movement. The books such as "The Renegade Pushpa Lal" and "Refutation of the Ultra-leftist Thoughts" written by Mohan Bikram from the neo-revisionist angle were mere devices to hit at the possibility of Party unity.
It is true that in the beginning, a large section of the sincere revolutionaries ignorant of political line had been united under the banner of Fourth Congress due to the so-called personality of Mohan Bikram, revolutionary phrases and eclectic politics with double meanings. Revolutionaries including immortal martyr Com. Azad had made efforts to explain and apply it in their areas as per their revolutionary objectives. But, without overcoming the eclectic neo-revisionism existing in the basic ideological and political line, the revolutionary spirit, intention and attempt to partially correct it alone could not resolve the problems and they were not. As was inevitable, the Mohan Bikram trend unleashed a series of splits inside the Fourth Congress. Wherever this trend prevails, it is bound to recur.
When the internal struggle was intensified in Nepal after the end of possibility of formation of a unified Communist Party on the basis of correct line at a very crucial bend of history, Mao died in China. Within one month thereafter, bourgeois revisionists conspiratorially seized the state power in China . Naturally, it had extremely negative impact all over the world and in the Nepalese communist movement as well. It consequently led the leadership of the then Marxist-Leninist group , which had been vacillating after the severe setback of Indian Naxalite movement following the death of Charu Majumder, to revisionism. But the Fourth Congress opposed the counterrevolution in China and led the Nepalese revolutionaries to rebel against revisionism. With this historical event, on the one hand, the M-L group which emerged from the Jhapa revolt and led the revolutionary trend in the Nepalese communist movement for about one decade degenerated into revisionism and gathering all new and old revisionists has now turned into the gendarme of the state and system of the feudal and comprador and bureaucratic capitalists, and, on the other, the sincere and genuine revolutionaries of the Fourth Congress fighting against and rebelling from old and new revisionism, devising correct ideological and political line, and uniting all the revolutionaries, have been leading the great People's War in Nepal today. Moreover, they are resolutely marching forward to rejoin the disconnected chains of history with initiative for revolutionary polarization and to make the New Democratic Revolution in Nepal a success.
At last, while synthesizing the Nepalese communist movement, it can be said that it is marching forward by forging new unity on a new basis in accordance with the dialectical principle of unity-struggle-transformation, or thesis-antithesis-synthesis. The founding of the Party, its preliminary manifesto, policy and programme was unity or thesis. In the process of development, various trends, internal conflicts, ups and downs, splits and factions was struggle or anti-thesis in the Nepalese communist movement. The great People's War led by CPN (Maoist) going on for 5 years is a manifestation of the transformation and synthesis or a new unity on a new basis. The whole process of the Nepalese communist movement can also be seen as a negation of negation. The initial correct policy of the Party was negated by the revisionism and later the revisionism by the correct revolutionary policy, and, eventually, the great process of People's War emerged. But it would be against the dialectical principle of development to understand or take it as perfect and final. The process of unity-struggle-transformation will continue. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism has provided us with a key to handle this dialectical process of development in favour of the proletariat and lead mankind to the apex of communism.