Developing on Marxism with the General Line of Unified People’s Revolution

Experiences of class struggle in many countries including in Nepal have proved that the victory on class war is difficult without attaining development in Marxism. Developing on Marxism means to develop on three components of Marxism as scientific socialism on social science, socialist economy on economic science and dialectical materialism on philosophical arena. These propositions are called three component parts of Marxism1. Marx developed dialectical materialism having developed on dialectics of Hegel and materialism of Firebaugh. While coming to the development of Maoism, historical is added and this dialectical materialism is called historical dialectical materialism. While developing on Marxism, it is necessary to develop on all three component parts.

In the needs of social changes, the development of philosophy can be judged from the practice. Lenin had developed the military line of armed insurrection in the country like Russia where capitalism had been developed and was an imperialist country in one hand and on the other, remnants of feudalism were prevailing. Mao Tse Tung had developed the strategy of protracted people’s war to make revolution in the country like China that was under semi-feudal semi colonial condition. In the revolution of Cuba and Korea, military lines of their own were defined. In the class society, the military strategy is essential to protect the class interest. The capitalist military strategy and socialist military strategy are fundamentally different. The capitalist military strategy, in essence, is based on the theory of private profit of the socialised production. It does centralise all its abilities to impose exploitation against people and bring people’s property under private use. Contrary to this, the socialist military theory is based on the principal of developing line and strategy to eliminating the capitalist system, exercise proletarian dictatorship having established socialism accelerate development process in the socialist mode of production system and encourage people in developing science and technology to accelerate socialist mode of production system.

Many ideological problems are seen in the process of developing Marxism. While the more the class struggle develops and the reactionary state resorts in defence of old state and negation of the new, the struggling socialist forces necessarily encounter with serious ideological, political and organisational challenges. The communist arrive at an stagnation in the absence of developing Marxism, bringing clarity in theory and chalking out a correct orientation in practice, thus to surpass such complexities, they uphold the scientific laws not to replicate revolution but develop in a dogmatic way, and they practice in the same way. These problems had been seen in many countries including Nepal, India, Philippines, Indonesia and Chile. In Nepal, the erstwhile ML rushed into Panchayet system in the name of doing revolution in new way. The erstwhile communist party of Nepal (Maoist) degenerated into parliamentrism. The more they talk of new, the more they are falling backward in the queue of reactionary system.

As much as the work has been done against Marxism, some has been done in the development. But these attempts are very less in comparison to the reformist and revisionist propaganda and attacks. These kind of attempts have been carried out by the Communist Party of Peru in Peru, by the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) in Nepal and the Revolutionary Communist Party of America (RCP USA). But these attempts are not giving a clear picture yet.

While the Communist Party of Nepal Maoist under Prachanda’s leadership failed to give the solution, new attempts are certainly made. The line and strategy of Unified People’s Revolution is the new way in real sense.

Philosophical Understanding prior to Marxism

Dialectical materialism was developed from the in depth study of materialism of Firebaugh and dialectics of Hegel. The materialism2 of Firebaugh (1804-1872) and dialectics of Hegel (1770-1831) were affected by the idealism in various ways. The dialectical materialist philosophy developed by Marx stood on the dialectics of Hegel and materialism of Firebaugh. The dialectics of Hegel was a fundamental principal of dialectics, it had put forward fundamental principal of dialecticism, but it was defined in mechanical way. Karl Marx (1818-1883) told that Hegel’s dialectics had stood on head and what Marx did was he made stand it on feet.

Hegel’s dialectics was fundamentally based on logic3 of Grice Philosopher Aristotle (384-322BC). The philosophy of Aristotle remained standard for 2000 years in the western world. Aristotle’s philosophy is called syllogism on which logic is made on the basis of three bases. These bases are considered and used to be studied as the principal basis of logic, the general basis of logic and synthesis of logic. According to this logic what could be argued as A=A. For example, according to this philosophy, thesis, anti thesis and synthesis could be defined in such way: all human have hands, therefore, those who have hands can be ancestor of human or can develop to human, so the monkey or monkeys having hands are either ancestor of human or can develop to human. This process of logic develops from simple to complex.

On the foundation of this logic or syllogism of Aristotle, Hegel developed new dimension in philosophy. The method of thinking differently than Aristotle was called dialectics. In the dialectics of Hegel, some more clarity was presented over Aristotle’s logic. On which “totality” is one category. In Hegel’s principal, only the whole is true. There is no truth in part. Every state are partial and all partiality are partially true and not completely true. Every stage or phases are partial so they are partially untrue. In Hegel’s dialectics, the totality is the product of a process which accumulates all elements in this process. While partially developing in this process, it develops to totality. Thus, in the process of developing partialities, they become inter related.

In the logic of Aristotle, every object is identical. Object is based on oneself, unrelated and static. Having developed on this traditional and static thinking of Aristotle, Hegel analysed that object is dynamic and it develops from partiality to totality. According to Hegel, no object is lost or destroyed, but it develops in a spiral process and get preserved in another form. This process can be seen in fern and shell which develops in spiral. Hegel told it “contradiction” on which a particular object seems as lost but it is preserved in spiral, which is called “aufhebung”. In the state of logic of Aristotle, Hegel told that object is essential to be anything.

Hegel considers that the principal of logic centralise everything in oneself, that distinct oneself from the world and it contains those logical categories which does not consider the mode of all as interrelated. These are considered to be separate and away from real world. Unlike to Aristotle, Hegel thought on combination of logics, on which being, becoming, one, many, essence, existence, cause, effect, universal, mechanism and life are interconnected and interdependent. While examining all these issues, Hegel revealed that there are inadequacies on its own and there are internal dynamic. Each category is made to generate another more promising one which in its turn will be subject to the same kind of scrutiny.

Hegel calls the above dynamic process of thought as “negations”. That means, state of static is discarded by the state of dynamic and recovers its eagerness to push on towards “the whole”. Hegel had discussed three types of contradictions in his dialecticism. The first contradiction is being or existence of object. In the general observation of human eyes, all objects look different. But those differences are quantitative and qualitative which look different. The meaning of being or existence in essence is interrelated. The second contradiction is essence. In this, all the objects are interrelated. In essence, there are inner and outer aspects. Here, to define one is at the same time is to define the other. The third kind is notion, where we reach an altogether more sophisticated level of contradictions. Here we find that the aspect of identity in the process of struggle of universal and particular contradictions is developed. To this principal Hegel told thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Though Hegel himself never defined this thesis, antithesis and synthesis but his dialecticism is understood in this triadic structure.

In the classical logic of Aristotle, the process of negation used to be reinstated on thesis itself. As such there was no antithesis. Through the process of thesis and thesis synthesis could be attained. Immanuel Cant (1724-1804) had defined this through the process of thesis and dialectic. According to Cant, analysis meant logics of understanding, which demotes the knowledge to define the existence of objects on the world and the consciousness that identifies its differences. And dialectic meant the existence of object in its eternal dynamic and motion in itself beyond the consciousness, practice and knowledge of human mind.

For Hegel, knowledge means what one does or what one acts. For him, knowledge is the presence of mind. Similarly, the final knowledge is oneself of being fully self-possessed, self-aware of thinking as self-presence. Hegel in his dialecticism put it everything depends on the “identity of identity and non-identity”.

Whatever development had been taken place on dialecticism and materialism, Karl Marx and Fredric Engels had developed them to the new height. The questions of object or material world and knowledge have always occupied a central part in philosophy for centuries. This problem remained complex until human knowledge was separated from physical body and real objective world. Hegel and Feuerbach had one-sided view of consciousnesses which presented the human knowledge separate from the external world. But Marx had proved that human being is not separate from the material world and human thinking are not separate from the behavior of their own. As the dialectical materialist philosophy reveled the reality of relationship between the interrelation between the object and human mind, then the philosophical belief from Pythagoras to Descartes and Hegel came to break down to collapse before practice4.

Materialism rejects the idealist understanding that human brain, consciousness and soul are separate from the material world. Ideas are the particular existence of human brain, which develops as life in a particular way. Human thinking are the sum total of activity of brain, and human sensuous activity and interaction with the world and with the other people undergone through processing by the nervous system.

Real character of idealism used to be covered up by religion and superstation. Idealism always stands on the foundation of religion. Pythagoras (582-500BC) and Plato (428-347BC) had defined that the human activities could be a weak reflection of human consciousness, which in general, considered that it was being applied in the origin of the world. French philosopher Descartes (1596-1650) established the concept of Pythagoras and Plato that human sole remains outside and separate to human body.

In philosophy, Descartes established that the ideas and consciousness are identical to the object. Though brain is placed inside human body yet it has an identical position to the human body. By this proposition, Descartes put forward the concept of dualism which in itself was eclecticism.

But the dialectical materialism has established that the elementary stone tools were the guiding power to the human consciousness. The brain which effected in the internal development that affected on the growth of the shape and size of brain. This kind of transformation in overall took a qualitative leap which posed human being identical to life and species. Therefore, human being was not created by god is a particular form, rather it is a result of persistently developing process, on which the decisive factors were the hands and the labor of human beings. Therefore, Engels told that it was not the brain that developed human beings, but hands that developed brain.

The development of the human consciousness is determined by human practice. Human practice of revolutionary transformation develops revolutionary consciousness. Marx told, “The materialist doctrine that men are products of circumstances and upbringing, and that, therefore, changed men are products of changed circumstances and changed upbringing, forgets that it is men who change circumstances and that the educator must himself be educated. Hence this doctrine is bound to divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society. The coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-change [Selbstveränderung] can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice.”5

Capitalist society is based on idealist philosophy. Capitalism tends to isolate and alienate people who are taught to see themselves as individuals from the outside world and objective reality according to the idealist propositions. Bourgeoisie individualism at its first stage was progressive for the reason that it could push the productive forces and culture towards new horizon of human civilization and culture. But this has been receded into the mist of history in such a way that the era of capitalist decay, individualism has become more egotism, parochialism, selfishness and inhumanity. Capitalism breeds indifferences towards the sufferings of others and foments barbaric attitude and behavior that threatens and undermines the very basis of culture and civilization.

In capitalism, it is said that human is “free” to do anything they want. But capitalism cannot leave anything free to lead in itself. Once a German philosopher Leibnitz told, if a magnetic needle could think it is doubtless that it could chose to point north direction on its free will. Darwin (1809- 1882) illustrated that human being was not gifted by God on its free will; rather it was the product of bound natural law from the realm of animal to the realm of human beings. And Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) demonstrated that many of the human actions are guided by practice unconsciously thus he accepted that the so called free will is really an illusion.

Marx had proved that human consciousness is determined by social environment and objective conditions. At every stage of society and as per its stage of development human beings have tried to deny exploitation by man against man. For human being it becomes necessity to reject and resist exploitation and create environment for a civilized society. As environment is prevailed to human being, the consciousness is developed accordingly. Consciousness is determined by the physical environment. If Albert Einstein had been born in a peasant’s hut in some African village, his native intelligence might have made him an expert in culture. Trotsky once asked: “How many Aristotles are herding swine, and how many swineherds are sitting on thrones?” Hegel had admitted that a true freedom is not the denial of necessity; rather it is the acknowledgement of necessity. Engels had clarified on it, freedom is insight to necessity and fighting for the necessity is freedom.

Marx explains that without organization the working class is only raw material for exploitation. The workers are obliged to co-operate in collective labor, on the production line, where the mode of production is social, not individual. A peasant can say: I grew that cabbage. But no worker of a Maruti Car factory in Delhi cannot say: I made that car.

Development of Marxism

Lenin had clarified that Marx had proposed a clear set of ideas on communism clearly defining dialectical materialism, socialist economy and scientific socialism6. Carl Marx discovered the law of internal relation of the dialectical materialist philosophy; he discovered the interconnections of capitalism which was based on contemporary European and American capitalism which had colonized a wide range of areas of on earth, he correctly pointed out the connectivity between the capitalism and previous societies.

Here, what Marx discovered a fundamental law is a character of society and interrelation of human being with the society which cannot be determined by the wishes of one person, or either this be a general types of people as labor, peasant, or a lumpen or extraordinary types of people as Robinson Crusoe they all have to take part in production and reproduction process to maintain human existence and social mobilization. Marx had also discovered how those ordinary and extraordinary people come together being interrelated in this social order, they use means of production and produce goods that they use. As Bob Avakian, Chairman of the RCP USA says, “to penetrate beneath all the complex layers of human historical developments and social organization to this underlying foundation and essential core of human social functioning was a great achievement and invaluable contribution of Marx”7.

Marx demonstrated that whenever people take part in production needed for them, regardless the character of productive forces, they get unified in a final and best way, and united in the best way possible and they determine what kind of production relation they wish to get in. On this Marx had also demonstrated that this can be determined not by the wish of one or another person but by the people’s necessity and condition of the contemporary production relation.

Another important fact Marx had explored is that in a particular time a particular types of political superstructure could be given birth on the base of particular economic base. This superstructure is a mode of political structure, institutions, and their method of work, and mode of thinking which stand on economic base and political superstructure. Marx has also explored that since the productive forces are guided by the production relation and that production relation is based on exploitation and controlling by one against another, society comes to be divide in to different classes. In the class society where the handful people who hold the main means of production such as technology, land and raw materials, they also hold the super structure such as politics and culture. This class which remains powerful economically comes to holds the state power in a autocratic way. This political force, which is the sum of state power on which means of oppression are rested, which has the parliament to make army, police, court, that controls everything in the society. Hence, the class which controls the society, its class consciousness, living style, culture and ritual, become the consciousness, culture and ritual of the entire society. Marx and Engels had said in the communist manifesto that as long as the society divides into the classes, in all the time, state ideology comes from the ideology of the ruling class. Then Marx had deepened his understanding what is the driving force in making development in the society and how and what basis that functions? The productive forces constantly develop through the human activities, ideology and organization. And at a certain time a new productive force comes to encounter to hostility with the existing production relation and superstructure related to that production relation. At that time, as Marx said, the overall existing production relation comes to be a fetter and chain to the developed new productive forces. Then the society develops to that level it demands revolution, so the fundamental character of this kind of revolution is to bring a overall changes in production relation or change the production relation as per the demand of the productive forces. The meaning of this revolution is to create such a condition where the production relation does not become the chain and fetter for the development of the productive forces, rather it becomes extremely favorable. This kind of revolution can only be led by that potential force which can transform the production relation. But this kind of struggle to seize political power needs mainly concentrate over superstructure which will do overthrow the old state power, complete dissolve that and establish a new state power at the position of old one and only that can transform the production relation according to the need and favor of productive forces and that only can prepare environment favorable to the new ruling class.

Development of Leninism

While Karl Marx developed dialectical materialism, scientific socialism and socialist economy, at that time, the nascent productive force had been able to establish Paris Commune to terminate old types of production relation. Establishment of Paris Commune was an attempt to achieve a great zenith in the process of human emancipation. But after the abolition of the old state, the Paris Commune could not be preserved due to the lack of scientific understanding and the leadership corresponding to this kind of understanding that could have capacity to preserve new state, that could foil the assault of the old state, that could completely destroy the old state machinery and strengthen the new one and that could lead the society to a continuously revolutionized. The lack of the leadership that could destroy the old state, that could destroy its established leadership and lead the society continuously towards persistent changes have been the reason of the fall of Paris commune. Marx told about the fall of Paris commune that communards failed to make assaults over the strongholds of the counterrevolutionaries, which were centered over the near city of Versailles, by that reason the counterrevolutionaries got success in gathering its strength, marched towards Paris and made deadly attacks over commune, and on this process, they killed in cool blood the thousands of bona fide cadres. Establishment and dissolution of Paris commune is yet a lesson for the representative of the proletariat the communist or the revolutionaries to learn. As Mao Tsetung said, if there was no communist leadership based on scientific understanding, the Revolutionary Communist Party of USA has said8 that even if the communards had had victory over Paris commune, they would have to face greater challenges.

Having learned from the Paris Commune, the great philosopher of the proletariat took advantage of the inner contradictions among the imperialist forces, and having attacking over the imperialist which was wrecked by the first World War, he eliminated the throne of the Tsar. This revolution which took to the root of the society destroyed the state of the Tsar and also destroyed the capitalist class that could attempt to ride to power seizing opportunity of “power vacuum” between the destruction of Tsar and yet unconsolidated communist force. While leading the Russian revolution and seizing political power, Lenin had to make breakthroughs on some aspects that Marx developed and continued to develop Marxism to a living way. Lenin took lessons from the Paris commune as well as historical lessons of the human society and law of development of the natural world. The most important aspect that Lenin developed on Marx is the principal of organized force of the proletariat that leads the masses of people consciously in organized form to destroy the state of capitalism and replace that by establishing the state of the proletariat, that destroy the old state and having constant revolutionizing the socialist society that leads to the final goal of the communist to reach communism, which cannot be established I one country of but will be in the world at a time.

Lenin applied in practice the ideas of Marx that were drawn from the bitter experiences of the Paris commune. Lenin also revealed the fact that it is impossible to make revolution, to make a drastic change in the socialist society, bringing a revolutionary transformation in a socialist society in a constant manner and lead the world towards communism by keeping the old readymade state, for that, it is necessary to have old state destroyed and replaced with a new one and instead of the old rotten bourgeoisie dictatorship in the state it is necessary to establish a new rising and dynamic proletarian class. Lenin asserted that the dictatorship of the proletariat is necessary for two reasons, first to prevent the old and new oppressors in and out of the country and in any country of the world from rising up again in the state power, to eliminate the ideas, consciousness and organized force, to ensure the people to get united in a campaign of making a sole new, militant, sole revolutionary society and world, to abolish all production relation that generates class division, to abolish the culture that are engendered by that production relation, and constantly revolutionizing the ideas and to ensure “four abolition” and “four transformation”. Second, the dictatorship of the proletariat is necessary to ensure the right of the people at any time, to ensure the scientific management of the differences that come in the society in a zigzag and ups and down manner during the the dissimilarities that appear in one country in the process of abolishing dissimilarities of the world, to take the world to that point from where possibility of rising head by oppressors will never realize again, and to take the world to that point where that class will never take incarnation, to take the world to that point where the established institution is not needed to impose power against human being and to erect the world where the social injustice and differences are completely abolished. process of remaining in socialism and advancing to communism, to abolish

After the establishment of the socialist society in Russia, Lenin marched ahead giving political and organizational leadership in the overall transformation process along with the transformation in socialist economy, politics, society and culture. After the death of Lenin, the responsibility to advance in this process had been shouldered over the Soviet Communist Party and its leadership Stalin. Establishment of the socialist state in Russia was an unprecedented phenomenon in the world that had given unprecedented contribution in the development of the human civilization. In this socialist society, there had been a drastic change in the masses of people in over all arena including drastic changes in the world outlook in viewing interrelation among the human beings, between women and men, different kind of nationalities, between the political institution and culture, human and society. In that society, an unprecedented development taken place in overall social arena including health, education, residence, literacy, and the living standard of the masses of people. In an overall view, Marxism has been developed to Marxism-Leninism thanks to Lenin’s unprecedented philosophical ability and brilliancy, method and policy of giving a scientific and dynamic leadership.

The socialist society that was continued after the death of Lenin couldn’t definitely be immune of some shortcomings, some conditional and some weaknesses. Such shortcomings couldn’t be avoided because of the first socialist society of the world as well as caused many practical reasons9 and some Marxist ideology, method of leading socialist society, and because of the method in leading the socialist society some complexities were being developed in Stalin. In spite of these weaknesses, and in spite of imperialist and reactionary attacks in continuous manner and in spite of the killing of twenty million socialist citizens by the Nazi Germany in the second world war, the flag of socialist ideology, philosophy and consciousness kept on fluttering and a new socialist society having accomplished the new democratic revolution rose in China under the leadership of great philosopher Mao Tsetung.

Development on Maoism

Mao Tsetung led the fierce revolutionary struggle in China over 25 years culminating the victory for New Democratic Revolution in 1949 having fought a vigorous struggle against wrong tendencies that could fall over the communist party of China from the contemporary Chinese society. It becomes a crystal clear that the revolution in China has immense importance in the development of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. There was a conventional wisdom including within the communist movement that in a country like China revolution could not be made that would lead to socialism and become part of worldwide struggle, as well as cannot usher the way to aim communism. But Mao had dismissed these wrong propositions by culminating NDR in China, transforming that into socialism and leading Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. China was not only a backward, but also dominated by other, the natural resources were bent to the looters for the imperialist accumulation. In this kind of country, Mao lead the revolution not directly aimed for socialism, but instead built a broad united front against imperialism and feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism linked to imperialism in the country. Not only that Mao also revealed the fact that in the semi feudal semi colonial country like China, the comprador bureaucratic plays the role to link the imperialism and feudalism. Hence, having studied the Chinese society, Mao discovered the law how to make revolution in the semi feudal semi colonial countries like China. Thus in China, he led the Chinese masses broadly uniting towards the revolutionary protracted people’s war that to encircle the city from the country side.

Again Mao had made it clear that historical victory which was attained having accomplished a new democratic revolution in China was merely a step forward in the long march of communist movement. Immediate transformation of New Democracy to socialism was not only important, yet it was a challenge. Not only that, just as the incident of Paris commune and the capitalist roaders attempted to retake socialist power in Russia seizing the opportunity of power vacuum between the fall of the Tsar and unconsolidated socialism, the danger of losing New Democracy still persisted amid seize of America from Taiwan and Britain from Hong Kong. Because of this there was a danger of rising in power of the imperialist and their Chinese stooges the bureaucratic capitalist. In this situation, Mao, having analysed the incidents of Paris Commune and the Socialist power in Russia, thousands and millions of conspiracies hatched by the capitalist class, the limitation and weaknesses of the communists as well as tremendously appearing global changes while arriving to the New Democratic Revolution in China, had reached to this conclusion that the Russian socialism cannot be copied as a model Socialism and China should develop its own model. This policy and method of Mao encouraged the Chinese people to participate in constructing Socialism from its base. To develop the nascent socialism, Mao took both people and technology together and he accentuated on socialist campaign through public participation on the arena of people’s ideological and theoretical clarity. This campaign was manifested under the banner of “grasp revolution and promote production”. This slogan was established as the ideological and political direction which develops productive force, transforms continuously the productive relation and ideological, political superstructure by founding the economic structure and strengthening the socialist power in China.

As Mao had accomplished new democratic revolution in China in a new and different situation that made additional contribution to develop on Marx’s universal laws in developing Marxism-Leninism to new height of ideological, political and organizational arena. On that, he led the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution to ensure consistent revolution inside the socialist society, to unite broad masses of people persistently in constructing socialism as well as mobilize all masses of people against capitalist ideology and politics, which not only created the capacity to solved the contradictions that arise in the socialist society but also helped to transform it in a whole including Mao himself10 and Mao contributed on Marxism-Leninism to bring to a new height and that is brought to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

Mao having made a complete breakthrough with the received wisdom or the orthodox way of upholding communist movement given a complete new definition, on which he revealed the facts that that even in the socialist society objective conditions do prevail which may bring counterrevolution even in the socialist society. In socialist countries themselves contradictions within the economic base, in the superstructure, and in the relation between base and superstructure as well as the influence and pressure and outright attacks from the surrounding imperialist and reactionary states could happen at any given time, that would give rise to the class difference and class struggle even up to the class hostility within the socialist society. These contradictions constantly pose the possibility of socialist society being led towards degeneration. These contradictions give rise to the bourgeoisie class within the socialist society. Those bourgeoisies uphold capitalist road in the name of the communist, they assimilate themselves with the imperialist and finally: they return to the capitalist road. Mao saw those people in authority held the capitalist road. He saw the epicentre of struggle among the supporters of the socialism and revisionism, or the socialist and capitalists on the superstructure of the socialist society.

Mao recognised and accentuated that so long as the material conditions of capitalism and their ideological reflections exist in the socialist society, there could be no guarantee against the reversal of revolution and the restoration of capitalism against socialism in the socialist society. There can be no easy and simple way to prevent these counter revolutions restoring the capitalist society over socialist than to continue the revolution within the socialist society together with the advance of the revolution in the world. So long as the communist revolution does not happen in the world, social inequalities and other vestiges of capitalism cannot be eliminated, so the danger of counter revolution in the socialist society continue to prevail.

Those contradictions generated inside the socialist society offered Mao an opportunity to synthesise the continuation of socialist revolution in order to prevent the restoration of capitalism. Thus, Mao cleared up a great deal of confusion with the scientific answer of those questions as to whether and why there is a danger of counter revolution to cause the capitalist restoration in the socialist society. The Great People’s Cultural Revolution was a great campaign to prevent the capitalist restoration in the socialist China, that mobilised millions of Chinese people on the debate on capitalism and socialism, it mobilized them for the continuation of the proletarian revolution, it clarified the ideological, political and practical merits in the broad masses of people to identify the differences between socialism and capitalism, it led the Marxist struggle to newer height against revisionism and it prevented the counter revolution in China in the lifetime of Mao Tse Tung.

Rising of Revisionism and Capitalism over Nepalese Revolution

The development of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and the influence of Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution led the Communist ideology and proletarian world outlook root deeply in Nepalese society. As the proletarian ideology established in Nepalese society along with the counter revolution in Russia and the great debate waged by Mao against it, the revisionist pollution entered together as another dimension of Nepalese Communist Movement. The struggle between Marxism and revisionism has been continued to be the bitter struggle of Nepalese Communist Movement.

Among the communists divided in Khruschevitan revisionism and Mao thought, there was a vigorous struggle on the question of the revolutionary path, question of tactics and overall state power of Nepal between the followers of Maoism and Mao thought. In this debate, ‘the most unclear and controversial position was held by the central nucleus’.11 The debate was rested on whether the path of Nepalese revolution goes as Russian way of armed insurrection or as Chinese way of protracted people’s war, and another debate was centred around Democratic revolution as strategy and ‘the government of the patriotic and democratic forces’ as the tactic. In this debate, Mohan Bikram Singh used to advocate two stage revolution and this general line was defeated along with the split of Mashal Party. But approximately after one decade, along with the pressure of the first people’s movement of Nepal, Baburm Bhattarai entered into the party in the name of party unity. Along with his entry, the revisionist policy, method and way of Nepalese revolution based on the two stage theory entered into the party. This revisionist line of Mohan Bikram Singh was adopted by the by then Communist Party on Nepal (Marxist-Leninist) led by Madan Bhadari and that was called ‘People’s Multiparty Democracy’.12 By carrying this obsolete slogan, Baburam made the Competitive Democracy of Twenty First Century.

The first thing is that Baburam Bhattarai couldn’t grasp the depth of Maoism till the Unity Congress. He had dissent on Maoism as being the guiding thought and the ideology of party. Later he had been dissenting on the issue of the necessity of the People’s War and its fundamental character. After the initiation of the PW, he had dissent even on the necessity and the importance of the establishment of the base area. At that time, he had adherence to the eclectic policy of Masal on the question of principal contradiction that hold equal status between the domestic reaction and Indian expansionism. But on these entire historical juncture and party decisions, he continued to follow the decision of majority. What has his characteristic remained was always to maintain his presence, control and observation on every sector. Although he continued to uphold the party decisions of the majority, he took out the internal debates to the open publications. By this, the fact was clear that he kept on grabbing senior position of the party and continued involving the outsider into the internal debates, thus revealing internal plans to expose.

Along with the process of the emergence of revolutionary people’s power by through the development of the People’s War, Baburam controlled the important links of the party which were essential to the revolution. Among the important components needed for revolution as party, information, supply and international relation, he controlled three aspects except party and reaching three steps ahead to Prachanda. Baburam’s position of holding senior post of the party on one side, exposing party’s internal debates to outside on the other, and making illogical arguments in the name of ‘New’ had been applying the fact that Mao drew along with the GPCR that the representatives of the capitalists enter onto the party centre through pseudo intellectuals.

In this reference, there were some important questions arisen in the second national conference in 2000. The questions of the weaknesses of Socialist Revolution waged in Russia, question of Stalin and the Democracy of 21st Century were discussed in that conference. A broad discussion was also held on the issues how to put the party continuously on the path of the revolution and under the control of the people. On all of these issues, there was drastic difference between the Central Committee under Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai in the understanding, way and methods. At that time Baburam gave an interview to Kantipur Daily declaring that he intended to convert a revolutionary communist party to a Gandhian party. He distorted the arguments of communist’s competition inside the socialist society to check counter revolutions that appeared after revolution in the international communist movement to the competition of the communists with the capitalists in the bourgeoisie’s society. What had been the interesting and bitter lesion of the liquidationist and vulgar general line of Baburam was that its application caused the downfall of the achievements gained from the People’s War like the collapse of Dharahara (Bhimsen Tower) by eight Rector-Scales earthquake.13 Whatever the debates had been undergone in the second national congress and however had the revisionist ideas and lines were prevented, that were adopted as the party policy in the Chunbang meeting held in 2005. Mr. Prachanda as a chairman of the Party had however been defending Maoist science in any form until 2005. In Chunbang meeting, Pachanda began to trip down Descartes’ dualism abandoning Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and he argued that Prachanda and Baburam could be intermingled to each other just as the capitalist do that the bourgeoisie and the socialist line could be merged as the theory of “two combine into one”.

The revisionist debate inside the party conducted by Baburam was published as an article named ‘The concept of New State Power’ in the party organs ‘MAOBADI’ and ‘The Worker’14. In that article, obsolete logics and the same pang and grunt as did by the revisionists around the world and shabby revisionist UML of Nepal were echoed. In that article he argued in the same length as did by the reactionaries around the world criticised the dictatorship of the proletariat while coming from Marx to Mao, on which he advocated that the dictatorship of the proletariat ultimately converts to ‘the dictatorship of the party’ like in Soviet Russia and China, furthermore, that falls down to the ‘dictatorship of the person’. These types of arguments were used to be raised by Rosa Luxemburg and Trotsky on the contemporary movements of Lenin. In China, the revisionists, who were against Mao, had raised it. While the People’s War was initiated with the promises15 that weapons would not be laid down so long as New Democratic Revolution could not be completed, in the middle of the war, he put forward the same obsolete logics as were done by Mohan Bikram ‘the government of the patriotic and democratic forces’ and further adopted by Madan Bhandari under the banner of ‘People’s Multiparty Democracy’ that the New Democratic Revolution could not be attained unless it going through a specific sub-steps, for which he told the ‘democracy of the 21st century. He launched a vigorous debate inside party and what would have been revealed in his document that the bourgeois republican political system is necessary before reaching into the New Democracy in Nepal. He argued that this republic will work as a driving force to take the society into the Democratic Republic. No matter how much logics he made in the attempts to theorise his revisionist attitudes, his core conclusion was that revolution is not possible in Nepal. His second conclusion he drew that economic revolution could be attained sans the political revolution and his third conclusion was neither any revolution is possible in Nepal nor that can sustain without the support of India. Baburam’s idealist, subjective, existentialist and backward conclusions continued the party being let towards wrong direction and influenced the main leadership Prachanda.

Baburam’s arguments inside the party posed new challenge before Prachanda pursuing to develop further on world outlook, ideology and philosophy, and politics and organization. Failure in meeting these challenges would necessarily lead to surrender to Baburam. New debates were underway inside the party under the leadership of Prachanda how to develop socialism to a new dimension. It was because, without thinking on that way neither New Democratic Revolution was possible in Nepal not that could transform to socialism, and on top of that what was very important that even if the revolution was completed it was not possible to maintain that socialist society without having such development. As a result to that attempt, new premises were put forward as to keep the party under people’s observation, formation of the South Asia Socialist Federation and making fusion of the Russian and Chinese strategy in order to complete the Nepalese revolution. But these premises were vulgarised by Baburam’s revisionist eclecticism and in the Central Committee meeting at Kamidanda in 2008, propositions were put forward that the line of revolution could go with the set of strategy of People’s War-People’s, people’s insurrection, dialogue and diplomacy were presented. While there has been impossible to Prachanda to refute Baburam and develop on MLM, then he could not help but uphold Darwin’s vulgar evolutionary theory that holds “environmental effects lead to varying degrees of reproductive success in individuals and groups of organisms” and “natural selection tends to promote adaptation in organisms when necessary for survival”16, so did he presented the policy of liquidation of revolution by saying that ‘if possible new democracy’ and ‘if not possible bourgeoisie democracy’ so compelled to parliamentarian environment for his livelihood rather transforming the country through revolution. Ideologically, it was Prachanda’s surrendering to Baburam. Prachanda’s surrendering to Baburam ultimately dragged him to surrender to the reactionary state power.

When the naked capitulation was occurred front of the old power, he was forced to act as a puppet of the bourgeois. Along with the emerging as a largest party in the Constituent Assembly, trend of Prachanda-Baburam went so widely and vulgarly in appreciating the parliamentarianism, cooperating with reactionary class or people’s enemy as it was no way indifferent to Alende the leader of Communist Party of Chile17. They appreciated the election of the CA so much, suppose that ten year long People’s War was only for the CA as if there were no meaning of New Democracy, Socialism, Communism and proletarian internationalism. Having forgotten the martyr’s blood, the dreams of disappeared and the cry of the peasants and workers, Communist party used to be called as ‘My party’ and the sacrifice, dedication and contributions of people were discarded and told that whatever achievements were done, were “by me”. They did not only this; in the name of tactic, they honoured the parliamentarian reactionaries like UML and Nepali Congress for their grace to ‘return them to the parliamentary mainstream from People’s War’. They blindly appreciated the ongoing comprador capitalism. But they never saw the people’s aspirations in the so called victory of election of the CA; rather they were mired by the illusion that they were elected because of their individual capability and excellences. While the situation come to form government through the process of the election, the political blindness was further aggravated that political agendas representing the family of martyrs, disappeared, peasant of the villages, oppressed workers and the whole question of nationality, democracy and livelihood came to be realised as a bone into dishes. People’s Liberation Army Nepal, that brought the country to republic through the process of great people’s war was dissolved recklessly. Political and military schooling inside the cantonment , which was mainly persuading the cause and necessity for the continuation of revolution and promoting abilities to fight against counter revolutionary weeds were banned18, and the PLA was promoted and enthused to filthy activities like smuggling, stealing, murdering and looting. The PLA which upheld the dialectical materialist philosophy and marched to change world was treated as a helpless creature and pushed to cultivate illusion and superstition.19

Along with ascending to government, their arrogance increased abnormally. Reactionary class created a phobia of so called Statesmanship. Suffered by the zest how to prove himself bona fide for so called statesmanship, Prachanda, went on bugging down into national chauvinism discarding the historic opportunity to accomplish NDR and also lead international communist movement. On top of that, becoming a ‘Statesmanship’ of the neo-colonial country is simply becoming a puppet of imperialism and expansionism. In ideologically degenerated Prachanda’s sight, the carrot of Statesmanship brightened just as a Nobel Prise does in the eyes of every intellectuals and Victoria Cross does to every bravos. Their political blindness was not limited to it; they were victimized by the provocation of UML and NC on the action to Rukmangad Katuwal. The contradiction between Prachanda and Baburam also played on it because the game was going on to topple down Prachanda and make Baburam the Prime Minister. Similarly, they lauded voices that since the political revolution has been completed, they will admit to economic revolution. Industrialists, national capitalist and the middle class people who hadn’t seen the possibility of development because of the neo-colonial condition of the state became frustrated by their conclusions and thus the trust over them went on eliminated.

The root cause of these consequences was the theoretical, ideological and political deviation appeared on them, and was the failure in developing on MLM and being fallen into perplexity.

Attempts for the development in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism

A good many attempts are being made to develop Marxism-Leninism- Maoism in the internationalist communist movement. These attempts are being made by many intellectuals, Marxists, supporters of socialism, and those people who want to develop on socialism. But, since Marxism is not a static but a living science, it requires a scientific application to have development on it. So far some specific attempts are made to develop on MLM through the scientific experiments of theory to practice and vice versa.

Among these attempts, one is the proposal forwarded by the Peru Communist Party (PCP). The PCP has proposed Gonzalo Thought20 under the leadership of Chairman Gonzalo. Gonzalo told that there would be a new wave21 of revolution in the world. Prior to have developing dialectical materialism, socialist political economy and scientific socialism as its set of ideology, politics and organisation, the Peruvian movement got to encounter a setback. After the arrest of Gonzalo the communists over there, in the continuation of class struggle, are trying hard to address the complexities of the development on MLM. The so called peace proposal22 which is attributed to Gonzalo, on that a rightist opportunist line applied by a wing of the central committee, the other fraction’s attempt to reach to the depth of the problems are the complex issued to be resolved for the development of MLM. Along with the international debate on these issues, the Peruvians are leading them ahead.

Another attempt to develop MLM in the communist movement is being advanced by Revolutionary Communist Party USA. The RCP USA has proposed some important debates for discussion with the objectives of studying deeply several complexities appeared on the socialist society, that aims at to grasp MLM firmly by adopting positive aspects in those experiences, so make clearing the negative aspects basing on scientific analysis and raise the MLM to a new height on the basis of developed science.23 RCP USA has put its finger on the pivotal points in making leap and breakthrough in the present understanding of the grasping MLM and applying it in practice by chalking out basic four points as philosophy and methodology, internationalism, dictatorship of the proletariats and strategy for the communist revolution. The RCP USA has attempted to show that the development in MLM at this time is related to the second wave24 of the socialist movement or the development of the new wave.

Alike the Maoist in Peru and Nepal and world over, Bob Avakian the chairman of the RCP USA has been grappling with the issues why do the socialist states fall to dissolution after the demise of the leadership that leads the revolution success. The reason left behind, he says, are some ideological and philosophical shortcomings of those successful leaders in spite of their strength and the successor leaders do fail to grasp in dialectical materialist approach rather they religiously upholding and ape them. He seems to grapple with the question to provide a scientific answer where do wrong tendencies come to the communists in philosophical arena. He analyses that Marx has to be understood from the depth of science. While doing this, whatever historical practices were performed correctly has to be learned from, and while putting these lessons in to practice, the communist should omit the erroneous aspects by applying the fundamental laws of communism. Bob argues that understanding of ‘Negation to negation’ had been establishing by Marxian era. But this understanding has been grasped as ‘Negation to affirmation’ till Mao era. Finally this understanding in philosophy tends to lead to inevitable-ism. For example, since the feudalism was negated by the capitalism, then the capitalism has to be negated by socialism and it can take us to the understanding that it occurs essentially and automatically. The consequences of this type of understanding will be either not to make revolution or fail to govern the prevailing socialist state and ultimately backtrack to counter revolution. It is the duty of communists to correct this kind of ideas. Some of these shortcomings were appeared in Stalin and Mao had broken away from that. In spite of these attempts Mao himself, naturally some influences were rested on Mao.

This kind of problem appears on internationalism too. RCP criticizes the socialist leaders having the tendency to consider the socialist state power above the internationalist movement instead of rather making the socialist state power the base area of the internationalist movement. Bob states that this kind of problem had been seen over then Soviet Union as well as in China.

In relation to the dictatorship of the proletariat, Mao had clarified how the existing material conditions lead socialist society backward to capitalism, so he had propounded a theory of continuous revolution to prevent it. Furthermore, Bob has argued that the communists need to make link between science and art and there need a broad discussions among the intellectuals to make further development on laws that Mao established. He argues similarly, that the role of the critics and oppositions is also significant in some contexts in the socialist society. Therefore, only after advancing the socialist society by a kind of competitive experiment the socialism can be transformed to communism, and possible shortcomings on leadership could be prevented. Bob Avakian warns that the tendency that the proletariat in power exercising dictatorship and making decisions either by individual or by group always mark proletarian so become in the interest and as per the science of communism leads to ‘conceptualism’ . These individuals and even group may not have correct socialist and communist ideas. But in the socialist society, these types of people could take a wrong decisions in given time, or problems could happen not seriously penetrating to the depth of socialist science or may not tolerate the ideas of the opposition and opposite ideas. He had pointed out that these problems had been seen on some individuals and groups during the time of Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. In these kinds of problems the concepts of ‘class truth’ supersede scientific truth.

Likewise, on the strategic approach of revolution, Bob Avakian asserts that people need to be made aware ideologically, politically and organizationally and with this revolutionary consciousness and revolutionary experience attained in the class struggle and Lenin’s methods to make revolution need to grasp firmly. This kind of ideas are interpreted as the ‘New Synthesis’ which the RCP USA considers as further development on MLM.

Comrade Ajith25, one of the senior members of Communist Party of India, has criticised in his polemic the logics of Bob Avakian, saying that his arguments would lead to individualism, adventurism and applying revisionism having abandoned MLM. Similarly some members of Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM), including the communist parties of Turkey, Afghanistan, Italy, have also criticized.

In Nepal, Maoist party under the leadership of Prachanda had paid attention in the development of ideology. But this process was interrupted when its main leadership knelt down to the bourgeois and revisionist line. This process of developing ideology is being proceeded along with the refutation of Prachanda Bhattarai neo-revisionism and having a formation and development of new party the Communist Party of Nepal Maoist. Apart from this, it is seen that the attempt to develop MLM in the communist movements in other countries are advancing their own way. But, because of the particularities of theoretical, ideological and organisational conditions, the general outcomes are becoming intolerance to each other, split among communist and dividing into groups, for there is feeling of the lack of authoritative leadership who can analyze correctly and the kind of ideological debate.

Marxism is science and it demands new clarity of new complex issues according to the new development of the society. The methods of all science to find truth are the social practice with the sum of struggle for production, class struggle and scientific experiment.26 Alike in other science, the science of making revolution also has to be proved through scientific experiment. But there are two problems appear on communists: firstly, if the concepts are put forward on the direction of developing ideology they are treated as authority and second, if any proposals are put forward by other they are negated outright. As the scientists take patience to see the final result of the research through scientific experiments, Communists should also learn the same patience in the arena of social science. Thus, whoever RCP, PCP, Communist Party of India or Communist Party of Nepal or any communist party of the world make any attempt to development in philosophy and politics, they should be considered as the property developed by the proletariat for the emancipation of human beings.

Integrated People’s Revolution: the path of New Democracy and Scientific Socialism

In order to accomplish the democratic and socialist revolution in Nepal, the international circumstances and national situation need to be analyzed correctly. Economic growth on the world, development of science and its impact, the growing interdependency on natural resources and means for progress of human being along with the development of science and the necessity to develop a worldwide collectiveness in production, distribution and consumption in many objects have laid foundation to establish the communist order in the world. Meanwhile, the monopolistic capitalist class who captures the world’s capital degenerating to a small gangster27, the people of the world being compelled to turn out to a machine for production and for consumption to the goods for the capitalist class, and the people of the world desiring to get free from this objective situation proves that the world imperialism is generating the oppressed masses of the world as the its own grave diggers and foundation are laid to establish communism in the world. To reach to this scientific socialism and communism, the appropriate line is necessary. In the present world situation, and to make such revolution, the general line is Unified People’s Revolution.

There are several questions arisen on the UPR now. The first task is to clarify these questions, establish this general line among the people and to organize people. Many of the expertise blame us Unified People’s Revolution is not based on “long taught Marxist idiom”. Some of the friends raise the question in which science the UPR is based on. Nevertheless, all of these tendencies need the clarification on the general line. The UPR is clear on ideological, political philosophical and organizational set of science. The scientists of chemistry and physics have come to the conclusion of the historical dialectical materialist norm that all of the advanced science cannot reject the older norms. The modern specific and advanced knowledge is explored on the foundation of the general knowledge of the former scientists. It can be called the qualitative transformation from the quantitative transformation of the knowledge. They came to the conclusion that all of today’s bigger explorations are based on the foundation of the past basic knowledge. Therefore, the development of recent and the future of the physics should be recognized as the integrated and contour form of the sciences from the general theories of Pythagoras through Newton, Galileo to the scientific norms of Einstein. In other words, only to grasp the developments of some scientists is to be one sided, imperfect, unrealistic; not able to distinct several strong and weak dimensions of these scientists and ultimately not to be succeed on these kinds of explorations.

This is also being implemented on social sciences. Coming up to the history of class struggle and socialist movement, Unified People’s Revolution is expressed in a integrated zeitgeist taking several successful and unsuccessful revolution in the past, deeply investigating the strong and weak aspects of those experiences, understanding the science of MLM deeply and applying them in distinct of universal and specific aspects of experiences and the policy, method and procedure to accomplish the New Democratic Revolution and advancing to scientific socialism.

On the context of new democratic or scientific socialist revolution, many of the communist leaders in the International Communist Movement (ICM) uphold Lenin, Mao, Che Guevara and Kim Ill Sung either of one in one-sided way and separating to each from other. Or, they fail to distinct between the universal laws and specific policies being applied in different context while applying communist strategy and tactic. Some people also link the norms and values of the communist movement with the bourgeoisie policy and propaganda. While separating the lessons of the communist movement become one sided, linking the historical dialectical materialist norms to idealism of the bourgeoisie becomes eclecticism. Therefore, ICM has been trapped in a roundabout of dogmatism, sometimes becoming one-sided and sometimes being victim of eclecticism. Nepalese Communist Movement too could not immune of this plight. This ideological and philosophical problem created in the communist movement is also resolved by the UPR.

There are some fundamental bases of the UPR which should be paid attention as the character of Nepalese revolution on the objective situation of Nepal. First, being a weak and centralized feudalist and comprador bureaucratic capitalist country, Second, with the impact of the global capitalism the villages being transform into cities and the cities transform cities to metropolitan and mega cities and narrowing the gap between villages and cities, Third, remaining the problems of ethnicity, region, genders and class of the country as it were and failing the comprador capitalism to solve practically these problems, Fourth, developing of the middle class due to the bureaucratic, comprador capitalist production relation in Nepalese circumstances, generally in the specific step of the development of the society, Fifth, collective ruin28 of PLA and Royal Nepalese Army (RNA) in the process of the PW and latterly the domination of comprador capitalist leaders on it and domination of the most traitor, fascist and anti-people force on the state power, Sixth, due to reactionary coalition of the traitors forces, raising of the patriotic awareness among scattered nationalist and democratic force and they are getting united against national traitor and Seventh, development of the technology and development of the awareness of the people and zest to take the world from necessity to freedom are the recent characteristics of Nepalese revolution to be noted. The policy, procedure and method to understand these characteristics in integrated and unified form and applying the is the general line of the Unified People’s Revolution. New Democratic revolution could be accomplished in Nepal only by understanding MLM on the ground reality of Nepal not mechanically and dogmatically. Thus, revolution is not possible based on the hearsay of the past, it has to be accomplished on the ground of actual geopolitics, economic, social, transformation of Nepalese society, which are the essence accumulated in the general line of Unified People’s Revolution.

When we see the international movement and people’s resistance, three types of movements can be seen developed against the Imperialism. First, the communist movements, revolutionary movements, are being waged with the goal of world communism and human emancipation on the basis of proletariat class. Second, national liberation movements are being waged against the oppression of the imperialist rulers, which they are imposing to the nationalities inside and outside of the country. Third, anti-imperialist movements are being waged as the world environment including economic, political, cultural movement, animal conservation, water conservation etc. Among those movements, no movement would neither address the issues nor succeed the movements except the revolutionary communist movement. The general line to wage those types of movement integrated and lead it ideologically, politically and organizationally by the communists is also the UPR.

In general, the revolution accomplished in any country should address the social trend and tendencies developed in the world. In particular, this kind of revolution addresses the problems of one country in a primary level. Some people say that the proletarian revolution is impossible in the modern age of the developed science and technology as well as the human consciousness. The Euro Communists, philosophers of the Frankfurt school, postmodernist philosophers have understood Marxism as the theological dogma, not as the continuously developing science and have established the same incorrect norms. MLM is the scientific communist philosophy which revolutionizes the society regularly. Socialist science is a philosophy which utilizes human scientific idea and experiment for the wellbeing of the people and encourages the people›s capacities. Therefore, MLM grasps the dynamism of society according to the development its pace and leads to continuous transformation of the revolution and aftermath. The idea to address this science is the general line is the UPR. If we see the situation of the country on this ideological and political merits, the globalised monopolistic capitalism and its inseparable links to Nepalese political and economic situation. Economically, Nepal is dominated by comprador capitalism and nowhere is found the mode of production based on classical feudalistic production relation based on lord vessels vest. But Imperialism has preserved the feudalist political, social and cultural system in third world counties and in order to facilitate this is has been protecting the comprador capitalism. That›s why the past feudalism has raised to comprador capitalism with the feudalist tradition, culture and tendency. Its character becomes anarchist in politics and arbitrary in judiciary. So it can be called the Anacho-autocratic system. Because of this system the nationalist and patriotic forces of the country have been developed. All of these facts should be considered on the context of Nepalese revolution.

Along with reduction of the gap between villages and the cities, as well as because of the urbanization of the country, utilization and exchange of foreign capital, coercion of Nepalese people to work in foreign industries and termination of the national capital, the middle class is being developed without the base or the national capital. On regard of the nation, contradiction between modern consuming commodities and old type of the means of the production, the cottage industries of and agriculture have been ended up. Which causes the productive forces of the country is decamped to abroad. This issue also should be addressed in Nepalese revolution.

Nepal is situated on a specific situation on regard of its geopolitics. Nepal is situated as such in between India and China and any political changes in this country will give impact to these giant and heavily populated counties. While seen in the present world situation, the present situation of Nepal is deeply mired under the unbearable pit of economic inequality29 . Countries and people living under the global organisations like United Nations of Organisation, European Union, BRICS and different regional organisations are badly suffered by the dissimilarities of the global distribution of the wealth. The global capital distribution is serious. From a great available data it has already been clear that world’s richest one percent assume world’ fifteen percent of wealth, while 20 percent poor possess merely one percent wealth. The capitalist themselves are badly frustrated by the serious economic crisis and they imagine30 to end the poverty by 2025. The contradiction between production and distribution and economic inequalities have constantly giving rise to the race of weapons and necessity of war, as well as that is bringing changes into global power balance and no matter how much they wish to shape the world to one polar, it is rapidly growing divided towards multi-polar situation. The American imperialist war economy is not only centralising the world economy, it has been giving birth to its enemy forces in the world over and has encouraged the production, experimentation and storage of the weapons. The process of American weapon production is not limited only in France, Britain, Germany and Japan, this technology has been transferred in other countries of the world as well, which is not only increasing the internal contradiction inside the pole of American imperialism but also cause the American economy to decline. Similarly, formation of BRICS, establishment of Asian Development Bank, development of atomic weapons in Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran and Korea are accelerating the multi-polar world. And the struggles in the Middle-East and the imperialist interference have intensified the inter-imperialist contradiction.

The world phenomenon that imperialism has been blocking the progress of the people of world in one side, and the public consciousness growing widely along with the development of the science and technology on the other, or zeal for political changes raise up tremendously, and on the other a contradiction being appeared between the development of capital and its distribution is forcefully leading the situation towards world socialist revolution. In this condition, the general political line of the UPR will not only guide the Nepalese revolution but will also make a tremendous contribution to lead the world revolution. If the condition of accomplishing the revolution and transforming into the scientific socialism will be created in Nepal, the general line of the UPR will be certainly a development in MLM.

End notes
1. See the three source and three component parts of Marxism by Lenin.

2. “The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. Man must prove the truth — i.e. the reality and power, the this-sidedness of his thinking in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking that is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question”. (Marx, Second Thesis on Feuerbach.)

3. Hegel for Beginners, by Llyod Spencer and Andrzej Krauze

4. Marx: Once the inner connection is grasped, all theoretical belief in the permanent necessity of existing conditions breaks down before their collapse in practice.

5. Karl Marx. Third Thesis on Feuerbach

6. See Lenin: Three Component parts of Marxism

7. See communism: the beginning of the new stage, A manifesto from the Revolutionary Com¬munist Party, USA September 2008, on

8. See RCP UDA document: But beyond the immediate consequences that flowed, to a significant degree, from the shortcomings and limitations of the Paris Commune, the reality is this: Had the Commune defeated the attacks of the counter-revolution and survived, it would then have faced the even greater challenge of reorganizing and transforming the whole society, and not just the capital of Paris, where it held power for a brilliant but all too brief period. It would have had to create a radically new and different economy, a socialist economy, in a country still made up largely of small farmers (peasants), and it would have had to overcome profound and tradition-steeped inequality and oppression, in particular the chains that have bound women for thousands of years. And here again the weaknesses and limitations of the Commune stand out: Women played a vital and heroic role in the creation of the Commune and the fight to defend it, but they were nonetheless maintained in a subordinate position within the Commune.

9. See Declaration of Revolutionary Internationalist Movement that addresses the shortcomings and limitation of the then Soveit State power under the leadership of Stalin : Mao Tsetung, while upholding Stalin from the slanders of Khrushchev, made serious and correct criticisms of these errors: Mao explained the ideological basis for Stalin’s errors: “Stalin had a fair amount of metaphysics in him and he taught many people to follow metaphysics”, “Stalin failed to see the connection between the struggle of opposites and the unity of opposites. Some people in the Soviet Union are so metaphysical and rigid in their thinking that they think a thing has to be either one or the other, refusing to recognise the unity of opposites.

10. Ranadhir Singh, Crisis of Socialism: p.126. The struggle, really a cultural revolution to change human beings, was also for Mao in very real sense class struggle, more important and difficult than overthrowing the old classes, nationalising property,building heavy industryor rising material living standerds of the people, important or difficult thoigh, all these things are.


12. See : Document of the fourth Congress of then ML.

13. There was the earthquake with magnitude of 7.9 rector scale in Nepal during the mid 2015. Which destroyed century old Dharahara or Bhimsen Tower at once. Several houses of Kath¬mandu with weaker foundation were devastated by this earthquake. Socialist romance of Prachanda-Bhattarai elevated on the weak theoretical, political and ideological foundation was also destroyed.

14. See ‘The Worker’ no. 9. Baburam had put forward his revisionist ideas as the demands of 13 points following 9 points one. He had been creating the multiple pressures to apply his politi¬cal line until his demands weren’t accepted by the party.

15. The initiative pamphlet of the great People’s War

16. Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

17. See Chile: An Attempt at “Historic Compromise” by Jorge Palacios. P.70. .. speaking before the plennum of the central committee of the Communist Party of Chile, Alende, said, “what we have done and achieved in Chile has not been done and achieved, until now in another country which is capable of takig power with legal means, inorder to initiate the revolution. The Chilian people is the only people, in this continent and in the world that has done this.”

18. The political instruction, fixed by the People’s Liberation Army before the election of the Con¬stituent Assembly, had been started from 7th division. After the emphasis of the instruction, held for five days, on the opposition of parliamentarianism and the continuation of the revo¬lution, Prachanda-Baburams cancelled the instructions of remaining 6 divisions questioning of “Reciprocity between the political and instructional dynamism”.

19. In most of the divisions, the job of the PLA commanders became trading and smuggling red sandal, Yarshagumba (Cordyceps Sinesis), precious stones and collecting the property. Prachanda-Baburam applied the policy that whoever can collect more and more money he will be the capable. The commanders, been blind for the property, took the job of searching jackal’s horn, paws of eagle owl (Huchil), bombax flowers. The deviation of the leaders and revisionist capitalist culture created by it, uncertain to the future and financial crisis and indif¬ference to the leaders morally lapsed the militant youths holding the great objectives to the ideological fall in short time and forced thousands of them to fall in the pit of superstition.

20. See AWTW no 18 interview of Chairman Gonzalo: In sum, GonzaloThought is none other than the application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to our concrete reality. This means that it is principal specihcally for our Party, for the People’s War and for the revolution in our country, and want to emphasize that. But for us, looking at our ideology in universal ferms, emphasize once again, it is Maoism that is principal.

21. See Starting from this key question, established in the I Congress of the Party, Gonzalo Thought is the application of the universal truth, of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, prin¬cipally Maoism, to the concrete conditions of Peruvian society and the world today. Therefore we say that the most substantive and most developed of Gonzalo Thought is found in the general political line of the Party and there the developments and contributions of Gonzalo Thought to Marxism are specified. Even more so, Gonzalo Thought solves new problems of the people´s war and develops bases of strategy and tactics for the world revolution; it establishes its three stages or moments, determining that around 1980 we entered its third moment; in his masterful Speech of the 24th of September 1992 he pointed out that we were entering a new great wave of the world proletarian revolution.

22. See Asumir document from the prison of Peru on which with 11 point proposal came out in the name of Gonzalo tells to give up people’s war, people’s liberation army and political power for until leadership is established. See the debate in AWTW no 21, 1995, as well as the docu¬ments of capitulation

23. See A brief introduction to BA’s new synthesis of communism: In terms of philoso¬phy and method, the new synthesis establishes communism even more fully and firmly on a scientific foundation. It deepens understanding of the material basis for internationalism and why, in an ultimate and overall sense, the world arena is most decisive, even in terms of revo¬lution in a particular country. On the character of the dictatorship of the proletariat, Avakian has brought forward a model of socialism as a vibrant and dynamic society – characterized by great ferment, dissent, experimentation, and initiative – that is also a revolutionary transition to communism. The new synthesis also comprehends a breakthrough in the strategic ap¬proach to revolution in today’s world, in particular an orientation for making revolution in the imperialist countries such as the U.S.

24. See COMMUNISM: THE BEGINNING OF A NEW STAGE A Manifesto from the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA

25. See Naxalbari no 4 July 2013, the polemic against avakianism by Ajith.

26. Where do correct ideas come from? Do they drop from the skies? No. They come from social practice, and from it alone; they come from three kinds of social practice, the struggle for production, the class struggle and scientific experiment. — Mao Tse-Tung

27. Facts tell that the economic distribution of the world is very uneven. Only one percent of the people have the property more than 50 percent of the population of the world have. In America, more than 99% of property belongs to 1% population and 97 persons of the world have the property more than 20% of the population of the world have. This type of centraliza¬tion of the property has made the situation of unifying the oppressed population of the world and of toppling down the oppressors.

28. See Communist Manifesto: Marx and Engels told in the communist manifesto, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes. It is to be clear that Royal Nepalese Army and Peoples’ Liberation Army Nepal were the rival forces in the PW of Nepal. This conflict had to be concluded to the revolutionary restructure of the society but both of them have been terminated collectively. The force which hadn’t army, which hadn’t any interest to transform the society, that complained to be trapped between two guns and destroy of democracy. And that force, which works as the comprador of the Imperialist monopolistic capitalism, is now in the power.

29. See : According to the OECD in 2012 the top 0.6% of world population (consist¬ing of adults with more than 1 million USD in assets) or the 42 million richest people in the world held 39.3% of world wealth. The next 4.4% (311 million people) held 32.3% of world wealth. The bottom 95% held 28.4% of world wealth.

30. See the End of Poverty by Jeffrey Sachs. He concludes that “We can realistically envision a world without extreme poverty bythe year 2025…..”p347. He used to be an ecomomic adviser of Kofi Annan in the UN.