Marked discrepancy in parties’ principles and practice

Yuba Nath Lamsal

It has been widely believed that Nepal’s political parties are fast losing credibility among the people because of their deviation from the ideology and political values they cherished. Most of Nepal’s existing political parties seem to have clearly devoid of the ideology and principle on which they were founded. As political parties and their leaders have already departed from the path of their ideological orientation and values and have adopted market politics marked by the taste of new hip-pop generation, Nepal’s politics is heading towards a game and gamble for power and position.

None of the political parties practice what they preach. This inconsistency in principle and practice, and rhetoric and action has made it hard to predict what course of action the parties and leaders will take. When principle, ideology and moral authority cease to exist and fail to guide the parties and leaders, anything is possible, and that makes the parties and leaders unreliable and unpredictable. This is the problem of Nepal’s contemporary politics. The present crisis in Nepal’s politics and other sectors can be attributed to this tendency of the parties and their leaders.
Existential politics is what has made the parties opportunistic, narrow-sighted, unreliable and unpredictable. The parties, instead of standing firmly for the cause and ideals they fought for, take decisions that serve the immediate interests of particular leaders and their coteries. The present state of Nepal’s politics can be defined as the phase of market politics, which guides the politics, not based on certain principles and values, but based on the demand of the market, like, as in the market economy, get quick and immediate gains.
Let us take a look at the individual political parties. Let’s begin first with the largest party in the Constituent Assembly—the Nepali Congress. The Nepali Congress is Nepal’s one of the oldest parties that, in principle, champions democratic values and social justice. In other words, the official version of its political doctrine is ‘Democratic socialism. But it has long ago departed from its doctrine of ‘Democratic Socialism’ introduced in the party by its founder BP Koirala long ago in early 50s. But the Nepali Congress, after it went to power following the political change in 1990, was quick to shift to ultra capitalism, in which the concept and characters of socialism have no place. However, the Nepali Congress has not removed democratic socialism as its principal political doctrine from its official document. Thus, this discrepancy and inconsistency in principle and practice has eroded public faith as it has slowly losing popular support which is well manifested in the elections over the last 24 years since 1990 political change. The Nepal Congress has not yet been able to regain its old glory and popular support due mainly to its ideological deviation.

As far as the CPN-UML is concerned, it, too, has markedly deviated from the ideology it cherished. The ideological ground upon which the party was built is Marxism-Leninism- Mao Zedong Thought.  But it has long ago abandoned this ideological base. In course of time, the UML abandoned Mao’s thoughts and retained Marxism-Leninism as its guiding principle. The ‘People’s Multi-Party Democracy’ is now the guiding political doctrine of the CPN-UML. But, in the name of the ‘ People’s Multi-Party Democracy’  adopted in its fifth national congress in 1991, the UML has given up many of the cardinal principles of Marxism and Leninism, too. The CPN-UML has, in the name of ‘People’s Multi-Party Democracy’, totally abandoned the revolutionary path and, instead, chosen the reformist parliamentary approach to go to power, which is quite opposite of what this party had preached in the past. Marx and Lenin never supported parliamentary method. They described the parliament as a forum to deceive the people. Although CPN-UML still claims to be a communist party, it no longer remains so in practice.

If we look at the Unified Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist, or UCPN-Maoist, this, too, has been deviating from its original political line and principle. This party was founded long ago, but its activities became more visible only after it launched an armed insurgency. The decade-long armed insurgency, which the party calls the ‘people’s war’, established it as the principal political force of Nepal.
The party was founded on the principle of Marxism-Leninism and Maoism. This principle propagates the continued revolution through which a communist state is established. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism does not believe in peaceful and competitive politics but wants to capture power through an armed revolution. Guided by this principle, the armed insurgency was launched in which they partially succeeded. The 238-year-old feudal institution of the monarchy was abolished, and the UCPN-Maoist proved its supremacy even in electoral politics. In the elections held to form a Constituent Assembly in 2008, the UCPN-M emerged as the largest party in Nepal but was reduced to the status of poor third in the election held in 2013. This dwindling popular support of the UCPN-M is partly attributed to its ideological vacillation. Viewed from the ideological perspective, the party seems to have clearly deviated from its cherished principle of Marxism-Leninism and Maoism. Marx, Lenin and Mao never advocated peaceful and competitive politics to go to power. An electoral process is bourgeoisie democracy, in which a true communist does not believe.
The Maoist party is currently in a dilemma as to whether it should continue with the course of politics it has adopted right after it joined the peace process or go back to the earlier approach of an armed revolution. Although some party leaders still claim that its ultimate goal is to capture power through a revolution, the issue concerning peace and constitution are just the tactical policies to achieve its strategic goal. However, it is now hard to believe that the party would again go back to the old era of protracted ‘ people’s war’.  The seventh national congress of the party held last year in Hetauda of Makwanpur has clearly adopted the political line of peaceful revolution to prepare a ground for socialism. The party claims that capitalist revolution has been partially successful and the remaining task of completing the revolution will be accomplished through peaceful means or through the revolution of national production. The Hetauda Congress is the clear departure of the UCPN-Maoist from its revolutionary path and it has adopted the peaceful path, which, in other words, is parliamentary road. Some describe the political line of the UCPN-Maoist as akin to that of CPN-UML’s ‘ People’s Multi-Party Democracy’ introduced by late Madan Bhandari. However, the political line of UCPN-Maoist or the ‘ capitalist democratic revolution’ is fundamentally different from that of the CPN-UML. The CPN-UML has completely abandoned Marxism and adopted the western capitalist democracy, the UCPN-Maoist still believes and champions some radical and revolutionary approaches, though peaceful, to achieve the goal of socialism. But this, too, is a sharp ideological U-turn.

 Similar is the case with other existing parties - big or small. The marked inconsistency in rhetoric and action of the parties is the root cause of the present political crisis in the country. As a result, the parties seem to have behaved as though they are bigger than the country, politicians tend to think that they are more important than the people. Similarly, power and position are of more importance for the parties and leaders than the interest of the country. Here lies the fundamental flaw which must be rectified by the parties if the country is to move ahead towards the path of peace, prosperity and stability.