Comrade Alastair

(this was also written as a post on www.Revleft.com, as part of the ongoing debate within the revolutionary socialist movement about Nepal. It was actually largely in reply to the pessimistic comments of a Maoist, a RL member of the Revolutionary Communist Party in the US, which shows that even within the Maoist current opinion is divided. I intend to write an in depth, well researched full length article about Nepal some time in the future, that will go over the ground I briefly covered here and elsewhere in a much deeper way. Watch this space…)

I reject the idea that the CPN (M) is going in the direction of becoming a “capitalist” party. The Bolsheviks did not immediately implement socialism, and that was in a large country with a strong industrial working class (it was a minority, but it was still much larger and stronger than anything Nepal has), and much greater development of national capital. Lenin referred to what the Bolsheviks were implementing as “state capitalism”, not socialism (which makes the Cliffite use of the term even more ridiculous), does that make him “pro-capitalist” and the Bolsheviks a “capitalist party”?

The Bolsheviks implemented the NEP, which was essentially allowing a form of capitalism to function, while keeping it under the wary eye of the workers state. They did this in order to develop the level of capital, infrastructure, industrial and agricultural production necessary to lay the foundations for socialist construction.

If the Bolsheviks did this when they were much stronger in Russia than the Maoists are in Nepal, when the organised forces of counter-revolution had been already defeated, and when world imperialism and capitalism was exhausted and weakened from the First World War, why is it that the CPN (M) is expected to act in an even more radical way than them? And if we accept that the Soviet Union did begin socialist construction later (which the great majority of Marxists do, to one degree or another), why are we so unconfident that the CPN (M) will do the same, if and when it is in a stronger position?

The first Five-Year Plan marked the beginning of serious socialist construction in Russia, and that didn’t begin until 1928, 11 years after the Revolution. If we’re happy to wait 11 years for the Bolsheviks, why is it that we’re denouncing the CPN (M) as revisionists in less than six months?

Nepal is an underdeveloped country with a very weak industrial proletariat and very little national wealth with which to construct socialism. It barely even has any national bourgeoisie to speak of, let alone a semi-progressive and patriotic wing of that national bourgeoisie! The conditions there are very, very difficult, and the Nepalese Maoists have no viable options other than to lean partly on foreign capital to develop their country – if they don’t, it won’t get developed!

The Maoists are doing what just about no other group in the world, be it Maoist, Trotskyist, Hoxhaist, or whatever, has managed to do in a long time – achieve major progress and move forward a great deal in the struggle against the oppressive system the people of the world currently live under. They have done and ARE doing this under the most difficult conditions imaginable, and have made stunning progress. They liberated 80% of the country in less than 10 years! They’ve obviously been doing plenty of things right so far, and their policies have been enthusiastically endorsed by the working masses of Nepal in the recent elections.

I for one am both confident and hopeful that the Maoists will continue to advance, and lead the workers and peasants of Nepal with them. I may be wrong in this – they may be toppled from power in a counter-revolution or foreign imperialist intervention. They may even veer off into reformism and revisionism, this is a very real danger for any large CP that’s reached the heights they have, especially one that will effectively be implementing a large degree of capitalistic development in the short term. But it is by no means certain, and I feel, by no means likely.

Our task is to offer critical support and solidarity to the unfolding revolution in Nepal, and we should see it as an inspiring and uplifting beacon of hope. People who dismiss every revolution that ever appears in the world will only end up depressed and disillusioned about communism – these ultra-leftist, sectarian and dogmatic people and groups certainly aren’t ever going to lead a revolution of their own!

All eyes must remain on the new Nepal – there’s going to be a hell of a lot going on there over the coming years for us to look at and draw inspiration from. I, for one, am looking forward to it. Lal Salaam!