Pleasure of Staying at the Crossroads by Rishi Raj Baral

Democracy and Class Struggle publishes this important contribution of Comrade Rishi Raj Baral to the debate on the Nepalese Revolution and the two line struggle.

Democracy and Class Struggle  draws a distinction between those who supported the peace agreement and those who did not like RCPUSA and CPI(Maoist).

Democracy and Class Struggle like the UCPN M supported the peace process and still does. Our problem is that Prachanda and Bhattarai have undermined that process by making concessions which party policy is clearly against and only the Kiran/Badal forces can rectify the peace process by going forward on the original peace process terms and not the Prachanda Bhattarai concessions which have done great harm.

The recent article by Comrade Dev Gurung  makes it clear what the party line was on the peace agreement and how Prachanda and Bhattarai have turned the party line into its opposite ie liquidationism.

Democracy and Class Struggle calls for rectification of the party, Comrade Rishi Raj Baral calls for restructuring of the Party.

The next party central committee meeting has to confront  Prachanda/Bhattarai  revisionism on the questions of Army Integration, The Constitution and The Madesh which have undermined the peace process.

Comrade Rishi Raj Baral says there is no staying at the crossroads.

Democracy and Class Struggle says wrong decisions will be judged harshly by history, rectification of the Nepalese Party is overdue.


From Marx to Mao we have a lot of writings about two line struggle. What is two line struggle? What are the differences between inner party struggle, two line struggle and class struggle ?

Is there any difference between two line struggle and 'differences in tendencies' ?

These are the questions to be answered now. Since last four years, especially after Kharipati (2008) meeting, we are talking about –'sharpening of the two line struggle within UCPN(Maoist)'. A lot has been written about this. Before Palungtar extended meeting comrade Gaurav wrote a long article about two line struggle in Samayabaddha, an ideological magazine in Nepali language.

Now Comrade Basanta has written another article entitled 'Two-Line Struggle in the International Communist Movement'. But the questions are unanswered yet. What will be the next step of 'Revolutionary Camp'? Comrade Basanta's article also is not clear in this aspect.

It is crystal clear that Prachanda and Babu Ram Bhattarai have betrayed the revolution and they are turned into the true servant of American imperialism and Indian expansionism. The 4pt deal with Madheshi Morcha is the clear evidence of their anti-national and counter revolutionary attitudes. Prachanda and Babu Ram Bhattarai are doing one after another anti-national and anti-revolutionary decisions and the members of 'Revolutionary Camp' repeatedly asking them to correct the 4pt deal, for their participation in the government. What a fun!

It is not the question of joining the government or not. Decisions must be done on the basis of ideological and political stand. Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai have proven themselves as the true treacherous of 21st century and they must be penalized.

But it is a matter to be worried that Baidhya faction is still in the position of wait and see. It seems that they are still looking towards Prachanda's transformation-transformation of Khrushchev into Lenin. Revolutionary cadres want concrete solution of the problem in practice. We must have a new step: that is, 'restructuring' the party organization.

Questions are raising: Is there really running two line struggle within UCPN( Maoist)?

Long before RCP(America ) and CPI (Maoist) had made clear about the ideological deviation of UCPN(Maoist). These documents are available also in Nepalese language. Last year RCP(America ) raised the question that in the name of two line struggle Baidhya faction also is practicing new type of eclecticism. 'On the Critical Crossroads in the Nepal Revolution, and the Urgent Need for a Real Rupture with Revisionism' (Revolution : 200, April 22, 2010) and ' Save the Revolution' by KJA ( first published in Samayabaddha (2010) magazine and it is available also in The Next Front) have openly raised the question on this issue.

Now the Maoist party of Colombia ( The Revisionist Traitors in Nepal Still in the Service of the Reactionary State) and France (Line, tendency, fraction and the question of Nepal)have raised the questions regarding the two line struggle within UCPN(Maoist). In their opinion, there is no any two line struggle within UCPN (Maoist), there is only 'differences of tendencies'. It is the question to note. Concerning the issue of two line struggle within UCPN(Maoist), now we have a large number of articles from the Maoist organizations and supporters of Nepalese revolution.

These days, a faction of revolutionary Maoists inside the country and abroad are raising a question: actually, is there any two line struggle within UCPN(Maoist) ?

Or that is only the struggle between the various tendencies running within UCPN (Maoist)?

It is known to all that a political line is not the expression of a tactical problem, but it is a question of strategic significance. It is a matter of irony that bargaining for ministers and high post also are defined as the two line struggle. Instead of Marxism some of our 'leaders' are exercising–Post-Modernist attitudes of 'inclusive' 'exclusive' and marginalized community etc. We cannot reduce the significance of two line struggle in such INGO type of activities. The oppressed community gender, caste, and region must be addressed, but the major question is proletariat outlook and class struggle.

We know that, the two line struggle within the party is the reflection of the class struggle outside. Hence, two line struggle means struggle between two opposite class outlooks- proletariat and the bourgeoisie. In fact, it is a struggle between bourgeoisie and the proletariat headquarters. Now we have the question how the party of proletariat can exist in the party of bourgeoisie ?

Baidhya faction is doing the work in the concept of 'Party within Party'. But we must be clear that 'Party within Party' means 'Faction within Faction'. Ambiguous working style must be abandoned. It needs transparency. Likewise empiricism, factionalism, regionalism and biased attitudes are the true enemies of unified effort. How can we fight against the revisionists and reactionaries without a strong unity within the faction? I don't want to explain it more. But Baidhya and Badal must be watchful on this type of activities. It is the matter to be checked in time.

In my opinion, the concept of 'Party within Party' is just an exercise of liquidation. Staying at the crossroads from long time means to harm oneself. It is not the correct way to fight against the revisionists and reactionaries. It does not lead the revolution a head.

As I mentioned above, restructuring the party is one and the only way to move forward. Restructuring the party means to break relation with revisionism-to overthrow the revisionists, who are in exercise of party liquidation . This is the scientific way of restructuring the party. Now the time has come to perform strong will power and conscious effort. First of all we must have a strong unity among the revolutionaries. Then we have to form a joint front to fight against the anti -national and anti-revolutionary elements. It only leads us in the way to national liberation and People's Democracy.