Government Change "protest" in Nepal and a striking example of the "collective stupidity" in the approach to the event.
The difference between a
knowledgeable person and an ignorant person is that the former is conscious of
the fact that in a constantly changing world his/her knowledge is limited and thus
constantly seeks to increase and deepen his/her knowledge, while the ignorant
believes and thinks that he/she already knows everything and does not need to
learn more and thus tends not to make an effort to research and learn anything.
Fundamentally, there are two
types of human beings one is "slave mind" that absorbs every
narrative of the Imperialists like a sponge and accepts their narrative as the
"objective truth", the other is "critical mind" that
questions the narratives and does research, makes logical and dialectical
connections in order to determine his/her own take on any given event or
subject.
Imperialists, especially the US-West has been controlling the flow of information world wide and making sure that they have no rivals challenging their narratives. That is how they have created the "collective stupidity" among the world population, even among those who called themselves leftists, or even Marxist-Leninists, Maoist. Despite the military and economic decline of US-West imperialism, they still control the entire information flow in the world. That's why their narratives have been dominant in the assessment of the protests in Nepal that led the government change.
Only slave minded people would believe that a
spontaneous “student” protest escalated
to the degree of a government change in
Nepal in a couple days. According to the slave mind, without any leadership,
prior preparation, financial, organisational,
and tactical support, a group of young students woke up and have taken the
streets and succeeded in “changing the government” in a country with 30 million
people.
Any critical minded person would question the possibility of such “succeeding”
event that does not have any example in the history of mankind. The first
question comes to the mind is “who is behind it”. In order to have a successful result the
protest needed to be pre-organized, not spontaneous. It requires leadership,
strategy, know-how of means and methods of carrying out the protests longer,
which in return, requires logistics and financial support, support of media,
especially social media as part of the communication and coordination of the
protests. Can anyone with a sane mind,
never mind a critical mind believe that the students had all these means to
carry out the protests to such government change results?
There were over 250 thousands
demonstrators in France, over hundred thousand demonstrators in Germany,
hundreds of thousands demonstrators in England. These demonstrations were not
“Gen- X or Z” but laboring people from all walks of the life yet they couldn’t
really make a dent on the regime.
The protests took place in Nepal in April 2005 and May 2006 led by the
Communist Party of Nepal supported by the labor movements through strikes and guerilla
fighters was not as successful as the
current “Gen-Z spontaneous “ protest. Is there any logic in this?
It is mind bugling to read so
called “leftists” using, cheering, and promoting the invented bourgeois term of “Gen(eration)”
which in reality is a bourgeois invention as part of the “clash of cultures”
theory with which the bourgeoisie denies
the class struggle and replaces it with the clashes between cultures and
generations. As one Socialist from Turkiye elegantly put it; “One of the
bourgeoisie's greatest talents today is reproducing reality through language.
The concept of "Generation Z" is a typical example of this. As if the
subjects who will shape history and shake the system of exploitation weren't
workers, peasants, unemployed, or students, but a generation defined by
letters.
Yet, if Marx taught us anything,
it's this: People's social existence determines their consciousness. The misery
of workers, the cries of the unemployed, the peasants losing their land, the
students grappling with a future lessness; all of this is not a "generation
problem," but a class contradiction.
The concept of "Generation
Z" was actually invented to erase the name of the working class. Because
what doesn't exist in language can't exist in thought. When the working class
isn't mentioned, it seems as if there is no such thing as the working class
anymore. You eliminate the concept and invent a sterile, ideological
"generation" in its place. “ (2)
The so called “Gen-XX” protests, in some cases related to the identity
politics, in most cases a tool for the US imperialism for the
government change in any given country. What makes the Gen-Z different ?
Nothing, other than being a useful tool for the government change in
Nepal.
Was the protest a spontaneous
one or a planned one?
It is an undeniable fact that the
protest was being planned long before, possibly since March 2024 when the
all-communist-socialist alliance
replaced the alliance with the National Congress Party. It is an undeniable fact that to overthrow a
government one needs an organized structure with all those requirements stated
above at its disposal. Still, any government would have all the means and
methods, logistics, security and other necessary organisation and coordination
at its disposal to suppress any “spontaneous
protest” to get out of hand. It is obvious for a critical mind that there was
powers behind the “protest” with a definitive goal- a change of government.
Without that element, it is impossible to topple a government with a
“spontaneous student protest”. That is a fallacy and fantasy dished out to have happened in Nepal by the
US-Western media. A fantasy and fallacy only the slave minded people would
believe and accept as the fact.
So, who was behind the “protest” or for the sake of argument, lets say ; “who
co-opted the protests in order to overthrow the communist government?”
Reading the narratives of the US-Western media actually gives the necessary
first hints if they are behind it or oppose to it. If they are oppose to it , it is most likely a protest against
pro-US government, if the narrative is for the protests, then it is a protest
against a government that is not a puppet of US-NED.
All the evidence show that US-NED
(and Britain) was behind the protest or co-opting the protest.
NED website shows the funding of the NGOs in Nepal. NGOs receiving funding
includes fake Human Right Organisations, Legal organisations (supporting and
defending US-NGO members), proxy- Media organisations and so many other
organisations in Nepal.
The information about the leaders
of the protests are slowly but surely coming out to surface.
One of the main leading role is
said to be Balendra Shah. Balendra Shah, known professionally as Balen,
is a Nepalese politician and a rapper who is currently serving as the 15th
mayor of Kathmandu since 2022. He is the first independent candidate to be
elected as the mayor of Kathmandu. The Kathmandu Municipal Government, led by
Shah, had faced criticism from organizations like Human Rights Watch due to
allegations of employing disproportionate use of force against street vendors.
Shah is a hard-core nationalist who supports the Greater Nepal theory that
claims states of Northeast India should be "returned" to Nepal.
(Interesting and coincidental choice of him as a leading personality
considering the current India-US
politics) Balen Shah's name is among the top 100 people of 2023 listed in Time
magazine.
In communication and coordination with its partners and affiliates, the Federation of Nepali Journalists played a decisive role in the protest. FNJ is funded by open society and NED. It is a local outlet, proxy of CPJ (Committee to protect Journalists) and FPJ (Forum to Protect journalists). CPJ is being funded by world financial organisations like Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sacks, Merryl Lynch, by Microsoft, Google and of course by Meta (Facebook), Ford Corporation, Major Media corporations, Open Society organisation, and hundreds of other Western Corporations.
CPJ plays an important role in protecting
the western propaganda in Nepal specific and in general. It is a front for the
western Media’s continuing dominancy and the means for suppressing the rivals
and the alternative media.
Another NGO is Freedom Forum Nepal; It lists on its site a quite number of other
organisations in Nepal as members of its organizational Network from
Broadcasting Association of Nepal (BAN) to South Asian Free Media
Association. It states on its site that
it is partnered with (ESP) Enabling
State Program. ESP was active late 1990s and was launched in 2001 when
the Monarch was active by Nepal government and UK department for
International Development (DFID) . Ironically , Freedom Forum Nepal states British Embassy, Nepal as one of the
partner.
Accountability Lab, a
Washington, US based organisation which is funded millions of dollars by the US
Department of State and Child Safe Net which is funded by all the same
US-NED organisations are some of the main NGOs who were active in the
organisation and carrying out of the protest.
It is reported that the
government had prior information on the possibility of a protest for government
change based on the information they gathered from the Social Media. They
banned Facebook and other such social media which are historically proven to be
used for the purpose of government change in opposing countries. All the NGOs funded by the US-NED opposed to the Social Media ban in order to
protect the “rights” of the Western Media and support their elimination of
“rivals” in the flow of information. They have escalated their propaganda and
provocation through proxy-media with huge support from the Western Mainstream
Media.
The reality of the events in
Nepal is that the events are not planned by the locals, but carried out by the locals under the leadership of US-NED .
 |
| Students??? |
First day of the protest in Nepal
I posted a comment with a title “What is going on In Nepal? How to approach to
the question from far away?” I stated ; “What differs Marxist Leninists from
others is that they are not subjective but objective. Unlike the "slave
minded people", Marxist Leninists have "critical mind". Their
approach to a political question in any given country requires some basic
knowledge of the political structure of that given country in particular and in
direct dialectical connection with whatever is going on in the world in
general. Critical objective thinking is essential not to fall into the trap of
the declining fascist imperialist powers.
In a country where a nationalist
or fascist party at the power, the opposition is commonly made up of social
democrats and socialists. In a country where the coalition of "communist
parties" are at political power , regardless of whether we consider them
as "communist" or not, since they represent communist ideology, the
opposition inevitably will be made up of anti-communists. Hindu Nationalism by
reactionary RPP adds more complication and external interference" in
internal politics. The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) that led a
decade-long insurgency against the monarchy is the third largest political
party in the country.” On the following
day I stated that “The main (internal) reason lying behind the co-opted
protests is the change in the coalition of government. Anyone who have a
critical mind can guess what the "external reasons" are in the
region.
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist
Centre) was not within the governing coalition in Nepal. A new coalition
government was formed on March 2024 with
the participation of Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist),
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Center), and various small socialist parties.
They literally excluded the ex-coalition partner Nepali Congress. Nepali
Congress is a "social democrat", nationalist party, aligned with the
monarchist and fascist parties.
Wide spread tearing and burning
of communist flags, attacking, and burning communist party buildings are self
explanatory on the question of the character of the protests. Some
"popular" leftists with their reformist delusional approaches hope
that the communists will be able to grab the leadership of the protests and
thus they proclaim their "support " for the protests. That is the consequence of subjectivity and
living in a fantasy world .
A critique of a writer from the “left” on the issue of Nepal
"Rulers cower as Nepalese
masses seek to burn the system down" by Jack Halinski-Fitzpatrick dated
September 10, 2025.”
With his article, Fitzpatrick
confirms the image what the US-NED tried and succeeded in portraying: "Corruption
didn't exist in Nepal until March 2024, and it started after the Communists
formed a government." The fact is that the (pre-planned)
co-opting of the leadership of the student protest by NED puppets and gangs,
and transforming the protest into an anti-Communist movement, is of
no "importance" to Fitzpatrick. Declaring everyone and every party
other than himself "fake communist," Fitzpatrick even conceals
the fact that the ruling party came to power just a year ago by
practically uniting all socialists and communists against the Monarchists and
fascists. "These are all fake communists," he says, so it's
permissible to support the Monarchists, Nationalists, and
fascists against them, and to define the fascists as "the
masses." This approach has nothing to do with the ABCs of
Marxism-Leninism. In fact, an approach that separates the particular from the
general and ignores the dialectical connection between them cannot be
Marxist-Leninist.
 |
| Do they look like students? |
In Nepal, the President and Vice
President are reactionaries, and the resigning Prime Minister is a
communist (although, according to Fitzpatrick, he is "fake".
Having waged a guerrilla war against the Monarchy for years,
having overthrown Monarchy, having being among those communists, "fake
communists" undoubtedly understand and know Nepal's
concrete conditions and situation better than the so-called "real
Communists" who are merely pontificating from afar.)
The new Prime Minister, who
replaced the Communist Prime Minister, (who, incidentally, is pictured holding
hands with the US-funded NGO leader who led the protests), is
anti-communist. In other words, a groundwork and environment extending
from the restoration of the Monarchy to the establishment of a reactionary
and fascist government was created in Nepal.
Is this the result of a
"popular movement," or is it the exploitation of a student protest
whose leadership had been seized by the US and its domestic lackeys for the purpose
of "changing government"? I believe Fitzpatrick is also
trying to conceal, even "dress up" and sell, the
NED's "government change practices" which have even been admitted in
the US Senate.
Ultimately, what is
happening in Nepal is nothing more than a US-NED attempt to change
government and establish its own puppet government in the country.
Let's move on to the general
picture. Such political developments are never independent of global
political and economic conflicts. The provocations and activities of the US
(through the NED and NGOs) in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Cambodia, Myanmar (and the
Caucasus and Balkans) cannot be considered or evaluated
independently of its conflict with China.
In particular, the
incipient conflict between the US and India, India's refusal to submit to the
US "on sanctions," and the events and developments that began in
Nepal cannot be coincidental. To consider these as
"coincidences," one would have to be a sheep in a flock of
"collective stupidity."
In conclusion, the "disease
of pontification" stemming from Western "superiority
complex" and arrogance, which sees the South and East as backward and
ignorant, has unfortunately manifested itself clearly in Fitzpatrick's
assessment. In our world, where every individual, group, or party labels the
other as a "fake communist" and makes their assessments based
on that subjectivity, it is inevitable that subjective, pedantic, and
arrogant "analyses" will prevail and be disseminated, rather
than the analyses based on imperative of objective research and studies,
which is called concrete analysis of the concrete situation. . This pedantic,
subjective evaluations by those who declare others "fake communists"
inevitably ends them up in siding with the Monarchists, Fascists,
and fascist, genocidal, and bellicose imperialists against the
communists.
Apparently, the "true
communist" Fitzpatrick defends the Monarchists, Nationalists, and Fascists
against the "fake communist" government. Lenin and Stalin,
on the other hand, defend bourgeois democrats, let alone "fake"
or not- communists, against monarchists and fascists. What a
paradox this is, it's hard to understand, just as it's hard to understand who's
a fake and who's a real communist.
Indeed, labeling a
communist organization or party from a country other than one's own as
"fake" cannot be the practice of an
internationalist Marxist-Leninist. When used in this way, the concept
of "fake" carries the accusation of "agent" of
bourgeoisie." Only "fake internationalists" mired
in arrogance and sectarianism can accuse communist parties and
organizations who have waged active armed struggle against the
monarchy and fascists for years, of being "fake" and lands
the accuser in siding with the Monarchists, Fascists, and fascist, genocidal,
and warlike imperialists against the communists.
Pontificators without deeds on one side, active communists
who wage wars against monarchial, fascist systems on the other side.
Which one has more likelihood of being categorized as fake-communist by genuine
Marxist Leninist students?
Conclusion
As the history has proven, for
the simple fact that the “student” protests lack the professional leadership,
coordination, financing, communication, logistics and all other necessary
requirements to carry it out longer term, they are vulnerable to be co-opted by
internal-external forces in order to be redirected for the interests and aims of
co-opters. Nepal case is another
striking example of this fact in which the US-NED co-opted the protests through
their local NGOs for a government change. Reported claim by a government
official that the Military refused to obey the Government’s order to interfere as
the protests initiated is another indication of the fact that the protests were
planned and put in practice not spontaneously by the students, but by others. All
these facts have been confirmed by the NGOs themselves. That reflects the aim
of US-NED in Nepal particular.
The region in general, the
target of US was not only Nepal but also India specific. The co-opted protest was
also an indirect message and threat to
Indian government. India is a multi ethnic, multi religion country in which
there already are conflicts going on. Inflating those conflicts and provoking
new ones can destabilize India and set the ground for a government change.
Despite all the confirmed and
dialectically connected objective truth, Nepal case has become another petty
bourgeois know-it-all pontification practice focusing on the critique of
communists of that country rather than the government change practice of the
imperialists itself.
Learned by rote theories and
ready made schemes do not determine the conditions and situations; the
conditions and situations determine the way in which the theories are applied.
Petty bourgeois, who does not have any possibility of knowing the concrete conditions and the
situation of that given country, with its
pedantry, pontification
criticizing the communists of a given country from far away, only serves the
interests of anti-communists in the final analysis.
In most cases, the petty
bourgeois philistines, through their commentaries prove the fact that they are not even aware of the recent history of
Nepal and even what parties make up the existing government.
The struggle against the King and
Monarchy in Nepal actively started in 1990 led by the United Left Front. The demonstration in April of the same year brought about the “Constitutional Monarchy”. Unsatisfied Communists formed the Communist
Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist) which is labeled as “ Stalinist” and in
1994 Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist
Centre). They launched an armed struggle in 1996. During 1990 and 2006 bourgeois Nepal Congress dominated the
government. On February 2005 King staged
a coup to regain its power and seized the power. One year later, in April 2006,
the famous 19 day protests supported by labor with general strike and tens of
thousands of armed guerillas, started .
It ended with the capitulation of Monarchy. However the struggle between the Bourgeois Nepali
Congress and the Communists did not end. In 2018 , the Communist Party of
Nepal (UML) and the
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) united to form the
Nepal Communist Party. However, no communist government remained in power for a
full year. There was no communist
government without a coalition even after 2018 with full power.
All in all, Communists holds 110
seats out of 275 seats, 138 seats is necessary for the majority. Both parties lost seats while National
Congress gain additional 26 seats.
However, the total popular vote count is a different story.
CPN (UML) is a head with 2,845,641 votes- makes up of
26.95%
Maoist Centre is 1,175,684 Votes- 11.13 %
Together they make up of % 38 of
total votes
The leading bourgeois party,
National Congress had 2,2715,225 - %25.71 less than CPN (UML)
In 2022 local election Bourgeois Nepali
Congress won the maximum number of seats, with 329 mayor posts and 300 deputy
mayor posts. CPN-UML won the second-highest seats with 206 mayor posts and 241
deputy mayor posts. CPN (Maoist Centre) won the third highest seats with 121
mayor posts and 128 deputy mayor posts.
In March 2024 the chairman of the Maoist Party, Nepal’s third
largest, exchanged the Nepali Congress party for the Unified Marxist Leninist
party (UML) as his principal coalition partner. In July, the Nepali Congress party
and Unified Marxist Leninist party reached an agreement to form a coalition
together, replacing Dahal as prime minister with UML chairman K.P. Oli.
Without knowing the facts and
assuming that the Communists have total control over the government and
supporting the bourgeois, fascist and monarchist led “protests” is an
unforgivable anti-communist act on the part of so called “communists” of other nations.
Disregarding the serious event
itself, putting forward criticism of communists on a "theoretical
basis" is, apart from being arrogant, disrespectful, contrary to the internationalist understanding for
Marxist Leninists. Internationalism brings with it the responsibility of being
constructive and progressive, not obstructive, or accusatory. For international
Marxist Leninists, criticism is made for socialism, to influence it better and
in the right direction, not to slander those who are proceeding in the path of,
in the ideal of socialism.
Without having concrete and
accurate information about Nepal and internal and external factors played role
in the event, relying only on and repeating the memorized, sloganized theories,
criticizing Nepali communists reflects
the arrogance of those who call
themselves "communist".
Through the control of
information and narratives, the
bourgeois "identity politics " replaced the working class
politics. The identity politics of our era reflects itself as "Generation
politics"; Gen-x,y,z. This politics have nothing to do with
Marxism-Leninism but everything to do with anti-Marxist-Leninist bourgeois
politics.
In a similar case, when the
imperialists staged a typical "identity, Gen(eration) politics" in
Cuba, same petty bourgeois pontificators had taken a similar stand. In
response, a Cuban comrade had said the following;
"“We would evaluate every criticism from internationalist communists to the extent that it is appropriate to the existing situation and conditions, and take it seriously. Likewise, we sincerely and cordially wish each of them success -within the shortest possible duration- in their struggles in their own countries. Because their overthrow of the bourgeois government in their own countries and their steps in the construction of socialism will ease and accelerate our success here. At the same time, the political, social, and economic steps they will take to establish socialism, their attitudes against internal and external pressures, and the measures and successes they take will provide "living" examples not only to us but also to others.”
Cuban comrade, with his
politeness, was actually saying
"stop pontification, start action in your own country and defeat the
reaction in your own country.
In reality, history has proven
that these petty bourgeois know-it-all critiques of every communist party,
every communist or communist leaning country
in the earth, have not shown a
serious (theoretical and practical) leadership, a serious organization, even a
serious struggle in their own countries, in most cases, where the fascist
dictatorship and/or reaction have been dominant for years. Despite this
concrete fact, they believe that they have earned the right to criticize those
communists who waged armed struggles, kicked out imperialists from their
countries, toppled Monarchies, puppets, and fascists, and made forward steps on
the way to socialism in their own country.
While we do not see the
communists and communist parties of the countries who defeated the imperialists
and reaction in their countries interfering in each others internal affairs and
criticizing each other, we see the “communists” of the reactionary countries criticizing all
of them. All talk no walk they say.
These petty bourgeois philistines
who think that they are the "ultimate" representative of Marxism
Leninism in the entire world , never mind striking a blow to their own
countries' ruling classes, in most cases, they couldn't even formed a "party"
after 50 +- years of their existence in Leninist sense.
Lenin stated that; "We are
obliged to recognise that it is only this class-conscious minority that can
direct and lead the broad masses of the workers... If this minority is really
class-conscious, if it is able to lead the masses, if it is able to reply to
every question that appears on the order of the day, then it is a party in
reality...If the minority is unable to lead the masses and establish close
links with them, then it is not a party, and is worthless in general, even if
it calls itself a party ".
It is a concrete ironic fact that
these petty bourgeois sophists who call themselves and/or act as the
"authority" for Marxism Leninism
criticize how "revisionist" the communist parties of other countries
are, yet they are not even capable of building a Leninist "communist
party" themselves.
In most cases these groups who
call themselves "organization" or "party" are either a
front for the imperialists or within the category of "slave mind" ,
"ignorant" people who believe they know everything but in factually
know nothing. Being a student of Marxism Leninism over a century long, I have become familiar with such groups made
up of, and based on family, kins, social and/or tribal relations.
It is difficult and too much work
for them to study the events based on the concrete conditions and situation in
particular and in general to come up with a Marxist-Leninist analysis. They
prefer, borrowing from the Western Media narratives and focus on not the event
itself but to the communists. It is a typical bourgeois liberal tactic of
deflecting attention from the event itself.
The duty and responsibility of
Marxist-Leninists is to study the event and inform the masses what the
objective truth is in regard to the event itself. That is what the priority is.
Erdogan A
September 8-14, 2025
Notes
(1) Lenin, The Tasks of the Youth Leagues
(2) Salim Diyap
.jpg)
