top of page

A Dialectical Analysis of the Nepali Communist Movement: Historical, Ideological, Organizational, and Social Realities

  • Writer: AIOR Admin
    AIOR Admin
  • Dec 23, 2025
  • 1 min read

Ram Prakash Puri

Tribhuvan University, Nepal



This article presents a dialectical–materialist analysis of the Nepali communist movement, examining its historical trajectory, ideological evolution, organizational dynamics, and socio-political impact. Through qualitative analysis of party documents, leadership accounts, and scholarly literature, the study identifies persistent factionalism not as an organizational aberration but as a constitutive feature arising from unresolved structural contradictions. The research highlights the core tension between revolutionary Marxist–Leninist–Maoist ideology and the pragmatic demands of parliamentary politics—a contradiction that manifests in the gap between the movement’s emancipatory promises and its frequently oligarchic, exclusionary practices. The article argues that factionalism serves a dual function: it is both a symptom of systemic weakness and a mechanism for ideological negotiation and strategic adaptation. Key findings reveal that formal adherence to “democratic centralism” often devolves into personalized leadership cults, while social inclusion rhetoric rarely translates into representative internal structures. The post-conflict integration into competitive multiparty democracy has further widened the parliamentarism-revolution divide, compelling communist parties to dilute class-based politics in favor of electoral and developmental agendas. Ultimately, the study concludes that the future of the Nepali communist movement hinges on its ability to reconcile these dialectical tensions. It faces a critical choice between renewal—through genuine internal democratization, ideological coherence, and meaningful social representation—and decline—through continued fragmentation, ideological ambiguity, and the erosion of its transformative legitimacy. The article contributes to broader debates on left politics in post-conflict societies, illustrating how revolutionary movements navigate the fraught transition from insurgency to institutional governance.




 
 
 

Comments


bottom of page