The
following interview took place in December 2012 in Mr. Rajendra Shrestha’s
residence in Kathmandu. Mr. Shrestha is regarded as the ideological architect
of the recently formed Federal Socialist Party, Nepal; currently, he is its
General Secretary. The FSPN was created after many leaders belonging to Nepal’s
indigenous groups rebelled and abandoned the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified
Marxist Leninist), the third-largest party in the last Constituent Assembly.
Below is an excerpt from a longer conversation.
 |
| Rajendra Shrestha |
On
formation of a new party:
Mainstream
political parties have not followed a national agenda reflective of the makeup
of Nepal as a multi-caste, multi-lingual, multi-cultural, multi-religious with
great geographic diversity; with only one cultural group dominating the
mainstream parties. Take for example the United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist),
Nepali Congress, and CPN (UML), who were voted by people in 1st, 2nd and 3rd
place respectively. In all these parties, the leadership is based on a single
caste. For example in UML, party president is Bahun (highest in Hindu caste
hierarchy), two Vice Presidents are Bahun, General Secretary is Bahun, and all
the three Secretaries are Bahun. After the Rana (an autocratic regime run by
the Rana family between 1846 to 1953) period ended, the Shah Kings (the ruling
monarchy of modern Nepal until it was abolished in 2006) rose to power. After
the Shah regime ended, Nepal became a Bahun regime. Another example of such a
lack of diversity in representation is the Nepal Workers Peasants Party, who considers
themselves Marxist-Leninists. Observing the makeup of their leadership,
however, one may note that the President is Newar, the VP is Newar, the
Secretary is Newar and so is the Spokesperson. There are no leaders from other
groups besides Newar. Similarly, there are Madeshi parties with only Madeshis
represented from the President to the very bottom of the organization. This
model of political party will not make our national unity strong. Only when
political parties begin reflecting the nations social makeup, will the state
too reflect this. It is for this reason that we came to the conclusion that the
mainstream political parties will not fulfill the desires of the people and the
state, especially after their betrayal in the Constituent Assembly. We
concluded that these parties’ time and mandate has expired. We thus rebelled
from different political parties and joined to form a new political force that
is proportionally inclusive and one that is more reflective of the social
makeup of the country. We formed a central standing committee that represents
all groups of Nepal. There are five general groups in Nepal. And in our party
this is reflected in the leadership. For example, representing indigenous
nationalities are Ashok Rai and I; from the Khas community there is Prem
Krishna Pathak, who is a VP, and Radha Timilshina, the Vice General Secretary.
Similarly, there are Gopal Thakur who is also a VP and Ram Singh Yadav the
Secretary, both from the Madeshi community. Representing the Dalit ('untouchables')
community is Dil Bahadur Nepali, who is Secretary, and from the Muslin
community is R. Ansari, who is also a VP. In this manner, we have tried to
represent the national makeup of the country. We will form our organization
based on proportional inclusivity. In the bylaws of our organization, we have
stated that whatever the population proportion of these five communities is, it
will be represented in our organization in the same way. If such representation
is not possible in party conventions or district level conventions, we will
leave the position vacant for the specific community. In our party there will
be a requirement of 33% representation of women. We will leave the position
vacant if we cannot find women representatives. After the convention is over, a
committee will nominate for the vacant positions. We have worked out our
thoughts clearly, mainly on ideological and organizational fronts.
On
party expansion, Federalism and ideology:
In
the first phase, we were doing our ideological homework. Currently, in our second phase, we are
building and expanding our organization. Ideologically, we have two key
concepts: caste liberation (jatiya mukti) through Federalism and class
liberation through Socialism. Up to now, the political parties have been saying
that class liberation will automatically lead to caste liberation. These
parties however, were not able to bring neither class nor caste liberation. We
are saying that one does not intersect the other. The two things have to be
handled in parallel. If we strive for change, then why can we not bring change
to both? In the 240 years since Prithivi Narayan Shah expanded the state, there
has been a single identity domination of the State. For example, with the
dominance by the Khas group - the language belongs to the Khas group, as is the
culture Khas-ized, and even the clothing attire. Not only were the Kings from
the Khas community, 35 or 36 prime ministers so far, only Marich Man Singh was
not from the Khas community. Looking at these historic facts, there has indeed
been Khas caste-based ruling of the State. To go against that caste-based
state, we want to have federal states (or provinces). In the central government
there should be (sajhadari shasan) equal representation and in the regional
levels, there should be self-governance. Shared governance in the centre and
self-governance in the province. Hence, we seek the end of single group
dominance and argue that federalism should be the way forward. Those in power
(mainstream parties), however, take the opposite position. They run the single
caste rule and they blame others. In this context, we are obliged to spend a
lot of time explaining the situation to the people. We are against geography-based
Federalism. Neither are we for administrative-based Federalism. Geographic and
administrative Federalism will not liberate from caste oppression (jatiya
mukti). We propose identity-based Federalism. An example being Canada, where
there exist provinces such as Quebec with a francophone identity, as well as
Nunavut, an autonomous territory, based on the identity of the indigenous Inuit
who live there. In Nepal we seek autonomous self-governing units on different
levels. Where there exist large population groupings, there should exist a
provincial-level autonomy. Where there are areas with less population, there
should be autonomous jurisdictions. Where there are minorities, marginalized or
communities nearing extinction (e.g. the nomadic Rautes), there should be
protected areas for them. There will be different kinds and levels of autonomy.
This is a Nepali model of Federalism. This model will slowly form into a
multi-identity state or plurinational state. Once Nepal becomes plurinational,
a Raute group may have an identity-based autonomous area (albeit a small one)
and that can develop into a nation. Similarly, a Kusunda (small tribe based in
Western Nepal) region will also develop. Maybe it will only be of 500 people,
but there will be a nation of Kusundas. These will be internal nations and not
independent or sovereign countries. Nepal is in fact many nations within a
nation. We have advocated for this kind of new outlook based on authentic
features of Nepal, based on the diverse identities that comprise Nepal. Such a
system will deliver caste liberation because it will end exploitation and
subjugation based on caste. There are those who question the ability of
Federalism to end caste-based exploitation. Leaders from the old regime say
that identity-based federalism will not work. It will divide the country and
start caste-based conflict. They dissolved the CA based on these arguments.
Secondly,
we advocate socialism in order for class liberation. There is poverty, lack of
education, starvation, lack of health services and unemployment in Nepal. And
even today, the level of economic development is very low. Poverty eradication
has not been possible. The gap between the higher classes and lower classes is
huge. How do you end this class exploitation? Whatever Nepal has achieved since
the 2006 uprising, when considering the achievements since, there has been no
class liberation. Previously, the King led feudalism. The faces of feudal power
have been changing. But in the later stage, semi-feudal capitalists have been
in charge of production control. Today the King-led feudalism has collapsed.
Socioeconomic system was collapsing earlier on, and the political feudalism has
ended after the 2006 revolution. After this revolution, Nepal has entered into
capitalism. In capitalism there is an internal conflict between labour and
capital. The labour will be exploited. Therefore what we are saying is, Nepal
should be free of exploitation from one human to another - that is the kind of
society we want to build. The products produced by the country can be owned by
all. For example, Guthi (communal ownership by the Newars), communal lands,
Kippat (communal ownership of land that used to be practiced by the Kiratis) ñ all
will be communally owned. Combining co-operative ownership, private ownership,
communal ownership and other kinds of ownership, we want to develop a new model
of modern socialism specifically for Nepal. This modern socialism will liberate
all kinds of exploitation, especially of labour.
Some
question the origins of this social Federalism. It does not exist in America,
China, India nor Europe. Yes in the world, the Communists accept Socialism.
There is another ideology of Social Democrats. There is also Liberal Democracy.
There is Conservatism. But that does not mean we have to follow only what is
already practiced in the world? Some say Socialism has failed, lets go with
Social Democracy. If we want to follow Social Democracy, then lets join the
Nepali Congress, which since 2012 has followed the ideology of Social
Democracy. BP Koirala himself was the VP of Social Democrat International. And
currently Sher Bahadur Dueba is the VP of SDI. Since 1990 all the parties that
have been formed have followed Social Democracy. For example, Gore Bahadur
Khapangi formed the Janamukti Party, whose ideology is Social Democracy. There
is Mathbir Sing Thapa, who is a Social Democrat. Madehsis created parties, like
Upendra Yadavís, are also based on Social Democracy. Nepalis choose the Nepali
Congress as the main Social Democratic party because it has advocated Social
Democracy for the longest time. Bernstein and Kautsky are credited for starting
Social Democracy. If you look at the world, there are many developed countries
that have implemented Social Democracy. But in our under-developed country that
ideology will not flourish. The most successfully implemented Social Democratic
systems are considered to be those in the Scandinavian countries - Norway,
Sweden and Denmark. All of these three countries have monarchy. This ideology
is based on the model of central governance. According to BP's Social
Democracy: firstly there is monarchy and secondly central governance. There is
no inclusive democracy, no Social Federalism, proportion-based election but
only Westminster democracy - majority government and a minority opposition.
That means with social democracy in Nepal’s context, Janjatis (indigenous
nationalities), Madeshis, Dalits and women will always be excluded.
