Party without principle
Since the time I knew about the multi- parties in politics and existing political systems running in different countries, I always had a question in my mind about whether we really have to have political parties with various political philosophies to work for the country. Do we need political parties to learn and teach and run educational institutions? Do we need them to provide good services to our people with health, electricity, water, food, or shelter? Do we need them for our economic and welfare planning? I have varieties of questions like these. But I never found the necessities of political parties and political philosophy for all these things except for creating legislative and executive. I think we can provide these services much better with unbiased plans and programs unitedly rather than dividing and fighting in the name of democrats, communists, nationalists, or other groups; I always think we need not necessarily be the communists or democrats licensed by political parties to write good poems, short stories, essays, or novels.
In the same way, we need not be any party's followers to be good writers, scholars, students, or professors. Nor is it necessary to be a good businessman or industrialist. That is undoubtedly true. More than that, we all know how our education, administration, health, judiciary, and many other services are crippled by political interference.
No offices, including the offices of constitutional bodies, can evade the political interference of political leaders and parties in power, which is the leading cause of the mismanagement, malpractices, and corruption in our offices. Those things are indeed necessary to rectify for the good of the country. But I think when you have multiparty democracy, the political parties are essential for this. Political parties are the hearts of multiparty democracy. Without that, the system does not function. You cannot form a government and cannot run a country. You have to have a party to participate in that game, just as one needs to have a football team to participate in a football tournament. It would help if you had a different political philosophy from others for your clearcut identity to establish, organize, and run your party. It would help if you had a different flag, a symbol for that purpose. It would be best if you had these things to propagate your philosophy, make members, and spread your thoughts among the people. But in this context, I never thought about a party without principle. I never imagined a party like this because I always think the party and its political philosophy and manifesto are correlated, and one cannot exist without the other.
At the same time, I also think that a political party does not need to exist only with established traditional dogmas and political philosophies like communists, socialists, and democrats based on foreign political philosophers or leaders. You do not necessarily need to fight to work and develop your country in the name of parties belonging to these philosophies. Instead, you can form your party based on the main principles of the nation, nationality, the welfare of the people, and the country's development. In this line, dozens of my articles have been published in People's Review with various titles. My article titled "Balen, Botswana, and Nepal," published in this paper on June 8, 2022, is one of them. In that article, I wished for a party for the nation and the people (PNP) based on national needs and culture. I wrote, "We do not need to adopt any "isms" – socialism, communism, capitalism, except to think about the welfare of the people and the country's development. We do not need to hang the pictures of Marx, Mao, Lenin, Stalin, or any other foreign leaders and worship them to work for our country. Everything, including politics, government, policy, and programs, should be for the country and the people, not the other way around."
As I mentioned above, the proposed party is totally different from the existing political parties and political dogmas but with the country's development policy, plans, and programs.
Just after my above writing Rabi Lamichhane with his Rashtriya Swatantra Party appeared in the country with almost the same philosophy based on nation and nationality. It was a joy to see it as I enjoyed seeing Dr Surendra Bhandari, Balkrishna Neupane, Gyanendra Shahi, etc. before. It seems his party is reliable, responsible, and non-biased, standing for the nation and nationality, and entirely different from the traditional party castes, which created a different political caste system in the country and established the touchable and untouchable castes like in the backward traditional society. We know those traditional party castes of communist parties and democratic parties discriminated against even professional people - teachers, professors, medical doctors, and engineers based on political ideology and pushed them out of their services. But his party came with the name "Swatantra" (Independent), which I had not imagined.
After introducing the multiparty system in Nepal, the multiparty propagators have been trying to establish the new and wrong meaning of Swatantra and are meaning it as "Without Principle". On the other hand, when Lamichhane spoke about his party, he once said he was concerned not much about the system and the constitution but with the people's problems. I am glad to hear his view of disagreement about the present Pradesh System under the federal structure later on. Still, I doubt the present federal system under his proposed directly elected chief minister works for the country's benefit. Besides calling himself Swatantra, I do not know why he was not yet so open to speaking clearly about his views on the well-talked other public concerning constitutional matters. I assume he spoke that way to show his main concern for the people and the country, not that he was not concerned with other important things. But it sounded and somewhat looked like a party without principle, which cannot be. Not only does it sound like this, I see it in some way; some people are confused about it and take it as a party without principle.
Besides, the existing prominent political parties based on traditional dogmas may have played a role in spreading this wrong impression and misconception about it, scarring Lamichhane's popularity and attraction among the masses. To my understanding, the parties that have alliances with other parties are those without principles. Because without leaving one's principle, one cannot alliance with other parties. That is crystal clear.
One cannot see the principle of honesty in Prachanda's party's alliance with the party of Baburam, who once levelled billions of rupees in corruption charges against Prachanda and said that was the reason for his separation from Prachanda's Party. You see almost the same dishonesty in alliances between the five parties who are in the government. They levelled various charges against each other and became one when there was a chance of sharing the power. What would have been more immoral than this? Everything moral or immoral, evil or good - is accepted in our country, so the leaders do not feel shame in doing morally wrong things in this land.
I assume Lamichhane's Swatantra (Independent) means "to stand for truth and to fight with untruth" in any circumstances, however cutting the situation may be. I also like to understand his Swatantra means to stand for justice and righteousness and to fight injustice and unrighteousness without distinction of caste, creed, religion, social status, political status or political faith. I think that is the correct meaning of Swatantra. I am sure his party has a clear-cut principle regarding all the necessary matters. I do not know Rabi Lamichhane personally. But I know him through his excellent work as a TV journalist, which is praiseworthy and admirable.
The way he has been speaking for the people's welfare and the country's development as the new party president is worthy of appreciation. Wherever he goes, it seems people are attracted to him and have immense love and trust in him. That is undoubtedly a sign of his success in his mission. I can assume his Party's main principle is the nation's welfare and nationality, peace, and happiness of the people. I honestly feel he should have clearcut thoughts on religion, the Hindu state, and the government system, including about the King and the Crown based on nation and nationality, as he presented his thought on the federal structure recently if he really is determined to achieve people's aspired national goals if he has not made it. At the same time, if he wants to achieve his goal soon, he must try to unite with other similar parties and independent groups with the same thoughts and ideas without delay. We all know "United You Rule, Divided You Fall." Otherwise, it might not take much time to disappear or to be discouraged like many other parties and good people with similar thoughts. I wish him success.