There is currently a serious discussion, debate and controversy going on in Nepali politics about political parties and leadership. Such a debate is not unnatural since in a democratic system, the state is run by the party and the party is run by the leadership. After the Gen-G movement built traditional concepts and standards about parties and leadership, such a debate has gained more volume, density and scope.

Not only in the context of Nepal, but now globally, on the one hand, there has been a controversial debate on the state, politics, alternative politics, government, party, leadership, etc. On the other hand, it seems that ultra-nationalist, populist, liberal, right-wing, anarchist parties, trends and commentary are becoming dominant. Which commentary, debate and trend has also been having an indirect or direct impact on Nepali politics. 

The old parties and the original leadership of those parties failed. Or did the party have to be restructured, transformed and purified by establishing new leadership with generational transfer. Otherwise, a new party with a new vision and approach had to be formed. Such a commentary seems to be becoming prevalent and popular in contemporary politics.

Have the concepts, bases and dimensions related to parties and leadership changed or are the old parties becoming irrelevant and failing like the prevailing commentary? Has the era of the old parties ended and the chapter of the new party begun? Is it possible to restructure and transform the old parties by establishing new leadership with generational transfer? If so, what is the roadmap for it?

Is a new party the only option now because the old parties have no prospects? What kind of party and leadership do the people want? Natural but complex questions have arisen. Therefore, an attempt has been made to objectively analyze the theoretical dimensions of the party and leadership and the relativity of the people's expectations in the changing national and international context. 

Traditional methods of party formation

Until the end of the 20th century, any party was formed on a specific political ideology, principle and class basis. Not only the Nepali Congress and Communists, but also the Republicans and Democrats in America, the Labour and Conservatives in Britain, the BJP and Congress in India, and all other parties were formed on the same theoretical, ideological and class basis. But in the post-modern, post-ideological and post-truth era of the 21st century, the traditional methods of party formation have been dissolved and new standards have been established.

How relevant and appropriate are ideology (ideology, ideology) and theory? The theoretical question has been the subject of intense study and debate among political scientists themselves. Not only now, such a debate had begun since the publication of the much-loved book ‘The End of Ideology’ by American political scientist Daniel Bell in 1960. 

In the context of Nepal, the old parties have been prisoners of empty theories and ideologies. They are still chanting classical theories and ‘jargon’ like Marxism, communism, socialism, liberalism, nationalism, expansionism, feudalism, colonialism, imperialism. The ideal men of the Congress and the Communists, BP and Marx, were dynamic and progressive. But the Congress has been interpreting and analyzing BP, the Communists Marx and Lenin, and the Maoists Mao as the Gayatri mantra, as status quoists and rigidists.

Therefore, the Congress, UML, and Maoists have become status quoists from a theoretical and ideological point of view. If we are to develop as a dynamic, vibrant and relevant party according to the public sentiment, then the Congress needs to revisit and rethink BP, the UML needs to revisit Marx and Lenin, and the Maoists need to rethink Mao. Similarly, it is inevitable to redefine or supplement the ideology and basic principles of BP, Marx, Lenin, and Mao while continuing them.

The main basis of party building is principle, organization, and leadership. Until the 20th century, leaders and activists used to go to the people with the party's principles, ideas, and policies. Although the medium for any party to reach the people was to some extent the public media, the leaders and activists were fundamentally the same. On that basis, public opinion was obtained by organizing. But now there is no possibility of building a party through such traditional methods and styles.

In the current digital age, the methods and styles of party building have changed fundamentally. Therefore, a situation has arisen where the party building method itself needs to be redefined. Due to the educational level of the people and the development of information technology and social media, a new method of party building has evolved. Through public media, social media and digital media, parties, leaders and cadres are communicating, interacting and exchanging ideas with the people directly. This has become the most effective and popular medium in terms of political communication and dialogue. 

The basis and agenda of party building now

Like Bell's conclusion, politics has now shifted towards ideas, policies and agendas rather than mere ideology and principles. Ideas, policies and agendas have become the main basis for party building and evaluation. However, advocating or imagining a party without ideology and principles is not the aim of the columnist. It is only a conclusion drawn on the basis of global waves and new trends in party building.

The politics of ideology, principles and values ​​has not ended, but the era of delivery has only begun. The ideologies and principles of any party are not religious texts or mantras. Reforms, updates, and developments are made according to the pace of society, the development of consciousness, the political-economic environment, and the feelings of the people. Because ideologies and principles are dynamic. The main reason why democracy and liberalism are enduring is their dynamics. Therefore, the party's principles, ideas, and policies must also be updated. If they are not updated, they become outdated.

The problems of the 21st century are more complex and challenging than those of the 19th and 20th centuries. Classical theories and policies are unlikely to solve these problems. New issues, problems, and challenges such as sustainable and green development, environmental imbalances, economic inequality, climate change, temperature rise, unemployment, artificial intelligence, gig economy, digitalization, immigration, and urbanization have emerged. The people need concrete ideas, policies, and roadmaps to solve these problems. Parties that follow timely policies are popular and relevant. But parties that do not are unpopular and irrelevant. Therefore, a dynamic and policy-oriented party is needed today, rather than a classical theorist. 

Due to the development of information technology and social media, a situation has been created in which ideas are formed and commentary is established through intellectuals and professionals, celebrities, social media 'influencers', and independent citizens. The social media department is becoming more powerful and influential than the organization department of the party.

A new chapter in the practice and strategy of managing the media, digital media, and social media has begun to win elections and weaken competing parties. Until yesterday, it was the practice of reaching or bringing to leadership a character who had a hold on the organization and had the trust of the leadership, that is, the blessing. But now, the method of reaching leadership, not only of leaders and cadres, but also of characters who have gained the trust of the people, is developing. Therefore, now the era of developing a party based on policies, principles, and agenda, and leadership based on vision and image has begun. This is a positive aspect from the perspective of party building and leadership development.

Reorganization of old parties or a new party?

Will old parties be reorganized or will new parties be formed? This is the burning and much-discussed question of the present. It seems that the sponsored commentary that the party and the party system itself have failed is becoming popular. But this is not the failure of any particular party or party system.

It is the failure of the top leadership of the old parties, who have been in the leadership of the government and the party for a long time and have not been able to deliver despite getting opportunities time and again. There is widespread dissatisfaction, anger and disgust among the people towards the failed leadership of the old parties. That is why those parties are becoming unpopular. But the party and the party system should not be the victim of failed and unpopular leadership. The people have not sought an alternative to the party and the party system. But the old parties as they are have neither a future nor a justification.

The first and natural option is to reorganize and transform the old parties that have made a special contribution to the democratic movement. If new leadership is established and fundamentally transformed, including generational transfer, there is a possibility that people's trust in the old parties will be reestablished. The sooner they get rid of such failed and unpopular leadership, the sooner they will be revived.

The debate on restructuring and transferring leadership through generational transfer is going on in all parties including Congress, UML, Maoists, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), RPP and Madhesh-centric parties. All parties are going through the same labor pains of restructuring, transformation and leadership transfer.

However, there are serial disputes and accusations going on in Congress regarding whether to hold a special or regular general convention and the elections to the House of Representatives on Falgun 21 or after. But in any case, there is a possibility that a new leadership will be established in Congress through generational transfer from the upcoming general convention. However, the possibility of establishing a new leadership in parties other than Congress with generational transfer in the near future seems slim.

The people, disappointed by the failure of the old parties and the original leadership, seem to be attracted to the new party. The political employment season has now begun in a country with high unemployment. Gen-G, celebrities, professionals, experts, industrialists, and businessmen have all announced parties one after another, while some are in the process of announcing them. But there was no possibility of forming a unified new party with alternative principles and culture, including the Gen-G generation, in line with the spirit of the movement.

On the one hand, the division of the agitating Gen-G generation, on the other hand, the initial public comments on the parties announced so far by social media-centric characters using populism as the main basis and deifying certain leaders are not encouraging. But not only the reorganization and transformation of old parties, but also the formation of new parties seems to be equally challenging and disappointing. Therefore, drawing a roadmap by learning from the successes and failures of old parties will be beneficial for the health of new party supporters.

A serious review is needed on why and how the new and alternative Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Janamat, and Nagarik Unmukti Party, which suddenly emerged in the 2079 elections with the slogan of 'No Not Again' against old parties, became controversial, failed, divided, and faced disintegration. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is a vivid example of how a party with potential can collapse when a controversial figure with weak ideological and moral foundations and extreme ambitions takes over the leadership.

President Ravi Lamichhane's extreme lust for power, cooperative fraud, and his release from prison on the basis of a forged government letter under the cover of the Gen-G movement have raised more serious questions. Former Education Minister Sumana Shrestha, who has built a relatively good image, has left the RSS, making serious allegations against Lamichhane, while leaders such as Tosima Karki, Ganesh Karki, Pukar Bam and others are demanding reorganization and transformation. The illusion towards the RSS has ended in less than three years. The new 'race' parties that have been announced one after the other are certain to cause the biggest damage to the RSS.

After the public opinion and civil emancipation that gave up principles for power, went to the government to do controversial work, and considered the family as the party, there was no question of wasting time discussing those parties. Therefore, the so-called new and alternative parties, characters, and trends also became populist and power-oriented, synonymous with political and economic distortions and anomalies. The problems that existed in the old parties were more complex than those in the new and alternative parties. Therefore, it seems that those parties are heading towards the direction of decline at the same speed at which they rose.

The party that the people are looking for 

Now the question arises, what kind of party is the party that the people are looking for? The answer is simple and clear. A party that is not history-oriented and past-oriented, but future-oriented is the need of the day. The people are looking for servants, not rulers. They are looking for good governance, not just government. They are looking for delivery.

A party that cannot deliver has no future. Therefore, the people have sought a more advanced democratic, liberal, pluralistic and people-oriented party with a clear vision and a concrete roadmap to solve the existing problems. Similarly, the people want a party that is fully committed to the constitution, rule of law and human rights formed through a popularly elected Constituent Assembly and is accountable to the people. Let no one be confused, the people want a party that is not regressive, status quo, populist, liberal, or anarchic. No one has daydreamed of regression and populism. The people's sentiment and the Gen-G movement have also reaffirmed this reality.

What is the appropriate model for environmentally friendly economic policy and sustainable development? What is the concrete policy to end corruption and ensure good governance and provide quality and accessible education and health? What is the vision to create employment opportunities in the country at a time when thousands of youth are going abroad every day due to the unemployment problem? What is the roadmap to establish an equitable society by ensuring social justice? What is the program for all three levels of government to provide services in an accessible manner? What is the concrete policy to solve the problems of cooperatives, microfinance and meter interest victims, farmers, and landless citizens? These are the questions of the Nepali people now, these are the issues, and these are the priorities. Which party has a concrete roadmap to solve those problems?

Democratic and visionary leadership 

After principles and policies, the most important pillar of any party is leadership. But in the context of Nepal, the biggest problem lies in leadership. The people's expectations about leadership are clear. They are looking for a democratic, liberal, and credible leadership that is not populist, conservative, and reactionary, but one that will make the democratic system stronger, people-oriented, and action-oriented.