What the Uprising Revealed

The immediate trigger, a ban on social media platforms, seems trivial until we understand its significance. The Oli government’s attempt to silence online criticism revealed a fundamental issue- Nepal’s ruling class, despite having a formal democracy, governs with the same authoritarian tendencies as the previously established monarchy. Politicians who once rallied people against royal autocracy have since become a closed group, sharing power among themselves while accumulating wealth that is disconnected from productive activity.

When young Nepalis saw the children of political leaders displaying luxury goods and taking foreign vacations on Instagram and TikTok—platforms the government then banned- they confronted a clear contradiction. The political class that claims democratic legitimacy is visibly enriching itself while the majority struggles with unemployment, poverty, and the need to migrate for survival. Remittances from workers abroad now account for one-third of Nepal’s GDP, highlighting the failure of the domestic economy to support its own people.

This pattern is seen across South Asia. In Sri Lanka, the Rajapaksa family’s corruption and economic mismanagement sparked mass protests in 2022. In Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina’s authoritarian rule ended in August 2024 after violent street demonstrations. Now Nepal faces a similar situation. The common element is not just corruption- though that is certainly present- but something deeper: the failure of postcolonial capitalist development to bring genuine improvement in living conditions for most people, even after decades of formal democracy.

Nepal’s political elite emerged from real mass struggles. The Maoist insurgency, the Communist Party of Nepal, and the Nepali Congress all played roles in ending the monarchy in 2008. Many made significant sacrifices in that fight. However, political power cut off from a plan for changing property relations and productive capacities inevitably falls apart. Without restructuring the economy to meet the needs of the people rather than just profit for the elite, political democracy becomes hollow- it becomes a way to manage competition among elite groups while leaving the structural issues that create poverty, migration, and dependence unresolved.

The Limits of Spontaneity

The September 2025 protests showed remarkable courage. Young people faced water cannons, tear gas, and live ammunition. They forced a prime minister to resign. They burned symbols of state power, including government buildings, party offices, the Supreme Court, and the Presidential palace. For a brief moment, it seemed as if state authority had collapsed.

But what happens when the fires go out? This is where the limits of the uprising become clear. Spontaneous revolt can cause destruction- it can lead to resignations, damage property, and create momentary crises for those in power. However, it cannot build alternative structures of power or implement a plan for social change on its own.

The protests struggled with organization. While activists like Sudan Gurung of Hami Nepal took on coordinating roles, the movement was intentionally leaderless and decentralized. This mirrors a broader trend in contemporary protest movements worldwide, like Occupy and the Arab Spring. Horizontal organization and skepticism of leadership arise both from valid critiques of hierarchical party structures and from confusion about how power functions and how it might be seized and used for meaningful change.

Without organization capable of sustaining the struggle beyond quick bursts of anger, lacking clear demands that go beyond just removing individual politicians, and not connecting to workplace struggles where workers can effectively halt production and services, such movements will wear themselves out. The anger is real, and the grievances are valid, but anger alone cannot restructure society.

The violence toward individual politicians and their families highlights this issue. Attacking Sher Bahadur Deuba in his home or assaulting Ravi Laxmi Chitrakar may seem like justice to those who have suffered under corrupt governance. Yet individual politicians can be easily replaced. The system that produces them- the integration of Nepal into global capitalism as a dependent economy, the challenging geography that makes it susceptible to pressure from India and China, the lack of industrial development that forces workers abroad, and the concentration of land and wealth- remains unaffected when one corrupt official is swapped for another.

The Question of Class

A Marxist perspective asks us to consider which classes were involved in the uprising and what their interests were. The protests were primarily led by youth, crossing some class lines. Students, unemployed youth, small business owners harmed by the social media ban, and workers all had reasons for anger. However, the movement did not develop specific working-class demands or organization.

Nepal’s working class remains small and divided due to limited industrialization. The largest concentrations of Nepali workers are not in Nepal but as migrants in India, the Gulf states, Malaysia, and elsewhere. This migration highlights Nepal’s marginal role in the global economy- unable to generate enough jobs or productive work internally, it exports labor.

The protests mainly reflected the frustrations of educated urban youth dealing with unemployment and corruption rather than organizing workplace struggles against exploitation. This observation is not a dig at the protesters, but it points out the movement’s class foundation and its potential paths.

Without grounding protest movements in the specific power that workers wield- the ability to quit work and stop production- they remain reliant on street mobilization, which is often temporary and draining. The most enduring and impactful movements historically have combined large street protests with organized workplace actions, where workers not only protest but also demonstrate the capacity to manage production themselves.

Geopolitical Constraints and Possibilities

Nepal’s location between India and China influences its political options in significant ways. India has traditionally seen Nepal as part of its security area, with intelligence agencies playing large roles in Nepali politics. China has increased its influence through infrastructure investment and diplomatic connections. The United States pursues its interests through development programs like the Millennium Challenge Corporation grants.

Any truly transformative movement in Nepal must navigate these external pressures. This does not mean accepting control by foreign powers, but it does mean recognizing that small countries sandwiched between major powers face challenges that sheer determination cannot overcome. Regional cooperation among progressive movements, linking struggles in Nepal with those in India, Bangladesh, and beyond, becomes essential rather than simply aspirational.

The reported plans by the Delhi Police Commissioner to respond to Nepal’s protests acknowledge something significant: ruling classes throughout South Asia understand that the conditions leading to rebellion in Nepal are present across the region. Youth unemployment, corruption, inequality, and authoritarian governance are not unique to Nepal but are widespread throughout South Asia. The question is whether movements can establish transnational coordination and shared goals.

What Is To Be Done?

The typical activist response to spontaneous uprisings is to call for building ‘the party’ or ‘the movement’ in vague terms. However, effective organizing requires clarity about social forces, immediate demands, and strategic vision.

For Nepal, several tasks seem crucial. First, connect urban protest movements with rural struggles concerning land, water, and agricultural policy. Most Nepalis still reside in rural areas and rely on agriculture. Any transformative plan must focus on their conditions, not just those of urban youth.

Second, develop organization among migrant workers abroad. Since remittances make up one-third of GDP, Nepali workers overseas represent significant potential power- but only if they are organized. Creating transnational worker organizations to coordinate actions across borders addresses both Nepal’s specific issues and the broader reality of global labor migration.

Third, clarify demands that extend beyond removing individual politicians to tackle structural problems: land reform, public ownership of key industries, democratic economic planning aimed at meeting needs rather than profit, and real sovereignty that rejects subservience to Indian or Chinese interests.

Fourth, engage in patient political education to help people understand not only that the system is corrupt but also why it creates corruption- how capitalism in peripheral economies inevitably produces the conditions people are rebelling against. This requires study circles, worker education, and developing local intellectuals who can connect immediate struggles to a longer vision.

Fifth, learn from both the successes and failures of previous movements. The Maoist insurgency in Nepal mobilized thousands and challenged state power for years but ultimately reached a political settlement that left underlying structures unchanged. Understanding this requires a honest assessment, not glorification or condemnation.

Rebellion Is Not Revolution

The September 2025 uprising in Nepal is significant. It shows that even in small countries facing various external pressures, public anger against corrupt governance can erupt dramatically. It indicates that South Asian youth refuse to passively accept systems that offer neither dignity nor decent living conditions. It exposes cracks in the legitimacy of political arrangements throughout the region.

However, rebellion is not the same as revolution. Forcing one prime minister to resign while leaving the same system intact is not real change. Burning buildings does not create alternative institutions. Spontaneous uprisings without organization, without clear demands, and lacking roots in working-class power will either fade away or be redirected into replacing one group of elite managers with another.

The job for socialists is not to step back from these movements or lecture participants about their shortcomings. It is to participate actively while addressing the limitations- to help build the necessary organizational structures, develop clarity of program, and connect with working-class power that can turn spontaneous rebellion into a sustained effort for fundamental change.

Nepal’s uprising will not be the last in South Asia. The conditions that lead to these explosive moments-unemployment, corruption, inequality, authoritarian governance, and the crisis of capitalism-are growing, not shrinking. The question is whether the next uprising, wherever it happens, can evolve from spontaneous rebellion into organized struggle that truly transforms society rather than merely swapping individuals in positions of power within an unchanged system.

That transformation requires a clear understanding of how capitalism operates on both global and local levels, how state power functions and how it can be contested, and how movements can build the capacity not just to resist but also to govern- to really reorganize production and distribution based on human needs rather than profit. This is the work that lies ahead. Nepal’s uprising offers valuable lessons for this endeavor, both in what it accomplished and what it could not.

8 October 2025

Radical Socialist (India)

---