An ecologist's view of communism and its relevance in Nepal

Ecological models are useful tools for understanding how populations change, but they rely on assumptions that rarely hold indefinitely in nature. The exponential and logistic growth models illustrate how ignoring limits such as resource availability and competition can lead to unrealistic predictions. This article uses these population models as a framework to examine political and social systems, particularly communism, to show how simplifying assumptions about human societies can produce elegant theories that struggle when confronted with real-world complexity and constraints.

Exponential growth model and its assumptions

The exponential population growth model in ecology is the simplest model that helps us to understand how population grows, or changes, over time. At the core of this model, there are few basic assumptions: that population increases at a constant rate and there is unlimited resources available. Population growth in this model is represented by Fig. 1a where x-axis represents time and y-axis represents population size. The red line represents the population size at any given point in time. We can see that as we move from left to right in x-axis (i.e., as time passes), the population gets bigger; and gets bigger very fast as population size increase. Mathematically, the model is indicated by the equation dN/dt = rN, where r represents population growth rate, N represents population size, t represents time; dN and dt indicates change in population and time respectively.

Change in population size with respect to time based on a) Exponential and b) Logistic growth models

Exponential growth assumes that there is an endless supply of food, space, and no competition. However, in nature, this never lasts long as we can never have situations where we have unlimited resources, space and zero competition. Global effort to introduce green revolution to produce more food, invent genetically modified products are examples that humans need to act to ensure that the resources are available. In fact, when we assume that increasing population leads to the scarcity of resources which puts brake on growth rate itself, then growth slows or stops. This scenario is incorporated by another model of population growth called Logistic growth model (Fig. 1b). This model assumes that an area will have a certain ability to hold an arbitrary population size called carrying capacity. Once the population size reaches carrying capacity, population ceases to grow.

One of the great mathematicians George Box famously said, "all models are wrong but some are useful". Whatever model we develop to represent nature, it cannot explain everything. The same logic is probably true for human societies. Just as ecology's simple exponential growth model fails when resources are limited, no political or governance model for human societies are without limitations or weaknesses. Let's explore this through the lens of population models to see why no system is perfect, but some are better equipped for reality.

Is communism just like exponential growth model?

Communism's basic idea works in much the same way as exponential growth model. Just like exponential growth model assumes unlimited resources and constant growth rate for it to predict population growth correctly, communism, at its core, assumes a clear divide between oppressed workers and oppressive capitalists, promising unlimited equality once that divide is bridged. It assumes society splits neatly into two groups: the oppressed working class and the oppressive capitalist class. Remove the oppressors through revolution, share resources equally, and society should grow toward perfect equality with no limits. It envisions a classless society where people work for the benefit of the community and get satisfied with whatever falls their way. This presents a picture of utopian community that places societal benefit over individual desires. There is a clear similarity in how communism's fundamental assumption is similar to that of exponential growth model.

When does communism fails?

However just like the limitations of exponential growth model to exclude resource limitation and variable growth rate, communism completely leaves out the heterogeneity that exists in every human population: gender, ethnicity, religion, regional loyalties, personal ambition, and cultural traditions. These factors act just like the "limited resources" or "competition between species" or "age-specific growth rate" in ecology. When they are ignored, the system cannot achieve the smooth, unlimited progress it predicts. History shows that revolutions often replace one form of hierarchy with another, just as exponential growth collapses when real limits appear.

Question then arises in ecology. What if exponential growth is unrealistic? Here comes the logistic growth model which assumes there is a carrying capacity (K) in any ecological system. It assumes that, the population grows fast but slows gradually as the population approaches the maximum an environment can support which better reflects the reality. Mathematically, the model is represented by dN/dt = rN(1 – N/K). Logistic model has the same factors as exponential model, but adds K in the equation, which represents the carrying capacity of an environment or system in the equation.

Communism, too, has had attempts to add realism. Some thinkers have tried to account for environmental limits, social complexities, or the need for gradual change; ideas sometimes called "eco-socialism" or "democratic socialism." But even these revised versions struggle when the carrying capacity is misjudged or when new divisions emerge. Societies are not uniform; they have age groups, classes within classes, and competing interests. Adding age-structured or stage-structured models in ecology shows how different life stages affect overall growth. Human societies work similarly; generational differences, family ties, and local customs create their own dynamics. No simple two-group model can capture all of this without oversimplifying.

Predator-prey interactions and class struggle

Ecology's predator-prey models offer another warning. In the Lotka-Volterra models, predators and prey oscillate in cycles. Remove the predators, and prey numbers explode, until they exhaust resources and crash. Communism aims to eliminate the "predator" class (capitalists). But in practice, new power structures often emerge; bureaucrats, party officials, or local elites, who take on similar roles. The cycle repeats, just as predator-prey populations fluctuate when balance is disrupted.

Biodiversity and the strength of diversity

Ecology also shows that diverse systems are more resilient. A forest with many tree species withstands disease and drought better than a monoculture. Uniform systems are fragile; one strong shock can wipe them out. Societies follow the same pattern. Systems that allow variety: different opinions, local customs, competing institutions, are more stable. Democratic socialism, regulated capitalism, and mixed economies let these differences coexist, like a diverse ecosystem. Communism's push for one class, one party, and one truth is closer to the monoculture: efficient in theory, vulnerable in practice.

Conclusion

No political system is perfect, just as no ecological model predicts everything. Ecology shows us a clear lesson: some models explain natural systems better than others because they adapt to limits, embrace diversity, and allow flexibility. Communism’s basic assumption overlooks these realities. Like the exponential growth model, it promises rapid progress without limits, but when real constraints appear, the system falters. The idea is appealing and often inspires mass movements, yet these revolutions rarely bring lasting change on the ground. Reducing complex social problems to a single factor is as misleading as relying on unchecked exponential growth to predict human populations, it is bound to fail.

This lesson is especially relevant in a country like Nepal, with its long history and remarkable ethno-cultural and religious diversity. Communism’s high ideals quickly gained support here, but it could not sustain itself. When the late Madan Bhandari introduced “People’s Multiparty Democracy,” he tried to blend communist principles with multiparty democratic elements. Nepal’s most recent communist movement, the Maoist insurgency, drew widespread backing in the 2000s and early 2010s by opposing capitalism and certain cultural norms. Yet despite holding power for much of the past 15 years, it has lost popular support because it could not deliver meaningful change.

An imaginary depiction of Maoist revolution in the mountains of Nepal

Human societies, like natural ecosystems, do not thrive on simple principles alone. They succeed when they adapt to reality and build on what actually works. Nepal’s experience, and ecology’s deeper message, reminds us to choose approaches that respect complexity, value diversity, and remain open to adjustment.