There is a big difference between the kind of Maoism that exists in places like India, Nepal or even the Philippines to some extent, and the larpy western “Maoist” Gonzaloites. Yes they all commit left-deviationist errors to some degree, but those Maoist groups that have survived and have had some measure of success in their respective regions are generally not as dogmatic as western “Maoists” and have adapted their tactics to the specific local conditions and to the needs of the local population. Another commenter mentioned the Naxalites in India and i think they are an interesting case study of pragmatic Maoism in action. It is probably not a model that can be extrapolated to the whole of India but it has been able to achieve some victories locally.

Since these groups have decades of experience operating and conducting their struggle in their respective regions, in my opinion the right approach for a national-level Marxist-Leninist party in the initial stages of the revolution is not to actively oppose these groups (unless they commit very serious errors) but to try to court them and incorporate them into the larger national strategy of the party as something like regional autonomous branches that are given considerable freedom over how to organize and administer their respective regions so long as they have the popular support of the masses there. Over time, they will be merged ideologically and organizationally into the main communist party and subordinated to the central proletarian government.

In this we can look at the example of the One Country Two Systems model that China is applying to Hong Kong for the duration of its transitional period of integration. There is no reason why, so long as the national authority of the Marxist-Leninist vanguard party is not challenged by these Maoists groups, they could not also be part of a similar arrangement.