Nepal: Maoists desist, support CPN-Marxist candidate

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12358985


Nepal: Jhalanath Khanal elected new prime minister

It took 17 attempts to elect Nepal's new PM, Jhalanath Khanal
Continue reading the main story
NEPAL AT A CROSSROADS

Stand-off
Fragile state
Symbolic moment in Gyanendra's fall
Nepal: The rocky red road
Parliamentarians in Nepal have elected a new prime minister after more than seven months of stalemate.

The deadlock was finally resolved when the Maoists, the largest single party, decided to withdraw their own candidate and to support Jhalanath Khanal, the chairman of a smaller allied party.

Nepal has been without a functioning government since June.

Many Nepalese are angry, saying issues including the economy and the peace process have been neglected.

"Jhalanath Khanal secured 368 of the 598 votes cast, giving him a majority," speaker Subash Chandra Nemwang told parliament.

It was the 17th time Nepalese MPs had voted to elect a new prime minister. Changes in the election process helped to clear the deadlock.

Jhalanath Khanal's victory came after a last-minute decision by the Maoist party to withdraw their own candidate - Pushpa Kumar Dahal, also known by his nom de guerre Prachanda - from the race.

An hour before the vote was due, they announced they would support Mr Khanal, whose Communist Party of Nepal is the third largest in the house.

Analysts say the Maoists made this decision because Mr Khanal was sympathetic to their views, and it was unlikely that they would have been able to gain enough support to lead a majority government themselves.

Army row
Nepal has had no prime minister after Madhav Kumar Nepal resigned in June, under pressure from the Maoists in a row over the control of the army and the integration of former fighters into regular forces.

Mr Nepal has been running a caretaker government ever since.

Mr Khanal, 60, is a veteran politician who was involved in the pro-democracy protests against the monarchy in 1990 and again in 2006.

A 2006 peace deal ended the war between the Maoists and the then royal government, in which more than 16,000 people were killed.

The Maoists won parliamentary elections in 2008 and the 239-year old monarchy was later abolished.

It is hoped that the new administration will be able to move forward on the two key issues that have held up the country's long-running peace process - deciding the future of more than 19,000 former Maoists fighters, and the completion of a new democratic constitution, says the BBC's Joanna Jolly in Kathmandu.

However, there are fears that if Nepal's new communist-led government does not work closely with the opposition Nepali Congress party, the divisions that have paralysed politics for the past few years will continue to block the country's development, our correspondent adds.

I wonder if Nepal will become the first parliamentary socialist republic? A sort of independent kerala.

[RED DAVE]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12358985



I wonder if Nepal will become the first parliamentary socialist republic? A sort of independent kerala.Don't hold your breath. It's going to be a fully capitalist country whose capitalist government is supported by the Maoists.

RED DAVE

[The Hong Se Sun]

Wow, Red Dave replied to another Nepal thread!

That would be nice Shiva, communism is very popular in Nepal and it has many different communist parties. The Maoist are simply the most popular party among the people because they carry out the wishes of the proletarian masses even when it meant dropping the war and joining a election. They truly let the people dictate them like any real communist party who claims to be one with the people would do.

[RED DAVE]

The Maoist are simply the most popular party among the people because they carry out the wishes of the proletarian masses even when it meant dropping the war and joining a election.What you are saying is that if the level of political consciousness of the working class is low, the Left should accede to this. That's not what Marxists do. Marxists, as opposed to Maoists, attempt to provide revolutionary leadership and lead the working class to seizing power.


They truly let the people dictate them like any real communist party who claims to be one with the people would do.You obvious have no conception of the role of a revolutionary party.

RED DAVE

[The Hong Se Sun]

Well you see Dave there is a thing called the dictatorship of the proletarian (you're probably not familiar). It means the the proletarians are the ones in control. Thus meaning that they control the policies and the workings of the party. I know that is a crazy thing to imagine, the proletarians in control and not needing to be dictated to but I think you can grasp it if you try hard enough (won't hold my breath). When the masses wanted the guns to be laid down the Maoist did what the people wanted because they are a party that serves the proletarian masses.

what trotskyist (not marxist) do is try to dictate the working class to what they are going to do and hints why there never has been a trotskyist revolution ever. So when you or any trotskyist lead a revolution, come back and we can talk about the role of the revolutionary party. Funny for how much you attack Maoist for being "anti-working class" you sure sound more like you want to enslave the working class and force them to follow your method or else the movement is wrong. I will write my comrades in Nepal and let them know they are doing it wrong :rolleyes:

[scarletghoul]

This is terrible news. Apparently Khanal is on the left wing of the UML but he's still UML, which is a revisionist party. Hopefully this will not last too long and the Maoists can turn things their way again..

And yeah it is pretty cool to have a country where 2 'communist' parties compete in elections..

[DaringMehring]

I hope that this does not lead to the isolation in the UCPN of the more revolutionary elements. If Bhattarai/Prachanda lead the majority of the Party onto the bourgeois parliamentary road, isolating Baidya and any more aggressive elements, then it will lead to a decisive disaster for the revolution.

A moment of truth is coming soon, in the internal discourse of the UCPN. This latest development doesn't bode well.

[RED DAVE]

Well you see Dave there is a thing called the dictatorship of the proletarian (you're probably not familiar).Never heard of it.


It means the the proletarians are the ones in control.No really, is that what it means? Wow! Sounds terrific.

I guess that would mean that the working class would control the society, including the economy, right?


Thus meaning that they control the policies and the workings of the party.Uhh, Comrade, you are confusing the party and society.


I know that is a crazy thing to imagine[.]Outlandish; craziest thing I ever had.


[T]he proletarians in control and not needing to be dictated to but I think you can grasp it if you try hard enough (won't hold my breath).Hold your breath; I want to see if you turn blue.


When the masses wanted the guns to be laid down the Maoist did what the people wanted because they are a party that serves the proletarian masses.So the leading revolutionary party, instead of being at the head of the masses is somewhere near its ass.

By the way how did the masses communicate this to the party?


what trotskyist (not marxist) do is try to dictate the working class to what they are going to do and hints why there never has been a trotskyist revolution ever.So when the Nepalese Maoists go into an alliance with the bourgeoisie, they are actually doing the will of the working class. Wow! The working class wants an alliance with its class enemy.


So when you or any trotskyist lead a revolution, come back and we can talk about the role of the revolutionary party.Tell you what; when you Maoists stop being the door stop for capitalism, let me know.


Funny for how much you attack Maoist for being "anti-working class" you sure sound more like you want to enslave the working class and force them to follow your method or else the movement is wrong.Yeah, that's what we trots want to do: enslave the working class.

Worker of the World Unite (with the Trotskyists); You Nothing to Gain But Your Chains!



I will write my comrades in Nepal and let them know they are doing it wrong :rolleyes:Do that. Send Prachanda my regards. I here he's been depressed because they won't let him be the prime minister of a bourgeois republic.

RED DAVE

[RED DAVE]

This is terrible news. Apparently Khanal is on the left wing of the UML but he's still UML, which is a revisionist party. Hopefully this will not last too long and the Maoists can turn things their way again..Don't wait "too long" for that to happen.


And yeah it is pretty cool to have a country where 2 'communist' parties compete in elections..Wow! Whoopee! Two cps competing to run a bourgeois republic.

RED DAVE

[scarletghoul]

I hope that this does not lead to the isolation in the UCPN of the more revolutionary elements. If Bhattarai/Prachanda lead the majority of the Party onto the bourgeois parliamentary road, isolating Baidya and any more aggressive elements, then it will lead to a decisive disaster for the revolution.

A moment of truth is coming soon, in the internal discourse of the UCPN. This latest development doesn't bode well.Kiran's reaction will be the key to understanding this imo. Was it a flat-out betrayal or did they agree a wider strategy etc

[RED DAVE]

I hope that this does not lead to the isolation in the UCPN of the more revolutionary elements. If Bhattarai/Prachanda lead the majority of the Party onto the bourgeois parliamentary road, isolating Baidya and any more aggressive elements, then it will lead to a decisive disaster for the revolution.The disaster already happened when a so-called revolutionary Marxist party decided that its political task is to run a bourgeois republic.


A moment of truth is coming soon, in the internal discourse of the UCPN. This latest development doesn't bode well.The Maoists were iffy from the start. They have never emerged from the shadow of Mao, which meant they were always ready to open the door to state and private capitalism. Which is what they're doing.

RED DAVE

[DaringMehring]

The disaster already happened when a so-called revolutionary Marxist party decided that its political task is to run a bourgeois republic.

The Maoists were iffy from the start. They have never emerged from the shadow of Mao, which meant they were always ready to open the door to state and private capitalism. Which is what they're doing.

RED DAVE

Their ideology isn't the be all and end all of the revolution.

The Mensheviks also had ideas about the bourgeois parliamentary path & allowing capitalism -- they had their day, but in the end workers, peasants & true revolutionaries were able to push through.

I doubt there will ever be a revolution purely under control of Bolshevik-types from the beginning. That doesn't mean that there won't be revolutions that end like October 1917.

[RED DAVE]

Their ideology isn't the be all and end all of the revolution.Do you know of any non-Maoist revolutionary groups in Nepal?


The Mensheviks also had ideas about the bourgeois parliamentary path & allowing capitalism -- they had their day, but in the end workers, peasants & true revolutionaries were able to push through.That's because they had the Bolsheviks.


I doubt there will ever be a revolution purely under control of Bolshevik-types from the beginning. That doesn't mean that there won't be revolutions that end like October 1917.Hopefully a real revolutionary party will arise.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Hopefully a real revolutionary party will arise.


It's already (http://www.onesolutionrevolution.com/node/234) there. It is only a matter of time before they lead the workers' insurrections. Too bad they missed the war against the monarchy though. Just bad timing I guess....

[red cat]

I hope that this does not lead to the isolation in the UCPN of the more revolutionary elements. If Bhattarai/Prachanda lead the majority of the Party onto the bourgeois parliamentary road, isolating Baidya and any more aggressive elements, then it will lead to a decisive disaster for the revolution.

A moment of truth is coming soon, in the internal discourse of the UCPN. This latest development doesn't bode well.

Indeed. Moving for the seizure of power will complete the first stage of the revolution, while fully embracing the parliament and doing away with the revolutionary programme will provide a very attractive future for the revisionist elements inside the party. Generally a very sharp two line struggle precedes such decisive actions. I think we are very near to a time when we will see coups or purges within the party, followed by a total surrender or victory of the revolution.

[RED DAVE]

It's already (http://www.onesolutionrevolution.com/node/234) there. It is only a matter of time before they lead the workers' insurrections. Too bad they missed the war against the monarchy though. Just bad timing I guess....Not to necessarily support this group, but too bad the Socialist Party and the IWW weren't around during the US Civil War. And where were those nasty Bolsheviks when the serfs were liberated in Russia?

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Not to necessarily support this group, but too bad the Socialist Party and the IWW weren't around during the US Civil War. And where were those nasty Bolsheviks when the serfs were liberated in Russia?

RED DAVE

Were the serfs in Russia liberated by a full scale people's war ? Did they do away with the monarchy ? Did the Bolsheviks confine their activities to publishing a few reports ?

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Why are "maoists" seen as so pro-capitalist? Wasn't it Deng Xiaoping who brought private capital to interact with state capital, and abandoning "for the time being" the road to collectivization?