People's War in Bangladesh?

[Ret]

Bangladesh is a country experiencing a people's war and advancing worker's struggles.
This is how the incidents listed above above (here; http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-bangladesh-t154364/index.html) break down;

Killed by rivals; 4
Indeterminate killing (probably rivals); 7
Indeterminate killing (probably cops); 2
Police killing; 9
Arrests; 12

35 incidents; 4 were killings by rivals, 7 are unclear but reported as probably rival killings - so, from 35 incidents in 4 months, 11, nearly a 3rd, are probably factional killings between rival groups (use of machetes adds to the likelihood); leaving 24 incidents, of which 11 are armed clashes. I don't call that evidence of what you claimed on 5 May, that;

Armed struggle in Bangladesh is actually quite developed in some areas. Today you increase your claim and say;

Bangladesh is a country experiencing a people's war and advancing worker's struggles. This is evidence only of very minor skirmishes in remote areas, which have been occurring periodically without growing much for many years - and that have little impact so far on the wider society. Nor are Maoists "advancing workers' struggles", which are concentrated in Bangladesh in the garment industry, in Dhaka and other urban areas where Maoists have no presence. These struggles are largely self-organised, autonomous from political groups and have shown some of the highest level of class struggle in the world for several years; http://libcom.org/library/tailoring-needs-garment-worker-struggles-bangladesh.

Recent incidents show that rural Bangladeshis are quite capable of organising themselves; http://libcom.org/news/gamekeepers-turned-poachers-villagers-cop-robbers-05052011

[red cat]

This is how the incidents listed above break down;

Killed by rivals; 4
Indeterminate killing (probably rivals); 7
Indeterminate killing (probably cops); 2
Police killing; 9
Arrests; 12

35 incidents; 4 were killings by rivals, 7 are unclear but reported as probably rival killings - so, from 35 incidents in 4 months, 11, nearly a 3rd, are probably factional killings between rival groups (use of machetes adds to the likelihood); leaving 24 incidents, of which 11 are armed clashes. I don't call that evidence of what you claimed on 5 May, that;

Who are these rivals? Could be militant Islamists, could be remnants from the leftist groups of the 70s that had might have turned into armed revisionist ones, or just even the state forces who concoct stories about intra-rebel clashes to blame the collateral damage on them.

The movement in Bangladesh is close to what the Indian movement was twenty years ago; many splinter groups trying to unite, and mainly politicizing and recruiting from the masses while concentrating on looting arms and avoiding major conflicts with large battalions. The primary force is non-existent. While this is very small when compared to giants like the Indian movement, it is certainly a very well developed armed struggle considering the global situation.



Today you increase your claim and say;
This is evidence only of very minor skirmishes in remote areas, which have been occurring periodically without growing much for many years - and that have little impact so far on the wider society. Nor are Maoists "advancing workers' struggles", which are concentrated in Bangladesh in the garment industry, in Dhaka and other urban areas where Maoists have no presence. These struggles are largely self-organised, autonomous from political groups and have shown some of the highest level of class struggle in the world for several years; http://libcom.org/library/tailoring-needs-garment-worker-struggles-bangladesh.On the contrary, it is the armed struggle in rural Bangladesh that is progressing quickly when compared to the urban workers' struggles that have been going on for decades but have not managed to raise the slogan for seizure of power yet. The struggle by the garment workers in Dhaka is pretty underdeveloped when compared to the struggles of many sections of Indian workers who are trying or in some cases have managed to overthrow the capitalists who own the means of production.

Given the clandestine nature of Maoists movements, it is not at all wise to state that they have no presence in the urban areas. Recent history has shown that Maoists sometimes follow the line of remaining silent about movements of which they are a part in white areas. The struggle of the garment workers is surely a very progressive and a potentially revolutionary one, but the only way it can achieve victory is by joining the Maoist armed movement instead of reformist unions that will try to liquidate it.


Recent incidents show that rural Bangladeshis are quite capable of organising themselves; http://libcom.org/news/gamekeepers-turned-poachers-villagers-cop-robbers-05052011Obviously they are, otherwise the Maoist people's war would not exist. What is your point?

[Ret]

Who are these rivals? Could be militant Islamists, could be remnants from the leftist groups of the 70s that had might have turned into armed revisionist ones, or just even the state forces who concoct stories about intra-rebel clashes to blame the collateral damage on them.I'm just assessing the info you provided as the basis of your claim of a war going on. I divided incidents into categories based on descriptions in your info. As I said, machetes indicate it's unlikely to be cops killing - cops like to avoid hand to hand, face to face combat - they also like to openly claim kills to impress the state with their efficiency. Yes, there are exceptions to this, but no evidence here for them.

The movement in Bangladesh is close to what the Indian movement was twenty years ago; many splinter groups trying to unite, and mainly politicizing and recruiting from the masses while concentrating on looting arms and avoiding major conflicts with large battalions. The primary force is non-existent. While this is very small when compared to giants like the Indian movement, it is certainly a very well developed armed struggle considering the global situation. You've shown no evidence for these claims of "a very well developed armed struggle" - quite the opposite; so what sources are you basing these claims on? You claim "Bangladesh is a country experiencing a people's war". I read the Bangladeshi news everyday, have been in contact with locals there etc. There is no "war" going on there, that's a romantic myth fed to, or invented by, naïve western leftists. However much you split hairs about what percentage of 35 minor incidents in 4 months are evidence of armed skirmishes, it shows the opposite of what you claim. A few isolated militants running around the woods shooting at each other and the occasional cop is not a "war".


On the contrary, it is the armed struggle in rural Bangladesh that is progressing quickly when compared to the urban workers' struggles that have been going on for decades but have not managed to raise the slogan for seizure of power yet. The struggle by the garment workers in Dhaka is pretty underdeveloped when compared to the struggles of many sections of Indian workers who are trying or in some cases have managed to overthrow the capitalists who own the means of production. The above shows you really don't know much about Bangladesh at all. So mass revolts like 2006 - http://libcom.org/news/article.php/bangladesh-garment-revolt-140706 - where 100s of thousands of garment workers took collective action, and have sustained a high level of struggle since - http://libcom.org/tags/bangladeshi-garment-workers - are 'less developed' than the evidence you give above of a handful of remote skirmishes that have been occurring periodically for years with little expansion? 'Less developed' because a few isolated leftists have made an abstract call for 'revolution', in whatever way they understand that term? That is nonsense. And where have Indian workers overthrown capitalists? For how long? If you point to guerrilla activity to 'prove' this, you probably continue the error of mixing up two different phenomena, urban workplace struggles and rural guerrilla activity. (Or have the guerillas supposedly fighting 'rural feudalism' somehow stumbled across some capitalists in the wrong historical time zone?)


Given the clandestine nature of Maoists movements, it is not at all wise to state that they have no presence in the urban areas. This line we've heard before; 'just cos there's no evidence they exist doesn't mean they're not there'. (A bit like God.) But it's wiser not to claim, on this basis, the existence of a mythical "war".

Recent history has shown that Maoists sometimes follow the line of remaining silent about movements of which they are a part in white areas.If so, in this case, they have kept themselves totally invisible within the garment worker movement for over 25 years! (Which seems both a bit unlikely and pointless.) So how could you know about them then? This is fantasy.

The struggle of the garment workers is surely a very progressive and a potentially revolutionary one, but the only way it can achieve victory is by joining the Maoist armed movement instead of reformist unions that will try to liquidate it. I expect the Maoists, given the power, would seek to liquidate it in the interests of the productivist ideology of promoting SEZs, like UCPN(M) advocate in Nepal. They'd probably justify it as 'overcoming feudalism'(!), but Bangladeshi SEZs are a living example of what a counter-revolutionary policy that is, from the perspective of the working class - and also, how the working class can resist such exploitation, whoever the boss is.


Quote:
Recent incidents show that rural Bangladeshis are quite capable of organising themselves; http://libcom.org/news/gamekeepers-t...bbers-05052011 (http://www.anonym.to/?http://libcom.org/news/gamekeepers-turned-poachers-villagers-cop-robbers-05052011) Obviously they are, otherwise the Maoist people's war would not exist. What is your point? Sorry, that's fantasy; "the Maoist people's war" doesn't exist at present in Bangladesh - but self-organised rural struggles already do, have done for a long time, eg - http://libcom.org/news/bangladesh-phulbari-mining-garment-industry-010906 - and so are not dependent on existence of Maoists or anyone else to organise themselves.

The fact that you start a thread called 'News from Bangladesh' with a list of obscure remote skirmishes while ignoring these other struggles shows you have your evaluations completely upside down.

[red cat]

I'm just assessing the info you provided as the basis of your claim of a war going on. I divided incidents into categories based on descriptions in your info. As I said, machetes indicate it's unlikely to be cops killing - cops like to avoid hand to hand, face to face combat - they also like to openly claim kills to impress the state with their efficiency. Yes, there are exceptions to this, but no evidence here for them.
You've shown no evidence for these claims of "a very well developed armed struggle" - quite the opposite; so what sources are you basing these claims on? You claim "Bangladesh is a country experiencing a people's war". I read the Bangladeshi news everyday, have been in contact with locals there etc. There is no "war" going on there, that's a romantic myth fed to, or invented by, naïve western leftists. However much you split hairs about what percentage of 35 minor incidents in 4 months are evidence of armed skirmishes, it shows the opposite of what you claim. A few isolated militants running around the woods shooting at each other and the occasional cop is not a "war".


The guerrilla warfare going on is itself an evidence of a very well developed armed struggle.

And it seems that seeing an ongoing revolution as a "few isolated militants running around the woods shooting at each other" is characteristic of certain naive western leftists. :rolleyes:


The above shows you really don't know much about Bangladesh at all. So mass revolts like 2006 - http://libcom.org/news/article.php/bangladesh-garment-revolt-140706 - where 100s of thousands of garment workers took collective action, and have sustained a high level of struggle since - http://libcom.org/tags/bangladeshi-garment-workers - are 'less developed' than the evidence you give above of a handful of remote skirmishes that have been occurring periodically for years with little expansion? Libcom is one of the shittiest sources on south Asia. What have the urban workers' struggles achieved so far, after twenty five years, that indicates that those are a high level of struggle?



'Less developed' because a few isolated leftists have made an abstract call for 'revolution', in whatever way they understand that term?Why does a revolution seem abstract to you?


That is nonsense. And where have Indian workers overthrown capitalists? For how long? If you point to guerrilla activity to 'prove' this, you probably continue the error of mixing up two different phenomena, urban workplace struggles and rural guerrilla activity.This again shows that you know nothing about India or south Asia in general. Go through the threads on India to find out where this has happened.


(Or have the guerillas supposedly fighting 'rural feudalism' somehow stumbled across some capitalists in the wrong historical time zone?)At least make sure that you are somewhat knowledgeable about a topic before turning to sarcasm.



This line we've heard before; 'just cos there's no evidence they exist doesn't mean they're not there'. (A bit like God.) But it's wiser not to claim, on this basis, the existence of a mythical "war".Why do you keep making such idiotic comments even though there is enough evidence of the war ? Do you fear the revolution that much?


If so, in this case, they have kept themselves totally invisible within the garment worker movement for over 25 years! (Which seems both a bit unlikely and pointless.) So how could you know about them then? This is fantasy.Are you in a position to decide what is unlikely or pointless for revolutionaries in south Asia?



I expect the Maoists, given the power, would seek to liquidate it in the interests of the productivist ideology of promoting SEZs, like UCPN(M) advocate in Nepal. They'd probably justify it as 'overcoming feudalism'(!), but Bangladeshi SEZs are a living example of what a counter-revolutionary policy that is, from the perspective of the working class - and also, how the working class can resist such exploitation, whoever the boss is.I would like to see an official statement by the CC of the UCPN(M) supporting SEZs in recent days. It should appear in their own sources if you are right.



Sorry, that's fantasy; "the Maoist people's war" doesn't exist at present in Bangladesh - but self-organised rural struggles already do, have done for a long time, eg - http://libcom.org/news/bangladesh-phulbari-mining-garment-industry-010906 - and so are not dependent on existence of Maoists or anyone else to organise themselves.

The fact that you start a thread called 'News from Bangladesh' with a list of obscure remote skirmishes while ignoring these other struggles shows you have your evaluations completely upside down.Isolated actions by the rural and urban masses are present in every south Asian country, that doesn't prove anything. I have gone through a few of your posts in the past on other Maoist movements and you intention here is clear. This is a thread on the people's war and workers' struggle in Bangladesh. You have posted enough of your ignorant trollish nonsense here, if you want to express your own views on the nature of struggle in Bangladesh, then start a different thread for it.

[RED DAVE]

I would like to see an official statement by the CC of the UCPN(M) supporting SEZs in recent days. It should appear in their own sources if you are right.SEZs are part of the official policy of the present government of Nepal, dating back to 2006.

http://seznepal.gov.np/index.htm

The UCPN(M) is an active member of this government and, in fact, held its prime ministership at one point. You're part of a government; you are responsible for its policies. That's part of the fun of supporting a bourgeois regime.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

SEZs are part of the official policy of the present government of Nepal, dating back to 2006.

http://seznepal.gov.np/index.htm

The UCPN(M) is an active member of this government and, in fact, held its prime ministership at one point. You're part of a government; you are responsible for its policies. That's part of the fun of supporting a bourgeois regime.

RED DAVE

That proves nothing. If the UCPN(M) was really committed to creating SEZs in Nepal, then it should have cheered the process in its own periodicals. You need to provide some solid evidence of the Maoist line on SEZs by listing some of their activities around operational SEZs.

[Ret]

The guerrilla warfare going on is itself an evidence of a very well developed armed struggle. So you have no evidence for that other than perhaps a dozen isolated skirmishes, from a source that doesn't itself talk of any "war" - but you keep repeating the myth anyway. Nothing new in that.


And it seems that seeing an ongoing revolution as a "few isolated militants running around the woods shooting at each other" is characteristic of certain naive western leftists.You have that the wrong way round - it should read 'seeing a "few isolated militants running around the woods shooting at each other" as an ongoing revolution is characteristic of certain naive western leftists'. And now you escalate your fantasy claims further - now there is "an ongoing revolution" going on in Bangladesh!!! That will certainly be big news to those who live there!!!

Libcom is one of the shittiest sources on south Asia. Considering your absurd claim above about "revolution", your baseless fantasies make libcom look pretty good. Unsurprising that a critique of Maoism would bring this opinion - but articles there are generally well sourced and coherently argued. Not always true for claims of pro-maoists here, as we can see.


What have the urban workers' struggles achieved so far, after twenty five years, that indicates that those are a high level of struggle? In an industry only around 25 yrs old, they have won some concessions, relative to their situation; minimum wage, supplementary food rations, improvement in workplace conditions and welfare. Unsurprisingly, these are not uniformly implemented by bosses and state, but then they aren't in any other country. They are fighting one of the most repressive regimes in one of the most exploitative industries in one of the poorest countries in the world. But under the most difficult conditions, workers have sustained - with few, if any, legal protections - high levels of self-organisation and collective defence and extension of their interests, mobilising millions of workers. That their struggle is hard and long is not a reason to dismiss their achievements, as you do, but is a partial explanation for their high level of struggle - if one is able to see it.

Go through the threads on India to find out where this has happened.So - another claim you fail to provide evidence for when asked. And you accuse me of trolling?

That proves nothing. If the UCPN(M) was really committed to creating SEZs in Nepal, then it should have cheered the process in its own periodicals. There you have it;

MARCH 2008
In March the Maoists published their party manifesto for the upcoming Constituent Assembly governmental election, clearly stating their programme of capitalist development centred around attracting foreign investment in SEZs;
Foreign investors who specially invest in industries that provide substitutes for import shall be welcomed. Joint investment with 51% national investment shall be highly emphasized. Keeping in mind the large market in India and China, `special economic area’ shall be established in major Southern and Northern border areas to establish export-oriented industries. (New ideology & new leadership for a new Nepal: commitment paper of the CPN(M) for the CA election, March 2008; http://www.cffn.ca/historicdocs/0803-CPNM-Manifesto-EN.php)
APRIL 2008
After the Constituent Assembly election of April 2008 the Maoists became the leading party of the coalition government. The development of SEZs were again emphasised as a key part of Maoist economic policy. As Maoist party chief and new Prime Minister Prachanda made clear, the Chinese model of hyper-exploitation of the working class is the preferred path to 'socialism' for the Maoists;
“We will build special economic zones like China,” Prachanda said. “The special economic zones stimulated China’s economic development, and we want to learn from China. China’s experience is really helpful for us.” In the interview, Prachanda emphasized the geographic proximity between China and Nepal, and the high respect that Nepalese people have for China and Chinese people. “For Nepal’s national independence, it is critically important for Nepal to maintain intimate relations with China” (Nanfang Daily, June 30 2008). (http://www.jamestown.org/programs/chinabrief/single/?tx_ttnews[tt_news]=5029&tx_ttnews=168&no_cache=1)
[B]OCTOBER 2008
When the Maoist-led government set their first Budget in October they stated;
"... The Act relating to the special economic zones will be enacted in this Fiscal Year. Necessary provisions are made in the accompanying Finance Act for providing customs and income tax exemption facilities in the special economic zones." (Oct 6 2008) (http://neilsnepal.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/maoists-new-nepal-industrial-capitalism-covered-by-socialism/)
So despite their regular 'anti-imperialist' rhetoric the Maoists were bending over backwards to invite foreign capital to exploit the cheap labour of the country (and in the process make the Nepali ruling political and economic elite richer).

http://libcom.org/library/myths-realities-nepalese-maoists-their-strike-ban-legislations
Isolated actions by the rural and urban masses are present in every south Asian country, that doesn't prove anything.
Except when they are by isolated Maoists, right? Then they supposedly prove "an ongoing revolution" in Bangladesh!!!

Nor can one dismiss the Phulbari struggles, which have continued up to now since 2007 and involved the seizing of the town by 30,000 protesters and a nationwide general strike in protest at police killings there, as "isolated actions"; http://libcom.org/news/bangladesh-ph...ndustry-010906

I have gone through a few of your posts in the past on other Maoist movements and you intention here is clear. This is a thread on the people's war and workers' struggle in Bangladesh. You have posted enough of your ignorant trollish nonsense here, if you want to express your own views on the nature of struggle in Bangladesh, then start a different thread for it. So this thread reserved for your fantasies?! And no one should be allowed to question them or ask for evidence? Sorry, this is the (sur)real world. I have remained completely on topic - if anyone is trolling, it's yourself with unverified claims for a "war" and total nonsense about a mythical revolution in Bangladesh.

[thälmann]

its of course good, when there are armed struggle in the countryside. especially in a country like bangladesh. i dont know why any revolutionary try to play this down.

if the maoists have influence in the existing workers struggles is important. but they are not shit if they havent. then they have to change this.

@red cat: iam totally on your side in this discussion, but its not profitable if you try to defend the nepalese "maoists". it doesnt work.

this is a news thread....

[red cat]

@red cat: iam totally on your side in this discussion, but its not profitable if you try to defend the nepalese "maoists". it doesnt work.

this is a news thread.... Thanks.

If you look at the present line of the UCPN(M) you will notice that it is far less revisionist than what it had become in 2006. The UCPN(M) is slowly but steadily returning to a revolutionary path. So it is the duty of every communist to primarily defend it against the usual accusations of pseudo-communists, and then criticize it for its errors.

[RED DAVE]

If you look at the present line of the UCPN(M) you will notice that it is far less revisionist than what it had become in 2006. The UCPN(M) is slowly but steadily returning to a revolutionary path.I guess you think that assuming the prime ministership or other ministries in a bourgeois government is "slowly but steadily returning to a revolutionary path."

Are you willing to admit, for openers, that you were dead wrong about the UCPN(M) not advocating SEZs?

Are you willing to admit that the UCN(M) was willing to advocate no-strike pledges?

RED DAVE

[red cat]

So you have no evidence for that other than perhaps a dozen isolated skirmishes, from a source that doesn't itself talk of any "war" - but you keep repeating the myth anyway. Nothing new in that.

You have that the wrong way round - it should read 'seeing a "few isolated militants running around the woods shooting at each other" as an ongoing revolution is characteristic of certain naive western leftists'.

You are getting it wrong again. You are the naive western leftist here.


And now you escalate your fantasy claims further - now there is "an ongoing revolution" going on in Bangladesh!!! That will certainly be big news to those who live there!!! I think some middle class teen denying the people's war will be an even bigger news.


Considering your absurd claim above about "revolution", your baseless fantasies make libcom look pretty good. Unsurprising that a critique of Maoism would bring this opinion - but articles there are generally well sourced and coherently argued. Not always true for claims of pro-maoists here, as we can see.When it comes to anti-Maoism, the Libcom's sources are no better than right-wing magazines like Himal etc. That is where they show their true colours.


In an industry only around 25 yrs old, they have won some concessions, relative to their situation; minimum wage, supplementary food rations, improvement in workplace conditions and welfare. Unsurprisingly, these are not uniformly implemented by bosses and state, but then they aren't in any other country. They are fighting one of the most repressive regimes in one of the most exploitative industries in one of the poorest countries in the world. But under the most difficult conditions, workers have sustained - with few, if any, legal protections - high levels of self-organisation and collective defence and extension of their interests, mobilising millions of workers. That their struggle is hard and long is not a reason to dismiss their achievements, as you do, but is a partial explanation for their high level of struggle - if one is able to see it.Sorry, that is not a high level of struggle. It should be supported and holds tremendous revolutionary potential, but it is still in a primarily reformist stage, as your post indicates.


So - another claim you fail to provide evidence for when asked. And you accuse me of trolling? Just admit that you're too lazy to browse through a few threads.


There you have it;
Except when they are by isolated Maoists, right? Then they supposedly prove "an ongoing revolution" in Bangladesh!!!Yes, an "isolated" people's war that is threatening the state to such an extent that the security forces are being told to use maximum force against it. :rolleyes:



Nor can one dismiss the Phulbari struggles, which have continued up to now since 2007 and involved the seizing of the town by 30,000 protesters and a nationwide general strike in protest at police killings there, as "isolated actions"; http://libcom.org/news/bangladesh-ph...ndustry-010906 Now that is a good action. And here are Libcom reports on the equally if not more developed movement in Lalgarh and the comments of the "communist" posters there:

http://libcom.org/library/global-crisis-india

http://libcom.org/forums/news/more-maoist-violence-india-17062009?quicktabs_1=1

Libcom revisionists are so scared when real communist movements advance. :lol:



So this thread reserved for your fantasies?! And no one should be allowed to question them or ask for evidence? Sorry, this is the (sur)real world. I have remained completely on topic - if anyone is trolling, it's yourself with unverified claims for a "war" and total nonsense about a mythical revolution in Bangladesh.Now that you have got your own thread, troll as much as you like.

[red cat]

I guess you think that assuming the prime ministership or other ministries in a bourgeois government is "slowly but steadily returning to a revolutionary path.

No, there are other indications for that. Exposing the praisers of Trotsky as right-wingers, for example.



Are you willing to admit, for openers, that you were dead wrong about the UCPN(M) not advocating SEZs?Which SEZ ?


Are you willing to admit that the UCN(M) was willing to advocate no-strike pledges?

RED DAVEYes, temporarily, in some sectors, at a time when there was acute shortage of food and electricity and a constant threat of royalist counter-revolution. Maoists use the experience of Russia to advance their revolutions. I understand that your anarchist politics is against this, but sorry, Maoists are Bolsheviks.


The bourgeoisie are prepared to commit the most heinous crimes; they are bribing the outcast and degraded elements of society and plying them with drink to use them in riots. The supporters of the bourgeoisie, particularly among the higher clerical staff, bank officials, and so on, are sabotaging their work, and are organising strikes to thwart the government's measures for the realisation of socialist reforms. They have even gone so far as to sabotage food distribution, thereby menacing millions of people with famine.

Urgent measures are necessary to fight the counter-revolutionaries and saboteurs. In virtue of this, the Council of People's Commissars decrees:

(1) Persons belonging to the wealthy classes (i.e., with incomes of 500 rubles or more per month, and owners of urban real estate, stocks and shares, or money amounting to over 1,000 rubles), and also all employees of banks, joint-stock companies, state and public institutions, shall within three days [2] present to their house committees written statements in three copies over their own signatures and indicating their address, income, place of employment and their occupation.

(2) The house committees shall countersign these statements, retain one copy and send one copy to the municipality and another to the People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs (address:. ...[3]).

(3) Persons guilty of contravening the present law (failing to submit statements, giving false information, etc.) and members of house committees infringing the regulations governing the collection, filing and presentation of these statements to the institutions mentioned above shall be liable to a fine of up to 5,000 rubles for each infringement, or to imprisonment up to one year, or shall be sent to the front, depending on the nature of the offence.

(4) Persons sabotaging the work of, or declining to work in, banks, state and public institutions, joint-stock companies, railways, etc., shall be liable to similar punishment.

- Lenin,

On Fighting Counter-Revolutionaries and Saboteurs

[RED DAVE]

Yes, temporarily, in some sectors, at a time when there was acute shortage of food and electricity and a constant threat of royalist counter-revolution. Maoists use the experience of Russia to advance their revolutions. I understand that your anarchist politics is against this, but sorry, Maoists are Bolsheviks.Well, Comrade, bullshit.

http://libcom.org/library/myths-realities-nepalese-maoists-their-strike-ban-legislations


By Biz Correspondent on March 18, 2009

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ on Wednesday said the government was committed towards resolving problems being faced by the industrial sector of the country.


Saying that the industrial sectors are backbones of the nation economy, PM Prachanda during a meeting with representatives from business community, said that government was going to prohibit all kinds of strikes in industrial sector declaring the sector as banda free zone.


Representatives of from Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industries (FNCCI), Confederation of Nepalese Industries (CNI) and Nepalese Chambers of Commerce had met the PM ‘Prachanda’ and submitted a memorandum urging the government to address various issues related with industrial sector... [Our emphasis](http://www.nepalbiznews.com/newsdata/Biz-News/pm_meets_business_community.html

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Well, Comrade, bullshit.

http://libcom.org/library/myths-realities-nepalese-maoists-their-strike-ban-legislations

(http://www.nepalbiznews.com/newsdata/Biz-News/pm_meets_business_community.html

RED DAVE

Very interesting. Do you know what a banda is? It is odd that the report says that the government was going to prohibit all kinds of strikes in industrial sector but would declare the sector only as a banda free zone. I would like to see this report in a few popular newspapers of Nepal. Seems quite odd as the Maoists themselves led a huge strike a few months later.

http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=11964

[Ret]

its of course good, when there are armed struggle in the countryside. especially in a country like bangladesh. i dont know why any revolutionary try to play this down.I'm not 'playing it down' - I asked for evidence that it amounted to a "war" and "ongoing revolution". I've seen no evidence to back those claims up. (The varied content of armed struggle, its validity as a tactic and its intentions etc are matters not relevant here.)

Red cat's predictable pattern of practice;
1) make outlandish claims about guerilla activity, based on little or no evidence.
2) when asked for evidence, fail to produce any that backs up claims.
3) throw insults as weak substitute for absence of concrete evidence.

We have established that red cat is unable to back up with credible evidence his outlandish delusional claims of a "war" and "an ongoing revolution" in Bangladesh. We have also established that, quite typically, when he's losing an argument and can't refute criticism he throws baseless slurs based, like his other claims, on no evidence; there is no other content to post #11 above.

As for this, another of his fantasies;

I think some middle class teen denying the people's war will be an even bigger news.This is really childish, but your desperate and embarrassing attempts to discredit opponents in this shallow way do reveal much about you - and the weakness of your argument here; you don't even know me - but I'm neither middle class or a teen! Epic fail. Kind of how I picture you though.

Now that you have got your own thread, troll as much as you like.As concerned as you may be to try to stop me querying your dubious claims on the other thread, I didn't ask for 'my thread' and don't claim ownership of it. I'll continue to post on the other thread if and when I see fit and will continue to be on topic. I strongly suggest that readers of such threads don't take things at face value - but ask red cat to back up his claims with stated sources and credible verifiable evidence.

[RED DAVE]

Very interesting. Do you know what a banda is? It is odd that the report says that the government was going to prohibit all kinds of strikes in industrial sector but would declare the sector only as a banda free zone. I would like to see this report in a few popular newspapers of Nepal. Seems quite odd as the Maoists themselves led a huge strike a few months later.

http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=11964Translation: I can't refute what you've posted, so I'll quibble. The "huge strike" referred to is described as follows:


A total of 20 industries, including dairy firms, plastic and metal companies, are operating in the DIA.

The companies stopped their operations after All Nepal Trade Union Federation (ANTUF) Industrial Unit Committee (IUC) launched the strike in the industrial area, claiming that four pharmaceutical companies of Dharan had not fulfilled the demands of agitating workers.

“The shutdown has affected manufacturing works worth millions of rupees,” said Dibya Raj Aryal, administrative officer at the DIA.

ANTUF IUC, meanwhile, said the strike was launched as a part of their solidarity to agitating workers of Shiva Pharmaceuticals, Manoj Pharmaceuticals, Manoj Chemical and Makalu Herbal Company.

Eighty-two workers of those companies have been protesting against the management of the four pharmaceutical companies since the last three weeks, demanding the management to raise their salary and perks.If we are generous, we could estimate 500-1000 workers, which is hardly huge. And, in fact, the strike what is called in the US a "sympathy strike" to support other workers actually involved in an industrial dispute, which included 82 workers.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Translation: I can't refute what you've posted, so I'll quibble.

Whenever you come up with these translations of yours, I deduce that you won't be able to debate logically anymore :)




The "huge strike" referred to is described as follows:

If we are generous, we could estimate 500-1000 workers, which is hardly huge. And, in fact, the strike what is called in the US a "sympathy strike" to support other workers actually involved in an industrial dispute, which included 82 workers.

RED DAVE

Alright, so a strike of 500 workers from a party allegedly banning strikes is quite what you expect normally.

[RED DAVE]

The "huge strike" referred to is described as follows:

If we are generous, we could estimate 500-1000 workers, which is hardly huge. And, in fact, the strike what is called in the US a "sympathy strike" to support other workers actually involved in an industrial dispute, which included 82 workers.
Alright, so a strike of 500 workers from a party allegedly banning strikes is quite what you expect normally.Comrade, you said "huge." That was an attempt to exaggerate the extent of the strike. And an attempt to cover up the fact that the UCPN(M) is in the business of banning strikes.

In any event, 82 workers on strike and a sympathy strike of another 500-1000 workers is not huge.

RED DAVE

[red cat]

Comrade, you said "huge." That was an attempt to exaggerate the extent of the strike. And an attempt to cover up the fact that the UCPN(M) is in the business of banning strikes.

In any event, 82 workers on strike and a sympathy strike of another 500-1000 workers is not huge.

RED DAVE

I knew that this debate would boil down to either the usage of a word or Trotsky's execution. :lol:

The main point is, if the UCPN(M) really had the intention to ban strikes, then why would it lead strikes in the following months? Also, why aren't you showing more reports of them banning strikes from other Nepalese newspapers?

[RED DAVE]

I knew that this debate would boil down to either the usage of a word or Trotsky's execution.You really are a bizarre combination of an idiot and a shit.


The main point is, if the UCPN(M) really had the intention to ban strikes, then why would it lead strikes in the following months?Consistency is not a hallmark of Maoism. Why the fuck would any Marxist party offer the capitalists a program to ban strikes in the first place?


Also, why aren't you showing more reports of them banning strikes from other Nepalese newspapers?Why don't you find a faction of the UCPN(M) that denounces the leadership for the bourgeois policy of banning strikes? But, to make you happy, I'll what else I can find. Of course, you can always, in the meantime, explain why they offered to ban strikes in the first place.

RED DAVE

[RED DAVE]

01.25.2009

Q: The business community's concerns are exactly what you stated. One, they say, the government's attitude to labour issues leaves a lot to be desired and that labour problems are getting worse. Second, there cannot be high growth until there is an adequate supply of power.


Bhattarai: I wouldn't say the situation is getting worse. Things were much worse in the past. But the people wanted very fast recovery; that hasn't happened. Things are improving but not to the desired level. Both the management and workers have a common interest now, for the development of the economy. They both fought against the feudalism, autocracy and monarchy. Now, to create a vibrant industrial economy, is in the interest of both the management and the workers. But this reality is not sinking in their minds. This government is playing its role in creating a healthy relationship between the two. There were some disputes, especially regarding the minimum wage issue. This has been solved. So what I appeal to the management is that they should provide the minimum wage. The workers shouldn't resort to bandas and strikes. If this understanding is honoured we'll have a healthy environment in the days to come.


Q: So the party wants to ensure that whenever there is a labour dispute, legal recourse should be taken?


Bhattarai: Yes. At least for some time, there should be no bandas and strikes in the industrial, health, education sectors, on the major highways, in the public utility sectors. The government is trying to build political consensus on this issue.http://www.phillyimc.org/en/maoist-leadership-nepal-bans-strikes (http://www.phillyimc.org/en/maoist-leadership-nepal-bans-strikes)

RED DAVE
(http://www.kantipuronline.com/interview.php?&nid=175026)

[Ret]

This strike ban issue has all been gone over before; http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1644367&postcount=42
It's also a derail of this thread. I don't care, but this thread was split from here; http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-bangladesh-t154364/index.html (http://www.revleft.com/vb/here;http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-bangladesh-t154364/index.html) - supposedly to stop derailing (though more likely to try to stop questioning of red cat's myth-making). If red cat thought it necessary to split the other thread, surely this one should be split to a separate discussion on Nepali Maoist strike bans.


The main point is, if the UCPN(M) really had the intention to ban strikes, then why would it lead strikes in the following months? Also, why aren't you showing more reports of them banning strikes from other Nepalese newspapers?
There are several quotes from different papers about the strike ban proposals here; http://libcom.org/library/myths-realities-nepalese-maoists-their-strike-ban-legislations
Why have Maoists led strikes since their govt brought forward strike ban legislation? As the article says;

When in power, strikes become increasingly undesirable for the Maoists - when out of power they again become a political weapon. In power, the Maoists want to develop capitalism, so attract investment, particularly from foreign capital - strikes don't fit in with this. (SEZs - areas of hyper-exploitation - are generally attractive due to their more restrictive labour laws, usually outlawing strikes.) When in opposition the Maoists have an interest in strikes and economic disruption as a means to regaining state power, destabilising and discrediting opponents.

As the article says, in May 2009;
The Maoists left government before they got much chance to use these powers more widely.Since then they continue organising strikes and bandhs.

For more info, see the most complete article on the issue; http://libcom.org/library/myths-realities-nepalese-maoists-their-strike-ban-legislations

[Ret]

On the original topic; on the thread this was split from http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-bangladesh-t154364/index.html red cat posted lists of guerilla activity. there was already a link to that site in an earlier post - no need to spam the whole page onto that thread, he couldv'e just posted the link. Regardless, it still doesn't pass as evidence of anything more than periodic skirmishes of small numbers in remote areas.

A lot of those incidents listed above are not even about combat with the state - many are about, eg, extortions and clashes between rival militants. Or lynchings - according to red cat's evidence the militants supposedly propagating "people's war" don't seem to have been always very popular with local people, eg;

February 9:A suspected PBCP cadre is lynched by a mob at Munshipara under Khulna Police Station.
April 16: A mob lynches two PBCP (Janajuddha faction) cadres after they were caught trying to bomb the Gallamari Police Box under Sonadanga Police Station.
June 2: Two PBCP (Janajuddha faction) cadres are killed during mob violence in the Fakirhat area of Bagerhat district.
August 26: Two operatives of the PBCP (Janajuddha faction) are lynched by a mob at Rajghat in the Fakirhat sub-district.
September 22: Two PBCP (Janajuddha faction) activists are assaulted by a mob for demanding toll of Taka 50,000 from a cement dealer of Sabujbagh under Sonadanga Police Station.
October 26: Local villagers lynched two PBCP-Janajuddha cadres at Kurhia village in the Batiaghata sub-district of Khulna district.
November 4: A PBCP- Janajuddha cadre was lynched by a mob in Khulna.
December 1: Two PBCP-Janajuddha cadres were killed by an angry mob while extorting money in separate incidents in the Nehalpur village and Daulatpur kitchen market area of Khulna district.
January 3: A PBCP- Janajuddha cadre, identified as Abdur Rob, was reportedly beaten to death by villagers at Chalna Bazaar in the Khulna district.
October 27: Anwarul alias Joy (39), a PBCP-ML regional leader was killed in a mob beating at Bhalaipur village in the Chuadanga district. Police sources said that the incident took place when the extremist leader was trying to collect extortion amount of Taka 300,000 from two local businessmen. Joy was accused in nine different cases, including three for murder.
Some of the factional murders listed;

September 15: Nifaz Uddin, a cadre of PBCP- Lal Pataka faction, was killed in an attack by his colleagues in the Ataikula police station area of Pabna district.
November 16: Two PBCP-Lal Pataka extremists, Nizam Uddin and Afser Ali Shikderwere, were killed by their rivals in the Pabna district.
December 5: PBCP cadres killed Abdul Kuddus, one of their rivals, in the Chuadanga district.
December 22: Communist War faction of the PBCP killed three cadres of rival PBCP-Janajuddha faction in the Meherpur and Chuadanga districts.
February 5: A JMJB cadre, Omar Ali, was killed by cadres of the Red Flag faction of the PBCP at Baroihati bazaar in the Bagmara area of Rajshahi district.
February 5: A Red-flag faction cadre of the PBCP, Hafizur Rahman alias Hafi, was killed by his rivals belonging to the Janajuddha faction in the Khoksa area of Gangni sub-district in the Meherpur district
November 17: Ziaur Rahman Zia, a PBCP-Lal Pataka extremist, was killed by his rivals in the Ataikula sub-district of Pabna district.
In 2008 the surrender of only 105 guerillas severely hampered the activities of the guerillas - so hardly large scale forces operating that could justify calling it a "war";

November 2: Daily Star reported that the PBCP is regrouping in Chalan Beel in Sirajganj, Natore and Pabna districts before the December elections to the national assembly. Extortions, robberies, abductions and murders by PBCP extremists have been reported from Tarash, Raiganj, Belkuchi, Shahzadpur, Chowhali and Ullapara sub-districts of Sirajganj, Gurudashpur, Natore sadar and Singra sub-districts of Natore and Bera, Sathia, Ataikula, Sujanagar, Bhangura, Atghoria and Chatmohor sub-districts of Pabna. PBCP activities have also been noticed in the remote places of Sherpur sub-district in Bogra. The activities of the outfit had came down significantly after 105 of its cadres surrendered to police at Katagari Bazar of Tarash in November last year. However, extremist leaders like Nurjahan Begum, Abu Sayeed, Shahjahan Ali, Bablu, Paresh, Kana Rasheed and Huzur Ali have reorganised the activities of the outfit and have targeted businessmen, affluent farmers, contractors and teachers.There is no evidence of the Bangladeshi Army involvement in those clashes - because there is not any great or growing threat and because there is no "war". The Bangladeshi Army has been for years the largest contributor to UN peacekeeping forces - would they really be sending thousands of soldiers away for long periods if there was an actual "war" or "revolution" going on at home??

Police estimated 1000 leftist guerrillas in 2005. In a country of 160 million - the most densely populated on earth - 1000 militants is not a lot, and this number is split into many rival groups. The leftist armed groups seem to spend half their time splintering and killing each other or being killed by Islamic groups;

According to police sources, at least 10 outlawed parties with 1000 armed cadres grouped in 30 gangs are active in three districts. About 40 lakh people in three districts are hostage to them.

Fifteen ringleaders control the armed cadres who posses about 10,000 illegal firearms, according to sources in intelligence agencies. The parties are Bipplobi Communist Party (BCP), New Biplobi Communist Party (NBCP), Banglar Communist Party (BCP-Laltu) Gono Mukti Fouj (GMF), Biplobi Anuragi, (BA), Bangladesher Socialist Party (BSP), Jashod Gono Bahini (JGB) and three factions of Purbo Banglar Communist Party (PBCP-ML, PBCP-Janajuddho and PBCP-Red Flag). http://www.thedailystar.net/2005/06/06/d50606070264.htm There is minor periodic, scattered guerrilla activity by small groups, that's all. Nobody in the Army or government is talking of a "war" or "revolution"(!). It's a myth.

[red cat]

You really are a bizarre combination of an idiot and a shit.


This is extremely funny when it comes from someone who has been a Trot for most of his life. :lol:


Consistency is not a hallmark of Maoism. Why the fuck would any Marxist party offer the capitalists a program to ban strikes in the first place?

Why don't you find a faction of the UCPN(M) that denounces the leadership for the bourgeois policy of banning strikes? But, to make you happy, I'll what else I can find. Of course, you can always, in the meantime, explain why they offered to ban strikes in the first place.

RED DAVEI think in future years detailed analysis will be published by the UCPN(M) itself. As of now other military issues are enough to isolate and purge Trotskyite elements within the CP.


http://www.phillyimc.org/en/maoist-leadership-nepal-bans-strikes (http://www.phillyimc.org/en/maoist-leadership-nepal-bans-strikes)

RED DAVE
(http://www.kantipuronline.com/interview.php?&nid=175026)

Thanks for the source. I notice that the whole accusation is against a proposal, not an action, of banning strikes.

The report quotes Laldhwaj :


01.25.2009

Q: The business community's concerns are exactly what you stated. One, they say, the government's attitude to labour issues leaves a lot to be desired and that labour problems are getting worse. Second, there cannot be high growth until there is an adequate supply of power.


Bhattarai: I wouldn't say the situation is getting worse. Things were much worse in the past. But the people wanted very fast recovery; that hasn't happened. Things are improving but not to the desired level. Both the management and workers have a common interest now, for the development of the economy. They both fought against the feudalism, autocracy and monarchy. Now, to create a vibrant industrial economy, is in the interest of both the management and the workers. But this reality is not sinking in their minds. This government is playing its role in creating a healthy relationship between the two. There were some disputes, especially regarding the minimum wage issue. This has been solved. So what I appeal to the management is that they should provide the minimum wage. The workers shouldn't resort to bandas and strikes. If this understanding is honoured we'll have a healthy environment in the days to come.


Q: So the party wants to ensure that whenever there is a labour dispute, legal recourse should be taken?


Bhattarai: Yes. At least for some time, there should be no bandas and strikes in the industrial, health, education sectors, on the major highways, in the public utility sectors. The government is trying to build political consensus on this issue. Then it proceeds to its own analysis. It omits the next part of the answer to the question:

The problem of power shortage was not created by the Maoist government — everybody knows that. In the last tenth five year plan, the goal was to produce 300 MW of electricity. But only 30 MW were produced. Because of that we have run short of the demand. But the government has formulated a 35-point plan of action and will solve this problem as soon as possible. By next year we want to do away with loadshedding in Nepal.
It is clear that in times of tremendous failures in production, the move was to ensure undisrupted production for some time. Particularly in a country where a strike mostly is a part of a programme undertaken by a big parliamentary party to flex its muscles, and is not an independent action of workers against bosses, this seems reasonable, given that the other parliamentary parties were trying to sabotage production when the Maoist led government was in power.

The next point to note is, had the proposal to ban strikes been a genuine move to curb workers' rights, it would have been accepted immediately by the bourgeois parties. But this did not happen. Strikes were never effectively banned in Nepal. Although I suspect that the proposal might have undergone some amount of criticism inside the party itself, given the labeling of Laldhwaj as a right-opportunist, that is not the main question. The main question is, despite the effort to terminate reactionary sabotage being the obvious reasons for proposing a temporary ban on strikes in some sectors, and the Maoists' record of being the only tendency effectively advancing the cause of the working class in south Asia, why are some self-proclaimed communists making such a huge issue out of this? Why are they so worried about a mere proposal of Maoists to ban strikes temporarily in some sectors, while remaining silent about many real atrocities that are being committed by the bourgeois groups in south Asia ? Very strangely, all the criticism of some of our comrades here seem to be focused on anything that militarily or politically challenges western imperialism. Not surprising at all.

[red cat]

This strike ban issue has all been gone over before; http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1644367&postcount=42
It's also a derail of this thread. I don't care, but this thread was split from here; http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-bangladesh-t154364/index.html (http://www.revleft.com/vb/here;http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-bangladesh-t154364/index.html) - supposedly to stop derailing (though more likely to try to stop questioning of red cat's myth-making). If red cat thought it necessary to split the other thread, surely this one should be split to a separate discussion on Nepali Maoist strike bans.


There are several quotes from different papers about the strike ban proposals here; http://libcom.org/library/myths-realities-nepalese-maoists-their-strike-ban-legislations
Why have Maoists led strikes since their govt brought forward strike ban legislation? As the article says;
In power, the Maoists want to develop capitalism, so attract investment, particularly from foreign capital - strikes don't fit in with this. (SEZs - areas of hyper-exploitation - are generally attractive due to their more restrictive labour laws, usually outlawing strikes.) When in opposition the Maoists have an interest in strikes and economic disruption as a means to regaining state power, destabilising and discrediting opponents.

As the article says, in May 2009; Since then they continue organising strikes and bandhs.

For more info, see the most complete article on the issue; http://libcom.org/library/myths-realities-nepalese-maoists-their-strike-ban-legislations

Of course, strikes which are not the actions of the working class against capitalists, but are led by big comprador parties, are the enemies of revolution. They have nothing to do with the movement of the proletariat itself. These are undesirable for Maoists or for any other revolutionary communist group. Anyone supporting these strikes against a revolutionary CP is siding with imperialism.

[red cat]

On the original topic; on the thread this was split from http://www.revleft.com/vb/news-bangladesh-t154364/index.html red cat posted lists of guerilla activity. there was already a link to that site in an earlier post - no need to spam the whole page onto that thread, he couldv'e just posted the link. Regardless, it still doesn't pass as evidence of anything more than periodic skirmishes of small numbers in remote areas.

A lot of those incidents listed above are not even about combat with the state - many are about, eg, extortions and clashes between rival militants. Or lynchings - according to red cat's evidence the militants supposedly propagating "people's war" don't seem to have been always very popular with local people, eg;


Those tricks of yours won't work. Let alone the MLs or Maoists here, even many anarchists or Trots are aware how reactionary "peace keeping forces" organized by the ruling classes militarily combat Maoists in the name of the masses.


Some of the factional murders listed;
In 2008 the surrender of only 105 guerillas severely hampered the activities of the guerillas - so hardly large scale forces operating that could justify calling it a "war";
There is no evidence of the Bangladeshi Army involvement in those clashes - because there is not any great or growing threat and because there is no "war". The Bangladeshi Army has been for years the largest contributor to UN peacekeeping forces - would they really be sending thousands of soldiers away for long periods if there was an actual "war" or "revolution" going on at home??

Even the Indian army was only recently openly deployed against the Maoists. Proves nothing. Generally the involvement of the army against forces within the country evokes strong reaction from the masses. So it is not done openly until the rebels become powerful enough to overthrow large portions of the government.


Police estimated 1000 leftist guerrillas in 2005. In a country of 160 million - the most densely populated on earth - 1000 militants is not a lot, and this number is split into many rival groups. The leftist armed groups seem to spend half their time splintering and killing each other or being killed by Islamic groups;

Beautiful argument. Needless to say, a perfect communist movement would be embraced by Islamic fundamentalists. :rolleyes:



There is minor periodic, scattered guerrilla activity by small groups, that's all. Nobody in the Army or government is talking of a "war" or "revolution"(!). It's a myth.

Denial is not a very clever way of sidelining armed struggle. I suggest that you generalize Libcom's line that in some places Maoists conduct armed struggle so that the government increases security funds, which are then shared by parliamentary politicians with Maoists, to the whole of south Asia. That will sound less funnier, and will serve the purpose of denouncing Maoism.

[RED DAVE]

It is clear that in times of tremendous failures in production, the move was to ensure undisrupted production for some time.And, after all, we know that production is more important than class struggle. Please note that instead of asking the working class to engage in conscious self-restraint, which might lead to an enhancement of the notion of workers control, the Maoists are suggesting that a bourgeois government ban strikes, which leads to a consciousness that it is all right for a bourgeois government to control the class struggle.


Particularly in a country where a strike mostly is a part of a programme undertaken by a big parliamentary party to flex its muscles, and is not an independent action of workers against bosses, this seems reasonable, given that the other parliamentary parties were trying to sabotage production when the Maoist led government was in power.Note that the prohibition was not against political strikes but against strikes.


The next point to note is, had the proposal to ban strikes been a genuine move to curb workers' rights, it would have been accepted immediately by the bourgeois parties. But this did not happen. Strikes were never effectively banned in Nepal. Although I suspect that the proposal might have undergone some amount of criticism inside the party itself, given the labeling of Laldhwaj as a right-opportunist, that is not the main question. The main question is, despite the effort to terminate reactionary sabotage being the obvious reasons for proposing a temporary ban on strikes in some sectors, and the Maoists' record of being the only tendency effectively advancing the cause of the working class in south Asia, [:rolleyes:] why are some self-proclaimed communists making such a huge issue out of this? Why are they so worried about a mere proposal of Maoists to ban strikes temporarily in some sectors, while remaining silent about many real atrocities that are being committed by the bourgeois groups in south Asia ? Very strangely, all the criticism of some of our comrades here seem to be focused on anything that militarily or politically challenges western imperialism. Not surprising at all.We are worried because the history of Maoism is the establishment of capitalism. Look at China. And the Maoists in Nepal are carrying out the same policy that led to capitalism in China. Right now, they are effectively a parliamentary party working to introduce capitalism to Nepal. The proposal to ban strikes was a harbinger of what they are doing now.

RED DAVE

[Ret]

Those tricks of yours won't work. Let alone the MLs or Maoists here, even many anarchists or Trots are aware how reactionary "peace keeping forces" organized by the ruling classes militarily combat Maoists in the name of the masses.
Red cat's trickery;
1) present data as (unconvincing) evidence for "people's war" and "revolution"(!).
2) Repeatedly credit only the most favourable interpretation that supports your myths, with no supporting hard evidence. All other interpretations are dismissed as impossible and counter-revolutionary. When his data is actually analysed and found, eg, to contain some evidence of local people's opposition to guerrilla activity, insist on only the most convoluted and favourable interpretation of the inconvenient data - even if some of the meaning of the data is the opposite of what he tried to originally prove.
The reports of locals attacking guerrillas are from the info you provided as evidence of "war" and "revolution". Obviously it's open to interpretation, but your insistence on selectively accepting and rejecting parts of it according to whether you can try to make it support your case is unconvincing and dishonest. And presenting pure speculation as fact - based on dubious unsupported interpretation - is irresponsible and a bad joke.

Generally the involvement of the army against forces within the country evokes strong reaction from the masses. The idea that local people could never possibly get angry (or have good reason to) with some guerrillas and that "the masses" of Bangladesh are wholeheartedly supporting obscure tiny groups in remote rural areas is another daft myth. These events are generally not big national news in the country and are largely irrelevant and/or unknown to the millions of urban workers. If after decades of guerrilla activity there are only 1000 armed militants in a country of 160 million, and with thousands leaving rural villages for the city every day, how can anyone credibly say there is mass support and a growing guerrilla "war" and "revolution"??

Denial is not a very clever way of sidelining armed struggle. Denial that the facts don't support your fantasies is the problem.


I suggest that you generalize Libcom's line that in some places Maoists conduct armed struggle so that the government increases security funds, which are then shared by parliamentary politicians with Maoists, to the whole of south Asia. That will sound less funnier, and will serve the purpose of denouncing Maoism. More delusion; there is no "libcom line" on things any more than there is a Revleft line on anything. Well, in fact there's far more of a Revleft line on Maoism, as parroted by those collective faithful on here and necessarily fed by the myth-making criticised here. But the articles contributed on libcom are written by individuals, not some central committee. There are no 'members' of libcom, apart from the 9 or so admins, and none of them wrote the Maoism articles. Yes, like any site, articles must broadly conform to the site ethos - but the articles on Maoism aren't the product of "a line"; don't judge others by your own miserable standards.

Libcom's line that in some places Maoists conduct armed struggle so that the government increases security funds Wrong yet again; that article (http://libcom.org/news/maoism-south-asia-republican-nepal-indian-naxalites-25122007) was clearly referencing comments from a non-libcom article and never pretended it was a general truth - and, like all else you say, you dismiss it not on the basis of any presented evidence, but merely because it questions your 3rd worldist fantasies. It seems all you know or can present as 'evidence' about Bangladeshi guerrillas is from an obscure anti-terrorist monitoring site that doesn't even suggest that, as you claim, there is "a well developed armed struggle", "a war" and a "revolution" going on there. If that's all your claims are based on - and you've shown no other evidence - it's ridiculous to peddle these fantasies as fact. There is no substance to your claims, you provide no evidence for them.

On Nepal;

had the proposal to ban strikes been a genuine move to curb workers' rights, it would have been accepted immediately by the bourgeois parties. But this did not happen. Strikes were never effectively banned in Nepal. Wrong - if you bothered to read the libcom 'myths & realities' article linked above you'd see these old excuses you repeat are refuted there. The SEZ's were not operational (I think they still aren't) and the law dealing with SEZ investment and labour relations has been favoured by successive governments and all parties, including Maoists. You have had to concede the Maoists have stated they are in favour of SEZs, explicitly based on the Chinese model with its disgusting working conditions, which is damning enough - so little point splitting hairs about this.

Further, the ESA act, a provision for an almost blanket strike ban, was enforced when the Maoists were in government (see article), so your excuses don't wash - a strike ban was imposed by the Maoist-led govt shortly before they left power. And, as shown in the article, the proposed strike ban was not against strikes by rival parties - so wrong again. The Maoists were in a coalition government with other rival parties, remember, when this legislation was dealt with - and these parties expressed no opposition to these measures. But carry on trying to split hairs and twist yourself in knots about this if you wish - it won't change the available evidence.

None of your excuses or attempted diversions are credible or have evidence to support them. Why? Cos they are yet more fantasies invented by Maoist apologists. No amount of your personal insults can hide that truth. When you feel you have to resort to them it reveals the absence of any credible argument.

[red cat]

Red cat's trickery;
1) present data as (unconvincing) evidence for "people's war" and "revolution"(!).
2) Repeatedly credit only the most favourable interpretation that supports your myths, with no supporting hard evidence. All other interpretations are dismissed as impossible and counter-revolutionary. When his data is actually analysed and found, eg, to contain some evidence of local people's opposition to guerrilla activity, insist on only the most convoluted and favourable interpretation of the inconvenient data - even if some of the meaning of the data is the opposite of what he tried to originally prove.
The reports of locals attacking guerrillas are from the info you provided as evidence of "war" and "revolution". Obviously it's open to interpretation, but your insistence on selectively accepting and rejecting parts of it according to whether you can try to make it support your case is unconvincing and dishonest. And presenting pure speculation as fact - based on dubious unsupported interpretation - is irresponsible and a bad joke.

In other words, we should completely accept every piece of news provided by an organization that calls revolutionaries terrorists. How intelligent of you !

What we post in news-threads are subject to variable interpretations. Generally we selectively accept news heavily relying on our knowledge of more well known Maoist movements. Reports from the South Asia Terrorism Portal are not evidence of a people's war or advancing armed struggle in Bangladesh; statements from other Maoist CPs declaring thte presence of an advancing armed struggle in Bangladesh are.



The idea that local people could never possibly get angry (or have good reason to) with some guerrillas and that "the masses" of Bangladesh are wholeheartedly supporting obscure tiny groups in remote rural areas is another daft myth. These events are generally not big national news in the country and are largely irrelevant and/or unknown to the millions of urban workers. If after decades of guerrilla activity there are only 1000 armed militants in a country of 160 million, and with thousands leaving rural villages for the city every day, how can anyone credibly say there is mass support and a growing guerrilla "war" and "revolution"?? Here, I am saying it. That's how. Given the present circumstances, even a thousand guerrilla fighters is a lot in a country like Bangladesh.


Denial that the facts don't support your fantasies is the problem.No, your lack of knowledge is.


More delusion; there is no "libcom line" on things any more than there is a Revleft line on anything. Well, in fact there's far more of a Revleft line on Maoism, as parroted by those collective faithful on here and necessarily fed by the myth-making criticised here. But the articles contributed on libcom are written by individuals, not some central committee. There are no 'members' of libcom, apart from the 9 or so admins, and none of them wrote the Maoism articles. Yes, like any site, articles must broadly conform to the site ethos - but the articles on Maoism aren't the product of "a line"; don't judge others by your own miserable standards. The general line of Libcom and the "miserable standards" of its posters, visible in their posts both inside and outside of libcom, are the product of their class character. This type of elites and petit bourgeois elements who do not know the meaning of exploitation are inherently reactionary. They don't need a central committee to guide them in opposing revolutions.


Wrong yet again; that article (http://libcom.org/news/maoism-south-asia-republican-nepal-indian-naxalites-25122007) was clearly referencing comments from a non-libcom article and never pretended it was a general truth - and, like all else you say, you dismiss it not on the basis of any presented evidence, but merely because it questions your 3rd worldist fantasies. They write "the article reveals ... ", and they nowhere give a hint about them remaining neutral on the article. Given this and the general stand on Libcom posters on the Indian Maoist movement in the other link, it is very reasonable to assume that they present the articles as acceptable sources.


It seems all you know or can present as 'evidence' about Bangladeshi guerrillas is from an obscure anti-terrorist monitoring site that doesn't even suggest that, as you claim, there is "a well developed armed struggle", "a war" and a "revolution" going on there. If that's all your claims are based on - and you've shown no other evidence - it's ridiculous to peddle these fantasies as fact. There is no substance to your claims, you provide no evidence for them.
Again, the evidence lies in the statements of fraternal Maoist CPs.


On Nepal;
Wrong - if you bothered to read the libcom 'myths & realities' article linked above you'd see these old excuses you repeat are refuted there. The SEZ's were not operational (I think they still aren't) and the law dealing with SEZ investment and labour relations has been favoured by successive governments and all parties, including Maoists. You have had to concede the Maoists have stated they are in favour of SEZs, explicitly based on the Chinese model with its disgusting working conditions, which is damning enough - so little point splitting hairs about this.

Further, the ESA act, a provision for an almost blanket strike ban, was enforced when the Maoists were in government (see article), so your excuses don't wash - a strike ban was imposed by the Maoist-led govt shortly before they left power. And, as shown in the article, the proposed strike ban was not against strikes by rival parties - so wrong again. The Maoists were in a coalition government with other rival parties, remember, when this legislation was dealt with - and these parties expressed no opposition to these measures. But carry on trying to split hairs and twist yourself in knots about this if you wish - it won't change the available evidence.

None of your excuses or attempted diversions are credible or have evidence to support them. Why? Cos they are yet more fantasies invented by Maoist apologists. No amount of your personal insults can hide that truth. When you feel you have to resort to them it reveals the absence of any credible argument.I have refuted these arguments in my previous posts. Despite there being hardly any workers' strike in Nepal, and the Maoists supporting any SEZ in practice, and themselves being the biggest organizers of strikes, denounce Maoists for using Bolshevik strategy for suppressing compradors and imperialist agents if you will. It will only expose the political bankruptcy of Libcom-pseudo leftists more and more.

[red cat]

And, after all, we know that production is more important than class struggle. Please note that instead of asking the working class to engage in conscious self-restraint, which might lead to an enhancement of the notion of workers control, the Maoists are suggesting that a bourgeois government ban strikes, which leads to a consciousness that it is all right for a bourgeois government to control the class struggle.

If the economy destabilizes and India and other imperialists seize the opportunity to invade Nepal, then which infrastructureless-class struggle will save the Nepalese masses?


Note that the prohibition was not against political strikes but against strikes.

Why don't you give examples of some big non-political strikes in Nepal to support your argument ?


We are worried because the history of Maoism is the establishment of capitalism. Look at China. And the Maoists in Nepal are carrying out the same policy that led to capitalism in China. Right now, they are effectively a parliamentary party working to introduce capitalism to Nepal. The proposal to ban strikes was a harbinger of what they are doing now.

RED DAVE

You are worried not because of these imaginary reasons, but because you know that Trotskyism in south Asia is in a miserable condition while the Maoist movements are advancing workers' struggles. Admit it.

[Ret]

. Reports from the South Asia Terrorism Portal are not evidence of a people's war or advancing armed struggle in Bangladesh;
But, on the original thread, that's exactly what you produced the SATP report to 'prove' - in answer to my request for credible evidence of a "people's war"!! Now that the details don't match the claim, you claim the opposite!!

What we post in news-threads are subject to variable interpretations. Obviously; and in your hands the same source magically takes on an opposite meaning when necessary - very 'dialectical'. This is all typical of your blurring of fact, fantasy and speculation.

They write "the article reveals ... ", Another inaccuracy; you confuse that the article distinguishes between "revealing" one uncontroversial fact and "reporting" the other you disagree with;
The article reveals that whereas universities were previously the heartlands of recruitment for the Indian maoists - leftist guerilla movements traditionally recruited their functionaries from over-qualified students with few career prospects due to stagnent economic conditions - now the booming IT-driven economy and accompanying growth of the skilled middle class has destroyed this cadre recruitment for the the Maoist movement.
The article also reports that in those remoter forest areas with great potential for mining and other resource extractions the Maoist threat is being used by vested government and business interests as an excuse to use terror to clear forest villages and herd villagers into less remote camps near main roads. This separates them from their traditional means of subsistence in preparation for a new life as wage labour in the mines or other extractive industries. The new enclosures... or in the sanitised jargon of modern security specialists - "strategic hamleting".http://www.himalmag.com/2007/december/cover_feature_chhattisgarh.html
The article reports too that in some areas the Maoists are well accommodated within the local political ruling structures and have a clever scam operating with them; the Maoists keep up sufficient level of activity to show 'evidence' of them being a security threat - this justifies regular applications by the remote local government to the central government for increased security funding. Once secured, the proceeds from the government funds are then divided amongst the Maoists, local politicians, government officials and security forces.http://libcom.org/news/maoism-south-asia-republican-nepal-indian-naxalites-25122007
Regardless, you're unable to factually refute this.

Given this and the general stand on Libcom posters on the Indian Maoist movement in the other link, I already explained that, though the general politics of the site are not sympathetic to bolshevism, stalinism, maoism etc, there's no "libcom line" - the Indian articles you linked to are reproduced from another site and are not written by "Libcom posters".

The general line of Libcom and the "miserable standards" of its posters, visible in their posts both inside and outside of libcom, are the product of their class character. This type of elites and petit bourgeois elements who do not know the meaning of exploitation are inherently reactionary. Straight out of the 'Stalinist handbook of cynical slander and smears'; as if anyone who can present you with a difficult argument you can't refute must be labelled as a class enemy. I doubt that any higher percentage of libcommers are heads of elites, non-proletarian, shopkeepers or small business owners than Revlefters or its pro-maoists!! I doubt you actually believe this yourself. Fortunately, you don't have a KGB or Stasi to back up your sad smears. The 'prolier than thou' hint is a sure sign of desperation and reveals the general lack of substance to your politics. It also shows an idealised view of the working class - as if 'no true prole could possibly ever criticise Maoism'. But if you need to believe these fantasies...


If after decades of guerrilla activity there are only 1000 armed militants in a country of 160 million, and with thousands leaving rural villages for the city every day, how can anyone credibly say there is mass support and a growing guerrilla "war" and "revolution"??
Here, I am saying it. That's how. Given the present circumstances, even a thousand guerrilla fighters is a lot in a country like Bangladesh."That's how?" So just by quasi-religious faith it becomes 'true', due to some psychological need. "Given the present circumstances" - ie, tiny numbers scattered in rival groups involved in minor skirmishes in remote areas and lack of any mass support - there is no "war", never mind the sad fantasy of a "revolution".


Again, the evidence lies in the statements of fraternal Maoist CPs. So if delusionists like you make the claims you do, that's proof. Brilliant circular 'logic'.


I have refuted these arguments in my previous posts. Er, no you haven't at all, as can be seen above.

Despite there being hardly any workers' strike in Nepal, and the Maoists supporting any SEZ in practice, and themselves being the biggest organizers of strikes, ...Whereas you conveniently ignore that all these excuses have been dealt with above. Nepali Maoists support the planned future SEZs (I believe none are yet operational); you have been forced to concede it's in their official program.

denounce Maoists for using Bolshevik strategy for suppressing compradors and imperialist agents if you will. So courting closer relations and more investment from an increasingly regional imperial China and copying their SEZ program of super exploitation of workers is "suppressing compradors and imperialist agents"?!


It will only expose the political bankruptcy of Libcom-pseudo leftists more and more. There you go with your childish name-calling again; a sure sign of no more credible response to the actual argument. You find yourself in the embarrassing - but predictable - position of feeling obliged to defend the growing "political bankruptcy" of the Nepali Maoists. Even as the Party's internal rival gangsterism threatens to spin out of control; http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2111647&postcount=195

[red cat]

But, on the original thread, that's exactly what you produced the SATP report to 'prove' - in answer to my request for credible evidence of a "people's war"!! Now that the details don't match the claim, you claim the opposite!!

Sorry, but I don't remember doing that. Generally I ignore the foolish demands for "evidence" of people's war; I don't think that it's my duty to enlighten someone who is lacking in knowledge up to that extent about the very existence of Maoist armed struggles.


Obviously; and in your hands the same source magically takes on an opposite meaning when necessary - very 'dialectical'. This is all typical of your blurring of fact, fantasy and speculation.Now I cannot make much meaning out of your posts. Probably you are habituated to fully trusting bourgeois sources. Not surprising.


Another inaccuracy; you confuse that the article distinguishes between "revealing" one uncontroversial fact and "reporting" the other you disagree with;Regardless, you're unable to factually refute this.It seems that you are the one who is utterly confused here. I disagree with what you call an "uncontroversial fact" too. That itself is a lie as far as the Indian Maoist movement is concerned.


I already explained that, though the general politics of the site are not sympathetic to bolshevism, stalinism, maoism etc, there's no "libcom line" - the Indian articles you linked to are reproduced from another site and are not written by "Libcom posters". That is what I understand by the Libcom line on Maoism. Obviously it will be anti-Maoist as long as most of the posters are communist only in name.


Straight out of the 'Stalinist handbook of cynical slander and smears'; as if anyone who can present you with a difficult argument you can't refute must be labelled as a class enemy. I doubt that any higher percentage of libcommers are heads of elites, non-proletarian, shopkeepers or small business owners than Revlefters or its pro-maoists!! I doubt you actually believe this yourself. Fortunately, you don't have a KGB or Stasi to back up your sad smears. The 'prolier than thou' hint is a sure sign of desperation and reveals the general lack of substance to your politics. It also shows an idealised view of the working class - as if 'no true prole could possibly ever criticise Maoism'. But if you need to believe these fantasies...Unfortunately, the "prolier than thou" argument has to be used when a bunch of elites from imperialist countries try to slander communist movements that pose a threat to imperialism. I am certain that most Libcomites are elites and horribly rich when compared to the average south Asian Maoist.


"That's how?" So just by quasi-religious faith it becomes 'true', due to some psychological need. "Given the present circumstances" - ie, tiny numbers scattered in rival groups involved in minor skirmishes in remote areas and lack of any mass support - there is no "war", never mind the sad fantasy of a "revolution". The psychological need seems to be that of a middle class, totally ignorant, western wanna-be communist, not mine. Pseudo-lefitsts that really support imperialism always claim that Maoists are insignificant and lack any mass support. That bourgeois trick of yours is not new to us.


So if delusionists like you make the claims you do, that's proof. Brilliant circular 'logic'.Real communists often seem to be delusionists to bourgeois elements.


Er, no you haven't at all, as can be seen above.
...Whereas you conveniently ignore that all these excuses have been dealt with above. Nepali Maoists support the planned future SEZs (I believe none are yet operational); you have been forced to concede it's in their official program.
So courting closer relations and more investment from an increasingly regional imperial China and copying their SEZ program of super exploitation of workers is "suppressing compradors and imperialist agents"?!

There you go with your childish name-calling again; a sure sign of no more credible response to the actual argument. You find yourself in the embarrassing - but predictable - position of feeling obliged to defend the growing "political bankruptcy" of the Nepali Maoists. Even as the Party's internal rival gangsterism threatens to spin out of control; http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2111647&postcount=195More demonization of communist tactics and class struggle within the CP, I see. As if opposing both India and China at the same time would be very helpful in preventing a military intervention, or as if it is very difficult to understand their practical line on SEZs from the experience of the Indian Maoist movement. And of course bourgeois elements will see class struggle both inside and outside the CP as gangsterism; that is what threatens the existence of pseudo-leftists like most of the ones posting in Libcom.

[DaringMehring]

Red cat, unfortunately you remind me of what happened in the 1930s with CP militants. After the Comintern had jerked them back and forth left and right based on the blunderings of the leadership, they had lost all reason and ability to derive a socialist program from their principles and articulate it. How could they, when they were forced to defend the Comintern line, which was constantly making huge leaps. As Deutscher noted, they were more and more reduced to simply asserting their views, backing them up with such "arguments" as "the Comintern said so," and "the Trotskyite wreckers and bourgeoisie want you to believe otherwise." I don't think it is any accident, that this is all you yourself can come up with. It's trying to argue with an empty gas tank of actual points.

They lost those arguments in factories and on street corners then in the 30s, and you have to realize that you also lose badly in this type of thread. In the eyes of anyone who is not already extremely pro-CPNM, pro-"People's War", pro-this-particular-type-of-Maoism, that is to say, the masses of random proletarians and socialists, your arguments add up to nothing. I'm interested to know, have you ever succeeded in convincing any proletarian of your views?

Take this thread. The interview provided with B. Bhattarai is utter shit. It is anti-socialist to the core. Workers and ownership are allies who are to work for common benefit? That is right out of the playbook of a right-wing anti-communist labor leader clearing out commies from the unions during McCarthyism. But we knew Bhattarai is garbage. Prachanda has been riding the fence saying both that revolt is needed and that it is necessary to build capitalism. Now he is falling to the side of Bhattarai. There is a clear divide between the Party tops and the base, who still take aggressive actions sometimes. The only way forward will be for the base to toss out their Menshevik Party bosses. They may be forming to a degree under Baidya but even Baidya may not be the full solution.

It is an intense living struggle. And what do you say? Do you have any analysis? You have only banal one-liners and mystic pro-Party snippets. If the CPNM cannot be rescued by the militants among the masses, and does fail as a revolutionary organization, which is looking a big possibility, you'll just say, "oh, revisionists got them."

As for Bangladesh, if you can't see how what Ret posted was much better argued, you're in bad shape.

And all the while you fall back on some mantra against "Trotskyites" as if that were a magic word that could turn everything around. But I doubt you have any idea of the work that certain Trotskyist groups do. I have personally witnessed Trotskyist groups developing socialist consciousness in the working class, connecting to workers and playing an important role organizing workers in the class struggle. Take the general strikes in Guadeloupe and Martinique, which were in the end led by Trotskyists, and led to a big victory. Yet these are the people you say are imperialist puppets, should be purged, etc. Yeah, some Trotskyists may have lost the plot; so have elements from all tendencies, including Maoism where you have RCP Revolutionary Cult of Personality, FRSO refoundation social-democrats, etc. We could conduct an analysis of why the movement as a whole has suffered, but it is beside the point. The point is, your mindless and obsessive anti-Trotskyism is stupid.

The only reason I type this out is; unlike Red Dave who just likes to needle you for kicks, or other posters who just ignore you, I think you can do better as a socialist. We need every fighter and you obviously care (or do you, maybe you just fetishize guerilla war and The Party?) -- so do some thinking about what you think and how you can convey that. * * * Because right now with your arguments you're not going to help the proles develop socialist consciousness or help achieve socialism ! * * *

[RED DAVE]

The only reason I type this out is; unlike Red Dave who just likes to needle you for kicksBelieve me, I have better kicks that that.


or other posters who just ignore you, I think you can do better as a socialist.I agree. I admire red cat's persistence and willingness to fight for his position, while at the same time I seriously disagree with him.


We need every fighter and you obviously care (or do you, maybe you just fetishize guerilla war and The Party?) -- so do some thinking about what you think and how you can convey that. * * * Because right now with your arguments you're not going to help the proles develop socialist consciousness or help achieve socialism ! * * *I couldn't agree more.

RED DAVE

[Ret]

But, on the original thread, that's exactly what you produced the SATP report to 'prove' - in answer to my request for credible evidence of a "people's war"!! Now that the details don't match the claim, you claim the opposite!! Sorry, but I don't remember doing that. Generally I ignore the foolish demands for "evidence" of people's war;
What you selectively choose to remember and forget is part of your problem with connecting with reality. Go and refresh your memory on the other thread and see that's exactly what happened; since then you've denied that your data was proof of what you originally used it to 'prove', now above you deny you ever tried to use it to prove anything. Your argument has crumbled into a heap of self-contradiction; the story keeps changing, one evasion on top of another.

I am certain that most Libcomites are elites and horribly rich when compared to the average south Asian Maoist. I presume you're not posting to here from the remote forests of Asia - so this evaluation must also apply at least as much to you.

More demonization of communist tactics and class struggle within the CP, I see. As if opposing both India and China at the same time would be very helpful in preventing a military intervention, or as if it is very difficult to understand their practical line on SEZs from the experience of the Indian Maoist movement. I don't believe there is evidence for any present threat of military intervention. It would take a really serious provocative act by either China or India to even come close to that; in comparison the Maoists are very much small fry and, along with other parties, are contained by other tried and tested covert methods. For the rest of your comments, you're back to talking in convoluted incoherent riddles again... which doesn't amount to any refutation or defence of Maoist support for SEZs.

I'll summarise your general argument; 'I can't refute anything with a shred of factual evidence to justify my claims, so I'll resort to throwing pathetic childish labels scraped from the dustbin of Stalinism.'

And of course bourgeois elements will see class struggle both inside and outside the CP as gangsterism; So you advocate factional attempted murder as a form of internal Party struggle. Nice, comrade; http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2111647&postcount=195

And if you want to use categories of class as criticism, apply them to those in the appropriate class - stop talking like some wooden 1930s CP hack. "Petit bourgeois", "bourgeois elements" etc are not firstly moral or ideological categories, but socio-economic ones. The myth that anyone who criticises Maoism is objectively working for the bourgeoisie is itself a form of totalitarian ideology, a slavish defence of 'the one true God' against all heresies.

You would be more accurate applying the term 'bourgeois' to your gurus, the Party leaders - those same ones the Party rank'n'file keep criticising for their luxurious lifestyles;

Recent news reports reveal the wages and expenses of the newly elected members of the Assembly. While they spend an indefinite period drawing up a new national Constitution they will be paid - by Nepali standards - enormous wages;
each CA member will receive net salaries of 23 thousand one hundred rupees per month [£176/$345/Eur224]. On top of this they'll get expenses for drinking water, electricity, telephone, rent, newspapers & "miscellaneous". These expense allowances bring the total income of a CA member to 45 thousand 98 rupees [£345/$674/Eur437] each per month. [...]
So the ruling class, led by the Maoist 'proletarian vanguard', feather their nest. These salaries must be compared with the Nepali average wage of just $200 a year [£102/Eur129]; Nepal is the poorest country in Asia. Around 10% of the population takes 50% of the wealth, the bottom 40% takes 10%. 85% of Nepalese people don’t have access to health care. So the monthly income of a CA politician is well over three times the annual national average wage! Jobs within the CA are already being allocated by all the various member parties to their friends and family.
http://libcom.org/news/nepal-a-nice-little-earner-maoist-ruling-class-lenins-footsteps-12052008
And yes, we all know the bourgeois press is always 'unreliable evidence' except when you pro-maoists use it - and you pro-maoists should know, as you use it more than most, as your news threads show. Regardless;

4th September 2010 - The Kathmandu Post
The paradox of the Maoists
KAMAL DEV BHATTARAI
KATHMANDU, SEP 03 -
The UCPN (Maoist) has been warned from within that its very communist ideals are fast eroding. A majority of the party’s Central Committee (CC) members has said the party is gradually bringing to manifest a huge and embarrassing paradox: The rise of new classes within the party, haves and have-nots.
They strongly believe that as a community party, the ultimate goal of the UCPN (Maoist) is to achieve a classless society— as “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.”
The concern comes amid the ongoing discussions within the party’s Central Committee meeting. Maoist CC members insist that the party leadership’s failure to implement a “code of conduct” and take action against those who have misused the party’s name to amass personal wealth has given rise to new classes of rich and poor in the party’s rank and file.
As a first step to “purging” the party, the majority of the CC members have urged Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal to strictly implement the code of conduct and also the report submitted four months ago by a high-level commission led by Vice Chairman Mohan Baidya. The commission — assigned to study and recommend how the leaders’ living style and their financial activities could be made transparent — had recommended action against more than half a dozen central-level leaders and scores of local leaders for amassing private property, engaging in businesses and indulging in luxurious lifestyle.
“Despite pressure from the majority of CC members, the party leadership has not taken action against those leaders indicted in the report,” said politburo member Hari Bhakta Kandel. “If the party fails to address these problems, it would badly affect the revolutionary and proletariat image of the party.” The CC members have also demanded strict implementation of the “code of conduct” issued two years ago to curtail the luxurious life style of party leaders.
CC members grumbled that after entering peaceful politics, many leaders are hoarding money and buying houses by the dozen. “While some central level leaders are engaged in big deals like grabbing contracts, brokering land and real estate, local cadres are collecting donation without any transparency and accountability,” said a Maoist CC member. “These ills are eroding communist ideals and casting a shodow over comrades.” “There has been rapid deterioration in the party’s proletarian conduct and working style,” said Politburo member Dharmendra Bastola.
The code requires each party leader to deposit all private property details in the party’s name. “Instead of depositing, leaders are in a race to amass private property,” said a CC member. “This has frustrated thousands of honest and revolutionary cadres.”
Posted on: 2010-09-04 08:04" http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2010/09/03/top-story/the-paradox-of-the-maoists/212335/

[red cat]

Red cat, unfortunately you remind me of what happened in the 1930s with CP militants. After the Comintern had jerked them back and forth left and right based on the blunderings of the leadership, they had lost all reason and ability to derive a socialist program from their principles and articulate it. How could they, when they were forced to defend the Comintern line, which was constantly making huge leaps. As Deutscher noted, they were more and more reduced to simply asserting their views, backing them up with such "arguments" as "the Comintern said so," and "the Trotskyite wreckers and bourgeoisie want you to believe otherwise." I don't think it is any accident, that this is all you yourself can come up with. It's trying to argue with an empty gas tank of actual points.

They lost those arguments in factories and on street corners then in the 30s, and you have to realize that you also lose badly in this type of thread. In the eyes of anyone who is not already extremely pro-CPNM, pro-"People's War", pro-this-particular-type-of-Maoism, that is to say, the masses of random proletarians and socialists, your arguments add up to nothing. I'm interested to know, have you ever succeeded in convincing any proletarian of your views?

Take this thread. The interview provided with B. Bhattarai is utter shit. It is anti-socialist to the core. Workers and ownership are allies who are to work for common benefit? That is right out of the playbook of a right-wing anti-communist labor leader clearing out commies from the unions during McCarthyism. But we knew Bhattarai is garbage. Prachanda has been riding the fence saying both that revolt is needed and that it is necessary to build capitalism. Now he is falling to the side of Bhattarai. There is a clear divide between the Party tops and the base, who still take aggressive actions sometimes. The only way forward will be for the base to toss out their Menshevik Party bosses. They may be forming to a degree under Baidya but even Baidya may not be the full solution.

It is an intense living struggle. And what do you say? Do you have any analysis? You have only banal one-liners and mystic pro-Party snippets. If the CPNM cannot be rescued by the militants among the masses, and does fail as a revolutionary organization, which is looking a big possibility, you'll just say, "oh, revisionists got them."

As for Bangladesh, if you can't see how what Ret posted was much better argued, you're in bad shape.

And all the while you fall back on some mantra against "Trotskyites" as if that were a magic word that could turn everything around. But I doubt you have any idea of the work that certain Trotskyist groups do. I have personally witnessed Trotskyist groups developing socialist consciousness in the working class, connecting to workers and playing an important role organizing workers in the class struggle. Take the general strikes in Guadeloupe and Martinique, which were in the end led by Trotskyists, and led to a big victory. Yet these are the people you say are imperialist puppets, should be purged, etc. Yeah, some Trotskyists may have lost the plot; so have elements from all tendencies, including Maoism where you have RCP Revolutionary Cult of Personality, FRSO refoundation social-democrats, etc. We could conduct an analysis of why the movement as a whole has suffered, but it is beside the point. The point is, your mindless and obsessive anti-Trotskyism is stupid.

The only reason I type this out is; unlike Red Dave who just likes to needle you for kicks, or other posters who just ignore you, I think you can do better as a socialist. We need every fighter and you obviously care (or do you, maybe you just fetishize guerilla war and The Party?) -- so do some thinking about what you think and how you can convey that. * * * Because right now with your arguments you're not going to help the proles develop socialist consciousness or help achieve socialism ! * * *

Since you have been a sympathizer, even though from a different tendency, I am somewhat surprised by your post. You know that when certain people here attack Maoist movements here they do so with the sole aim of opposing the revolution, and there is no use of reasoning with them. Sometimes they are proved plain wrong by the future actions of Maoists. To refresh your memories go through this (http://www.revleft.com/vb/maoists-gays-capitalist-t81944/index.html?highlight=homosexuality)thread. You being a member of the MLM group, I also expect you to know our general stand on various leaders of the UCPN(M). You should also keep in mind the norms that communists follow when they are not totally aware of the minutes of a situation and the CP concerned is known to be a revolutionary one.

I will once again remind you that I recognize the achievements and movements of revolutionary Trotskyites, but that does not change the fact that most Trot groups, particularly the ones in south Asia, are engaged in spreading lies and half-truths about Maoists, which is a counter-revolutionary activity in the present situation. Certain posters here too follow this line of slandering Maoist movements.

Given that Maoists in south Asia have established the first peoples' governments where the working class and lower peasantry practice true democracy through their numerical majority and control of the state machinery, every real communist should be discussing and principally upholding these. But instead, the pseudo-communists here continuously describe Maoists as anti-worker "gangs" or tiny splinter groups with "no mass support of any kind". They have done this repeatedly for the Indian Maoists in the past, in spite of being given evidence again and again of both their size and support, and now they are doing this for Bangladeshi Maoists. We know this line of attack very well and we do not identify them as potential comrades or sympathizers that we will explain the dynamics of a revolutionary movements to them. So if you have any question about the Maoist movement in Bangladesh, ask it separately, preferably in the MLM group or via a PM, and you will receive an appropriate answer.

[red cat]

What you selectively choose to remember and forget is part of your problem with connecting with reality. Go and refresh your memory on the other thread and see that's exactly what happened; since then you've denied that your data was proof of what you originally used it to 'prove', now above you deny you ever tried to use it to prove anything. Your argument has crumbled into a heap of self-contradiction; the story keeps changing, one evasion on top of another.

Why don't you provide a link to where I used these ad an evidence in reply to your demand, instead of posting useless paragraphs ?


I presume you're not posting to here from the remote forests of Asia - so this evaluation must also apply at least as much to you. It does, but I am not the one here slandering, opposing or denying the existence of a revolutionary movement.


I don't believe there is evidence for any present threat of military intervention. It would take a really serious provocative act by either China or India to even come close to that; in comparison the Maoists are very much small fry and, along with other parties, are contained by other tried and tested covert methods. For the rest of your comments, you're back to talking in convoluted incoherent riddles again... which doesn't amount to any refutation or defence of Maoist support for SEZs.Of course, we know that given the history of Indian political intervention in Nepal, military intervention in Bhutan and US military intervention in Nepal, you are the most trusted analyzer of such matters. As for the Maoist stand on SEZs, there is no practical proof of that other than their anti-SEZ movements in India. There is no instance where Maoists have sided with the owners in an operational SEZ.


I'll summarise your general argument; 'I can't refute anything with a shred of factual evidence to justify my claims, so I'll resort to throwing pathetic childish labels scraped from the dustbin of Stalinism.' When it comes to evidences, the Libcom evidences of certain Maoist activities in south Asia tell a lot about your credibility. You'd better fix those before anything else.


So you advocate factional attempted murder as a form of internal Party struggle. Nice, comrade; http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2111647&postcount=195Whether this particular action was carried out by reactionaries or revolutionaries is not the point. Classes exist within the party, and as the decisive moment of revolution draws near, there can be military actions within the party as well. Those who closely follow the movement will denounce the actions by reactionaries and uphold those by revolutionaries.


And if you want to use categories of class as criticism, apply them to those in the appropriate class - stop talking like some wooden 1930s CP hack. "Petit bourgeois", "bourgeois elements" etc are not firstly moral or ideological categories, but socio-economic ones. The myth that anyone who criticises Maoism is objectively working for the bourgeoisie is itself a form of totalitarian ideology, a slavish defence of 'the one true God' against all heresies.There are useful criticisms of Maoist movements, but yours are not among them. Yours are aimed indirectly to defend imperialism.


You would be more accurate applying the term 'bourgeois' to your gurus, the Party leaders - those same ones the Party rank'n'file keep criticising for their luxurious lifestyles;


Recent news reports reveal the wages and expenses of the newly elected members of the Assembly. While they spend an indefinite period drawing up a new national Constitution they will be paid - by Nepali standards - enormous wages;
each CA member will receive net salaries of 23 thousand one hundred rupees per month [£176/$345/Eur224]. On top of this they'll get expenses for drinking water, electricity, telephone, rent, newspapers & "miscellaneous". These expense allowances bring the total income of a CA member to 45 thousand 98 rupees [£345/$674/Eur437] each per month. [...]
So the ruling class, led by the Maoist 'proletarian vanguard', feather their nest. These salaries must be compared with the Nepali average wage of just $200 a year [£102/Eur129]; Nepal is the poorest country in Asia. Around 10% of the population takes 50% of the wealth, the bottom 40% takes 10%. 85% of Nepalese people don’t have access to health care. So the monthly income of a CA politician is well over three times the annual national average wage! Jobs within the CA are already being allocated by all the various member parties to their friends and family.
http://libcom.org/news/nepal-a-nice-...steps-12052008 (http://www.anonym.to/?http://libcom.org/news/nepal-a-nice-little-earner-maoist-ruling-class-lenins-footsteps-12052008)

What is the average income of an average European or American worker, what is the amount required for living decently in Nepal, and what are the steps that Maoists are taking against those leaders who are said to be living luxurious lives? Before, criticizing our "gurus", have a look at your neighbourhood comrades.



And yes, we all know the bourgeois press is always 'unreliable evidence' except when you pro-maoists use it - and you pro-maoists should know, as you use it more than most, as your news threads show. Regardless;The point being ? We should believe the particularly anti-Maoist reports chosen by pseudo communists may be ?

[RED DAVE]

Since you have been a sympathizer, even though from a different tendency, I am somewhat surprised by your post. You know that when certain people here attack Maoist movements here they do so with the sole aim of opposing the revolutionThat, of course, is a lie. People such as myself support revolutions in Asia, and elsewhere. What we oppose is the Maoist strategy of class collaboration, whose results we know.


and there is no use of reasoning with them.Translation: They refuse to accept my bs and insist on looking at what is really happening.


Sometimes they are proved plain wrong by the future actions of Maoists. To refresh your memories go through this (http://www.revleft.com/vb/maoists-gays-capitalist-t81944/index.html?highlight=homosexuality)thread. You being a member of the MLM group, I also expect you to know our general stand on various leaders of the UCPN(M). You should also keep in mind the norms that communists follow when they are not totally aware of the minutes of a situation and the CP concerned is known to be a revolutionary one.Translation: We've been covering up for the UCPN(M) and now the situation is unraveling due to their line.


I will once again remind you that I recognize the achievements and movements of revolutionary Trotskyites, but that does not change the fact that most Trot groups, particularly the ones in south Asia, are engaged in spreading lies and half-truths about Maoists, which is a counter-revolutionary activity in the present situation. Certain posters here too follow this line of slandering Maoist movements.See above.


Given that Maoists in south Asia have established the first peoples' governments where the working class and lower peasantry practice true democracy through their numerical majorityWhere? Do you mean China, Vietnam or Nepal?


and control of the state machinery, every real communist should be discussing and principally upholding these.Show me one country where the workers and peasants control the state machinery.


But instead, the pseudo-communists here continuously describe Maoists as anti-worker "gangs" or tiny splinter groups with "no mass support of any kind".He's talking about Bangladesh, where the mighty Maoists have 1000 people in a nation of 160 million.


They have done this repeatedly for the Indian Maoists in the past, in spite of being given evidence again and again of both their size and support, and now they are doing this for Bangladeshi Maoists.If you want to reopen the discussion of Indian Maoism, start a thread.


We know this line of attack very well and we do not identify them as potential comrades or sympathizers that we will explain the dynamics of a revolutionary movements to them. So if you have any question about the Maoist movement in Bangladesh, ask it separately, preferably in the MLM group or via a PM, and you will receive an appropriate answer.Translation: Let's sweep it under the rug. Note the complete absence of any factual information in red cat's post. What we have is slanders of another tendency and vague generalizations containing incorrect facts.

RED DAVE

[Ret]

Sorry, but I don't remember doing that.
Why don't you provide a link to where I used these ad an evidence in reply to your demandOK, I now see what you're doing - when I pointed out you'd contradicted yourself by saying you don't respond to requests for evidence, you said "I don't remember doing that" (ie, replying to my request for evidence of a "war" by spamming the other original thread with list of incidents) and now you ask me to post a link to where I asked you for evidence. But you know well that when this thread was split from the original my first post was deleted and not carried over to here. But in reply to your claim that;

Bangladesh is a country experiencing a people's war and advancing worker's struggles. http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2103530&postcount=1 I posted (from memory);

Really? Can you provide some credible evidence for that? For some reason this post has now been deleted and not carried over here. It's obvious that it existed, though you use its deletion to now pretend you "don't remember" it! Even though you could hardly forget that it was my request that started this whole discussion. Yet that was the reason you posted the long lists of incidents, as a response to it. It's that old dishonest selective memory again, a necessary tool for living with the threadbare contradictions you defend, the blinkers of your faith. No matter, this deception has about as much integrity as all else you say, and your arguments are as lacking in substance or concrete evidence as ever.

But it is all self-reinforcing of a stance that admits no self-reflection; no disagreements need be considered as, after all, only counter-revolutionaries could possibly disagree with your one true faith - and everything counter-revolutionaries say is by definition wrong. You are trapped in a bad place, politically and mentally - the Stalinist paranoia of denouncing all who disagree as 'agents of imperialism' blah blah is just using parroted slogans as knee jerk defence mechanisms, substitutes for any critical thinking of your own. You carry on disregarding the arguments of others and repeating the same myths and slogans like a cultish robot.

I'm sure DaringMehring - and Red Dave, for that matter - have many political disagreements with me but I appreciate their sensible and rational manner. I'm sure DM won't be shut up by your attempts to impose silence on him, to restrict his criticisms to off-forum PMs; but even he, someone more sympathetic to your politics, can see how hopeless, embarrassing and self-defeating your ridiculous behaviour and attitude here is.

I guess every tiny incident or skirmish you can dig up from the bourgeois press will still be used to try to perpetuate a myth of a "war" and "revolution" occurring in Bangladesh (and probably other places). But it will remain fantasy and myth.

[red cat]

OK, I now see what you're doing - when I pointed out you'd contradicted yourself by saying you don't respond to requests for evidence, you said "I don't remember doing that" (ie, replying to my request for evidence of a "war" by spamming the other original thread with list of incidents) and now you ask me to post a link to where I asked you for evidence. But you know well that when this thread was split from the original my first post was deleted and not carried over to here. But in reply to your claim that;
I posted (from memory);
For some reason this post has now been deleted and not carried over here. It's obvious that it existed, though you use its deletion to now pretend you "don't remember" it! Even though you could hardly forget that it was my request that started this whole discussion. Yet that was the reason you posted the long lists of incidents, as a response to it. It's that old dishonest selective memory again, a necessary tool for living with the threadbare contradictions you defend, the blinkers of your faith. No matter, this deception has about as much integrity as all else you say, and your arguments are as lacking in substance or concrete evidence as ever.

Your denial stretches from people's wars in south Asia to your own posts. I do not recall reading any post of yours asking me for evidence in the Bangladesh news thread, let alone replying to it. I also remember that all of the first few posts in that thread were mine. But now you come up with a story of your post being deleted from there! It is clear that either you never wrote that post or you deleted it yourself for some reason that only you know.


But it is all self-reinforcing of a stance that admits no self-reflection; no disagreements need be considered as, after all, only counter-revolutionaries could possibly disagree with your one true faith - and everything counter-revolutionaries say is by definition wrong. You are trapped in a bad place, politically and mentally - the Stalinist paranoia of denouncing all who disagree as 'agents of imperialism' blah blah is just using parroted slogans as knee jerk defence mechanisms, substitutes for any critical thinking of your own. You carry on disregarding the arguments of others and repeating the same myths and slogans like a cultish robot.

Nice attempt, but your argument fails again. "Stalinists" do not denounce anyone who disagrees with them. There are Guavaraists, Hoxhaists, Trotskyites and even anarchists who do not agree with Maoism but still uphold the ongoing Maoist people's wars as primarily revolutionary ones. Maoists do not denounce them because the line of these non-Maoist comrades is essentially a revolutionary one, whereas the line of those self-proclaimed communists who oppose or slander the people's wars is reactionary in essence.


I'm sure DaringMehring - and Red Dave, for that matter - have many political disagreements with me but I appreciate their sensible and rational manner. I'm sure DM won't be shut up by your attempts to impose silence on him, to restrict his criticisms to off-forum PMs; but even he, someone more sympathetic to your politics, can see how hopeless, embarrassing and self-defeating your ridiculous behaviour and attitude here is.

Why stop at that ? Go ahead and accuse me of trying to purge DM, that will be even more creative of you.


I guess every tiny incident or skirmish you can dig up from the bourgeois press will still be used to try to perpetuate a myth of a "war" and "revolution" occurring in Bangladesh (and probably other places). But it will remain fantasy and myth.
Still more denial from you.

[red cat]

That, of course, is a lie. People such as myself support revolutions in Asia, and elsewhere. What we oppose is the Maoist strategy of class collaboration, whose results we know.

There is hardly any evidence of you supporting any revolutions in Asia. Your posts are generally confined to attacking them.


Translation: They refuse to accept my bs and insist on looking at what is really happening.

Translation: We've been covering up for the UCPN(M) and now the situation is unraveling due to their line.

See above.

Translation : Your attacks on Maoist movements usually boil down to yourself translating English into English.


Where? Do you mean China, Vietnam or Nepal?

Show me one country where the workers and peasants control the state machinery.

Certain regions in India.


He's talking about Bangladesh, where the mighty Maoists have 1000 people in a nation of 160 million.

This is a known pattern. The Indian Maoist movement was also slandered and underestimated in a similar way. How many armed red fighters does any group affiliated to Libcom have in any such third world country, that they will judge how big a mass base is required to maintain a single communist guerrilla squad ? Moreover, bourgeois media sources mainly underestimate the strength of Maoists on purpose. In India they still claim that there are only about twenty-thousand Maoist fighters.


If you want to reopen the discussion of Indian Maoism, start a thread.

There is no need for that. We have already seen in a past India thread how you try to wriggle out and then back away from your claims when evidence for Maoist mass base and strength meeting your own conditions is given.


Translation: Let's sweep it under the rug. Note the complete absence of any factual information in red cat's post. What we have is slanders of another tendency and vague generalizations containing incorrect facts.
RED DAVE

Look who's talking ! :rolleyes:

[Ret]

Your denial stretches from people's wars in south Asia to your own posts.
There you go distorting what people say again. I have only denied your deluded claims about mythical "war" and "revolution" in Bangladesh, which you have been totally unable to verify or provide any evidence at all for. What has occurred in such places as Nepal and India is obviously a different matter. And what I said about disappearing posts is true, as you know. Maybe those who split posts will be more careful in future.

Nice attempt, but your argument fails again. "Stalinists" do not denounce anyone who disagrees with them. I think history tells a different story. Alternatively, it must just be you, then.

Why stop at that ? Go ahead and accuse me of trying to purge DM, that will be even more creative of you. No thanks - unlike yourself, I'll just stick with the truth.

I was talking to a Bangladeshi neighbour yesterday; I mentioned some of the claims made here and he laughed. He goes back occasionally and is in regular contact with family in Bangladesh, including in areas where there is occasional guerilla activity. He verified that the idea of a "war" and "revolution" going on there is absurd, and that there is very limited support for the tiny guerilla groups. I guess he must be an 'agent of imperialism' too. Still, I'll take his word over red cat's wet dreams any day.

[DaringMehring]

You should also keep in mind the norms that communists follow when they are not totally aware of the minutes of a situation and the CP concerned is known to be a revolutionary one.

I feel I give them the benefit of the doubt, but the impasse has been long and public divisions are clear now. Right now class war is being fought by the Nepali vanguard within the CPNM and I stick my analysis of the social forces involved and who has to win and what has to happen for the working class to push forward.



I will once again remind you that I recognize the achievements and movements of revolutionary Trotskyites, but that does not change the fact that most Trot groups, particularly the ones in south Asia, are engaged in spreading lies and half-truths about Maoists, which is a counter-revolutionary activity in the present situation. Certain posters here too follow this line of slandering Maoist movements.


Not every criticism is a slander.



Given that Maoists in south Asia have established the first peoples' governments where the working class and lower peasantry practice true democracy through their numerical majority and control of the state machinery, every real communist should be discussing and principally upholding these.


I do not see this in Nepal and the situation in India is too murky for me to be confident in a social analysis of the Maoist-controlled areas.



But instead, the pseudo-communists here continuously describe Maoists as anti-worker "gangs" or tiny splinter groups with "no mass support of any kind".


It is obvious in Nepal from the election results that put Maoist Party as the nr. 1 in the nation (though not above 50%), that the CPNM currently has mass support in Nepal.


now they are doing this for Bangladeshi Maoists.

I don't see that revolt is anywhere near as advanced in Bangladesh as it is in India, though it seems like it could be on track to develop in that direction. That is part of what I am saying, when I say that you do not present a convincing argument.

[red cat]

There you go distorting what people say again. I have only denied your deluded claims about mythical "war" and "revolution" in Bangladesh, which you have been totally unable to verify or provide any evidence at all for. What has occurred in such places as Nepal and India is obviously a different matter. And what I said about disappearing posts is true, as you know. Maybe those who split posts will be more careful in future.

I repeat, the statements by fraternal Maoist groups on their Bangladeshi counterpart is evidence enough. Also, there is no reason to think that the movements in India and Bangladesh are so different that they will not have any common characteristic at all. The movement in Bangladesh can be analyzed in light of the movement in India.

By the way, still sticking to that false claim of post disappearance, I see.



I think history tells a different story. Alternatively, it must just be you, then.
No thanks - unlike yourself, I'll just stick with the truth.

History is being created by the south Asian proletariat, and it is telling a true story about the pseudo-communists who deny the existence of people's wars.


I was talking to a Bangladeshi neighbour yesterday; I mentioned some of the claims made here and he laughed. He goes back occasionally and is in regular contact with family in Bangladesh, including in areas where there is occasional guerilla activity. He verified that the idea of a "war" and "revolution" going on there is absurd, and that there is very limited support for the tiny guerilla groups. I guess he must be an 'agent of imperialism' too. Still, I'll take his word over red cat's wet dreams any day.

Now you have got me. Clearly your neighbour has the last authority on deciding what is true and what is not about the movement in Bangladesh. :rolleyes:

[red cat]

I feel I give them the benefit of the doubt, but the impasse has been long and public divisions are clear now. Right now class war is being fought by the Nepali vanguard within the CPNM and I stick my analysis of the social forces involved and who has to win and what has to happen for the working class to push forward.

I understand your point, but as long as there is no split, our policy should be limiting the discussions on the topic among sympathizers.



Not every criticism is a slander. I didn't claim all of them are.




I do not see this in Nepal and the situation in India is too murky for me to be confident in a social analysis of the Maoist-controlled areas.

In Nepal such big organs of people's power were at least officially dissolved when the CP entered parliamentary politics. However, these power organs generally follow people's wars, and it is safe to assume that the smaller ones continue to exist in western regions of Nepal where the UCPN(M) the only political party.






Given that Maoists in south Asia have established the first peoples' governments where the working class and lower peasantry practice true democracy through their numerical majority and control of the state machinery, every real communist should be discussing and principally upholding these.

It is obvious in Nepal from the election results that put Maoist Party as the nr. 1 in the nation (though not above 50%), that the CPNM currently has mass support in Nepal.

That referred to the Indian movement.


I don't see that revolt is anywhere near as advanced in Bangladesh as it is in India, though it seems like it could be on track to develop in that direction. That is part of what I am saying, when I say that you do not present a convincing argument.

It is not. But it is among the seven countries experiencing developed people's wars, and the Maoist forces in Bangladesh are moving towards the direction of unification.

[Ret]

it is among the seven countries experiencing developed people's wars, and the Maoist forces in Bangladesh are moving towards the direction of unification.Wow, some pretty strong stuff you're smoking there man - those pipedreams are getting like, unbelievable...

[Ret]

I repeat, the statements by fraternal Maoist groups on their Bangladeshi counterpart is evidence enough.
Though it could hardly count as convincing independent evidence, nevertheless it's surprising you haven't shown us what they say - considering that you claim it as your sole evidence.

Clearly your neighbour has the last authority on deciding what is true and what is not about the movement in Bangladesh.More distortion - did I say that? No. Unlike your uninformed self, he wouldn't make such fantastic claims. But his evidence is from direct long term experience and so is far more informed and credible than your fantasies. It also tallies with other evidence.