Nepals Maoists Reconsider position on King

[KGB5097]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4475510.stm

This supprises me a bit...

[celticfire]

Prachanda isn't saying the will allow the King to hold total power, but they will "cool it" if there is free elections supervised by foreign observers. (Those dictator Maoists! LOL!)

"If [the] monarchy comes with that kind of position [acceptance of constituent assembly] we can think about the new situation. But right now we feel that this is not the case in our country" - Chairman Prachanda.

I personally applaud the Nepalese comrades for their undogmatic approach so far. They've had open debates and have been very democratic about the situation. And they've always called for free elections and the creation of a republic.

I don't see why anyone who calls themselves a Marxist or Communist or Anarchist doesn't support an anti-fuedal movement!

[JKP]

This is one point I did not expect the Maoists to compromise on, but it isn't terribly surprising. It shows that "great leaders" like Prachanda, Mao and undoubtedly Avakian are willing compromise with the oppressors.

And your vanguard can do nothing to stop it.

[Correa]

I agree, negotiations with the capitalist elite/monarchy are the begining of the end of any socialist movement. Let's see what happens. Going from a economically burdened monarchy to a socialist state is much more challenging, just ask the bolsheviks.

[Punk Rocker]

I'm dissapointed. Reform never works, the Nepalese of all people should know that. They watched their king dissolve the republic and make himself a fascist dictator.

The people of Nepal are winning the revolution! Why the fuck do they want to start compromising with fascists?

[Cyber Communist]

I personally applaud the Nepalese comrades for their undogmatic approach so far. They've had open debates and have been very democratic about the situation. And they've always called for free elections and the creation of a republic.

This is not about being undogmatic with Marxist theory, such as having an open mind on say, dialectical materialism or whether a vanguard is needed to carry out a revolution.

Im not a Maoist, but at least with Maoist nations like China, when the Maoist system fell apart, it produced modern industrialised capitalism, with a literate and educated population.

You cannot go from rural fuedalism straight to advanced communism, thats like jumping from childhood straight to being middle aged, without going through the years in between.

Abolishing the autocratic monarchy is one of the main tasks for all progressives, socialists and communists.

The Nepalese Royal family has shown many times over that it respect of democracy is very thin. They have spent most of the time in the royal palace running a backward dictatorship.

The current king in particular is an autocrat who has shown to many people that he cannot co-exist with an independent and capitalist-democratic structure.

The class interests which the king represents are those of the fuedal class, he only represents the capitalist class outside of Nepal has no capitalist class of it's own, just fuedal.

As communists and socialists, we have to analyse all developments in this world through the prism of class collaboration and class conflict.

Is in the interests of the respective classes that hold power to see the king of Nepal give his power away, of course not. Thus that is how things will develop.

The king of Nepal needs to be at least overthrown, if not killed.

This surrender by the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-M) on this vital issue, to the capitalist system, is bad news.

Prehaps the CPN-M may end up compromising to the extent that the CPN-M may no longer be able to claim to represent the Nepalese workers and peasants.

Althought i really hope not.

I hope this stupid policy is reversed and reversed soon!

[bolshevik butcher]

Well, I can't say that I am surprised. I was expecting the leadership to fall in at some point. The nepalses people desperatley need a revolution within a revolution to get rid of people like this who compramise with tyrants.

[Severian]

I don't think any of these negotiating positions have any significance whatsoever. The CPN(M) is not likely to make any negotiated settlement of the war, since they could not hope to retain any political support in a postwar situation. Right now, much of their support is coerced.

[Janus]

Perhaps the Maoists believe that they will succeed in an election and be able to wrest power away from the king. Their 9 year struggle still hasn't been able to topple the monarchy and perhaps they are looking for alternative tactics in order to weaken and finally overthrow the monarchy and establish a communist state.

[celticfire]

There overall approach has been very pathbreaking. I don't think they will "reform" with the King at all in the end. It will probably end up being propaganda.

And I don't think it's the beggining of the end either. The Maoists hold control of the majority of the country side, but there is more to think about then that. Remember the capitalists rulers in China and India don't like that their neighbor might go red...and that must be taken into consideration.

(severian: I like your avatar text! LOL :lol: )

[Guerrilla22]

I didn't see anyhting about negociations, he was merely saying he would accept the result of fair and impartial elections, which the king would no doubt lose.

[justice]

I would like to strongly commend the leadership of the Maoist revolution in Nepal.

I think this is a reality check for many who would maintain a strict (orthodox, fundamental, zealous) interpretation of communism (in any one of its many forms). The truth of the matter is that Prachanda knows more about leading and fighting revolutions than any of us. He has also (apperently) realized that at some point it becomes neccassary to compromise, yes even with our enemies, in the name of the peoples interest.

To reiterate a past point: overcoming feudalism is more important than dogmatica commitment to ideology.

The reason that they have decided to compromise with fascists ( in my opinion) is there responsible decision to unify peoples, by joining their voice with the voice of opposition parties in calling for a more widely accepted sollution to the problems in nepal. The war hastn helped the people of nepal...9 years is enough. Move on to new approaches...after all, it is the Nepalese people who matter most.

[viva le revolution]

Taking an ultra-left sectarian view of things won't help. this is a wise move on the part of the Maoist comrades. Given the fact that china has begun giving arms to the king, the maoists are at a disadvantage. The odds against them have increased furthur. This is a temporary respite for the maoists to assess the situation and prepare accordingly.

[JKP]

Originally posted by viva le [email protected] 28 2005, 06:23 AM
Taking an ultra-left sectarian view of things won't help. this is a wise move on the part of the Maoist comrades. Given the fact that china has begun giving arms to the king, the maoists are at a disadvantage. The odds against them have increased furthur. This is a temporary respite for the maoists to assess the situation and prepare accordingly.
:lol:

Ok then.

As you know, not willing to compromise with oppression makes you a sectarian.

[bolshevik butcher]

Well, looking at the maoist stance on oppression it usually makes you a revisionist :P

I support the maoists over the monarchy but I fear that if they follow the traditional maoist line they will just form another isolationist oppressive state.

[JKP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 11:21 PM
I would like to strongly commend the leadership of the Maoist revolution in Nepal.

I think this is a reality check for many who would maintain a strict (orthodox, fundamental, zealous) interpretation of communism (in any one of its many forms). The truth of the matter is that Prachanda knows more about leading and fighting revolutions than any of us. He has also (apperently) realized that at some point it becomes neccassary to compromise, yes even with our enemies, in the name of the peoples interest.

To reiterate a past point: overcoming feudalism is more important than dogmatica commitment to ideology.

The reason that they have decided to compromise with fascists ( in my opinion) is there responsible decision to unify peoples, by joining their voice with the voice of opposition parties in calling for a more widely accepted sollution to the problems in nepal. The war hastn helped the people of nepal...9 years is enough. Move on to new approaches...after all, it is the Nepalese people who matter most.
I get it now. So it's not pandering to exploiters, it more of a "great step foward for the revolution" right?

Kind of like how Mao, with his infallible leadership, took a giant step foward by hanging out with imperialists like Tricky Dick right?

Right?

http://www.archives.nysed.gov/projects/legacies/Images/syrimages/syrCh_images/NixonMao.jpg





I support the maoists over the monarchy but I fear that if they follow the traditional maoist line they will just form another isolationist oppressive state.

That's kind of the point though; regardless of rhetoric.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 05:48 PM
Kind of like how Mao, with his infallible leadership, took a giant step foward by hanging out with imperialists like Tricky Dick right?

Right?
I'd have thought that you'd have approved of Mao meeting Nixon. This was after all another step towards the death of Leninism and the emergence of modern capital in China. ;)

[Delirium]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 07:21 AM

I think this is a reality check for many who would maintain a strict (orthodox, fundamental, zealous) interpretation of communism (in any one of its many forms).
Do no speak of communism as a religion. I would use dogmatic.

On the larger question i believe that the elections are the correct route to go. When the maoists win as they will, it will only show the world that the people of nepal support the maoists. Even the most slippery of capitalist governments cannot deny the result of free elections.

[JKP]

Originally posted by ComradeOm+Nov 28 2005, 09:54 AM--> (ComradeOm @ Nov 28 2005, 09:54 AM)
[email protected] 28 2005, 05:48 PM
Kind of like how Mao, with his infallible leadership, took a giant step foward by hanging out with imperialists like Tricky Dick right?

Right?
I'd have thought that you'd have approved of Mao meeting Nixon. This was after all another step towards the death of Leninism and the emergence of modern capital in China. ;) [/b]


Communism can only blossom from the ruins of a capitalist society.


Even the most slippery of capitalist governments cannot deny the result of free elections.

Sure they can. They'll just have the C.I.A overthrow it and install a dictatorship.

[bolshevik butcher]

Yeh, dont forget about chile and what they tried to do in venezuela.

[Delirium]

You guys are correct, what the fuck was i thinking? I guess i was feeling idealistic.

[Red Heretic]

That article is total BULLSHIT! Chairman Prachanda refuted these lies.

We haven't given up republicanism: Prachanda


KOL Report

KATHMANDU, Nov 25 - Chairman of the Communist Party of Nepal, Pushpa Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda has said that his party has not given up its agenda of republicanism.

"The publicity that we have given up (the agenda of) republicanism can only be a result of not understanding the spirit of the understanding at all. Because, in the understanding, the issue of constituent assembly has been mentioned without any conditions attached to it," Prachanda said in an interview to Krishnasen Online today.

Prachanda's remarks have come at a time when the 12-point understanding reached between the seven mainstream parties and Maoist rebels is being interpreted as the Maoists agreeing to give up their republican agenda.

"Thus, there is no question of it (constituent assembly elections demand without any precondition) creating any problem in moving ahead with our immediate policy of republicanism with determination or we giving up or have given up (the demand of) republicanism," Prachanda said in the interview.

According to him, the "main spirit of the understanding is to create a storm of agitation against autocratic monarchy, form an interim government and create a new people's Nepal by the restructuring of the state through an election to a constituent assembly."

"In other words, its spirit is to establish the sovereign right of the people to decide their own fate and future and to sweep away feudalist autocracy," Prachanda said.

"Objectively and ultimately, the main spirit of the understanding is not to seek compromise with any kind of monarchy but to generate widespread struggle against it," he added.

Responding to a question as to how an understanding between the Maoists spearheading an armed rebellion and the political parties leading a peaceful agitation was possible, Prachanda said, "The understanding stands on the foundation of the historic need of democracy and peace."

"We think that this understanding is in itself a preliminary coalition between the republicanism of the masses and the political parties aspiring for peace. We do not understand why some people fear from the use of the word coalition. Certainly, if all sides move forward the gravity of the subject in a responsible manner, this understanding can rise to a long-term front," the Maoist supremo has said in the interview.

He has also ruled out the possibility of any compromise with the monarchy. "From the end of autocratic monarchy and the establishment of absolute democracy (as mentioned in the 12-point parties-Maoist understanding), our party, certainly does not mean it will compromise for ceremonial monarchy and there is nothing in the understanding that gives that meaning," he said.

However, he said that his party is committed to accept a constituent assembly election conducted in a free, fair and peaceful manner and its result, adding, "the understanding carries this very spirit."

In the interview, Prachanda has also explained the "new peaceful political stream" mentioned in the understanding. "The political stream (that will be) created by the people through the constituent assembly elections is the new political stream."

On the question of whether or not his party would extend the ceasefire, Prachanda said, "Our party is yet to take a concrete decision whether to break the ceasefire or to extend it. The Party HQ will make a decision after considering the overall situation."

He, however, said that government actions like "killing unarmed Maoist activists, abducting them and terrorizing them..." were forcing him to take a "hard decision", adding that the breakdown of the ceasefire will not affect the understanding his party has reached with the seven mainstream parties.

"We have done enough discussion with the parties regarding this. Therefore, even if the ceasefire is broken, it will not have any effect on the understanding," he said.

[Janus]

I doubt the king will compromise at all with Prachanda. The Maoists' purpose is to topple the king and this current extension toward the monarchy may just be a pretension in order to steer public opinion away from the king. If it isn't, then the Maoists will have taken a major gamble by calling for a constitutional assembly and still allow the authoritarian king to hold onto power.

[Delirium]

True but I think that the majority of the people of nepal will vote for the opposition partys rather than a monarch which has limited thier human rights. (Assuming it is a fair election.)

[bolshevik butcher]

Yeh, the government would probably just get dissolved though. As long as a monarchy has a large influence chances for democracy are slim.