Prachanda Caves In

[CCCPneubauten]

Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
:o

I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.

[Comrade Don]

Well he stuck to his word, Prachanda said when he started the revolution that all they wanted was a end to the monarchy.

If anything this shows that he is a man of his word, and will be admired more by the people of Nepal, I can see Nepal being a true success story.

[Severian]

Yeah, I was just going to start a thread on this.

If you were under the illusion the Communist Party of Nepal(Maoist) represented some kind of revolutionary force, this agreement to join a coalition government with the capitalists would be a total sellout.

In reality, it's a positive step forward towards a negotiated settlement of a bloody civil war. Which helps clear the way for further steps forward by working people in the aftermath of the massive wave of popular protests which swept away the absolute monarchy regime recently.

The overall pattern in recent weeks includes: significant steps forward by the government, under popular pressure. (Control of army transferred from monarch to parliamentary government; Nepal declared a secular state, etc.) Agreement by the government to most of the Maoists' stated demands, like a constituent assembly. Rapid progress of the negotiations. This latest deal on the interim government is a good example.

The Nepalese Army (formerly Royal Nepalese Army) is going along with everything so far, even saying a merger of the two armies would be possible.

Anyway, news:
BBC: Maoists to join Nepal government (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/5085760.stm)

Text of the 8-point agreement on setting up the interim government (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=76803)
Kantipur is a good Nepali newspaper, BTW; probably the most pro-democracy of the major papers there.

The bloodshed and intimidation by the official and Maoist armies has tended to drive working people out of politics; the end of the war would do the opposite.

This may be already starting to happen:
Reuters: Fear starts to lift in rural Nepal after peace deal (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/DEL234924.htm)

Ram Kumar Jaisawal says the people of his tiny village on Nepal's baking southern plains would never have had the courage to speak out against Maoist rebels a few days ago.

But after a landmark peace deal between the government and rebels on Friday, the people of Maoist-dominated rural Nepal might gradually be finding their voices again.

Shortly after news of the deal filtered through, dozens of men and women gathered in a grove of mango trees in Betahani to protest against the Maoists and a commander who they say is intimidating them and extorting money.

"There is tremendous fear," said 50-year-old farmer Jaisawal. "But since there is some unity between the government and the Maoists, now we think we can speak to the party and be heard."
.....
"When they hold meetings, they come with a big stick and say you must attend or pay us money," said a farmer from Ramawapur village on the fertile Terai plains, bordering India. "When there is voting, people will vote for them out of fear."
.....
"Until they deposit their weapons, we will be scared of them," said the farmer, sitting on a rope bed outside his home, which had an ornately carved door but no electricity. Reluctant to give his name, he said he would not have spoken out at all before the ceasefire.

[EusebioScrib]

It's no suprise. I mean who ever believed that Prachanda was an actual communist? He's just a bourgeois revolutionary who wanted to end the Monarchy(= Feudalism) so a democratic-republic hence capitalism, could be established more properly.

[Janus]

The thing is that the monarchy hasn't even been totally abolished yey since the PM stopped this from happening.

This isn't really surprising at all as Prachanda has always talked about multi-party democracy and never ruled out the Maoists rejoining the system. If the Maoists disarm, then they will be fully reintegrated into the parliamentary system. I don't see how Prachanda hopes to establish his socialist state after multi-party democracy.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2006, 10:28 AM
I don't see how Prachanda hopes to establish his socialist state after multi-party democracy.
You mean, his Nepal Rouge / Shining Path state? He doesn't, but neither is there any realistic prospect of doing so any other way. That's why they made the deal with the 7 parties, and why the negotiations are continuing to advance.

They do hope to become a substantial parliamentary party, I think. The difficulty is, how realistic is that, with the popular resentment of their terrorism? Hard to say: in the vacuum caused by the lack of a revolutionary party, some people may continue to support the CPN(Maoist) as the most radical-seeming alternative.

Because of this uncertainty, elements of the CPN(Maoist) will probably try to drag their feet in negotiations, retain their weapons and ability to intimidate the peasants to vote for them, etc. Since they may doubt that they can remain a significant force otherwise....which implies certain material personal interests for cadres.

[More Fire for the People]

I wouldn't say that the Maoists have caved in. More like they're probably low on arms and are taking advantage of the fact that the Nepalese government shits itself in fear of the Maoists.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

The Nepalese Army (formerly Royal Nepalese Army) is going along with everything so far, even saying a merger of the two armies would be possible.

What are the two armies?

The Nepalese Army and..?

[Severian]

Ah. They "shit themselves in fear" over an organisation which is "probably low on arms"? Congrats on contradicting yourself within one sentence.

In reality, the military situation is hopelessly stalemated, due to the essential nature of guerilla warfare and the Nepal Rouge's inability to move on to anything else. This was an essential condition for the opposition-Maoist alliance and everything else that's happened recently.

As far back as February, in this interview with Prachandra (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=46166), he was not expressing any hope for an outright military victory, but pinning everything on the alliance with the opposition parties.

See also my comments, and quotes from Maoists, in this February thread. (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=46448) Pretty good predictions if I say so myself.

[More Fire for the People]

Ah. They "shit themselves in fear" over an organisation which is "probably low on arms"? Congrats on contradicting yourself within one sentence.
Loyalty in-itself can be nearly as powerful as arms.


...the military situation is hopelessly stalemated, due to the essential nature of guerilla warfare...
I agree. Guerrilla warfare without urban insurrection is a failure.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2006, 01:07 PM


The Nepalese Army (formerly Royal Nepalese Army) is going along with everything so far, even saying a merger of the two armies would be possible.

What are the two armies?

The Nepalese Army and..?
The Maoists' army, of course.

[Janus]

In reality, the military situation is hopelessly stalemated, due to the essential nature of guerilla warfare and the Nepal Rouge's inability to move on to anything else.
Severian is right. Even Prachanda showed doubts about a military takeover. That's why the 7 party alliance was needed but he didn't really pin everything on the alliance if I remember correctly. More or less, he continued to pin his hopes on the people.


Guerrilla warfare without urban insurrection is a failure.
But there has been urban violence and protests.


You mean, his Nepal Rouge / Shining Path state? He doesn't, but neither is there any realistic prospect of doing so any other way. That's why they made the deal with the 7 parties, and why the negotiations are continuing to advance.
I'm simply confused on whether Prachanda hopes that a multi-party democracy will evolve into a socialist state or whether he plans to actually take over militarily and establish a socialist state.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2006, 03:07 AM
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
:o

I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.

[Hiero]

The Maoist have already won a military victory. The government army can only move freely in 3 regions in Nepal. The government army hasn't won a major battle for a long time. Basically the Maoist have won the military vitory. Now if they are going to win the political victory and secure the future of socialsim in Nepal they need to build Nepal into a strong country, they need the new democratic revolution.

The Maoist have the reactionaries surrounded, they have no where to go and it is only time till the progressive forces gain a political vitory in the cities.

[Poum_1936]

Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.

Um.. Wow.

This is probably the dumbest, most mechanical interpretation of Historical Materialism I have ever heard.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2006, 10:54 PM

Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.

Um.. Wow.

This is probably the dumbest, most mechanical interpretation of Historical Materialism I have ever heard.
Why don't you explain.

[CCCPneubauten]

Originally posted by Red Heretic+Jun 20 2006, 06:42 AM--> (Red Heretic @ Jun 20 2006, 06:42 AM)
[email protected] 19 2006, 03:07 AM
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
:o

I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism. [/b]
That's true, but when did the New Democratic Revolution happen in China?

I am pretty ignorant of the history of the area, care to suggest any books?

[Burrito]

The rampant armchair quarterbacking here really makes me chortle. I know ya'll don't believe in "Statism" but let's look at the situation realistically for a moment.

(First thing, stop trying to predict the future. Last I checked, clairovoyance was yet to be proven.)

Joining the provisional government gives the CPNM huge influence over the drawing of the next constitution, which is sole purpose of the provisional government. The purpose of the constitiution is to create a framework for a republican government and embark on democratic bourgie revolution - which has yet to happen in Nepal. (Trots: think of 'Transitional Program', sorta.)

It's a massive win the US and other imperialists fought tooth and nail to avoid.

Second, I trust journos and political analysis on the ground in Nepal far more than the SWP's decripiit "analysis" compiled from that oh-so-heady mix of Internet news articles and Barnes' comically sectarian brand of antiquated Trot dogma. Newsflash: Your precious urban insurrection already happened, it's what forced the king to finally relenquish control.

Prachanda hasn't caved into anybody. The CPNM is virtually dragging the SPA every step of the way. Hell the CPNM can barely keep up with the masses at this point.

Finally, just READ this interview:


INTERVIEW WITH PRACHANDA

Excerpts of a recent interview with Chairman of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), Prachanda alias Pushpa Kamal Dahal:

Q. Which name do you prefer to be addressed by- Chairman, Prachanda or Puspa Kamal Dahal?

Prachanda: I prefer Chairman and Prachanda. The name Puspa Kamal Dahal represents a certain culture while the name Prachanda represents a feeling and ideology that intends to take the whole country forward independently. Therefore, I want that all of my friends and the Nepali people recognise me with the name Prachanda.

Q. Your name has caused a big shake-up in the political sector. You remained underground for 25 years. Now you have abandoned the underground life and entered public life. How do you feel?

Prachanda: I had a different life before I went underground. I used to teach Science in High School. I was involved in politics as well. I was a member of the Party. We boycotted the Panchayat elections of 2038 BS. Then I became totally underground. My situation after the 1990 popular movement was almost like it is today. I was open to the media and was not completely underground. A totally new process began after the start of the People's War (in 1996). Now the situation is somewhat similar to 1990.

Q. You have suddenly landed on the liberal political ground from a violent political base, especially after the 12-point understanding with the seven parties. What were the reasons behind the understanding?

Prachanda: Our political base was not that rigid. Ours is a party which had to wage a People's War for just rights despite entering Parliament. We were the third largest party in Parliament.... We lawfully tried to raise some issues- issues related to nationality, people's daily requirements and democracy- even back then. We are not rigid. What we said even after starting the People's War is that we are not communists of the traditional type. Even after the start of the People's War, we have always been ready to accept the people's verdict. We had told the government during the very first peace talks let's hold constituent assembly elections; that the solution to our problem lay there. We were never into rigid politics. We were very much wide and flexible.

Q. You took up arms for political change. Isn't that rigid?

Prachanda: To take up weapons is just a form of politics. I don't think you become rigid once you take up arms. Taking up weapons is also a form of flexibility.

Q. While talking about dialogue and sustainable peace, you once said, in a different context though, that even the king was acceptable?

Prachanda: I didn't say this in that sense. What I had said is we are ready to accept what the people decide through constituent assembly elections. We are ready to accept if the people's verdict is in favour of the king or monarchy...The situation was different when Birendra was the king. In our understanding, the relevance of king and monarchy ended after the royal palace massacre.

Q. You said the relevance is over. But you twice held talks with the governments of the same irrelevant king. What was the compulsion?

Prachanda: The relevance is over indeed. Right after the royal palace massacre, we said the institutional development of republicanism was necessary in Nepal. We are still firm and clear on this stand. As regards to the issue of talks; a war was on between two forces. The initiatives for talks had been taken to avoid further bloodshed between the two sides. It didn't mean we accepted the relevance of monarchy.... When the UML and Deuba were in power last time, we said we would hold talks with the master not with the servants. Because we thought talks would mean something only if we knew who had the real power. Enough talking was done with the parties. But nothing happened.

Q. Who first saw the need for the 12-point understanding after the king began his direct rule- you or the parties?

Prachanda: On our part, we had seen the historic importance of the unity between our party and the parliamentary parties right after the royal palace massacre. But the seven parties didn't listen to us. We had said also in the Siliguri (India) meeting that a working unity was needed between the parties and us. On their part, the seven parties, too, couldn't do much for the people in the democratic period. The parliamentary parties were so much indulged in their power games that they could not grasp what we were trying to say, or let's say we could not make them understand properly. Their situation was totally different after February 1, 2005. Then the seven parties came and we signed the 12-point understanding.

Q. Had any international power pushed you or the seven parties towards each other?

Prachanda: It's both. If you talk negatively, Gyanendra pushed us towards each other. His negative actions pushed us towards each other. I doubt if this change would have come, hadn't some international powers, mainly India, urged us (Maoists and parties) to "do something" jointly. Had the seven parties somebody who could think independently, the country would have been different right after the royal palace massacre. The country would not have suffered this much, had there been leaders who could think for themselves. This time, India helped the 12-point understanding in a positive way.

Q. To the seven parties?

Prachanda: Let's not say seven parties; mainly the UML and the Nepali Congress.

Q. But no understanding seems to be building between you and the UML?

Prachanda: It is building as per the need. They, too, are in the seven-party alliance, apparently. Let's say it's building. But they might be thinking that they would lose their ground if we enter peaceful politics. In our opinion, it's a narrow-minded thought. Let me tell you one thing, our talks team was in Kathmandu during the first round of talks. We were raising the issue of constituent assembly. There was a wave of encouragement among the people. The then Prime Minister Deuba was not in a position to do anything on the issue of constituent assembly. After we realised that the peace talks were going nowhere, we planned to attack Dang. After the attacks in Dang, the UML leaders became happy. May be they thought that it would be a great loss to the UML if we entered peaceful politics. But this was not on our mind. We were concerned about giving an outlet to the crisis and taking the country forward. They thought "Thank God! You saved us" when we attacked Dang.

Q. A huge shakeup took place after the 12-point understanding. The House of Representatives was restored and it took a lot of decisions. You have come out in public and look very calm and relaxed. It seems as if you are eagerly enjoying the talks. What is the truth?

Prachanda: This is not the truth. Though it looks that way, it's not like that. The 12-point understanding was reached after a lot of hard work. This is something our party had been thinking about for the past four years. Our Indian friends had contacted and talked with us before the king's coup. We were in Rolpa then. But the right environment for it was created only after Gyanendra took over on February 1. There isn't that much brainwork done by the seven parties behind the 12-point understanding. It would have been great had this understanding been built on their (seven parties') own vision. The understanding lacks depth as it was formed amidst the negative moves of Gyanendra and India's advice (to the seven parties and Maoists) to move ahead positively. We had told the seven parties when they put forward the House restoration issue that this will provide the king and monarchy a back door. Even among the seven parties, six were not in favour of House restoration. But the Nepali Congress could not give up this slogan. Girijababu could not abandon it. We knew that a design was hidden in this (House restoration) slogan...We knew this a year before the 12-point understanding was reached. We went ahead with the understanding despite knowing this. We had no other alternative to agitate the Nepali people to a new level of awareness.

Q. Dialogue with India was on while you were still in Rolpa, before the King's coup?

Prachanda: We were in direct contact. Indian friends were there. They said the House should be restored. We said House restoration had no relevance. It is our conclusion that the people have stood up now in this fashion because of the 10-year long People's War and the 12-point understanding. The people stood up under the cover of the 12-point understanding because a direct confrontation through the People's War would lead to much bloodshed. House restoration was not the people's demand. This was not even on their mind. We have taken it (House restoration) as a recurrence of what happened in 1951. Therefore the people still need to be alert.

Q. But the mass movement has stopped?

Prachanda: Rather than saying the movement stopped, let's say it was time to change its form. There was no situation for the movement to go on the way it was going. It was slightly divided as well. There was a change in the political situation.

Q. How can the talks move forward in such an artificial environment?

Prachanda: This thing is very important. We will stick to the dialogue process till the end. It is our objective that a peaceful outlet is found. But the seven-party leaders are creating an artificial environment. They are doing the opposite. Not respecting the people's feelings. We want to keep the pressure on from the ground... If the talks fail, there will definitely be an October Revolution of its own kind in Nepal. We are ready to lead that revolution.

Q. This means you are ready to wait till October?

Prachanda: What I mean, in clear words, is that if the seven parties do not understand by October, then the situation will move towards an October Revolution.

Q. How optimistic are you? Do you doubt Girija Prasad Koirala's honesty?

Prachanda: Rather than Koirala's honesty, how he will run the politics is the major thing. In my first meeting with him three years back, I had told him "You accept a republic, we will accept multiparty. Then the country will become new. Let's make a new Nepal." He had replied immediately, "Congress cannot go for a republic right now." He is still where he was three years back. He mentioned ceremonial king only yesterday. But this ceremonial thing doesn't work in Nepal. This proves how much rigid he is. This concept of a ceremonial king will not work- one, because of the army, and two, because of the king's own character.

Q. Do you personally feel that the talks will be successful?

Prachanda: I don't think the seven-party leaders are in favour of making the talks successful. And I don't think the international power centres, too, are in favour of giving Nepal and Nepalis a forward-looking exit from the current crisis by making the talks successful. To tell you directly, I haven't seen the signs for the talks to be successful. But again, the Nepali people want the talks to be successful and our party, too, wants the same. It depends on how much the people's and our party's initiatives can be taken forward. The talks will be successful if the pressure can be increased.

Q. What kind of republicanism is it that you have been talking about?

Prachanda: There shouldn't be the parliamentary republicanism, which is in practice in other countries, in Nepal. That doesn't solve the problem. There's no question of an autocracy. We need a republicanism of our own kind.

Q. You have envisioned a people's republic, no?

Prachanda: Mao Zedong's People's Republic cannot fulfill the needs of today's world. It cannot address today's political awareness appropriately. Mao said cooperative party theory; we called it competitive party theory. We have said let's move ahead from the conventional People's Republic and develop it as per the specialties of the 21st century.

Q. You do not follow the old concept of communism?

Prachanda: Definitely not. What happened without competition? In the USSR, Stalin gave no place to competition and went ahead in a monolithic way. What was the result?

Q. Let's talk about the economy. The 21st century world is a free-market world. How do you see the open market economic policy?

Prachanda: The economy should not be given a free rein in the name of a free market. We should take the middle way. Words like libralisation and globalisation are being much touted these days. But if you look at it closely, the very supporters of these theories have not implemented it in their own countries. The most powerful countries and America themselves have not implemented it. They have referred it to the poorest countries. Competition has been referred to undeveloped countries. We are against that policy. It's not right.

Q. The country's resources haven't increased. The number of mouths to feed has. In such a situation, do you think the country's development is as easy as you are saying?

Prachanda: I think development is not that difficult a thing. The main thing is what policies and plans the state adopts and what kind of programmes it brings forward for the millions of people. This is the main thing. One hundred years back, we were very much self-dependent. We were not economically weaker than others. If you compare us with many countries of the world, you will know that we are not weak. Others kept progressing and we kept going downhill. We have serious problems in the policies adopted by the state. What I think is if the state has the right programmes and vision, then there are only 200 million mouths but 400 hands. If the 400 million hands are put to work in the right way, imagine where this could take the country in 10 years.

However, we have to cut down certain things to save money. I have been saying that we do not need this 90 thousand-strong army. We can cut it down by 80 thousand. 10 thousand is enough. And then see how much capital we will have. It's not out of any personal grudge that we want to abolish the monarchy. They have amassed hundreds of billions of rupees. Imagine the kind of capital we will have if that is nationalised. Won't miracles happen if we then mobilise the 400 million hands? We can earn millions from our herbs. We have so much Yarchagumba. Let's open processing factories where it is found. Thousands will get jobs and we can earn hundreds of millions of rupees. Money will start growing there.

Q. You just mentioned about decommissioning the army. What will happen to your army?

Prachanda: The same for the Liberation Army. I have also been training them now. There is no use of increasing the number of our army, either. We don't have the status to beat the Indian or the Chinese army even with our 30 thousand and the 90 thousand-strong royal army. We don't have the status to beat anyone. You go through history; the only thing the Nepali Army has done after the Sugauli Treaty is to kill the people. We can ensure security by forming the people into a militia. If all citizens are made to undergo a five-year military training, there will be 250 million soldiers ready. Once that army is ready, even if India or China attacks, we can save the country. But even if we make a 500 thousand-strong army and keep it in barracks, it cannot fight anyone. What's the use of it?

Q. That means the management of arms and armies will not be a stumbling block on the way to a constituent assembly?

Prachanda: In my opinion, it will not and should not. If the seven-party leaders are really serious about the country, peace and development, this problem will not come. It will not come from our side. We are going to put forward this proposal. I have already talked about it. Let's cut down the armies of both sides. Let's train the people into a militia. The militia will maintain law and order. Let's keep the army only to train the people.

Q. Business people, industrialists and entrepreneurs are a little concerned about you. Their fear is if you can give them so many problems as a powerful party, you will squeeze them once in power.

Prachanda: We encourage those who want to develop industries in the country, create jobs, make profits and invest the profits in the country. We are organising a national meet of the capitalists. There, we will invite even those who disagree with us. We want that Nepal's capital does not go outside. We are clear that there will be no development in Nepal unless the capitalists can make some profit. But let that profit not be through exploitation and let it also not go abroad. We are also going to propose to the capitalists to invest where the most profit can be made. We should introduce a strict law to stop those who earn here and deposit the money in America or India.

http://kantipuronline.com/interview.php?&nid=77214

[Cheung Mo]

When I read about farmers being "oppressed" by the Maoists, I think of rich Brahmin fucks crying their eyes out because they have to share with the unwashed masses.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

From what I have read, they kidnap peasants so as to force them to indoctrination meetings.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2006, 03:24 AM
From what I have read, they kidnap peasants so as to force them to indoctrination meetings.
From your maid?

Seriously shut up with wild accusation, at least say "the bourgeois sources claim the Maoist kidnap peasants".

edit: changed mum to maid.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Okay now you crossed a line!

Don't you ever talk about my mom, and don't you ever tell me to shut up! Learn some manners.

Ideally you should be ashamed.

[barista.marxista]

It's cute how the Stalinists are all excited about Pranchanda's "glorious" liberal victory. :lol:

[Mesijs]

Originally posted by Hiero+Jun 21 2006, 05:16 PM--> (Hiero @ Jun 21 2006, 05:16 PM)
[email protected] 22 2006, 03:24 AM
From what I have read, they kidnap peasants so as to force them to indoctrination meetings.
From your mum?

Seriously shut up with wild accusation, at least say "the bourgeois sources claim the Maoist kidnap peasants". [/b]
What kind of dumb post is this? Please stop calling everything against your beloved Maoists bourgeois and unreliable etc.

There are a lot of eyewitness accounts. Read any (major) newspaper or (major) (political) magazine. When you think these are all pure lies and that Prachanda's men are actually utopian people creating paradise on earth, you must be REALLY ignorant.

Also insulting a person by naming one's mum is very immature.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2006, 04:39 AM
Okay now you crossed a line!

Don't you ever talk about my mom, and don't you ever tell me to shut up! Learn some manners.

Ideally you should be ashamed.
You should be ashamed of thinking you could get away with making a accusation in a political forum and not referencing it. Then you should be ashamed again that your reply didn't help prove the accusation, so i can assume that maybe your mum did tell you that Maoist are kidnaping peasants.


It's cute how the Stalinists are all excited about Pranchanda's "glorious" liberal victory.

Yeah real "cute" that we are happy that everyday peasants will be able to stop major combat, that women will free from religion and patraichy, that all children will be able to go to schools in this new Nepalese society, that Nepal is on the way to building the foundations to socialism. That doens't sound so cute at all, it sounds a bit like supporting a communist movement.


There are a lot of eyewitness accounts. Read any (major) newspaper or (major) (political) magazine. When you think these are all pure lies and that Prachanda's men are actually utopian people creating paradise on earth, you must be REALLY ignorant.

Well they are the bourgeois sources. And all i have read is claims that Maoist were kidnaping urban students, which turned out wasn't the case. The Maoist were holding meetings to unsuspected students, but no one was forced or hurt and everyone was allowed to leave.

The very idea that the Maoist are kidnaping peasants and forcing them to fight the war is unrealistic. There is no possible way that a political party which came from a small base could enforce such slavery. The fact is that peasants are the maoist base, that they have accepted the leadership of the Maoist party, that they will benifit from land reform and social reform. Your just going to have to accept that 3rd world movements are out of your hands and are not going to abide by some unrealistic expectations as to what is revolutionary.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2006, 04:39 AM
Okay now you crossed a line!

Don't you ever talk about my mom, and don't you ever tell me to shut up! Learn some manners.

Ideally you should be ashamed.
You should be ashamed of thinking you could get away with making a accusation in a political forum and not referencing it. Then you should be ashamed again that your reply didn't help prove the accusation, so i can assume that maybe your mum did tell you that Maoist are kidnaping peasants.


It's cute how the Stalinists are all excited about Pranchanda's "glorious" liberal victory.

Yeah real "cute" that we are happy that everyday peasants will be able to stop major combat, that women will free from religion and patraichy, that all children will be able to go to schools in this new Nepalese society, that Nepal is on the way to building the foundations to socialism. That doens't sound so cute at all, it sounds a bit like supporting a communist movement.


There are a lot of eyewitness accounts. Read any (major) newspaper or (major) (political) magazine. When you think these are all pure lies and that Prachanda's men are actually utopian people creating paradise on earth, you must be REALLY ignorant.

Well they are the bourgeois sources. And all i have read is claims that Maoist were kidnaping urban students, which turned out wasn't the case. The Maoist were holding meetings to unsuspected students, but no one was forced or hurt and everyone was allowed to leave.

The very idea that the Maoist are kidnaping peasants and forcing them to fight the war is unrealistic. There is no possible way that a political party which came from a small base could enforce such slavery. The fact is that peasants are the maoist base, that they have accepted the leadership of the Maoist party, that they will benifit from land reform and social reform. Your just going to have to accept that 3rd world movements are out of your hands and are not going to abide by some unrealistic expectations as to what is revolutionary.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2006, 04:39 AM
Okay now you crossed a line!

Don't you ever talk about my mom, and don't you ever tell me to shut up! Learn some manners.

Ideally you should be ashamed.
You should be ashamed of thinking you could get away with making a accusation in a political forum and not referencing it. Then you should be ashamed again that your reply didn't help prove the accusation, so i can assume that maybe your mum did tell you that Maoist are kidnaping peasants.


It's cute how the Stalinists are all excited about Pranchanda's "glorious" liberal victory.

Yeah real "cute" that we are happy that everyday peasants will be able to stop major combat, that women will free from religion and patraichy, that all children will be able to go to schools in this new Nepalese society, that Nepal is on the way to building the foundations to socialism. That doens't sound so cute at all, it sounds a bit like supporting a communist movement.


There are a lot of eyewitness accounts. Read any (major) newspaper or (major) (political) magazine. When you think these are all pure lies and that Prachanda's men are actually utopian people creating paradise on earth, you must be REALLY ignorant.

Well they are the bourgeois sources. And all i have read is claims that Maoist were kidnaping urban students, which turned out wasn't the case. The Maoist were holding meetings to unsuspected students, but no one was forced or hurt and everyone was allowed to leave.

The very idea that the Maoist are kidnaping peasants and forcing them to fight the war is unrealistic. There is no possible way that a political party which came from a small base could enforce such slavery. The fact is that peasants are the maoist base, that they have accepted the leadership of the Maoist party, that they will benifit from land reform and social reform. Your just going to have to accept that 3rd world movements are out of your hands and are not going to abide by some unrealistic expectations as to what is revolutionary.

[TC]

CCCPneubauten writes
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.


I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.


This was always the plan, the government realizes that its been defeated militarily in the countryside and the streets of the capital have turned on it, its not trying to resist anymore because it would just lead to a blood bath that it would lose, so the fmr. royal nepali government is essentially allowing for a maoist takeover. To have the Maoists join the interim government so they can supervise the drafting of a new constitution under their own terms is nothing less than a surrender to the Maoists.

Severian writes

If you were under the illusion the Communist Party of Nepal(Maoist) represented some kind of revolutionary force, this agreement to join a coalition government with the capitalists would be a total sellout.

They're just taking state control with the minimual amount of violence necessary as the government has capitulated to all of their demands. They'll be in the position to rewrite the constitution to a socialist, secular republic. The royal hindu nepali government no longer exists as a viable state, only the Maoists have state power.

Red Heretic writes


Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.


Absolutely right.

Hiero writes

Now if they are going to win the political victory and secure the future of socialsim in Nepal they need to build Nepal into a strong country, they need the new democratic revolution
Right, and any free vote, supervised by the Maoists in the interim government, for a constitutional assembly will favor communists writing the constitution, because like in Vietnam, people with a revolutionary conciousness in a society where the old power structure has already been eliminated will vote for their own interests, which means for democratic socialism.

Poum 1936

This is probably the dumbest, most mechanical interpretation of Historical Materialism I have ever heard.

Um, i doubt you'd know, since you're not even using the phrase in a way that makes sense. He wasn't making an interpretation of historical materialism, which you'd know if you understood the concept, he was describing a strategy for revolution in feudal countries.

barista."marxista" writes

It's cute how the Stalinists are all excited about Pranchanda's "glorious" liberal victory.

Yah, thats right. Almost 30 million people will be free of the fuedalistic hindu caste system which has kept them in virtual slavery under an absolute monarchy supported by a hereditary aristocratic caste for centuries, treating women as sub-human property and lower caste majority as natural inferiors with no control over their lives or work. In the real world, where real revolutions happen, oppressed people take back their socities from the ruling elites by the means that work, marxist-leninist-maoist people's war and the establishment of a democratic workers state; they don't have the luxery of your 19th century unmaterialist ideology.

Whens the last time you guys have had a 'victory', how about never?

Mesijs writes

What kind of dumb post is this? Please stop calling everything against your beloved Maoists bourgeois and unreliable etc.


If you haven't noticed, the bourgeois media happens to make a lot of unsourced, unsited, highly speculative claims...do you like, not read the news, or do you just do it uncritically?

[TC]

CCCPneubauten writes
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.


I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.


This was always the plan, the government realizes that its been defeated militarily in the countryside and the streets of the capital have turned on it, its not trying to resist anymore because it would just lead to a blood bath that it would lose, so the fmr. royal nepali government is essentially allowing for a maoist takeover. To have the Maoists join the interim government so they can supervise the drafting of a new constitution under their own terms is nothing less than a surrender to the Maoists.

Severian writes

If you were under the illusion the Communist Party of Nepal(Maoist) represented some kind of revolutionary force, this agreement to join a coalition government with the capitalists would be a total sellout.

They're just taking state control with the minimual amount of violence necessary as the government has capitulated to all of their demands. They'll be in the position to rewrite the constitution to a socialist, secular republic. The royal hindu nepali government no longer exists as a viable state, only the Maoists have state power.

Red Heretic writes


Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.


Absolutely right.

Hiero writes

Now if they are going to win the political victory and secure the future of socialsim in Nepal they need to build Nepal into a strong country, they need the new democratic revolution
Right, and any free vote, supervised by the Maoists in the interim government, for a constitutional assembly will favor communists writing the constitution, because like in Vietnam, people with a revolutionary conciousness in a society where the old power structure has already been eliminated will vote for their own interests, which means for democratic socialism.

Poum 1936

This is probably the dumbest, most mechanical interpretation of Historical Materialism I have ever heard.

Um, i doubt you'd know, since you're not even using the phrase in a way that makes sense. He wasn't making an interpretation of historical materialism, which you'd know if you understood the concept, he was describing a strategy for revolution in feudal countries.

barista."marxista" writes

It's cute how the Stalinists are all excited about Pranchanda's "glorious" liberal victory.

Yah, thats right. Almost 30 million people will be free of the fuedalistic hindu caste system which has kept them in virtual slavery under an absolute monarchy supported by a hereditary aristocratic caste for centuries, treating women as sub-human property and lower caste majority as natural inferiors with no control over their lives or work. In the real world, where real revolutions happen, oppressed people take back their socities from the ruling elites by the means that work, marxist-leninist-maoist people's war and the establishment of a democratic workers state; they don't have the luxery of your 19th century unmaterialist ideology.

Whens the last time you guys have had a 'victory', how about never?

Mesijs writes

What kind of dumb post is this? Please stop calling everything against your beloved Maoists bourgeois and unreliable etc.


If you haven't noticed, the bourgeois media happens to make a lot of unsourced, unsited, highly speculative claims...do you like, not read the news, or do you just do it uncritically?

[TC]

CCCPneubauten writes
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.


I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.


This was always the plan, the government realizes that its been defeated militarily in the countryside and the streets of the capital have turned on it, its not trying to resist anymore because it would just lead to a blood bath that it would lose, so the fmr. royal nepali government is essentially allowing for a maoist takeover. To have the Maoists join the interim government so they can supervise the drafting of a new constitution under their own terms is nothing less than a surrender to the Maoists.

Severian writes

If you were under the illusion the Communist Party of Nepal(Maoist) represented some kind of revolutionary force, this agreement to join a coalition government with the capitalists would be a total sellout.

They're just taking state control with the minimual amount of violence necessary as the government has capitulated to all of their demands. They'll be in the position to rewrite the constitution to a socialist, secular republic. The royal hindu nepali government no longer exists as a viable state, only the Maoists have state power.

Red Heretic writes


Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.


Absolutely right.

Hiero writes

Now if they are going to win the political victory and secure the future of socialsim in Nepal they need to build Nepal into a strong country, they need the new democratic revolution
Right, and any free vote, supervised by the Maoists in the interim government, for a constitutional assembly will favor communists writing the constitution, because like in Vietnam, people with a revolutionary conciousness in a society where the old power structure has already been eliminated will vote for their own interests, which means for democratic socialism.

Poum 1936

This is probably the dumbest, most mechanical interpretation of Historical Materialism I have ever heard.

Um, i doubt you'd know, since you're not even using the phrase in a way that makes sense. He wasn't making an interpretation of historical materialism, which you'd know if you understood the concept, he was describing a strategy for revolution in feudal countries.

barista."marxista" writes

It's cute how the Stalinists are all excited about Pranchanda's "glorious" liberal victory.

Yah, thats right. Almost 30 million people will be free of the fuedalistic hindu caste system which has kept them in virtual slavery under an absolute monarchy supported by a hereditary aristocratic caste for centuries, treating women as sub-human property and lower caste majority as natural inferiors with no control over their lives or work. In the real world, where real revolutions happen, oppressed people take back their socities from the ruling elites by the means that work, marxist-leninist-maoist people's war and the establishment of a democratic workers state; they don't have the luxery of your 19th century unmaterialist ideology.

Whens the last time you guys have had a 'victory', how about never?

Mesijs writes

What kind of dumb post is this? Please stop calling everything against your beloved Maoists bourgeois and unreliable etc.


If you haven't noticed, the bourgeois media happens to make a lot of unsourced, unsited, highly speculative claims...do you like, not read the news, or do you just do it uncritically?

[Entrails Konfetti]

I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?

[Entrails Konfetti]

I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?

[Entrails Konfetti]

I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?

[TC]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 22 2006, 12:34 AM
I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?
Possibly because Trotskyism is relatively small, an urban, first world movement, with no history of revolutionary success, whereas Maoism is much larger, third world movement proven to work in third world, rural conditions. Also because, historically, trotskyists sell newspapers and hold rallys, maoists shoot soldiers and blow up government buildings.

If you want to overthrow a half-dead provisional government on its last legs, well, traditional marxist-leninist/trotskyist party tactics *might* work in urban settings, provided that there aren't any better organized or more militant parties around you know, it did work *once*...if you want to overthrow a strong feudal government with an effective army, guerrilla war along the Maoist tradition works a lot more consistently.

Anyways i think all of the sectarian identifications of 'maosim' and 'trotskyism', 'anti-revisionism', pro-Hoxha orthodox marxism-leninism (so called 'stalinism'), and so on, are anarchronistic and use flawed not very flexable analysis, but thats sort of besides the point, what matters is whats actually going on and how it works not what they want to call it, and Maoists tend to be very good at producing working marxist-leninist revolutons, not because they call themselves Maoists but because their tactics are effective and their tradition is militant and uncompromising...unlike the trotskyists...who despite in my opinion having more coherent (but still flawed) theory, do not have effective tactics or a history of taking the risks necessary to have a real revolution; so they are simply less relevant today because they accomplish much less.

And, i'm sure this post will have alienated just about everyone...oh well.

[TC]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 22 2006, 12:34 AM
I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?
Possibly because Trotskyism is relatively small, an urban, first world movement, with no history of revolutionary success, whereas Maoism is much larger, third world movement proven to work in third world, rural conditions. Also because, historically, trotskyists sell newspapers and hold rallys, maoists shoot soldiers and blow up government buildings.

If you want to overthrow a half-dead provisional government on its last legs, well, traditional marxist-leninist/trotskyist party tactics *might* work in urban settings, provided that there aren't any better organized or more militant parties around you know, it did work *once*...if you want to overthrow a strong feudal government with an effective army, guerrilla war along the Maoist tradition works a lot more consistently.

Anyways i think all of the sectarian identifications of 'maosim' and 'trotskyism', 'anti-revisionism', pro-Hoxha orthodox marxism-leninism (so called 'stalinism'), and so on, are anarchronistic and use flawed not very flexable analysis, but thats sort of besides the point, what matters is whats actually going on and how it works not what they want to call it, and Maoists tend to be very good at producing working marxist-leninist revolutons, not because they call themselves Maoists but because their tactics are effective and their tradition is militant and uncompromising...unlike the trotskyists...who despite in my opinion having more coherent (but still flawed) theory, do not have effective tactics or a history of taking the risks necessary to have a real revolution; so they are simply less relevant today because they accomplish much less.

And, i'm sure this post will have alienated just about everyone...oh well.

[TC]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 22 2006, 12:34 AM
I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?
Possibly because Trotskyism is relatively small, an urban, first world movement, with no history of revolutionary success, whereas Maoism is much larger, third world movement proven to work in third world, rural conditions. Also because, historically, trotskyists sell newspapers and hold rallys, maoists shoot soldiers and blow up government buildings.

If you want to overthrow a half-dead provisional government on its last legs, well, traditional marxist-leninist/trotskyist party tactics *might* work in urban settings, provided that there aren't any better organized or more militant parties around you know, it did work *once*...if you want to overthrow a strong feudal government with an effective army, guerrilla war along the Maoist tradition works a lot more consistently.

Anyways i think all of the sectarian identifications of 'maosim' and 'trotskyism', 'anti-revisionism', pro-Hoxha orthodox marxism-leninism (so called 'stalinism'), and so on, are anarchronistic and use flawed not very flexable analysis, but thats sort of besides the point, what matters is whats actually going on and how it works not what they want to call it, and Maoists tend to be very good at producing working marxist-leninist revolutons, not because they call themselves Maoists but because their tactics are effective and their tradition is militant and uncompromising...unlike the trotskyists...who despite in my opinion having more coherent (but still flawed) theory, do not have effective tactics or a history of taking the risks necessary to have a real revolution; so they are simply less relevant today because they accomplish much less.

And, i'm sure this post will have alienated just about everyone...oh well.

[LSD]

Well, it's probably a victory, TC, but I would hardly call it a revolutionary one.

Obviously the drafting of a secular liberal republican constitution would be in everyone's interest and would be a monumental step forward from feudal monarchist despotism.

That doesn't mean that Nepal is anywhere approaching the "road to socialism".

These kind of repressed peasant kingdoms are perfect breeding grounds for Maoists idealogues and, as evidenced in this case, bouyed by a strong national desire for liberation, they can even prove quite successful.

But in success, they naturally destroy themselves. And once Nepal is set on a remotely progressive path and violently oppressive feudalism makes way for less oppressive modern capitalism, support for "Maoists" will ineviitably evaporate.

"Socialist" parties can only do so much in third world conditions. Eventually they will advance a country far enough that they are simply no longer needed. Communism or true "democratic socialism", after all, was never even really an option given the socioeconomic conditions in question.

That said, though, there's nothing wrong with acknowleding that any defeat for the Monarchist forces in Nepal is a progressive step forward and even if the rebels identify themselves with that old faker Mao, they are still fighting agaisnt imperialism and a brutally oppressive state.

In the end, this is probably a social democratic victory at best. But that's still a hell of a lot better than the alternative.

[LSD]

Well, it's probably a victory, TC, but I would hardly call it a revolutionary one.

Obviously the drafting of a secular liberal republican constitution would be in everyone's interest and would be a monumental step forward from feudal monarchist despotism.

That doesn't mean that Nepal is anywhere approaching the "road to socialism".

These kind of repressed peasant kingdoms are perfect breeding grounds for Maoists idealogues and, as evidenced in this case, bouyed by a strong national desire for liberation, they can even prove quite successful.

But in success, they naturally destroy themselves. And once Nepal is set on a remotely progressive path and violently oppressive feudalism makes way for less oppressive modern capitalism, support for "Maoists" will ineviitably evaporate.

"Socialist" parties can only do so much in third world conditions. Eventually they will advance a country far enough that they are simply no longer needed. Communism or true "democratic socialism", after all, was never even really an option given the socioeconomic conditions in question.

That said, though, there's nothing wrong with acknowleding that any defeat for the Monarchist forces in Nepal is a progressive step forward and even if the rebels identify themselves with that old faker Mao, they are still fighting agaisnt imperialism and a brutally oppressive state.

In the end, this is probably a social democratic victory at best. But that's still a hell of a lot better than the alternative.

[LSD]

Well, it's probably a victory, TC, but I would hardly call it a revolutionary one.

Obviously the drafting of a secular liberal republican constitution would be in everyone's interest and would be a monumental step forward from feudal monarchist despotism.

That doesn't mean that Nepal is anywhere approaching the "road to socialism".

These kind of repressed peasant kingdoms are perfect breeding grounds for Maoists idealogues and, as evidenced in this case, bouyed by a strong national desire for liberation, they can even prove quite successful.

But in success, they naturally destroy themselves. And once Nepal is set on a remotely progressive path and violently oppressive feudalism makes way for less oppressive modern capitalism, support for "Maoists" will ineviitably evaporate.

"Socialist" parties can only do so much in third world conditions. Eventually they will advance a country far enough that they are simply no longer needed. Communism or true "democratic socialism", after all, was never even really an option given the socioeconomic conditions in question.

That said, though, there's nothing wrong with acknowleding that any defeat for the Monarchist forces in Nepal is a progressive step forward and even if the rebels identify themselves with that old faker Mao, they are still fighting agaisnt imperialism and a brutally oppressive state.

In the end, this is probably a social democratic victory at best. But that's still a hell of a lot better than the alternative.

[Janus]

That's true, but when did the New Democratic Revolution happen in China?
It began after the abdication of the emperor pretty much up to the end of the civil war.

[Janus]

That's true, but when did the New Democratic Revolution happen in China?
It began after the abdication of the emperor pretty much up to the end of the civil war.

[Janus]

That's true, but when did the New Democratic Revolution happen in China?
It began after the abdication of the emperor pretty much up to the end of the civil war.

[Janus]

support for "Maoists" will ineviitably evaporate.
Probably. A lot of their support stems from the fact that they have been at the forefront of the anti-monarchy campaign.


They'll be in the position to rewrite the constitution to a socialist, secular republic. The royal hindu nepali government no longer exists as a viable state, only the Maoists have state power.
There are other parties, namely the 7 party alliance that controls the government right now. I doubt that the Maoists will be able to fully take over and form a socialist state.


Of course, there is always a chance that the Maoists will become dissatisfied with the interim government as they will only become a part of it and return to war.

[Janus]

support for "Maoists" will ineviitably evaporate.
Probably. A lot of their support stems from the fact that they have been at the forefront of the anti-monarchy campaign.


They'll be in the position to rewrite the constitution to a socialist, secular republic. The royal hindu nepali government no longer exists as a viable state, only the Maoists have state power.
There are other parties, namely the 7 party alliance that controls the government right now. I doubt that the Maoists will be able to fully take over and form a socialist state.


Of course, there is always a chance that the Maoists will become dissatisfied with the interim government as they will only become a part of it and return to war.

[Janus]

support for "Maoists" will ineviitably evaporate.
Probably. A lot of their support stems from the fact that they have been at the forefront of the anti-monarchy campaign.


They'll be in the position to rewrite the constitution to a socialist, secular republic. The royal hindu nepali government no longer exists as a viable state, only the Maoists have state power.
There are other parties, namely the 7 party alliance that controls the government right now. I doubt that the Maoists will be able to fully take over and form a socialist state.


Of course, there is always a chance that the Maoists will become dissatisfied with the interim government as they will only become a part of it and return to war.

[Entrails Konfetti]

I haven't heard much on exactly how popular the Maoists are in Nepal, about how popular are they? How much influence would they have in drafting a consitution?

[Entrails Konfetti]

I haven't heard much on exactly how popular the Maoists are in Nepal, about how popular are they? How much influence would they have in drafting a consitution?

[Entrails Konfetti]

I haven't heard much on exactly how popular the Maoists are in Nepal, about how popular are they? How much influence would they have in drafting a consitution?

[Janus]

I haven't heard much on exactly how popular the Maoists are in Nepal, about how popular are they?
They seem to be pretty popular in the countryside and have gained popularity in the cities of late due to their anti-monarchy campaigns.


How much influence would they have in drafting a consitution?
The constitution will be drafted by the constituent assembly. However elections have not begun which has angered the Maoists.

[Janus]

I haven't heard much on exactly how popular the Maoists are in Nepal, about how popular are they?
They seem to be pretty popular in the countryside and have gained popularity in the cities of late due to their anti-monarchy campaigns.


How much influence would they have in drafting a consitution?
The constitution will be drafted by the constituent assembly. However elections have not begun which has angered the Maoists.

[Janus]

I haven't heard much on exactly how popular the Maoists are in Nepal, about how popular are they?
They seem to be pretty popular in the countryside and have gained popularity in the cities of late due to their anti-monarchy campaigns.


How much influence would they have in drafting a consitution?
The constitution will be drafted by the constituent assembly. However elections have not begun which has angered the Maoists.

[Janus]

It seems that one major problem is still present: Maoist disarmament. The Maoists refuse to disarm until elections for the constituent assembly begin and the current government said that the government will not share power with the Maoists until they disarm. So one side may have to give.

[Janus]

It seems that one major problem is still present: Maoist disarmament. The Maoists refuse to disarm until elections for the constituent assembly begin and the current government said that the government will not share power with the Maoists until they disarm. So one side may have to give.

[Janus]

It seems that one major problem is still present: Maoist disarmament. The Maoists refuse to disarm until elections for the constituent assembly begin and the current government said that the government will not share power with the Maoists until they disarm. So one side may have to give.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2006, 03:42 AM
The constitution will be drafted by the constituent assembly. However elections have not begun which has angered the Maoists.
Consituent assemble, you mean the interim government of appointed officials, right? Since the Maoists want to hold elections for a consituent assembly.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2006, 03:42 AM
The constitution will be drafted by the constituent assembly. However elections have not begun which has angered the Maoists.
Consituent assemble, you mean the interim government of appointed officials, right? Since the Maoists want to hold elections for a consituent assembly.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2006, 03:42 AM
The constitution will be drafted by the constituent assembly. However elections have not begun which has angered the Maoists.
Consituent assemble, you mean the interim government of appointed officials, right? Since the Maoists want to hold elections for a consituent assembly.

[Janus]

The constituent assembly exists for the sole purpose of drafting a constitution while the interim government actually wields power.

[Janus]

The constituent assembly exists for the sole purpose of drafting a constitution while the interim government actually wields power.

[Janus]

The constituent assembly exists for the sole purpose of drafting a constitution while the interim government actually wields power.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by CCCPneubauten+Jun 21 2006, 02:18 AM--> (CCCPneubauten @ Jun 21 2006, 02:18 AM)
Originally posted by Red [email protected] 20 2006, 06:42 AM

[email protected] 19 2006, 03:07 AM
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
:o

I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.
That's true, but when did the New Democratic Revolution happen in China?

I am pretty ignorant of the history of the area, care to suggest any books? [/b]
Throughout the entire period before the civil war between the Koumintang and the CCP (about twenty years). Throughout that time period, the proletariat and the national bourgeoisie were allied against fuedalism and against Japanese imperialism.

I highly recommend the account of an American journalist in China called "Red Star Over China" by Edgar Snow. Snow is realistic, mostly unbiased, and completely honest.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by CCCPneubauten+Jun 21 2006, 02:18 AM--> (CCCPneubauten @ Jun 21 2006, 02:18 AM)
Originally posted by Red [email protected] 20 2006, 06:42 AM

[email protected] 19 2006, 03:07 AM
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
:o

I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.
That's true, but when did the New Democratic Revolution happen in China?

I am pretty ignorant of the history of the area, care to suggest any books? [/b]
Throughout the entire period before the civil war between the Koumintang and the CCP (about twenty years). Throughout that time period, the proletariat and the national bourgeoisie were allied against fuedalism and against Japanese imperialism.

I highly recommend the account of an American journalist in China called "Red Star Over China" by Edgar Snow. Snow is realistic, mostly unbiased, and completely honest.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by CCCPneubauten+Jun 21 2006, 02:18 AM--> (CCCPneubauten @ Jun 21 2006, 02:18 AM)
Originally posted by Red [email protected] 20 2006, 06:42 AM

[email protected] 19 2006, 03:07 AM
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
:o

I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.
That's true, but when did the New Democratic Revolution happen in China?

I am pretty ignorant of the history of the area, care to suggest any books? [/b]
Throughout the entire period before the civil war between the Koumintang and the CCP (about twenty years). Throughout that time period, the proletariat and the national bourgeoisie were allied against fuedalism and against Japanese imperialism.

I highly recommend the account of an American journalist in China called "Red Star Over China" by Edgar Snow. Snow is realistic, mostly unbiased, and completely honest.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 22 2006, 12:34 AM
I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?
The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM). The RIM is a world wide union of Maoists which provides ideological leadership and an open forum for the sharing of ideas among Maoist parties. It was founded by the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA and the Peruvian Communist Party.

In addition, the RIM has summed up both the accomplishments and mistakes in past socialist countries, as well as created unity against the capitalist coup in China. It has essentially created an ideological foundation for the founding of revolutionary movements. In addition to the Nepali comrades, the are other active RIM parties in India and Turkey waging people's war, as well as movements to start people's war in Afghanistan and Iran.

Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is essentially the most developed and advanced revolutionary ideology in existence today. It addresses the real changed in the international communist movement such as revisionism and the rise of the world-wide imperialist system. MLM is essentially the only ideology in existence which provides a real way out for oppressed countries like Nepal.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 22 2006, 12:34 AM
I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?
The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM). The RIM is a world wide union of Maoists which provides ideological leadership and an open forum for the sharing of ideas among Maoist parties. It was founded by the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA and the Peruvian Communist Party.

In addition, the RIM has summed up both the accomplishments and mistakes in past socialist countries, as well as created unity against the capitalist coup in China. It has essentially created an ideological foundation for the founding of revolutionary movements. In addition to the Nepali comrades, the are other active RIM parties in India and Turkey waging people's war, as well as movements to start people's war in Afghanistan and Iran.

Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is essentially the most developed and advanced revolutionary ideology in existence today. It addresses the real changed in the international communist movement such as revisionism and the rise of the world-wide imperialist system. MLM is essentially the only ideology in existence which provides a real way out for oppressed countries like Nepal.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by EL [email protected] 22 2006, 12:34 AM
I know this is off topic, but why did they decide to be Maoist, and not Trotskyist or anything else?
The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM). The RIM is a world wide union of Maoists which provides ideological leadership and an open forum for the sharing of ideas among Maoist parties. It was founded by the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA and the Peruvian Communist Party.

In addition, the RIM has summed up both the accomplishments and mistakes in past socialist countries, as well as created unity against the capitalist coup in China. It has essentially created an ideological foundation for the founding of revolutionary movements. In addition to the Nepali comrades, the are other active RIM parties in India and Turkey waging people's war, as well as movements to start people's war in Afghanistan and Iran.

Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is essentially the most developed and advanced revolutionary ideology in existence today. It addresses the real changed in the international communist movement such as revisionism and the rise of the world-wide imperialist system. MLM is essentially the only ideology in existence which provides a real way out for oppressed countries like Nepal.

[Burrito]

The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM).

That may have been true at one time, but I don't think it's the case so much any more. The RCP and the CPNM are at odds over some issues of multi-party politics under the dictatorship of the proletariat (The RCP more or less against, the CPNM more or less for it) as well as some other issues probably.

The RCP, who normally was a rabid cheerleader for every little victory of the CPNM, has been conspicuosly silent (and by RCP I mean prominent RCP supporters' blogs and RCPers I meet in the street.) since the latest developments happened.

It seems that the CPNM is closer to the WPRM (World People's Resistance Movement) lately, so far as I can tell.

[Burrito]

The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM).

That may have been true at one time, but I don't think it's the case so much any more. The RCP and the CPNM are at odds over some issues of multi-party politics under the dictatorship of the proletariat (The RCP more or less against, the CPNM more or less for it) as well as some other issues probably.

The RCP, who normally was a rabid cheerleader for every little victory of the CPNM, has been conspicuosly silent (and by RCP I mean prominent RCP supporters' blogs and RCPers I meet in the street.) since the latest developments happened.

It seems that the CPNM is closer to the WPRM (World People's Resistance Movement) lately, so far as I can tell.

[Burrito]

The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM).

That may have been true at one time, but I don't think it's the case so much any more. The RCP and the CPNM are at odds over some issues of multi-party politics under the dictatorship of the proletariat (The RCP more or less against, the CPNM more or less for it) as well as some other issues probably.

The RCP, who normally was a rabid cheerleader for every little victory of the CPNM, has been conspicuosly silent (and by RCP I mean prominent RCP supporters' blogs and RCPers I meet in the street.) since the latest developments happened.

It seems that the CPNM is closer to the WPRM (World People's Resistance Movement) lately, so far as I can tell.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 05:42 AM


The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM).

That may have been true at one time, but I don't think it's the case so much any more. The RCP and the CPNM are at odds over some issues of multi-party politics under the dictatorship of the proletariat (The RCP more or less against, the CPNM more or less for it) as well as some other issues probably.

The RCP, who normally was a rabid cheerleader for every little victory of the CPNM, has been conspicuosly silent (and by RCP I mean prominent RCP supporters' blogs and RCPers I meet in the street.) since the latest developments happened.

It seems that the CPNM is closer to the WPRM (World People's Resistance Movement) lately, so far as I can tell.
I would really appreciate it if you would not spout of and act like you are speaking for the RCP. Neither you nor I knows what the behind the scenes dialogue between the RCP and the CPNM is, and I'd appreciate if you didn't pretend to know that you did. The RCP is still an ardent suppoerter of the CPNM.

Also, the WPRM is a RIM support group for Europe, and it and the RCP are close allies.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 05:42 AM


The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM).

That may have been true at one time, but I don't think it's the case so much any more. The RCP and the CPNM are at odds over some issues of multi-party politics under the dictatorship of the proletariat (The RCP more or less against, the CPNM more or less for it) as well as some other issues probably.

The RCP, who normally was a rabid cheerleader for every little victory of the CPNM, has been conspicuosly silent (and by RCP I mean prominent RCP supporters' blogs and RCPers I meet in the street.) since the latest developments happened.

It seems that the CPNM is closer to the WPRM (World People's Resistance Movement) lately, so far as I can tell.
I would really appreciate it if you would not spout of and act like you are speaking for the RCP. Neither you nor I knows what the behind the scenes dialogue between the RCP and the CPNM is, and I'd appreciate if you didn't pretend to know that you did. The RCP is still an ardent suppoerter of the CPNM.

Also, the WPRM is a RIM support group for Europe, and it and the RCP are close allies.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 05:42 AM


The CPNM's ideology is based upon the Declaration of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM).

That may have been true at one time, but I don't think it's the case so much any more. The RCP and the CPNM are at odds over some issues of multi-party politics under the dictatorship of the proletariat (The RCP more or less against, the CPNM more or less for it) as well as some other issues probably.

The RCP, who normally was a rabid cheerleader for every little victory of the CPNM, has been conspicuosly silent (and by RCP I mean prominent RCP supporters' blogs and RCPers I meet in the street.) since the latest developments happened.

It seems that the CPNM is closer to the WPRM (World People's Resistance Movement) lately, so far as I can tell.
I would really appreciate it if you would not spout of and act like you are speaking for the RCP. Neither you nor I knows what the behind the scenes dialogue between the RCP and the CPNM is, and I'd appreciate if you didn't pretend to know that you did. The RCP is still an ardent suppoerter of the CPNM.

Also, the WPRM is a RIM support group for Europe, and it and the RCP are close allies.

[Burrito]

First, I'll say whatever the fuck I want. I don't need your "appreciation". Second, Are you an RCP member? (Of course not. I know the modus operandi for RCP supporters - hell I have no guff with it). So, tell me, how do you know they are still ardent supporters?

One thing I forgot to say is that the leaders of the CPNM were seasoned revolutionaries when the RIM statement was proclaimed from their work in the CPNM's predecessor orgs, so it's a bit disingenous to say that their entire ideology is based on the RIM.

[Burrito]

First, I'll say whatever the fuck I want. I don't need your "appreciation". Second, Are you an RCP member? (Of course not. I know the modus operandi for RCP supporters - hell I have no guff with it). So, tell me, how do you know they are still ardent supporters?

One thing I forgot to say is that the leaders of the CPNM were seasoned revolutionaries when the RIM statement was proclaimed from their work in the CPNM's predecessor orgs, so it's a bit disingenous to say that their entire ideology is based on the RIM.

[Burrito]

First, I'll say whatever the fuck I want. I don't need your "appreciation". Second, Are you an RCP member? (Of course not. I know the modus operandi for RCP supporters - hell I have no guff with it). So, tell me, how do you know they are still ardent supporters?

One thing I forgot to say is that the leaders of the CPNM were seasoned revolutionaries when the RIM statement was proclaimed from their work in the CPNM's predecessor orgs, so it's a bit disingenous to say that their entire ideology is based on the RIM.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 06:03 AM
First, I'll say whatever the fuck I want. I don't need your "appreciation". Second, Are you an RCP member? (Of course not. I know the modus operandi for RCP supporters - hell I have no guff with it). So, tell me, how do you know they are still ardent supporters?

One thing I forgot to say is that the leaders of the CPNM were seasoned revolutionaries when the RIM statement was proclaimed from their work in the CPNM's predecessor orgs, so it's a bit disingenous to say that their entire ideology is based on the RIM.
No, I am NOT a member. I'm fucking 17 for chrissakes.

I base my assumption that the RCP and the RIM support the CPNM on articles it has published recently, as well as articles that have been run in the weekly journal "A World to Win."

link (http://revcom.us/a/045/nepal-upsurge-continues.html)

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 06:03 AM
First, I'll say whatever the fuck I want. I don't need your "appreciation". Second, Are you an RCP member? (Of course not. I know the modus operandi for RCP supporters - hell I have no guff with it). So, tell me, how do you know they are still ardent supporters?

One thing I forgot to say is that the leaders of the CPNM were seasoned revolutionaries when the RIM statement was proclaimed from their work in the CPNM's predecessor orgs, so it's a bit disingenous to say that their entire ideology is based on the RIM.
No, I am NOT a member. I'm fucking 17 for chrissakes.

I base my assumption that the RCP and the RIM support the CPNM on articles it has published recently, as well as articles that have been run in the weekly journal "A World to Win."

link (http://revcom.us/a/045/nepal-upsurge-continues.html)

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 06:03 AM
First, I'll say whatever the fuck I want. I don't need your "appreciation". Second, Are you an RCP member? (Of course not. I know the modus operandi for RCP supporters - hell I have no guff with it). So, tell me, how do you know they are still ardent supporters?

One thing I forgot to say is that the leaders of the CPNM were seasoned revolutionaries when the RIM statement was proclaimed from their work in the CPNM's predecessor orgs, so it's a bit disingenous to say that their entire ideology is based on the RIM.
No, I am NOT a member. I'm fucking 17 for chrissakes.

I base my assumption that the RCP and the RIM support the CPNM on articles it has published recently, as well as articles that have been run in the weekly journal "A World to Win."

link (http://revcom.us/a/045/nepal-upsurge-continues.html)

[Burrito]

No, I am NOT a member. I'm fucking 17 for chrissakes.


Fine, "RCYB Supporter". Big diff. :rolleyes:



I base my assumption that the RCP and the RIM support the CPNM on articles it has published recently, as well as articles that have been run in the weekly journal "A World to Win."

link

Do you think we are stupid? That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power! Get real.

[Burrito]

No, I am NOT a member. I'm fucking 17 for chrissakes.


Fine, "RCYB Supporter". Big diff. :rolleyes:



I base my assumption that the RCP and the RIM support the CPNM on articles it has published recently, as well as articles that have been run in the weekly journal "A World to Win."

link

Do you think we are stupid? That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power! Get real.

[Burrito]

No, I am NOT a member. I'm fucking 17 for chrissakes.


Fine, "RCYB Supporter". Big diff. :rolleyes:



I base my assumption that the RCP and the RIM support the CPNM on articles it has published recently, as well as articles that have been run in the weekly journal "A World to Win."

link

Do you think we are stupid? That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power! Get real.

[Red Heretic]

That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power!

Try May.

And actually the article was written nearly two weeks after the King relinquished power. Did you even look at it?

AWTW has written several article since then as well!


Do you think we are stupid?

The last thing I want to do is decieve people. Jesus christ.

[Red Heretic]

That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power!

Try May.

And actually the article was written nearly two weeks after the King relinquished power. Did you even look at it?

AWTW has written several article since then as well!


Do you think we are stupid?

The last thing I want to do is decieve people. Jesus christ.

[Red Heretic]

That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power!

Try May.

And actually the article was written nearly two weeks after the King relinquished power. Did you even look at it?

AWTW has written several article since then as well!


Do you think we are stupid?

The last thing I want to do is decieve people. Jesus christ.

[Martin Blank]

Can we get back to the matter at hand, please? I'm more interested in hearing comrades' thoughts on this development, not who is more representative of the RCP and CPN(M) viewpoint.

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Can we get back to the matter at hand, please? I'm more interested in hearing comrades' thoughts on this development, not who is more representative of the RCP and CPN(M) viewpoint.

Miles

[Martin Blank]

Can we get back to the matter at hand, please? I'm more interested in hearing comrades' thoughts on this development, not who is more representative of the RCP and CPN(M) viewpoint.

Miles

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 07:01 AM
Can we get back to the matter at hand, please? I'm more interested in hearing comrades' thoughts on this development, not who is more representative of the RCP and CPN(M) viewpoint.

Miles
Word.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 07:01 AM
Can we get back to the matter at hand, please? I'm more interested in hearing comrades' thoughts on this development, not who is more representative of the RCP and CPN(M) viewpoint.

Miles
Word.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2006, 07:01 AM
Can we get back to the matter at hand, please? I'm more interested in hearing comrades' thoughts on this development, not who is more representative of the RCP and CPN(M) viewpoint.

Miles
Word.

[Burrito]

That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power!


Try May.

And actually the article was written nearly two weeks after the King relinquished power. Did you even look at it?


My bad. It was written on 5/4 apparently. Still my point stands. Outdated!



AWTW has written several article since then as well!


Where? :blink:

Not to beat a dead horse, but here's the summary of articles on supporter Li Onesto's site, who wrote a wonderful full length book on Nepal PPW.



Yang Ban Xi: Model Revolutionary Works in Revolutionary China
by Li Onesto, Revolution #51, June 18, 2006

Reflections on Water
by Li Onesto, Revolution #49, June 4, 2006

Still Winter in New Orleans
by Li Onesto, Revolution #45, May 1, 2006
a photo essay by Li Onesto

Upsurge Continues in Nepal
U.S. Interests, Plots, and Intrigues
by Li Onesto, Revolution #45, May 1, 2006


It's like, hello? the parties resident expert on the matter has nothing to say on the developments there since May Day? It's not like nothing is happening, for fux sake!

[Burrito]

That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power!


Try May.

And actually the article was written nearly two weeks after the King relinquished power. Did you even look at it?


My bad. It was written on 5/4 apparently. Still my point stands. Outdated!



AWTW has written several article since then as well!


Where? :blink:

Not to beat a dead horse, but here's the summary of articles on supporter Li Onesto's site, who wrote a wonderful full length book on Nepal PPW.



Yang Ban Xi: Model Revolutionary Works in Revolutionary China
by Li Onesto, Revolution #51, June 18, 2006

Reflections on Water
by Li Onesto, Revolution #49, June 4, 2006

Still Winter in New Orleans
by Li Onesto, Revolution #45, May 1, 2006
a photo essay by Li Onesto

Upsurge Continues in Nepal
U.S. Interests, Plots, and Intrigues
by Li Onesto, Revolution #45, May 1, 2006


It's like, hello? the parties resident expert on the matter has nothing to say on the developments there since May Day? It's not like nothing is happening, for fux sake!

[Burrito]

That link is from April, before the King even relenquished absolute power!


Try May.

And actually the article was written nearly two weeks after the King relinquished power. Did you even look at it?


My bad. It was written on 5/4 apparently. Still my point stands. Outdated!



AWTW has written several article since then as well!


Where? :blink:

Not to beat a dead horse, but here's the summary of articles on supporter Li Onesto's site, who wrote a wonderful full length book on Nepal PPW.



Yang Ban Xi: Model Revolutionary Works in Revolutionary China
by Li Onesto, Revolution #51, June 18, 2006

Reflections on Water
by Li Onesto, Revolution #49, June 4, 2006

Still Winter in New Orleans
by Li Onesto, Revolution #45, May 1, 2006
a photo essay by Li Onesto

Upsurge Continues in Nepal
U.S. Interests, Plots, and Intrigues
by Li Onesto, Revolution #45, May 1, 2006


It's like, hello? the parties resident expert on the matter has nothing to say on the developments there since May Day? It's not like nothing is happening, for fux sake!

[Red Heretic]

AWTW's articles are released through their email service. You can subscribe at A World to Win (http://awtw.org). You'll need a yahoo account.

Here the most recent article I was referring to:



Rapid political developments in Nepal

22 May 2006. A World to Win News Service. The political landscape in Nepal is undergoing rapid and unprecedented changes. The three-week general strike in April forced King Gyanendra to restore the country’s parliament, which he had shut down in 2002. This House of Representatives then selected a prime minister and, after a few days, announced a cabinet. Unable to break with the political culture developed during their long years in office under the king, there was a tug of war over portfolios. On 18 May, this cabinet put forward a proclamation that was then approved by the House. The parliamentarian leaders termed this a glorious and historic day. The government declared the following day a national holiday, hoping that many thousands of people would come out to support the proclamation. Quite a few thousand people took to the streets across the country, but in addition to supporting this resolution, many also chanted what has by now become very popular slogan: “Leaders, beware! Don’t betray us again!”

In fact, there have been demonstrations by people of various walks of life every day since the reinstatement of parliament. Among the most notable was a march by angry students armed with batons in early May. The main theatre for these protests is Singhadarbar, the office of the Prime Minister, and since the reinstatement of the House of Representatives, most days this office has remained under siege by demonstrators distrustful of what is going on there. Moreover, as the BBC put it on 19 May, “Another move quietly made by the authorities was to ban demonstrations in parts of Kathmandu around the government buildings and the royal palace, just as the authorities of the previous royal government did.”

Having tabled the proclamation in the House, Prime Minister Girija Koirala said, “Through the peaceful movement, we have been successful in returning sovereign power to the people and establishing the people as the sole source of state power.” This deceptive statement contradicted his own admission that, “Each and every word in the proclamation has been written with the martyr’s blood.” First of all, this parliamentary party leader completely ignored the real force that made the 19-day struggle successful – and without which the general strike would not have taken place with the support of the parliamentary parties: the 10-year long People’s War led by the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).

Secondly, the reality was that these 19 days were not peaceful at all. Certainly this is incontestable on the part of the regime. King Gyanendra unleashed the police and army against the demonstrators, killing around two dozen and injuring at least 5,000 more. Thousands of people were detained. The people were also never peaceful. First of all, although the CPN(M) called a ceasefire in the Kathmandu valley, the People’s Liberation Army under its leadership kept all the country’s highways under its armed control. During these 19 days the PLA launched major assaults on government and military installations, and shot down a Royal Army helicopter in the east. Demonstrators in Kathmandu and other cities clashed with the security forces repeatedly, even if armed only with stones and other primitive weapons. They dug trenches to stop the Royal Army from entering the cities of Latitpur and Kirtipur, and staged violent resistance in Bhaktapur, Thimi and the areas surrounding Kathmandu.

In an 18 May statement from the CPN(M) Central Committee, the party’s Chairman Prachanda said, “Our party welcomes and supports the Declaration proposed by the government of the seven parties and approved by the reinstated House of Representatives today as victory of the 12-point memo of understanding [signed by the seven partiers and the CPN(M) as the basis of the April general strike] and the people’s historic movement. This Declaration has taken important political steps against the feudal autocratic monarchy. In this regard, our party is proud of the fulfilment of some of the demands, though partially and politically, which we had been raising since before the historic initiation of the People’s War.” Nevertheless, he continued, “This Declaration, on the whole, does not address the needs and aspirations of the people.”

The Declaration scrapped the king’s authority over the Royal Army. There are many formal changes, such as changing the name of the Royal Nepal Army to the Nepal Army, His Majesty’s Government to the Nepal Government, and declaring the formerly Hindu kingdom of Nepal to be a secular state. But, Chairman Prachanda said, reducing the king to a ceremonial position is “incomplete” in regard to “the essence and the aspirations of the people to abolish the monarchy and establish a republic”.

“Having not spoken against mounting foreign intervention in the Nepalese politics, not mentioned anything about comprehensive restructuring of the state, which mainly means, in the context of Nepal, the right of self determination for the [oppressed] nationalities, not even touched the question of national and regional autonomy and a federal state structure, not mentioned anything about necessity of land to the tiller and an independent economic policy, not mentioned anything about the need to respect the people’s fundamental rights to education, health and employment, and nothing spoken about special right for the downtrodden castes [dalits, so-called “untouchables”] and women, it appears very clear that the fundamental problems the Nepalese people encounter day-to-day will not be solved by this Declaration.

“The surprising silence towards solving the serious problems of Nepalese society brought to light by ten years of People’s War and the imminent dialogue has raised serious doubts about the Declaration. Every Nepali should give serious thought to whether this Declaration is part of a grave conspiracy to overshadow the dialogue, the election of a constituent assembly and a forward-going political solution, and confuse the people. Having not mentioned the historic 12-point memo of understanding, an odour of an ill intention, of conspicuously putting all the achievements of the movement into the baggage of the parliamentarian parties, is once again being given rise to by the Declaration. Whether the seven parties are attempting to avert the spirit and aspiration of the 12-point memo of understanding as per their wishes is a very serious issue.

“Having expressed a commitment to take these serious issues to the table of dialogue and among the masses of people, we appeal to all the political parties, civil society, social organisations, intellectuals and prominent personalities and broad masses of people to engage in serious debate on these fundamental questions”, Prachanda concluded.

In response to the reinstatement of the House of Representatives, the CPN(M) sent the parliamentary parties a proposed roadmap for Nepal’s future after the successful holding of a party Central Committee meeting. Kantipuronline (13 May) said that the 22 points include the following: the “declaration of a ceasefire; finalisation of code of conduct; formation of a talks team; release of political prisoners; starting talks; dissolution of the old parliament, constitution and government; formation of an interim guideline and government by holding a political conference with representation from the political parties, civil society and renowned personalities of different sectors; setting of electoral constituencies by ensuring the representation from people of all classes, castes, sectors and genders; holding constituent assembly elections under reliable international supervision; and restructuring of the whole state structures including the People’s Liberation Army and the Royal Nepalese Army as per the popular mandate expressed through the (constituent assembly) elections.”

The Maoist party has also announced that preparations for the talks would be conducted by a three-member team headed by Central Committee member Krishna Bahadur Mahara, who arrived in Kathmandu by plane from the western Nepal city of Nepalgung. A 13-member central party speakers’ team has also been set up to address the peaceful mass meetings across the country that the CPN(M) has begun to organise. The BBC reported that tens of thousands of people took part in a 20 May mass meeting in the city of Biratnagar, eastern Nepal, where a member of the party negotiations team spoke. One member of this team is Martrika Prasad Yadav. Yadav and Suresh Ale Magar, CPN(M) leaders who were kidnapped in India and taken to Nepal in February 2004, were released from military custody on 12 May.

In the meantime, the big powers have been continuing their political intervention. Right after the reinstatement of parliament, US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, Richard Boucher, visited Nepal. The first thing he offered the Prime Minister was weapons. In a speech to an American Congressional committee, Boucher said, “We also stand ready to provide assistance to security forces if requested by the new government; I told Prime Minister Koirala the same when I met him on May 2.”
-end item-

[Red Heretic]

AWTW's articles are released through their email service. You can subscribe at A World to Win (http://awtw.org). You'll need a yahoo account.

Here the most recent article I was referring to:



Rapid political developments in Nepal

22 May 2006. A World to Win News Service. The political landscape in Nepal is undergoing rapid and unprecedented changes. The three-week general strike in April forced King Gyanendra to restore the country’s parliament, which he had shut down in 2002. This House of Representatives then selected a prime minister and, after a few days, announced a cabinet. Unable to break with the political culture developed during their long years in office under the king, there was a tug of war over portfolios. On 18 May, this cabinet put forward a proclamation that was then approved by the House. The parliamentarian leaders termed this a glorious and historic day. The government declared the following day a national holiday, hoping that many thousands of people would come out to support the proclamation. Quite a few thousand people took to the streets across the country, but in addition to supporting this resolution, many also chanted what has by now become very popular slogan: “Leaders, beware! Don’t betray us again!”

In fact, there have been demonstrations by people of various walks of life every day since the reinstatement of parliament. Among the most notable was a march by angry students armed with batons in early May. The main theatre for these protests is Singhadarbar, the office of the Prime Minister, and since the reinstatement of the House of Representatives, most days this office has remained under siege by demonstrators distrustful of what is going on there. Moreover, as the BBC put it on 19 May, “Another move quietly made by the authorities was to ban demonstrations in parts of Kathmandu around the government buildings and the royal palace, just as the authorities of the previous royal government did.”

Having tabled the proclamation in the House, Prime Minister Girija Koirala said, “Through the peaceful movement, we have been successful in returning sovereign power to the people and establishing the people as the sole source of state power.” This deceptive statement contradicted his own admission that, “Each and every word in the proclamation has been written with the martyr’s blood.” First of all, this parliamentary party leader completely ignored the real force that made the 19-day struggle successful – and without which the general strike would not have taken place with the support of the parliamentary parties: the 10-year long People’s War led by the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).

Secondly, the reality was that these 19 days were not peaceful at all. Certainly this is incontestable on the part of the regime. King Gyanendra unleashed the police and army against the demonstrators, killing around two dozen and injuring at least 5,000 more. Thousands of people were detained. The people were also never peaceful. First of all, although the CPN(M) called a ceasefire in the Kathmandu valley, the People’s Liberation Army under its leadership kept all the country’s highways under its armed control. During these 19 days the PLA launched major assaults on government and military installations, and shot down a Royal Army helicopter in the east. Demonstrators in Kathmandu and other cities clashed with the security forces repeatedly, even if armed only with stones and other primitive weapons. They dug trenches to stop the Royal Army from entering the cities of Latitpur and Kirtipur, and staged violent resistance in Bhaktapur, Thimi and the areas surrounding Kathmandu.

In an 18 May statement from the CPN(M) Central Committee, the party’s Chairman Prachanda said, “Our party welcomes and supports the Declaration proposed by the government of the seven parties and approved by the reinstated House of Representatives today as victory of the 12-point memo of understanding [signed by the seven partiers and the CPN(M) as the basis of the April general strike] and the people’s historic movement. This Declaration has taken important political steps against the feudal autocratic monarchy. In this regard, our party is proud of the fulfilment of some of the demands, though partially and politically, which we had been raising since before the historic initiation of the People’s War.” Nevertheless, he continued, “This Declaration, on the whole, does not address the needs and aspirations of the people.”

The Declaration scrapped the king’s authority over the Royal Army. There are many formal changes, such as changing the name of the Royal Nepal Army to the Nepal Army, His Majesty’s Government to the Nepal Government, and declaring the formerly Hindu kingdom of Nepal to be a secular state. But, Chairman Prachanda said, reducing the king to a ceremonial position is “incomplete” in regard to “the essence and the aspirations of the people to abolish the monarchy and establish a republic”.

“Having not spoken against mounting foreign intervention in the Nepalese politics, not mentioned anything about comprehensive restructuring of the state, which mainly means, in the context of Nepal, the right of self determination for the [oppressed] nationalities, not even touched the question of national and regional autonomy and a federal state structure, not mentioned anything about necessity of land to the tiller and an independent economic policy, not mentioned anything about the need to respect the people’s fundamental rights to education, health and employment, and nothing spoken about special right for the downtrodden castes [dalits, so-called “untouchables”] and women, it appears very clear that the fundamental problems the Nepalese people encounter day-to-day will not be solved by this Declaration.

“The surprising silence towards solving the serious problems of Nepalese society brought to light by ten years of People’s War and the imminent dialogue has raised serious doubts about the Declaration. Every Nepali should give serious thought to whether this Declaration is part of a grave conspiracy to overshadow the dialogue, the election of a constituent assembly and a forward-going political solution, and confuse the people. Having not mentioned the historic 12-point memo of understanding, an odour of an ill intention, of conspicuously putting all the achievements of the movement into the baggage of the parliamentarian parties, is once again being given rise to by the Declaration. Whether the seven parties are attempting to avert the spirit and aspiration of the 12-point memo of understanding as per their wishes is a very serious issue.

“Having expressed a commitment to take these serious issues to the table of dialogue and among the masses of people, we appeal to all the political parties, civil society, social organisations, intellectuals and prominent personalities and broad masses of people to engage in serious debate on these fundamental questions”, Prachanda concluded.

In response to the reinstatement of the House of Representatives, the CPN(M) sent the parliamentary parties a proposed roadmap for Nepal’s future after the successful holding of a party Central Committee meeting. Kantipuronline (13 May) said that the 22 points include the following: the “declaration of a ceasefire; finalisation of code of conduct; formation of a talks team; release of political prisoners; starting talks; dissolution of the old parliament, constitution and government; formation of an interim guideline and government by holding a political conference with representation from the political parties, civil society and renowned personalities of different sectors; setting of electoral constituencies by ensuring the representation from people of all classes, castes, sectors and genders; holding constituent assembly elections under reliable international supervision; and restructuring of the whole state structures including the People’s Liberation Army and the Royal Nepalese Army as per the popular mandate expressed through the (constituent assembly) elections.”

The Maoist party has also announced that preparations for the talks would be conducted by a three-member team headed by Central Committee member Krishna Bahadur Mahara, who arrived in Kathmandu by plane from the western Nepal city of Nepalgung. A 13-member central party speakers’ team has also been set up to address the peaceful mass meetings across the country that the CPN(M) has begun to organise. The BBC reported that tens of thousands of people took part in a 20 May mass meeting in the city of Biratnagar, eastern Nepal, where a member of the party negotiations team spoke. One member of this team is Martrika Prasad Yadav. Yadav and Suresh Ale Magar, CPN(M) leaders who were kidnapped in India and taken to Nepal in February 2004, were released from military custody on 12 May.

In the meantime, the big powers have been continuing their political intervention. Right after the reinstatement of parliament, US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, Richard Boucher, visited Nepal. The first thing he offered the Prime Minister was weapons. In a speech to an American Congressional committee, Boucher said, “We also stand ready to provide assistance to security forces if requested by the new government; I told Prime Minister Koirala the same when I met him on May 2.”
-end item-

[Red Heretic]

AWTW's articles are released through their email service. You can subscribe at A World to Win (http://awtw.org). You'll need a yahoo account.

Here the most recent article I was referring to:



Rapid political developments in Nepal

22 May 2006. A World to Win News Service. The political landscape in Nepal is undergoing rapid and unprecedented changes. The three-week general strike in April forced King Gyanendra to restore the country’s parliament, which he had shut down in 2002. This House of Representatives then selected a prime minister and, after a few days, announced a cabinet. Unable to break with the political culture developed during their long years in office under the king, there was a tug of war over portfolios. On 18 May, this cabinet put forward a proclamation that was then approved by the House. The parliamentarian leaders termed this a glorious and historic day. The government declared the following day a national holiday, hoping that many thousands of people would come out to support the proclamation. Quite a few thousand people took to the streets across the country, but in addition to supporting this resolution, many also chanted what has by now become very popular slogan: “Leaders, beware! Don’t betray us again!”

In fact, there have been demonstrations by people of various walks of life every day since the reinstatement of parliament. Among the most notable was a march by angry students armed with batons in early May. The main theatre for these protests is Singhadarbar, the office of the Prime Minister, and since the reinstatement of the House of Representatives, most days this office has remained under siege by demonstrators distrustful of what is going on there. Moreover, as the BBC put it on 19 May, “Another move quietly made by the authorities was to ban demonstrations in parts of Kathmandu around the government buildings and the royal palace, just as the authorities of the previous royal government did.”

Having tabled the proclamation in the House, Prime Minister Girija Koirala said, “Through the peaceful movement, we have been successful in returning sovereign power to the people and establishing the people as the sole source of state power.” This deceptive statement contradicted his own admission that, “Each and every word in the proclamation has been written with the martyr’s blood.” First of all, this parliamentary party leader completely ignored the real force that made the 19-day struggle successful – and without which the general strike would not have taken place with the support of the parliamentary parties: the 10-year long People’s War led by the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).

Secondly, the reality was that these 19 days were not peaceful at all. Certainly this is incontestable on the part of the regime. King Gyanendra unleashed the police and army against the demonstrators, killing around two dozen and injuring at least 5,000 more. Thousands of people were detained. The people were also never peaceful. First of all, although the CPN(M) called a ceasefire in the Kathmandu valley, the People’s Liberation Army under its leadership kept all the country’s highways under its armed control. During these 19 days the PLA launched major assaults on government and military installations, and shot down a Royal Army helicopter in the east. Demonstrators in Kathmandu and other cities clashed with the security forces repeatedly, even if armed only with stones and other primitive weapons. They dug trenches to stop the Royal Army from entering the cities of Latitpur and Kirtipur, and staged violent resistance in Bhaktapur, Thimi and the areas surrounding Kathmandu.

In an 18 May statement from the CPN(M) Central Committee, the party’s Chairman Prachanda said, “Our party welcomes and supports the Declaration proposed by the government of the seven parties and approved by the reinstated House of Representatives today as victory of the 12-point memo of understanding [signed by the seven partiers and the CPN(M) as the basis of the April general strike] and the people’s historic movement. This Declaration has taken important political steps against the feudal autocratic monarchy. In this regard, our party is proud of the fulfilment of some of the demands, though partially and politically, which we had been raising since before the historic initiation of the People’s War.” Nevertheless, he continued, “This Declaration, on the whole, does not address the needs and aspirations of the people.”

The Declaration scrapped the king’s authority over the Royal Army. There are many formal changes, such as changing the name of the Royal Nepal Army to the Nepal Army, His Majesty’s Government to the Nepal Government, and declaring the formerly Hindu kingdom of Nepal to be a secular state. But, Chairman Prachanda said, reducing the king to a ceremonial position is “incomplete” in regard to “the essence and the aspirations of the people to abolish the monarchy and establish a republic”.

“Having not spoken against mounting foreign intervention in the Nepalese politics, not mentioned anything about comprehensive restructuring of the state, which mainly means, in the context of Nepal, the right of self determination for the [oppressed] nationalities, not even touched the question of national and regional autonomy and a federal state structure, not mentioned anything about necessity of land to the tiller and an independent economic policy, not mentioned anything about the need to respect the people’s fundamental rights to education, health and employment, and nothing spoken about special right for the downtrodden castes [dalits, so-called “untouchables”] and women, it appears very clear that the fundamental problems the Nepalese people encounter day-to-day will not be solved by this Declaration.

“The surprising silence towards solving the serious problems of Nepalese society brought to light by ten years of People’s War and the imminent dialogue has raised serious doubts about the Declaration. Every Nepali should give serious thought to whether this Declaration is part of a grave conspiracy to overshadow the dialogue, the election of a constituent assembly and a forward-going political solution, and confuse the people. Having not mentioned the historic 12-point memo of understanding, an odour of an ill intention, of conspicuously putting all the achievements of the movement into the baggage of the parliamentarian parties, is once again being given rise to by the Declaration. Whether the seven parties are attempting to avert the spirit and aspiration of the 12-point memo of understanding as per their wishes is a very serious issue.

“Having expressed a commitment to take these serious issues to the table of dialogue and among the masses of people, we appeal to all the political parties, civil society, social organisations, intellectuals and prominent personalities and broad masses of people to engage in serious debate on these fundamental questions”, Prachanda concluded.

In response to the reinstatement of the House of Representatives, the CPN(M) sent the parliamentary parties a proposed roadmap for Nepal’s future after the successful holding of a party Central Committee meeting. Kantipuronline (13 May) said that the 22 points include the following: the “declaration of a ceasefire; finalisation of code of conduct; formation of a talks team; release of political prisoners; starting talks; dissolution of the old parliament, constitution and government; formation of an interim guideline and government by holding a political conference with representation from the political parties, civil society and renowned personalities of different sectors; setting of electoral constituencies by ensuring the representation from people of all classes, castes, sectors and genders; holding constituent assembly elections under reliable international supervision; and restructuring of the whole state structures including the People’s Liberation Army and the Royal Nepalese Army as per the popular mandate expressed through the (constituent assembly) elections.”

The Maoist party has also announced that preparations for the talks would be conducted by a three-member team headed by Central Committee member Krishna Bahadur Mahara, who arrived in Kathmandu by plane from the western Nepal city of Nepalgung. A 13-member central party speakers’ team has also been set up to address the peaceful mass meetings across the country that the CPN(M) has begun to organise. The BBC reported that tens of thousands of people took part in a 20 May mass meeting in the city of Biratnagar, eastern Nepal, where a member of the party negotiations team spoke. One member of this team is Martrika Prasad Yadav. Yadav and Suresh Ale Magar, CPN(M) leaders who were kidnapped in India and taken to Nepal in February 2004, were released from military custody on 12 May.

In the meantime, the big powers have been continuing their political intervention. Right after the reinstatement of parliament, US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, Richard Boucher, visited Nepal. The first thing he offered the Prime Minister was weapons. In a speech to an American Congressional committee, Boucher said, “We also stand ready to provide assistance to security forces if requested by the new government; I told Prime Minister Koirala the same when I met him on May 2.”
-end item-

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2006, 08:54 PM
Joining the provisional government gives the CPNM huge influence over the drawing of the next constitution, which is sole purpose of the provisional government. The purpose of the constitiution is to create a framework for a republican government and embark on democratic bourgie revolution - which has yet to happen in Nepal. (Trots: think of 'Transitional Program', sorta.)
I'm sorry, no. Hoping a coalition government with the bourgeoisie will lead any kind of revolution has nothing to do with the Transitional Program or any kind of Marxism worthy of the name.

The capitalists are simply no longer a revolutionary class, anywhere in the world. Marx and Lenin were very clear on this; the Mensheviks and Stalinists have a different approach.

I earlier explained this in detail to Red Heretic in this thread. (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=ST&f=4&t=50710&hl=&view=findpost&p=1292092423)


Second, I trust journos and political analysis on the ground in Nepal far more than the SWP's decripiit "analysis" compiled from that oh-so-heady mix of Internet news articles and Barnes' comically sectarian brand of antiquated Trot dogma.

Leaving aside your cute little factional jibes, I'm the almost the only one on this board who routinely refers to "journos and political analysis on the ground on Nepal (Janus does also to an extent), other than slavishly believing everything in the Maoists' press releases or interviews. A news article from a Nepali paper does not become magically less reliable because you read it online rather than in a print edition.


Newsflash: Your precious urban insurrection already happened, it's what forced the king to finally relenquish control.

Duh. That's what I said. The CPNM, however, is hardly driving events. As you acknowledge: "Hell the CPNM can barely keep up with the masses at this point."

If you choose to respond to my posts please read them first.

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by Red Heretic+Jun 20 2006, 06:42 AM--> (Red Heretic @ Jun 20 2006, 06:42 AM)
[email protected] 19 2006, 03:07 AM
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
:o

I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!

This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.

See Chinese history.

Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:

New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism. [/b]
Remember that in Russia there were these people that argued for the need for a bourgeoirse revolution. They ended up fighting the bolsheviks and allying with the forces of the international bourgeoirse, mensheviks.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2006, 06:31 PM
Severian writes

If you were under the illusion the Communist Party of Nepal(Maoist) represented some kind of revolutionary force, this agreement to join a coalition government with the capitalists would be a total sellout.

They're just taking state control with the minimual amount of violence necessary as the government has capitulated to all of their demands. They'll be in the position to rewrite the constitution to a socialist, secular republic. The royal hindu nepali government no longer exists as a viable state, only the Maoists have state power.
I'm sorry, this is nonsense.

The government in Nepal is a coalition of bourgeois parties and reformist workers' parties. The army is the same one as a few weeks ago, as is the state bureaucratic machine. While this government has made some small but significant steps forward, it is not revolutionary even in the bourgeois-democratic sense.

The CPN(M) is going to join this coalition, and likely as a definite minority. It is not taking over power.

If it had been a revolutionary party, this would likely mark the end of it; it is impossible to strongly oppose a government, even in a political sense, when you are part of it.

To deny this is to reject the whole traidition of revolutionary Marxism, in favor of blatant social-democratic politcs at best. (http://mia.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1901/socialist-crisis-france/ch01.htm) But of course most of those who claim to be Communist did that long ago.

There is a lot more that would have to be done to really deal with the legacy of feudalism and imperialist domination of Nepal, and this bourgeois-democratic government is not going to do it. No bourgeois government has dealt with feudalism in a thorough, revolutionary fashion since the beginning of the 20th century. Nobody can name a case where one has - I asked Redstar to several times and he never could. But some people keep putting their faith in bourgeois-led revolution despite the clear record of history.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

"Ah. They "shit themselves in fear" over an organisation which is "probably low on arms"? Congrats on contradicting yourself within one sentence."




I know this was ages ago, but seriously, think about it. Just think about it. It quite clearly isn't a contradiction. If you absolutely must have me explain how, I will, but surely it's obvious?

-Alex

[Severian]

I'm sorry, it quite clearly is a contradiction, especially in the context of his original post and the actual situation in Nepal.

On the one hand, he excuses the Maoists making a deal on the grounds that they are too militarily weak to win an outright victory (and mistakenly tries to explain this by assuming they must be low on weapons.) On the other hand, he claims they have such military power the government "shits itself in fear".

These are two contradictory assessments of the military situation. The first has some relationship to reality.

[BurnTheOliveTree]

No, he made two claims which weren't necessarily linked. He said:

A. The maoists are low on arms.
B. The government is scared of the maoists.


If it's even possible that those two realities can co-exist (and they can), it is not a contradiction, regardless of any dispute of the facts themselves. :P

Sorry if i'm nit-picking. Bah.

-Alex

Edited for typos.