Nepal - peace treaty signed

[Severian]

The "Comprehensive Peace Accord" has now been signed. (Tuesday Nov. 21).

BBC - "Jubilation over Nepal peace pact" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6171586.stm)

A summary of the terms of the treaty (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=92143)

Its full text (http://www.kantipuronline.com/englishagree.php)

There are compliance issues already. (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?nid=92253) But Thousands of fighters are beginning to gather in camps, or trying to. (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?nid=92307)

There's every reason to think these problems, and others, can and will be overcome.

[Vargha Poralli]

Any how i am very much disturbed by those developments . The Nepalese struggle is very much comparable to the February revolution.History has repeated People directly rose against the monarch. But it didn't have the right ending in my opinion.CPN(Maoist) has missed a golden opportunity by taking advice from wretched CPI and CPI(Marxist). Instead of doing what Lenin and Trotsky did they have taken the line of mensheviks .No one knows what happened behind the scenes. I really wonder what will Prachanda and his men do when the second stage really comes . Can they accomplish after surrendering weapons what they have failed to do with it ? that i think only time can answer....

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2006 02:21 am
Instead of doing what Lenin and Trotsky did they have taken the line of mensheviks .
That's massively unfair to the Mensheviks. The CPN(Maoist) is more comparable to the Khmer Rouge - or, as they'll tell you themselves, to Sendero Luminoso in Peru.

The Mensheviks were part of the workers' movement. As are the Communist Party of Nepal(United Marxist-Leninist) and similar reformist parties today.

The CPN(Maoist) is not, and it has a record of terror against the workers' movement.


Can they accomplish after surrendering weapons what they have failed to do with it ?

Fortunately, no. Of course, they're only resorting to negotiations and electoral campaigning because they had no prospect of winning the war - as Prachandra has admitted.

A recent thread where this was discussed (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=58360)

But that's been discussed before. The treaty's new - if anyone wants to take a look at the text or summary, there's some interesting stuff in there.

[Vargha Poralli]

The CPN(Maoist) is not, and it has a record of terror against the workers' movement.

Of course what else we could expect from a maoist movement ? Unfortunately they had a massive support in the countryside just like the Naxals had once here in India. CPN had just screwed their own positions in a similar way to the Naxalbaris. i may be wrong to compare them with mensheviks but anyhow comparing them to Pol pot is somewhat too much IMHO.

Clearly Worker and peasant movements in South Asia lack vision and leadership.

[Severian]

It's not simply that they're Maoists; and it's not a peasant movement either. They rule the peasants by terror also, and extort forced labor from them.

In contrast to Mao, who politically led a peasant revolt. Or misled, but that also is a kind of leadership.

[Louis Pio]

The CPN(maoist) could have taken power easy if they wanted, they chose not to. Which flows from the reformist stage theory they subscribe to.
They are kinda reformists with guns who are now giving up the guns...
I think we will see their political authority crumble in the period to come

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2006 05:50 am
The CPN(maoist) could have taken power easy if they wanted, they chose not to.
How could they have taken power? And if you think they fought in order to do anything else, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.


Which flows from the reformist stage theory they subscribe to.They are kinda reformists with guns who are now giving up the guns...

Why post this without even addressing my earlier points about how they are much worse than reformists? Does truth come from repetition?

Incidentally, the traditional reformist "stage" conduct of Stalinism didn't flow from any "theory" - it flowed from the interests of the apparatchiks. They promoted the line of supporting the national bourgeoisie - as a way of furthering the diplomatic relations of the USSR and PRC with capitalist governments.

So you're using a vulgarized, idealist version of the traditional revolutionary internationalist critique of Stalinism - even before we get to the problem of automatically applying that critique to everything labelled "Stalinism".


I think we will see their political authority crumble in the period to come

To be sure. As they give up their ability to use armed intimidation - there will be popular backlash against their past crimes. It's already beginning.

But - as the reformists - like the CPN(UML) - and liberals stall on fufilling their promises of social change - there likely be a certain layer who will continue supporting the CPN(Maoist) - which will be rhetorically to their left.

[Janus]

The CPN(maoist) could have taken power easy if they wanted, they chose not to.
No, Prachanda and the Maoists explicitly admitted that military victory was unattainable which is why they entered these negotiations.

[Louis Pio]

How could they have taken power? And if you think they fought in order to do anything else, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.


Well only saying what a friend of mine who was in Nepal during the unrest told me. Most of the country would have been behind the maoists in removing the king and corrupt government. Of course they couldn't take power only by the socalled "protracted people's war", but on the back of the mass movement in the cities. Don't think that the nepalese maoists would neccessarily be interested in unlimited power at the present time since it would kinda give away the bankrupcy of their economical programme. And secondly it's the logical conclusion to the stage theory. Which follows that they must make a deal with the "progressive bourgiosie" and since it doesn't exist they have to invent it. Of course if it depends on wheter you think they could have taken power, I've have seen no indication whatsoever that they couldn't.

[Janus]

Most of the country would have been behind the maoists in removing the king and corrupt government. Of course they couldn't take power only by the socalled "protracted people's war", but on the back of the mass movement in the cities
The mass movement was anti-monarchy and not necessarily pro-Maoist.


Of course if it depends on wheter you think they could have taken power, I've have seen no indication whatsoever that they couldn't.
They've admitted themselves that they couldn't take power (due to the foreign support that the king was getting) which is why the war has been deadlocked until now.

[Louis Pio]

The mass movement was anti-monarchy and not necessarily pro-Maoist.


Which by no means concludes that the maoists couldn't have taken power with the correct political line. Again only saying what I heard from people seeing the events first hand.


They've admitted themselves that they couldn't take power (due to the foreign support that the king was getting) which is why the war has been deadlocked until now.


Of course they couldn't have taken power following the socalled "protracted people's war" I never said so, but on the back on the mass movement it would have been totally different.

[Janus]

The Maoists gained much of their popularity from their role as staunch anti-monarchists during the anti-king protests and they have benefited greatly from this. However, the popular sentiment towards the Maoists only goes so far so I think it's doubtful that the Maoists would've had an opportunity to actually take full power through the type of mass movement you're describing.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2006 02:01 pm

The mass movement was anti-monarchy and not necessarily pro-Maoist.


Which by no means concludes that the maoists couldn't have taken power with the correct political line.
I'm sorry, no. To even try it would have taken more than a "correct political line" - they would have had to be a completely different kind of movement. (And these things ain't simple for anyone - the Bolsheviks didn't take power in February, did they?)

Your faith in the ability of a "correct political line" to transform a party's class character, is, well, downright Maoist.

The fact is that 1) the monarch and his government (though not state) were removed, which was the demonstrators' goal. and
2) Most working people distrusted and feared the Maoists, who had been attacking them. Their blockades of the cities, for starters, involved attacking truck and bus drivers.

The mass movement could only develop when the Maoists called off these blockades - when people had confidence the Maoists wouldn't be able to exploit it to take the cities (by armed force.)

And when the reformist and liberal parties reached agreement with the monarch - the fact is that most people accepted that; most people were celebrating it. Instantly, the rallies of those continuing to protest were much smaller. According to news reports "tens of thousands" rather than the earlier "hundreds of thousands" continued to move towards the palace.

Some threads from the time:
link (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=ST&f=4&t=49182)
link (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=49229&st=0)
link (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=48642&st=25)

[OneBrickOneVoice]

That's massively unfair to the Mensheviks. The CPN(Maoist) is more comparable to the Khmer Rouge - or, as they'll tell you themselves, to Sendero Luminoso in Peru.

The Mensheviks were part of the workers' movement. As are the Communist Party of Nepal(United Marxist-Leninist) and similar reformist parties today.

The CPN(Maoist) is not, and it has a record of terror against the workers' movement


What fucking trot bullshit is this? *shock* there is death during a revolution *shock*! Can you stop being sectarian for a second and look at what the people war has accomplished and the joining of the government will accomplish?

The Khmer Rouge was very anti-maoist and claimed maoism was counterrevolutionary.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2006 04:24 pm
What fucking trot bullshit is this? *shock* there is death during a revolution *shock*! Can you stop being sectarian for a second and look at what the people war has accomplished and the joining of the government will accomplish?
Care to stop name-calling and deal with my actual points and the facts I've advanced in support of them?


The Khmer Rouge was very anti-maoist and claimed maoism was counterrevolutionary.

So what? Actions matter, not ideological labels.

[Louis Pio]

Hmm you could be right, I will look more into the subject when time allows.

EDIT: The point is im not sure on what degree of support the maoists have

[Janus]

The point is im not sure on what degree of support the maoists have
They seem to have popular support in the countryside and they did gain support in the cities as they were a major factor in the anti-monarchy movement. However, their support in the urban areas has waned since then and if they join the interim gov., they will also loose the full control they once had over large rural areas.

[black magick hustla]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2006 10:24 pm

That's massively unfair to the Mensheviks. The CPN(Maoist) is more comparable to the Khmer Rouge - or, as they'll tell you themselves, to Sendero Luminoso in Peru.

The Mensheviks were part of the workers' movement. As are the Communist Party of Nepal(United Marxist-Leninist) and similar reformist parties today.

The CPN(Maoist) is not, and it has a record of terror against the workers' movement


What fucking trot bullshit is this? *shock* there is death during a revolution *shock*! Can you stop being sectarian for a second and look at what the people war has accomplished and the joining of the government will accomplish?

The Khmer Rouge was very anti-maoist and claimed maoism was counterrevolutionary.
werent you a trot like....yesterday

and an anarchosyndicalist like

two weeks ago

holy shit

[The Grey Blur]

He isn't a Trot, a Maoist, an Anarchist or anything else. Every time he has taken up a political position on this board he has misrepresented and misunderstood it.

So anyway good news on Nepal, both gangs of reactionary thugs have their guns locked up. Maybe now a revolutionary organisation can start to harness the undeniable anger and energy of the masses in Nepal.

[Tekun]

The CPN(Maoist) is not, and it has a record of terror against the workers' movement.
Got a link Sev, or some sources?
I've yet to hear about this :huh:

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2006 04:31 am

The CPN(Maoist) is not, and it has a record of terror against the workers' movement.
Got a link Sev, or some sources?
I've yet to hear about this :huh:
I've given a lot of sources in the past, lemme see if I can bring most of 'em together in one place for future reference.

Numerous links given throughout the three pages of this thread (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=35386)

I gave some other sources in some more recent posts - some of the article links have expired so I'll give the posts where they're quoted.
here (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=51437&st=0&#entry1292092721)
This post (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=ST&f=4&t=45294&hl=&view=findpost&p=1292010068) and the one right after it. Also This post from the next page of that thread (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=45294&st=25&#entry1292010573)
Here (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=46166&st=0&#entry1292018787) and
here (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=ST&f=4&t=49388&hl=&view=findpost&p=1292061142)

Recent news articles, some of them from a Nepali paper (And of all the Nepali daily paper, Kantipur was the most supportive of the pro-democracy mass movement):
link (http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/villages-the-key-to-peace-in-nepal/2006/11/24/1164341380354.html)
link (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?nid=92140)
link (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=91554)
Reuters (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061119/wl_sthasia_afp/nepalmaoistunresttreaty_061119122644)
link (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?nid=93002)
link (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?nid=93156)
link (http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/rebels-take-the-high-ground-in-case-peace-fails/2006/12/01/1164777791362.html?page=2)

Theory & background, on the analagous Shining Path phenom in Peru:
From the Militant (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism/tree/browse_frm/thread/53b844aa05847658/0b92797712d98ec7?rnum=1)
Even from the semi-Maoist Monthly Review (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1132/is_n10_v44/ai_13607596/pg_4)

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2006 10:31 am

The CPN(Maoist) is not, and it has a record of terror against the workers' movement.
Got a link Sev, or some sources?
I've yet to hear about this :huh:
He draws all of his links from the bourgeois media, which has countless stories about both fabricated incidents, and actual mistakes that were made in the past which the CPN(M) took self-criticisms for. Sevarian's posts are characterized by vicious outright lies and dishonest criticism. I have grown tired of responding to his bullshit.

Just for the record, the same types of lies were perpetrated by the bourgeoisie regarding the Russian Revolution and the Chinese Revolution. Unfortunately, it doesn't surprise me that Sevarian uses the bourgeoisie's propaganda.

[Rawthentic]

Oh come on, just because he criticizes the Maoists in India of misdeeds against workers doesnt mean hes taking it from the bourgeois media. Those links he provided were pretty solid.

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2006 01:43 am
Oh come on, just because he criticizes the Maoists in India of misdeeds against workers doesnt mean hes taking it from the bourgeois media. Those links he provided were pretty solid.
Those publications are unquestionably bourgeois in character. Kantipur was even under state-censorship from the monarchy for the like 2 years, and printed only what the King wanted (until the April rebellions). Kantipur has ALWAYS attacked the Maoists, but as Sevarian noted, they supported the April rebellions against the monarchy one the same basis that the bourgeois Seven Party Alliance supported it, to defend bourgeois democracy from the monarchy.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Oh come on, just because he criticizes the Maoists in India of misdeeds against workers doesnt mean hes taking it from the bourgeois media. Those links he provided were pretty solid.


May we PLEASE have your sources for this?

Or are you "criticizing" the CPN(M) only because you feel comfortable dissing them along with the reactionary monarchy? :)

[Severian]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 03, 2006 06:50 pm
He draws all of his links from the bourgeois media,
That's just plain false, and I've pointed out before that it's false, so I gotta conclude you're consciously lying.

I've linked The website of the main labor union federation in Nepal (http://www.gefont.org/summary.asp?flag=3&cid=194), of the largest "Communist" party in Nepal (http://www.cpnuml.org/analysis.html), Amnesty International (http://web.amnesty.org/report2004/npl-summary-eng) and Human Rights Watch (http://web.amnesty.org/report2004/npl-summary-eng). And occasionally even Maoist websites (http://rwor.org/a/1248/nepal_peoples_war_students_kidnap.htm) admit something inconvenient.

Those are all sites I've linked in the past, most of 'em in the first thread. (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=35386) In one case, the page had expired so I'm now linking another page on the same labor federation site.

(And as you say, sometimes the CPN(Maoist) admits and apologizes for some of its crimes. That doesn't erase them.)

In general, Maoists say one thing about the facts in Nepal, and every other witness says the opposite. Since I don't believe in elaborate perfect conspiracies, I'll go with....every other witness.

BTW, it's stupid to go into complete denial about specific facts widely and independently reported in the bourgeois media - again, they're not a perfect conspiracy. And of course, all the deniers on this point, have been known to cite the bourgeois media when it's convenient for them....

For example, Red Heretic recently started this thread (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=43313) with a news article which originally appeared in....Kantipur Online. (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=58163) The same Nepali newspaper I've been linking - the only difference he didn't link the original source, and a bogus "editor's note" was added at some point. So Red Heretic cites the bourgeois press too, when it suits him - just less honestly than I do.

He also started this thread (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=47904) with a Chinese government newspaper article, this article from Kantipur Online (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=511), this article from the Indo-Asian News Service (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=49229). I could go on but this is getting repetitious. Heck, I searched up 4 pages of threads he started, and it looks like close to half of 'em start with articles from the bourgeois press.

But when I link the bourgeois press, horrors!

This is simple psychological denial. He doesn't want to believe it, so he'll always come up with some excuse not to.

[Red Heretic]

That's just plain false, and I've pointed out before that it's false, so I gotta conclude you're consciously lying.

Am I really the one being dishonest here Sevarian? I have a difficult time finding threads on this board where you have argued honestly. Your attacks on WCW for example have been extreme distortions of WCW's line, claiming that WCW claims that the USA is a fascist country. You make up false positions for people you oppose, and then argue against those to slander them. I seriously don't have time to deal with all of your bullshit.


I've linked

Yeah, you sure have linked to a lot of shit. Let's break that down.


The website of the main labor union federation in Nepal (http://www.gefont.org/summary.asp?flag=3&cid=194), of the largest "Communist" party in Nepal (http://www.cpnuml.org/analysis.html)

Well, Sevarian! You've already done half the work for me. It comes as no suprise that a party like the UML which was a part of the bourgeois state (and waged war against the CPN(M), while defending the monarchy) would publish anti-CPNM article.

By the way, in recent talks with the CPN(M), the UML took a position further right than the "conservative" Nepali Congress Party, defending the monarchy to this fucking day!


Amnesty International (http://web.amnesty.org/report2004/npl-summary-eng) and Human Rights Watch (http://web.amnesty.org/report2004/npl-summary-eng).

Isn't it funny how none of these is recent? Seems you're running out of fresh links Sevarian.

As much as I like AI on many of things, they still have their own biases and problems. Many parts of these reports accuse the CPN(M) on the basis of "there were reports of." Reports from where? The monarchy controlled media?

Either way, some of the criticisms held in these reports are actual mistakes that actually did happen years ago which the CPN(M) admitted to, self-criticized, and changed.


And occasionally even Maoist websites (http://rwor.org/a/1248/nepal_peoples_war_students_kidnap.htm) admit something inconvenient.

Back to dishonesty. That article didn't "admit" anything. If you read the blurb at the top, it clearly states that the reason that the article was taken from the bourgeois press was because it exposed the way the CPN(M) actual interacts with the masses, asking them for criticisms, giving them shelter and food to eat, welcoming them to join, and making them free to leave at any time, etc.

Obviously, Revolution Newspaper doesn't agree with everything in the article, but it was showing how some element of the truth sometimes leak through the bourgeois press.


For example, Red Heretic recently started this thread (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=43313) with a news article which originally appeared in....Kantipur Online. (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=58163) The same Nepali newspaper I've been linking - the only difference he didn't link the original source, and a bogus "editor's note" was added at some point. So Red Heretic cites the bourgeois press too, when it suits him - just less honestly than I do.

Talk about dishonesty. You posted articles from Kantipur as being the truth. I posted an article from Kantipur in the context that it had important quotes from Prachanda, and even criticized sections of the article through posting an editor's note. These actions are totally different.

Furthermore, there are many useful things that one can learn from the bourgeois press. Truthful accounts of what communist revolutionaries are actually doing aren't those things.


In general, Maoists say one thing about the facts in Nepal, and every other witness says the opposite. Since I don't believe in elaborate perfect conspiracies, I'll go with....every other witness.

Right because the bourgeois press is everyone else other than Maoists, right?


He also started this article from Kantipur Online (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=511), this article from the Indo-Asian News Service (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=49229). I could go on but this is getting repetitious. Heck, I searched up 4 pages of threads he started, and it looks like close to half of 'em start with articles from the bourgeois press.

But when I link the bourgeois press, horrors!

Like I said, there are certain things one can learn from the bourgeois press, and certain things one wouldn't take for granted from the bourgeois press. If one wanted to learn the truth about the the Russian revolution, would they use the Russian czar as their source of truth?


This is simple psychological denial. He doesn't want to believe it, so he'll always come up with some excuse not to.

Yes, but who is it that is in denial? Perhaps it's someone who's reformist line is finding it's way into the dust bin of history?

[Spirit of Spartacus]

In general, Maoists say one thing about the facts in Nepal, and every other witness says the opposite. Since I don't believe in elaborate perfect conspiracies, I'll go with....every other witness.

See, the trouble with "every other witness" is that different witnesses interpet the same event with their own biases.

So, for instance, if a revolutionary movement in country X targets counter-revolutionaries who work with the government, its quite convenient for the bourgeois media to depict the revolutionaries as murderers.

Nobody is saying that we totally throw the bourgeois-controlled sources of information out the window.
But we have to subject them to intensive criticism and questioning.

It is a fact that the bourgeois media NEVER supported a revolutionary communist movement throughout history, from the Paris Commune down to the Nepalese revolution. Surely you don't mean to say that every single revolutionary uprising in history has been as bloodthirsty as the bourgeois media would (understandably) have us believe?



BTW, it's stupid to go into complete denial about specific facts widely and independently reported in the bourgeois media - again, they're not a perfect conspiracy. And of course, all the deniers on this point, have been known to cite the bourgeois media when it's convenient for them....

Does something become a "fact" if it is widely reported in the bourgeois media?

And what makes you think the bourgeois media reports stuff "independently"?

The bourgeois media is just as biased as any other source, and whatever claims it presents ought to be taken with a grain of salt.

As for "deniers" quoting the bourgeois media, I'm sure they wouldn't do it unless they had additional information to corroborate their arguments.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Red Heretic+December 05, 2006 11:52 pm--> (Red Heretic @ December 05, 2006 11:52 pm)Yeah, you sure have linked to a lot of shit. [/b]
Oh. Is that so? 'Cause earlier you claimed:


Originally posted by Red Heretic @ December 03+ 2006 06:50 pm--> (Red Heretic @ December 03 @ 2006 06:50 pm)
He draws all of his links from the bourgeois media[/b]

C'mon, just admit that was a lie.

You dodge around a bunch with why you're unsatisfied with those different links - but you gotta admit, they ain't bourgeois media. It's all stuff I've linked in the past, which is why it ain't recent.


Originally posted by RH
You posted articles from Kantipur as being the truth. I posted an article from Kantipur in the context that it had important quotes from Prachanda, and even criticized sections of the article through posting an editor's note.

If you really think they're such big liars, how come you trust them to quote your Prophet Prachanda accurately? And in fact you use the bourgeois media for other stuff, too, in the other links.


Originally posted by Spirit of Spartacus
And what makes you think the bourgeois media reports stuff "independently"?

In the sense of different media outlets independently reporting on something, rather than just reprinting each others' stories. Different reporters on the scene.

That's a key to extracting useful info from the bourgeois media: that it has many voices, with somewhat different biases. Stalinist regimes are much more monolithic and uninformative.


Spirit of [email protected]
Nobody is saying that we totally throw the bourgeois-controlled sources of information out the window.

Maybe nobody is saying that, but that's precisely what Red Heretic and other CPN(M) fans have done with anything that contradicts their faith....


SoS
But we have to subject them to intensive criticism and questioning.

You don't go far enough: everything has to be read critically. Nothing should be taken on faith, including the truthfulness of CPN(M) press releases.


As for "deniers" quoting the bourgeois media, I'm sure they wouldn't do it unless they had additional information to corroborate their arguments.

You're wrong. Check the links. No additional information in sight, in any of RH's threads.

In contrast, I do have additional information to corroborate my arguments....see earlier posts.

[Red Heretic]

Hmm... yeah, I exaggerated there. I wasn't consciously lying, but I actually meant to refer to your most recent post in the thread. In that post, all of the links were from bourgeois sources.

Anyway, I should not have exaggerated.


You dodge around a bunch with why you're unsatisfied with those different links - but you gotta admit, they ain't bourgeois media.

The stuff you posted in that post was. Also, the overwhelming character of your sources are bourgeois. I wasn't really thinking "Hmm... let's think back to each individual post Sevarian made a year ago."


It's all stuff I've linked in the past, which is why it ain't recent.

But it also paints an misleading picture when analyzing the current line and actions of the CPN(M).


If you really think they're such big liars, how come you trust them to quote your Prophet Prachanda accurately?

First of all, I don't think Prachanda is some sort of magical prophet, and falsely characterizing me as dogmatically following him is totally uncalled for.

Secondly, the quotes in that article were taken directly from a Maoist publication. This question is ridiculous.


And in fact you use the bourgeois media for other stuff, too, in the other links.

Like I've said time and time again, there are many things that can be learned from the bourgeois media, but the vast majority of the time, the full truth about what communist revolutionaries are doing isn't one of those things.

They told all kinds of lies about the Russian Revolution. They told all kinds of lies about the Chinese revolution. For example, during the Chinese revolution, they tried to claim the CCP was just a bunch of bandits and thieves with no grasp of Marxist theory. What was the truth?

Just a few months ago they tried to claim that the Martyr's Road in Nepal (which is being built totally by the volunteer labor of people who support the revolution), was being done by slave labor. That has since been exposed as being a blatant lie, and hundreds of youth from all over the world who have gone with the Road Building Brigades have seen this first hand, and even worked right alongside the Nepalese masses. These hundreds of youth have written countless articles on how those claims by the bourgeois media were totally false. How can you take this other shit from the bourgeois media for granted?

[Severian]

Originally posted by Red Heretic+December 06, 2006 08:23 pm--> (Red Heretic @ December 06, 2006 08:23 pm)Hmm... yeah, I exaggerated there. I wasn't consciously lying, but I actually meant to refer to your most recent post in the thread. In that post, all of the links were from bourgeois sources.

Anyway, I should not have exaggerated.[/b]
Then why did it take you so long to admit it? And in fact, you're still wrong. In that "most recent" post I linked this thread (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=35386&st=0&#entry1291864457) which contained the links to the Nepalese union federation and most of the others.


Also, the overwhelming character of your sources are bourgeois.


You mean, the overwhelming majority? So what? By posting more links from the bourgeois media, does that make the others less reliable? Can there be too much evidence?


I wasn't really thinking "Hmm... let's think back to each individual post Sevarian made a year ago."

The funny thing about that is: right after I post a link to a union federation or other non-bourgeois media source - you'll immediately come back and claim all my sources are bourgeois media. You can see it in the thread where I originally posted these sources. You do it in this thread, too. For example:


Originally posted by Red [email protected]

Severian

In general, Maoists say one thing about the facts in Nepal, and every other witness says the opposite. Since I don't believe in elaborate perfect conspiracies, I'll go with....every other witness.
Right because the bourgeois press is everyone else other than Maoists, right?

See, right there, you pretend as if the bourgeois press was my only source. In your response to the same post where I directly linked the union federation and everything else. Nope, I've looked at the range of non-Maoist sources, and they all say the CPN(M) is conducting terror against working people and the workers' organizations.


Secondly, the quotes in that article were taken directly from a Maoist publication.

And how do you know they quoted that publication accurately? If they're such big liars. No, it's you who's being ridiculous.

Admit it, you quote the bourgeois media the same reason I do: it comes out daily in English. Takes you a long time to get the Maoist publication with the same Prachanda interview. Well, it takes longer for me to get the same info from another source, too.

And if interviews in the bourgeois media aren't really the bourgeois media as source - well, some of my bourgeois media links are also interviews, too.


ust a few months ago they tried to claim that the Martyr's Road in Nepal (which is being built totally by the volunteer labor of people who support the revolution), was being done by slave labor. That has since been exposed as being a blatant lie, and hundreds of youth from all over the world who have gone with the Road Building Brigades have seen this first hand, and even worked right alongside the Nepalese masses. These hundreds of youth have written countless articles on how those claims by the bourgeois media were totally false. How can you take this other shit from the bourgeois media for granted?

See, this is a good example of how self-contained, how internally sealed your faith is. The bourgeois media is untrustworthy. How do you know? Because they lied about the use of forced labor. How do you know they lied? Because international Maoist youth who volunteered to work on it say it wasn't.

So right there: Anything Maoists say is true, anyone who contradicts 'em must be a liar. Me, I'm sceptical of what True Believers say about their Holy Land.

C'mon, give me one non-Maoist source on how there's no forced labor on this road.

And the CPN(Maoist) has always been pretty selective about who gets to visit and see their "liberated zones"....

[ZACKist]

"C'mon, give me one non-Maoist source on how there's no forced labor on this road.

And the CPN(Maoist) has always been pretty selective about who gets to visit and see their "liberated zones"...."


Alright, I'm going to have to call bullshit. What the fuck are you talking about? You ever think it might be because there's a war going on that they're so "selective" about who goes in and out of hard-fought and won areas? I bet you haven't.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

"C'mon, give me one non-Maoist source on how there's no forced labor on this road.

And the CPN(Maoist) has always been pretty selective about who gets to visit and see their "liberated zones"...."

There was a 2 page article on liberated zones in the New York Times several months ago. There are also several books on the liberated zones.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2006 09:53 pm

"C'mon, give me one non-Maoist source on how there's no forced labor on this road.

And the CPN(Maoist) has always been pretty selective about who gets to visit and see their "liberated zones"...."

There was a 2 page article on liberated zones in the New York Times several months ago. There are also several books on the liberated zones.
You wanna give me a link or other info to find these articles or books? I'm not holding my breath - this has been going on for years without a single CPN(M) fan giving a single non-Maoist source. If they ever do, of course I'll have to check if these sources actually support their viewpoint....

[Joseph Ball]

I went to the Martyr's Road in Nepal, though admittidly it was a fairly brief visit. I asked the workers through a (Maoist) translator how long they worked every day-they replied 8 hours, I asked them how many days a year they worked on the road, they replied 15 (and only one person per household is requested to perform this labour). They gave these answers without hesitation, the answers were translated without hesitation Given the circumstances of our visit it would not have been possible for these have to been 'stooges' set up in advance to give the right answer. (I selected who to ask these questions on a random basis, the Maoist translator had no prior knowledge of what the questions would be.)

My observation also confirmed that no 'slave labour' was going on. When we passed by road building teams a lot of people seemed to be resting. When they saw the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) leader, who was accompanying us, coming they didn't all jump up and start working, although it was fairly clear people knew who he was.

So, we are not talking about a labour camp. Do people come there voluntarily to work or is some sort of pressure exerted? The line of the CPN (Maoist) is to use moral persuaison only. Some argue that those households who do not give someone to perform the 15 days labour are expected to make a cash payment and this amounts to a kind of presssure on people. Sadly, I was not there long enough to explore this issue. However, I have seen the great advantages the road has brought to the region and I am clear that it is an example of socialism in action.

The Maoist leader I am referring to was someone who people were greeting warmly but also someone that people could express their concerns and worries to. No-one was in awe of him and he was an equal of everyone. Of course the Maoist areas of Nepal are not without their problems, as the CPN (M) freely admits, but bourgeois stories of peasants held in the grip of a Maoist terror regime are quite simply foolish.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Joseph [email protected] 13, 2006 05:53 pm
I went to the Martyr's Road in Nepal, though admittidly it was a fairly brief visit.
You're not exactly a non-Maoist source, are you? C'mon, just one. They let you in 'cause they can be sure you'll say fluffy things.


I asked the workers through a (Maoist) translator

So right there you don't know if he was translating honestly. More important, there was a CPN(M) rep right there, translating, so they'd have to be suicidal to say anything critical. You say they can't have been set up in advance but you ignore these simpler and easier ways to manipulate appearances. As one would expect of a True Believer like yourself.


Some argue that those households who do not give someone to perform the 15 days labour are expected to make a cash payment and this amounts to a kind of presssure on people. Sadly, I was not there long enough to explore this issue. However, I have seen the great advantages the road has brought to the region and I am clear that it is an example of socialism in action.


You don't know if it's a labor tax but it's socialism regardless. Funny, that sounds more like a feudal corvee than socialism.

[Joseph Ball]

Originally posted by Severian+December 14, 2006 12:41 am--> (Severian @ December 14, 2006 12:41 am)
Joseph [email protected] 13, 2006 05:53 pm
I went to the Martyr's Road in Nepal, though admittidly it was a fairly brief visit.
You're not exactly a non-Maoist source, are you? C'mon, just one. They let you in 'cause they can be sure you'll say fluffy things.


I asked the workers through a (Maoist) translator

So right there you don't know if he was translating honestly. More important, there was a CPN(M) rep right there, translating, so they'd have to be suicidal to say anything critical. You say they can't have been set up in advance but you ignore these simpler and easier ways to manipulate appearances. As one would expect of a True Believer like yourself.


Some argue that those households who do not give someone to perform the 15 days labour are expected to make a cash payment and this amounts to a kind of presssure on people. Sadly, I was not there long enough to explore this issue. However, I have seen the great advantages the road has brought to the region and I am clear that it is an example of socialism in action.


You don't know if it's a labor tax but it's socialism regardless. Funny, that sounds more like a feudal corvee than socialism. [/b]
The business about the cash payment in lieu of labour is a story I've heard in the bourgeois press, I was just mentioning it for the sake of balance, I don't know if it is true. I don't think you can say that a road that allows children to go to school and people to travel to get medical care is an example of feudalism, its an example of modernisation. How are the Maoists extracting a surplus from the people by building this road? It is for the people's benefit.

As for the questions I asked the roadbuilders-I said I wasn't there long enough to get the full truth about everything going on there. As I don't speak Nepali I could only really go on people's body language. However, if I had asked the question 'How many days will you be working on the road' and the real answer was 'Indefinately, until its finished or we drop dead from overwork' I think the body language in response to my question would have been a bit different. The workers just confidently gave a single word response that was translated as 15.

So, let's get real. Nepalese Maoism isn't perfect but its not the kind of terror regime we are taught to think it is in the west. Let's have a scientific debate about it rather than something that sounds like it's straight out of the right-wing tabloids.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Joseph [email protected] 14, 2006 06:29 pm
The business about the cash payment in lieu of labour is a story I've heard in the bourgeois press, I was just mentioning it for the sake of balance, I don't know if it is true.
And more importantly, you don't care. It's socialism regardless.

That's always been the real disagreement between yours truly and various CPN(M) fans. It's not whether the Maoists are doing these things - everybody knows on some level that they are, whether you're willing to admit it or not.

It's whether you care. Denial and justification of atrocities always go hand-in-hand, paradoxically enough.


I don't think you can say that a road that allows children to go to school and people to travel to get medical care is an example of feudalism, its an example of modernisation.

Feudal lords also built roads. With corvees. But I didn't say it was an example of feudalism - I said the labor tax sounded more like feudalism than socialism. Really, it's a petty-bourgeois sect shoehorning everyone into their utopian blueprint by brute force - like Cambodia. Inherently unstable, and a product of some unusual conditions including a situation overripe for social change with a tremendous vaccuum of revolutionary leadership. In Cambodia, a product of circumstances surrounding the Vietnam War.


How are the Maoists extracting a surplus from the people by building this road? It is for the people's benefit.

See, circular argument. You start with the assumption that everything they do is for the people's benefit, then that is used to prove particular examples supporting that general assertion.

Other social orders also build roads, but you don't assume it's "for the people's benefit".


However, if I had asked the question 'How many days will you be working on the road' and the real answer was 'Indefinately, until its finished or we drop dead from overwork' I think the body language in response to my question would have been a bit different.

Subjective, involves your biases in interpreting body language. See, this is why I keep asking for a non-Maoist source.


The workers just confidently gave a single word response that was translated as 15.

Gee, but you're sure the translation was accurate? For all you know the translator just said "How are you feeling today?"


Let's have a scientific debate about it rather than something that sounds like it's straight out of the right-wing tabloids.

Sure, let's. None of my sources are right-wing tabloids. Let's see some non-Maoist sources from you.

[Joseph Ball]

There was an article in an Irish newspaper by a non-Maoist journalist who went to the road that was quite sympathetic, I'll have to dig it out. But Sevarin you always exaggerrate things. You talk about the possibility that people are given a choice between paying a money tax and working on the road and then you call this an atrocity. When I pay my taxes, its a pain the butt, but I don't regard it as an atrocity. This is why I say you sound like a right-wing tabloid.

My impression of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is that the leadership were very concerned with the human rights of the people in the liberated areas and strongly believed in a line of leading through political argument and education, not coercion. Their line is to try and convince people to work on the road by showing its benefits for the development of their region not trying to induce people to do it by saying they'll have to pay a tax otherwise. Lurid descriptions of atrocities and comparisons with the (non-Maoist) Communist Party of Kampuchea regime in Cambodia have no objective basis, this is just a right-wing tabloid line.

I don't think it is fair to make statements that there haven't been enough non-Maoists going to the base areas, so we'll just assume that the capitalist media rubbish about the Nepalese Maoists are true.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Joseph [email protected] 17, 2006 08:35 am
There was an article in an Irish newspaper by a non-Maoist journalist who went to the road that was quite sympathetic, I'll have to dig it out.
As with LeftyHenry - I'm not holding my breath. I have literally never once, in over a year, seen a single CPN(M) supporter produce a single non-Maoist source, to refute anything I've said about Nepal. One source would not automatically outweigh many, of course, but it'd be a start.

And there have been non-Maoist witnesses from within the "liberated areas", despite the obstructions put up by the CPN(M). One Human Watch Watch team (http://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/nepal1004/5.htm#_Toc84254031) described Maoist killings and torture aimed at intimidating the population, and how it was difficult - though not impossible - to get villagers to talk to them.

And theCommittee to Protect Journalists described (http://www.cpj.org/attacks04/asia04/nepal.html) Maoist abductions and killings of journalists attempting to report from within the "liberated zones".

Despite all these obstructions, at least one non-Maoist journalist was able to report on the "Martyr's Road" construction - one sees why the CPN(M) doesn't invite more.

TILA, Nepal -- The little girl in the green shawl leaned forward slightly, just enough so the large stone balanced on her head would not crush her feet when it fell onto the Martyrs Road.

She tipped it onto the ground, coughed into the damp mountain air, turned in silence and began to walk in her flip-flops back down the 500-yard stretch of steep, curving track that is the largest infrastructure project ever initiated by Nepal's Maoist rebels.

At the end of her walk, a pile of rocks awaited her and the other recruits from her village who, like thousands before them, had been forced to work on this road for seven hours a day for eight days, for no money, a two-day walk from their homes. The Martyrs Road, named in honor of Maoist fighters killed in battle, is not even routed through their village.

"Ten," the girl said, when asked how old she was. Gayatri Oli was her name, she said.

Nearly everyone interviewed -- old women, young men, mothers, grandfathers, boys and girls -- knew they were being watched and listened to by other workers or members of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), who were making them work on the 5 1/2-mile stretch of a road that Maoist planners say will reach the full 56 1/2 miles to the so-called Maoist capital of Thawang within the next three years. They were only too happy to help the region's development, they said, repeating a party mantra.

Gee, isn't that what they told you, Joseph?

Only one man broke the ideological harmony. "It's this way," he said, gazing across the valley and past the low clouds toward his village, which he had been forced to leave for over a week. "No one speaks the truth here. The truth lies inside and everyone says what they're taught to say." He walked off, heading for the pile of rocks, and refused to make eye contact again.
.....
The answer can be found only with the Maoists themselves, so a Newsday reporter and a photographer spent two weeks in June traveling with the Maoists in their heartland of Rolpa, a district in the west of the country, talking with their soldiers, party members and leaders -- and the civilians who live in the poor, mountainous district that saw the start of the rebellion in 1996.
.....
From the start of the trip, which began on the then-unfinished stretch of road leading to Tila, one thing became clear: Party members did not take part in the manual labor they supervised. Their shirts and pants remained clean while old people and children scrambled, some of them barefoot, in the dust and dirt.

Working on the road is dangerous. At least two people have died, Maoist leaders said, one of them earlier in June when a huge slice of rock fell on him from the cliff he was ordered to bore into. But not working on the road is not an option.

Feudal system seems to persist

"We won't kill them, but we will make them work," said the region's most senior Maoist official, Santosh Budha Magar.

The Maoists say they are fighting for the freedom of the people. Why should people be forced to work on the road, he was asked. Is that freedom? "That kind of freedom is not freedom," Magar replied.
.....
Throughout the two-week visit in Rolpa, party members accompanying Newsday would arrive in a village and begin ordering around local residents: Get us food, get us tea, find us lodgings. Some were polite to the residents. Others were magisterial. When questioned by a reporter about their behavior, some reacted as if they had not had their beliefs or actions questioned before.
read the whole article (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-wonepal-wonepa0814,0,1252426.story?page=1)

Newsday is, BTW, not a "right-wing tabloid". One Maoist article dismissing this as lies - must be, 'cause it's unfavorable - described it as liberal. McAllester is a experienced, prize-winning war reporter. He's also reported on the atrocities of the Royal Nepalese Army, and the brutality of the old order, which help explain why so many supported the Maoists at one time. (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-wonepal-womao0814,0,1338725.story?coll=ny-worldnews-toputility)

[Joseph Ball]

Sorry, Sevarin I was waiting for a description of the Maoist death road where peasants are worked into the grave by evil power-crazed overlords who, of course, are all worse than Hitler. You seem to have found an article where one person on the road criticises the Maoists. The others don't because they'll have their throats cut otherwise, it is implied, so presumably the critic is suicidal.

Yes, they told me about the 2 deaths too. This was very tragic but it's two deaths out of thousands. Lives are lost all the time on the precipitous mountain paths the Nepalese are forced to use in the absence of proper roads.

I'm not saying that the road is some example of the communist utopia of the future where we'll all do 2 hours work a day, or whatever. Nepal is one of the poorest countries on Earth. The Maoists aren't magicians who can make everything wonderful for the people without them having to make the slightest effort. The people need the road. And funnily enough you can't build a road like the Mississippi and all its tributaries, serving every single village in a region. Even if the road doesn't pass through a village it will still enhance the development of the region as a whole.

The bourgeoisie encourages individualism and localism in oppressed nations when it suits them, i.e. when this will undermine a socialist struggle. When oppressed peoples want to exercise their freedom to promote their own interests, rather than undermine collective struggle, they are cut down mercilessly. It's like the boss who raves about the worker's individual freedom to cross the picket line on a strike day while crushing and oppressing the freedom of the workers on every other day in the name of the 'manager's right to manage'. Do the Trotskyists really want to go along with this trend?

[Severian]

Originally posted by Joseph [email protected] 19, 2006 06:09 pm
Sorry, Sevarin I was waiting for a description of the Maoist death road where peasants are worked into the grave by evil power-crazed overlords who, of course, are all worse than Hitler.

That's your straw man; I'm not obligated to live up to it. Nobody in the real world is a Hollywood supervillain. But still, some are enemies of working people.


You seem to have found an article where one person on the road criticises the Maoists. The others don't because they'll have their throats cut otherwise, it is implied, so presumably the critic is suicidal.

So overall, you don't seem to be claiming the article is a lie - just that it's insufficiently unfavorable. So again, the real difference between us isn't a factual disagreement over what the Maoists are doing to working people - it's just that you don't care.

Oh, that some people criticize a regime hardly proves that there's no intimidation. People like this reporter, and the Human Rights Watch observer, are accustomed to dealing with repressive regimes and finding those people willing to talk about 'em.

A more recent article - from The Age (http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/a-war-veteran-shes-only-17/2006/12/08/1165081152875.html) also not a right-wing tabloid. It's an interview with Mina Sahi, a former soldier in the CPN(M)'s army - and still partly favorable to their cause. She says:

While she had no trouble with recruiting teenage soldiers, she disapproved of Maoist practices of forced labour and extortion, and said so in the regular self-analysis sessions.

"One of the weakness that my friends and I always pointed out was making people march long (distances), making them carry our rations, forcing people to (do) development activities, also taking donations," she says.

A political cadre in nearby Gorahi explains it differently, using the 18 kilometre stretch of the Rolpa Martyrs Road, built with forced labour, as an example. "First of all, it is difficult to make people make a tradition, … they don't understand it is for their benefit. That is a problem. In the beginning we forced them and the road was built there and later other villagers see the development and build roads for their villages. We are happy to make people aware."

I've often noticed the CPN(Maoist) says one thing for the consumption of their comrades internationally and other domestically. Everyone in Nepal knows they're using forced labor, so they can't deny it - they have to justify it.

Incidentally, I haven't been able to find anything on what's happening on that road currently. It'd to be interesting to see what's changed now that the Maoist soldiers and their weapons are now in camps.

Oh, still waiting for that non-Maoist source.

[Joseph Ball]

For a bourgeois source see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4714465.stm. This source is hardly compliementary about the Maoists but it does confirm that people only do 15 days per household. As far as 'gruelling work' goes-that certainly wasn't what I saw. 50% of all the workers seemed to be resting when I went by. Yes, some people have been forced out of their homes by Maoists but revolution isn't a dinner party. As I said on another thread, what on earth does Sevarin think happened in the Russian Civil War? She/he often talks more like an NGO employee than a revolutionary.

A People's Army cannot exist unless people give donations and provide assistance. This does not mean that they only exist by means of coercion. The role of the army is to educate the people about the need for struggle and sacrifice. The relatively small amount of sacrifice made by the people of Rolpa and surrounding areas has led to big gains in terms of the advantages the road is bringing.

In the Russian civil war peasants had to give up their food in return for worthless paper money as part of the food dictatorship. There was conscription both by the Red Army and the army of Nestor Makhno, so beloved by anarchists. In desperate circumstances the Bolsheviks were forced to resort to reprisals and executions to save the revolution and the country. The Maoists in Nepal have done nothing like this! It's been one of the least bitter civil wars the world has ever known.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Joseph [email protected] 20, 2006 03:58 pm
For a bourgeois source see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4714465.stm. This source is hardly compliementary about the Maoists but it does confirm that people only do 15 days per household.
Yeah, it says - "That is because households in villages all over the Maoists' heartland have been told to send one member each, to give up to 15 days unpaid labour." In other words, this article also confirms what I've said, that they use forced labor.

The length of time is not the dispute; I've made no claims about that.

Generally the rest of the article does not help your case - it helps mine. Heck, did you read it?


" As far as 'gruelling work' goes-that certainly wasn't what I saw. 50% of all the workers seemed to be resting when I went by.

Yes, the productivity of forced labor is often low. That's why chattel slavery was made obsolete by history. I'm not sure who you're quoting with the "gruelling work" or if you're just making up a quote.


Yes, some people have been forced out of their homes by Maoists but revolution isn't a dinner party.

Thank you for the truism. Of course, the issue you're unwilling to address is: terror against the exploiters or terror against the exploited?

[ZACKist]

My question was never answered, I held my breath. Now I'm dead.

This is ZACKist's ghost.

[pandora]

China

Nationalism in Nepal and a wish to not be over influenced by China had a role, even though the Maoists are not directly connected officially.

After the lose of Tibet to China, essentially a authoritarian capitalist state parading as Communist, would cause the Maoist cause to be seen as a lose of national soveignity against a land hungry China.

This would badly damage the need to get rid of the monarchy.

Nepal wishes to remain Nepal. How they can do that and remove the monarchy is the question. In general states do not go from monarchy to Communism over night, not without outside interests.

[Brownfist]

It is true that the CPN(UML) till around the late 90's was the largest communist party in Nepal. This was due to the political work that they had successfully engaged with in the 1980's and 90's. However, I do think that it should be mentioned that numerous leaders of the CPN(Maoist) were part of the very earlier formations that we are currently referencing as the CPN(UML) including Com. Prachanda and Com. Baburam (for example if we look at The Worker issue #1 it states that it was the official organ of the CPN(Unity Center) which was the Prachanda parallel that was established that later became the CPN(Maoist), whilst the other CPN(Unity Center) later became CPN(UML). However, it is also clear that in the post-palace massacre the CPN(UML)'s support base has whittled due to 1) the networks that they had built during the 80's and 90's being destroyed by King Gynanendra and 2) because of a recognition of the illegitimate government in Nepal. The CPN(Maoist) however, does have the majority support of the rural populations. However, there relationship to the urban population remains lukewarm. There has been a proliferation in the city of Kathmandu for example, of radical propgressive republican forces that are independent of any party but constitute a network of grassroots initiatives. Indeed, in the February revolt we did a confluence of the Maoist and the urban grassroots forces. The reality of this independent grassroots movement can be seen in the constituent assembly seat allocation, in which they were given their own seats (I forget the number).

I think the fact is that if one is not sympathetic to the Maoist movement in Nepal, one is always going to make spurious arguments about the Maoists being dictatorial and killing peasants, and will always cite materials that are produced by rival parties or the bourgeois media. Those are sympathetic to the Maoists will be more inclined to find materials in favor, and this is just the result of an argument that is debating an issue and place that is so far removed from the arguments participants own reality. Thus, besides Joseph's brief visit to the Martyr Road and need to use a translator, no one else has gone to Nepal. It seems to me that this debate has less to do with Nepal, than ideological differences between the SWP, RCP, independent maoists etc, who have transposed their ideological differences onto the terrain of Nepal. This I feel is a disingenuous way to conduct such a debate. If comrades, really do want to engage in a debate on Nepal they need to have a lot more knowledge than what they or I currently do have. I will be going to Nepal in the upcoming months and will be more than happy to share my experiences.

However, I do not think that it is fair to say that the Nepalese maoists have not been willing to allow visitors into the liberation zones. They have been more than willing and welcoming of people to visit them. Are they going to be suspicious? Of course they will, they have to deal with realities that none of us can really imagine. I know of several people who have gone to the liberation zones with great ease, including independent reporters, and have seen the conditions of the population there. Some of them have come back sympathetic and some not so. Again this depends on ideological predispositions, there is no such thing as objective reporting.

[Joseph Ball]

Dear Brownfist
There is such a thing as independent reporting and from the sound of it you would be in a position to do it. Communists need criticism as much as they need support. What I would urge you to do when making your enquiries about the Nepalese maoists is to give the peasants and workers a chance to answer your enquiries in a collective, rather than an individual way. E.g. ask people 'What do people in your street think about joining the general strike?' rather than 'Do you as an individual want to join the strike?'. This is because when you start asking Nepalese people to think about things as an individual, they will give individualistic responses, e.g. 'The strike is all very well, but I am losing money.' A struggle is about collective spirit. Western journalists always try to undermine the collective and get people involved in collective struggle to think about their purely, individual concerns rather than collective benefit. Given the undevelopment of Nepal only collective struggle and collective work can bring the people salvation-in my opinion-but it's up to you to draw your own conclusions.

[Brownfist]

Dear Com. Joseph,
Thank you for your confidence. I think that we as communists have become overtly defensive, due to the attacks from the bourgeois state, to the extent that even amongst our peers (even of different tendencies) we are unable to criticize and learn; rather, we all demand that our position be the only correct one. Mao, in "Combat Liberalism", talks about a methodology of principled debate (although we need to recognize that he is talking about inner-party discipline and debate) which I feel should be employed in this forum as well. Mao also writes in "Oppose Bookworship" (something that we all engage in) that one should not talk if they have not done the requisite social investigation, which I do not believe that majority of the people on this board, including myself, have done.

I agree that the correct way of asking questions is asking them in a collective. The problem with bourgeois media reporting is that it consistently emphasizes the individual. The individual as we all know from Marx is a product of capitalism, and the private/public divide that is encouraged under the said system. I thank you for your recommendations.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 04:54 pm
It is true that the CPN(UML) till around the late 90's was the largest communist party in Nepal.....However, it is also clear that in the post-palace massacre the CPN(UML)'s support base has whittled due to 1) the networks that they had built during the 80's and 90's being destroyed by King Gynanendra
Not to mention being destroyed by the Maoists. Yes, they've suffered from repression from both.

However, how do you know their popular support has diminished, or how much support the CPN(Maoist) still has? In the last contested elections, clearly the UML did well. We'll see how the constituent assembly elections turn out.


I think the fact is that if one is not sympathetic to the Maoist movement in Nepal, one is always going to make spurious arguments about the Maoists being dictatorial and killing peasants, and will always cite materials that are produced by rival parties or the bourgeois media.

In other words, those without faith can never see the true face of God. If everyone but Maoists claims one set of facts, and Maoists claim the other (at least for international consumption) - still do not lose faith!


Those are sympathetic to the Maoists will be more inclined to find materials in favor,

The difficulty is, you can't. Except for Maoist propaganda - no other witness supports your claims.

C'mon, one non-Maoist source.


I know of several people who have gone to the liberation zones with great ease, including independent reporters, and have seen the conditions of the population there. Some of them have come back sympathetic and some not so.

Really? Show me this independent reporting that's sympathetic.

Basically you're doing the whole postmodernist BS that the truth is unknowable, all we have are biases. How do we know the Iraq war even happened, when we just saw it on TV, Baudrillard asked.

I prefer a more scientific approach: despite bias, it is possible to think and search for facts.

[Brownfist]

Severian, I would suggest that you read the works of Deepak Thapa and Anand Swaroop Verma. Neither of them are Maoists, and have different levels of sympathy with the movement. I am not sure whether Anand Swaroop Verma's work has been translated into English, but I do know that Deepak Thapa's is available. I think that even if we look at bourgeois newspapers that there has been numerous cases in which they have argued that the Maoists have a lot of support in the working-class and peasantry. The Kathmandu Post for example, which by no means is a Maoist source, has an article on the All-Nepal Federation of Trade Unions written by Narayan Manandhar which actually demonstrates that there is a lot for the Maoist trade union federation. Indeed, it is very difficult, almost impossible to get real statistics about what is the current membership of any of these parties and unions. The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (Nepal) which is an independent organization has not released a report on the state of trade unions since 2001.

The last election that you mention was a sham election that was conducted post-palace massacre and was not really even an election to an assembly with power. Furthermore, majority of the election results from that election were urban-based, with very little rural voter turnout. The constituent assembly elections indeed will be important to gauge support. I would however, like to point to the fact that the CPN(UML) has been given 73 seats in the interim government which reflects their relative strength in the elections that you have cited. However, the Maoists have also been given 73 seats. The only party that has more seats is the Nepali Congress which has 75 seats.

I do not believe that God has anything to do with evaluations of conditions. Rather, I do think that most of the argumentation that occurs on this board is of a polemical nature. I mean we are all relying and challenging one another's sources because they are what we perceive to be untrue. Any source that provide will be called Maoist, and any source that you provide will be oppositional or bourgeois. The only way in which these questions can be reconciled is through serious socio-economic political study of the situation. I think that the question of biased reporting is an important one, and I have not insinuated a postmodern politics of the lack of real; rather, I am arguing that we are currently engaged in a non-scientific method of investigation. You keep on making a call to scientific methodologies, yet have never demonstrated such a methodology, rather you resort to the very polemics that you accuse others of using.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 08:02 pm
Severian, I would suggest that you read the works of Deepak Thapa and Anand Swaroop Verma.
You mean This Deepak Thapa? (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Nepal/Kingdom_Under_Seige.html)

Amnesty International and other non-governmental organizations have also condemned Maoist tactics. Rebels routinely kill or mutilate political opponents and suspected government informers. Abductions of civilians often lead to sentences in makeshift "labor camps" run by the Maoists. Lately, Maoists have been forcing schoolchildren and teachers in rural areas to undergo political indoctrination en masse. Despite denials by the Maoists, child soldiers form a considerable proportion of their fighting forces.
While government security forces are responsible for the vast majority of casualties, the Maoist rebels have often turned violence into grisly public theater for maximum impact. On a September day in 2003, Maoists carried out a "people's action" against 35-year-old Gyanendra Khadka, a village schoolteacher who also worked as a correspondent for a prominent national newspaper and the government news agency. Maoists dragged Khadka from his classroom, tied him to a post and hacked at his neck with khukuris (machetes) before the other villagers, even as his hysterical wife begged for his life. All the while, the Maoists denounced Khadka's "crime": writing "false" stories about the Maoists and "spying" for the government.

How did you put it earlier? "I know of several people who have gone to the liberation zones with great ease, including independent reporters, and have seen the conditions of the population there. Some of them have come back sympathetic and some not so." And some of them came back dead.

I'm not going to search up the rest of your sources for you; it's your job to provide them. But funny how these sources usually turn out to support my claims not yours.

[Brownfist]

Hello Severian,
Yes I do mean that Deepak Thapa. He is very critical as you have correctly pointed out of the Maoist insurgency in Nepal, however, I do think that you need to read more of his work to get a better picture of what is going on in Nepal. I have met him and he has a far more nuanced analysis than you are willing to conduct. This is of course because you refuse to conduct the very scientific investigation you demand of others, and continue your ideological campaign. I do not believe that the CPN(Maoist) has not committed numerous flaws and mistakes, rather, I try to account for these events within my analysis of a movement.

I think that you should look at the work that was done post-1968 rebellion in France, in which theorists actually write about the uncontrollability of the revolutionary moment. The consistent flaw of comrades around the world whose movements are tiny and ineffectual, and completely removed from any revolutionary action and moment, is that they start to engage in an analysis in which they can control ever micro-detail of revolution. This, I think that has been consistently shown around the world is that the revolutionary movement can be directed, but is actually larger and much more unpredictable than most armchair revolutionaries would have it.

Also since you are so intent on the CPN(UML) I would suggest that you read this:

ANNFSU central member joins ANNISU-R
Himalayan News Service
Kathmandu, January 2:

Central committee member of the All Nepal National Free Students Union affiliated to CPN-UML announced today to join Maoist-affiliated students’ union. Namita Neupane stated in a release that she had decided to leave ANNFSU because the CPN-UML and ANNFSU were not doing enough towards building a new Nepal.
Neupane also stated that ANNFSU education policy was creating confusion among the students. “Maintaining status quo at a time when the progressive and regressive forces are having fierce battle would ultimately help regressive forces to raise their heads.”
She also appealed to like-minded revolutionary friends in the ANNFSU to join All Nepal National Independent Students Union - Revolutionary (ANNISU-R). Vice-president of the ANNISU-R Yubaraj Chaulagain said the central committee meeting of the union would decide how to accommodate her.

[Brownfist]

Also, Severian this was also found on the GEFONT website:

Now ANFTU apologizes
12/4/2006

December 04- All Nepal Federation of Trade Unions (ANFTU), the labour wing of CPN (Maoist) has apologized on its attack against GEFONT founder leader Comrade Madhav Neupane. Issuing a press communiqué Maoist aligned union's president Shalikram Jamkattel expresses his deep concern on the incident that took place yesterday evening in the Kathmandu's 5-star Hotel, Hotel de'la Annapurna where Com Madhav is currently working.

"Violating 4-point understanding of October 19, 2006 with GEFONT and 10 points declaration made with GEFONT and other unions on December 2, 2006, the activists of All Nepal Hotel & Restaurant Workers Union (affiliated with ANFTU) pitifully misbehaved President of Nepal Independent Hotel Workers Union Com. Madhav Neupane, our organisation sadly regrets on the incident. We would like to make clear that those all involved in the incident will be punished whatever position they hold in our organisation", the ANFTU press release reads.

ANFTU president has further shown his commitment to adhere on 4-point understanding with GEFONT and the 10 points declaration which was signed in the presence of ILO Director Shengjie-Li.

"We call upon entire leaders and cadres of ANFTU" he said to adhere on the commitment and asks to move forward in competitive politics based on political ideology."

Violating the one-day old understanding with other trade unions vowing to cooperate with each other, Maoist cadres have smeared black paint and manhandled GEFONT leader Madhav Neupane who is the president of Nepal Independent Hotel Workers Union, yesterday.

Following that incident GEFONT had immediately sent fact finding mission in the Hotel led by its Secretary General Binod Shrestha.

"They just came and accused that I had committed corruption. I counter it, however they hurriedly painted my face black," explained Madhav Neupane.

Addressing brief press meet Secretary General Binod Shrestha condemned the incident and warned the Maoists to clarify the incident or face consequences.

GEFONT HQ, NIHWU and all of the GEFONT affiliates have issued press release condemning the incident immediately.

The incident occurred a day after four trade unions including GEFONT and the Maoists' union had signed an understanding pledging to cooperate with each other. This is the 4th attempt by the Maoists against GEFONT after the agreement. They have already physicaly attacked to the GEFONT unioists at Hotel malla and Bhrikuti pulp and Paper Ltd.

It is very interesting that you did not bother to post this when posting the other article from the GEFONT website. I guess that this did not make your point adequately, especially the fact that the GEFONT seems to believe that the ANFTU is making overtures to re-affirm the agreement.

Also, I find it fascinating that you werent able to find this article (but since I did find it I will do you the favor of posting it):
Enter the ANFTU
By NARAYAN MANANDHAR
(Source: The Kathmandu Post)

- Maoist ideologue Dr. Babu Ram Bhattarai must be spitting fire when he says, "we have emancipated villages, and we have emancipated the poor farmers and the dalits, now we should focus our attention on urban centers – the residing palace of the ruling capitalists. The power of revolution comes from the working class. Therefore, our center of attention will be the working class and factories will be our working fields. Just like the way we used villages to be the camps for our PLAs, we will convert urban factories into our barracks." (Dr. Bhattari in Mazdoor Bulletin published by ANFTU).

The message is loud and clear – industrial conflicts will continue to be the feature of Nepal's labor relations. Increasing political conflicts at the national level will be re-enacted in the industrial settings. The industrialists and businessmen are already feeling discomfort here.

First, they are accused of collaborating with the regression. People have hardly forgotten the fact that the reception given to King Gyanendra coincided exactly on the date multi-party was re-instituted in Nepal. A lame excuse could be that the reception extended beyond mid-night in Hotel Hyatt. FNCCI's last minute exercise, on April 11 2006, to control damages by expressing its commitment to democracy went unheeded. Given the scale of bank defaulting, the public rating of industrialists in Nepal is pretty low at the moment. Second, business class is bit wary of Maoist economic policies. They are busy deciphering words like nationalist capitalists and comparador capitalists. The brisk parlays with Maoist top-shots, in June and July, after Maoist trade union intervention in Dabur Nepal, and subsequently, the closure of industries in Bara and Parsa districts did not seem to have paid off. Maoist trade union called All Nepal Federation of Trade Unions (ANFTU) is still pulling the saddle and dictating the show.

ANFTU first gave its presence during two rounds of failed negotiations carried out in 2001 and 2003. They strategically concentrated their attacks on carpet, garment and hotel industries – these industries are concentrated in the Capital. Many believed that ANFTU's was deploying pressure tactics to extract concessions from the then government sitting on the negotiation table. With the failure of the talks, along with the Maoist Party, ANFTU too went underground. It claims to have lost the lives of 53 comrades and further 35 members are unaccounted. With the successful April Movement, they are back into action with a kind of revenge mode.

The actions of ANFTU have both the elements of attractions and distractions. The rank and file workers are attracted by its short-cut methods. There is nothing procedural like submitting a charter of demands, secret balloting, and waiting for cooling periods, entering into phase-wise negotiations with the management and the labor office and finally, a never ending wait at the gates of the labor court. In January, ANFTU abducted 10 labor contractors from Bara district; others were simply scared to be out. With no contractors, the workers secured permanent positions. Recourse to formal channels would have taken ages. When a small invitation note for a chat is enough to heed your demands why bother drawing a long charter of demands? This is what attracts rank and file workers. In the Maoist world, force is the medium and the message. Obviously, the regime who only listens to the language of force, it is normal to be conditioned by the language of force. Industrialists have hardly forgotten their actions on Reliance Spinning Mills and Jyoti Spinning Mills – the two largest spinning mills in Nepal.

The arrival of ANFTU and its methods of industrial actions have posed a kind of impact ever felt in the field of industrial relations in Nepal. Even Chairman Prachanda seems to have been overwhelmed by the inflow of people coming to participate in ANFTU's 4th National Convention held with much fanfare in Kathmandu, on September 6 2006.

It is amazing to see how ANFTU is run by rag tag of ideologically driven young guys. In November, this scribe met dozens of their comrades – the average age must be around mid twenties. One can visibly figure out why Maoist Party is a slow burning fuse – the angst burning within. The boys are essentially meant for actions and showdowns. In the days ahead, capitalists, riding in a chauffeur driven limousine will increasingly feel uncomfortable to deal with these youngsters. They probably have to learn a new language and a new culture to deal with these boys. The discipline and punctuality of ANFTU boys equally baffles people. If you ask them to come for a meeting at 7.00 a.m., they may turn up before 7.00 a.m., but never after. They are also equally inaccessible. Access can be made only from recourse to the top. In Maoist world everything is centralized. Their membership strength is unknown. What you will be told is an overestimated figure running over 400,000. They plan to recruit all workforces as their members.

At the moment, ANFTU has made a good presence in the informal sectors - the unorganized sectors like street hawkers, security guards, hotel and restaurant workers, transport workers, rikshaw pullers, painters, hair-cutters and carpet industries. As they approach organized industrial sectors, they are coming into direct clash with GEFONT unions.

The basic philosophy of ANFTU is to oppose all forms of class-coordination, economic determinism and trade unionism. It is difficult to churn these words. This scribe is already grappling with phrases like "two line struggle" "four point preparations'. Remember: dhadma tekear taukoma hanne (climbing the shoulder to strike on the head). Unlike other 'authorized' trade unions that want to keep distance with the political parties, for an "unauthorized" Maoist trade union politics and trade unions are one and the same.
It has been written by critical source (a bourgeois newspaper in fact! Not one of my evil Maoist sources) that articulates the fact that the ANFTU has been very active in the informal sectors and the unorganized sectors, and has come into conflict with the very union that you cite due to competition about organizing the industrial sectors. This is especially going to be true because of the small size of the industrial sector in Nepal.

I eagerly await your next polemical attacks on me and this article, and how the CPI(Maoist) is anti-working class. I am sure that there is something in your magic bag of tricks, maybe a quality article from The Militant.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Brownfist+January 05, 2007 12:51 am--> (Brownfist @ January 05, 2007 12:51 am) Hello Severian,
Yes I do mean that Deepak Thapa. He is very critical as you have correctly pointed out of the Maoist insurgency in Nepal, however, I do think that you need to read more of his work to get a better picture of what is going on in Nepal. I have met him and he has a far more nuanced analysis than you are willing to conduct. [/b]
Do you accept the accuracy of Thapa's statement, which I quoted? 'Cause I'd be ready to declare the argument over, then.


I do not believe that the CPN(Maoist) has not committed numerous flaws and mistakes,

Mistakes? Deepak Thapa says they "routinely kill political opponents." Routinely is not an accidental error. It is not a failure to "micro-control" everything. Routinely means policy.

Your argument, incidentally, is the same argument used by supporters of the U.S. government after the Abu Ghraib revelations. It's false for the same reasons in both cases.


It is very interesting that you did not bother to post this when posting the other article from the GEFONT website.

What? Look, when I linked the GEFONT website I was giving examples of the sources I've linked in the past. I wasn't obligated to link every article on their website - I woulda preferred to link the original article from 2005 if it was still up.

Now, what does your article prove? That the Maoists admit to physically attacking labor unionists. Funny how Maoists internationally never admit this stuff 'til the Nepalese Maoists do. Right up to then it's bourgeois lies.

Also, that they apologize for at least one of these incidents and promise that those individuals involved will be punished. Bush promised the same thing after Abu Ghraib.

It does not prove those individuals actually were punished, let alone the individuals who gave them their orders or set the policy. If this were in fact the case - these things wouldn't occur so 'routinely'. That's true of the U.S. government, and it's true of the CPN(Maoist).

Now, show me that these attacks have stopped, and that'll mean something. But no, this actually proves the opposite, and that even the Maoists admit what they're doing.


Also, I find it fascinating that you werent able to find this article

I coulda, with time and effort, the question is why should I do your job for you? I don't ask you to find sources supporting my claims.


from the article
In January, ANFTU abducted 10 labor contractors from Bara district; others were simply scared to be out. With no contractors, the workers secured permanent positions.

Now, abduction is not a typical mass-action tactic. (Only occasionally.) More likely, this was an action of Maoist cadre, full-time activists of a quasi-military sort.

So ANFTU is not part of the self-liberation of the working class - it promises to do things for the workers. Manadhar asserts - without data - that it is appealing to rank-and-file workers. Maybe it is. In a "Robin Hood" kinda way.

But it frankly reminds me of the tactics organized crime types use to muscle into the labor movement. They use violence against the employers at times, to get a contract. More often in the long term, they use violence against the ranks, to shove rotten contracts down their throats. See above on how the ANFTU already uses violence against workers and the labor movement.

Also, the article's titled "enter the ANFTU" and asserts the ANFTU is, since April, "back into action". In other words, it's just now starting to be a factor among workers.

In a recent article, (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=93231) the same author asserts "There is greater possibility that ANFTU will emerge as one of the major players in the trade union movement." which necessarily implies it isn't now.

I could do a big thing about how fascinating it is you didn't link that article too, but I don't expect you to prove my points for me.

Anyway, here's a non-Maoist source, yes, with a tone and slant that's clearly favorable to the Maoists. But do the specific facts reported actually support your claims? No.

It's kinda a funny thing about you lot: you like anything that's favorable in tone. While anything that's unfavorable in tone must be bourgeois lies. Actually looking at the specifics reported - forget it.

But the truth is always concrete.

[Brownfist]

I actually do think that it proves a point: THAT THE CPN(MAOIST) IS NOT ANTI-WORKING CLASS. I am asking you today to tell me what are your credentials to talk about the situation in Nepal and the nature of the CPN(Maoist) besides news reports that you have read. Have you been there? Have you done academic work on the Nepalese situation? Have you been chronicling the Marxist movement in the region for several years and have come to understand the historical, political and socio-economic questions that were raised during the different movements? Do you speak Nepalese? I do not claim any expertise on Nepal and have tried to engage in some academic literature that concerns the region, however, by no means do I understand it. Rather, my academic training is broadly as a South-Asianist, but even that more on India-Pakistan during the colonial period.

Methodologically I cite as many articles as I can find and when I can find them. I am a graduate student am extremely unfond of shoddy scholarship and argumentation. Thank you for providing me that article. I have consistently said that I read as many different sources as much as possible and try to evaluate what is currently occurring those reports. It is not clear that you do that. If you have an ideological issue, please make it and lets have a frank debate rather, than just stew in these anecdotal diatribes. Otherwise dont waste your time responding.

Stop using hyperbole and engage in a debate. If you want to engage in a theoretical debate, fine I am willing to do that and we can engage systematically on a key text of a figure that you choose. I have access to the third biggest academic library in North American and am sure that I will be able to find the text that you wish to discuss. All arguments will be backed by philosophical arguments made by other concerned philosophers and theorists, but no anecdotes because as at this point you will be engaging with a philosophical/theoretical debate. If you choose a historical incident then fine, lets engage in a historical discussion with very clear and academic texts on that issue i.e. no pamphlets from this or that Trot, Stalinist, Maoist etc sect. This is a call for you to engage with not only me, but everyone interested on this board to really develop an understanding of an issue or philosophical contribution. I would prefer this to be a method by which we can all enhance our understandings of situations, not just be a soapbox from which we can hear your voice.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2007 06:27 pm
I am asking you today to tell me what are your credentials to talk about the situation in Nepal....I do not claim any expertise on Nepal and have tried to engage in some academic literature that concerns the region, however, by no means do I understand it. Rather, my academic training is broadly as a South-Asianist, but even that more on India-Pakistan during the colonial period.
I'm not an expert in anything. The facts and reasoning I present have to stand on their merits.

The same goes for the facts and reasoning you present, if any.

[Brownfist]

Gautam warns of another Jana Andolan

Kantipur Report

KATHMANDU, Jan 6 - Taking cue from Maoist Chairman Prachanda's recent statement, CPN-UML leader Bamdev Gautam too on Saturday warned of another 'Jana Andolan' if the interim constitution is not promulgated by the end of Poush (Jan 14).

Addressing a programme – Campaign for Democratic Republic -- in Tansen, Palpa today, Gautam said that Prime Minister Girija P Koirala was the main cause impeding the promulgation of the interim statute.

Stating that the UML would no more walk along Koirala, Gautam said that his party now onwards would not be able to befriend those who are joining hands with regressive forces.

Gautam said that the UML would never bow to any force and would never compromise with anyone. Stating that the UML cannot go against the aspiration of the Nepali People, Gautam said that he and other members of his party were ready to make any sort of sacrifices for the betterment of the people of Nepal.

Ruling out the possibility of a coup by the king, Gautam emphasized on the need of a democratic republican front to wipe out the monarchy from the country.

[Joseph Ball]

As I have said before about Sevarin, it is hard to believe that he/she is a Leninist. What does Sevarin think happened in the Russian Civil War? Sevarin condemned the CPN (M) because he/she thought it was a peasant movement. Now a Maoist labour union is condemned for allegedly using force in a dispute about awarding permenant contracts. So trade unionists should only use peaceful, legal tactics and stand helpless by the roadside while the scabs are bussed past. This is not marxism, this is liberalism. One day self-styled marxists of the west will wake up to the real world of sweat-shop labour in the oppressed nations, the assassination of union activists, Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. We are fighting a class war. You win a war by defeating your enemies not by giving them the 'human right' to oppress and exploit others.

[Brownfist]

I think it is also fascinating that Severian does not seem to understanding that the notion of the ANFTU entering the industrial sector organizing is because they have been very active till date in the informal and unindustrial sector of the working class, as the article above suggests. It is true that the ANFTU is a newcomer to industrial organizing, but as a major international center has shown the sector that needs unionizing and is larger than the industrial sector is the informal sector, the very sector that the ANFTU has been active in! Furthermore, it seems that Severian does not seem to get the very simple concept that the proletariat is not only engaged in the industrial formal economy but also in un-industrial and informal markets. Also, as Joseph has demonstrated aptly above, Severian seems to follow a very liberal union approach which has just made capitalism more bearable for the working class, I guess that is the model that Severian approves of.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 06:20 pm
I think it is also fascinating that Severian does not seem to understanding that the notion of the ANFTU entering the industrial sector organizing is because they have been very active till date in the informal and unindustrial sector of the working class, as the article above suggests.
You could both stand to read my posts and what they actually say before trying to refute them.

For example:
Also, the article's titled "enter the ANFTU" and asserts the ANFTU is, since April, "back into action". In other words, it's just now starting to be a factor among workers.

In a recent article, the same author asserts "There is greater possibility that ANFTU will emerge as one of the major players in the trade union movement." which necessarily implies it isn't now.


Notice nowhere in that do I, or Manandhar who I'm quoting, specify industry.

Now, elsewhere Manandhar says "At the moment, ANFTU has made a good presence in the informal sectors - the unorganized sectors like street hawkers, security guards, hotel and restaurant workers, transport workers, rikshaw pullers, painters, hair-cutters and carpet industries."

He doesn't specify what a "good presence" is, or give any concrete details at all. I might comment, incidentally, that some of those sectors are wage-workers, proletarians; others are self-employed layers of working people (street hawkers, rickshaw pullers, probably many bus and cab drivers).

In the context of the article, you also get the impression this also is a recent development. "at the moment", it says, and "With the successful April Movement, they are back into action with a kind of revenge mode." appears to be describing the ANTFU as a whole, doesn't specify industry.

Joseph Ball is simply unable to distinguish between violence by workers against the bosses, and violence by a middle-class paramilitary group against the workers. I'd guess he simply has nothing to do with the working-class movement, and never has, and knows nothing about it. He's stated before that he became a Maoist through the examination of historical questions, specifically through deciding Mao did not murder millions of people. (BTW, kinda low standards in a leader there.)

Brownfist also is coming out of academia and even seems to think one needs academic credentials to assess these questions! So total cluelessness about the basic class questions involved is not surprising.

"it is hard to believe that he/she is a Leninist." That's because we mean opposite things by some of the same labels. Oh, and why haven't you (Joseph) learned to spell my username by now, or figured out it's a boy's name?

And if you both think the self-liberation of the working class - as opposed to armed groups playing Robin Hood to shower blessings or curses on us - is a liberal concept....nope, it goes back to Marx. Why do Maoists still claim to be Marxist, anyway?

******

Now, why does all this matter. I'll give one example: the many "strikes" the Maoists have called over the years, often with success in shutting things down. Apparently they've done this without having many workers organized, or until recently even much of a foothold in the "informal sectors" like transport.

So what were these "strikes"? How were they called and enforced? Not by most workers deciding to go out, but by the leadership of a guerilla army threatening to attack anyone who goes to work. Violence against workers, not violence by the workers.

[Brownfist]

yes, I do come out of academia as it provides me the time to think seriously about questions of class and struggle. Having said that I have spent much more time studying theory, and not political economy and often have to rely on secondary source materials for that analysis. I have no intention of ever resorting to the emptying out of very complicated theories of class that have been put forward by people like Marx, Engels and so forth. This is exactly what majority of Marxist organizations around the world have done. I think that your stance actually is the problem with the current Marxist left, in which their is a reliance on outmoded dogma to discuss contemporary political and socio-economic conditions. I guess you of course fail to recognize that Marx himself spent almost 10 years in the British Library reading and writing on the questions that still plague us till today. I wouldnt say that I am totally clueless about the basic questions involved, but rather have not spent the adequate time needed to do a serious study of the political economy or history of Nepal. I think doing any less would make me sound like a fool, which you have mastered and developed to an art form. This is why the caliber of Marxist leadership around the world has dropped.

I think that one does not need an academic degree to be proficient in a study of Nepalese politics and economy, indeed some very good work has come out of people not employed in academia. However, I do think that serious study and not anecdotal evidence must be employed to ascertain the nature of a struggle, and the material conditions in the country discussed. I would do the same study of American conditions if I was interested. I think it is notable to mention that Baburam Bhattarai's first work was a political economic study of the underdevelopment of Nepal. Today, what the Left has reduced itself to is the chanting of a few axioms of Marxist theory, an ABC of Marxism as it where and has de-intellectualized the entire Marxist movement. I think it is notable that the original Bolshevik party was comprised of a number of intellectuals, and that the debates that raged within the Second and Third International have yet to be seen since. It is true that similar quality debates have occurred by Marxian and Marxist academics in their own journals, but these have not contributed to the Marxist theoretical field.

[Brownfist]

Also, you know nothing of my life. So dont just make me someone who has come out of academia. I have experienced struggles and pains that you read and deride in newspapers and history books. I have experienced war, genocide and real revolt in my life firsthand and have not sat comfortably in America and proclaimed some revolutionary dreams.

[Severian]

Brownfists' yet again failed to actually respond to my points about Nepal, but I guess I can do the meta-subject thing too.


Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 07:19 pm
I guess you of course fail to recognize that Marx himself spent almost 10 years in the British Library reading and writing on the questions that still plague us till today.
Not in academia, however. Marx was first and foremost an activist, and became fully communist through the merger of his current with a workers' organization, the League of the Just. Engels commented that Marx's role in the IMWA was the jewel of his life, but of course most academic experts on Marxology emphasize Marx's theoretical writings to the exclusion of his political and organizational activity.

Marx was always ready to set aside theoretical work for developments in the class struggle, and did most of his time-consuming economic research during slack periods. And it turns out he was a lot more productive in thought and theory than any of the professional academic "thinkers".

How ironic, then, that you take an attack on bourgeois academia as an attack on deep theoretical thinking.

Almost as ironic as a Maoist trying to lecture me on the need for theoretical sophistication - something not exactly evident in Mao's own writing, or most Maoist material. Indeed, Mao openly derided the reading of "too many" books, even Marxist books, and during the Cultural Revolution prioritized the printing of many copies of the Red Book, with its simple platitudes, over printing a range of different books.

No, the Maoist norm of theoretical debate has always been to shoot those who persistently disagree with you. A tradition carried on by the CPN(M) against other trends claiming to be "Communist." No wonder you have no concept how to debate with facts and reasoning - you've never had to.

Another Maoist poster, Flyby, a knowledgeable RCP spokes-tape-recorder, once explained the correct way to handle disagreements under socialist rule, obviously thinking she was being very enlightened and democratic. If people express disagreement, you should try to convince them - only if that fails should they be subject to repression. Avakian also expresses this, quoting Mao in the process. (http://rwor.org/a/072/ba-dissent-en.html)

Of course, this is the same standard used by the medieval Inquisition, which technically defined heresy as "obstinate doubt." Try persuasion first, then bring out the thumbscrews.


the debates that raged within the Second and Third International have yet to be seen since.

More accurately, within the Second and early Third International. There's a reason for that: Stalinism, and its physical suppression of debate.

[Severian]

There was only one Maoist on this board, ever, who knew what debate was. Went by the username "1949". As a result of knowing what a debate was, 1949 would have to say things to other Maoists like:

Second, you speak a lot of Mao's "profound (and correct) critique of Stalin's approach" to collectivization without actually addressing the question Severian brought up about whether Mao applied this in actual practice. I feel as if you have just repeated what you already said previously without providing any concrete evidence for your assertions, as if by virtue of you saying it repeatedly, it automatically becomes true--which is starkly opposed to the method our Chairman is fighting for in the epistemology talk (link). Perhaps you could cite some historical books you have read which bolster your claim that the collectivization campaign in socialist China was predominately voluntary?
thread link (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=35417&st=50)

That essential point could be made about pretty much any post by almost any Maoist on this board.

****

Update on the original topic of this thread - the peace process in Nepal. Apparently there's an agreement on promulgating the interim constitution and convening the interim parliament. link (http://kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=96907)

Part of this agreement:
The SPA and Maoist leaders have also decided to complete the task of reinstating the police posts displaced during the decade-long conflict by January 14.

Today's meeting also decided to begin the process of issuing citizenship certificates and updating voters’ list for the constituent assembly elections and ask all VDC secretaries to rejoin their offices by January 14.

The police posts and VDC secretaries are the local arms of the bourgeois state machine in rural areas.

There's also apparently a number of strikes going on, including a nationwide transport strike and a strike by water company workers. I'm not sure which federations the unions involved are affiliated with - apparently several in the case of the transport strike. But it does seem like this is more, not less common, since the end of the "People's War."

Also of interest:
Maoists not to allow other unions in Kapilbastu (http://www.gorkhapatra.org.np/content.php?nid=9479)
Maoists abduct 4 students for protesting against favoritism by school administration (http://www.gorkhapatra.org.np/content.php?nid=9920)

[Joseph Ball]

Sevarin doesn't really understand strikes. In a strike you have to make sure there is solidarity. This means sanctions have to be used against those that strike break. It's no good arguing that everyone should follow their own individual desires when it comes to following a strike call. If the majority want it, then the minority have to be obliged to follow the call. If not those who supported the strike will see scabs still receiving their pay while others suffer for their benefits. The strike will be likely to collapse in such circumstances. Trotskysists in the UK, anyway, tend to eulogise the strike wave of the 1970s. There was violence during strikes in this time (e.g. Grunwick) but most strikes were not very violent. This was because of the government sanctioned social-democratic settlement which allowed unions to operate closed shops. Workers who refused to strike would lose their union cards and hence their job. The closed shop was made unlawful in the '80s and after a couple of pretty violent strikes (the Miner's Strike and Wapping) the power of the unions collapsed. Now they organise the odd, legal one day strike and that's about it. This goes to show that what union power that exists in the west does so because of the legal protections afforded by the state (and indeed state funding of unions in mainland Europe).

In the oppressed nations the workers have never and will never have such protection, until imperialism is defeated. Therefore confrontations with scabs tend to go a bit further than angry words on the picket line, unfortunately. Meaningful union organisation is either impossible or very difficult. Unions tend to have no legal protection and face severe repression. Any serious workers movement will face armed violence. Hence the need for the Party of the Proletariat to have an army. Street protests and strikes are part of the revolutionary struggle but not the leading part. Sevarin thinks you can have non-violent strikes in oppressed countries. This is just a projection of the conditions of the 70s onto the conditions of oppressed nations now. Unfortunately, the revolution is not a dinner party.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Joseph [email protected] 10, 2007 03:44 pm
Sevarin doesn't really understand strikes.
That so? I spent nine months on strike once - got fired for alleged strike violence. And I've been active in solidarity with others. How about you, Mr. I-became-a-Maoist-because-of-history?


In a strike you have to make sure there is solidarity. This means sanctions have to be used against those that strike break.

No shit, Sherlock. The difference is, in a workers strike, most workers decide to strike, and it only needs to be enforced on a scabby minority. As you admit yourself: "If the majority want it, then the minority have to be obliged to follow the call."

Now, when a middle-class organization, with little base in the working class, declares a strike, and uses military force and threats against most workers - that's something different.

I doubt you're really so stupid as to be unable to understand this, though your ongoing inability to spell my username might be taken as evidence that you are. It's probably more that you just don't care.

[SPK]

The past one hundred plus years have demonstrated conclusively that collaboration with the capitalist state is a road to failure for communists. We have seen this over and over and over again. The defenders, in this thread, of the CPN(M)’s current path exist in some strange, alternate universe where this history no longer applies. Instead, the visionary leadership of the CPN(M) will overcome an entire century of these political lessons and, somehow, transform their current alliance with the Nepalese ruling class into a revolution! :rolleyes:

It is one thing to learn about events like this in a history book: I tut-tut when I read about various social-democratic betrayals in the past. It something else entirely to see this process happening before my very eyes. Appalling.

On a related note, the CPN(M)’s new position as an element of the existing state apparatus in Nepal has, apparently, spurred some its supporters in the usa to rethink the relation between capitalism and the state. One of Marxism’s core doctrines has been that the state is an appendage or tool of the bourgeoisie: it is a superstructure, the characteristics of which are determined by the capitalist economic base. Since the CPN(M) has decided not to push for the overthrow of capitalism, at least a few forward-thinking Maoists here are now suggesting that perhaps the state is not merely a tool of the bosses, but something more: perhaps it has agency and is relatively independent and autonomous of the economic system. This theoretical position conveniently justifies the illusion that a bourgeois state -- say, for example, one with the participation of the CPN(M)? -- does not necessarily have to buttress capitalism, but could potentially oppose it and work for its overthrow. This is not good. Here are two links to the blog entries I found, one written by a formerly-active RevLefter:

- Bronx Bolsheviks (http://shinethepath.blogspot.com/2006/12/thoughts-on-revolution-state.html)
- Portland Maoist (http://portlandmaoist.wordpress.com/2006/12/30/base-superstructure-and-agency)

The events in Nepal could have broad effects on the left, particularly among self-identified Marxists. These two links are but two – relatively early -- examples of how this debate could develop going forward. Of course, the lines that are put forth around this question won’t be merely about Nepal itself, but also – need I point this out? :lol: – implicitly or otherwise about revolutionary politics in other countries as well.

(edit - fixed link)

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 11:58 pm
The events in Nepal could have broad effects on the left, particularly among self-identified Marxists. These two links are but two – relatively early -- examples of how this debate could develop going forward. Of course, the lines that are put forth around this question won’t be merely about Nepal itself, but also – need I point this out? :lol: – implicitly or otherwise about revolutionary politics in other countries as well.
Well, yeah, especially if you mean self-identified Maoists. Those who've been singing the praises of the CPN(Maoist) won't necessarily stop as it tries to become an electoral party.

This article in Workers' World (http://www.workers.org/2006/world/nepal-0629/) is also interesting. They praise the CPN(Maoist) and the agreement on it entering a bourgeois coalition government.

Amazingly, they even compare this to the course of the Bolsheviks in 1917! Only if the Bolsheviks had joined the Provisional Government....

A few reactions from Maoist groups in the U.S.:
The Workers World splitoff "Party of Socialism and Liberation" also praises the peace accord and the "revolutionary" CPN(Maoist) taking seats in the new government. (http://socialismandliberation.org/mag/index.php?aid=740)

The RCP has finally run an article on the peace process (http://www.rwor.org/a/072/nepalagree-en.html) - an oddly noncommittal one, especially for them.

If anyone wants a laugh you can check out MiM on this too; they seem kinda split-personality on it. (http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/im/imupdate110806.html)

Just to give a sampling from one country.

And it is interesting how many self-described Maoists on this board have also been constructing rationalizations for joining bourgeois coalition governments - I guess "Portland Maoist" used to go by "Celticfire" on here.

Now, how new is this? Only semi. It's always been implied by the whole "People's Democracy" business of support to the "national bourgeoisie." Let's not forget that the Communist Party of Indonesia's Allende-like class-collaboration was approved by Mao, and led to one of the biggest and bloodiest defeats in the history of the modern working class.

More importantly, there's the class composition of the Maoist parties. Pretty definitely middle-class and student, especially in the imperialist countries. That tends a drift towards increasingly open reformism. Cf the RCP's pro-Democratic "Drive Out the Bush Regime" campaign.

So events in Nepal are just another push in the same direction....

[Joseph Ball]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 11:06 pm

That so? I spent nine months on strike once - got fired for alleged strike violence. And I've been active in solidarity with others. How about you, Mr. I-became-a-Maoist-because-of-history?

I doubt you're really so stupid as to be unable to understand this, though your ongoing inability to spell my username might be taken as evidence that you are. It's probably more that you just don't care.
If Sevarin really did get sacked by some yank boss, maybe this shows that US capitalism isn't all bad.

When I'm as intelligent as Sevarin, I'll realise why backing up my arguements with miscellany from the internet is more effective than doing proper research and actually talking to people effected by the issues I'm sounding off about.

Oh, by the way Sevarin, how do I spell your name again?

[Joseph Ball]

deleted

[Severian]

Originally posted by Joseph [email protected] 14, 2007 06:11 pm
If Sevarin really did get sacked by some yank boss, maybe this shows that US capitalism isn't all bad.
I'm awed by your sense of internationalism and class solidarity. Also by your thoughtful response to my points.

[Brownfist]

Nepalese Maoists name their MPs
By Charles Haviland
BBC News, Kathmandu

Nepal's Maoist party has named the people who will serve as its MPs in a interim parliament to be established on Monday, after a 10-year civil conflict.

The rebel group says it will now follow a political rather than a violent path.

Its list of 73 MPs includes many people from traditionally marginalised groups, but not the party's top three leaders.

In the past, these groups have been excluded from power and influence in what is an exceptionally hierarchical society, dominated by high-caste men.

The Maoists are now on the brink of sharing power - and it is weapons, not votes, that have brought them to this point.

Their selection of 73 MPs - their allotted share - is therefore intriguing.

Twenty-eight - or more than a third - are women, who are extremely under-represented in Nepalese institutions.

Eleven of the Maoist MPs will be Dalits, formerly known as Untouchables; 22 are from indigenous ethnic groups called janajatis; and 21 from communities of the plains bordering India.

Arms impounded

The list suggests the Maoists mean to raise up some of the communities they have always said they are fighting for.

The parliamentary group will be led by Krishna Mahara, the Maoists' main peace negotiator, who served as an MP in the early days of democracy 15 years ago.

It was known in advance that top leaders, including the party chairman, Prachanda, would not join parliament. They perhaps feel they can maintain a more radical stance outside it.

On the same day the new parliament convenes, the Maoists' weapons are due to be impounded as part of the peace deal.

The rebel group is still learning about democracy - there are still regular reports of their local-level members attacking and injuring people from rival parties.

In a few weeks, the Maoists are to join an interim government which will organise elections to a new assembly this year.

[Severian]

About 3/4 of the police posts shut by the guerillas have been re-opened....


904 of 1271 police posts restored

BY KOSH RAJ KOIRALA

KATHMANDU, Jan 15 - Despite calls from various quarters to re-establish police posts, 1271 of which were displaced during the decade-long insurgency, the government was able to put in place only 904 such posts as the self-set deadline ended on Sunday.

A total of 367 such posts couldn't be re-established, thanks largely to angry response - sometimes violent - from local Maoist cadres in various parts of the country.
Kantipur (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?nid=97582)

"Only" 904? In any case, clearly the former state machine is being re-established throughout the country.

The interim parliament has convened and the interim constitution put into force.