NEPAL MAOISTS LEAVE GOVERNMENT!

[Red Heretic]

Maoists decide to quit govt

Kantipur Report

KATHMANDU, Sept 18 - All efforts to stop the Maoists from quitting the government have failed.

A crucial meeting of the top leaders of the four major political parties held at the Prime Minister’s official residence in Baluwatar Tuesday ended with the parties could not agree on the Maoist demands.

The Maoist ministers also left the vehicles provided to them by the government and headed towards the open air theatre to address the protest assembly called by the party.

The Maoist leaders are due to formally announce their decision to launch an agitation at the assembly, which is scheduled to start at 2:00 pm.

Posted on: 2007-09-18 01:41:20 (Server Time)

[NaxalbariZindabad]

Originally posted by eKantipur.com
Hundreds of Maoist cadres and sympathizers gathered at major intersections before the midday have started to proceed towards the assembly venue. Many buses carrying the demonstrators were also seen heading towards the open air theatre.

They are chanting slogans such as “Declare a republic to ensure Constituent Assembly elections” and “Hail to republican Nepal”.

Traffic in large parts of the capital has been crippled.

Posted on: 2007-09-18 01:41:20 (Server Time)

[ComradeR]

It's excellent to see the Nepal Maoists haven't betrayed the Nepalese people.
So does this move mean a return to armed conflict?

[blazeofglory]

left me a lot optimistic!!!

and I watched the speech of Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, second in command of the CPN(M), and wat a speech it was! this man's simply amazing, an intellectual!!!

well, they had a mass gathering today and the leaders resigned from the government!!!

[che_diwas]

Now they have realized that joining a capitalist government (with feudalistic system) is never going to help the revolutionaries..... But still they can go back to the government if the bergeois parties fool them by giving some useless hopes and powers...

Blaze, I also listened to his speech live, though I couldn't go to Tudikhel, and man that was one hell of a speech... My best part of his speech was

" My message to the International Empire is this that, if you try to make Nepal another Iraq or Afghanistan, then Nepal will be the first Vietnam of the 21st century"

The maoists have said that the protests will be peaceful, but if the government uses any repressive measures, then they have secured the right to use any means possible...

The main problem that the country is facing is the constitutional deadlock, now the maoists are out, that means this interim constitution's legitimacy is in crisis, so people can now go to the supreme court and file a case asking "What legitimacy and constitution is this current government is standing on?"

Lets see how this story continues in the future...

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 08:46 am
It's excellent to see the Nepal Maoists haven't betrayed the Nepalese people.
So does this move mean a return to armed conflict?
They said they will return to arms upon any suppression of their movement. We'll see what happens.

[bootleg42]

Sounds like good news. And it sounded like a great speech, any video of it with english subs???? Or at least a transcript????

[Labor Shall Rule]

Excuse my ignorance, but are they materially capable of launching another armed resistance? I thought their weapons were locked up by the United Nations?

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 09:07 pm
Excuse my ignorance, but are they materially capable of launching another armed resistance? I thought their weapons were locked up by the United Nations?
Well, theoretically, they have the keys to the UN gun crates and are allowed to open the creates at anytime, but opening the crates means they will be basically treated as a terrorist organization and brought under attack by many different imperialist forces.

[autocritique]

The representatives of the old order will certainly criticize this as a blow to "democracy" and the "rule of law" but it should not be forgotten that this is a direct result of their inability to agree to implement the basic measures of republican democracy and proportional representation. All their hemming and hawing must be viewed within this light.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 03:07 pm
Excuse my ignorance, but are they materially capable of launching another armed resistance? I thought their weapons were locked up by the United Nations?
In theory, they could take their weapons out. That's not going to happen, though, and would probably be a disaster for them if they did. Most Nepalis would blame them for restarting the bloody civil war, so they'd be weaker than before. And all they could manage before was a stalemate.

At most, there will be some rallies and road-blocking, possibly ending in some compromise that will return them to participation in the bourgeois government. Or else in them boycotting the elections.

It's interesting to note the stated purpose of these protests:
Kantipur newspaper (http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=122926)


Within hours of walking out of the eight-party government, CPN-Maoist has announced that it would boycott the Constituent Assembly elections if the government tried to hold the elections without declaring Nepal a republic.

Addressing a protest assembly organized at the Khula Manch (open air theatre) at Tundikhel in the capital Tuesday to formally declare the party’s withdrawal from the government and to announce the agitation, Maoist second-in-command Dr Baburam Bhattarai also publicized three-week long protest programmes chalked out by the Maoist high command with an aim to disrupt the elections slated for November 22.

Now it's been agreed all along that the Constituent Assembly will write a new constitution, that's what it's for. That includes deciding republic vs monarchy.

The CPN(M) itself had proposed the Nov. 22 election date, and criticized other parties in the coalition government for not holding the elections sooner. Now they're doing a 180 and opposing those elections. The most likely explanation for this about-face is they've realize they're likely to do very badly in those elections. Their support was always based in intimidation to a large degree; and many of those who did voluntarily support them have become disillusioned.

But still, they'll probably come to some kind of compromise and most of this is just a threat display to extract some concessions.

One thing they're demanding is the elections be conducted solely by a proportional representation system for the elections. Representation by proportion of the vote, I guess that means, rather than a winner-take-all election-by-district system. Currently I guess the plan is a mix of the two systems.

I guess they might get the proportional representation system, and it would probably help parties with less support, like them, get some representation in the Assembly.

It also helps position them as rhetorically more radical than the older reformist parties like the CP(United Marxist-Leninist)....apparently the CPN(Maoist) haven't been able to find any more substantive or less demagogic way to do that.

[Red Heretic]

Severian! You're late! I've been waiting all morning for you to come take a shit on this thread.

So has anyone else noticed how no matter what the CPN(M) does, Severian always, like clockwork, attacks it? Only a week ago, Severian was attacking the CPN(M) as being "all talk" about walking out of the government.

[Severian]

^^Red HereticYou mean this thread? (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=70277) Not exactly a week ago.

On Aug. 9, in that thread, you posted a Prachanda interview saying:

So, when are you quitting the government?
Our ministers are giving an ultimatum today. Then, it will depend on how the government leadership takes the issue and how it is discussed in the eight-party. It will be sorted out in a few days.

On Aug 27, I pointed out that more than a few days had passed, yes.

In fact, now only on Sept. 18 are they quitting the government.

So clearly, yes, there's a lot of bluff and bluster involved, "all talk" if you like. There still is; the stuff about disrupting the elections is probably a threat aimed at getting their demands in negotiations.

One certainly hopes so; to disrupt the Constituent Assembly elections would be a criminal sabotage of the forward momentum of the democratization of Nepal.

That momentum comes out of the mass mobilizations that brought down the absolute-monarchy regime. It is continued by the ongoing actions of different oppressed and exploited sectors, who are taking advantage of lessened repression to organize raise all kinds of demands.

The CA has the potential to finish off the monarchy and codify many of the demands of the oppressed. To block it over narrow partisan considerations of how many reps the CPN(Maoist) might have in it....would further discredit the CPN(M) in the eyes of working people in Nepal.

On that, it's interesting to note that even your buddy Blazeofglory seems kinda frustrated with them. (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=68727)

BTW, in that interview Prachanda also claimed:

On the question of a republic?
Our party has decided that a republican set up is a must. We have already announced that we will run campaigns for the republican set up. However, we will not shy away from the elections if that does not happen.

Now, however, they are in fact "shying away" from the elections.

He also said:

What will be the status of the Koirala government if, in case, the elections don’t take place?
There won’t be the Koirala government if elections don’t take place. Not only will Koirala’s government go, the country will face a huge disaster.

What kind of disaster?
The country will be caught in a complex civil war if the CA polls are not held in proper manner.
....

That means, if polls don’t happen in November, there is no possibility of polls at all in the near future?
I think it won’t be wrong to draw such a conclusion.

So not holding the election in November would lead to a disaster for the Nepali people; yet now the CPN(M) is threatening to block the elections. I ask you.

What is this, if not complete demagogy? They cannot stick to any line; they have no principles; the leaders of the CPN(M) care about nothing but themselves.

[Red Heretic]

One certainly hopes so; to disrupt the Constituent Assembly elections would be a criminal sabotage of the forward momentum of the democratization of Nepal.

Constituent Assembly on whose terms? Those of the proletariat and it's allies, or those of the reactionaries?


On that, it's interesting to note that even your buddy Blazeofglory seems kinda frustrated with them.

Well if one person on the internet (who probably isn't actually from Nepal) says something, then it must be true!

It's as if Severian sits there salivating for every opportunity he can find to attack and disrupt support for the CPN(M). Severian sits there in waiting for every physical possibility to attack them and break every last bit of unity around them, trying to pit every possible force he can think of against them.

[Severian]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 18, 2007 05:31 pm

One certainly hopes so; to disrupt the Constituent Assembly elections would be a criminal sabotage of the forward momentum of the democratization of Nepal.

Constituent Assembly on whose terms? Those of the proletariat and it's allies, or those of the reactionaries?
Translation: "the proletariat and its allies" is the CPN(M); "the reactionaries" is everyone else.

So: the elections on their terms, or not at all. Rather than just restating this, why not try to explain what those terms are, and why they justify threatening to disrupt the elections?

[Red Heretic]

No... the "proletariat and it's allies" means "the proletariat and its allies" and "the reactionaries" means "the reactionaries."

Do forces want to smash the feudal state and the grip of imperialism on Nepal, or do they want to maintain it?

[Comrade_Scott]

great news glad to see that they havent sold out like some other revolutionaries and parties, mabey now they can topple the monarchy and set up a true socialist state however they need to play on the safe side as the opposition could use this as a launching pad to colour the CPN as not having the states interest at heart

[OneBrickOneVoice]

The reason they left the gov't is because they know the government won't get rid of the monarchy unless it does it before. It'll just legitimize it like in Bhutan. It needs to get rid of it before hand. This is a good move, Severian, do you ever post anything other than slander and shitslinging against any group that isn't the type of armchair revolutionary you are.

Of all the members on this board, actually of all the communists and anarchists, and revolutionary leftists I know (quite a few) you're the person who I have the least respect for. Why? Because this is all you do, and this is all your shit paper does. Throw shit at Revolutions.

[Great Helmsman]

They aren't going to get any power peacefully, the imperialists and their plans for 'democracy promotion' will make sure of that.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 06:37 pm
The reason they left the gov't is because they know the government won't get rid of the monarchy unless it does it before.
How do they know the CA won't abolish the monarchy?


Why? Because this is all you do, and this is all your shit paper does. Throw shit at Revolutions.

Nepal is only one of the things I post about. The Militant, which I presume is the paper you're referring to, has barely mentioned it, and most of that is not denunciation of the CPN(M). You oughta read it before attacking it.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Originally posted by Severian+September 19, 2007 12:45 am--> (Severian @ September 19, 2007 12:45 am)
[email protected] 18, 2007 06:37 pm
The reason they left the gov't is because they know the government won't get rid of the monarchy unless it does it before.
How do they know the CA won't abolish the monarchy?


Why? Because this is all you do, and this is all your shit paper does. Throw shit at Revolutions.

Nepal is only one of the things I post about. The Militant, which I presume is the paper you're referring to, has barely mentioned it, and most of that is not denunciation of the CPN(M). You oughta read it before attacking it. [/b]
Because the CA with a monarchy in place would only legitimize it as a state function, it would act like a guardian of the bourgeois against revolution. If the monarchy was abolished before the CA elections, it would put the working class in a upperhand postion, a new democratic republic would be formed.

And I have read the Militant. I picked up san issue on saturday. The paper had a little bit of news and then like half was about how Stalin was evil and stupid and the fact that the 1927 revolution didn't succeed was all his fault. That's exactly what I'm talking about. The masses need exposures of the crimes of the system, and then a clear path out, a paper which very boldly fights for them. History is good to know but putting it in the paper is the problem with trotskyist papers, they just don't understand that a party needs to be a liberating document not some tool to trash talk.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

And yes I'm sure you have posted on other things, but I rarely seen anything other than slandering of maoists

[blazeofglory]

BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!!! is the answer!!!

the CPN(M) (actually Dr. Baburam Bhattarai) clearly stated that nothing could stop them gettin their objective. Neither the bourgeoise parties, nor the army, nor the American and Indian imperialists and other expansionists, not the UN, not the king, hell NOBODY!!!

They have come out of the government and assured the mass that they will disrupt the polls if the present government (or we should say, wat is left of the govt.) doesnt announce Nepal a republican, theres no legitimacy of the CA POLLS taking place.

Comrade Che_Diwas, great to hear from you again.

And yeah, I loved it when Bhattarai said "Nepal could be the 1st Vietnam of the 21st century!!!!"

Well, lets see them stand out against everybody, a vote of applause, actually.

The only thing is, I got my exams coming and they are asking for a shutdown of everyting, including educational institutes, and personally it became really a difficult situation. :(

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 07:13 pm
Because the CA with a monarchy in place would only legitimize it as a state function, it would act like a guardian of the bourgeois against revolution.
You're just repeating yourself. How do you know?

If most people in Nepal want the monarchy abolished, they'll vote for parties promising that. If the parties break their promises, there'd be a much more favorable situation for mass mobilization.

There is not going to be popular support for actions against holding elections.

Or is this just a fancy way of saying the CPN(M) thinks the election results will be unsatisfactory to it? If so, that's what I said originally.


And I have read the Militant. I picked up san issue on saturday. The paper had a little bit of news and then like half was about how Stalin was evil and stupid and the fact that the 1927 revolution didn't succeed was all his fault.

Heh. The last issue had one brief book excerpt on Stalin's role the defeat of the 1927 Chinese Revolution. (http://www.themilitant.com/2007/7135/713549.html) It's about half of page 8.

That issue also included:
# Minnesota meat packers call union defense rally: Bosses deny union officials entry to plant
# General: U.S. troops in Iraq for ‘long-term effort’
# Workers in Virginia protest local cop immigration checks
# Miner killed on the job in West Virginia
# Stepped-up campaign for Cuban 5 launched (photo box)
# Troops out of Iraq, Afghanistan now!
# Letters
# Reply to a Reader: On immigration and unionization
Etc.

But in your mind, the one book excerpt is "half the issue" and everything else is "a bit of news". I guess the rest of that is stuff you're just not much interested in?

Similarly, in your mind, if I say anything against the CPN(M)....then that's all I ever post. Well, maybe those are the only threads you look at, or maybe you're just delusional.

Apparently? Any criticism of Maoism is too much.

No surprise there, 'cause none of you have the slightest idea how to begin addressing a criticism or defending the CPN(M)'s indefensible actions......

[Karl Marx's Camel]

If the Maoists take power, all that will change is that the aristocrats and capitalists will be replaced by cadres.


Of course a lot of Stalinists will get a hard one right now, but all the Maoists will do is to create a state capitalist Nepal, and that is not something leftist revolutionaries should aim for.

[YKTMX]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 18, 2007 07:46 am
Maoists decide to quit govt

Kantipur Report

KATHMANDU, Sept 18 - All efforts to stop the Maoists from quitting the government have failed.

A crucial meeting of the top leaders of the four major political parties held at the Prime Minister’s official residence in Baluwatar Tuesday ended with the parties could not agree on the Maoist demands.

The Maoist ministers also left the vehicles provided to them by the government and headed towards the open air theatre to address the protest assembly called by the party.

The Maoist leaders are due to formally announce their decision to launch an agitation at the assembly, which is scheduled to start at 2:00 pm.

Posted on: 2007-09-18 01:41:20 (Server Time)
Isn't it a little bit suspect that the "Maoist leaders" are to "announce" the "agitation"? Surely if this party was Marxist as it claims to be they would be heeding calls from the workers and peasants of Nepal, not the other way around. Unfortunately, it just seems like they're "stopping and starting" the mass movement to coincide with their own political machinations in the feudal order.

The Nepalese masses should be leading this thing, not the annointed leaders, who no doubt would jump straight back into bed with the King and his lackeys if they smelled power.

[che_diwas]

The Maoists were left with no option but to launch a programme of strong protests to establish a republic because Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala hesitated to express his commitment towards republicanism.

The Maoist are in better position right now, because the elections without them will be of no meaning and they have again organized a central committe meeting today and have decided to stick to their plan of declaring Nepal a republic...

I am surprised to read from other members who are not Nepalese and that they know more than me who lives in the heart of Kathmandu...

The first flaw of this topic is that most news are quoted from rightwing media, which is always supporting the middle and the upper class...

The Maoists are very clever in taking right decisions at the right time...

1. The anti maoists had announced that their People's War will only survive hardly for 3 months, but it went over 10 years....

2. Then when they made the peace accord and launched a peaceful movement with the seven parties alliance against the royal regime, the King said that they will use violence in the name of peaceful protests, but not a single shot was fired by them..

3. Then when they entered the Parliament and the government, they made the US and other foreign diplomats believe in them that they will abide by the peace process and rule of law ( The US was always against them, but they could only use verbal abuses and nothing else)

4. Till now from the time they entered the peace process, the maoists are everywhere... they have their own unions in each and every part of Nepal's structure...

- Student Union
- Teacher's Union
- Journalist Unnion
- Hotel and Resturant's workers union
- Farmers Union
- Bus drivers, taxi driver's union
- Government official union
- Nationalists industrialists Union
- Doctors union
- Women's Union
- Youth Union
- People's council
- seven different autonomous federal councils..
- Young Communist leage ( Wartime militias)
- Peoples Liberation army
And many many more... and they have a great number of members...

Now their latest move to quit the government and to start the movement is actually to use all of the above fronts excepts the guns inside the UN box... Now tell me if all of the above fronts starts a wave of protest, then how can the government run... and if the army is deployed then they have the every right ( According to the peace accord of the UN) to use the guns inside the UN box...

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by Karl Marx's [email protected] 19, 2007 04:25 pm
If the Maoists take power, all that will change is that the aristocrats and capitalists will be replaced by cadres.

And the homosexuals will face greater repression. And democratic workers unions will be smashed up.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

they have their own unions in each and every part of Nepal's structure...

- Student Union
- Teacher's Union
- Journalist Unnion
- Hotel and Resturant's workers union
- Farmers Union
- Bus drivers, taxi driver's union
- Government official union
- Nationalists industrialists Union
- Doctors union
- Women's Union
- Youth Union
- People's council
- seven different autonomous federal councils..
- Young Communist leage ( Wartime militias)
- Peoples Liberation army
And many many more... and they have a great number of members...

Leading question:

Who control the unions?


4. Till now from the time they entered the peace process, the maoists are everywhere... they have their own unions in each and every part of Nepal's structure...

My emphasis.

Since you say "they" I assume it is the Maoists who control the unions.

[NaxalbariZindabad]

Thanks for these informations, comrade che_diwas. Most of the time, it's impossible for activists living far away from Nepal to get information about the current Nepalese situation that hasn't been distorted by the reactionary media.


I am surprised to read from other members who are not Nepalese and that they know more than me who lives in the heart of Kathmandu...

Yeah, I was surprised about such things too, the first times I visited this forum. But now I understand that there are many people writing here who aren't serious at all. Sometimes it's because these people are really young activists and don't know what they're talking about, or sometimes it's because some have a dishonest or anti-scientific attitude.

You shouldn't pay too much attention to such baseless comments (like those of Karl Marx's Camel for example)

[NaxalbariZindabad]

Since you say "they" I assume it is the Maoists who control the unions.

Well of course, what do you think? These are maoist unions, which means that their members are maoists... It doesn't seem complicated to me :rolleyes:

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Most of the time, it's impossible for activists living far away from Nepal to get information about the current Nepalese situation that hasn't been distorted by the reactionary media.

True.

But we must also remember that information about the current Nepalese situation can also be distorted by the maoists.

Considering how those other leninist/stalinist experiments went, we should be sceptical.

And we should discuss who controls the movement, and what will happen this time that will be different from those other failed leninist/stalinist experiments. In fact, we should ask ourselves: Will anything of significance be different?


You shouldn't pay too much attention to such baseless comments (like those of Karl Marx's Camel for example)

Are you saying discussing whether the unions are controlled by the people or some party elite is irrelevant?

[NaxalbariZindabad]

Are you saying discussing whether the unions are controlled by the people or some party elite is irrelevant?

Of course not! I'm just saying your comments are irrelevant.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Comments include:


Who control the unions?


And we should discuss who controls the movement, and what will happen this time that will be different from those other failed leninist/stalinist experiments. In fact, we should ask ourselves: Will anything of significance be different?


These questions are very relevant, yes?

So let us discuss them and other things that are relevant.


These are maoist unions, which means that their members are maoists..

So one relevant question is: Are the unions controlled by party leaders or the people?

[che_diwas]

Karl Marx's Camel and NaxalbariZindabad, you two are in a useless debate...

I'll clear all your confusions... First of all I'm not linked in any sort to the Maoists, Yes I support them, I didn't picked up weapons at the wartime but I go to most of the protests that they launch...

The Maoist's were a different party before they launched People's War.. It was a parlimentary party named United People's Front Nepal... After the 1990 uprising, which threw the King's regime and established a multyparty democracy, there was debate inside the party wheather to go to parliament or begin a new rebellion...

After the party got inter party conflicts, it spited up and then the new party was The CPN (Maoists)... after this the entire organizations and unions related to the mother party also splited up and went underground...

You people might think that the Maoist leaders and its high command control it, its completely nonsense, this is because why:

Before two months, the maoist had organized a Plenum meeting, where all the politburos, central committe, working committe members, all the members of the unions, the different councils and also the deputy commanders of the liberation army were present.

At that meeting, the leaders of the maoists were telling them that the party should remain in the government... but that was not supported, all the members stressed that the party was losing its revolutionary ground and was turning out to become like one of the burgeois parties so it should come out of the government... they also threatend the leadership that if their voice was not addressed then they would start revolting again... the leadership had no option but to listen to them and thats why they quited the government....


"When we take a left step (socialist), the empires will be againts us, when we take a right step (right wing) then they will support us, but we will be taking both steps to move forward, but our last step will surely be the left one to reach the destination"
- Comrade Prachanda

[Karl Marx's Camel]

So from this we can gather:

1. The people are more revolutionary than the party, or if we look it the other way around, the party is more reformist than the people are. That the people are more revolutionary than the self-proclaimed (real or not) revolutionary party is a positive indication, but doesn't that not tell us that the party is a potentially (if not already) obstacle?

2. So the members had to threathen to quit in order to get their will? Why do the people have to use such "extreme" measures in order to get a decision done? Why, as a party that is supposedly a party of the people, can they not decide this for themselves?

Why must they have some enlightened leader to tell them what do next? This suprisingly reminds me of the relationship between the rebellious teenager and their parents. It is a hierarchial relationship, that, while claiming to be in "the best interest" of the one of the lowest rank, is most likely not.

What you said tells us that the people have a limited influence on the party, but that they have to use (or threathen to use) force in this "people's party" to get their will. That's not a sign of a healthy party. It is a sign of a revolutionary people unfortunately clinging onto a much less (how much less is debatable) revolutionary party.

[Axel1917]

I wish the Maoists would seize power, as they would be able to carry things forward, but they won't, and I think that Severian has made very good points. Menshevism again on their behalf.

[RNK]

It is a sign of a revolutionary people unfortunately clinging onto a much less (how much less is debatable) revolutionary party.

Yeaahh. They only went to war for a good 10 years, lots thousands of lives.. no, they're hardly revolutionary at all. They are, infact, quite clearly Mensheviks -- those wussy peace-loving social-democrats.

:rolleyes:

Good to see the CPN(M) finally get back on it's game. Good to see, too, the plethora of nay-sayers and anti-Maoists coming out of the woodwork with their contradictory statements and desperate scramblings to denounce everything. That's when you know you're doing something right.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

They only went to war for a good 10 years, lots thousands of lives.. no, they're hardly revolutionary at all.

It is not "going to war" which defines a revolutionary.

The North Americans went to war against Vietnam for a good 20 years, they must be twice as revolutionary!

If I am not mistaken, what defines a revolutionary is having a revolutionary class background and wanting revolutionary change in favor of the class one belongs to.

When the people in the party have to use force in order to have their will of distancing a party from reformism, that is a quite clear indication that the party is more reformist than the people. In other words, the party may very well be an obstacle for revolutionary change.


How do the people control the party? Or do they? Obviously decision making is not in the hands of the people, but the party leadership. What does that remind us of? Certainly not the dictatorship of the proletariat, but more like the dictatorship of the party.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Excellent news!

The Maoists have demonstrated clearly that they are a revolutionary force, and not a bunch of revisionist parliamentarians.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

We've seen that the people are a revolutionary force, not the leadership. From what we can gather from che_diwas's post, if it was up to the leadership, they would still be in government.

[che_diwas]

The people are always on the upperhand than the leaders.. but a mass of people will get more torture and punishment if the opressers wont get a indivisual
leader(s) to blame on... they willl just say its a bunch of hooligans or something like that...Maybe some will turn out to be like Stalin but that doesn't mean everyone will... What's wrong to support a party with leaders? Maybe Prachanda is not revolutionary... the party belongs to the people... they will decide when to throw him out....

The rightwingers are so clever in this issue.. they know how to break a revolutionary party into separate party and destroy them...

I dont understand why do people in this forum speak the same words that the Nepalese burgeois leaders speak everyday? Maybe Maoists are not what we really want them to be... But I cant stand reading the same stuffs in this forum which I have to hear everyday in the burgeois media...

I thought this place was where we (revolutionaries) could come at the moment when we were in desparate need of the socialist spirits and speak out our hearts and minds... but If its the same as the burgeois media..... I am really confused

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Maybe some of us don't fully understand the situation in Nepal.

But we are sceptical of these leaders for a reason. We are sceptical about the leaders and the level of industrial development in Nepal. We are not sceptical of the people. :)

It is easy for us to talk about how things should be done hundreds, maybe even thousands of miles away. But again, we have seen what happens when maoists get in power, and it ends badly. Very badly.

Nepal is a underveloped country, and how is such a country going to become socialist, let alone communist? And if not socialist and not communist, what will Nepal be? State capitalist?

We are sceptical because history is like a giant whip, and the actions of stalinists/maoists whip us every day and the global working class movement is tiny due to their actions.

Will anything be different than what the maoists in China did? History does in fact repeat itself because society has some inborn mechanisms. If you just repeat what happened in China, if you let leaders have much power, you will get capitalism in the end. So what will be different this time?

[NaxalbariZindabad]

I dont understand why do people in this forum speak the same words that the Nepalese burgeois leaders speak everyday

Comrade, the reason for this is because this forum is full of petty-bourgeois armchair "revolutionaries" from North America and Western Europe.

Unfortunately, there isn't a large internet forum for communist revolutionaries at this moment (as far as I know).

The best we have so far is this private discussion group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/maoist_revolution

[RNK]

When the people in the party have to use force in order to have their will of distancing a party from reformism, that is a quite clear indication that the party is more reformist than the people. In other words, the party may very well be an obstacle for revolutionary change.

Funny. For the longest time, the popular criticism was "there's no inter-party democracy! its a dictatorship!" Then, when solid proof comes out that it actually isn't a dictatorship, and that the voice of the people is the voice of the Party, suddenly it's "look! everyone has to threaten the party in order to make it do what they want!"

Of course, the mere fact that this is proof of the absence of totalitarianism in the Party is lost on you. While you obviously want to see it in some make-believe negative light, the point you can not refuse is that the party leadership answers to the people, plain and simple. They wanted to leave the government, the leadership disagreed, the people said too bad, so the leadership complied.

If it were any other organization other than Marxist-Leninist-Maoists, this tiny, insignificant disagreement would've fractured into a violent schism which would see the Party split to its foundation and a dozen or more splinter groups emerge. Luckily, for the world and especially for Nepal, this isn't the case with "us". ;)


Unfortunately, there isn't a large internet forum for communist revolutionaries at this moment (as far as I know).

The best we have so far is this private discussion group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/maoist_revolution


http://www.marxism-leninism-maoism.net

<_<

[NaxalbariZindabad]

OK, if you wanna discuss what&#39;s happening in Nepal without being annoyed by bourgeois propaganda, let&#39;s post there instead:

http://marxism-leninism-maoism.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5

[Red Heretic]

US warns Maoists against trying to &#39;trash&#39; elections; Senator Leahy also speaks out

At a time when India, European Union, United Nations and Japan have expressed concerns over the Maoist decision to quit the government and launch agitation to disrupt the November election, the United States, on Thursday, has come down with a strong warning to the ex-rebels against trying to &#39;trash&#39; the November polls, which it has said is quite crucial for Nepal&#39;s future.

To decide sensitive questions of constitutional change and the role of the monarchy in Nepal, it is "essential" to consult the voters, top State Department official Richard Boucher said, according to a report by AFP.

"We&#39;re glad to see the elections scheduled for November and we think it&#39;s very, very important that everybody respect that and that everybody go through that polling process," said Boucher, who is Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia.

"Trying to trash this election is trying to trash the whole process," Boucher said at Washington&#39;s Johns Hopkins University.

"Declaring yourselves an opponent to the democratic voting process, we can&#39;t abide that. So I hope they won&#39;t go that far," Boucher said.

Boucher said the US government would continue to treat the Maoists as extremist outcasts until the movement becomes a normal political party.

"They need to give up the gun. They need to give up extortion. They need to give up the militant youth groups that have sort of extended their power and tried to intimidate people in the countryside," he said.

In another development, US Senator Patrick Leahy, speaking at the Senate Floor in Washington DC on Tuesday, has said that "the leaders of the Congress parties and the Maoists have done little to prepare for the elections."

Leahy, who had been outspoken against King&#39;s rule in the past, said, "At times, party members have seemed more interested in furthering their own personal ambitions and in derailing the electoral process altogether."

Leahy has said that the UML has done more to prepare for the polls. He also praised the Election Commission for its preparations. "There is no doubt that the people are eager to go to the polls, just as they were determined to put an end to the King&#39;s abuse of power."

"To the Maoists I would say that it was you who called for a Constituent Assembly. Saying you are committed to the democratic process at the same time that you withdraw from the government, make new demands that contradict previous commitments, support disruptive economic strikes, and threaten to return to confrontation, is not the way to earn the people&#39;s trust and support that are necessary to become an effective force for change. Nor is it the way to earn the trust of the United States," he said. nepalnews.com sd Sep 21 07

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Apparently none of you leninists want to answer the question:

Will anything be different than what the maoists in China did?

Because if they just go along with the leninist paradigm, society will return to capitalism&#33; Is this what you want? It seems like you don&#39;t care.

And since Nepal is so backwards, what system will be set in place in Nepal?


For the longest time, the popular criticism was "there&#39;s no inter-party democracy&#33; its a dictatorship&#33;" Then, when solid proof comes out that it actually isn&#39;t a dictatorship, and that the voice of the people is the voice of the Party,

The voice of that party is the voice of the leadership having been forced by the people to obey. So yes, to a certain extent it is the voice of the people, but it seems it is the leadership who make the final decisions; they can either decide to listen to the people, or not.

Also, is the leadership elected, or self-appointed?

Why don&#39;t the people decide for themselves "what to do next"? Is it a revolution of the people or a revolution for the party?

[Karl Marx's Camel]

I remember Redstar saying that when the revolution arrives, the reformists will say "let us settle with this, let us negotiate". And that is when communists will say "No half measures&#33; Let&#39;s go all the way&#33;"

I think that holds some truth, and in Nepal&#39;s situation today we see the party leaders being the reformists (wanting to stay in the bourgeois government), while the people don&#39;t.

Again, it would be good to see a leninist answer the questions above.

[ComradeR]

I don&#39;t get it, people criticize the Maoists for joining the government then they condemn them for leaving it. They condemn them saying that the people have no voice in the party, then when evidence comes up that the people do in fact have power over the party&#39;s actions they try to put it into a negative light... While I agree we should be wary of Maoists we shouldn&#39;t dismiss them outright as some people are doing.

I remember Redstar saying that when the revolution arrives, the reformists will say "let us settle with this, let us negotiate". And that is when communists will say "No half measures&#33; Let&#39;s go all the way&#33;"

I think that holds some truth, and in Nepal&#39;s situation today we see the party leaders being the reformists (wanting to stay in the bourgeois government), while the people don&#39;t.
Agreed, but it seems that the people hold power over the party, and I have enough faith in the Nepalese people that if the Maoist leadership goes against them the people will sweep it away.

Because if they just go along with the leninist paradigm, society will return to capitalism&#33; Is this what you want? It seems like you don&#39;t care.
First off it&#39;s Maoism, which true it may be a offshoot of Leninism it is not Leninism itself. Second off explain how Leninism is a capitalist ideology?(which is what you seem to imply in your statement) You seem to have a horribly unmaterialistic view of history.

And since Nepal is so backwards, what system will be set in place in Nepal?
If all goes relativity well it will archive a socialized society, true it cannot achieve full Socialism, but it will allow it to create the foundations necessary to archive full Socialism in the future.

Why don&#39;t the people decide for themselves "what to do next"? Is it a revolution of the people or a revolution for the party?
As long as the people hold power over the party and it&#39;s leadership it will remain the peoples revolution.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

people criticize the Maoists for joining the government

Yes, of course.


then they condemn them for leaving it.

False.

We criticize the leaders of that party for wanting to stay in the government. If it had not been for the masses threathening to use force, the party would have been in government today. The leaders are reformists. The people, on the other hand, do not seem to be.

That they actually complied is a good thing, but a people&#39;s party must be ruled by the people, not some benevolent leader or a group of professionals. The reason for that is pretty clear, if you look at how leninism went in the USSR or China, or pretty much any other leninist experiment.


then when evidence comes up that the people do in fact have power over the party&#39;s actions they try to put it into a negative light

There was no vote, or anything like that. The people used force against the already reformist leaders. Tell us, how are decisions made in the party?


Second off explain how Leninism is a capitalist ideology?

Never said that.

But pretty much all the leninist experiments have turned into state capitalism, and then after serious degeneration of the already degenerated society, capitalism jumps right back in.

It is very easy: 1 + 1 = 2. It doesn&#39;t become 1 + 1 = 3 no matter how hard you try, or how many times you try. Leninism will degenerate into capitalism in the end. That history has shown us consistently. So either leninists will have to seriously change their thinking or they will drag the whole working class movement down in the drain, of which they have been doing a pretty good job so far.


If all goes relativity well it will archive a socialized society, true it cannot achieve full Socialism, but it will allow it to create the foundations necessary to archive full Socialism in the future.

What are these foundations?

And what is a "socialized society"? Doesn&#39;t that sound awfully much like state capitalism?

If the people don&#39;t have firm control over the party now, how can we expect the people will gain control over the whole of Nepal? We can&#39;t.

And no one has still answered:

Why don&#39;t the people decide for themselves "what to do next"?

[Xiao Banfa]

A state capitalist Nepal? Is that what mass mobilizations and 10 years of popular insurgency is going to create?

I hardly think so.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

A state capitalist Nepal? Is that what mass mobilizations and 10 years of popular insurgency is going to create?

What happens will be determined by material conditions, not "how hard" people try.

Nepal, as I understand it, is essentially fuedal. You cannot create socialism out of a society which has little or no industrial base.

This is one of the least developed countries there is, you cannot create socialism out of a society that hasn&#39;t experienced capitalism.

[ComradeR]

then they condemn them for leaving it.

False.

We criticize the leaders of that party for wanting to stay in the government. If it had not been for the masses threathening to use force, the party would have been in government today. The leaders are reformists. The people, on the other hand, do not seem to be.
That was directed at people like YKTMX who were condemning it before it was learned that it was because of the people that the Maoists quit the government.

There was no vote, or anything like that. The people used force against the already reformist leaders. Tell us, how are decisions made in the party?

I wouldn&#39;t know as I am not in Nepal or a member of the Maoist party.

Second off explain how Leninism is a capitalist ideology?

Never said that.
I know, but I guess you didn&#39;t read this part of what i said.

(which is what you seem to imply in your statement)
--

But pretty much all the leninist experiments have turned into state capitalism, and then after serious degeneration of the already degenerated society, capitalism jumps right back in.

It is very easy: 1 + 1 = 2. It doesn&#39;t become 1 + 1 = 3 no matter how hard you try, or how many times you try. Leninism will degenerate into capitalism in the end. That history has shown us consistently. So either leninists will have to seriously change their thinking or they will drag the whole working class movement down in the drain, of which they have been doing a pretty good job so far.
Again you seem to have a horribly unmaterialistic view of history.

If all goes relativity well it will archive a socialized society, true it cannot achieve full Socialism, but it will allow it to create the foundations necessary to archive full Socialism in the future.


What are these foundations?
Development of democracy, industrialization, folding the peasant class into the working class etc. of course this all depends on the Nepalese people plus internal and external conditions.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Development of democracy, industrialization, folding the peasant class into the working class etc.

That sounds much like the dawn of capitalism.

How about we look at how means of production are organized in maoist controlled territory? Maybe that will give us a glimpse of how Nepal will look later on?

Who control the means of production? The leadership or the people?




Again you seem to have a horribly unmaterialistic view of history.

How is that?

And you haven&#39;t answered this one:


If all goes relativity well it will archive a socialized society

What do you mean by "socialized society"? A welfare state?

[Red Heretic]

KMC is an example of someone that Marx would have described as "never gets past the narrow horizon of bourgeois right" and has the "ideology of a shopkeeper."

The problem with this line that is being put forward is that it ignores the ways in which parties like the Chinese Communist Party or the CPN(M) are in themselves concentrations of the masses of people. They rely on and depend on the people. If they did not have the overwhelming material and logistical support of the masses of people the would have been destroyed. They would not have been able to operate. They would have been annihilated.

Instead they recieved the overwhelming love and support of the masses of people, recieving housing, logistical ssistance, financial assistance, and many other things. None of this would be possible if they did not have a close bond with the people. It is the actions of the masses of people that are decisive, not votes&#33;

[Red Heretic]

This is a very important article from A World to Win News Service:





Communist Party (Maoist) pulls out of Nepal government

24 September 2007. A World to Win News Service. Warning that "the country is now at the frontier of a big revolutionary possibility and an awful accident", the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has left the government. In a reversal of policy, it announced a programme of mass street protests to "disrupt all ongoing election plans", namely the Constituent Assembly initially to be held last June and now scheduled for 22 November.

In April 2006 a mass upsurge forced the king to bring back the parliament he had suspended. A seize-fire was declared in the ten-year people&#39;s war that the CPN(M) had been leading. In November of that year, the party signed a 12-point Comprehensive Political Agreement with the seven parliamentary parties to form an interim government and hold elections to a Constituent Assembly to decide the country&#39;s future form of government, including the fate of the monarchy. The party agreed that its People&#39;s Liberation Army would be stationed in camps and their weapons placed under storage, both under UN supervision. CPN(M) entered parliament in early 2007. In April, four party members began serving as ministers in the cabinet of Prime Minister G. P. Koirala.

During this period, reactionary forces in the Terai plains region along the Indian border have been trying to build opposition to the CPN(M), with the support of the US and Indian governments. The Terai is home to about half of Nepal&#39;s population, including people of various ethnicities, and its flourishing agriculture makes it crucial to the country&#39;s economy.

The pro-imperialist, Brussels-based International Crisis Group describes this movement as offering "hope to diehard royalists and Hindu fundamentalists, including some from across the border, who see it as a chance to disrupt the peace process" by directing violence against the Maoists. (Nepal&#39;s Troubled Tarai Region, Asia Report no. 136, July 2007) Forces claiming to represent the region&#39;s Madhesi people denounced the CPN(M) for agreeing to a draft interim constitution that fails to fulfil the party&#39;s promises of proportional representation in the national government and regional autonomy. In the most notorious incident, a mob attacked Maoist party members and supporters in the town of Gaur last March, killing 27 people. The American ambassador and Indian political figures all but applauded.

At the same time, conditions for the People&#39;s Liberation Army fighters in the camps have also remained deplorable, with serious shortages of food and lack of decent shelter, despite numerous CPN(M) protests that the promises made by the government and the UN were being violated.

Now the situation in Nepal has reached a major turning point. The CPN(M) put forward 22 demands on the Koirala government, chief among them that parliament abolish the monarchy immediately, without waiting for the Constituent Assembly, and that elections to the CA be proportional to ensure proper representation for the country&#39;s oppressed nationalities and others. The party took the position that no "real election" can be held without the previous abolition of the monarchy. Koirala responded that although he was in favour of ending the monarchy, there was no question of doing so before the convening the CA or altering the election plans.

On 18 September, the CPN(M) ministers resigned from the government. At a mass rally held in Kathmandu later that day, CPN(M) leader Baburam Bhattarai, declared, "We will struggle for the purpose of having a real election, not this hypocritical drama." "We will not accept the code of conduct announced by the election commission and we will disrupt all ongoing election plans," he told the cheering crowd. "We will launch peaceful protests, but we have the right to counter those who try to suppress our peaceful programme."

The CPN(M) put out a schedule for the "first phase" of an agitation campaign. It began with a "funeral procession for the monarchy" on 18 September, door-door campaigning 19-21 September and rallies and other campaigns starting 22 September. The Maoist-led Nepal Transport Workers Union called a strike 23 September to protest police arrests and harassment of drivers, setting up burning barricades on a major motorway and stopping bus and truck traffic elsewhere.

From 29-September- 3 October, according to Nepali press reports, the CPN(M) will expose corrupt people in power and those responsible for atrocities committed against the April 2006 mass movement. On 30 September, there are to be gherao (sit-in blockades) at all District Administration Offices across the country. They have also announced a bandh (general strike and shutdown) 4-6 October, which would impede the nomination of candidates for the Constituent Assembly by 5 October.

This change in policy was decided at the CPN(M)&#39;s Fifth Expanded Central Committee meeting held 3-8 August. The 2,174 party members who participated in the meeting ranked from Central Committee members to leaders of district committees, People&#39;s Liberation Army branches, mass organizations and others. It was held in an industrial area in the capital. The central document was the proposal "Unite to make a new ideological advance and a new revolutionary movement" submitted by Party Chairman Comrade Prachanda.

The post-meeting press communiqué signed by Chairman Prachanda explains, "There are three important sections in the document. Important ideological and political questions have been discussed in the first part. In the second part, the past movement and peace-negotiation has been reviewed. And in the third, light has been shed on the forthcoming tactic and the party plan.

"In the context of discussing &#39;Some fundamental theoretical questions&#39; emphasis has been given upon the question of distinguishing the difference between the Marxist and opportunist outlook mainly on compromise, reform and revolution, and revolutionaries are instructed to remain resolute in MLM and Prachanda Path by way of struggling against right capitulationism, centrist vacillationism and &#39;left&#39; adventurism. In the present backdrop of negotiations and peaceful development of revolution, the question in which the revolutionaries should specially prioritise ideological struggle is against the rightist tendency of &#39;enjoying the status quo, conceiving of compromise and reform as everything and refusing to propel the revolution forward&#39; has been mentioned in the document. Likewise, it has been mentioned in the document that the struggle against the centrist opportunism that surfaces in different forms in which one always falls prey to vacillation between right and wrong, talks of revolution but practices right reformism and shows sense of disappointment, frustration and escape must not be undervalued. Also, the document has cautioned the revolutionaries to remain cautious towards the danger of &#39;left&#39; phrase-mongering and adventurism that &#39;Without having concrete analysis of the concrete situation subjectively opposes all kinds of compromises&#39;."

In the section on "Strategy and tactics of revolution", "it has been clarified in the document that the party, going ahead with flexible tactic and firm strategy of democratic revolution, has synthesized a slogan of all-party conference, interim government and constituent assembly election as a political tactic while arriving at the historic second national conference accomplished in 2001 and the same with modification has been carried on till now from the Chunwang Meeting held in 2005. Likewise, in relation to tactical slogan of democratic republic, quoting the decision of Chunwang meeting the document says, &#39;Party has regarded the democratic republic neither in the form of bourgeois parliamentarian republic nor in the form of the new democratic republic. With an extensive restructuring of the state power, this republic will play a role of transitional multiparty republic as to resolve the problems related to class, nation, region and sex.&#39;"

This concept of a "transitional multiparty republic" that is "neither a bourgeois parliamentarian republic nor a new democratic republic" has been a basic theoretical pillar of the party&#39;s actions over the last several years.

In the following section "assessing the peace negotiations and the events following it, the CPN (Maoist), which had not incorporated itself in the old parliamentary mainstream, but had, preserving the achievements of ten years of people&#39;s war, participated in a transitional state of compromise to institutionalise through constituent assembly the new type of democratic republic but now it has been concluded that the major parliamentarian parties leading the government, going against the spirit of 12-point understanding, have destroyed the basis of unity with the CPN (Maoist). In particular, &#39;Although it had been said that army would be confined at barracks and PLA at the cantonments as to make the interim state a neutral one as far as possible and all of the decisions to run the state would be taken up in consensus, the theoretical, political and moral basis for the CPN(Maoist) to stay in government is getting to an end because the state in the present transitional period has been tried to run as the state of feudal, bureaucrat and comprador bourgeois&#39; has been the important conclusion of the resolution. So cautioning seriously the forces that lead the interim government the proposal says, &#39;The CPN (Maoist) will have no alternative to go to movement by quitting the government, if it is not guaranteed to ensure running of the interim government in accordance with the spirit of the agreement, bring an end to terror and regressive feudal conspiracy taking place against the constituent assembly election by declaring republic, take up actions against the criminals involved in a series of killings in Madhesh, publicize the state of disappeared citizens, impartially distribute relief to the families of martyrs, push forward the process of scientific land reform according to the spirit of the interim constitution, take up effective steps to stop killings, conspiracies and terror against the CPN (Maoist) and treat the PLA respectfully.&#39;"

Regarding the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the CPN(M)&#39;s policies since then, the communiqué sums up that "the party tactic from the 12-point understanding to the participation in the interim government was correct and politically advantageous; however, in the resolution serious self-criticism has also been made on behalf of the party for some mistakes and weaknesses committed in this course." Among others, it enumerates the party&#39;s problems in the "coordination between compromise and struggle" after the murder of the Maoists in the Madhesi region, and failing "to "inform the masses" of the party&#39;s strenuous but ultimately unsuccessful efforts in negotiations to get the seven-party alliance to accept "a federal state system and proportional elections", which "provided an opportunity for the reactionaries and opportunists to launch a campaign against the party by spreading confusion that Maoists left their agenda on Madhesh."

In its conclusions, the meeting document warns, "a situation of triangular contradiction among feudal royalist forces, status quo-ist bourgeois parliamentarian forces and revolutionary democratic forces exists and all of them are trying to hold sway of their own." The situation is one of "a very fluid and serious revolutionary crisis"

It is likely that in the coming weeks and months, the class struggle will continue to intensify in Nepal. The enemies of the revolution in Nepal and their foreign backers have already given a glimpse of their willingness to use both political and violent methods in their efforts to consolidate the reactionary order in the face of this "serious revolutionary crisis" and wipe out any traces of the ten-year people&#39;s war. No doubt this tumultuous situation will bring into sharper focus the question of what kind of state and what type of system Nepal needs, and the means for doing so.
(For the full press communiqué in Nepali and English, see www.cpnm.org)
- end item-

[Karl Marx's Camel]

The problem with this line that is being put forward is that it ignores the ways in which parties like the Chinese Communist Party or the CPN(M) are in themselves concentrations of the masses of people.
And we see how the Chinese experiment went. :rolleyes:

[Rawthentic]

RedHeretic is right, your horizons are completely narrow.

And you seem to be a troll now as well. Everything is Leninism&#39;s fault (which is tied to Marxism.)

RH is talking about a serious revolutionary movement and you bring up shit like that?

[RNK]

Originally posted by Karl Marx&#39;s [email protected] 27, 2007 05:00 pm

The problem with this line that is being put forward is that it ignores the ways in which parties like the Chinese Communist Party or the CPN(M) are in themselves concentrations of the masses of people.
And we see how the Chinese experiment went. :rolleyes:
Again, atleast Leninism (and Maoism) has gotten to such an advanced stage that there is experimentation going on.


RH is talking about a serious revolutionary movement and you bring up shit like that?

Don&#39;t fret -- it&#39;s quite common for petty idealists like him to automatically start throwing around names and labels when their point is pointless. Their "defense" against MLM is nothing more than the defense right-wingers give against communism in general -- name-calling, sectarianism, etc.

Anyway it&#39;d good to see the Nepalis come around again. They were worrying me for some time, and I&#39;m glad to see appropriate actions have been taken and self-criticisms made.

[IronColumn]

KMC is quite correct. The only ones with a bourgeois materialist analysis are those who assume that the PRC or USSR were socialist, simply because the leaders of the society said so. The real economic foundations of both these societies were quite clearly state-capitalist; this is even many many times stated by Lenin in regards to the young USSR. The only thing Mao and Stalin did was capitalize feudal agricultural relations and further develop an industrial proletariat to rule over. This has nothing to do with socialism, just as these pitiful maoist gangsters have nothing to do with socialism either.

[RNK]

Maoist gangsters... I like that.

Anyway thanks for proving my point, whoever you are.

Thanks for also confusing the word "socialism" with "communism".

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 05:41 pm
KMC is quite correct. The only ones with a bourgeois materialist analysis are those who assume that the PRC or USSR were socialist, simply because the leaders of the society said so. The real economic foundations of both these societies were quite clearly state-capitalist; this is even many many times stated by Lenin in regards to the young USSR. The only thing Mao and Stalin did was capitalize feudal agricultural relations and further develop an industrial proletariat to rule over. This has nothing to do with socialism, just as these pitiful maoist gangsters have nothing to do with socialism either.
NOT&#33;

Pitiful &#39;Maoist gangsters&#39;? :huh:

You&#39;ll be singing a different tune when they take Kathmandu.

These people want to improve living conditions and modernize their country. The same thing is happening in Bhutan.

What do you believe in anyway? Can you actually refute these revolutionaries with anything but name-calling?

[IronColumn]

Oh, I don&#39;t know, Leninist history?

[Red Heretic]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 10:41 pm
KMC is quite correct. The only ones with a bourgeois materialist analysis are those who assume that the PRC or USSR were socialist, simply because the leaders of the society said so. The real economic foundations of both these societies were quite clearly state-capitalist; this is even many many times stated by Lenin in regards to the young USSR. The only thing Mao and Stalin did was capitalize feudal agricultural relations and further develop an industrial proletariat to rule over. This has nothing to do with socialism, just as these pitiful maoist gangsters have nothing to do with socialism either.
Yeah it&#39;s not like people ever read huge works of Chinese political economy like The Shanghai Textbook. We all just assumed China was socialist because leaders said so.

Clever.

[IronColumn]

Maybe you should read a critique of political economy called Kapital. That might help you to understand things a bit better.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

KMC is quite correct. The only ones with a bourgeois materialist analysis are those who assume that the PRC or USSR were socialist, simply because the leaders of the society said so. The real economic foundations of both these societies were quite clearly state-capitalist; this is even many many times stated by Lenin in regards to the young USSR. The only thing Mao and Stalin did was capitalize feudal agricultural relations and further develop an industrial proletariat to rule over. This has nothing to do with socialism, just as these pitiful maoist gangsters have nothing to do with socialism either.

Yeah Lenin called it out during the fucking NEP, the USSR was building socialism from the bottom up during this time. State capitalism is a shit theory because it is so broad and completly defeatist. the Soviet Union and China were socialist because they had broken out of the system where a small percentage of bankers and capitalist businessmen controlled all the wealth and ran things based on how they could make money, and built a system where the wealth was controlled by the working class and their representitives and their councils and commitees to serve the people. If they were capitalist their oreintation would be towards making a profit, but as the communal kitchens, universal housing, employment, healthcare, and the revolutionary support of national liberation and socialist revolutionary struggles around the world begins to show, this was not so

[RNK]

Actually I&#39;ve been reading Kapital (repeatedly) for the past 3 months or so. As such, I fail to see how bringing it up has anything to do with your accusations -- you certainly haven&#39;t made such concrete allegations that would warrent even mentioning Kapital, since they&#39;ve got about as much to do with political economy as the bowel movement I had this morning.