Maoist Woman Elected Assembly Vice Chair

[KurtFF8]

Source (http://southasiarev.wordpress.com/2008/12/23/maoist-woman-elected-assembly-vice-chair/)


From Red Star #19.

Purna Subedi has been elected vice-chairperson of the constituent assembly (CA). She is also a member of the Constituent Assembly from CPN-Maoist.

Subedi won the election when the CPN (Maoist), the CPN (UML), People’s Front Nepal, Sadhbawana Party and other small left parties supported her. She received two-third vote.

After victory, she informed media persons that she is able to play the responsible role given to her. She says, “I am ready to accomplish my task impartially”. Clarifying the challenges before her, she says, “The principal thing is to have the ambition, the will, the expectations and mandate of the people given to the CA”.

According to her, the status-quo tendency has been the main obstacle in fulfilling the expectations of the People. The tendency of status-quo only presents the showy and pretended behavior and plots against progressive steps.

“To break the barricades, all the parties should be ready to accomplish the expectations of the people for peace and change”, she says. “Though the parties have their own different opinions and ideals, the will of the majority of the people is to institutionalize the Federal Democratic Republic, and this is the solid foundation of our success.”

Commies are always so progressive :)

[Leo]

I don't think electing a woman vice-president has got anything to do with destroying patriarchy.

[black magick hustla]

Chile, a third wolrd country, has a female president. There are countless other examples of "reactionaries" having female leaders. Thatcher for example-

[KurtFF8]

But at least you both can admit the difference between a bourgeois party electing a female and a revolutionary Marxist party that carries a line of the liberation of women (At least I think the Nepali Maoists do) doing it.

[BobKKKindle$]

a bourgeois party electing a female and a revolutionary Marxist party

Except, Left-Communists will adopt a simplistic stance and tell us that the CPN(M) is reactionary in exactly the same way as a bourgeois party and so should not deserve even critical support - ignoring all of the important gains which have been made since the CPN(M) gained power in April of this year - the abolition of the traditional form of bonded labour known as "haliya" (which previously subjected around twenty thousand people to servitude, mainly in rural areas), the cancellation of loans made to small farmers under the feudal regime, and the promotion of wireless networks which allow remote villages to communicate with each other and share their experiences. Left-Communists will tell us the only valid form of political change for Nepal is an immediate socialist revolution despite the fact that Nepal is surrounded by other countries and is in desperate need of foreign investment.

[KurtFF8]

Except, Left-Communists will adopt a simplistic stance and tell us that the CPN(M) is reactionary in exactly the same way as a bourgeois party and so should not deserve even critical support - ignoring all of the important gains which have been made since the CPN(M) gained power in April of this year - the abolition of the traditional form of bonded labour known as "haliya" (which previously subjected around twenty thousand people to servitude, mainly in rural areas), the cancellation of loans made to small farmers under the feudal regime, and the promotion of wireless networks which allow remote villages to communicate with each other and share their experiences. Left-Communists will tell us the only valid form of political change for Nepal is an immediate socialist revolution despite the fact that Nepal is surrounded by other countries and is in desperate need of foreign investment.

Indeed they will. I think that it's quite telling of some leftists who can't even support the Nepali revolution considering the current state of Nepal.

[cyu]

in desperate need of foreign investment

By "foreign investment" do you mean begging capitalists for help, siding with the capitalists when the employees go on strike, and in the long term, allow the profits generated by your country's people to be taken out of Nepal by the capitalists who own these companies?

[Saorsa]

siding with the capitalists when the employees go on strike

Only the Maoists havn't done that. The Maoist trade unions have been occupying factories and striking every other day for months! They're in a very difficult place and have to be very careful, but they certainly havn't started siding with the bosses against the workers.

[Wanted Man]

Interesting news. I liked this too: http://www.revleft.com/vb/nepalese-maoists-endanger-t97875/index.html

Who's siding with the capitalists now? Oh, I know! Wait for it... it's actually a conspiracy from teh evil state capitalists! Otherwise, they would have done the right thing and let the country starve to death until the great apocalyptic worldwide Left Communist revolution!

So how do "real communists" react to this? Oh, right, by being painfully ambivalent, pretending that nothing has changed really, just the left faction of the bourgeoisie maintaining the spectacle, blah, blah blah...

[black magick hustla]

I wasnt simply stating anything beyond the fact that many bourgeois parties have female leading members. I dont see how my opinion on "socialist revolution in nepal" has anything to do with the fact that it is silly to bask under the maoists for having female leaders when even other third world countries have already female presidents.

However, whatever floats your boat gentlemen. Let us celebrate next time a marxist organization elects a black leader.:lol:

[black magick hustla]

People who think we want a "left communist revolution" have no idea of what we are for. We dont think the revolution will be made by "communists", because communist militants are always a minority.

[Leo]

But at least you both can admit the difference between a bourgeois party electing a female and a revolutionary Marxist party

...

Indeed they will. I think that it's quite telling of some leftists who can't even support the Nepali revolution

You don't have to be a left communist to see those people are neither marxists nor revolutionaries, and that they aren't making a revolution in Nepal:

"Rest assured, we are in favour of the capitalist economy."

“we will not confiscate the properties of the owners contrary to what has been disseminated in order to malign the Maoist party”


"the mantle of economic revolution would be handed over to the businessmen/industrialists and that we in the government would only facilitate their march towards economic revolution".

"We would like to assure everyone that once the Maoists come (into government) the investment climate will be even more favourable. There shouldn’t be any unnecessary misunderstanding about that. The rumours in the press about our intention are wrong, there are reports of capital flight, but this shouldn’t happen. And the other aspect is that once there is political stability, the investment climate will be even better. Our other agenda is economic development and for this we want to mobilise domestic resources and capital, and also welcome private foreign direct investment. The only thing we ask is to be allowed to define our national priorities."

"We want to fully assure international investors already in Nepal that we welcome them here, and we will work to make the investment climate even better than it is now. Just watch, the labour-management climate will improve in our time in office. What happened in the past two years with the unions happened during a transition phase...."

[Bilan]

So?

[cyu]

Only the Maoists havn't done that. The Maoist trade unions have been occupying factories and striking every other day for months!
No doubt there are factions within the government - here's hoping the side we both support gains a larger following.