Naxalites

[Art Vandelay]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyL7IzI6pEM

I found this documentary pretty good, it seems to be fairly non-biased in its perspective. Was wondering what some Naxalite supporters take on it would be. I feel like the Naxalite's cause is undoubtedly progressive, but some of these methods I could never agree with.

[Brutus]

Overly brutal, it seems.

[Let's Get Free]

I see the Naxalites as just another statist movement that will replace the existing capitalist state with another capitalist state. That is, if they actually win their hopeless and futile guerrilla war campaign.

All movements have some veneer or essence of progress to them, but as a communist, we should view them objectively. The prime question should be, "is communism being built"? Is the state being torn down, are workers being facilitated to lead themselves and organize themselves to meet their own needs? Is the commune the principal method of organization? I don't see Naxalite communes, I don't see the Naxalites following any line other than to create another state, therefore, they are not a communist organization and will not lead to communism. I oppose the organization, but I support the working class and hope that the workers struggle in their own interests

[Art Vandelay]

Was hoping to get some Naxalite supporters comments?

[nativeabuse]

Even after watching that documentary I still support them. I feel like it is stupid to assume that from a few bad apples we can paint a picture of the entire Naxalite army. Out of a group of estimated 20,000 soldiers you are going to get some people who are assholes and some psychos who are in it simply because they like the violence and couldn't give a rats ass about any supposed communist cause. The portrayal of several isolated incidents in the same area (probably perpetrated by the same small group of shitty Naxalites) as typical is highly misleading.

Just my two cents.

[Art Vandelay]

Even after watching that documentary I still support them. I feel like it is stupid to assume that from a few bad apples we can paint a picture of the entire Naxalite army. Out of a group of estimated 20,000 soldiers you are going to get some people who are assholes and some psychos who are in it simply because they like the violence and couldn't give a rats ass about any supposed communist cause. The portrayal of several isolated incidents in the same area (probably perpetrated by the same small group of shitty Naxalites) as typical is highly misleading.

Just my two cents.

That is a completely understandable position, an admirable one at that, however I would need to see some evidence that these are merely just 'isolated incidents' before agreeing. However, none the less, I am glad I finally got a Naxalite supporters opinion.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

That is a completely understandable position, an admirable one at that, however I would need to see some evidence that these are merely just 'isolated incidents' before agreeing. However, none the less, I am glad I finally got a Naxalite supporters opinion.

(I haven't watched the documentary in full so I can only comment in general)

We will likely never know if they are isolated incidents or not, not unless one have a degree in Indian studies and are well versed in these matters. Otherwise we can only go on the fact that the Naxalites are a indigenous revolutionary movement that is spread widely throughout 1/3 of India. With a movement of that size one must understand that combat is not consistent in each instance, meaning, local commanders have their own manner of fighting. This means some will engage in access while others engage in smarter means of warfare. At any rate one cannot judge those who are trying their best in what is a tough situation. When innocents are caught in the cross-fire it is regrettable but in any mass-movement that comes into violent contact with the state this is expected and we should not shriek away from those who are seeking to implement our goals simply because they might have made some "extreme" tactics.

I support any revolutionary movement which seeks to overthrow capitalism: death(s) is not a factor in my opinion. The Naxalite, Peruvian guerrillas, Nepalis Maoists (and others)... all are doing their best and I am not about to condemn their tactics when they are operating among very different circumstances than any revolutionary in the first world is.

[Zostrianos]

It depends where they're located in India. There's places where the Naxals are liked by the local populace and have done some good things, but there's others where they're as low and corrupt as you can get, allying themselves with Islamist groups, and even helping Christian missionaries assert control over tribal areas to wipe out local customs. Overall, though they have done some good, they seem extremely corrupt as a movement and I don't see them achieving anything good in the long run.

[Art Vandelay]

(I haven't watched the documentary in full so I can only comment in general)

We will likely never know if they are isolated incidents or not, not unless one have a degree in Indian studies and are well versed in these matters. Otherwise we can only go on the fact that the Naxalites are a indigenous revolutionary movement that is spread widely throughout 1/3 of India. With a movement of that size one must understand that combat is not consistent in each instance, meaning, local commanders have their own manner of fighting. This means some will engage in access while others engage in smarter means of warfare. At any rate one cannot judge those who are trying their best in what is a tough situation. When innocents are caught in the cross-fire it is regrettable but in any mass-movement that comes into violent contact with the state this is expected and we should not shriek away from those who are seeking to implement our goals simply because they might have made some "extreme" tactics.

I support any revolutionary movement which seeks to overthrow capitalism: death(s) is not a factor in my opinion. The Naxalite, Peruvian guerrillas, Nepalis Maoists (and others)... all are doing their best and I am not about to condemn their tactics when they are operating among very different circumstances than any revolutionary in the first world is.

First off I must say that I agree with much of what you are saying and secondly I would like to say that if you do choose to watch the documentary (it is about 45 minutes long) that I would love to hear your opinion.

What I found reprehensible about it was the scene which depicts a Naxalite 'people's court' in which they beat two men with large and thick sticks due to the charge that they have consumed alcohol, commenting that the consumption of alcohol is deemed by the Naxalites as 'anti-social' behavior (how alcohol can be seen as anti-social is beyond me, since it has the exact opposite effect), but regardless I have to wonder how those fighting for such progressive social change (communism) can come to the reactionary and nonsensical conclusion that the consumption of alcohol is something worthy of punishment. Now this may seem like a tedious issue, however to me it seems like a representation of certain backwards and reactionary elements to the movement.

Regardless thank you for actually taking the time to engage with the subject matter.

[nativeabuse]

What I found reprehensible about it was the scene which depicts a Naxalite 'people's court' in which they beat two men with large and thick sticks due to the charge that they have consumed alcohol, commenting that the consumption of alcohol is deemed by the Naxalites as 'anti-social' behavior (how alcohol can be seen as anti-social is beyond me, since it has the exact opposite effect), but regardless I have to wonder how those fighting for such progressive social change (communism) can come to the reactionary and nonsensical conclusion that the consumption of alcohol is something worthy of punishment. Now this may seem like a tedious issue, however to me it seems like a representation of certain backwards and reactionary elements to the movement.

Did you watch the whole documentary? I think it is pretty clear that they are attempting to combat stuff like you are seeing at 44:04. Where there is an entire village completely wasted out of their minds, drinking from a gigantic pool of moonshine made in a mud puddle. Complete with drunk kids that appear to be under 6 years old. If you don't call that anti-social I don't know what is.

I think that is what they mean when they say they don't want 'anti-social' behavior. They don't want people building stills and ending up like the other village. Also, the explanation for them doing it because of 'anti-social behavior' comes from the narrator, so we don't know what he was really told, how it was translated to him, and how he is interpreting it. We don't know if those people were being drunk and disorderly or just had a few. The guy on the left looks really out of it, he doesn't even react to them hitting him and he can't sit up straight. In any case a few hits with a cane doesn't seem like all that bad to me. And this is no worse than American law where you can't walk down the street drunk in public. That's assuming that the Maoists didn't walk into the guys house for no reason, and rip him from a chair under suspicion of drinking which seems pretty far fetched. They were probably walking around like that bothering people.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

(I haven't watched the documentary in full so I can only comment in general)

We will likely never know if they are isolated incidents or not, not unless one have a degree in Indian studies and are well versed in these matters. Otherwise we can only go on the fact that the Naxalites are a indigenous revolutionary movement that is spread widely throughout 1/3 of India. With a movement of that size one must understand that combat is not consistent in each instance, meaning, local commanders have their own manner of fighting. This means some will engage in access while others engage in smarter means of warfare. At any rate one cannot judge those who are trying their best in what is a tough situation. When innocents are caught in the cross-fire it is regrettable but in any mass-movement that comes into violent contact with the state this is expected and we should not shriek away from those who are seeking to implement our goals simply because they might have made some "extreme" tactics.

I support any revolutionary movement which seeks to overthrow capitalism: death(s) is not a factor in my opinion. The Naxalite, Peruvian guerrillas, Nepalis Maoists (and others)... all are doing their best and I am not about to condemn their tactics when they are operating among very different circumstances than any revolutionary in the first world is.

While I think there's something to be said for remembering that guerrillas in some forlorn part of the 3rd world are fighting under "difficult circumstances" etc, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be highly critical of their tactics. There's no reason why the Peruvian guerrillas had to kill 70 unarmed, peasant men, women and children in a massacre, no matter what their material conditions are. When any group uses tactics like that, the same moral disgust that many outsiders feel is only going to be greater in the communities which are negatively effected. Once enough peasants think that a guerrilla army is nothing more than a group of murderous thugs, the State no longer needs to utilize propaganda to discredit a movement.

If you look at most of the successful guerrilla movements and 3rd world mass movements in recent history, they did not become successful by overly risking or targeting innocent civilians. In fact, the groups which do that often enough fade into history. The only time they do win in such circumstances is when the State is just that much more ghoulish and brutal, they have substantial outside support or there is some total state breakdown for an unrelated reason.

Simply put, no peasant or worker will support a party which they think might line them up against a wall and shoot them because (a) their neighbor wrongfully accused them of ratting to the State for petty revenge, (b) some local guerrilla leader mistook him for a paramilitary or (c) for any other reason which the party decides (60 years after the Chinese revolution, Chinese policemen are cracking down on striking unions). For all of this armed confrontation with the state to work, the masses need to trust the people with the guns and that trust is lost easily.


The Naxalites have a bunch of practical disadvantages in their way right now, aside from any human rights concerns. They are a movement mostly contained in mountainous jungle area far away from the main urban centers, even if there are small cells in such places. Organizing the cities, factories and ports will be as important as taking the countryside, but they don't seem to be there yet.

Did you watch the whole documentary? I think it is pretty clear that they are attempting to combat stuff like you are seeing at 44:04. Where there is an entire village completely wasted out of their minds, drinking from a gigantic pool of moonshine made in a mud puddle. Complete with drunk kids that appear to be under 6 years old. If you don't call that anti-social I don't know what is.

I think that is what they mean when they say they don't want 'anti-social' behavior. They don't want people building stills and ending up like the other village. Also, the explanation for them doing it because of 'anti-social behavior' comes from the narrator, so we don't know what he was really told, how it was translated to him, and how he is interpreting it. We don't know if those people were being drunk and disorderly or just had a few. The guy on the left looks really out of it, he doesn't even react to them hitting him and he can't sit up straight. In any case a few hits with a cane doesn't seem like all that bad to me. And this is no worse than American law where you can't walk down the street drunk in public. That's assuming that the Maoists didn't walk into the guys house for no reason, and rip him from a chair under suspicion of drinking which seems pretty far fetched. They were probably walking around like that bothering people.

I guess the question is if a bunch of maoist guerrillas caning people for being boozers is really any less anti-social than public alcoholism. Or for that matter if caning is actually a socially responsible way of controlling such habits. Granted, it could be worse (but the Naxalites have been accused of involvement in some other pretty nasty things too, though of course it's hard to tell the difference between accurate reporting and mere Indian propaganda).

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Also, I just want to put it out there that the question of Alcohol is not new. While in the West it is an old question it wasn't always so, sot back during prohibition, anyway, when a great deal of communists supported it because they thought it was something the capitalists used to suppress workers. It sounds like the Naxalites, at the time of making, were going through their own evolution in regards to inter-personal social relations. We can only hope that they evolve on their position here and learn how to promote reasonable abuse prevention.

[Art Vandelay]

Did you watch the whole documentary? I think it is pretty clear that they are attempting to combat stuff like you are seeing at 44:04. Where there is an entire village completely wasted out of their minds, drinking from a gigantic pool of moonshine made in a mud puddle. Complete with drunk kids that appear to be under 6 years old. If you don't call that anti-social I don't know what is.

Yes and I am sure the best way to combat this is by beating those who get drunk with huge sticks.

I think that is what they mean when they say they don't want 'anti-social' behavior. They don't want people building stills and ending up like the other village. Also, the explanation for them doing it because of 'anti-social behavior' comes from the narrator, so we don't know what he was really told, how it was translated to him, and how he is interpreting it. We don't know if those people were being drunk and disorderly or just had a few. The guy on the left looks really out of it, he doesn't even react to them hitting him and he can't sit up straight. In any case a few hits with a cane doesn't seem like all that bad to me. And this is no worse than American law where you can't walk down the street drunk in public. That's assuming that the Maoists didn't walk into the guys house for no reason, and rip him from a chair under suspicion of drinking which seems pretty far fetched. They were probably walking around like that bothering people.

I'll just let this speak for itself.

[nativeabuse]

I'll just let this speak for itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Singapore
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Malaysia

Anyone else remember the whole Singapore canning incident in 1994 when Bill Clinton tried to intervene and stop that American kid who vandalized cars with spray paint from being caned?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_P._Fay

It is simply a common form of punishment all over Asia even in developed areas like Singapore and Hong Kong. So yes I don't think caning is that bad of a punishment, and it isn't anything weird, or something they wouldn't receive from a regular court in the area.

Of course I don't think they should do it. But I stand by what I said in full. A few whacks with a cane isn't that bad, and by punishing people in that way they are doing nothing that is out of the ordinary for that area of the world.

I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill, I feel like a few canings isn't even really worth discussing, when we need to look further into the actual problems with the movement like the civilian casualties that have absolutely no excuses.

[Zostrianos]

i dont know much about the naxeiltes ,but have u links to any of those storys ?

On collusion between Naxalites and evangelicals:
http://www.christianaggression.org/i...&id=1271269941

The collaboration between Maoists and Evangelical Christian outfits must be understood within this broad goal of engaging above the ground outfits that pursue advocacy on behalf of below the ground terrorists.

It is also interesting to note that the Evangelicals who bat for Maoist Terrorists do so under inoccuous secular sounding banners like the "Adivasi Mahasabha" or the "Cordillera Peoples Alliance".

Also, the murder of a Hindu swami which led to the Kandhamal riots a few years back was committed by Naxals, who sided with missionaries who were converting tribals in the region. The swami was trying to stop missionary abuses in the region, and they killed him for it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_...Investigations

A few claims that Maoist sympathizers of south Orissa had initially denied the role of CPI-Maoist were made in the murder of VHP leaders that sparked off communal violence in Kandhamnal district.[17] Communist Party of India (Maoist) leader Sabyasachi Panda claimed that they killed Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati and four of his disciples at his Jalespeta ashram on 23 August [18] .[19] On Wednesday July 22, 2009, a young Maoist couple, Surendra and Ruppi Pidikka alias Jaya Venkwara claimed to have been involved in the Swami's killing and surrendered to the Orissa police.[20]

On Naxalite-Islamist links:
http://islamicterrorism.wordpress.co...istsnaxalites/

Also, Maoists are helping out the NLFT, a Christian terrorist group in northern India whose goal is to create a Christian theocracy in the region:
http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...mohan-debbarma

[ind_com]

On collusion between Naxalites and evangelicals:
http://www.christianaggression.org/i...&id=1271269941

The collaboration between Maoists and Evangelical Christian outfits must be understood within this broad goal of engaging above the ground outfits that pursue advocacy on behalf of below the ground terrorists.

It is also interesting to note that the Evangelicals who bat for Maoist Terrorists do so under inoccuous secular sounding banners like the "Adivasi Mahasabha" or the "Cordillera Peoples Alliance".

Also, the murder of a Hindu swami which led to the Kandhamal riots a few years back was committed by Naxals, who sided with missionaries who were converting tribals in the region. The swami was trying to stop missionary abuses in the region, and they killed him for it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_...Investigations

A few claims that Maoist sympathizers of south Orissa had initially denied the role of CPI-Maoist were made in the murder of VHP leaders that sparked off communal violence in Kandhamnal district.[17] Communist Party of India (Maoist) leader Sabyasachi Panda claimed that they killed Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati and four of his disciples at his Jalespeta ashram on 23 August [18] .[19] On Wednesday July 22, 2009, a young Maoist couple, Surendra and Ruppi Pidikka alias Jaya Venkwara claimed to have been involved in the Swami's killing and surrendered to the Orissa police.[20]

On Naxalite-Islamist links:
http://islamicterrorism.wordpress.co...istsnaxalites/

Also, Maoists are helping out the NLFT, a Christian terrorist group in northern India whose goal is to create a Christian theocracy in the region:
http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...mohan-debbarma

One just needs to look at the names of some of the websites you cite to deduce that they are heavily biased. Maoists do not associate with any Islamist or reactionary religious groups. The TOI report had been highlighted a lot by the government at one point, but later they dropped all details because of lack of proof.

As for the killing of that communal leader, that is something the CPI (Maoist) takes full responsibility of. He had been pitting Hindus against Christians for a long time and was behind many hate crimes and murders on those lines. In general, the CPI (Maoist) acknowledges Hinduism as the dominant religion in India and hence the main cultural front of the Indian ruling class. It also identifies the propagators of militant Hinduism and casteism as class enemies of the Indian working classes.

@ 9mm - Internet is too slow. I will watch the movie and comment later.

[Zostrianos]

In general, the CPI (Maoist) acknowledges Hinduism as the dominant religion in India and hence the main cultural front of the Indian ruling class. It also identifies the propagators of militant Hinduism and casteism as class enemies of the Indian working classes.

One thing is to attack Hindu nationalists, police or the ruling class, another is to go after Hinduism in general, vandalize temples, and threaten worshippers with violence if they visit temples or participate in religious festivals, all things the Naxals have done. These Naxals are looking more and more like the Maoist fanatics of China's cultural revolution, than decent revolutionaries who care about equality and social justice.
Here's a site that catalogues Naxal activity throughout India, and it doesn't look pretty:
http://naxalwatch.blogspot.ca/2010/0...by-maoist.html

Naxals shoot 19-year-old girl

Alok Pandey, Thursday March 4, 2010, Latehar, Jharkhand

Nineteen-year-old Anju Kumari was shot in the stomach by Naxals. The reason - she filed a police case against their leader Pappu Lohra alleging rape and assault.
Latehar in Jharkhand is a district ravaged by Naxal violence for years.
Their reign of terror is evident in Anju's case. Before the police could make a headway, the Naxals had extracted their revenge.
''The girl is in a serious condition. We have referred her to a better hospital in Ranchi,'' said Dr Hareshan Mahto, Deputy Superintendent, District Hospital, Latehar.
March 2, Munger: A cop and were civilian beheaded because the police busted a Naxal camp.
February 18, Jamui: Eleven villagers killed because Naxals though they were police informers.
March 4, Latehar: And now they have shot Anju.
From Latehar, the Naxal offer of peace talks and the 72-day ceasefire seems just a paper offer, far from the ground reality of these villages living in the shadow of everyday violence.

[ind_com]

One thing is to attack Hindu nationalists, police or the ruling class, another is to go after Hinduism in general, vandalize temples, and threaten worshippers with violence if they visit temples or participate in religious festivals, all things the Naxals have done. These Naxals are looking more and more like the Maoist fanatics of China's cultural revolution, than decent revolutionaries who care about equality and social justice.
Here's a site that catalogues Naxal activity throughout India, and it doesn't look pretty:
http://naxalwatch.blogspot.ca/2010/0...by-maoist.html

Naxals shoot 19-year-old girl

Alok Pandey, Thursday March 4, 2010, Latehar, Jharkhand

Nineteen-year-old Anju Kumari was shot in the stomach by Naxals. The reason - she filed a police case against their leader Pappu Lohra alleging rape and assault.
Latehar in Jharkhand is a district ravaged by Naxal violence for years.
Their reign of terror is evident in Anju's case. Before the police could make a headway, the Naxals had extracted their revenge.
''The girl is in a serious condition. We have referred her to a better hospital in Ranchi,'' said Dr Hareshan Mahto, Deputy Superintendent, District Hospital, Latehar.
March 2, Munger: A cop and were civilian beheaded because the police busted a Naxal camp.
February 18, Jamui: Eleven villagers killed because Naxals though they were police informers.
March 4, Latehar: And now they have shot Anju.
From Latehar, the Naxal offer of peace talks and the 72-day ceasefire seems just a paper offer, far from the ground reality of these villages living in the shadow of everyday violence.

Again, that website is notorious for being a propaganda site for GOI. In the past, it had brought up stories of cannibalism and extortion of Rs. 1,500 crore against Maoists without any substantial proof, and had been criticized and rejected in the human rights circles in India.

Maoists never threaten the common Hindu people, but those who implement the casteism and racism inherent in Hinduism are naturally opposed. Most Hindu temples are closed to low caste Hindus, a practice that Maoists consistently oppose, and urge the lower castes to size control from the upper caste. Due to this position, the upper castes falsely accuse Maoists of threatening peace loving religious people, a stance that you too have taken here.

The particular report about the girl has two sides to it. She was being given police protection and a different place to live in the town instead of her home in the village. This is something unusual for anyone ordinary who is not involved with the state apparatus. In that locality, statements were issued by Maoists accusing her of being a police informer. Indeed, those who are used to accuse Maoists in false cases are given protection and accommodation in safe areas for free by the ruling class. However, in this case, the just action on the part of Maoists would have been to bring her to the people's court and give her a fair trial. It happened in the year 2010, when elsewhere too Maoists were emphasizing on killing informers rather than capturing them and producing them in court. This line went heavy self-criticism and was largely abandoned in the next two years.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Hinduism isn't the only thing keeping the caste system alive in India - some Hindu rishis, swamis and sadhus in history actually rejected the caste system and casteism is a problem among non-Hindu populations too. Of course caste is referred to multiple times in many Hindu holy texts and is a deeply embedded part of the culture but it's also not necessary for people to have some kind of Hindu spirituality.

That said, BJP style hindu nationalism should be critiqued and organizations like that should be opposed for obvious reasons.

The particular report about the girl has two sides to it. She was being given police protection and a different place to live in the town instead of her home in the village. This is something unusual for anyone ordinary who is not involved with the state apparatus. In that locality, statements were issued by Maoists accusing her of being a police informer. Indeed, those who are used to accuse Maoists in false cases are given protection and accommodation in safe areas for free by the ruling class. However, in this case, the just action on the part of Maoists would have been to bring her to the people's court and give her a fair trial. It happened in the year 2010, when elsewhere too Maoists were emphasizing on killing informers rather than capturing them and producing them in court. This line went heavy self-criticism and was largely abandoned in the next two years.

She's 9 and complains of rape and assault so gets shot as an informant? The just or fair action towards this 9 year old would have been to investigate her allegations seriously well before shooting her or producing her before a people's court.

[Rurkel]

19, not 9.