Maoists organized a mass meeting on Wednesday to warn the government on issues including Constituent Assembly in a school in Mahendranagar (Kanchanpur). Maoist guerillas present cultural program in combat uniform. Pic by Chitrang Thapa
It’s an open secret in Kathmandu that the recently ‘concluded’ historical Jana Andolan was in fact triggered by the Maoists. These days we can hear many people saying something like this: “They came to me and said ‘either come with us [in the jungle] or go with them [carrying flags in the city area and participate in the Jana Andolan]. And I choose to go to city and take part in the Andolan.” That is why, people say, this Jana Andolan saw such a massive turnout. That was beyond anyone’s expectations. King Gyanendra included. Read what Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, top Maoist leader, wrote the other day in Kantipur daily. Responding to his old time friend Dr. Arun Sayami’s open letter in the daily, the rebel leader claims the same: We sent all those folks in the city to take part in the movement. That was part of the Maoist policy to surround the city after capturing the villages. 19 people died, thousands were injured in Jana Andolan. That is why, the rebel leader argues, it wasn’t a peaceful movement. It was, according to Dr. Bhattarai, part of the Jana Yudda (Peoples’ War).
Maoist guerilla girls were centre of attraction in a mass meeting organized in Birendranagar, the headquarters of the Mid West region. The mass meeting saw massive turnout of general citizens. It is not immediately clear if they were forced to take part in the meeting. It’s not new for Maoists to force people to be present in their programs. When this photo was taken, Maoists were ‘terrorists’ in the eyes of the state. Pic by J Pandey
Maoist Welcomes: Maoist rebels said Thursday that they welcomed the government announcement of ceasefire and dismissal of various charges on them, reports eKantipur. Issuing a statement, Maoist Chairman Prachanda said today that his party was ready for dialogue with the present all-party government. Yesterday, the government had announced a three-month-long ceasefire and dropped the Red Corner Notice and terrorist tag labelled on the Maoists. Acknowledging the government dropping the charges, Maoist supremo Prachanda said, “We welcome the offer for talks as a positive step towards the people’s desire for establishment of Loktantra, peace and progression.”
Stating that his party was ready to sit for dialogue with the present government, Prachanda said, “Our party expresses commitment to help the nation enter into republic era through peace process as per the spirit of the 12-point understanding and the historic people’s movement.”
Now that the government has removed the ‘terrorist’ tag from the forehead of the Maoists, they are free to organize mass rallies around the country. They are now focusing in city areas where they couldn’t organize such rallies in the past. Maoists were organizing rallies like those in the pictures posted along with this blog even before the government decided about the Red Corner notice and the ‘terrorist’ tag.
Residents of Surkhet district heading to take part in the Maoist mass meeting in Birendranagar. Maoists demanded the election of constituent assembly in the meeting. Army created an obstruction in the Salleribazaar region to prevent people from going to that meeting. Some of these people said that they were going to attend the meeting bypassing the obstruction. Pic by J Pandey
United We Blog 
Comments
157 responses to “The Days of Maoist Comrades Have Come”
Taaya,
I respect you. I am fond of listening and respecting ideas. But you are completely wrong in interpreting people’s voice and verdict. Now I am busy. After a couple of hours I will come back to you. Good point of view indeed. I am also a young guy, may be like you.
Surendra Bhandari
What is this WTO Doctor Bhandari arguing? He thinks that all laws enacted in this country are genuine and valid. If so how can Gyane[ndra] stay above the law? And how can we accept the law enacted/ordanined by Gyane[ndra]?
Mr. Santosh!
I beg you don’t send yor mom home.
Stupid and dont ever come home again.
BYE
xyz,
I agree with you because this man is always saying that without the announcement from the King, there cannot be CA. I think this man is suffering from OVER KANOONCHI syndrome.Like baburam and prachanda, when you read the red book Mao, you do not see other solution. once when I was in college, I used to read the Red book and book about Che, I looked upon all the people as reactionaries.
In a way, i am very happy that Maoists are coming to the all party Govt., of course without guns in their hands. And they will be responsible for any wrong doings when they are in the govt. So this should be taken as a positive development if that is going to solve a decade of our insurgency and killings and torture to the people..
Thuldai, you said ‘Maoists are coming to the all party Govt., ofcourse without guns in their hands.’ Wow, that’s great! When did they surrender their arms? I really missed that!
I read Mao’s Little Red Book for about six pages and then used it under a table leg to even out the table. It’s good for that but little else.
Dorothy Parker had a good one about such books. To quote-‘This book should not be taken lightly. It should be hurled out of the window with great force.’
Two more Maoist murders ……..
Maoists kill two civilians in Bara
In a clear instance of violation of human rights and humanitarian laws, Maoists beat to death two alleged robbers in Bara despite their pledge to halt all violence for three months, according to reports.
The two men were accused of robbing residents of Ganjabhawanipur, a village in an area that has a strong rebel presence.
The rebels apprehended the men and brought them before villagers, then the insurgents beat the men to death, reports quoted Santaraj Subedi, the chief district officer of Bara as saying.
Police were sent on Thursday to the village to investigate the killings, Subedi said.
The rebels last week declared a three-month unilateral ceasefire, saying they would defend their positions only and launch no attacks on the government or civilians in an effort to foster peace
In case someone finds it easier to read in Nepali
??????? ?????????? (Death Penalty in Public Meeting)
?????, -???)?
???? ?????? ???????????? ???“ ????? ??????? ?????? ?????? ? ??? ????????????? ?????? ??????? ????????? ?? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?????????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ??? ?????????? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????????? ??? ????? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?????-? ????? ???? ??? ? ???? ??????? ????? ???????? ????????? ?????? ??? ??????? ?????? ??????? ??????? ???????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ?????????“? ?????? ? ?????? ?????? ?? ???????? ??????????? ????????? ???????? ???????? ?????????, ???? ?????? ??? ????????????? ?????? ??????? ??
Kirat,
You guys in this blog are all pessimists. You never saw a light on the other side of a tunnel.Even you don’t see a tunnel itself. Yesterday, PM has agreed to bring them to the interim Govt. Maoists are also saying that after the dialogue and dissolution of this parliament, they are ready to join the Govt. It may or may not be reality but it certainly is a great possibilty untill now.This is a present roadmap to peace. Visit other websites and read the news also. Do not stay in this blog only like a THAKALI.
Thuldai, your reaction is typical. Why don’t you answer my questions rationally (if you can rationalize that is). I’m all for the Maoists coming to the mainstream and for peace and prosperity in Nepal. But as a democrat I have the right to ask questions of the Maoists, just as I will ask the same questions of the SPA or the Palace. You think I am not aware of the present developments in Nepal?I live here so don’t give me any of that crap. Why is it that when any valid questions of the Maoists are asked people like you avoid answering them or even thinking about them? Why hide? Why the blinkered views?
Good comments from many, including xyz. I appreciate all of you.
What all of us are pointing out is that there should be a smooth democratic transition in the country. How we can achieve this? Just arguing that it is a political matter and decision so that we can decide anything that we desire and like. Is it helpful?
Always, in a transitional stage every country faces basically three problems, as follows:
First, the earlier laws and regulatory instruments are not sufficient to move ahead and create inroad achieving legitimacy of the actions of the government. For example, CA under the regime cannot be declared by the Parliament. The question is that what should be done then? If it is to be declared by the Parliament then what the Parliamentshould do? Where from to get this authoirty? Yes you can say people’s movement has given? It is a matter of constructive ambiguity. Therefore it creates uncertainty, which is the first problem associated with legitimacy. Therefore, to solve this problem the Parliament first needs to be engaged in preparation of a new constituion under the political authority of the people’s movement and can have all the authority under the interim constitution to move ahead. If this authority is not vested upon the Parliament the existing structue does not allow the Parliament to declare CA. If you believe in rule of law as the sine qua none of democracy you should come to the point that the Parliament should be empowered first.
Second, during interim period the government needs to take many decisions. It should revoke earlier decisions and embark on new decisions. These are taken on political hallmark but the political hallmark needs to be legitimized for its validity and authority. If you are student of political science as weel you come across with the improtance of validity and authority. For this reason too the Parliament needs to prepare an Interim Constitution so that the government will be authorised with needed authority and power.
Third, no system or government functions without law. The present government is functioning under the 1990 constitution. Since 1990 I am the one who is in writing saying that the 1990 constitution is not based on constitutional monarchy rather the monarchy holds adequate privilegs, immunities, power and authorities. Unless we don’t take it back to the people’s portal (Parliament) the government can not make headway. For this reason too the interim constitution is needed.
If the interim constitution is not prepared and the governemnt and the Parliament are not provided with needed authority and power there is a high chance that the democratic transition will suffer again.
Surendra Bhandari
i think maoists are simply campaigning for votes. so far they have been known as terrorists. they have to let the public know of their policy and attitude. they need votes and people in rural nepal are not going to vote them if they dont come to the public and do what they are doing right now. well, it least i hope this is true.
Dear Bloggers find the TRUE COLOUR of MBs:
Maoists redistribute former NRB governor’s land
Nepaleyes Report; Itahari, May 5
Who gave this right to MBs and when?
Hail The Brilliant Victories Of The People’s War In Nepal
Central Committee
Communist Party of the Philippines
February 13, 2006
Congratulatory Greetings of the Communist Party of the Philippines
to the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)
The Communist Party of the Philippines extends its most militant greetings of solidarity to the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) on the 10th anniversary of the launching of people’s war in Nepal. We congratulate you and the revolutionary Nepali people for the brilliant victories that you have achieved in the past ten years of waging people’s war. We take this occasion to honor the revolutionary martyrs who have given up their lives for the glorious cause of national democracy, socialism and communism.
Creatively applying the universal theory of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in the concrete conditions of a semi-colonial and semi-feudal country, the CPN (M) under the able leadership of Comrade Prachanda has led the Nepali masses in advancing the people’s war wave upon wave. You have successfully created revolutionary bases in the countryside, built a strong people’s army mainly from the peasant masses who are the main force in the new democratic revolution and dealt heavy blows on the reactionary armed forces. The wide countryside has now become the impregnable bastion of the revolution and only the big urban centers remain in the hands of the reactionaries.
Greatly alarmed by the growing strength of the people’s war, the ultra-reactionary King Gyanendra launched a coup d’état in February 2005 in a desperate attempt to stop the further advance of the people’s war. This has led to a greater polarization of society. In this new situation, the CPN (M) has creatively applied united front tactics to win over the seven main parliamentary parties to the platform of democracy to isolate the ultra-reactionary Gyanendra clique. Gyanendra’s scheme to use municipal elections to shore up support for his tottering regime has failed. The main parliamentary parties have boycotted the elections and the broad masses have stayed away from the polls in response to the call of the CPN (M) and the parliamentary parties to reject the sham elections.
The victories of the people’s war in Nepal serve as shining inspiration to the people of the world who are struggling against imperialism and reaction for national independence, democracy and social liberation.
The Communist Party of the Philippines under the guidance of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is also leading the Filipino masses in waging a life and death struggle against US imperialism and the local exploiting classes of compradors and landlords for national freedom and democracy and later for socialism. The Filipino revolutionaries are in solidarity with the Nepali people and other peoples who are waging people’s war or who are preparing to wage people’s war. Our struggles complement one another and contribute to the overall weakening of imperialism and reaction.
LONG LIVE MARXISM-LENINISM-MAOISM!
DOWN WITH IMPERIALISM AND REACTION!
ADVANCE THE PEOPLE’S WAR TO TOTAL VICTORY!
LONG LIVE PROLETARIAN INTERNATIONALISM!
Mga protesta laban sa hari ng Nepal, lumalawak
TULUY-TULOY ang malalaking kilos protestang pinangungunahan ng mga rebolusyonaryo at demokratikong pwersa sa Nepal mula noong Abril 6 para patalsikin si Haring Gyanedra.
Nagmartsa ang mamamayang Nepali sa kabila ng buong-araw na curfew na ipinataw ng hari noong Abril 9 at 12 at ng kautusan sa mga pwersang panseguridad na barilin ang sinumang lalabag. Ang utos na ito ng hari ay nagpatindi pa ng mga sagupaan ng mga pulis at mga demonstrador at nagresulta sa pagkamatay ng ilan.
Mula Abril 12, di na bababa sa sampu ang napatay sa pamamaril ng mga pulis sa mga rali. Umabot na rin sa 500 ang inaresto ng pulisya.
Lumawak ang panawagang ibagsak ang hari at magtatag ng demokratikong pamahalaan mula nang buwagin ng hari ang parlamento at angkinin ang absolutong kapangyarihan noong nakaraang taon.
Ang kasalukuyang bugso ng mga kilos protesta ay bunga ng kampanyang inilunsad ng nagkakaisang prenteng kinabibilangan ng mga partido ng ligal na oposisyon at ng mga rebolusyonaryong pwersang pinamumunuan ng Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).
Get ready for a one party state. If any one here has no idea of what that means. Instead of talking without knowing and posting ridiculous comments on communism in the theoretical form, please try and have a conversation with someone from Cambodia,Cuba or the old iron curtain countries (eg. Czechoslovakia, U.S.S.R, Bulgaria etc.) or if you are lucky a common Chinese about their experiences during communist rule. I have had the good opprtunity to come by several and not one of them even the one’s who served in govt. have to say anything good.
Well, several years of getting our assess kicked or getting shot, after that “bhaiya” will probably step in, so the one’s who make it can be prepared by practicing your “Jai Hind” and “Jana Gana Mana”.
jeevan, would they let other political parties campaign freely in their ‘territories’?
some western saying ” the only good injun is a dead injun”
similar applies to the maoists …well not the infantry really but the top brass oh yeah i wish them was dead.
Private ownership of land is not part of communist ideology. Land belongs to the people. The people are represented by the party. The party distributes land as it chooses. It usually chooses to distribute more generously to the party leaders than anyone else.
Bideshi:
“It usually chooses to distribute more generously to the party leaders than anyone else. ”
criticising is good . but don’t talk jpt abt what u don’t know.
No thanks comrades!
Does removing the red corner notice without having to lay down arms mean that they we will see comrades with guns walking about town and entering cafes with guns?
Karl Marx introduced communism to the world, but he wrote it with Germany in mind. A country with very different social and cultural make up than ours.
Marxism has never really been practiced in any nation, the only place where it is practiced is in communities like the kibutz in Israel.
All other nationwide attempts to adapt his views have been one or two ideas borrowed from him and then interpreted accordingly. Trotsky and Lenin are examples of such people, who have used Marxism to their own benefit, murdering millions in the process. The Maoists are the same and are closely linked to Trotsky’s ideas.
It is tantamount to the modern day Islamist fundamentalists, who use parts of the Koran the holy book of a truly wonderful religion, and interpret it to their own evil ends.
Communism has (as pointed out by many) been a failure, except I would like to point out perhaps in Costa Rica, but here again the first President after the revolution made it clear that communism/socialism as perceived by the world will not work, so their country has to mix and match and not trample on ideas of private property rights and freedom of expression and speech. They used a formula which was institutionalised and one can say they took and adapted the best from all “isms” and then added their own masala according to the needs and the environment of the nation. They are a good example of a democratic socialist republic. But I’m afraid the other nations as history has shown went the way of the Islamist fundamentalist scenario, where the whims and fancies of one man or group were catered to as opposed to the needs of the nation both economically and socially.
Taaya, what do you think? Will the Maoists let the other political parties campaign freely in their ‘territories’? If they are for real democracy then even pro-palace parties must be allowed to campaign in their territory don’t you think?
No thanks comrades!
Does removing the red corner notice without having to lay down arms mean that they we will see comrades with guns walking about town and entering cafes with guns?
Karl Marx introduced communism to the world, but he wrote it with Germany in mind. A country with very different social and cultural make up than ours.
Marxism has never really been practiced in any nation, the only place where it is practiced is in communities like the kibutz in Israel.
All other nationwide attempts to adapt his views have been one or two ideas borrowed from him and then interpreted accordingly. Trotsky and Lenin are examples of such people, who have used Marxism to their own benefit, murdering millions in the process. The Maoists are the same and are closely linked to Trotsky’s ideas.
It is tantamount to the modern day Islamist fundamentalists, who use parts of the Koran the holy book of a truly wonderful religion, and interpret it to their own evil ends.
Communism has (as pointed out by many) been a failure, except I would like to point out perhaps in Costa Rica, but here again the first President after the revolution made it clear that communism/socialism as perceived by the world will not work, so their country has to mix and match and not trample on ideas of private property rights and freedom of expression and speech. They used a formula which was institutionalised and one can say they took and adapted the best from all “isms” and then added their own masala according to the needs and the environment of the nation. They are a good example of a democratic socialist republic. But I’m afraid the other nations as history has shown went the way of the Islamist fundamentalist scenario, where the whims and fancies of one man or group were catered to as opposed to the needs of the nation both economically and socially.
Taaya, The Janandolan of April showed how peaceful protests with the backing of the people can topple governments. Should not the Maoists learn from this and abandon their weapons? After all less than a month of peaceful protests in many ways proved more successful than their tens years of armed struggle.
Taaya,
I had a personal question. Are you a girlfriend of Wagle or the other blog guy?
I was just curious because you never seem to get moderated, but the rest of us are either moderated or scrapped altogether.
Of course Kirat,
Maoists have a lot to learn.
And I am among the one who talks to give them a platform to correct their mistakes and return to multi-party democracy.
But again, this is a proven fact that maoists movement have a lot to contribute in this recent jana andolan.
Read 12 points understanding between SPA and maoists:
Maoists are commited for peace and democracy now. We have to trust them until they do otherwise due to following reasons:
Maoist have already passed from their central committe that one party rul is not practicle at this era and in a coutry with so much ethinic diversities and also due to geogrphic location. There can be no one party communism in Nepal until India possesses this system first. Moreover, China which is the leading communist country in the world is liberalising itself and it has been condemning Maoist movement in Nepal rather than supporting it.
SPA has done a lot of home work and cofidence building to negotiate with them. They resisted prussure from Western countries to detach SPA from Maoist and ask them to join hands with Gyanendra. But SPA were convinced that maoist were looking for the safe landing and Gyanendra was the obstacle all along.
Only problem now is the arm management and many countries including UN are actively involved now to take care of it which Maoist had already agreed.
Trust Nepalese people and SPA leaders, WE ARE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
So until the Maoists do give up their arms you must agree that we do have the right to be suspicious of them. Right?
U ‘must’ be suspicious.
But some go to the extremes like
-in communism u have to share bed
-in communism land is shared among leaders.
Common, people neednot go to such extremes of nonsense imaginations in their fear .
Please read the Open letter of Ameet Dhakal to Baburam Bhattarai in today´s Kantipur.
I think all of us should join together and convince Maoists that voilence breeds voilence, they should learn lesson from the people´s power and peaceful movement.
Maoist of course, will have this hang over for some days to come because:
1. many people do not want to accept their mistakes easily as human nature, moreover,
2. they are answerable to their caders and all the victims of the war, so
3. they would like to justify their action, before they go to the people
Believe me they are prepared for safe landing and let us get ready a well functioning airport.
Communism vs. Socialism
Marx was influenced in his economics and philosphy by Rousseau, Goethe , and hegel-among others. Briefly his Communist manifesto was based on an interpretation of economic history in terms of class struggles. His 900 page unfinished work Das Capital –or Capital also. He was obscure in his lifetime. his wife was a German aristocrat ,Jenny Westphalen. He was not revolutionary in action, but saw the victory of the proletariat coming through unions and collective action.It was only after the October Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917 that his work came to prominence, even though he is now acknowledged as one of the greatest thinkers of the 19th century.
The relationship of his ideas to popular ‘Marxist’ interpretations –especially those of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and Mao is still a subject of great controversy. Marxism is popular in academic circles and its interpretations in ploiltical science. Marx came to England through Fredric Engels, son of a German Industrialist who owned factories in Manchester. Engels was a committed communist when Marx met him in Paris-this term communist pre-dated the manifesto and was related to the Paris communes of workers who had held that city under seige for 2 months.So Marx did not invent communism and neither was he ever actively a communist.He rather had a humanist concept of communism –common ownership and means of production, along the lines of a Kibbutz. However, his ideas remain theoretical because thanks to interpretations and distortions of his ideas most communist states have ended up having a state that dictates to the proletrait , and not the other way around as Marx envisioned. Nor would he have envisoned a State that murdered dissenters as under Leninism, Stalinism, and Maoism.
Now to Socialism, within the broad panorama of which Communism is seen as a branch of Socialist thought. But Socialism is the umbrella. Socialist theory is diverse, and no single body of thought is shared by all socialists. It is this diversity of thought and the freedom to practice and express it that distinguishes it from State Communism. Socialism stems from the concept that all humans are social beings and need interaction to survive, as opposed to capitalism that believes the individual can survive and thrive alone or communism which permits only state approved social interaction. Marxism when it came along had a strong influence on Socialist thought, but Socialism continues to be diverse today with much debate. The majority form at present is ‘democratic socialism’ which seeks to propagate socialist ideas within a democratic system. The belief is of gradual legislative reforms towards tolerance , equitability ,and humane systems through evolutionary and educational reforms. The core beliefs are of freedom of the individual from discrimination , right to individual liberty, freedom from abusive political power , equality and social justice.
Below is a definition fashioned by the Socialist International to which the British labour Party and Fabian Society belong.
The Socialist International (SI) – the worldwide organisation of social democratic and democratic socialist parties – defines social democracy as an ideal form of resprenstative democracy and emphasises the following principles: Firstly, freedom – not only individual liberties, but also freedom from discrimination and freedom from dependence on either the owners of the means of production or the holders of abusive political power. Secondly, equality and social justice – not only before the law but also economic and socio-cultural equality as well, and equal opportunities for all including those with physical, mental, or social disabilities. Finally, solidarity – unity and a sense of compassion for the victims of injustice and inequality.
Taaya, the history of communism has shown
-in China a lot of young girls had to share the bed of Chairman Mao (I am sure other leaders indulged in this too-but were too insignificant to be reported)
-the leaders of the communist party do get a lot of the privileges that are denied to the ordinary people.
The above are facts.
Yes Gita,
I have also expressed my appreciation for this article in #47.
Maoists may try to justify their intent but their approach is failed one.
But we have to utilise them as a pressure force for the feudals and incrementalists.
The line I liked most
“Violence is not an event. It is a culture”
Will I be right to say
-In capitalism secretaries and movie queens are not safe (Monika lewinsky/Clinton and Maryln Munroe/JFK )
-Where in the world the people with dadu panyu has not benefitted?
Please donot associate a personal mistake with the whole system.
We cannot be so mean to the things u hate.
If u have found a maoist leader sleeping with gals (but I have heard Badal and pampha were penalised)then u put such questions.
If u find the land being distributed among leaders according to their norms ,then u can point.
No you will be wrong :-
1. No one coerced Marliyn Monroe and Monica Lewinsky to have those affairs.
2. So now you admit a communist system is not as saintly.
Because of the very nature of one party communist rule, or communist forms of government criticism and transparency of their/in their dealings are not possible or tolerated. Thus this system seems to encourage the worst abuses.
Who said communism is saintly.
My point is that ‘Communism is also not that evil’ that u go on making your own stories and assumptions and propogandas and all these nonsense.
I have always opposed one party rule(Please I am not that insane)but when there are lot of chances that communism can reform to socialism (my choice) why support the US strategy to cut communism from root.
I agreew with Kirat
Taaya knows about Badal and Pampha. But it is a known fact that most of girls are used in maoists are for either cooking,singing, dancing or as a sex object.
And about the lands and money. No one knows where they are going. Every now and then we hear that some maoists leaders disappeared with huge amount of money. Or they have lended in interest to their relatives.
This news came in Kantipur i think long time ago.
Why waste time reforming communism to socialism? Why not go straight to socialism? Time is not for wasting.
Is it technical problem or UWB making diasppear all my comments?
What they will do to Kantipur and press? Can they run smoothly if Prachanda become supremo of Nepal and the army?Poor SPA…..running from backside door of the parliament…so sad…we too don’t know where we are heading…what will be our future…pray for the god but nothing else…
What a sad days to SPA…they are running from the paliament from the backdoor….there won’t be press freedom at all….
Is this Kirat talking who was always for incremental change?
What are u actually trying to convey from# 78.
(wipe out all the communists?)
Maoists if they come to agreement they have to transform themselves to multi-party communism/socialism forsaking their one party communism.
Even UML was hard liner communist yesterday but are now compromising socialists.
Lets give maoists also platform to change for good. They must change for Nepal’s sake and their too.
Red corner notice has been removed, Government cease fire was been declared, terrorist tag has been withdrawn, peace talks have been planned. What more of a platform do they need?
From #78 I am trying to tell you and others with a similar bent of mind to stop apologizing for the communists.
My incremental change is not for the violence of the Maoists.
Kirat,
So you do not want maoist to be transforrmed to a communist party in a multiparty system. And also you did not like the communists parties all over europe to have changed to left paries.
you do not believe in evolution and change? we should give chance for transformation or reform.
your decrease your size with this comment.
kirat,
I agree incremental change is not for violence, but incremental change is from violence to peace, do you agree, which is taking place in Nepal.
gita, last I checked there was no decrease in my size!
Sure I want the Maoists to be transformed into hippy socialists. Like I said in #80 there is a great oppurtunity for change for them. But that does not mean we should overlook their shortcomings-the most important one being acting like democrats while holding guns in their hands and not practising democracy i.e. no freedom and democracy in the areas they control. Should there be no conditions planned for a disarmanent or for their giving up control of the so called liberated areas? How can we even talk about elections to the CA without talking about these issues? Can you see why Baburam’s talk of an unconditional CA makes sense only to him (Maoists). Besides declaring a ceasefire (the authencity of which is questionable) what else are the Maoists willing to sacrifice for the welfare of the Nepali people? Besides what does a Maoist ceasefire mean in Maoist held areas?
Prakash. thanks for expressing so clearly what i have believed all along.you are so right. The Maoists are outplaying the parties at their own game. Baburam is brilliant, and if he had intentions other than a totalitarian state, he would make a great leader for Nepal! People may wonder, where is a great leader for Nepal? Well, he is among you, and his name is Prachanda. And the Maoists have guns, and Baburam has clearly said, as late as Feb. of this year in an interview with the BBC, that they will accept NO LESS THAN THE EXECUTION OF THE KING. Think about it.
Communism vs. Socialism
Let’s begin with Marx:
Marx was influenced in his economics and philosphy by Rousseau, Goethe , and hegel-among others. Briefly his Communist manifesto was based on an interpretation of economic history in terms of class struggles. His 900 page unfinished work Das Capital –or Capital also. He was obscure in his lifetime. His wife was a German aristocrat ,Jenny Westphalen. He was not revolutionary in action, but saw the vitcory of the proletariat coming through unions and collective action.It was only after the October Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917 that his work came to prominence, even though he is now acknowledged as one of the greatest thinkers of the 19th century.
The relationship of his ideas to popular ‘Marxist’ interpretations –especially those of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin and Mao is still a subject of controversy. Marxism is popular in academic circles and its interpretations in ploiltical science. Marx came to England through Fredric Engels, son of a German Industrialist who owned factories in Manchester. Engels was a committed communist when Marx met him in Paris-this term communist pre-dated the manifesto and was related to the Paris communes of workers who had held that city under seige for 2 months.So Marx did not invent communism and neither was he ever actively a communist.He rather had a humanist concept of communism –common ownership and means of production, along the lines of a Kibbutz. However, his ideas remain theoretical because thanks to interpretations and distortions of his ideas most communist states have ended up having a state that dictates to the proletrait , and not the other way around as Marx envisioned.Nor would he have envisoned a State that murdered dissenters as under Leninism, Stalinism, and Maoism
Now to Socialism, within the broad panorama of which Communism is seen as a branch of Socialist thought. But Socialism is the umbrella. Socialist theory is diverse, and no single body of thought is shared by all socialists. It is this diversity of thought and the freedom to practice and express it that distinguishes it from State Communism. Socialism stems from the concept that all humans are social beings and need interaction to survive, as opposed to capitalism that believes the individual can survive and thrive alone or communism which permits only state approved social interaction. Marxism when it came along had a strong influence on Socialist thought, but Socialism continues to be diverse today with much debate. The majority form at present is ‘democratic socialism’ which seeks to propagate socialist ideas within a democratic system. The belief is of gradual legislative reforms towards tolerance , equitability ,and humane systems through evolutionary and educational reforms. The core beliefs are of freedom of the individual from discrimination , right to individual liberty, freedom from abusive political power , equality and social justice.
Below is a definition fashioned by the Socialist International to which the British labour Party and Fabian Society belong.
The Socialist International (SI) – the worldwide organisation of social democratic and democratic socialist parties – defines social democracy as an ideal form of resprenstative democracy and emphasises the following principles: Firstly, freedom – not only individual liberties, but also freedom from discrimination and freedom from dependence on either the owners of the means of production or the holders of abusive political power. Secondly, equality and social justice – not only before the law but also economic and socio-cultural equality as well, and equal opportunities for all including those with physical, mental, or social disabilities. Finally, solidarity – unity and a sense of compassion for the victims of injustice and inequality.