| Username |
Post |
| the real ashu |
Posted
on 10-Jul-01 02:18 AM
History has shown again and again that Nepali communists
are incapable of sustaining unity amidst themselves over
a long haul. They fight with one another all the time, with
each side caliming itself to be more Lenin, more Marxist
than Lenin and Marx themselves.
Because, true to communist ideology, dissent in any form
is NOT tolerated and because one-dogma-fits-all approach
is taken by top communist leaders, we often see groups/blocks/factions breaking away from the main
trunk of every Nepali communist tree.
That is why, there are numerous communist parties and their numerous factions (aboveboard and underground) in Nepal.
And that is why, at the time of Jan Andolan, a majority of
the communists got together and cobbled together their 'main team', so to speak, and started calling themselves United
Marxist Leninists (or UML), with a focus on the new
word 'United'.
That 'united' stance started failing when Bamdev Gautam broke
away, and he now runs his own pathetic ML (or Maalay) unit.
The present-day Nepali Maoists too are NOT immune to this
disease.
In days ahead, I expect bitter fights among their ranks, and splinter groups to come about. But the break-ups within
the Maoist ranks will be dangerous because each faction
then will be carrying arms and, having tasted blood already,
will be all the more bloodthirsty. In fact, these factions
will be using violence against one another. (For instance,
Maalay's biggest enemy is NOT Nepali Congress but its mother,
the UML!)
Assuming, with an aid of history, this scenario plays out, and safely assuming continuing incompetence from Girija & Company,
we in Nepal are in for, what historian Pratyoush Onta
calls,
|
| Trailokya Aryal |
Posted
on 10-Jul-01 03:17 AM
hi ashu dai,
would you mind posting the whole article? sounds interesting. But, as far as I know, there's no such thing as Maoism because Mao never preached anything like Marx or Lenin. All Mao did was to apply those Marxist/Leninist concepts in China.
Anyway, it will be interesting to read the whole article.
Trailokya
|
| Trailokya Aryal |
Posted
on 10-Jul-01 03:17 AM
hi ashu dai,
would you mind posting the whole article? sounds interesting. But, as far as I know, there's no such thing as Maoism because Mao never preached anything like Marx or Lenin. All Mao did was to apply those Marxist/Leninist concepts in China.
Anyway, it will be interesting to read the whole article.
Trailokya
|
| EastSideBoy |
Posted
on 10-Jul-01 11:03 AM
Maoism is a ghost from the past. It has absolutely NO future. Period.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 10-Jul-01 03:07 PM
Dear Ashu:
>And that is why, at the time of Jan Andolan, a majority of
>the communists got together and cobbled together their 'main
>team', so to speak, and started calling themselves United
> Marxist Leninists (or UML), with a focus on the new word
>'United'.
A majority of communist party formed UML? Only two . ML and
Marxist formed UML.
I think you are talking about Samyukta Baam Morchaa(United
Left Front). Out of 10+ communist parties operating in different
names, United Left Front was formed by seven left parties. Another
one, probably called Rashriya Jana Andolan Samiti(or something
like that) constitued CPN(Mashal), CPN(Masal)etc, CPN (Mashal) is
the mother party of current Maoists. Mashal later got united with
a few other left parties and was named Unity Center, but a split
among members again disturbed that unity. Now they call themselves
CPN(Maoists).
|
| GP |
Posted
on 11-Jul-01 07:40 PM
Hi!
Whatever name you give to those unions +- intersection,
they are just communists. They do not have ideological
differences, but, personal differences drive them. If
the old "clinically brain dead" Girija can make them
real fool (refer: those 14points and resignation drama),
and Bhim Rawal to Royal Comission . . ., I don't find
themselves much different from ML (Bame used to ask
for King's involvement in the politics until before
birendra died). BRB also said Birendra was a good
King when he found People's overwhelming support, and
even had condolence book in villages set by Maoists.
They are all for powers within party, and within
public -- government -- . I think use of CPN is
enough for a common people like, instead of going
referring the local names --extensions --. They have
great unity in vandalism oriented DeshBandhs and other
activities, but, they don't have unity in actions that
could bring positive differences in the country.
I have become too cynical to these all kinds of CPN.
I have no passions to hear what makes them different.
GP
|
