From Nepal: Shocked by brutal state murder of Troy Davis
Posted by Mike E on September 23, 2011
Troy Davis
The following first appeared on Winter Has Its End, revolutionary journalism blog.
The statement is from a young Nepali Maoist from the remote rural Himalayan town of Thewang in Rolpa, the village where the Nepali people’s war began.
Uday advocates for the continuation of the Nepalese revolution, and wrote a statement on the lynching of Troy Davis in the United States.
* * * * * * * *
by Uday Magar
We are shocked by this brutal act of America. We can prove that it is America who is guilty of murdering our friend, TROY DAVIS.
The question is: Who is going to punish the murderer?
The answer is: US.
A part of America is occupied by machines that reject love and justice. Even after it was proven that TROY DAVIS is an innocent man, he was inhumanly murdered. It’s crystal clear that America cruelly kills every hope that is likely to oppose it. It mercilessly murders the minds that show signs of opposition to its plans.
We are one with the big part of America that favours a society free of domination and discrimination in the name of race,color, caste, and class.
We are one Troy Davis who has bee murdered. We are all Troy Davis, and we will not die silently, but instead struggle strongly to establish the only nation in our imagination – A NATION OF WORKERS.
YOUTH OF THE WORLD-UNITE!
CWM said
It’s not exactly accurate to describe the Winter Has Its End blog as journalism . . .
If I understand correctly, the people putting out this blog don’t speak Nepali, which will clearly limit their capacity to do any reporting, but would it be possible to say anything about Nepal’s new maoist Prime Minister (Baburam Bhattarai)? What has he been doing (or not doing)? Any thoughts?
Mike E said
CWM:
The world is full of journalists who interview people through interpreters and translators. I’m sure you understand that this is common, and while it does pose some obstacles, it is hardly something that prevents the uncovering of important truths or the reporting on important experiences. (Do you think John Reed spoke Russian when he arrived in the middle of the Soviet revolution?)
Or — to put it another way — this revolutionary reporting project involved a team of reporters and a teams of translators (Greek, Turkish, Nepal languages), and both the writers and interpreters were necessary in creating the journalism, and both deserve respect and credit.
CWM said
Well, as I see it, reposting a statement or a poem is not really journalism—it’s just reposting something. Perhaps some people find that very valuable; for my sake, I would be much more interested in hearing something about the course of political events in the country. I am particularly curious about the activities of the Maoist Prime Minister and the Maoist-led cabinet. Any thoughts?
Mike E said
Well, CWM, the posting of a statement or a poem is not itself reporting (though it is an editorial function of journalism). But it seems odd (in the extreme) to act as if WHEI site is not full of interviews and reporting from Athens, Kathmandu and the rural districts of Nepal.
The Prime Minister is at the moment in New York City giving a talk. One of our reporters is in the audience taping it.
Pal said
what is the point of this article? i mean, its great that people in nepal care about this issue, but so what? you could go to any country and pick some guy off the street who would tell you the same thing. CWM above is right. Isn;t bhattarai in new york? is kasama going to report on his address at the new school about the relevance of Marxism?
Red Fly said
The hostile tone seems a bit strange.
I’ve enjoyed a lot of the stuff from the WHIE folks, but I also would like to see more interviews and analysis. Let us criticize and demand more but let’s do it in a way that encourages our people instead of denigrating them. (And I think this should apply not in just this particular instance but also in our work generally.)
CWM, have you not found anything of value in the reporting from Nepal?
I agree with you and Pal that an in-depth report on Bhattarai’s speech is needed.
CWM said
I found the WHIE pieces on Greece more interesting than the pieces on Nepal. Among the latter, there are celebratory articles, and there is some transcription and re-posting, but little that would qualify as journalism.
It seems like reporters interested in a) Nepal and b) Maoism would be particularly interested in the activities of the new Maoist Prime Minister and the Maoist-led cabinet. And, also, what is the status of the arms’ hand over? Have they all been handed over? . . . There are so many issues to discuss, thing that seem so much more important than a statement from a random “young Nepali Maoist” on Troy Davis. It’s not that such a statement is a bad thing but, really, so what?
I can search Google News for articles, but do the people from WHIE have any insights to offer?
Red Fly said
I agree. These are important issues that need to be reported on. I also think we should keep in mind though that the WHIE folks are just getting their feet wet. They’re learning on the fly and with limited resources. Let’s criticize and encourage so that they can get better and we can get the kind of revolutionary journalism we need. Overall, I think the WHIE folks are off to a promising start and will get better over time with our criticism and encouragement.
I think propagating a revolutionary internationalist message is a good thing. The report is slight but it’s good for people to know that the murder of Troy Davis is an event that is being recognized and understood around the world.
CWM said
Red Fly, I strongly suspect that WHIE’s silence on the Maoist-led cabinet and the arms’ handover has more to do with ideological blinders than practical limitations. It seems to me that actually reporting on current events in Nepal would make it hard to sustain the claim that Nepalese Maoists are revolutionary–a claim I associate with this site–whereas posting a random statement about Troy Davis by a random “young Nepalese Maoist” challenges little.
And what does it mean to say that Uday “advocates the continuation of the Nepease revolution”? Does that mean that Uday rejects the Maoist-led cabinet?
Mike E said
You write:
This seems confused to me. There is not a single “Nepalese Maoists” — their movement has split, between those who are for a deeper revolutionary change and those who want to consolidate the overthrow of the monarchy without carrying through further social changes (agrarian revolution, socialist economics etc.).
We don’t report on daily events in Nepal, because an endless reposting of bourgeois reports gets monotonous, and is easily available elsewhere. And the work of the Winter Has Its End was obviously not to document the same micro-events in the day to day jousts of line struggle and central government politics — but to report on the views of those who are generally not heard from (in the reporting of the mainstream press.)
As for whether the recent events somehow undermine our view of Nepal’s revolutionary attempts…. I have to ask have you read the essay Eric and I wrote on this?
CWM said
Mike, when I spoke of “Nepalese Maoists” I was referring to the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). When you say that “their movement has split,” are you suggesting that a new party has emerged?
Mike E said
I’m saying that there is no single policy defining the UCPN(Maoist) — and its opposing wings are increasingly operating as different networks. The split is not open or final — but clearly their unity has eroded very far and one cannot speak of “Nepalese Maoists” as if this is a single movement with a single policy or strategy.
If that is news to you, then you have not read the Winter Has Its End reporting (that you started by mocking). Perhaps you should read their articles. Here is one you could start with:
http://winterends.net/nepal-stories/123-a-maoist-performance-bring-the-storm
CWM said
First you say that “their movement has split” then you say that the “split is not open or final.” If the split is not open or final, how do you know about it?
I would be interested in reading about a split in the UCPN(Maoist). To be convinced of a split, I would need to see things like calls for a new party, efforts to force the existing party leadership to resign, etc. Clearly some people are upset that the party handed over its arms, but being upset and splitting are two different things.
eric ribellarsi said
CWM, I am literally bewildered by how hostile you are without even understanding the actual politics of the people you are attacking.
And, in fact, we wrote daily articles opposing the disarming of the PLA, reporting from the torch demonstrations in every major city of the country opposing the disarming of the PLA and showing a conscious, disciplined, mass militant force. We reported from the performance that is touring the country to build opposition to Prachanda and Bhattarai. We have conducted two interviews, one text and one video, with Biplap (a leader of the Maoists who wants to launch new revolutionary preparations), and I authored a statement with Mike Ely opposing the moves to disarm the PLA and supporting new revolutionary preparations.
Right now we have another major interview with a leading Nepali Maoist, Dev Gurung, that will speak both on the struggle within the party and their larger vision for a revolutionary road in Nepal. We are working on a theoretical piece that is precisely about Bhattarai’s program.
It is very frustrating to see comrades give months of their lives, take on a huge amounts of debt and not even be able to eat, and then to have someone who apparently hasn’t even read their articles declare that they are “not really reporters.”
Yes. That is exactly what it means. He is from the village where the people’s war began, his home was blown up by the Nepal Army, and now he is part of preparation to forge a new revolutionary road in Nepal, one that is directly opposed to the road chosen by Bhattarai and Prachanda, one that would involve the defeat and overthrow of the Nepal Army, revolutionary land reform, liberation from imperialism, and aimed at being a base area for revolution in South Asia and the world. And part of what is remarkable is that someone who is in Rolpa is so serious about world revolution that he is intently following the events in the U.S. and wanted to write to us about Troy Davis. I find that inspiring, and deeply opposed to much of the politics in the US where people refuse to look beyond their local Wal-Mart, and speak only of their individual identities.
eric ribellarsi said
You want them to spell out for you that they plan to do this thing that will create great repression, even perhaps an Indonesia type scenario? Why is it their responsibility to fill you in on all their internal preparations?
But seriously: read the recent interview with Biplap. He spells out the terms very clearly: ”
That was BEFORE the keys handover. Don’t be naive, things are accelerating.
CWM said
Eric, I’m sorry that you feel attacked by me but, if you read over my comments, you’ll see that I have not said anything about you as a person or commented upon the debts you have incurred while traveling to Nepal. This is really not about you.
I am not hostile to you (I don’t know you) but I am against Maoism for reasons that should be pretty clear when you think about groups like the RCP, the UCPN (Maoist), not to mention the Shining Path and others. I’m sorry if my opposition to Maoism comes off as opposition to you as a person. It shouldn’t be read that way.
Now, for the sake of clarity, I’d like to see if I understand your position: like Mike, you think there is a split in the UCPN but that it is not “open or final” (as Mike puts it). So, even though the leadership of the UCPN (Maoist) clearly has NO revolutionary aspirations, you believe there is another faction of the party that is secretly revolutionary. Is that your stance?
And, when you say “things are accelerating,” you are saying that this secret revolutionary faction (which is apparently not secret to you) is going to emerge suddenly? Is that your argument?
Tell No Lies said
CWM,
Were you similarly critical when subComandante Marcos wrote a public letter to Mumia Abu Jamal? To be sure Uday Magar doesn’t have the literary talents of a Marcos. (Who among us does?) But to my mind that makes this statement even more interesting. This is not coming from the urban university-educated leadership attuned to symbolic needs of North American activist audiences. It comes from a young peasant revolutionary from a remote corner of the world. And what does he say?
He says:
And he sees the difficulties presently facing the revolution in Nepal through that lens, in terms of his responsibilities not just to his village, but literally to the people of the world, including us.
Is it journalism? Who cares. It is noteworthy. And it is a measure of the cynicism that is attached to anti-communism (even in its left-wing form) that your response to the publication of this expression of international solidarity is so snarky.
The WHIE team is bringing us important reporting. Do they speak Nepali? No they don’t. At least not yet. But they do speak English. And so apparently does a decent enough sized fraction of Nepalis to support English-language media. How many people who reported on the Zapatistas spoke one of the four Mayan languages that are the first languages of virtually every Zapatista? I’m not trivializing the significance of the language barriers. They are a profound obstacle. Which is why it is so critical that there are revolutionary reporters there now developing the means to not just to translate what people are thinking and saying in Nepali or Magar but to explain in it terms that we can understand.
Your doubts that there are deep divisions among the Maobadi, like your earlier doubts that the RCP organized hundreds of people to wage a militant protest against Deng Xiao Ping’s visit to the US, say more about your methods than they do about the matters (not) in question. That the divisions exist is an uncontroversial fact to anybody who has taken a little time to follow events. What they mean and where they will lead are of course matters open to debate. I’m always a little confused by these expresions of doubt on your part. It is entirely reasonable that you or anyone else might not know about the RCP’s actions in DC thirty years ago or about the latest developments inside a political party on the other side of the planet. But then why not come willing to learn from those who, whatever differences you have, actually care a lot about these matters and do know?
Tell No Lies said
CWM,
It isn’t a secret and it includes important sections of the leadership. There have been open polemics between leaders of the UCPN(M) that have been reported and published here and on our sister site, Revolution in South Asia. And there have been mass demonstrations by supporters of the UCPN(M) against the actions of Bhattarai. Also reported her, with photos. Of course there are aspects of all this that are, of necessity, secret. But that there is a deep divide with significant forces in open opposition is not something that anybody here is making up and your insinuations that this is all just in our minds is simply silly. Eric has given you multiple links. Click over to the Revolution in South Asia site. Or just fricking Google it and take the 15 minutes to bring yourself up to speed. C’mon.
CWM said
TNL, you have often accused me of being unwilling to learn when we draw different conclusions about a matter. Had it ever occurred to you that I am just as willing to learn as you are, but I simply have different views? Think about it.
I am aware of the public expressions of discontent in the UCPN (Maoist) against the handing over of arms. This has been reported here and elsewhere. However, there is a big difference between statements of discontent and an actual split. For instance, some liberal democrats have publicly voiced their frustration with Obama, but most of them will line up behind him when he runs again.
For me to be convinced that there is a split in the UCPN (Maoist), not just discontent, I would need see a call for a new party or effort to force the current party leadership to resign. I have yet to see either of those things.
CWM said
By the way, TNL, it’s not really that noteworthy that some random young Maoist opposes the execution of Troy Davis. Sure, that’s nice, but not exactly news. Forgive me if this is just an expression of my bad “method” [cough cough], but I tend to think that the activities of the Maoist Prime Minister and Maoist-led cabinet and the state of the arms’ handover are a little more newsworthy. . . .
Mike E said
CWM:
There has been an organized movement to force Prachanda to resign as chairman.
It is a curious choice to come into a discussion and (rather belligerently) demand information that regularly shared in that discussion (and that would be available, as TNL says, from a simple google search). Your current demands for proof are a bit like your previous strange intervention into the discussion of the Deng Demo, where you demanded proof that it had even happened (even though some of us had been there, and one of us had been indicted for it).
Why don’t you do a little homework first? Otherwise doesn’t it border a bit on trolling? And isn’t the angry suspicious edge to your tone rather odd?
* * * * * * *
As for this post itself — perhaps you don’t find it interesting that even in Rolpa (as remote as life gets on earth), the case of Troy Davis is discussed and sparks outrage. Perhaps you don’t find there any insight into how the U.S. is perceived around the role, and the impact of racist acts on that perception.
But really, if some of our posts don’t interest you, you are always free to not read them — and if a post doesn’t interest you, why would that be the one you comment on?
eric ribellarsi said
CWM, I have presented you with at least a dozen articles which are precisely about the questions that you claim we haven’t reported on. Normally I would just say “don’t feed the troll” and leave it at that, but:
I saw this new today. Apparently Kiran has delivered a message directly to Prachanda today, in a meeting that lasted only 10 minutes:
“There is no other way to go except waging a fresh revolt. If you join us we will go together else we are ready to go alone.”
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-09-24/dahal-baidya-meet-inconclusive-trying-time-for-nepal-maoists-party
CWM said
Eric, you and I evidently differ on what constitutes journalism, but asking you to clarify your views is not a form of trolling or an attack on your character.
The article you point to is interesting to me. It makes it clear that there is NO SPLIT in the UCPN, but that unity is quite fragile. I see that Baidya is pointing toward a “fresh revolt” but also says that Prachanda should sort out the differences in the party. This strikes me as both tough talk and conciliatory talk at the same time.
What do you think a “fresh revolt” would look like? If I understand correctly, all the arms have been handed over and the PLA demobilized, in which case armed action would be pretty tough. What are the feasible scenarios?
Also, are you aware of settings in which the base of the UCPN gets to express its views? Is there some way that it could force the resignation of the current leadership? Are their mechanisms in which the base could revoke or recall Prachanda (or others)?
Contrarian said
Getting back to the original comment, I am puzzled as to why any progressive or revolutionary minded person would not find value in the statement of support for Troy Davis by someone from Nepal. Yes, I suspect one could find people in many countries who would express solidarity with Troy Davis, and that is good. If there were a million statements by different people from 170 countries, I would be enthused to see them published. I wish that the individual and collective voices of most of humanity would be raised in outrage at the murder of Troy Davis. I know that I joined with many others in posting “I am Troy Davis” in my Facebook page on the day he was murdered. I had some friiends who altered their profile pictures that day to picture of Troy Davis. Solidarity with the oppressed is good, and needs no “justification.” Is it “journalism”? Well maybe not, but who claimed it was?
As for the Winter Has Its End website, they are offering material not found elsewhere that is of value. Could they do more or better. Perhaps. But that is a matter of resources, both money and people. Sure a reporter can learn more if they know the country’s language. But if they don’t, is that some reason not to find out what they can through translators, etc?
There are things at Kasama and at Winter Has Its End that I don’t agree with at times, but given the varying viewpoints expressed often, it would be ridiculous for someone to claim that they agreed with everything.
I am thrilled to read of the solidarity of the comrade from Nepal. Ultimately we are all in this together. We will all get to communism worldwide, or none of us will, seeing instead the “common ruin of the contending classes.”
eric ribellarsi said
CWM writes:
Again, don’t be naive. Kiran is giving an ultimatum. My view that everyone in the world knows how Prachanda will respond. But isn’t there, in moments like this, a need to show that one has struggled as far as one can struggle to overcome these line differences? I realize that out of principle in some factions of anarchism people often refuse to have such protracted debates with people they fundamentally disagree with, but that really is not how the Nepali Maoists view things. They want to win over everyone who can be won over to what comes next.
I suspect that depends what the balance of forces are among the UCPN(M). I know that know that Kiran’s people do not advocate a return to only rural protracted people’s war. They uphold the need to have both rural base areas and people’s war, combined with urban insurrection. Will it be possible to maintain an urban version of the party after a split? That we will have to wait and see. I also know that the bulk of the UCPN(M)’s fighters have actually left the PLA, and were organized into the Young Communist League (and the new body led by Biplab, the People’s Volunteers). A new army will likely have to be formed.
Yes. You may not be aware, but in October of 2010, there was a mass meeting of the party with 8000 people present, called Palungtar. And in the meeting, people challenged the road of reform and demanded that the party make preparations for insurrection. And an overwhelming majority are said to have voted in favor of that, while Bhattarai was steamrolled over. And, at that time, Prachanda voted in favor of insurrection, but then after the meeting, Prachanda chose to refuse to implement that Party’s decision. He blocked the formation of the People’s Volunteers, which was said to be the main body of the insurrection, even while he continued his mode of rhetoric in favor of insurrection. And meanwhile, especially after April of 2011 (when he suddenly declared opposition to insurrection), he began preparations to disarm the PLA. But the democratic decision of the party all along has been insurrection.
That kind of meeting is called an “extended plenum.” There is one other meeting which is even larger, and which involves the entire party: it is the “general convention.” The general convention has the authority to elect a new leadership and has absolute authority over the line of the party. Such a meeting has been the demand of Kiran’s faction for a long time, and Prachanda originally agreed to such a meeting (even while he constantly raises logistical reasons that the meeting cannot take place), and even while he accelerates his plans to damage the revolution so much that his road becomes irreversible.
I suspect such a meeting, in the end, will not be able to take place before a showdown within the party. But the mechanism for such a meeting is there, and it is a real possibility.
CWM said
Thanks for your reply, Eric. I appreciate it. Can you say anything about the culture of the party that allowed Prachanda to run rough-shod over the apparent wishes of the rest of the party? Is there are a cult of personality around him? Are the mechanisms permitting the recall of the party leadership (etc) very weak? What made it possible for the chairman to disregard the wishes of the base so wantonly?
Also, another question: you say that “such a meeting . . . will not be able to take place before a showdown within the party.” The word “showdown” implies a confrontation to me but the scenario you describes suggests to me that one faction of the party would just walk away. Do you imagine a more dramatic split than a simple defection?
CWM said
Two additional questions that I forgot to include in my previous comment: do you know if there are attempts to strengthen democratic mechanisms within the UCPN (so that the leadership can’t dismiss the wishes of the base in the future)? Also, if a split were to occur, is there reason to suppose that the new formation would be more democratic than the UCPN is now?
Miles Ahead said
From Contrarian:
I agree. In fact, what was reported in the mainstream media was that there were huge protests against the execution of Troy Davis (capital punishment, Jim Crow, etc.) in Europe (mainly France, Sweden, London, Germany, where many targeted U.S. embassies) and as far away as Hong Kong. There were hundreds of thousands of Tweets circulating and streaming around the world.
We are internationalists. And now, thanks to WHIE, the international (and revolutionary-minded) community is hearing from a brother/comrade/fellow revolutionary in Nepal. And the message from Uday Magar is not only a very powerful one, it is an internationalist one:
IMO, WHIE are partisan/revolutionaries/internationalist “reporters” for the people. How many “journalists” as we know them, can make that claim? Certainly many who are watching the events unfolding in Nepal want to have a better understanding of the political, ideological line struggles taking place. And certainly many of the questions asked are legitimate. BUT…We are fortunate that WHIE is on the ground in Nepal—and their contributions to the overall picture have been (and continue to be) very valuable.
They are doing revolutionary work—but not necessarily with answers to every nuance, every political battle taking place. How could they? While Eric (and Kasama, and Kasama’s thread Revolution in South Asia) has continually laid out different scenarios, line struggles, etc. he also prefaces much in this arena with “I suspect.” But the WHIE team has gone to the people, and in particular, but not exclusively, revolutionaries, and has shared their voices/views with “us,” as well as a broader audience. (Just one example: “Greece: Report from Rebel Exachia”.) Sure beats the “silence” and avoidance emanating from some “revolutionary” quarters.
But as Mike Ely pointed out in Comment 2 (in regards to language barriers)—
And then Mike adds: “(Do you think John Reed spoke Russian when he arrived in the middle of the Soviet revolution?)”
In John Reed’s less famous (than Ten Days That Shook the World) tome, Insurgent Mexico there are many insights. Reed, whose boots were on the ground, doesn’t strictly report on various forays and battles during the Mexican Revolution of 1910. (And BTW, Reed did not himself speak Spanish.) After months of trying, he was finally granted a very private interview with Venustiano Carranza—of whom he later wrote ¡clearly has dementia! Meanwhile, those vying for power were trying to both prop up (literally and figuratively) Carranza and at the same time sequester him from the public and antagonistic political forces. Reed’s writing (for some bordering on biblical) caused quite a controversy…especially since a broad spectrum of people (to this day) think that Carranza was instrumental in the assassination of Pancho Villa.
WHIE, especially as they learn more, are more steeled in practice and mature, are helping play an important role in doing just that. And the statement “from a young Nepali Maoist from the remote rural Himalayan town of Thewang in Rolpa, the village where the Nepali people’s war began,” in solidarity with all the Troy Davis’ of this world, is a potent contribution.
land said
This is thrilling. To see this statement for Troy and against his brutal murder coming from a young peasant revolutionary from Nepal. How this happened is a story in itself. It might not have happened without WInter.
This government always says “no one cares about Mumia, No one cares about Troy. They know nothing..
Troy would be thrilled,. Mumia would immediately want to know how he can write to this young revolutionary peasant revolutionary.
This isn’t all there is to internationalism but it concentrates a lot.
When we were in the streets the night they executed Troy this woman came up and said how do you know Troy is innocent. I gave her the facts of the case but I could tell she wasn’t that interested in the facts. She didn’t want what she considered her government to look bad.
I wish I had had this statement from the revolutionary in Nepal. I would have read it to her. And handed out copies to everyone else..
Otto said
This is a great story. Last week I sparred with the LLCO who tried to tell me that no one in the third world cared about nor felt sorry for any US citizen who has been mistreated. This statement proves him wrong. A few years ago, it would have been hard for such a statement to get to this country and both the people here and those in Nepal might know little of each other.
The internet has allowed us to have a more global outlook and I find it very refreshing that peasants in Nepal realize that our government is repressive here as well has else where. He is aware of what this system is like and unlike a lot of Americans, he can see that oppression in this country is for real.
When Uday Magarsaid;
“It’s crystal clear that America cruelly kills every hope that is likely to oppose it. It mercilessly murders the minds that show signs of opposition to its plans.”
It showed me that he understands what some Americans still don’t get. This country will do all it can to kill off and hide dissent. He realizes that and I’m grateful.
Red Fly said
This.
Sure, hearing what party leaders have to say is important, but the heart and soul of a revolutionary party worthy of that appellation is the revolutionary cadre. Just because Uday Magar is not a designated “leader” doesn’t mean his words aren’t important. That the murder of Troy Davis has really struck a chord with progressive and revolutionary-minded people as far away as Nepal says a lot about the age we’re living in from a communications/technology standpoint, but also says a lot about the ability of ordinary folks to understand justice and injustice on a very universal, human level. It’s a very eloquent testament to the essential truth of proletarian internationalism.
CWM said
For my sake, I’m not very interested in what some randomly selected individual thinks about the execution of Troy Davis. That doesn’t necessarily tell me anything about the larger social processes or issues at hand. It just tells me what this particular individual thinks about this particular topic. If some people find this thrilling, well, good for them.
Personally, I’m more interested in the social and political changes underway in Nepal. For instance, I’d be interested in learning about how remote areas dominated by the UCPN relate to the activities in the urban centers, where the leadership appears to reside. Is there a difference in the political cultures or outlooks in the respective areas? And how exactly do UCPN members in remote areas influence UCPN policies? In comment 25, Eric mentioned mechanisms through which UCPN members can hypothetically influence party decisions, but these mechanisms seemed to require meetings in urban centers, which would presumably be quite inaccessible for people in remote areas. Does this mean that people in remote rural regions (people like Uday) just passively take orders or are there mechanisms through which they can influence the party? Also, Eric claims that Prachanda transgressed the majority position in the UCPN when he began disarming the PLA, which makes me wonder what mechanisms allowed him to disregard the will of the majority and if his apparent lack of accountability played out in the remote areas in the same way as it did in the urban centers.
I’m more interested in topics like these.
Miles Ahead said
Not that this is in anyway the main point, but a correction to comment 28…
“…especially since a broad spectrum of people (to this day) think that Carranza was instrumental in the assassination of Pancho Villa.”
Meant to say Emiliano Zapata, not Pancho Villa.
eric ribellarsi said
CWM writes:
As Mike pointed out in a different thread, there were actually inequalities of opinion in different bodies of the party. The party’s base largely supported insurrection, but the party had merged with many other parties, and given them positions within the central committee as concessions during those mergers. These parties that merged in had largely opposed people’s war (with a few minor exceptions), and were much more conservative than the Maoist party itself.
So, when in October 2010, Bhattarai was steam-rolled over by the Party’s base cadre, the reaction was essentially: “Well, let’s move the debate to the body where we have a majority.” So in April of 2011, they staged a semi-coup by having the central committee (a body subordinate to the extended plenum) to adopt an anti-insurrection position… and Bhattarai and Prachanda camps claimed that they were carrying through the decisions of the extended plenum (because they can choose to interpret that decision however the hell they want to).
But really: The decision to abandon insurrection took place much earlier than April of 2011. After the October 2010 meeting that ratified the plans for insurrection took place, cadre loyal to Prachanda (who claimed to agree with that decision!) and Bhattarai had simply refused to join the new organization purposed with launching the insurrection (called The People’s Volunteers). Through their actions, they had weakened the insurrectionary body and made it impossible to implement an insurrection at that point.
And like Mike Ely wrote in his post, this is mainly not a question of process, but a question of different class forces with different class interests and outlooks… it has to do with balance of forces in Nepali society.
I’m not sure. A number of scenarios are possible… Legal process says that the UCPN(M)’s majority could actually recall Bhattarai from the Prime Minister position and form their own block within the constituent assembly (wouldn’t that be interesting to see?). But I suspect the backing of powerful reactionary forces will ensure that that scenario is not allowed to happen.
But other scenarios would include the sudden emergence of a new party, pre-trained before a split, with a disciplined urban and rural presence. It would have to spend a period preparing both the rural base and urban forces for a final showdown insurrectionary-type setup. Or perhaps the revolutionary forces will not be strong enough in the cities, and will have to return to the 2005 lines, where the Maoists controlled 80% of the countryside, and the reactionaries controlled the capital city (perhaps in the end, the Nepali Maoists will be forced to split the country in two, as was recommended by the Indian Maoists). Or perhaps the reactionaries will launch Indonesia and attempt to drown the revolution in a sea of bodies before it can regain its footing. Or perhaps Bhattarai will royally fuck up in some way and be defeated in both the UCPN(M) and the larger society, and Kiran’s people will take the party apparatus, and proceed where things left off.
Many different scenarios are now possible (though some are much more likely that others), and I don’t want to try to play fortune teller. But I do believe the revolution is far from over.
Sasha said
TO CWM.
Since you are obviously so keen, so interested (as you have repeatedly reiterated) in those topics, why then don’t you put up such a site yourself where all your rigorous criteria on what constitutes true journalism will be met? “I want to see this, I want to know that, where’s your news about this..” [m0derator snip of snark]