• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Unified Maoists expected to form government in Nepal

Laika

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Three Communist Parties in Nepal are expected to agree to Unify after elections signing a Pact on October 3rd. This would make them the biggest political force in the country and potentially able to form a government. Polls are taking place on November 26th and December 7th, and the Communists have aimed to win a two-third majority of seats under an electoral alliance.

This follows the decade long civil war which ended in 2006 in which the Maoists waged a "people's war" against the monarchy in order to establish a Republic. The Maoists performed well in elections in 2008, but were in a much weaker position in 2013. The country has had nine governments in nine years, under-going successive unstable coalition governments and the move has led to a great deal of speculation as to Nepal's future.

There is some suggestion that the unification is being orchestrated by Beijing, to create a stable political system in Nepal that works in their favour, as the parties are known to be friendly with China. This was a surprise decision that looks set to bring down to current government and is seen as a betrayal by the Nepali Congress Party as it was in coalition with one of the parties. Relations between Nepal and India have been strained, but there are hopes things may improved under a unified Communist government.

I'm assuming that the level of interest on the main forums will be small, so I've put this thread in the Communist only sub-forum. Any thoughts on this new development Comrades?

UPDATE: Three communist parties of Nepal agree for unification after polls – OnlineKhabar
Major parties in Nepal announce to merge and launch new communist party - Xinhua | English.news.cn
CPN-UML and CPN-Maoist Centre form alliance in Nepal
Nepal Communist Parties to Merge
Is Nepal headed towards a communist state?

**Please Note this is in the Communist Only Sub-forum**
s_l300_1.png
 
Laika

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
YmirGF said:
WoW, there are still Maoists around? That IS news!
Click to expand...

Well, now you mention it...

In 2007 Maoists controlled 40% of India's land area known as the "Red Corridor" and it was described by the Indian Prime minister as the "single biggest internal security challenge ever faced by our country".

...And the American occupation has been at war with a Maoist Insurgency in Afghanistan since 2004.

But of course I didn't say anything. I don't want to get chased by the Men in black because I'm exposing glitches in the matrix. If it doesn't get on TV News with its own intro and theme music, its clearly not important.

oh look! A Kitten! :D

cutest-cat-gifs-kitten-meow.gif
 
Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
It would be interesting to watch the Western powers squirm around some if Communism begins to make a comeback.
Duke_Leto said:
And we know how well those turned out.
Click to expand...
Way more complicated than what most people want to acknowledge. It's absolutely pathetic how we're supposed to worship Capitalist societies, despite their record of brutality, death, and human rights violations, yet, unlike even Cuba, we think people should be at the "mercy" of the free market when it comes to health care, we don't campaign to spread literacy, but we have lots of flashy, shinny junk to keep you distracted. Tit-for-tat, the comparisons get ugly. We stuff (often private) prisons full of non-violent offenders and then harvest slave labor from them, we ruin social and economic stability of other nations through military domination so we can live even further and further entrenched in unsustainable comfort, and even degrade people to the status of "human resources" so they can be exploited and their potential and actualization put aside to feed people to a machine, living unquestioned and unexamined lives so a few can soak up every last penny and ounce of power they can. We don't have a good model for what a family is, and we've long had the expectations that our children will have more than their parents.
 
Duke_Leto

Duke_Leto

Active Member
Shadow Wolf said:
It would be interesting to watch the Western powers squirm around some if Communism begins to make a comeback.

Way more complicated than what most people want to acknowledge. It's absolutely pathetic how we're supposed to worship Capitalist societies, despite their record of brutality, death, and human rights violations, yet, unlike even Cuba, we think people should be at the "mercy" of the free market when it comes to health care, we don't campaign to spread literacy, but we have lots of flashy, shinny junk to keep you distracted. Tit-for-tat, the comparisons get ugly. We stuff (often private) prisons full of non-violent offenders and then harvest slave labor from them, we ruin social and economic stability of other nations through military domination so we can live even further and further entrenched in unsustainable comfort, and even degrade people to the status of "human resources" so they can be exploited and their potential and actualization put aside to feed people to a machine, living unquestioned and unexamined lives so a few can soak up every last penny and ounce of power they can. We don't have a good model for what a family is, and we've long had the expectations that our children will have more than their parents.
Click to expand...

It is more complicated than many would like to acknowledge. That doesn't change the fact that "Marxist-Leninist" (i.e. Stalinist) states have all been dictatorships (literal ones -- not "dictatorships of the proletariat"), where the working class is just as powerful in them as in explicitly capitalist societies, if not less so. Furthermore, commodity production -- the defining feature of capitalism -- remains intact. The only people who would claim otherwise are generally edgy leftoids, likely used to a comfortable lifestyle in the first world, who have no connection to communism outside some naive utopianic fantasies, and have never seriously thought about what capitalism is, or read the thoughts of people who have (such as Marx, but even Adam Smith, Keynes, or Milton Friedman are probably outside their grasp).

Capitalist society is terrible, that's true, and what you mentioned does occur and is terrible. That said, when people try to defend their own horrors, is that any better? Do wage slavery, imperialism, gulags/prisons, dictatorships, or, as you said, a tiny minority becoming more powerful at the expense of others any better when done by people waving red flags?

I guarantee you that 100% of these Maoist "People's Resistance" nonsense are comprised of people not supported by the working class, or even actively opposed to it. What they want is a system driven by ideologues that looks marvelously similar to capitalist society, but perhaps with fewer political opponents, more unions (or one state-controlled union), and state control of industry. They do not in any way represent the interests of the working class, and would likely shoot any working-class person who protested their rule. The Soviet Union did this, China did this, the DPRK is still doing this.
 
Last edited:
Laika

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Duke_Leto said:
I am.
Click to expand...

Well then, Welcome to the Communist Only sub-forum Comrade. When unknown people typically give one line responses, it usually means they are anti-communists which is why I was not more welcoming sooner. My apologies as I misread your intentions.

Duke_Leto said:
Capitalist society is terrible, that's true, and what you mentioned does occur and is terrible. That said, when people try to defend their own horrors, is that any better? Do wage slavery, imperialism, gulags/prisons, dictatorships, or, as you said, a tiny minority becoming more powerful at the expense of others any better when done by people waving red flags?
Click to expand...

I don't know. The fact I don't know is the reason I feel more comfortable being a Communist than a Capitalist. As a Communist you can at least try to take some degree of collective responsibility for those decisions and try to evaluate the decisions of your "comrades". you can read the theory and the history and try and imagine what you would have done in those situations. It is a much richer, more intense and complex experience and is typically a greater contribution to understanding or preventing a re-occurrence of those atrocities than most anti-communists would actually do. It depends how the knowledge and the power and freedom it can bring is used but definitely an intellectually and morally sensitive business.

Duke_Leto said:
The only people who would claim otherwise are generally edgy leftoids, likely used to a comfortable lifestyle in the first world, who have no connection to communism outside some naive utopianic fantasies, and have never seriously thought about what capitalism is, or read the thoughts of people who have (such as Marx, but even Adam Smith, Keynes, or Milton Friedman are probably outside their grasp).
Click to expand...

Well I was never edgy. I was socially awkward and my friends can vouch for that. :D

Actually, I was depressed and suicidal and being a communist was part of a really difficult cocktail of bad experiences and vulnerabilities. Its unlikely I would have become a Communist otherwise. I have read Ayn Rand, some Milton Friedman, I did have a copy of Keynes but never read it. I find Hayek the most impressive and sophisticated of the lot. I couldn't help agreeing with the Road to Serfdom, and his book "The Fatal Conceit" on the errors of Socialism is easily one of the finest examples of criticism of socialist beliefs.

The problem is that it doesn't criticise Marxism specifically and it often show an almost complete disregard for Marxist philosophy because they treat their criticisms as the a "self-evident" truth based on "natural laws". The more sophisticated and "dialectical" the nature of Marxism becomes, the harder it is to dismiss. Even if it is an absolutely appalling totalitarian nightmare, it would be hard to say its entirely false or entirely immoral. My personal experience is I haven't met an anti-communist who could or was willing to concede that even if Marxism was Totalitarian, it was partly true and partly moral. They typically reject knowledge in favour of simplicity, aren't willing to come to terms with the nature of their fear of power, violence and death and slip in to hysterics. Its why I can't comfortably dismiss "Stalinism" and go back to being a conformist consumer like I'm supposed to. I sort of want to know the answer as to "why" they did such terrible things even though it scares me by holding a mirror up to my humanity and our own capacity for darkness.
 
Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Duke_Leto said:
Capitalist society is terrible, that's true, and what you mentioned does occur and is terrible. That said, when people try to defend their own horrors, is that any better? Do wage slavery, imperialism, gulags/prisons, dictatorships, or, as you said, a tiny minority becoming more powerful at the expense of others any better when done by people waving red flags?
Click to expand...
What really got me thinking about such things was a debate between Foucault and a Chinese Maoist. From the perspective of this Maoist, he was praising the Chinese state and Maoist philosophy like the average American would praise America and Capitalism. I loathe the idea of playing "victim olympics," but instead of pointing fingers as we do, saying Soviet Russia did this and Castro did that, while they are saying the British Empire did this and America did that, it should be rather considered and asked what state, in all of human history, hasn't succumbed to oppression, violence, illusions of freedom, and the few profiting off the sweat of the many? Any system, any state, some have had it better while others haven't. Myself, proletariat work is what made me a communist, especially in a warehouse where it was a long drudge and thinking of how screwed up the system is, basically priming me into an "agreement frenzy" over many things Marx wrote of, such as the prices of commodities and the alienation of labor. If I had it as good then as I do now--being petty bourgeois and enjoying a host of benefits and perks--I may never have went further Left than Socialist, maybe not even much past that of a Liberal. But I've worked myself into the operating room a couple times, have been able to afford to eat nothing more than a few slices of bread for a meal, and have always made poverty wages until now. Soviet Russia was oppressive and dealt in international warmongery, but my rights aren't fully recognized in America and boots on the ground (especially in the Middle East) has been a constant.
And, I too thought you weren't a communist, for reasons already mentioned by Laika. Usually when someone here drops a one line criticism of Communism here, they don't know there are more varieties of Communism than Lennon-Marxism, which they think is synonymous and interchangeable with Marxism, and are oblivious to things such as women's suffrage, improved medical care, and improved literacy that were seen in some states after a Communist revolution. At times, I'm not even sure they are fully cognizant of the fact that Soviet Russia was technology competing, and even winning in areas and at times, against America: All they know is Capitalism "won."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top