Please help Links stay afloat. Donate what you can!
Click on Links masthead to clear previous query from search box
Syndicate
Recent comments
- Revolutionary Nepal
20 hours 53 min ago - sraeli Communists Thank Hugo Chávez
22 hours 24 min ago - Calcutta News: Israeli army are cowards says Chavez
22 hours 27 min ago - El Salvador: Take Action to Oppose Dirty Campaign!
1 day 2 hours ago - Norway: Unions strike over Gaza
1 day 2 hours ago - Africa takes to the streets on Israel massacres in Gaza
1 day 3 hours ago - Media disinformation on Hamas
1 day 3 hours ago - Nasrallah: Arabs have much to learn from Chavez
1 day 3 hours ago - Lessons for the NPA from the SSP/Solidarity experience
1 day 10 hours ago - Requesting list of Israeli & Palestinian attacks.
1 day 10 hours ago
Nepal: Prachanda in New York -- A Maoist vision for a new Nepal
`A Maoist Vision for a New Nepal' -- MP3 recordings of a talk by Nepal's Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda), followed by questions and answers, presented to the India China Institute of New School University, New York City, on September 26, 2008. The MP3 audio clips were first presented on the Hegemonik site, and are posted here with permission
Nepal's newly elected Prime Minister Prachanda came to New York to address the United Nations General Assemby on September 26. Click HERE to download the text of his UN speech (PDF) or click HERE to watch a video of the address (requires Real Player).
After his UN address, Prachanda spoke to a mixed audience of intellectuals, expatriate Nepalis and leftists at a talk sponsored by the New School University’s India China Institute. He described the new Nepal's attitude to foreign investment, development of its natural resources and relations with China and India. The question and answer session touched upon the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)'s ideological positions.
Prachanda also spoke at a September 25 invitation-only reception organised by the International Action Center. (You can listen to the speeches HERE.) According the account posted at the Absent Cause web site:
``Comrade Prachanda explained that the CPN(M) has tried to understand the lessons of the international communist movement, of the revolutions and counter-revolutions of the 20th Century. He briefly reviewed the history of the peoples war, which began in 1996 after the Nepali government's violent repression of mass demonstrations. Prachanda said that his party worked to explain to the people that they were not opposed to peaceful change, but that all avenues had been closed and armed struggle was necessary.
``After five years of civil war, the CPN (M) embarked on a serious internal discussion of the lessons of previous revolutions, including the socialist revolution in Russia. At this time the party adopted the idea that a multi-party system and political competition should exist even under socialism. They determined that this is what Lenin would have done had he lived another five or 10 years, in the process of trying to build the basis for a socialist economic system in Russia. Lenin would not have followed the same path as Stalin, who made `serious mistakes in his understanding of philosophy and dialectical materialism'" according to Prachanda.
``Following this internal discussion, the CPN (M) initiated negotiations with the Nepali government. However, the talks did not succeed because the government would not agree to the minimum conditions of a constituent assembly.
``Saying that the democratic revolution must be completed to carry through the socialist revolution, Prachanda explained that the monarchy had played a very important role in how the revolution developed through its stupidity and intransigence. The result was an understanding between the peoples war and other parties involved in the mass struggle, of bourgeois democratic and peoples movements side-by-side. This culminated in 19 days of mass actions that brought about the beginning of the end to the monarchy in 2006.
``Prachanda commented on the `confusion of some people' when the Maoists became the leading party in Nepal. He said the CPN (M)-led government's mandate consists of three tasks: 1) drafting a new constitution; 2) carrying through the peace process, termed the `rehabilitation and integration' of armed forces; and 3) initiating new economic development.
``When he appeared at the closing of the Olympic Games in Beijing, Prachanda explained, he tried to convey that `we are making a big experiment -- not only for Nepal, not only for South Asia, but for the people of the world. We communists are more flexible and dynamic. We try to develop our ideology according to new conditions. We understand the dynamic of change.'
``Recalling that just three years ago he was labeled a terrorist by the US and had a price on his head, and the CPN (M) is still on the US `terrorism watch list', Prachanda joked about the leaders of the US being the ones who are truly `sectarian and dogmatic', not the communists. He thanked the audience for the opportunity to address the `socialists of the USA'.''
Comments
Nepal: Maoism is our identity, not a tail, Mohan Vaidya Kiran
You are considered as a hardliner in the Maoists’ Party. Tell us briefly where and on what account you differ sharply with the party?
Kiran: I feel that conspiracies are on to foil the Maoists’ established credentials. After I was released from the Indian prison, talks of artificial division in and among the hardliners and the liberals have cropped up. I think specifically the revolutionary ideology of the Maoists is being targeted deliberately. The trend has been that if one talks on ideological grounds he or she is labeled as a hardliner. As far as differences are concerned, I do not have any objection to the party. And of myself who would always tell my mind without hesitation. However, the moot questions remain intact. There is the great danger that in the name of liberalism whether the party will loose its basic ideology? Are we forgetting our commitments? Whether our commitment to National Sovereignty is on the continuous wane? Is the party falling into the trap set by the Rightists? These are not my personal concerns, instead should be the concerns of the party as a whole?
Tell us something about the hullabaloo over changing the party’s tag? There is a kind of competition among the Maoists and the UML in removing Mao’s name from the party tag? What say you?
Kiran: As far as the UML is concerned, I personally feel that it is not even a Communist party. There are some leaders in the UML camp who believe in communist ideology but the party is not a communist party. Thus there should not be any debate even if it declares that it is no more a communist party. However, in our case changing the party tag is irrelevant and illogical.
Your Party Chairman has already said that the debate over abandoning the party tag is on in the party for over two years now? Is Mao’s name a tail now?
Kiran: As is normal of a political party we too discuss and debate over several critical and crucial issues. Nevertheless, without making a formal decision over the contentious issue, nothing can be taken for granted. For us, Maoism is the party’s identity---it is not at all a “tail” as it is being interpreted by some both within and without. It is the prime identity of the peoples’ revolt. In the UML’s case it is indeed a tail but not for the Maoists as such.
Unless a formal decision is taken by the party whosoever is advocating the case of dropping the tag are his/her personal considerations.
Regarding the Communist unity is concerned I do not rule out the possibility in the distant future but for the time being it is not possible.
What about the inner rife in your party as regards the Militia integration is concerned?
Kiran: It is also a critical issue but there is no difference as you have pointed out. We have charted out clear party lines over the issues of peace process, constitution drafting and the Militia integration. We need rather to devise modalities for the integration process—we need thorough discussion over this issue as well.
What about the emerging differences between you and party president?
Kiran: The political situation is such that it demands debates and discussions. That’s all.
Where is the Maoists’ party heading towards?
Kiran: Revolutionary spirit is still kicking and alive in the party paraphernalia. Nevertheless, we need to continuously rectify our mistakes as there is the concern among our supporters whether the party is deviating away from its prime ideological premises. The central leadership, unfortunately, has kept itself away from the people—which should not have been the case.
The party is undergoing a transition as the State too is. We are yet to totally dismantle past set-up and rebuild a new one.
Tell us about the debate on People’s Republic and Democratic Republic?
Kiran: We are still mulling over the issue. It needs ample discussion as it is directly linked to drafting the new constitution. It is my belief that Democracy as such needs to be redefined in the Nepali context else drafting the constitution becomes redundant.
And it is only but normal that in such critical issues various opinions emerge and there also the collision.
Why is it that there are so much of differences in the Maoists’ Camp?
Kiran: More than concentrating on making determined efforts we have exhibited flexibility. No compromise should be made on our ideology---this is what I believe.
The Maoists have come this far ahead after holding intense debates and discussions. The party will continue to serve the people in this way. However such discussions and debates should not become public---that will invite anarchy.
How do you evaluate the government performance?
Kiran: It will only become a premature evaluation. We want to move ahead, yet we do not have the needed absolute majority. Old mindset prevails in the bureaucracy. Nevertheless we are determined in our set objectives.
Political revolution vs. economic revolution—it is also being debated in the party?
Kiran: Political revolution is yet to conclude. It is still on. We are still within the framework of the democratic republic. Some of our friends have begun talking of the economic revolution. I don’t’ think that unless political revolution comes to a positive end, economic revolution is possible.
(Courtesy: Naya Patrika Daily, October 21, 2008)
For more information visit: http://www.telegraphnepal.com/
Post new comment