cemertyone
Well-Known Member
fanta said:
have you been DRINKING again Fanta???now now you naughty naughty boy!!!!!....where you not already warned not to drink and post its a deadly combinatation esp coming from you,,,,,,
Commie Bastards have one more success in Nepal!
- Thread starter DrRingDing
- Start date
have you been DRINKING again Fanta???now now you naughty naughty boy!!!!!....where you not already warned not to drink and post its a deadly combinatation esp coming from you,,,,,,
cemertyone
Well-Known Member
belboid said:
Tomorrow then... a strategy for finding a concencious among the urban and rual poor is not out of the question and a political path has already been out-lined by the rebels......come back then to you...
harticus said:
Aye, the CPK were indeed, and the Soviet backed Vietnamese communists helped kick them out of power in 79. The Khmer Rouge Communists aren't the only radicals, responsbile for large-scale human suffering and death. Perhaps if the US had not tinkered with Cambodia in the early 70's with bringing in Lon Nol, and blasting the peasantry to smithereens in the countryside, then perhaps they might not have come to power.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
.....make that 'would certainly have never come to power'
Dhimmi
Half Man Half HobNob
Red Jezza said:whose dismissals and which opinions?
Well on this one belly telling fanta he's helping the Nepali Monarchy.
Seems to me it happens a lot on here which is a shame because there's some cracking discussion occasionally.
DGMW I enjoy a good discussion just tired of seeing them descend into muck slinging, I'd always be interested in hearing about different opinions just not tricks, ploys and insults thinly disguised as discussion.
Red Jezza said:
On one level, I accept that things need to change in Nepal. The monarchy is utterly corrupt - as are many of the (recently defrocked) politicians and their hangers on - and needs, at the very least, to be severly shackled constitutionally.
The problem, as identified by bellboid, is that the maoists have no way of winning and, inevitably, neither does the govt/king.
And as you point out in a later post Jezz, it's going to get really, really, nasty.
One concern I have is as to what would follow a "successful" govt/monarchy overthrow by the maoists. I have serious reservations that the lot of the average Nepali would be greatly improved over the following decade.
What convinces you that life would improve Jezz? I know how bad it is now, but........
I am fortunate to count a fair few Nepalese among my friends (prolly a dozen or so,) and am thus exposed to a range of perspectives - from apathy, thu' monarchist, to rebel supporters, thru' various "party" perspectives, etc. The general consensus, or at least the widely held sense running through the majority of those with relatively less extreme or "centrist" views, seems to be one of "hands thrown in tthe air" - not positive about the future whatever happens. Unfortunately, due to the king's restrictions on reporting, many good sources (such as nepalnews.com,) are currently not putting out the wealth of info' available before the kings latest venture.
I get the sense that people are tired, scared, exhasperated, angry - with both "sides" and see no hope of short/medium term solace.
I remain to be convinced that anything good is coming - even if by some stroke of "God", the Maoists should wrest power.
It is a desperately sad situation and the consensus view seems to be that Nepal is rapidly sliding towards "failed nation" status.
Woof
Interesting article for DoUsAFavour.
http://dalits.blogspot.com/
More on here.
http://www.nyuhr.org/nepalreport.htm
Perhaps not a cool a light to see the Communists in but there you go.
http://dalits.blogspot.com/
More on here.
http://www.nyuhr.org/nepalreport.htm
Perhaps not a cool a light to see the Communists in but there you go.
poster342002
PROPER leftwing socialist
.
Peasants kill Maoists in retaliation for kidnapping?
http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-08/15/content_469111.htm
http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-08/15/content_469111.htm
DrRingDing
'anti-human wanker'
Ryazan said:
Can you honestly not see through this slight twist of words?
If not your a bit dim IMO.
Nepal has taken all the peaceful routes over the last 30 odd years to take power and deliver basic facilites for the normal people of the country. Elections have been won but no change has come.
Why? Because the people in power will not give that up without being violently overthrown.
As much as I'd like to a see a peaceful anarchist revolution or if must a violent one it ain't gunna happen.
Anybody in their right mind wants the bizarre and cruel caste system destroyed and if the only route for people to do this is through violence, so be it.
What a communist state in Nepal would bring is infrastructure, education and basic health facilities which are completely lacking in most of the country.
I support the people of Nepal in their struggle against poverty and discrimination. If you don't, then fuck yer.
The point is, the Communists aren't their good saviours nessescarily, and the "people" aren't all the same in Nepal are they? Given the findings in that report.
It was you who said "fucking get down sisters!" on another thread a bit ago on this subject. Well, abuses against women seems to be pretty rife on both sides.
It was you who said "fucking get down sisters!" on another thread a bit ago on this subject. Well, abuses against women seems to be pretty rife on both sides.
fishfingerer
sultan of cringe
So which side do you want to see win? Maoists or King guy. And don't give us any 'neither, they're both as bad as each other' shit. If they're both as bad as each other you won't mind seeing the maoists winning and executing the monarchy.Ryazan said:
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
I've been pretty depressed at parts of this thread too, but I'd say there's no-one more culpable than any other, tbh (tho fanta was being a tad provocative)Dhimmi said:
I know Fanta; he's a good chap, but I'd be interested to know, fanta, why you were so willing to instantly rubbish all those who - given no cuddwy, fluffy option 3 - plumped for for the new firm rather than the pretty damn awful existing order?
and why in such dismissive terms?
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
In answer to jessiedog earlier; my POV precisely.DoUsAFavour said:
The maoists are no angels - but that don't make them Satan In The Mountains either.
They are a genuine peasantry-based movement with a commitment to improving the lot of the poor that is too central to their core mission, their Raison D'etre to be simply discounted.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
F-me no! Nepal crisis revealed as due to centuries-old vicious class system!Ryazan said:
(and with all allegations curtiously un-overladen with weight of substantiation in said link).
no. Shit. Sherlock.
cathal marcs
Well-Known Member
'The more you see of war the more you hate it. But this one has got to be seen through. When the pacifists show me the way of beating Franco & Co, I’ll be their first recruit. Until then, this dirty way is the only way.’ Frank Ryan
The above quote by Frank Ryan Sort of sums my view on this situation. My word i wsh could be a utopian socialist and dream of a bloodless revolution but sadly the laws of history show it is not going to happen.
The above quote by Frank Ryan Sort of sums my view on this situation. My word i wsh could be a utopian socialist and dream of a bloodless revolution but sadly the laws of history show it is not going to happen.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
Ok...fair enough...but, again - and given the somewhat partisan, 'loaded' nature of those linked pieces - substantiate the beef agin the Maoists, please...?Ryazan said:
(edit; I know they can be a vicious bunch. but anyone who tried to pull off a genuine revolution in Nepal without the rough stuff would last roughly 10 minutes. Camberley it ain't)
True, but I just get the feeling that it is the romantic sight of masked women with archaic rifles shooting soldiers that can overshadow some the more "vicious" aspects of maoist revolution in that country. DoUsAFavour does not inspire much hope on that score with "well fuck yer"when the rebels have some criticism.
Those links, if you do not have any faith in them, well that is fine, I can't go into any vast detail you are demanding, I have not, and would not be capable of doing years of research in that country, as I suspect you couldn't either. The Scheduled castes have it shit there, like in India too, and deserve more recognition for their plight not just at the hands of the government, but also the people supposedly helping them to freedom. I don't think they should be used. And is the claim that Dalits are abused by Maoists in several ways that you find distatesteful and difficult to take on board, or are you disagreeing with how they can be one of the preferred victim groups for reprisals by frustrated government soldiers? The article and report only focuses on how the Maoist insurgency affects one group of people, not by any means covering all the dynamics of class and peoples strgggling to get by amid all the fighting and disruption. People on here might join Communist groups or have Communist beliefs and want to defend what the insurgency is doing, and again I say that they are preferred in my mind to the government, but in Nepal many people join the Communists out of fear and hunger. But it is all very upsetting (an understatement) the ways in which war is carried out there, and divisions between the opressed peoples are not helped by the tactics of the rebels.
Those links, if you do not have any faith in them, well that is fine, I can't go into any vast detail you are demanding, I have not, and would not be capable of doing years of research in that country, as I suspect you couldn't either. The Scheduled castes have it shit there, like in India too, and deserve more recognition for their plight not just at the hands of the government, but also the people supposedly helping them to freedom. I don't think they should be used. And is the claim that Dalits are abused by Maoists in several ways that you find distatesteful and difficult to take on board, or are you disagreeing with how they can be one of the preferred victim groups for reprisals by frustrated government soldiers? The article and report only focuses on how the Maoist insurgency affects one group of people, not by any means covering all the dynamics of class and peoples strgggling to get by amid all the fighting and disruption. People on here might join Communist groups or have Communist beliefs and want to defend what the insurgency is doing, and again I say that they are preferred in my mind to the government, but in Nepal many people join the Communists out of fear and hunger. But it is all very upsetting (an understatement) the ways in which war is carried out there, and divisions between the opressed peoples are not helped by the tactics of the rebels.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
those ain't the worst links I've ever seen; but they ARE light on substantiation or back-up of the claims. But - nevertheless - and both sites REEK of judgemental western liberalism, without any appreciation of the wider (nepali social and political) context - even they do seem to slate the Monarchy more than the rebels.
And no I am not disputing SOME excesses on part of the maoists - this is a savage civil war, and it tends to go with the territory.
I'd like to know how, precisely, you could get accurate reportage of them tho'...
And no I am not disputing SOME excesses on part of the maoists - this is a savage civil war, and it tends to go with the territory.
I'd like to know how, precisely, you could get accurate reportage of them tho'...
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
ain't one of them "an anarchist suddenly introduced to the harsher face of reality"? 
I suppose my point would be is that the situation the Rebels have been in since day 1 not only makes it inevitable they'd fight hard, dirty and for keeps; it also makes the rebels excesses kinda unavoidable - they were triggerered by that environment and context
The sandinistas, equally, didn't have a spotless chargesheet, of course.....
I suppose my point would be is that the situation the Rebels have been in since day 1 not only makes it inevitable they'd fight hard, dirty and for keeps; it also makes the rebels excesses kinda unavoidable - they were triggerered by that environment and context
The sandinistas, equally, didn't have a spotless chargesheet, of course.....
Flavour
hang the bankers
My reasons for supporting the Maoist guerilla war in Nepal:
1. With two options, Monarchy (which is exploitative in theory, exploitative in practice, and gives some people something for nothing, others nothing for everything) or Maoism (which is Utopian in theory, has been less than perfect on a humanitarian scale so far but has given China the same great advances in technology that the Soviet Union saw under Stalin)... I choose Maoism everytime. There's a chance, slim but still a chance, that Maoist rule in Nepal would be brilliant and solve a lot of problems. There is 0 chance of the Monarchy achieving anything.
2. The Maoists aren't like all these pussy-footing , "bloodless revolution" idealist no-marks who sit around all day discussing Lenin and selling papers, they are getting out there and doing what all Communists must do: Try and wrestle power from the oppressors.
3. It's probably going to be the last ever Communist revolution, the last chance for it to work. I reckon it's always worth a try, at any cost.
1. With two options, Monarchy (which is exploitative in theory, exploitative in practice, and gives some people something for nothing, others nothing for everything) or Maoism (which is Utopian in theory, has been less than perfect on a humanitarian scale so far but has given China the same great advances in technology that the Soviet Union saw under Stalin)... I choose Maoism everytime. There's a chance, slim but still a chance, that Maoist rule in Nepal would be brilliant and solve a lot of problems. There is 0 chance of the Monarchy achieving anything.
2. The Maoists aren't like all these pussy-footing , "bloodless revolution" idealist no-marks who sit around all day discussing Lenin and selling papers, they are getting out there and doing what all Communists must do: Try and wrestle power from the oppressors.
3. It's probably going to be the last ever Communist revolution, the last chance for it to work. I reckon it's always worth a try, at any cost.
SwizzleStiX
Active Member
Jezza posting
whether you see this or not, you've been far harsher with the form,er than the latter.
I'm bored with saying that the Maoists are 'no angels' - neither were Mao's actual bunch, back in the 40s; what is indisputable is that they did a far better job - for all their flaws - than their predecessors.
You are applying different standards for each party. Why have you barely - if at all - trained your critical eye on the incumbents? Why do the Maoists have to be perfect, before you accept them at all, whilst this appalling Monarchy's faults have not been zeroed in on to the same extent or effect?
2. Why is it that illogical for the Maoists to target their own, in their recruitment drive?
3. Why is it so amazing that the maoists have been 'hard bastards' in their drive to win the country? THIS IS A WAR, NOT A SODDING WIN WHIST DRIVE!!! Sheesh....
I have never said they are perfect - they certainly give me doubts - as I have said all along - but they are clearly, to me, the lesser of two evils here. Whatever the maoists may have done which you have given no hard proof of - The State has done 10x worse. They are truly - unreservedly - hateful.
EASILY.
No Question
And whilst we're at it, hunger's a great reason to join a revolution, as is fear of the authorities!
errr....why is it that the maoists have to go to such greater lengths, in your eyes, than that far crueller, more corrupt institution, the Nepal monarchy to get a clean bill of health?Ryazan said:
whether you see this or not, you've been far harsher with the form,er than the latter.
I'm bored with saying that the Maoists are 'no angels' - neither were Mao's actual bunch, back in the 40s; what is indisputable is that they did a far better job - for all their flaws - than their predecessors.
You are applying different standards for each party. Why have you barely - if at all - trained your critical eye on the incumbents? Why do the Maoists have to be perfect, before you accept them at all, whilst this appalling Monarchy's faults have not been zeroed in on to the same extent or effect?
2. Why is it that illogical for the Maoists to target their own, in their recruitment drive?
3. Why is it so amazing that the maoists have been 'hard bastards' in their drive to win the country? THIS IS A WAR, NOT A SODDING WIN WHIST DRIVE!!! Sheesh....
I have never said they are perfect - they certainly give me doubts - as I have said all along - but they are clearly, to me, the lesser of two evils here. Whatever the maoists may have done which you have given no hard proof of - The State has done 10x worse. They are truly - unreservedly - hateful.
EASILY.
No Question
justify and prove please, with more than just URL-Rhetoric (as your second link certainly was).
And whilst we're at it, hunger's a great reason to join a revolution, as is fear of the authorities!
GRANTED, but There's this big difference, y'see, between Surrey (or wherever) and the roof of the world)......
SwizzleStiX
Active Member
Jezza Posting
< makes mental note to buy flavour a pint, on next meeting>
You've just said what I wanted to say......
Top man!Flavour said:
< makes mental note to buy flavour a pint, on next meeting>
You've just said what I wanted to say......
I am not saying that the Monarchy are not to be criticised. I am for the monarchy being toppled. But, I am interested in how the insurgency is affecting those either fighting with it among the poor, and also those who are just getting on. The Maoists deserve investigation in this regard.
Your romanticism makes me laugh. Hunger is a good enough, if not one of the most important reasons to make a revolution. But the peasantry, although being indoctrinated with propaganda, will not be the the fully-fledged heroic Communists you perhaps envisage them to be. they want rid of the monarchy, but they want immediate concerns sorting out, like not starving. Ben Kiernan's book Year Zero is quite good in describing the fall of Phenom Phen to the Khmer Rouge in 75. Many of the rural fighters who entered the city were just kids, hungry, and with heavy indoctrination of which beyond rhetoric these people had not really criticised or evaluated what they had been fed. How could they? They were from such crushing circumstances and where a secretive and educated elite were in charge of their affairs in the Khmer Rouge. Not insulting their intelligence, just the way things are done, so before you think it don't start this "how dare you think of those people as being dumb animals to be brainwashed". I don't think in those terms, but it does happen. Manipulation I mean. And fear. And yes, you say fear of the monarchy. Many are fearful of the insurgents, among the poor.
Sorry for not being "right on". But there you go. I don't live in Surrey either mate. I am quite offended by that actually, seen as your sly impliccation as to my class origin has affronted my sense of identity.
Getting rid of the monarchy is one thing. But what about after it, how will all the people's of Nepal be treated? Specualtion yes, but worth seeing how they act now to certain groups among the poor, like the Dalits, who doubtless have their own political ambitions.
As for roof of the world, well have you been in the kind of situation where you either fight or starve? I doubt it. Tha'ts the difference you see. They fight, starve, die over there. You patronise and romanticise about it over here.
Your romanticism makes me laugh. Hunger is a good enough, if not one of the most important reasons to make a revolution. But the peasantry, although being indoctrinated with propaganda, will not be the the fully-fledged heroic Communists you perhaps envisage them to be. they want rid of the monarchy, but they want immediate concerns sorting out, like not starving. Ben Kiernan's book Year Zero is quite good in describing the fall of Phenom Phen to the Khmer Rouge in 75. Many of the rural fighters who entered the city were just kids, hungry, and with heavy indoctrination of which beyond rhetoric these people had not really criticised or evaluated what they had been fed. How could they? They were from such crushing circumstances and where a secretive and educated elite were in charge of their affairs in the Khmer Rouge. Not insulting their intelligence, just the way things are done, so before you think it don't start this "how dare you think of those people as being dumb animals to be brainwashed". I don't think in those terms, but it does happen. Manipulation I mean. And fear. And yes, you say fear of the monarchy. Many are fearful of the insurgents, among the poor.
Sorry for not being "right on". But there you go. I don't live in Surrey either mate. I am quite offended by that actually, seen as your sly impliccation as to my class origin has affronted my sense of identity.
Getting rid of the monarchy is one thing. But what about after it, how will all the people's of Nepal be treated? Specualtion yes, but worth seeing how they act now to certain groups among the poor, like the Dalits, who doubtless have their own political ambitions.
As for roof of the world, well have you been in the kind of situation where you either fight or starve? I doubt it. Tha'ts the difference you see. They fight, starve, die over there. You patronise and romanticise about it over here.
revol68
what, fucking what?
Anyone who quotes Frank "what the fuck am I doing on a Nazi U-boat" Ryan should be taken outside and given a swift beating.
Not only was he a useless stalinist stooge but he went on to become a useless nazi stooge!
As for the mad maoist of nepal, well from what I've read, their concept of a general strike is to tell people not to go to work or they'll be shot and to plant bombs in urban centres. just cos they are better than the monarchy is hardly a justification for supporting them, especially when they aren't exactly the only options. Or has everyone given up that old idea of working class self emancipation in favour of sexy images of guerilla fighters with RPG's?
Not only was he a useless stalinist stooge but he went on to become a useless nazi stooge!
As for the mad maoist of nepal, well from what I've read, their concept of a general strike is to tell people not to go to work or they'll be shot and to plant bombs in urban centres. just cos they are better than the monarchy is hardly a justification for supporting them, especially when they aren't exactly the only options. Or has everyone given up that old idea of working class self emancipation in favour of sexy images of guerilla fighters with RPG's?
Similar threads
