Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Commie Bastards have one more success in Nepal!

Analysis of the situation in Nepal from the Committee for a Workers International:

http://www.socialistworld.net/eng/2005/02/16nepal.html
http://www.socialistworld.net/eng/2005/02/22nepal.html

CWI said:
The Maoist’s programme remains unclear. Their perspective is that a final phase of their struggle is approaching, which, most likely, will include fighting the Indian army. Their main demand, the “minimum demand”, is for a constituent assembly to establish ”bourgeois democracy”. In talks with the government, in 2001 and 2003, the Maoists asked for UN involvement. Recently, the rebels welcomed European Union representatives. Another indication of the Maoist’s ideas is that following the coup, the CPN (M) invited all other political parties to form a ‘front’ against the King.

It is clear from all reports that the government’s troops cannot defeat the Maoists. The Maoists, on the other hand, have all the classical weaknesses of Maoism: a stages theory, (which sees a ‘democratic’ stage followed by a ‘socialist stage’ in the dim and distant future), ‘popular-frontism’ (which means class collaboration with pro-capitalist parties), an emphasis on military organisation instead of democratic organisations of the oppressed, and also an emphasis on the countryside and nationalism.

This said, the extreme weakness of Nepalese capitalism and the regime means that the Maoists taking power is not ruled out. This, in turn, would pose an immediate reply from the US and from India.
 
Flipping heck.

Here's my take on this, as someone married to a Nepali - I've spent a total of about three years in the country, starting in 93.

Yes, the monarchy and a combination of the upper castes (Brahmin, Chhetri and indigenous Newar), have had it their own way for far too long, and a big backlash was pretty much inevitable, given the life most Nepalis lead in the rural areas - unless you've been there, you really can't appreciate what that kind of poverty means.

Yes, the introduction of 'democracy' in the early 90s was a failure - the old guard (those who used to surround the King) were out (they're back now), but the Congress/mainstream communists who alternated power were really no better from the perspective of the ordinary Nepali. One bunch of self-serving bastards was replaced by another. The corruption there is also something you have to see to believe - an early slogan of the Maoists, seen daubed around Kathmandu, was 'We don't want the world's help' (in English). Why? Because aid money is syphoned off by the elite, who have spent it all on flashy houses in Kathmandu.

But...what makes you think a Maoist takeover will make things better, assuming they can win? (A very big assumption.)

Nepal will still be dirt poor landlocked country which requires huge infrastructure investment to even stand a chance of development. The people in charge will still be corrupt (just a different bunch). The ordinary people will be just as screwed.

Oh, and India will for sure invade the country. They are not going to have a Maoist-run country on their doorstep that their own Maoists can use as a base. Suggest you take a look at what happened when such groups were using Bhutan as a base.

So, what's the answer? That's just it - there is no easy answer. A deal that would accommodate all points of view seems hard to conceptualise. It's tempting to wish that the King and his family would just leg it into exile and let the Maoists and the other parties work it out. But, he wouldn't take the army with him, would he? Are they likely to sit there and let the Maoists round them all up and kill them? I think not.

Any Nepali with two sticks to rub together (or a bunch of relatives who'll club together and borrow some money) is leaving the country to work. Either to India or the Gulf (there were riots in Kathmandu not so long ago when a group of Nepalis were shot in Iraq - they'd gone there to work as labourers), or, assuming they can convince an Embassy to give them a visa, to Europe, Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, the US, etc. Again, you have no concept of how desperate these people are, unless you've actually met them. One example: my wife and I were in the airport in Kathmandu a few years ago when a bunch of Nepalis flying to Qatar approached and asked her to help them fill in their exit forms - they couldn't read or write their own language, which is something they have in common with the majority of their countrymen.

It's a tragic situation, not helped by the actions of western governments in my opinion, who've been a bit too keen to hand the King weapons, and not that keen on seeing some kind of negotiated solution - reaching one will be very difficult, but it's far preferable to continuing bloodshed and eventual collapse. The real issue behind all this - the extreme poverty in rural Nepal - isn't going to go away in a hurry (one thing that can be said with certainty is that western aid has made no difference over the last thirty or forty years, except to those that directly cashed in), but you're on crack if you think the Maoists can solve it. If you think they can, let's hear how. Otherwise, you might like to consider that real people are getting killed, maimed and raped, by both the army and the Maoists.

Anyway, no doubt you'll ignore this, so I'm not sure why I bothered...

Oh, and if you are considering a trip to Nepal, I say do it - sure, both the government and the Maoists will be taxing you when you're there (if you pay tax in the UK, you already give money to the Nepali government anyway), but some of your money will find its way into the pockets of normal people. Yes, holidaying in a poor country is a difficult and challenging experience, but it is quite an effective way of transferring some wealth - a better way than giving it to charity, without doubt.
 
interesting post blazzers - I must start by saying that this is a subject I know nothing about. I dont know whether a maoist revolution would help or not - but I can say with some confidence that undoing a caste system is a complex and timely process that changes through cultural means, not through violence.

Nepal seems to me a country perched between mighty neighbours, with little natural resources and hence lacking internal wealth to give it strength. Unfortunately its destiny is tied inextricably to the wills of India and China, as much as to its own internal politics.

Maoism and Monarchy are both extreme positions, and I would hazard a guess that what would best benefit Nepal at this time is some moderate government. Maoism throughout the Tibetan region has been repressive and forced - I cant see a subsequent forced Maoist intervention as ever bringing lasting peace.

Interesting parrallel with Iraq - Iraq is a modern country which had a floursihing civil society - it is therefore more able to negotiate its way through the minefield of extremist and moderate politics. Nepal is a poor agrarian country, and its people can only be oppressed by such extremist competing systems as proposed by the monarch and the Maoists.


How much is the Chinese government behind the Maoist rebels?
 
Not at all as far as I know - the Chinese, I assume, wouldn't want the Indians to have an excuse for an invasion, and wouldn't welcome the sort of anarchy a Maoist takeover would produce. The King has visited China recently, and I've seen Chinese troops in Nepal, on joint exercises with the Army (they don't lack advice from the US, UK, India and others too, on how to beat an insurgency, though the advice doesn't seem to have worked so far).

Some of the theories around how the Maoists grew from a very small fringe group armed with little more than a few knives and muskets, to being in charge of most of the countryside, are interesting. Some say that the former King (the present King's brother) deliberately shied away from allowing the government to tackle the Maoists head-on in the early days, 'cause he wanted them to screw things up enough for democracy to be seen to be a failure, following which he and the Army could come to the rescue. Don't know how true this is.

There have been rumours recently of Maoist figures being in talks with the Indian government - about what, I'm not sure. There have also been splits within the movement itself.

It's all chaos anyway.

On economic development, the one thing Nepal does have, aside from quite a lot of tourist potential (though the environmental impacts of this would have to be better managed than in the past), is a lot of potential for development of hydroelectic schemes (which also have their environmental problems, of course). People have always said that Nepal should build a load of dams and sell the power to India. Easier said than done, given the topography of the area. Plus, cynics (me included) would see potential for a Nigeria type situation - the energy is sold, but only a few benefit.

In the meantime, the lucky ones (barring those who end up in Iraq or Afghanistan) will go abroad to work - the country is surviving on remittances now (at least those people with relatives overseas), but this is bringing its own problems. The money tends to get invested in housing in Kathmandu, a city with very poor infrastructure and hardly any water. The difference between Ktm now and even ten years ago is stark - a lot more dust (from construction) and traffic pollution, and water that comes for an hour every two days. Hippy paradise it ain't.

I'm still hoping for some kind of miracle in the form of an inclusive negotiated settlement, and a commitment from all sides to development. With population growth of 2%+ per year though, and increasing pressure on scarce resources and crap infrastructure, if something doesn't happen soon, it will be too late. There are some similarities to Iraq I think - a country with quite a diverse set of ethnic/caste/religious groupings, long-held grievances, and a shaky sense of common nationality. What's lacking in Nepal's case though, is any large incentive for outsiders to get too involved (except perhaps India). Hard to say if this is a good or bad thing - you know, the old dilemma of condemning intervention in Iraq, but wishing we could do something in the Sudan? The genie's out of the bottle in some ways - western aid has actually exacerbated the disparity between rich and poor in Nepal over the past few decades.

It would be tempting to advocate some kind of World Bank trade will set you free argument - India will get rich and drag Nepal along with it. Not sure I'm convinced by all the hype about India for one thing, and I think the relationship between India and its small neighbours would have to be a lot less one-sided for the little guys to see many benefits.
 
Re: China and the Maoists - The Chinese government is actually backing the king as they dont want any revolutionary politics to spread to Tibet. The Nepali King is skillfully playing his relationship with China off onto India. After the king sacked the government early this year India cut of aid and arms to the king, so the king just asked china who dont give a shit about such things, but India quickly changed its policy because the last thing it wants is easy access for china into central India.
 
just a crystal ball thought about China's long term direction: as far as i am aware there are many different "races" within the borders of China, and many have long wished for their independence. The Chinese attempt to dismantle communism makes an iteresting comparison with USSR - Gorbachev and Yeltsin deserve much criticism for the way they went about "fazing" out communism. In fact they didnt faze out at all, and basically dropped it like a ton of bricks, making the rubel utterly worthless and throwing much of the country into worse povery than before.

- However, with their new capitalist-style system came fragmentation of the coutnry into traditional regional groupings, the product of which is many "new" countries around the Russian periphery. China's move to capitlaism, and the governments hold in power is much tighter and controlled, but I dont think it is that unlikely that longterm we may see a similiar fragmentation take place within the Chinese borders.

Pure speculation along an infinite timeline, but this would change the dynamic for Nepal considerably.
 
Regarding Nepal, as per my many previous post on the topic, I concur wholeheartedly with blazzers.

All the information I have suggets that no solution will be forthcoming and the Nepali people will continue to suffer and die.

In the unlikely event the maoists prevail, I see no reason whatsoever to hope that the lot of the majority will improve.....And neither does any Nepali I have spoken to.



niksativa said:
just a crystal ball thought about China's long term direction: as far as i am aware there are many different "races" within the borders of China, and many have long wished for their independence. The Chinese attempt to dismantle communism makes an iteresting comparison with USSR - Gorbachev and Yeltsin deserve much criticism for the way they went about "fazing" out communism. In fact they didnt faze out at all, and basically dropped it like a ton of bricks, making the rubel utterly worthless and throwing much of the country into worse povery than before.

- However, with their new capitalist-style system came fragmentation of the coutnry into traditional regional groupings, the product of which is many "new" countries around the Russian periphery. China's move to capitlaism, and the governments hold in power is much tighter and controlled, but I dont think it is that unlikely that longterm we may see a similiar fragmentation take place within the Chinese borders.

Pure speculation along an infinite timeline, but this would change the dynamic for Nepal considerably.


Hey nik,

Frankly, I can't (ever) see this happening. Certainly not to anything like the extent that occurred in the former USSR.

The country is poorer and less separatist than any of the Soviet peripherals were. The independence movements in Tibet and Xinjiang have been all but crushed. And vast migration of ethnic Han (Chinese) means that Tibetens and Uigurs are now all but minorities within their own provinces. All officials posted to/appointed in each province are loyal to the Party and the provinces are extremely closely watched for the merest signs of unrest.

When policemen can still send anyone to a forced labour camp for three years hard slog, without the need for a judge, court, trial, or any other authority, well, it certainly makes it easier to handle any "issues". Many hundreds/thousands are jailed within Tibet and Xinjiang, some have been languishing for decades.

Regarding Taiwan. Should the island look like it's preparing for independence, China will prepare for war. Should Taiwan declare independence, China will attack. I believe this unequivocably. The country is constutionally obliged to do so and will not hesitate - no matter the consequences. Further, should Taiwan provoke China to such an extent, I doubt it would muster much sympathy with the US which has clearly stated that it wants to see the status quo maintained and does not support ANY unilateral moves by the island.

The major problem is that China has staked too much on "territorial integrity", essentially selling it to the people as the most pressing social issue and HUGELY bigging up the return of HK and Macau in recent years (helps keep the masses from focussing on the REAL problems the country faces. China simply cannot afford to allow any loosening of its hard line. To do so would demonstrate to the Chinese people that the govt. "cannot hold the country together". This would spell the demise of the govt. the demise of the CCP and China descending into civil war and chaos.

I can't see it happening.

China will gradually democratise at it modernises over the next twenty years and this will lead to the eventual absorbsion of Taiwan, but prolly not before the middle of this century. For Tibet and Xinjiang, any realistic prospect of separation is non-existant - no meaningful countries would aid either province in such an attempt. Internal supression would be both brutal and decisive.

The continued "Hanification" of minority provinces and the (slowly) emerging benefits of economic freedom and infrastructure development further undermine seperatist tendencies.

I see a lot of rocky times ahead for China - there will be increasingly large-scale uprisings, riots, disturbances, etc. though not about autonomy/independence, but the more usual reasons of non-payment of wages, consfication of land by officials, endemic corruption accross all sectors of govermant and business/industry, the poisoning and degratation of village/community environments through industrial effluence and and pollution, the emerging VAST disparities of wealth across the country, both within and between provinces.

Last year, according the the State Ministry for the Interior, there were some 74,000 violent demonstrations across the country. The top guy of the ministry is now saying that wealth/income disparity is the prime cause and that unless wealth is spread more evenly, and other social problems dealt with far more rapidly, such disturbances will increase vastly in number and, that, if not tackled, the spiralling number of such incidents will threaten the very survival of the CCP before the end of this decade. And THAT'S the OFFICIAL line - you can be sure things are actually worse in reality! :eek:

Some of the incidents reported this year have involved thousands of villagers battling hundreds of police and security officils over days at a time after having "seized" the local government officials office, barracaded the village and burning all arriving police vehicles. Dozens were killed in some incidents.

That said, I thing China will pull through, will hold together in its current form and will emerge as a modern, thriving, giant of a global economic power.

I just spent a few days up in Zhuhai, a thriving south coast industrial city of several million. The rate of development never fails to astonish me. If you're away for a year you'll have trouble finding your way around upon return. Away for five years? You won't recognise the place at all as the one you previously visited (old buildings come down in two weeks and big, shiny, new ones go up in three months flat - factories, schools, offices, shops, light industrial, it just doesn't stop). Away for a decade? Where before, you stood in the middle of the countryside, surrounded by paddy fields as far as the eye could see, for miles in every direction, there's now a metropolis of five million or more people - at least half are immigrants from poorer provinces, mostly young, female, factory workers.

It's happening now and it ain't stopping for nobody.

The CCP have a tenuous hold outside of Beijing. Most of the south and east coast of the country consists of overlapping fiefdoms being milked by local officials, outside the radar of the centre. That said, the govt. through it's petty officials right down to village level, maintains a sprawling, if fragmented and decentralised grip across the country. Even if the left hand is unaware of the right and the central nervous system has limited control.

It's a mess, but an unbelievably exciting one. The east and south of the country (not to mention the commercial and political centres (Shanghai and Beijing respectively,) are vibrant, noisy, pushy, busy, hungry for business, hungry for growth and ready to face the world. There is a real sense among people that finally, at long, LONG last, their time is coming.

It is.

:)

Woof
 
Hi jd hope your well...

talking of han-ification, it reminded me of an article i read about a train line that is being built into tibet. The effects of are positive in part http://www.chinapage.com/road/qinghai-tibet-raillway.htm, but negative also http://www.tew.org/development/rail.right.track.html.

"Representatives of the exiled Tibetan government have no doubts about the impact of the new line: "We feel that the continuing construction of railways in Tibet will facilitate Chinese control over Tibet and the settlement in Tibet of many more Chinese migrant workers," says Thubten Samphel, secretary of international relations."

The article I read in NI (not yet online for another month) says that the pattern for a railway line to the reaches of the empire has precedent, in that once the railway is up and running the Han soon become the majority. This has happened in Mongolia before, and is happening in Tibet now: there is already an influx of Han workers who are building the line.

Regarding any long term split of the gargantuan state that is modern China, I dont think you can ever rule it out JD: yes the Chinese government of today runs and tight a oppresive ship, but who can tell what the current cultural and economic revolution will bring in the long term.
 
niksativa said:
Hi jd hope your well...

talking of han-ification, it reminded me of an article i read about a train line that is being built into tibet. The effects of are positive in part http://www.chinapage.com/road/qinghai-tibet-raillway.htm, but negative also http://www.tew.org/development/rail.right.track.html.

"Representatives of the exiled Tibetan government have no doubts about the impact of the new line: "We feel that the continuing construction of railways in Tibet will facilitate Chinese control over Tibet and the settlement in Tibet of many more Chinese migrant workers," says Thubten Samphel, secretary of international relations."

The article I read in NI (not yet online for another month) says that the pattern for a railway line to the reaches of the empire has precedent, in that once the railway is up and running the Han soon become the majority. This has happened in Mongolia before, and is happening in Tibet now: there is already an influx of Han workers who are building the line.

Regarding any long term split of the gargantuan state that is modern China, I dont think you can ever rule it out JD: yes the Chinese government of today runs and tight a oppresive ship, but who can tell what the current cultural and economic revolution will bring in the long term.


Aye, as I mentioned, even in Tibet and Xinjiang, indigenous peoples are all but minorities already. Railway expansion to Tibet (AND Xinjiang,) is a deliberate strategy of the CCP in order to suppress, even swamp, dissent.

Of course I'll never say never about a country as vast and diverse as China. Just a prediction, based upon observation, inquiry and research........China will remain intact (as is) for the next forty years and will go from strength to strength (though not in a straight line). Taiwan will (re)unify eventually (by about 2050 tops) and the country will emerge rapidly as a real economic growth engine and attain previously undreampt of gobal influence.

I could, of course, be hugely and entirely wrong (and often am).

We'll just have to wait and see.

Honestly, it's nigh on impossible to understand what's happening in China, without regularly visiting and seeing with ones own eyes. The pace of change across half the country is stunning and development astonishingly rapid, seemingly impossibly so (while the other half languishes far behind).

Personally, I wouldn't want to be anywhere else on the planet right now. It is just the most exciting time/place. China IS the future and it's pushing the envelope in so many ways.

The world will never be the same.

(EDIT: I guess I should try to stay on topic on this thread - check out fela's Understang China Better. thread, if you haven't seen it.)

Joy Ghin!

Tai tien!

:)

Woof
 
And know they have arrested the former Prime Minister...........democracy rules eh???????
I would rather have the Moaists to tell the truth..but thats just me..a sense of order is whats required....
 
One thing that may stall the Chinese economic "miracle" is water:

China struggles to satisfy thirst for water
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jir/jir040803_1_n.shtml
China pleads for foreign investment in water
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/asia_pacific/news/aim/aim000918_6_n.shtml
Drought revives water diversion plan
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/asia_pacific/news/aim/aim000726_6_n.shtml

Basically, all this new industry is putting huuge strains on already meager water supplies - and the projected growth rates are completely unsustainable environmentaly. THey are already buying water from neighbouring countries... putting the strain on an ever wider area.

Perhaps China's projected boom is more of a blip than a long term trend.
 
cemertyone said:
And know they have arrested the former Prime Minister...........democracy rules eh???????
I would rather have the Moaists to tell the truth..but thats just me..a sense of order is whats required....

Who said anything about a democracy? The king just set up a government because of outside presures, but he didnt actually give up any of his power, he just made them do his work for him. Maoists would bring no order what so ever any more than the king did. The problem with the country is, IMO, that its practically ungovernable. The terrain isolates many of the people making it impossible for any kind of government to tell the communities what to do. The people have always just lived off the land keeping to themselves largely, the only changes that need to be made to the rural lifestyle is that of environmental problems as the populations increase the finite resources.
 
Yes, the lack of communications in the form of roads and telephones will hamper any attempt to govern the country - and, yes, there are very strong local identities which resist rule from outside. I wouldn't completely rule out a national government though, with very strong local autonomy built in. The problem with the system since democracy was established in the 1990s was that each region was governed by officials sent from Kathmandu (though local officials were also elected, these were subordinate to Ktm's appointees). Presumably any Maoist government would also be strongly controlled from the centre, as the Maoists are now - they have a policy of sending their fighters to the other end of the country from where they were born, so that they won't be compromised by family or other connections. Ironically, under the old Panchayat system, pre-democracy, local areas were governed by local people, and this system has come back recently, since the King suspended democracy - problem with this of course, is that they're nearly all high-caste landowners, appointed by the King.

China is a player in the future of Nepal, but really by far the most important country to Nepal is India. Nepal is a long way from the centres of economic growth in China, and on the other side of the world's highest mountains - it's still easier and cheaper to ship goods from China to Nepal via India than it is through Tibet (though some do come that way). India has Nepal in its economic and cultural grip, though the Nepalis will play them off against China if they can, as noted by someone above.
 
Jessiedog said:
Regarding Nepal, as per my many previous post on the topic, I concur wholeheartedly with blazzers.

All the information I have suggets that no solution will be forthcoming and the Nepali people will continue to suffer and die.

In the unlikely event the maoists prevail, I see no reason whatsoever to hope that the lot of the majority will improve.....And neither does any Nepali I have spoken to.







Hey nik,

Frankly, I can't (ever) see this happening. Certainly not to anything like the extent that occurred in the former USSR.

The country is poorer and less separatist than any of the Soviet peripherals were. The independence movements in Tibet and Xinjiang have been all but crushed. And vast migration of ethnic Han (Chinese) means that Tibetens and Uigurs are now all but minorities within their own provinces. All officials posted to/appointed in each province are loyal to the Party and the provinces are extremely closely watched for the merest signs of unrest.

When policemen can still send anyone to a forced labour camp for three years hard slog, without the need for a judge, court, trial, or any other authority, well, it certainly makes it easier to handle any "issues". Many hundreds/thousands are jailed within Tibet and Xinjiang, some have been languishing for decades.

Regarding Taiwan. Should the island look like it's preparing for independence, China will prepare for war. Should Taiwan declare independence, China will attack. I believe this unequivocably. The country is constutionally obliged to do so and will not hesitate - no matter the consequences. Further, should Taiwan provoke China to such an extent, I doubt it would muster much sympathy with the US which has clearly stated that it wants to see the status quo maintained and does not support ANY unilateral moves by the island.

The major problem is that China has staked too much on "territorial integrity", essentially selling it to the people as the most pressing social issue and HUGELY bigging up the return of HK and Macau in recent years (helps keep the masses from focussing on the REAL problems the country faces. China simply cannot afford to allow any loosening of its hard line. To do so would demonstrate to the Chinese people that the govt. "cannot hold the country together". This would spell the demise of the govt. the demise of the CCP and China descending into civil war and chaos.

I can't see it happening.

China will gradually democratise at it modernises over the next twenty years and this will lead to the eventual absorbsion of Taiwan, but prolly not before the middle of this century. For Tibet and Xinjiang, any realistic prospect of separation is non-existant - no meaningful countries would aid either province in such an attempt. Internal supression would be both brutal and decisive.

The continued "Hanification" of minority provinces and the (slowly) emerging benefits of economic freedom and infrastructure development further undermine seperatist tendencies.

I see a lot of rocky times ahead for China - there will be increasingly large-scale uprisings, riots, disturbances, etc. though not about autonomy/independence, but the more usual reasons of non-payment of wages, consfication of land by officials, endemic corruption accross all sectors of govermant and business/industry, the poisoning and degratation of village/community environments through industrial effluence and and pollution, the emerging VAST disparities of wealth across the country, both within and between provinces.

Last year, according the the State Ministry for the Interior, there were some 74,000 violent demonstrations across the country. The top guy of the ministry is now saying that wealth/income disparity is the prime cause and that unless wealth is spread more evenly, and other social problems dealt with far more rapidly, such disturbances will increase vastly in number and, that, if not tackled, the spiralling number of such incidents will threaten the very survival of the CCP before the end of this decade. And THAT'S the OFFICIAL line - you can be sure things are actually worse in reality! :eek:

Some of the incidents reported this year have involved thousands of villagers battling hundreds of police and security officils over days at a time after having "seized" the local government officials office, barracaded the village and burning all arriving police vehicles. Dozens were killed in some incidents.

That said, I thing China will pull through, will hold together in its current form and will emerge as a modern, thriving, giant of a global economic power.

I just spent a few days up in Zhuhai, a thriving south coast industrial city of several million. The rate of development never fails to astonish me. If you're away for a year you'll have trouble finding your way around upon return. Away for five years? You won't recognise the place at all as the one you previously visited (old buildings come down in two weeks and big, shiny, new ones go up in three months flat - factories, schools, offices, shops, light industrial, it just doesn't stop). Away for a decade? Where before, you stood in the middle of the countryside, surrounded by paddy fields as far as the eye could see, for miles in every direction, there's now a metropolis of five million or more people - at least half are immigrants from poorer provinces, mostly young, female, factory workers.

It's happening now and it ain't stopping for nobody.

The CCP have a tenuous hold outside of Beijing. Most of the south and east coast of the country consists of overlapping fiefdoms being milked by local officials, outside the radar of the centre. That said, the govt. through it's petty officials right down to village level, maintains a sprawling, if fragmented and decentralised grip across the country. Even if the left hand is unaware of the right and the central nervous system has limited control.

It's a mess, but an unbelievably exciting one. The east and south of the country (not to mention the commercial and political centres (Shanghai and Beijing respectively,) are vibrant, noisy, pushy, busy, hungry for business, hungry for growth and ready to face the world. There is a real sense among people that finally, at long, LONG last, their time is coming.

It is.

:)

Woof

Thanks for the info.

Are you seriously in China at the moment? if you are, then what is your purpose there?
 
Macabre said:
Maoists would bring no order what so ever any more than the king did. The problem with the country is, IMO, that its practically ungovernable. The terrain isolates many of the people making it impossible for any kind of government to tell the communities what to do. The people have always just lived off the land keeping to themselves largely, the only changes that need to be made to the rural lifestyle is that of environmental problems as the populations increase the finite resources.

That's simply not the case, Mao was focused on rural areas, seeing the people their as the main drivers of revolution unlike Marx.

The Maoist, at present, are building infrastructure in the countryside, a place that has been completely ignored by the king and his cohorts.
 
DoUsAFavour said:
That's simply not the case, Mao was focused on rural areas, seeing the people their as the main drivers of revolution unlike Marx.

Yes it is!

What the hell has Mao got to do with Nepal's "Maoists"?

:confused:

I call myself a dog, doesn't necessarily mean.....

And anyway, exactly what acheivements should Mao be smiling about in his grave?


The Maoist, at present, are building infrastructure in the countryside, a place that has been completely ignored by the king and his cohorts.

Really?

I hear many reports (some first hand,) of how the rebels "tax" the countryside - excessively and violently, but few (very few,) reports of them providing for the country's poor..

Could you post some links to verify the establishment of all this rebel built infrastructure across the countryside?

:)

Woof
 
What JD said :) ta

I'll admit I exaggerated somewhat that Nepal is ungovernable but it is still bloody hard to coordinate things there.
 
Jessiedog said:
Could you post some links to verify the establishment of all this rebel built infrastructure across the countryside?

:)

Woof


"At first concentrating in the most remote and downtrodden areas, the Maoists enjoyed considerable support especially as they did managed to reduce levels of corruption, improve public service and make in-roads into the eradication of domestic violence and alcoholism.

Support for the Peoples War continued to grow because, living in grinding poverty and neglected by their politicians in far-off Kathmandu, villagers saw immediate benefits stemming from work the CPN (Maoists) were doing. "

http://www.azeecon-lwf.com/lwf/burning_issues/maoist.html



...and of course that road

http://www.kantipuronline.com/artha.php?&nid=44308
 
DoUsAFavour said:
"At first concentrating in the most remote and downtrodden areas, the Maoists enjoyed considerable support especially as they did managed to reduce levels of corruption, improve public service and make in-roads into the eradication of domestic violence and alcoholism.

Support for the Peoples War continued to grow because, living in grinding poverty and neglected by their politicians in far-off Kathmandu, villagers saw immediate benefits stemming from work the CPN (Maoists) were doing. "

http://www.azeecon-lwf.com/lwf/burning_issues/maoist.html



...and of course that road

http://www.kantipuronline.com/artha.php?&nid=44308

:D
 
Macabre said:
The problem with the country is, IMO, that its practically ungovernable. The terrain isolates many of the people making it impossible for any kind of government to tell the communities what to do. The people have always just lived off the land keeping to themselves largely...

How is that a problem?
 
DoUsAFavour said:
"At first concentrating in the most remote and downtrodden areas, the Maoists enjoyed considerable support especially as they did managed to reduce levels of corruption, improve public service and make in-roads into the eradication of domestic violence and alcoholism.

Support for the Peoples War continued to grow because, living in grinding poverty and neglected by their politicians in far-off Kathmandu, villagers saw immediate benefits stemming from work the CPN (Maoists) were doing. "

http://www.azeecon-lwf.com/lwf/burning_issues/maoist.html



...and of course that road

http://www.kantipuronline.com/artha.php?&nid=44308

A few nice words from a foriegn NGO that the Maoists had some sympathy back in 1996, when the "war" started.

The NGO admits that they themselves had to close down in 1997 due due rebel "pressure and threats". Their last comments (in January 2003,) were "The future seems to be optimistic as everyone is seeking for peace and harmony."

Yeah. Fuckin' right!!

WTF have the Maoists really done for the people? Next to nothing except contribute to some 12,000 dead (at least half by govt. forces, tho'), see kids forced out of school and brainwashed, spreading violence, theft and fear throughout communities.

Oh, and that road.

Yeah. The rebels built a single road to a village in the middle of their own stronghold. And they bulit it using FORCED LABOUR.

As Ryazan says.....

:D

Honestly DUAF, but well......

Do us a favour!!


:p

Woof
 
revol68 said:
so where has RedJezza gone with his ultra sonic death ray?

I had almost forgotten about him.

Maybe he has gone over to Nepal to give his invention to the rebels for use against the monarchy. The autocrats won't know what hit em!
 
Jessiedog said:
Yeah. The rebels built a single road to a village in the middle of their own stronghold. And they bulit it using FORCED LABOUR.


Asking for two weeks work from one member of one family is hardly slave labour.

But of course you wouldn't be interested in working for your communty wuld you? You'd get the little men from the village to do it for you, wouldn't yer?
 
Jessiedog said:
WTF have the Maoists really done for the people? Next to nothing except contribute to some 12,000 dead (at least half by govt. forces, tho'), see kids forced out of school and brainwashed, spreading violence, theft and fear throughout communities.

You know full well the majority of those murders have been commited by the the army and police.

Brainwashing? The people of Nepal are some of the poorest in the world and are lacking education. The Maoists take school villagers etc to show a different perspective on what could be possible, hardly brainwashing.

Spreading violence? Real change will only be met with extreme violence, which I beleive we have not seen the worst of yet. Like it or not violence is the only way for real change.

Theft! I'm sure you are refering to soldiers asking for a meal, the cheek of it!

Fear? The people who get punished are the ones that are grasses and so should be punished IMO.
 
oh doUsAfuckingFavour and try to understand the world is alot more complicated than your piss poor analysis. Perhaps you should begin by tryng to decipher how the people in Nepal fee about the issue, instead of cackhandedly rushing to the defense of any group of guerilla's fighting "the system, man".
 
Back
Top Bottom