June July 2006 Issue

August 6, 2006

To download the June-July 2006 Issue of People’s March

——— CLICK HERE ————-

Highlight:
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH CPI(MAOIST)SPOKESPERSON ON NEPAL DEVELOPMENTS

Advertisements

3 Responses to “June July 2006 Issue”

  1. Joseph Says:

    On August 27, 2006, in the naxalrevolution.blogspot.Com.I saw comments of Com. Bahadur regarding Nepal. Those comments were sent from Peoples March and I was expecting to see them either here or in the current issue. Due to some reasons they are not. However, I do believe that there must be a violent theoretical struggle against revisionism and non-proletariat trends in every sphere to put forward the revolutionary struggle. The interview of Com. Azad and the comments of Com. Bahadur have immense importance in that respect. Since the comments of Com. Bahadur are not available in here, I am also adding them as Appendix.

    In the interview, Com. Azad, mainly dealt with political line line of CPN(M); showed their fallacy, their anti-Marxist perspective on the question of state, their ‘class-independent’ point of view. But, philosophical perspective was not explained in detail that was done in these comments.

    Com. Bahadur has correctly pointed out that the cause of development is internal. “Self movement of matter” is the fundamental Marxist conception we must keep in our mind. They are the revisionists who don’t care the internal contradictions, but rely upon only external influences.

    With almost full agreement with the point of view expressed in the interview and the comments, I would like to add couple of more points. And this is regarding the theoretical conception of CPN(M). When they directly advocate the parliamentary line instead of class struggle any student of Marxism can understand that they are following the teachings of Khrushchev, not Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin-Mao. But, the point is, according to the teachings of our great teachers, there must be a course of development of any process. Nothing comes all of a sudden. So there must be a development in their line that finally leads to clear revisionism today. It is the duty of any real Marxist to understand that process; otherwise the fight against revisionism (which in essence against imperialism-big comprador bourgeoisie and feudalism) will not succeed.

    I do believe that the whole issue should be considered along with theoretical conception of RIM. In the political line of RIM, there are couples of points, from where revisionist thinking is being enriched. We must expose those.

    First of all Stalin question. From the very beginning they have been denouncing Com.Stalin. Under the leadership of Com.Stalin CPSU(B) constructed socialism with proletarian dictatorship in USSR. That is the one of greatest advancement in the whole history of class-struggle. It was possible in one country, although encircled by capitalism. Com.Stalin fought against Trotskyite line that held up the external factors and argued that in one country socialism building was not possible because of surrounding capitalism (now, we hear essentially the same argument from the followers of ‘Prachanda-Path’). This is Com. Stalin, who taught us proletarian dictatorship in practical. And in great debate, we know, how Com. Mao up held the teachings of Com. Stalin. The revisionists, who don’t rely on proletarian dictatorship, can only deny the teachings of Com. Stalin. RIM and their followers did the same. They even shamelessly dared to place Com. Mao against Com. Stalin.
    When the followers of ‘Prachanda-Path’ are scared of U S intervention and stress over the idea of external influence and abandon proletarian dictatorship, is there any fundamental difference with the line proposed by Trotsky?

    Prachanda-Path. This is the most ridiculous and stupid theoretical fashion in RIM. Before ‘Prachanda-Path’, in Peru we have seen ‘Gonzalo thought’. That means RIM believes for each and every country there could be different ideological line. Our teachers, Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin-Mao on the other hand taught us that ideology of proletariat must be a whole. Being in connection with everything, each particular thing in essence just as infinite in its many sidedness as the world as a whole. Therefore, the general guiding ideology must be the same for the proletariat of the whole world at a given period with some particular features at a specific situation. If there are different guiding ideologies for proletariats of different countries, then it will no longer be Marxism, rather bourgeois nationalism. If we remember the Yugoslavia question in Comminform, we can see this was exactly what Tito proposed. According to Tito, “socialism” of Yogoslavia would be different. And again Com. Stalin exposed the inner reactionary character of it and finally Yugoslavia was expelled from Comminform. Therefore, the tendency of proposing different ‘Thought’ or ‘Path’ for different countries is completely anti-Marxist.
    And now, the non-proletarian orientation of ‘Prachanda Path” is crystal clear, as Com. Bahadur correctly commented “In the stead of People’s War they have proposed since June 2003, reaching the victory of New Democratic Revolution through bourgeois democracy…. And these people have named this as a sub-stage of the New Democratic Revolution.”
    At this point it could be mentioned that following Khrushchev, RIM criticizes Com. Stalin and Comminform for expelling Yugoslavia. On the other hand, we know, in Great Debate, CPC exposed the character of Yugoslavia and firmly supported the standpoint of Com. Stalin. So we can see, whom RIM follows, Com. Mao or Tito-Khruschev?

    Their guiding ideology. Com.Lenin taught us “His (Marx’s)-doctrine emerged as the direct and immediate continuation of the teachings of the greatest representatives of philosophy, political economy and socialism. (The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism.)”. That means guiding ideology of proletariat is not just the idea of any individual (Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao or whoever he is). Rather, Com.Lenin wrote “Just as man’s knowledge reflects nature (i.e., developing matter), which exists independently of him, so man’s social knowledge (i.e., his various views and doctrines—philosophical, religious, political and so forth) reflects the economic system of society. Political institutions are a superstructure on the economic foundation (The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism.)”. Therefore, there is a close connection between the economic structure and the world outlook of proletariat. During the stage of development of capitalism the proletarian strategy and tactics was Marxism. When capitalism reached imperialism, the moribund and the highest stage of capitalism, the Marxism has developed into Marxism-Leninism. Com. Stalin said, “Leninism is Marxism of the era of imperialism and the proletarian revolution”. After second world war, the crisis of imperialism deepens and imperialism enters the phase of “total collapse”, a phase in the era of imperialism that ensures the possibility of victory of Neo Democratic Revolution in the semi feudal-semi colonial countries of Asia-Africa-Latin America, the neo colonies of today’s imperialism. Taking these changes (which are quantitative, not qualitative) into account the guiding ideology of world proletariat has further developed into Marxism-Leninism-Mao thought. But, the era of imperialism has not been changed. The Leninist strategy and tactics are still valid.

    Although RIM says that “The fundamental principles of Leninism are not outdated, they remain the theoretical basis guiding our thinking today”, they actually propose a qualitatively different era when say “The Declaration correctly stresses-Mao Tsetung-s qualitative development of the science of Marxism-Leninism- and affirms that he raised it to -a new stage.” But, what is the basis of this qualitative development? Their answer will be for sure “contribution of Com. Mao”. But, is it in agreement with Marxist-Leninist epistemology? We have seen, how Com. Lenin stressed on the economic structure in relation to human knowledge. It is the economic structure, which determines our socio-political consciousness. Therefore, when RIM formulates the ‘qualitative development of the science of Marxism-Leninism’, they are just proposing a new era without any materialistic basis. And without materialistic basis, any conception must be nothing but the idealism. This idealism is being reflected in their view as they have concluded “On top of it the development of science and technology in the 21st century has qualitatively enhanced the international situation in determining the success of the revolution of any country.” Now it is quite clear that they define current period as qualitatively different form the era that Com. Lenin defined as imperialism. Starting from this theoretical proposition they step forward to advocate the sub-stage of bourgeois revolution and obviously negate the Leninist strategy and tactics. And it is the direct outcome of their theoretical line, “qualitative development of the science of Marxism-Leninism”. Com. Bahadur has already noticed that negation and correctly remarked, “The era of independent bourgeois republics have long gone since 1917.”

    The whole theoretical conception of RIM is full of non-proletarian trends. Their basic conception is significantly different from the teachings of our great leaders. The old Trotskyite and Tito-like tendencies in their conception have now been developed into clear revisionism.
    To understand this revisionism, it is better to keep in mind that these people have called themselves as “Maoists”, not in the sense that they are the followers of teachings of Com.Mao, rather claming a qualitative difference between ‘Mao-thought’ and ‘Maoism’.

    In the present context, when objective condition is in great favor of proletariat and oppressed people of the whole world, we cannot achieve victory because of our shortcomings in subjective preparations. Unfortunately there is no socialist country in the present world to give international leadership. Under the circumstances, any little revisionist deviation will only give advantage to the reactionary camp. As Com.Mao stressed on the correctness of political line, we should be very cautious for any new theoretical formulation. The international political line established through Great Debate, 9th and 10th Congress of CPC was under the leadership and guidance of Com.Mao. It is our duty to grasp and follow that international line.

    Best regards,
    Joseph

    Note:
    1. RIM wrote in its declaration:
    “Stalin had a fair amount of metaphysics in him and he taught many people to follow metaphysics”, “Stalin failed to see the connection between the struggle of opposites and the unity of opposites.” Stalin’s most fundamental error was to fail to thoroughly apply dialectics in all spheres and thus draw serious wrong conclusions concerning the nature of the class struggle under socialism and the means to prevent capitalist restoration. While waging a fierce struggle against the old exploiting classes, Stalin denied in theory the emergence of a new bourgeoisie from within the socialist society itself, reflected and concentrated by the revisionists within the ruling communist party, hence his erroneous claim that “antagonistic class contradictions” had been eliminated in the Soviet Union as a result of the basic establishment of socialist ownership in industry and agriculture. Similarly a failure to thoroughly apply dialectics to the analysis of socialist society led the Soviet leadership to conclude that there was no longer a contradiction between the productive forces and the relations of production under socialism and to neglect to pay adequate attention to carrying out the revolution in the superstructure and continuing to revolutionise the relations of production even after the establishment, in the main, of the socialist ownership system.

    This incorrect understanding of the nature of socialist society also contributed to Stalin’s failure to adequately distinguish the contradictions between the people and the enemy and the contradictions among the people themselves. This in turn contributed to a marked tendency to resort to bureaucratic methods of handling these contradictions and gave more openings to the enemy (Declaration of RIM).

    3. The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism. V. I. Lenin

    Appendix:

    Nepal : Changes in society are chiefly due to the development of Internal contradictions
    Got this in my email today from peoplesmarch
    ——————————-

    From P.Govindan Kutty, Editor of People’s March
    Website – Peoplesmarch

    NEPAL: CHANGES IN SOCIETY ARE CHIEFLY DUE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL CONTRADICTIONS

    (Comment on January 1996 document and June 2003 Document)

    What caused the development of society? Internal contradictions.

    Chairman Mao Zedong has said that, “Changes in society are due chiefly to the development of the internal contradictions in society, that is the contradictions between the productive forces and the relations of production, the contradiction between classes and the contradictions between the old and the new; it is the development of these contradictions that pushes society forward and gives the impetus for the supersession of the old society by the new.” Note 1

    This analysis of society is Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, it is universally true for every country, for Germany as well as Nepal.

    As regards Germany, it is an imperialist country, the third most powerful in the world and the most powerful in Europe. The development of German society has been, is, and will be, due to the development of its internal contradictions in the main and not to anything else.

    In Nepalese society, the development of this society during the last seven to ten years has also been due to the development of the internal contradictions and this development has been very rapid. Why has it been very rapid?

    This is due to the correct leadership of the CPN(M), the waging of People’s War, and the formation of the united front in Nepal during the past seven years from 1966 to 2003. The objective conditions for People’s War existed and with the subjective reaction on these objective conditions, the revolution made rapid progress.

    This is due to the correct ideological and political line in launching People’s War and not indulging in any monarchical parliamentarianism. The CPN(M) has also implemented a correct military line in establishing base areas and surrounding the cities from the countryside and seizing political power by armed force. What kind of ideological line and political line is this? It is the ideological and political line of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. It is the military line of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

    As early as January 1996, Chairman Prachanda in his “War Policy of Nepalese New Democratic Revolution in the Context of Historical Development” wrote clearly and firmly, ” It is necessary on the part of the people to use force to accomplish New Democratic Revolution by destroying the existing semi-feudal and semi-colonial state system to liberate from acute problems of economic subjection, cultural perversion and political stagnation the Nepalese society is facing. In the present situation our Party has firm belief that a new system can be established only by applying the method of protracted People’s War according to the objective situation of Nepal and that under the leadership of the Communist Party based on the strategy of encircling cities from countryside.”

    He further concluded, “We have Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the invincible ideological weapon that the international proletarian class has developed as a highest synthesis of knowledge of the human being. We have a universal proletarian military theory of People’s War which being developed amidst intense storms of class struggles have proved the best. Our Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Party is the one which has developed amidst long and intense ideological struggle against different forms of opportunist and mainly right revisionism seen in the Nepalese communist movement.

    “Apart from this, what can we say from the experience of the
    history is that the tactics of encircling the cities from the countryside
    goes well not only with the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist theory of
    protracted People’s War but also with the historical development
    process of Nepal. There can be no talk of a new type of Party and a
    new society in the countries like ours without the protraccted process
    of People’ War.

    The experience of class struggle has elucidated the
    fact that the People’s War does not have any alternative in today’s
    world. Shattering the opportunist illusions that deceive people by
    saying that the mass movement and parliamentary struggle is
    principal, now it has become a historical necessity to enter into the
    course of People’ War.

    People are the creators of history. To provide
    leadership to the Nepalese people that (who) have a glorious
    history of heroism is the duty of the communists today” Note 2

    From a position of having not even one soldier, guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism the CPN(M) through the courageous pursuit of People’s War and struggle on many fronts under the aegis of People’s War, is now having a People’s Liberation army of tens of thousands (thirty thousand) and a militia of much more, and a liberated area of eighty percent of the country, that is the greater part of Nepal, other than some of the big cities and towns, in trust for the people of NepaL.

    The United Front of the party has been very closely and widely knit, encompassing even some of the servers of the monarchical regime, (while the main leaders of the parliamentary parties retain their reactionary class character). This is a shining example of the efficacy of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist social science. This is the greatest victory so far in the history of the Nepalese people and a great contribution to the proletarian world revolution regardless of what may happen next.

    Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is universally true and invincible against all odds. The New Democratic Revolution is the common path that will be traversed by all semi-colonial and semi-feudal countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America however much the reactionaries may try to hold back the wheel of history, the New Democratic Revolution will break out and will inevitably triumph!

    What about external causes affecting the development of internal contradictions?

    Materialist dialectics “holds that external causes are the condition of change and internal causes are the basis of change and that external causes become operative through internal causes. In a suitable temperature an egg changes into a chicken, but no temperature can change a stone into a chicken because each has a different basis. There is constant interaction between the people of different countries. In the era of capitalism and, especially in the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution, the interaction and mutual impact of different countries in the political, economic and cultural spheres are extremely great. The October Revolution ushered in a new epoch in world history as well as in Russian history. It exerted influence on the internal changes in other countries in the world and similarly and in a profound way, on internal changes in China. These changes were effected through the inner laws of development of these countries, China included. ” Note 3.

    The external causes do affect the development of the internal contradictions. But the effect is not decisive or determinative as the development of the internal contradictions. These external factors affect; but not as internal contradictions; and only through internal factors do external factors affect the development of internal contradictions.

    For instance in Germany, the internal principle contradiction is between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat of Germany. It is the development of the class contradiction between the two classes that pushes German society forward and gives the impetus for the supersession of the old German society — the imperialist-capitalist society, by the new socialist society.

    External influence may affect the development of the internal

    contradictions but these will play only a minor and secondary role.

    For instance, when the German proletariat with its class allies

    rise in insurrection against the German imperialists, whatever

    external help that the U S may give to their class allies in Germany

    cannot and would not be the decisive factor in the determination of

    the struggle between the German imperialists and the German

    proletariat.

    Of course, the U S imperialists may intervene directly, send its

    own soldiers into Germany and take over the fight from the German imperialists, for them and with them, when the fight is going badly for he German imperialists. Then the U S imperialists become the invaders and their contradiction with the people of Germany become the principal contradiction and the fight will be between all the people of Germany against the U S invaders!

    As it is in Nepal, up to the 2003, the U S imperialists have sent military advisors and military and economic aid to the reactionaries in Nepal. The Indian expansionists have also aided the reactionaries in Nepal. But so far these aid and assistance has been externally given to the reactionaries.

    All the roar of the U S imperialist tigers and all the manteras of the Indian expansionists wishing Maoism’s death and CPN(M)’s failure and all their personnel and material aid have not stopped the People’s War in Nepal. In fact People’s War in Nepal has grown and is growing. The progress of history go against their intentions, no matter what they do. Their aid and assistance have caused difficulties to the people, but these difficulties are difficulties on the road of progress.

    Is it not evident the that thus far, up to 2003 it is the development of the internal contradictions, the fight led by the CPN(M) that has produced the revolutionary situation in Nepal despite the aid and assistance given by the U S Imperialists and the Indian expansionists to the reactionaries? Can there be any doubt that the further development of the internal contradictions will lead the Nepalese people through to the stage of strategic offensive in the People’s War and to final victory in the New Democratic Revolution?

    A document entitled Present Situation and Our Historic Task, adopted by the Central Committee of the CPN(M) in June 2003 has the following basis for its thinking. We quote: “Today the great Nepalese People’s War (PW) is in a specific stage of strategic equilibrium and in preparation for strategic offensive. Theoretically, this stage is very complex and sensitive by itself. In imperialist era, whenever any country’s people’s revolution advances up to this stage of development then it becomes obvious that it starts clashing with world imperialism” Note 5

    On what ideology is this thinking based?

    We wish to say that objectively, the Initiation of the People’s War in Nepal in 1996 (February 13) must have shocked the reactionaries and their retained masters, the imperialists and the expansionists to the marrow of their bones! Similarly, in imperialist era and proletarian revolutionary era, the Naxalbari Uprising jumbled the innards of the Indian reactionary classes. Likewise when the flag of Uprising was raised over Chingkangshan, the Guomindang was dumb struck! The initiations were the start of the end of the paradise of the reactionaries on earth! How can they fail to feel first shock and then anger.

    Thus the clash with the internal enemies is also at the same time with their retained masters. It begins from the beginning to the end of the fight, that is, until final victory because the help given by the retained master to the reactionaries is hostile and antagonistic to the people. It does not begin only to matter only from the stage of strategic offensive to final victory.

    Of course from the initiation, the fight to strategic equilibrium and also to strategic offensive and final victory is with the internal enemy (supported by their retained masters). The victory of the New Democratic Revolution in China is the principal case in point.

    But the imperialists, especially, the U S imperialists and Indian expansionists may intervene directly in the on-going war in Nepal on the side of the reactionaries. This is possible. Why?

    Imperialism, especially US imperialism is the enemy of the people of the world. It has led the imperialist powers of Europe in dismembering Yugoslavia and attacking and occupying Afghanistan and also invaded and occupied Iraq with its coalition of the willing. It threatens a number of countries of the world. It has military bases in many places of the world. To use a phrase from a country that has fought the U S and other imperialists to a standstill, it is an evil empire. Thus, it is possible that the U S imperialists may intervene in Nepal.

    Why is it that U S imperialism will have the capacity to intervene?

    Because it is the sole super power. Though it is still occupying Afghanistan and Iraq; and threatens many other countries, it will have the military might and men to intervene in Nepal.

    On the question of whether or not the U S imperialists and the Indian expansionists will intervene, it is better to prepare for their intervention. On the question of whether they will intervene singly or jointly, it is better to prepare for their intervention jointly. On the question of whether or not that they will intervene on a small scale or a large scale, it is better to make provisions for them to intervene on a large scale. Timely and adequate preparation is the basis for carrying on the fight against the invaders without let up.

    At the start of the intervention, the invaders will as a whole be tactically superior in arms and attack many parts of the country. But as they spread out their finger to grapple with the people’s war in the whole country, their forces would be gradually tied down and thinned out. The Nepalese people’s forces would be able to attack the U S imperialists’ or Indian expansionists’ weakest parts first and then go on to cut off their fingers one by one, or in other words to eat up the other stronger parts mouthful by mouthful. It is imperative that the effective people’s forces at the start of the invasion by the U S Imperialists and Indian expansionists be moved out harm’s way, out of their frontal attack and let the land of Nepal take the brunt of the attack. U S tomahawk missiles and the bombs and aerial and artillery attack look terrifying but would only create a number of holes in the mountains of Nepal! The hills and mountains of Sagarmartha fame can withstand the onslaught of U S imperialists’ weapons. The tens of millions of sons and daughters of Nepal who have fought the reactionaries of Nepal to strategic equilibrium can go on to overwhelm any invading force that the U S imperialists and/or Indian expansionists may send. In the final analysis, the people will be proven to be stronger than any invading force that the imperialists and expansionists may send for the following reasons:

    a. Nepal is in the era of progress, of ascendancy, it is moving toward New Democracy and then Socialism for the people, It is a movement which cannot be stopped. While on the other hand, U S imperialism is in her dying days, like the sun setting in the west. It is old and decaying, moribund and beset with a thousand crises which cannot be overcome. This is also a movement which cannot be stopped,

    b. The aid and assistance given by the U S imperialists and other imperialist powers and the aid and assistance given by the Indian expansionists to the reactionaries of Nepal are unjust and any invasion of the country by them either singly or jointly would be unjust and condemned by the world. On the other hand, the Nepalese people fighting for their freedom up to now is just and fighting against invasion would be doubly just. Fighting a just cause merit the help and assistance of the revolutionary people of the world including the revolutionary people of the U S. It is certain that the people and the Maoists of India in the various states of India would not stand by with folded arms while U S imperialists and/or Indian expansionists ravage the land and kill the people of Nepal.

    c. The people Nepal have experience in carrying out the strategy and tactics in waging People’s War against the reactionaries, they will be able to apply the strategy and tactics of People’s War against the invaders.

    d. Though the invaders at the start have a preponderance of weapons, fire power and men; as the war expanded over the whole country and they occupy cities and towns and have to garrison them, their men would be thinned out and tied down; and their weapons and fire power, used.

    Through perseverance in the protracted war against the invaders, the tide would turn in favour of the people and against the invaders until they are driven out. The Korean War, 1950 to 1953, and the Vietnam War in the Sixties and Seventies are instances in point.

    The U S would be fighting simultaneous wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Nepal and may be more. Can they really fight many wars all at the same time?

    Chairman Mao has said, “In any contradiction the development of the contradictory aspects is uneven. Sometimes they seem to be in equilibrium, which is only temporary and relative while unevenness is basic. Of the two contradictory aspects, one must be principal and the other secondary. The principal aspect is the one playing the leading role in the contradiction. The nature of a thing is determined by the principal aspect of the contradiction, the aspect which has gained the dominant position.

    “But this situation is not static; the principal and the non-principal aspects of a contradiction transform themselves into each other and the nature of a thing changes accordingly..” Note 3

    In the contradiction between U S imperialists and the people of the world, because of its present strength, imperialism, especially U S Imperialism constitute the principal aspect of the contradiction and the people form the secondary aspect. The world is known by the principle aspect—an imperialist world; simultaneously the subsidiary aspect is the proletariat and people of the world — the era of proletarian revolution.

    These aspects do not stay unchanged over time. Through struggle by the proletariat and the people of the world, the presently secondary aspect of the contradiction can and will transform itself into the principal aspect and the presently principal aspect will be transposed, to be relegated to the secondary aspect.

    Through the struggle of the people of the semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries of the world and the proletariat of the imperialist countries, the day will dawn when the imperialists will be relegated to the secondary aspect to make its downward slide into oblivion.

    At the moment, the U S imperialism call the shots and run riot all over the world. The CPN(M) in its Document “The Present Situation and Our Historical Task” state the following:

    A “Because of the development of the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution, the favourable and unfavourable international situation will be playing a strategic role in determining the success of specific country’s democratic revolution.” Note 5

    Is this ccorrect?

    The Marxist-Leninist-Maoist basis of thinking is that favourable and unfavourable international situation can only playing an influencing role in the New Democratic Revolution of a country and the influence can only be through internal causes. However, the document states that these will play a strategic role. It implies that no matter how well you fight in a semi-feudal and semi feudal country you are bound not to win in that country. So why fight? This is even so when the people of Nepal have won over 80% of the country? It this not telling the people not to fight any more.? Is there an iota of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in this? It is pure capitulationism.

    B “On top of it the development of science and technology in the 21st century has qualitatively enhanced the international situation in determining the success of the revolution of any country.”

    The development of science and technology is an enhancement in the development of material production. It intensifies the class struggle between the producers and the appropriators of the product of labour and brings the day nearer when the appropriators will be done away with. There have been improvements in science and technology throughout the centuries, not only the 21st century. It would be ludicrous just to mention only the 21st century. The reactionaries make use of the development in science and technology to make more powerful and destructive weapons against the people. That is true, But the revolutionary people who refused to be cowed and enslaved will give them tit for tat struggle.

    The contradictions between the people and the reactionaries is a class struggle. The improvements in science and technology cannot do away with the nature of class struggle. Class struggle will go on in spite of the improvements in science and technology. The outcome, victory in the New Democratic Revolution will still be decided by the internal class contradictions in each and every country in the semi-feudal and semi-colonial world. The international situation cannot be the determining factor in the success of the revolution in any country. Conversely, it is also true that a revolutionary international situation may not prevent a socialist country from being restored into capitalism as in the case of China in 1976.

    There may be a case though in the future when many of the semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries have become New Democratic societies and some imperialist countries have become Socialist, that the overwhelming revolutionary strength of the people of the world swamp the might of the remaining reactionary countries and revolutions in these countries will be less arduous as it is now. But this is class struggle on a world scale and has got nothing to do with development of science and technology enhancing the international situation in determining the success of the revolution in a country. Is this an opportunity for giving an excuse for not going on with People’s War to achieve total victory. What logic is this?

    C “In today’s conditions, any ups and downs in the revolution of in any country are related with the ups and downs that occur in the world situation. The development of revolution in the last seven years amply explains this reality” Is this correct?

    The ups and downs in the revolution in any country are chiefly due to the development of the internal contradictions in that country. The international ups and downs will influence the development of the internal causes but are not determinative of them. Even though influenced by international causes, the revolution in a country has its own causes of development and may yet push society forward into New Democratic society even though internationally, overall, the world situation is not favourable to the revolution in that country. It is guidancce by this Marxist-Leninist-Maoist philosophy that the revolutionaries in each country carry on the struggle against the reactionaries and their retained masters in each country. Otherwise, following the line laid down in the document above, each one will be playing a waiting game. Let us wait until the international situation is favourable and then and only then go into action! Is this not tantamount to saying that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is good, efficacious, invincible; But let us wait until to-morrow to adopt it? Is this not saying that People’s War is good; but only to-morrow? Is this not saying that strategic offensive is marvellous; but only to-morrow?

    D “However, at present there is no revolutionary wave under the leadership of the proletariat”

    Is this the talk of revolutionaries, and Maoist revolutionaries at that? Revolutionary wave under the leadership of the proletariat does not exist all at once for the taking. Neither does it drop from the skies. It has to be fostered, nurtured, created. It has to be created from many parts of the world, from a number of countries before the isolated ripples can form a wave. Is it not a requirement before the formation of a revolutionary wave that the revolutionaries of each country do their part?

    Though in Germany, we are reminded of a poem by Robert Burns entitled “Bruce of Bannockburn”\;

    “…

    Lay the proud usurpers low,

    Tyrants fall in every foe.

    Liberty’s in every blow.

    Let us do or die.”

    With imperialism and U S imperialism especially, running riot all over the Middle East and the world, the day cannot be too far away when the people will rise in revolt. The revolutionary people of Iraq is giving the U S invaders and occupiers a hard time in Iraq; The awakened fighters in Afghanistan is gradually taking on the U S and other imperialists. There are other theatres of war.

    It is up to the revolutionaries to organise the people and create the revolutionary wave.

    E “In the present context, when along with the restoration of capitalism in China there is no other socialist state existing when despite objective condition turning favourable, there is no advancement in any strong revolutionary movement under the leadership of the proletariat and when world imperialism is pouncing on people everywhere like an injured tiger. Is it possible for a small country with specific geo-political compulsion like Nepal to gain victory at the point of capturing central state through the revolution? This is the most significant question being put to the Party today”

    There has been Lenin and the Bolsheviks who were mountain eagles deplete with revolutionary vigour and vitality who ushered in the victory of the October Revolution in the Land of Russia.

    Other than Leninist and Bolshevik mountain eagles there must be Himalayan eagles with equal revolutionary strength and stamina who will usher in the victory of the New Democratic Revolution in Nepal.

    Geography is an important factor in war; but not the decisive factor. Mountainous and land locked country has both advantages and disadvantages in war and struggle. Advantages and disadvantages exist as one. We must look not only at the disadvantages but also at the advantages as well. How has the People’s War been prosecuted from Initiation up to the stage of Strategic Equilibrium? By the own efforts of the Nepalese people and their fighters. By self reliance.

    It is true from the stories of some of the people of Nepal that to get salt and kerosene they have to travel many kilometres. It is difficult. But these are difficulties waiting to be overcome. The decisive factor in victory in the People’s War is the political consciousness of the people. Conscious people are a gigantic force. Conscious people get their things other than from their enemies in war; also from the earth, from the mountains, in peace times.

    As regards the issue of being a small country, we say that there are big countries and small countries. The people of all countries, big and small, want revolution, that is, the New Democratic revolution and the Socialist Revolution.

    Can a revolutionary say that those in a small country must wait for those in a big country to be victorious before they will fight? Is this not playing the waiting game?

    The victory in the New Democratic Revolution in any country, whether big or small, decisively depend on the unity of its United Front, on the solidity of the People’s Liberation Army and the quality of the leadership of the Maoist Communist Party. In a word, it depends chiefly on people not the size of the land.

    As regards the injured tiger pouncing on the people, what must the people do? Simple. Put it to sleep.

    As regards there being not even one socialist country, a revolutionary and a good Maoist revolutionary should take a look at the world and see for himself. We are reminded by a description in a recent poem by Abdullah Iraq entitled “Onward Leap To Marxian Science” that New Ideas world wide retained.

    “…

    Form was crushed, ideas remained.

    Old ideas turn scales again.

    Change of colour base domains;

    New ideas world-wide retained!”

    At first there were only two – Marx and Engels.

    There was no socialist state.

    Then there was Lenin and no socialist state, no USSR prior to October 1917. But it came to fruition in the victory in October 1917 in Russia. We lost that in 1956â€_

    Then there was the People’s Republic of China in 1949. We again lost it in 1976.

    It has been 30 years since we lost it. The reactionaries all over the world say we have lost everything, there is not even one socialist state. Are you not repeating what they have said? Why this repetition? Why do you cry over spilt milk and ever so often? If you had tears, you should have shed them in 1976.

    The poem above remind us that new ideas, ideas of New Democracy and Socialism are world wide retained. This is the progress. This is the diamond.

    Bahadur

    160806

    Note 1 “On Contradictions” August 1937, Selected Works Vol. 1 p314.

    Note 2 “War Policy of Nepalese New Democratic Revolution In the Context of Historical Development P&P OTRIN pp193 to 203

    Note 3 “On Contradictions” August 1937, SROW from MZD p89

    Note 4 “On Contradicctions” August 1937, SROW from MZD

    P112

    Note 5 “The Present Situation and Our historical Task” SIDOT CPN(M) pp129 to 149

    DEVIATIONISTS IN MAOIST CLOTHING

    (Comment No 1 on the Resolution of the Central Committee of the Communist Party Of Nepal (Maoist))

    Erstwhile Maoists having reached the stage of Strategic Equilibrium in the People’s War in Nepal, that is having fought the reactionaries in Nepal who were aided and assisted both by the imperialists, especially the U S imperialists and the Indian expansionists, to a standstill have been having second thoughts about the Strategic Offensive, that is going ahead with the People’s War to capture total state power. Since June 2003, from the adoption of the Document ” The Present Situation and Our Historical Task”, they have passed one resolution after another up to the present resolution in justification of their present day actions. As documented in “The Present Situation …” in 2003, they are stating in the recent resolution that, “Today, any national liberation, democratic or socialist movement is not possible to succeed in any country of the world unless it does not (if it does not) advance as an inseparable part of the world people’s resistance movement…”

    What are the second thoughts that these people have? The people of Nepal face the possibility of direct intervention of U S imperialism and Indian expansionism. These people looking at the U S imperialists conquest of Iraq together with the British imperialists and the imperialist conquest of Afghanistan and the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, are scared stiff, like the chick seeing the rattle snake, any moment to be cobbled up by it!

    These people have used the argument that now at the stage of Strategic Offensive, the People’s War will clash with imperialism and by implication will invite the direct intervention of the U S imperialists and the Indian expansionists.

    Whether the U S imperialists and Indian expansionists directly intervene or not does not depend on the Nepalese people. The Nepal people are after all not their general staff and cannot decide for them. But these people state that the revolution will clash now with imperialism and expansionism but does not say whether or not they are prepared for the clash. In fact if and when the revolution moves forward it more likely than not that the U S imperialists and expansionist will intervene directly as they have done so indirectly. These people are keeping quiet about this. Is this the mark of revolutionaries or Maoist revolutionaries at that? Why do they act in this manner?

    In the stead of People’s War they have proposed since June 2003, reaching the victory of New Democratic Revolution through bourgeois democracy:

    An Interim Government with the Parliamentary Parties

    Election to a Constituent Assembly and

    A New People’s Constitution

    And these people have named this as a sub-stage of the New Democratic Revolution.

    In fact, this is, as Comrade Azad of the Communist Party Of India (Maoist) (CPI M) says in his email to the People’s March, ” is hobnobbing with all the reactionaries.” These people regard revisionists like Yechari of CPM of India as friends. This is in essence, trying to establish a bourgeois republic in a semi-feudal semi-colonial country which the imperialists and expansionists are loathe to allow for they want semi-colonies and colonies and not independent countries. The era of independent bourgeois republics have long gone since 1917.

    The nature of the semi-feudal and semi colonial state and that of the New Democratic State is diametrically opposite. It has to be one or the other. The semi-feudal and semi colonial state cannot peacefully evolve into the New Democratic State. Hence they deviate from MLM guidance by saying that the sub-stage will evolve into the New Democratic State. They are deviationists in MLM clothing.

    In proposing that there is a sub-stage before the New Democratic State, these people say that they are strategically firm and tactically very flexible.

    Any fool can say that. What is the real situation?

    These people are very fond of stating the concrete analysis of the concrete situation and one thousand quotations from MLM. What is the concrete situation?

    No Interim Government (as agreed in the 12-Point Agreement). Hence these people cannot participate in it.

    The Seven Parliamentary Parties are the so-called Government. They have called upon these people to negotiate. They are more equal than these people. This is the reality as regards the Interim Government.

    As regards the Constituent Assembly elections. That is in abeyance.

    As regards the New Constitution, if it ever come to pass it must be a constitution of the various existing classes the servers of the king and the representatives of the comprador and bureaucrat classes and perhaps some concessions to these people.

    This is the reality on the ground. This is the concrete situation.

    And this is the model that these people recommend to the Indian Maoist revolutionaries and all the Maoist revolutionaries in the semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries in the 21st century. This is the road to “paradise on earth”? The path to hell is paved with good intentions!

    Bahadur

    260806

    REVOLUTION WILL SUCCEED IN ONE COUNTRY AFTER ANOTHER

    (Comment No 2 On the Resolution of the Central Committee of the

    Communist Party Of Nepal (Maoist))

    Revolution occurs as a development of the contradictions between the forces of production and the relations of production, the contradictions between classes in each country and not to any other cause. There is no doing away with the contradictions between the forces of production and the relations of production in imperialist-capitalist societies and the contradictions in semi-feudal and semi colonial countries. Hence revolutions will take place and will inevitably triumph, no matter how long it takes. A hundred or even a thousand years!

    Proletarian revolution is a cause of a hundred or even a thousand years. Those who expect quick victory in the cause or who are impatient or want the fruits victory before the fruition or are fearful of the enemy had better look elsewhere. Revolution is no place for these people.

    In the confines of one country, in a semi-feudal and semi-feudal country, victory occurs through the establishment of base areas in the countryside, in waging people’s war on the basis of a united front of revolutionary classes under the leadership of the vanguard of the proletariat, the Communist Party. It occurs through the process of winning in one base area after another in different parts of the country and then linking up all the base areas as a whole in launching the assault on the main cities and towns, thus smashing the semi-feudal and semi-colonial state and establishing the New Democratic State for the revolutionary classes. The victory is achieved in one base area after another, This is due to the initially overwhelming strength of the enemy and the weak position of the revolutionary forces. By the exertion of the revolutionary forces led by the Communist Party, the people gradually acquire strength and turn the scales on the reactionary classes. Hence, victory does not happen all at once all over the country.

    Sometimes, there is a ding-dong battle in base areas and also cities and towns. A base area is established. However, the enemy concentrating their forces may counter-attack it. It may be more prudent to go away from that base area or town and preserve the effective forces than defending it with great losses. Thus the base area or town may be lost but the effective forces of the people are preserved. It does not mean that the revolution is lost when one base area or town is lost.

    In an imperialist-capitalist country, the model is first the insurrection in the towns and then spreading to the countryside. It still goes through a process.

    And there could be also direct external intervention which would delay total victory. But total victory there will be.

    Hence, victory will occur in one semi-feudal and semi-colonial country after another or a number of semi-feudal and semi-colonial countries after others. And victory will occur first in one or several countries in the imperialist-capitalist countries.

    Taking the world as a whole, the successful revolutions of each country form a base area of the world revolution. Linking up the base areas together and launching the final assault on the remaining enemies in the remaining non liberated countries is the task of the proletariat of every country led by their Chief of Staff in cooperation with all the other Chiefs of Staff of all the other countries. Our mission is the liberation of all mankind from the scourges of exploitation and oppression.

    However, the resolution states that “Today, any national liberation, democratic or socialist movement is not possible to succeed in any country of the world unless it does not (if it does not) advance as an inseparable part of the world people’s resistance movement…” It states that it is not possible to succeed in any country unless the worlds’ people resistance movement is there and it advances with it.

    This all at once negates Marxism-Leninism-Maoism which says that internal causes are the chief reasons for revolution in each country, that external cause only play an influencing and minor part. But the resolution has interposed it by stating the external cause will from now on, in the 21st century be the cause of internal development of each country.

    These people have given so many interviews and passed so many resolutions to try to peddle their perfidious theory world revolution in the 21st century to try to cover up their putting a brake on the People’s War in Nepal.

    Are not the reactionaries also trying to stop the People’s War in Nepal? They do. They say stop. But we know who they are. And they do not say it with much fanfare and swagger and do not wear the mantle of MLM.

    But history will proceed according to Marxist-Lenisnist-Maoist theory and will refute the deviationists thoroughly.

    Bahadur

    280806
    posted by Stalingam @ 8/27/2006 08:39:00 PM PERMANENT LINK

  2. saheb Says:

    hasta la victoria siempere!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  3. saheb Says:

    che ur death kills me every time

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s