Talk:Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This kind of news is quite interesting in understanding the tactics and strategies of the party:

Nepal rebels ready to surrender under UN supervision [ Sunday, November 20, 2005 01:13:57 amPTI ], from: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-1301467,curpg-1.cms

KATHMANDU: Nepal's Maoist rebels, spearheading a decade-old insurgency, have agreed to lay down arms under UN supervision and support the movement launched by an alliance of seven political parties to limit King Gyanendra's role as a titular head, highly placed sources said on Saturday. (...)

This is not true. The Maoists have clearly stated on multiple occassions that they will not lay down arms until an elected, constituent assembly convenes and decides the state structure of a post-monarchist Nepal. In the Stacks
On the contrary: As can now (january 2007) be seen, the maoists HAVE laid down arms, negotiated a peace settlement, and accepted UN supervision. Togrim, user of the Norwegian wikipedia, 2007-01-20

This article doesn't fully do justice to the origins of the Maoists, their conduct, or their current state.I would hope the wikipedia community would be more willing to allow edits that try to somewhat add some context to the situation.

The thing about the CPN(M) being a Khmer Rouge in the making was said in a major British daily newspaper - I can't remember which one - try Google searching if you really want to know.--XmarkX 07:06, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The Nepalese Maoists aren't the only people who don't accept the orthodox version of what happened under the Khmer Rouge: for example, Noam Chomsky. Questioning the official version of history in Cambodia does not necessarily translate into support for the Khmer Rouge (they don't; Maoist politics are actually quite different from Pol Pot's, irreconcilably so). To suggest that the CPN(M) is another KR in the making is really quite silly.

I'm not disputing that it's a stupid claim - the point is that it has been made--XmarkX 02:45, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

True; but if it's a bullshitty claim that's objectively false, some mention should be made of that. The way it's just sort of left to stand implies that its true or has merit.

.... in the interview linked from the main page, he says "we are no Khmer Rouge"

Do we have a reliable source that the government atrocities are much more severe? -Hmib 00:01, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


This is a blatantly, blatantly biased item, characterizing democracy's use of elected representatives as a "shallow" means of involving citizens in self-government, and making an unsupported statement that "The human rights abuses of the monarchy are over 5 times those of the Maoists, and far more horrific, although this fact is ignored by nearly all foreign press."

Apart from this problem, the item itself is shallow and fails to explore the political ramifications and causes of the maoist insurgency in Nepal in anything beyond the most summary terms of stating that it exists, and then saying that the royals are worse then the maoists.

This needs to be completely rewritten.

Read amnestys last Nepal reports. They say that both parts break human rights, but the govt side is much worse. Togrim, user of the norwegian wikipedia, 2006-06-17

Contents

[edit] Maoist

What exactly makes them 'Maoist' - which aspect of the politics or political claims matches those of Mao other then just being a peasant communist movement? What are the differences to the CPN (Unity Centre)? Any insight views? - Oliver

My personal wiew is that ONE basic thing here was the scarcity of NAMES. There has been, since 1962, something like 40 or more communist parties or groups of at least some importance in Nepal. There allready was one NKP(ML), NKP(United ML), NKP(Marxist), and TWO NKP(marxist-leninist-maoist). So they split the NKP(Ekda Kendra) (Unity Centre) - took the majority in that party, in fact - but wanted a new name, as the minority used the same name too - and NKP(Maobadi) was not used. Short, pithy, and everybody and her grandma in Nepals communist movement were or had been pro Mao.
Another thing is more archane and theoretical. During the 1980s the NKP(Mashal) (which was led by Prachanda and was a forerunner party to NKP(Ekda Kendra) (1990) and NKP(Maobadi) (1994) found out that they were NOT satisfied with "Mao Tse-tung Thought" but wanted "maoism". They argued that this had to do with the importance of Maos theories as on par with those of Marx and Lenin. Thats the SHORT version. (the long one is - LONGER!)
Togrim user of the norwegian wikipedia, 2006.06.24
PS. The Unity Centre say they are in favour of Mao and peoples war too ... only NOW is not the right time! t

[edit] NOT a MILITARY organisation

The NKP(Maobadi) is NOT a political party AND MILITARY ORGANISATION. They are a political party thast LEADS a military org, at present called the PLA, with 35 000 full time soldiers. (You can be a member of the party without carrying arms or wearing a uniform, and you can be a soldier in the PLA without being a member of the NKP(M).)

This is not unusual. In Nepal, the Nepali Congress had its own army both in 1950-51 and in 1961-1962. That didnt make the NC a "military organisation".

Togrim, user of the norwegian wikipedia.

Cut "and military organisation". Togrim, 23. july 2006

[edit] POV much?

"Its work was crucial" "However, the Maoists' social work and proposal of introducing socialism have been welcomed by wide-ranging popular support." Why not just say "The Communist Party of Nepal Rox0rz!!!"? The tone of this article is very much POV. WookMuff 22:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The fact that these reforms have wide ranging result is evident in any article done on the issue by the Hindi Times.--68.198.123.73 04:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

SOCIALISM? The fact is that the NKP(Maobadi) has NEVER had on its programme to introduce socialism in Nepal (exept as a far-off, future goal!). Their aim has allways been to make what Prachanda has even called a "capitalist revolution" in Nepal, and what they have compared to the english revolution of the 1600s against royality and feudalism. This may surprize some who have very simple beliefs about what "communism" and "socialism" is, but can be confirmed by reading their own programmes, documented among other places in the footnotes to the english wikipedia articles about the nepali maoists. Togrim, user of the norwegian wikipedia, 2007-01-20 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.48.140.40 (talk) 07:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC).

It's the Maoist conception of New Democratic Revolution. This happened with the revolution in China during the years leading to the seizure of power in 1949 (which brought into being the socialist stage of development). This is what the previous post, I assume, is meaning and what the CPNM means when they say “capitalist revolution” or something similar to that, (aka NDR).

[edit] Unsatisfactory Work

I think this article leaves a lot to be imagined, there is nothing here seemingly on the ideological character of the CPN (M), its role in the International Maoist movement and its relations with other various Maoist groups including those in India. I think someone should really try to put this together, I am willing of course to help.

[edit] India's Prisoners

"India had provided the Nepali government with aid to combat the insurgency and is currently holding two commanders of the CPN-M in jail." I don't have the resources right now to source it, but the two prisoners there were held in India were freed about a month to two months ago.


[edit] Maobadi

I receive frequent posting from a left wing discussion group (trainspotters) refering to the "Maobadi" although I am somewhat unclear of what it refers to. I is clear from context that it pertains to 1) Nepal 2)Maoist politics. Does the term "Maobadi" refer to CPN-M? If so I would create a redirect page to this article. Currently a wp search for "Mobadi" in article namespace returns nothing. Edivorce 20:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC) 'Maobadi'/'Maovadi' is Nepalese (and Hindi, Bengali, etc.) for 'Maoist'. The Nepali name for CPN(Maoist) is 'Nepal Kamyunist Party (Maobadi)', colloquially called 'Maobadi'. --Soman 20:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Material copied from other side without proper referencing / copyright infringement?

Hi,

the text under Leadership, Command Structure is almost verbatim copied from

http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/nepal/terroristoutfits/index.html

but no reference to this source has been made.

Can someone please check if this is o.k. and if other text from the same site has been copied? Wei Xiwu 11:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Weaponry

I added a statement to this section making note of the relatively antiquated nature of some of the weaponry carried by the Communist insurgents. I added a link to a photo gallery showing the insurgents carrying what appear possibly to be muskets. --KobaVanDerLubbe (talk) 00:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but I removed that here as it appears to be a classic case of OR. You need a reference if you want to make a note of their antiquated weaponary. You cannot add something based on your intepretation of a photo. While the whole article is in dire need of referencing it doesn't mean we should just add more OR. Nil Einne (talk) 08:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] massive update needed

large parts of this article still refers to the party as if the war was still going on. Details on armed forces needs to be shifted to a separate People's Liberation Army (Nepal) article. --Soman (talk) 08:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality of the article

This Article is problematic. It seems as if a few writers urge the visitor to pick up a specific point of view regarding this. I would suggest to simply remove anything without sources, and rewrite the whole stuff that is without any facts. And more links to a critical, thinking journalism would not be bad here. 80.108.103.172 (talk) 18:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)