Democracy and Class Struggle is publishing two long articles because they address the important question of State Power in Nepal.
The first is from comrade Barburam Bhattarai and was published in 2004 and still gives the best view of the UCPN Maoist view of the State and the question of Democracy.
Comrade Stephen Maudlin who has recently made contributions on this and other sites on the question of the State and Revolution in Nepal has brought Bhattarai's contribution to our attention once again - and we publish it because we cannot assume that new and some old comrades know its content.
The second is from comrade Joseph Ball who is critical of the UCPN Maoist view of the State and multi party democracy but is also active in support of the Nepalese Revolution.
We hope these different contributions deepen your understanding of the dynamics of the Nepalese Revolution.
5 comments:
Joseph Ball touches the points but has no real idea about what to do apart from following Avakian. Maudlin is on the clouds with Badiou. Bhattarai actually has the power, and it is a revisionist bourgeois view.
Joseph Ball is one of the best critics of the Nepalese Revolution because he is committed supporter of the Nepalese Revolution from a Maoist perspective.
Stephen Maudlin tries to integrate new theoretical perspectives from Badiou with the practice of the Nepalese Revolution and he is now on the ground in Nepal - yes literally - Nepal is one of those places where feet on the ground can also mean head in the clouds!
Bhattarai and Prachanda are driven by the logic of power to the political centre but have a vibrant democratic UCPN Maoist party that can curb their centrist tendencies and bring them back to the revolution and the left.
Has the latest report above from Ben Petersen shows the Nepalese revolution progresses and thankfully is not dependent in any way on its nay sayers.
i think you guys are dreaming, and you do not really understand real politics. UN, world bank, etc
I'm afraid the revolutionary seizure of power is not possible when you have a leadership with 'centrist tendencies'. Spontaneous pressure from the proletariat cannot force a leadership with a non-revolutionary line to seize state power and then lead in a way which facilitates proletarian rule. The correct line of the leadership is necessary for revolution. I accept it's not sufficient. You also need a critical revolutionary mass among the proletariat, so there are actually people to be led.
Comrade Ball you are ignoring the two line struggle in the UCN(Maoist) and how the Kiran Gujarel wing of the Party brought the leadership into line on the question of Peoples Democratic State.
Comrade Ball I have read your article and it reflects left dogmatism propagated by RCPUSA on Nepal Revolution and is highly schematic
Post a Comment