More Maoist Violence in India
Jun 17 2009 14:21
From the BBC:
wrote:
Maoist-linked violence has killed 6,000 people in India over the past 20 years.The tribespeople-dominated Lalgarh area in West Bengal's West Midnapore district has been under the virtual control of the Maoist rebels since last November.
Over the past few days, villagers backed by the rebels have taken over more villages in the area and burnt down and demolished offices belonging to the ruling Communist Party of India (Marxist) or CPI(M).
Early on Tuesday morning, three local party workers were killed by suspected rebels who came on a motorcycle and fired on them. The workers were at a local tea shop when the incident happened, the police said.
Jun 17 2009 16:52
#2
Vlad336 wrote:
more infighting between bourgeois "communist" parties for which workers have to pay with their lives.
It doesn't even seem like that, more just straightforward resistance by the population against the ruling class (which, in this case, happens to call itself "communist"). I suppose it all comes down to who the "rebels" are.
EDIT: Shit, sorry, I completely misread that, I didn't realise the rebels were the Maoists. Sorry, you were right first time.
Jun 17 2009 21:34
#3
To be fair it seems like the maoists do have genunie popular support in the countryside, which is not to defend their shite politics, but it is not that cut and dried by any means.
Jun 17 2009 21:47
#4
vanilla.ice.baby wrote:
To be fair it seems like the maoists do have genunie popular support in the countryside, which is not to defend their shite politics, but it is not that cut and dried by any means.
The Tories have genuine popular support in the countryside, that doesn't make them any less bourgeois.
~J.
Jun 18 2009 00:00
#5
Er yeah well writing it off as bourgeois vs bourgeois is still not very insightful, even if true.
Jun 18 2009 01:14
#6
obviously the cunting maoists have support amongst the peasants and workers, and so does the bigger Communist Party I imagine, but that doesn't change the nature of the violence. In the end the shits who run the Indian CP and the Maoist guerillas will simply settle their accounts using workers as cannon fodder.
It would be interesting to know however if there are any active anarchist/communist groups trying to counteract the effects of the destruction.
Jun 18 2009 16:23
#7
the Lalgarh uprising was not lead by the maoists but by a democratically elected tribal leadership, the governments (both the CPI(M) led one in Kolkatta and the Congress led one in Dehli) try to blame the maoists for it for justifying violent repression
more infos here: http://sanhati.com/front-page/1083/
Jun 18 2009 16:53
#8
Interesting, cheers.
Jun 19 2009 12:50
#9
There is a communist organisation in India that has denounced this inter-bourgeois fraction bloodbath: the ICC. We have intervened on demos to distribute a leaflet warning about the danger of taking either side in this terrible slaughter, which has seen village burned to the ground, killings, assassinations and displacement. A sordid fraction fight that has been used by the bourgeoisie to step up repression throughout Bengal.
At the moment I cannot find the leaflet, it is on our website somewhere in English, Bengali and Hindi
Jun 19 2009 12:59
#10
was it this article?
Jun 20 2009 02:31
#11
I am sorry, but I am leaving libcom.
p-b 
Jun 20 2009 03:13
#12
that was quick.
Jun 21 2009 22:59
#13
Vlad336 wrote:
obviously the cunting maoists have support amongst the peasants and workers, and so does the bigger Communist Party I imagine, but that doesn't change the nature of the violence. In the end the shits who run the Indian CP and the Maoist guerillas will simply settle their accounts using workers as cannon fodder.
It would be interesting to know however if there are any active anarchist/communist groups trying to counteract the effects of the destruction.
I had the same question here and olso in anover topik about Iran.
http://libcom.org/news/storm-insurrection-iran-20062009
And i am afreid that unswer is NO.
It seems to me that modern anarchists and ultralefts can not make insurrections etc. 90% of tham just strugle for animal rights or lissening punk musik. As for ulntraleft- there are some liberals from ICC for hoom any form of riot or sabo is rong.
Look at this: indian maoists (no douts: thy are avtoritarians) can, islamists (they ara shitty) can, irish nationalists (they are olso shitty) can but anarchists can not. Be onest - we are movement of loosers.
Or better to say there is no any real anarchist movement. Where we are?
Jun 21 2009 23:22
#14
pannekoek-bakunin wrote:
I am sorry, but I am leaving libcom.p-b
It'd be nice if you at least said why. 
Jun 22 2009 06:43
#15
magidd wrote:
Vlad336 wrote:
obviously the cunting maoists have support amongst the peasants and workers, and so does the bigger Communist Party I imagine, but that doesn't change the nature of the violence. In the end the shits who run the Indian CP and the Maoist guerillas will simply settle their accounts using workers as cannon fodder.
It would be interesting to know however if there are any active anarchist/communist groups trying to counteract the effects of the destruction.I had the same question here and olso in anover topik about Iran.
http://libcom.org/news/storm-insurrection-iran-20062009
And i am afreid that unswer is NO.
It seems to me that modern anarchists and ultralefts can not make insurrections etc. 90% of tham just strugle for animal rights or lissening punk musik. As for ulntraleft- there are some liberals from ICC for hoom any form of riot or sabo is rong.
Look at this: indian maoists (no douts: thy are avtoritarians) can, islamists (they ara shitty) can, irish nationalists (they are olso shitty) can but anarchists can not. Be onest - we are movement of loosers.
Or better to say there is no any real anarchist movement. Where we are?
Is this satire?
Jun 22 2009 16:26
#16
no, it is emorchy, that is anarchy with a touch of emo melodrama. I think it's a success.
Jun 22 2009 18:44
#17
This is where we are
Jun 22 2009 18:48
#18
maggid, despairing over the lack of cohesiveness of anarchist/communist movements, and our powerlessness in the face of organized state repression is a pretty defeatist way to look at things.
What alternative do you propose? Vote labour? Become apathetic?
Jun 22 2009 19:04
#19
Of course not.
But we have to understand what is going on.
There are big insurrections in India, Iran and may be (in future) in China- in a new industrial but still partly rural traditional countres.
Resuistens there exist INSPITE of repressions- look at the fucking maoists in India.
May be anarchists have to do something with that plases like: to send there people and to start there something like Mahcnovshina?
I understend it sounds like fantasy but than Marcous and his fucking maoist friends came to Chiapos there were about few dosens of people from city's of Mexsika.
Jun 22 2009 20:18
#20
magidd wrote:
I understend it sounds like fantasy
Yes, it does.
The Makhnovists weren't "sent" from anywhere - it was local self-organisation emerging from the class needs of the historical situation. Marcos and co were in the jungle for a decade or so before they took the actions they are now famous for (and which are deserving of some criticism). Why don't you show us the way and send yourself to the dense Indian forests, parachute in - I suppose you speak some of the 100s of local dialects, are familiar with jungle survival and guerilla war techniques, and are knowledgeable about the history and needs of those struggles? And are sure that your own political ideas are a 'one-size-fits-all' universally applicable solution to situations you know little or nothing about? And, like your model the Zapatistas, you plan to set aside the next decade or two of your life in building your jungle guerilla army? Or is this all just advice for others, the general planning strategy for the infantry?
It's not as if there's much in common between the social composition of the Indian maoist activity (or the rural peasant struggles) and the urban Iranian revolt. Yet you lump them together as equivalents in your fantasy.
It's not as if there's any great merit to competing with the bourgeois politics of leftism on its own terms, competing for 'leadership of the masses'. The content of leftist guerillaism and a struggle to abolish capitalism are quite different - their development is not a mere question of the presence of the 'right militants with the right political line' making an appearance. That is precisely the logic of maoism etc.
Jun 22 2009 20:48
#21
It's not as if there's much in common between the social composition of the Indian maoist activity (or the rural peasant struggles) and the urban Iranian revolt.
Comment
No it is common.
As i said: India, Iran, China- are a new industrial but still partly rural traditional countres. Russian revolution in fact was born in the same conditions - during the transition from traditional rural society to industrial society. Murreey Bukchin gave a good analising of the same situation in Spane 1936.
Here is an intreasting arcticle about that
http://libcom.org/forums/thought/3-stages-of-the-proletarian-struggle
The Makhnovists weren't "sent" from anywhere - it was local self-organisation emerging from the class needs of the historical situation.
Comment
Only in the begining. Than they violently spread in Ukrain.
The content of leftist guerillaism and a struggle to abolish capitalism are quite different - their development is not a mere question of the presence of the 'right militants with the right political line' making an appearance. That is precisely the logic of maoism etc.
Comment
That is precisely bullshit. Remember Bakunin and his isurrectionism.
He send people everywhere. As Machno olso who send gerilia groopes to Tambov amd to territory near Volga.
Why don't you show us the way and send yourself to the dense Indian forests,
Comment
Good qewstion. First I don't know hindy or persian and i don't no anyone in that countres. Do you?
Jun 22 2009 21:08
#22
1)The remote jungle of India and the city of Tehran are quite distinct in terrain and in social composition. To put it mildly.
2)The Makhnovists spread, yes, but not because, (to reverse your example) peasants from the Indian jungle parachuted in to spread the gospel.
3)If Bakunin had insurrectional aspects to his theory - within very different historical circumstances and locations - that does not refute my description of present day maoism.
Quote:
Good qewstion. First I don't know hindy or persian and i don't no anyone in that countres.
Now there's a surprise!
Quote:
Do you?
Yes - but they're not into maoism, insurrectionism or guerilla activity.
Jun 22 2009 22:52
#23
The remote jungle of India and the city of Tehran are quite distinct in terrain and in social composition. To put it mildly.
Comment
Rong. Both areas belong to proletarised traditional spase.
The Makhnovists spread, yes, but not because, (to reverse your example) peasants from the Indian jungle parachuted in to spread the gospel.
Comment
No. They were comming on "tachanka's" from thousends of kilometrous and from agricultural areas to big industrial citys.
In the same time anarchists from big citys like Aron Baron and Vsevolod Volin play importent role in army of Machno. :
Do you?
Yes - but they're not into maoism, insurrectionism or guerilla activity.
Comment
Hope they stand for animal rights?
No siriosly - who do you mean? What are they doing?
If they exist why don't they write about situation in Iran and India? Or if they write where can i read it?
Jun 23 2009 07:17
#24
some new texts on Sanhati on the Lalgarh uprising: http://sanhati.com/front-page/1083/
Jun 23 2009 08:37
#25
magidd wrote:
The remote jungle of India and the city of Tehran are quite distinct in terrain and in social composition. To put it mildly.Comment
Rong. Both areas belong to proletarised traditional spase.
If you can't see the obvious truth of what I say and prefer to use such vague categorisations that gloss over all particularities then nothing useful can come from discussing further with you. Goodbye.
more infighting between bourgeois "communist" parties for which workers have to pay with their lives.