Who produced Maoists and what the producer/s doing now?

Mansion,
I agree with you. Maoism is an ideology which prospers in the fertile ground of poverty, discrimination and social unjustice.

I-me-myself,
"But what I am scared most about Maoist is that they are smart bunch of people with hardline ideologies-- a very lethal combination for rise of yet another dictatorship."

Good observation. Prachanda, Baburam and Ram Bahadur are amibitious, cunningly clever and academically brilliant. It is still unknown how much united or divided these three leaders are (keep in mind, Baburam and Ram Bahadur were suspended/demoted at least once). What worries me even more is that - will their cadres at district level will stop violence, if the leaders asked them to do so.

I am anxious to see the outcome of Summit talks which will begin tomorrow. Among many possible outcomes, I would like to remain optimistic about Nepal's future.

Ya! may be handful of Maoist leaders are clever bunch of oppurtunist... but i feel whole group is an ideology driven organization with strong commnad structure. Oppurtunist-so are the lots of royalists and lots of democrats. Its a sorrow of society in transition like Nepal. So, it wont be wise to discount maoist as a political force. If anything makes more sense is a proper negotiation and a end result where a person with individual agenda is discouraged. That is achieveable only and only with honesty. Which at present lacks in all the parties ... and people like you and me are following blindly one set of ideologies. All parties are questioning each other motives and intention... but isnt is suppose to be peoples verdict? Let people decide it when time comes... And its a testing time for all of them aspiring to be leaders... let their leadership be tested... lets see who comes with best negotiation in interest of people.... though I have very limited hopes from all of them engaged in discussion right now... but its an evolving process... with new found awareness there is only better future for nepal... only fear is bloodshed and violence... which wont end untill prosperity and sense of individual confidence and inclusion of people from all culture and class... Ya Moaist restructuring of state sounds racial and if motive and intention is wrong that may lead to disintegration of country... but if its in true sense to reconize communal identtiy and devolution of power... may be it makes sense... only time will tell

I am not an expert on sociology or politcal science. May be that is the reason I never understood the rationale behind or even liked the idea of restructuring Nepal with Karnali, Kirant, Madhesi or Magar pradesh. It sounds hypocritcal to me when Maoists want to eliminate existing racial/class discriminiation from the society but at the same time they want to create a new wall of separation among Nepalese.

Mansion, you know what communist ideology says? It says that all wealth should be equally distributed even if you did not work to get it and the powerful party member decides how they are distributed. Meaning if someone does not want to work for a living and you work for a living then half of your salary goes to the person who does not want to work, now tell me why people are after creating a communism state. As far as people in Nepal who are fighting for communism are concerned, I bet 95% of them do not know the ideology itself. And the people who are brain washing them are Prachanda, Baburam, and his alike who are power hungry.

is administrative boundry a sole reason for wall of seperations between nepali? I dont know? or is it a mechanism to protect communal identity? I guess its an individual's interpretation... are nepalese really unified... i think so... there is a basic component... nepali way of life... nepali language ... and cultural similarity that has and will unite us as a nation... but yet we are land of diversity and there is need to preserve that diversity... to strike a right balance is a challenge... and it will come with sincerity in part of every one... rather than talking in racial line.. there is need to reconize the reality....

First these faggots baburam, Prachanda, Mahara etc should be eliminated...... they are bunch of thugs... not academically intelligent at all.. just by getting degree doesn't mean aa person is intelligent... these murderers are to be eliminated asap.

There are better ways to preserve Cultural identity than to create a wall in between the races.Now when one should be leaving behind these racial identity and think more progressive approach,Maoist are taking back nepal 200 years.A better implemented affimative actions can equally improve the representation of different ethnicity But In ONE NEPAL. when brothers divide - enemy takes advantage.These enemies can be inside or outside the boundary of Nepal.

People who justify that how states are divided in India.Then i want to say this :"There is a difference when many are united with one goal to make one country and when u divide one country into many to make one country.
If you guys have bit of analysis capability you would realize what i am saying.

So far ..this has been strategy of Maoist - divide and rule and yet they hate imperialist British ..what an irony,hypocrisy and falacy in idealogy of Nepalese maoist.

Well definetly there should not be wall between the races and races should unite to form a nation. Yes! definetly individual's identity shoud take precedence over collective identity, which requires lot of sole searching at individual levels in a society where once identity has either been nationalized or communalized. It is like a marriage union, untill two personality is reconized marriage union is not possible unless there is compromise in ones part. At national level I guess this compromise takes a form of marginalization. Yet! successful marriage is only possible with common denominator. Lots of Balkan countries lacked this common denominator and ultimately got divided. In Nepal there is one common denominator... Nepali way of living and cultural similarity... so I am not scared of divide... only threat to nepals divide is inablility to reconize others identity and insensitivity... opression and margnalization. Yes! right ideology would be for multiple people to unite to form one country... no question about it... problem yet is people's sense of collective identity... which i doubt will transform in one or two years... nowere in the world it has happend yet... I will say let people decide it... ultimately that matters for stable society... violence and bloodshed will continue untill thier aspirations are fulfilled....

who produced Maoists?

Good question....

These people produced Maoists...

(1) corrupted and criminals Political leaders and members

(2) Corrupted and criminals Government Officials

(3) Sumgglers, Blackmarketers and Bribers

(4) Girija, Madav and Deuba

There you go.... all (1), (2), (3) and (4) are faggots.... who produced Maoists, then Maoists must be the worst.

Marx

mother fugger faggots. what kind of Qs is this. Who produce Maoist gor ray?
why don;t you ask maiost leader.

If the need of division arose from " inablility to reconize others identity and insensitivity..." then "only threat to nepals divide is inablility to reconize others identity and insensitivity..." IS definite.

Then, why do so?

भ्र्स्टचार produced Maosist.
But they have lost their way and forgot what is it they truly were fighting for and now they have gone tooo far with every thing.

It is a politics cycle running round and round and round.

Nepali politician = १२ बर्ष कुकुरको पुछर धुङ्रोमा रख्यो बाङ्गा को बाङ्गै

by the way delineation of administrative boundry is not a division of country... i think discussion here is will it divide country?

by the way delineation of administrative boundry is not division of the country. There are all other factors that plays role in systemnatic delineation of administrative boundry in the process of restructuring the state? Eg. Geography, history, socio-cultural distribution, economics... I think the question of discussion here is Will this delineation in somesort of ethnic line has potential to divide the country? or it might be opposite (unite the country in real sense considering the ground reality)? We also have to understand interwinding realtions between all the factors... No answer might be right or wrong... its more about which is more feasible....

I think the division of administrative boundary "on the basis of ethnicity' WILL divide country too.

For example, suppose division happened last year. Then I will fall in the region where there are many magars and gurungs. Actually, i will be the minority in that place. So, whenever I will introduce myself to people from other regions, then they "MIGHT" think that I was supposed to be magar/gurung..... bla bla..only because I am from that place...bla bla.. which will not make me feel good.. secondly, since the devision is done giving the priority to those people, administration might be influenced by them soo much that they forget that other people exist there... this will only increase the ethnic consciousness , rather say over-consciousness, which leads to sense of 'not-belonging' to that place, then differences, and finally UNITY WILL BE BROKEN.

my thoughts.

Mao Tse Tung produced the Maoist. End of research.

Isn't that the same thing is happening right now... istead of you its them... and worse of all is power is centralized only in you... that is why minority have started asking for their right... definetly just reversing it is not the solution... there should be proportional representation with devolution of power... with equity... sense of cummunalism might disappear ... reservation is no solution coz you are saying you are inferior... so their should be resepectable representation.. yet! federal structure in line of ethnicity is still a very delicate balance which needs to be well thought... i agree that there is risk of commuanl riot if not handled carefully... remeber, sense of communalism is byproduct of marginalization and oppression, and it can sometime also be sense of superiority and egoism...

exactly, if we still need to fight to get proper recognition even after federal system, why introduce it at all.. why not amend the situation from the existing situation by introducing proper reservations for the minorities. I would rather consider introduction of federal system as more 'playing around' with the sentiments than trying to improve the situation. more playing= more marginalization of more groups (like in see-saw) = more hatred = ethnic clash = civil war = death of nepal.