Nepalese Maoists Suppressing Homosexuality
I couldn't believe this. Bruce Loudon is no relation, by the way.
From Indymedia
Nepal's Maoist movement has gays in its sights. This article comes from a mainstream Australian paper, but for confirmation of its claims from left-wing sources see:
sketchythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/03/revolution-in-nepal.html
Gays are a capitalist pollutant: Maoists
Bruce Loudon
January 06, 2007
NEPAL'S Maoist guerillas, on the brink of achieving effective government power in the Himalayan kingdom, have turned their attention to so-called "social pollutants" and denounced homosexuals as "a by-product of capitalism".
Emerging from a decade of fighting government forces, the insurgents have launched a clean-up drive against polygamy, polyandry, infidelity, drunkenness and homosexuality -- even though many gays were previously aligned with the Maoists against the autocratic rule of the widely despised King Gyanendra.
Maoist cadres, seen regularly on the streets of Kathmandu as they move towards taking over key roles in the Government under a peace accord worked out with Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, have warned home owners not to let out rooms to gays and lesbians.
They have also announced "a zero-tolerance policy towards homosexuality" and a crackdown on pornographic films.
A Maoist commander allegedly told a group of gay men: "We are against any aberrant activity that could have a negative and vitiating effect on society."
And when members of the gay rights group Blue Diamond Society met Maoist leader Dev Gurung, he reportedly said homosexuality was a by-product of capitalism. "Under Soviet rule and when China was still very much a communist state, there were no homosexuals in the Soviet Union or China," Mr Gurung is reported to have said.
"Now they are moving towards capitalism, homosexuals may have arisen there as well. So homosexuality is a product of capitalism. Under socialism this kind of problem does not exist."
According to India's IANS news service, when the Blue Diamond Society members met other Maoist leaders to complain that homosexuals were under attack from Maoist cadres, the reaction was "disheartening".
Amrita Thapa, general secretary of the Maoist women's association, told a conference recently that homosexuals were unnatural and were "polluting" society.
New Zeal As Don Franks and his Workers Party are strong supporters of the Nepali Maoists, I'd be very interested in their reaction to this news.
Looks to me that Nepal might be heading for a (hopefully softer) version of the Pol Pot treatment.
From Indymedia
Nepal's Maoist movement has gays in its sights. This article comes from a mainstream Australian paper, but for confirmation of its claims from left-wing sources see:
sketchythoughts.blogspot.com/2006/03/revolution-in-nepal.html
Gays are a capitalist pollutant: Maoists
Bruce Loudon
January 06, 2007
NEPAL'S Maoist guerillas, on the brink of achieving effective government power in the Himalayan kingdom, have turned their attention to so-called "social pollutants" and denounced homosexuals as "a by-product of capitalism".
Emerging from a decade of fighting government forces, the insurgents have launched a clean-up drive against polygamy, polyandry, infidelity, drunkenness and homosexuality -- even though many gays were previously aligned with the Maoists against the autocratic rule of the widely despised King Gyanendra.
Maoist cadres, seen regularly on the streets of Kathmandu as they move towards taking over key roles in the Government under a peace accord worked out with Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, have warned home owners not to let out rooms to gays and lesbians.
They have also announced "a zero-tolerance policy towards homosexuality" and a crackdown on pornographic films.
A Maoist commander allegedly told a group of gay men: "We are against any aberrant activity that could have a negative and vitiating effect on society."
And when members of the gay rights group Blue Diamond Society met Maoist leader Dev Gurung, he reportedly said homosexuality was a by-product of capitalism. "Under Soviet rule and when China was still very much a communist state, there were no homosexuals in the Soviet Union or China," Mr Gurung is reported to have said.
"Now they are moving towards capitalism, homosexuals may have arisen there as well. So homosexuality is a product of capitalism. Under socialism this kind of problem does not exist."
According to India's IANS news service, when the Blue Diamond Society members met other Maoist leaders to complain that homosexuals were under attack from Maoist cadres, the reaction was "disheartening".
Amrita Thapa, general secretary of the Maoist women's association, told a conference recently that homosexuals were unnatural and were "polluting" society.
New Zeal As Don Franks and his Workers Party are strong supporters of the Nepali Maoists, I'd be very interested in their reaction to this news.
Looks to me that Nepal might be heading for a (hopefully softer) version of the Pol Pot treatment.
posted by Trevor Loudon at
1/08/2007 10:27:00 AM
14 Comments:
Was just going to say something similar.
Of course homosexuality (or at least open homosexuality) is a byproduct of capitalism, if of course you assume that captialism equals freedom from the state.
The thoughts and actions of Nepalese Maoists and Castro just show the pitfalls of any authoritarian system, whether it be capitalist, communist or anything else.
I think us libertarians of right and left can agree on this one.
libertarians of the left?
Cuba used to persecute Gays and lesbians, but it wiped its main anti-gay law in 1979 - six years before NZ. The last vestiges of anti-gay legislation were removed in 1992.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights_in_Cuba
be sceptical of this story. And be sceptical of NGOs until you
know where their money comes from.
It is just Ulhas vomiting up - as always when it comes to Nepal & India -
anti-communist propaganda. The source, MJAkbar's sheet, is unreliable,
and the story itself in a totally yellow journalist style does not quote
the Maoists but hearsay accounts from unnamed third persons presented
inside quotation marks, to fool the careless reader.
In fact, for at least four years the Maoists have had openly homosexual
cadre and boasted of it:
-------
Party woman
Ghatna Ra Bichar, 18 June, 2003
...
Five months into the ceasefire, Hisila Yami, Central Working Committee
member and chief of the Women Department of the Maoist party, recently
attended a meeting in Kathmandu. It was her first public appearance in
eight years after she went underground.
...
Yami said nearly 33 percent of the Maoist army were female, and that two
had risen up the ranks to become brigade commanders. "In some cases men
have abandoned weapons and run from encounters, but women have never
done so. We won all the battles that involved a large number of women
guerillas," said Yami.
The party not only arranges weddings between members but has also set up
"childcare centres" around Rukum, Rolpa and other Maoist hotbeds.
Literacy among Maoist women is highly encouraged. Yami also confirmed
the recruitment of homosexuals. In a short conversation regarding
monarchy, Yami said the crown could never be a symbol of Nepal's unity.
Yami wore military green shirt and pants. There was a conspicuous lack
of personal bodyguards.
"libertarians of the left?" yup we are pretty similar we just believe that human animal and environmental rights are more important than property rights.
Anonymous, why do you love to pander to your fellow comrades like those in Nepal? Perhaps those reports of the same human rights abuses are also "untrue" about Fidel Castro jailing gay and lesbian Cubans?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism
Here is some stuff on Libertarian socialism for the person who was interested.
From the link Cameron posted...
"Libertarian socialism includes a group of political philosophies that aims to create a society without political, economic or social hierarchies - a society within which individuals freely co-operate together as equals. This would be achieved through the abolition of private property, thereby giving direct control of the means of production and resources to the working class and other unpropertied classes."
Contradictory piffel.Its just Socialism under a very thin (and poorly conceived) veneer of waffle. Without private property rights freedom is impossible.If you have no security over your person and what you create or acquire through free trade with others then you are not free but at the mercy of the first user of force who comes along.By giving "direct control"(?) to abstractions like the "working class" (who says sad old Marxist utterings are dead?)you are effectively a slave at the beck and call of others...where's the freedom Cameron?
us lefties had "Libertarian" first. its the old word for an anarchist way back in the 1930s The right stole the term in the 1980s.
Just like "Liberal" was originally a right wing thing but has now come to mean an authoritarian PC labour party supporter.
Lets swap. You give us "Libertarian" and you can keep "Liberal" for your selves
Mr G
a libertarian communist aka anarchsist
All "libertarian socialism" does is give you the freedom to steal my shit. Plain and simple.
All libertarian capitalism does is give you the freedom to exploit others.
Btw have you got any good shit to steal? A broad band modem and new computer would be good.
Small government and socialism being combined is an oxymoron.
All trade between free peoples "exploits" the other party....just as they "exploit" your need or want of what of what they have.Indeed all human interaction...be it romantic,business,family etc is exploitation to get what each individual wants,Ie: a greater value for themselves then they had before.
Ban "exploitation" and you ban human relationships effectively.....and these people are "SOCIALists"?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home