Hangen, Susan

English

DigitalCommons@Macalester College

Himalaya, the Journal of theAssociation for Nepal andHimalayan StudiesVolume 23Number 1 Himalaya; The Journal of the Associationfor Nepal and Himalayan StudiesArticle 112003Comments on papers from the panel "Nepal'sMaoist Movement Session II: Ethnographic andComparative Considerations" Madison, WI,October 10, 2002Susan HangenAnthropology, Ramapo CollegeFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/himalayaThis Research Article is brought to you for free and open access by theDigitalCommons@Macalester College at DigitalCommons@MacalesterCollege. It has been accepted for inclusion in Himalaya, the Journal of theAssociation for Nepal and Himalayan Studies by an authorizedadministrator of DigitalCommons@Macalester College. For moreinformation, please contact scholarpub@macalester.edu.Recommended CitationHangen, Susan (2003) "Comments on papers from the panel "Nepal's Maoist Movement Session II: Ethnographic and ComparativeConsiderations" Madison, WI, October 10, 2002," Himalaya, the Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies: Vol. 23: No.1, Article 11.Available at: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/himalaya/vol23/iss1/11SUSAN HANGEN ANTHROPOLOGY, RAMApo (OLLEGE, NJRESPONSE TO THE PAPERSWhile most scholarly and media analyses of theMaOIst movement in Nepal seek to explain its emer-gence by focusing on the politi~al and economiccondnions that created support for this movement,the papers on this panel offer a different perspectiveon this movement. Shneiderman and Pettigrew il-luminate the experiences of individuals who eithertake part in the movement or are affected by the con-Ilict, while Bownas examines the internal dynamicsof the Naxalite movement in India and encouragescompansons between this movement and the Maoistmovement in NepalShneiderman makes the important point that manyanalyses of the Maoist movement have failed to rec-ognize rural Nepalis as political actors. As a meansof acknowledging the political agency of these indi-VIduals, she seeks to understand the "motivations" ofthose joining the Maoists. Focusing on the appeal ofthe Maoists' practical ideology for rural supportersof the movement suggests that the reasons why localpeople support the movement may differ from thereasons that party leaders support the movement,and from how they explain popular support for theirmovement. While this is an important interventionIn the studies of the Maoists, I would caution againstlimiting investigations of mobilization of this move-nH:'nt to a search for "motivations" of the supporters.The term "motivation" may overemphasize the ideathat JoinIng a movement is strictly a matter of ratio-nal calculation on hehalf of the participants.In explaining vIllagers' motivations for support-ing the Maoist movement, Shneiderman points tolocal experiences and memories of state repressionand violence. While memories of such events can hedeployed at times of political mobilization, we cannot interpret such experiences as directly leading toany particular form of political action. It is important[0 recognize that it was not inevitable that the lo-cal experience and memories of the Piskar massacrewould lead to support for the Maoist movement inparticular. Elsewhere in Nepal, individuals who haveexperienced similar incidents of state repression citethese events as the reason for their support for otherpolitical movements, as I have described in my studyof the Mongol National Organization, a radical eth-nic political party (Hangen 2000). To understandthese links between experience, memory, and politi-cal action, we need to examine who is interpretingthese events at particular moments and how they arerecounting these memories.Judith Pettigrew considers those individuals whoare caught in the middle of the conflict between theMaoists and the Nepal army. Her paper is a mov-ing portrayal of the routinization of terror and fear,and the coping strategies that people employ to dealwith these circumstances. While her paper makesan important contribution by documenting violenceand terror, Pettigrew does not limit her analysis toreflecting on the horror of these experiences. Rathershe also seeks to analyze the meanings that are ex-pressed in acts of violence, as well as in symbolicforms of violence. We should also try to understandhow these forms of violence and terror used by theMaoists relate to those used by the state in the his-tory of Nepal As Shneiderman notes, violence is nota new form of political action in Nepal, and there isno radical break between state violence and Maoistviolence.While reading about the experiences of these in-dividuals, I wanted to know more ahout their sociallocation and political affiliations. It is important torepresent these individuals not just as victims, butalso as actors who have particular interests, identi-ties and alignments-even if their agency is moreconstrained than that of the army and the Maoists.To be caught in the middle is not necessarily to beapolitical. Many of those in this position in otherparts of Nepal are in fact supporters of or close rela-tives of supporters of other political parties.Richard Bownas's paper provides an historical examina-tion of Naxalism in India, highlighting points of comparisonthat could be made between this movement and the Maoistmovement in Nepal. The importance of Naxalism for under-standing politics in Nepal is not limited to its use as a com-parative case of radical leftist organizing. Naxalism has had adirect influence on political movements in Nepal in the past,particularly in eastern Nepal, and as Bownas notes, there aredirect connections between Naxalism and Nepal's Maoists,both practical and ideological. Here his focus is not to explorethese links but rather to use the history of Naxalism to shedlight on the trajectory that the Maoist movement in Nepalmight take.Bownas suggests that studies of Maoism in Nepal shouldexplore the relationship between the movement and the lo-cal population. He argues that Naxalism succeeded in areaswhere the leaders of the movement became well integratedwith local people and where there was a "pre-existing infra-structure of resistance." He suggests that the particular formsof protest used by Naxalites were borrowed from earlier formsof local protest and thus resonated with the local people.Shneiderman's paper begins this project by examining howvillagers in Piskar interpreted the Maoist's goals in terms ofhistorical conflicts in the area.Another provocative point for potential comparison be-tween these movements comes from Bownas's discussion ofthe shape of the Naxalite movement in the I980s and 1990s,when the movement became more enmeshed with local con-cerns than with capturing the state. He notes that in areaswhere the Naxalites have managed to maintain a power base,they operate by collecting funds from villagers and in turnprovide security, education, work on development projects,and profits earned from local resources. To what extent mightMaoists in Nepal be able to maintain a durable power basein the western districts where they are acting as the state,regardless of whether the Maoists are successful in achievingtheir main goal of creating a republic in NepaPBownas also points out that the Naxalite movement drewupon ethnic struggles and ecological struggles, and proposesthat researchers investigate the extent to which the move-ment in Nepal articulates with the struggles of other socialmovements. Many observers of the Maoist movement inNepal have noted that ethnic rights issues became a majorpart of its platform and that the movement has been success-ful at mobilizing marginalized ethnic groups. More thoroughreports on this facet of the movement are emerging, andthis is an important area for further exploration. It is crucialto recognize the Maoists as one set of actors in a crowdedpolitical field and to examine the relationships between thismovement and other movements in Nepal, including ethnicpolitics, the women's movement and communist party orga-nizing.As a whole, these papers point to the urgency for morework on historical and contemporary social movements inNepal. The lack of attention in the ethnographic recorel tothe centrality of political action in rural Nepal places anthro-pologists at a disadvantage in understanding the meanings ofMaoism. As Shneiderman notes, representations of Nepal asa peaceful, non-political place have led many to perceive theMaoist movement as a rupture in the country's history. To un-derstand the origins of the Maoist movement, the particularform of organizing and the modes of protest that the Maoistsemploy, we must gain a deeper understanding of the politicalculture out of which it has emerged.Sharma, Sudheer (2002) The Ethnic Dimension of the Mao-ist Insurgency. Kathmandu: NEFEN.

Comments on papers from the panel  Nepal\u27s Maoist Movement Session II: Ethnographic and Comparative Considerations  Madison, WI, October 10, 2002

Name not available

https://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1359&amp;context=himalaya

Comments on papers from the panel Nepal\u27s Maoist Movement Session II: Ethnographic and Comparative Considerations Madison, WI, October 10, 2002

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@Macalester College

Name not available