Politburo and central committee members on Saturday spoke along three lines floated by Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Senior Vice-chairman Mohan Baidya and Vice-chairman Dr Baburam Bhattarai respectively.[break]
According to sources, the leaders were divided along these lines while some voiced “mixed opinions” or took neutral positions about CA term extension and the party’s next move.
Leaders including Lokendra Bista, Shakti Basnet and Hitraj Pandey argued along the lines taken by Dahal, who stated in his political document that the party should not lend support for CA term extension without dissolution of the incumbent government and amendment of the interim constitution to replace the current majority system with the previous consensus system. He has argued that the political vacuum created in the aftermath of a constitutional crisis will either lead to a new political agreement or provide leverage for launching a “people’s revolt”.
Similarly, leaders including Janardan Sharma, Chandra Prakash Khanal, Devendra Paudel, Bhim Prakash Gautam and Hisila Yami spoke in favor of adopting maximum flexibility to save the CA from dissolution and drafting a progressive constitution, postponing any people’s revolt to a later date.
Likewise, Hitman Shakya, Agni Sapkota, Khadga Bahadur Viswakarma and Kul Prasad KC, among others, spoke along Baidya’s line, which is not very different from that of Dahal and advocates immediate revolt to seize state power.
The leaders also differed over identifying the party’s arch enemy. While the majority of members agreed that domestic reactionaries backed by Indian expansionism should be identified as the arch enemy, Baidya and a few others vociferously put forward the view that Indin should be identified as the arch enemy.
On Friday, Dahal presented his political document, “Analysis of current situation and the party’s responsibility”, and leaders are currently commenting on it. “Party standing committee will synthesize the opinions of the leaders and take a decision,” said a leader.
Bourgeois lifestyle
Some members have raised the issue of “bourgeois lifestyle” adopted by party leaders. They stated that a section of the party is living like “masters” and others like “workers”. “We joined the party to change the existing political culture, not to adopt it. If we are to follow the lifestyle of NC and UML leaders, we should forget about revolution,” a central leader quoted Maoist politburo member Ram Karki as saying.
The leaders argued that the proletariat should have a different culture and lifestyle, and expressed concern that leaders are deviating from it.Om Prakash Pun also bashed the leadership for sliding into boursois lifestyle. Maoist leaders have been frequently criticized by lower ranks and cadres for leading a luxurious lifestyle and using expensive cars.
Related story
Way to solve India-Nepal border dispute
-1200x560-1779450784.webp)
