 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
| |
| |
|
Sara
Shneiderman/The Formation of Political Consciousness
in Rural Nepal: Lessons from Local History
The
Maoist insurgency has served as a wake-up call
for social scientists in Nepal, in that new actors
– rural, non-elite Nepalis – are playing
an important role in the country’s politics.
For a mode of politics to be truly progressive,
it must engage local issues, including the diverse
discourses that feed left-wing or religious-based
movements. Nepali politics has largely failed
in this task to date, and if the state wishes
to avoid future insurgencies, it must find a way
to bring political consciousness productively
into the national discourse.
One
entry point for examination of the Maoist movement
is considering why Maoist ideology has proven
so ‘successful’. More broadly, the
Nepali state might benefit by looking at how this
movement has grown, and why people respond to
it. In considering the Maoist movement, most academics
have viewed the insurgency as an aberration or
as a continuation of political party splits. This
presentation takes a different angle, placing
the Maoist movement within Nepal’s longer
history of violence.
The
work of Antonio Gramsci posits three conditions
for a crisis of hegemony: crisis at the top, a
serious economic situation, and a crisis at the
base. This paper argues that Nepal faces a Gramscian
crisis of hegemony, and emphasises the third condition
of developments at the ‘base’ level.
There
are structural similarities between the pre-independence
peasant movements in India studied by Ranajit
Guha and the current situation in Nepal. Political
consciousness, as argued by Guha, always exists
with peasants, and ‘apolitical’ people
are not tricked into movements. In the case of
Nepal, interviews with ex-fighters and Maoist
sympathisers appear also to confirm this.
A
local event may prove critical to the development
of ideologies and identities. In 1984, in Piskar,
Sindhupalchowk, police killed seven villagers
during a festival. In interviews, all ex-Maoist
fighters from Sindhupalchowk cited the seven deaths
as a grievance against the government. Operations
Romeo (1995) and Kilo Sierra (1998), during which
the Nepali state attempted to pacify the region,
also contributed to the receptivity of anti-government
messages, though grievances dated back much further.
What
happened at Piskar is important for understanding
the Maoist movement’s later success in the
area. During the festival, about 2000 villagers
gathered for a local jatra at which landlords
were customarily mocked. In 1984, the police,
at the behest of a powerful landlord, fired on
the crowd, killing seven and seriously injuring
15. A petition concerning the incident was filed
with government of Lokendra Bahadur Chand, but
nothing came of it.
Amnesty
International and INSEC reports suggest that outside
political agitators might have imbued the 1984
jatra with politics. However, others say that
political consciousness had been growing in the
area in its own right. Either way, the structural
shape of jatra participation foreshadowed local
Thangmi villagers participation in the Maoist
movement. When the Maoists showed up in early
1998, many of their demands matched with expressions
first voiced during and after the jatra. As the
movement grew, the Maoists and the government
began competing for hegemony.
In
Thangmi discourse, the first two Thangmi dead
were initially seen as martyrs for democracy.
But, later, after the perception of democracy
as having failed had settled in, these deaths
were interpreted in other ways. Many people were
affected by the killings and the round of arrests
following the jatra, with some imprisoned for
as long as three years. The killings were eventually
interpreted as a basis for anti-state feelings.
The
practical ideology of the Maoist movement in Dolakha,
as opposed to the theoretical ideology of the
larger movement, reflected people’s concrete
needs. Locals agreed with the tailored demands
of the Maoists, though most perhaps did not really
understand the theoretical ideology. But practical
ideology alone cannot provide a basis for egalitarian
civil society, and, as shown in James Scott’s
formulation, revolutionaries often do not eliminate
hegemonies. This would appear to hold true for
Nepal, where the Maoists are more hegemonic than
the state in many respects.
Local
politics can be harnessed for different purposes.
But why did Maoism strike a chord with the population
when other ideologies did not? Another issue is
the tendency to view these groups as regional
ethnic actors as opposed to national political
ones. The Maoists have succeeded to a certain
extent in co-opting ‘ethnic’ grievances
into their political programme, in large part
taking over the Janjati agenda. More generally,
there is a need to move beyond ethnic and development
ideologies that limit the impact of local actors.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
