parisar …………………………………………….परिसर

a forum of progressive students……………………………………………………………..प्रगतिशील छात्रों का मंच



  1. its a good site. but i want to know mail id of maoist org of india. if you have plz give me.

    Comment by prasoon | August 19, 2006

  2. we are unable to responce your demand as we have not any intraction with any maoist organisation. – editor

    Comment by parisar | August 25, 2006

  3. maoist org???? whats going on here?
    Lets not work on ideaologies, the best ideology is common sense.

    Comment by Suneet | January 15, 2007

  4. ha ha hha what a request you have done.

    Comment by lenin kumar | March 7, 2007

  5. Please add us in~
    The Student’s Revolutionary Brigade,or Brigada Revolucionario Estudiante!

    Comment by Comandante H.C Chen | July 14, 2007

  6. Excellent work. We are introducing the website for your information and for the information of your readers. Do let us know if you require any essays of interest. Keep up the good work.

    Comment by | September 1, 2007

  7. Position Paper dated Nov 04, 2007
    Ref: Nepal, CPN (M).


    Should Nepal’s revolutionaries return to the Liberated Zones?
    And what are the lessons for India and the region?

    Did Nepal’s Maoist Communist Party make a strategic error in engaging the Kathmandu Parliament and committing to a heavily flawed electoral process? And what are the related lessons, if any, for those pursuing the struggle for human dignity and land in India? This position paper examines the central issues at stake.

    The central issue remains one that has been challenging revolutionary ideology since the mid-1950s: can any credible movement for revolutionary change in the developing world succeed via the electoral process?

    By all openly verifiable accounts, mainstream communist parties in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East have achieved little, if anything, by adopting the “power through the ballet box” approach, which did receive the more-than-tacit consent of the leaders of the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War era. Independent statistics on poverty, disease, hunger and child labour, serve to defy the intrinsic justification for reform, particularly in economies where short-term benefits are invariably eroded by inflation, labour migration, deteriorating public health care and education, energy prices and periodic food shortages.

    The central issue continues to be defined by the struggle for land. Make no mistake about that. Encouraged by the experiences of the revolutionary war in Vietnam, Che Guevara made the struggle for land the central question in the mid-1960s, repeatedly, in one third world conference after another; and he certainly was not indulging in over-simplification.

    In Nepal–like in India, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh for that matter–all acts of oppression [money lending, child malnutrition, corruption, human trafficking and widespread intimidation in the daily lives of the poor and the marginalized] must be viewed from the discreet prism of land. Otherwise, one risks involvement in reformist, and essentially unsustainable, exercises governing human rights and wages. Of late, we are also witnessing a focus on the environment; quite obviously, for those barely managing to access food and medicine, green is a total non-issue.

    To what end?

    Nepal’s revolution is at a critical juncture. The politburo of the CPN (Maoist) risks sacrificing phenomenal gains by leaving intact for much longer the compromises made with respect to the vast areas freed from the control of the state-sponsored machinery over a 10-year period.

    The CPN (M) is correct in insisting that the Monarchy be abolished immediately, given the historical role Nepal’s Royal Family has played in ensuring the continuance of a military-backed feudal regime in Nepal’s interior. But, at this juncture, it is not the Monarchy alone which is impeding the revolutionary agenda; powerful elements in the non-CPN (M) parties also represented vested interests: village-level and small-town money lenders, absentee landlords, women and child traffickers, illegitimate loggers and brutal army commanders.

    In brief, assuming that the Royals are stripped of constitutional authority, an election dominated by money politics, will achieve nothing. Given the structure of the electoral map, the CPN (M) will not win more than 35% of seats in Parliament. What next? An endless, and probably fruitless, struggle to effect substantive social change under the umbrella of the existing Nepalese Constitution?

    Bear in mind that Nepal’s revolutionaries did not make extremely significant sacrifices to achieve land reforms, limited or comprehensive. Virtually all post-WW II land reform programmes in the third world have been dismal failures [India, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Afghanistan and Pakistan, to cite only a few examples], particularly in the absence of adequate rural credit, state expenditures in irrigation and farm machinery, a corruption-free land title bureau, a halt in the country-to-town migration and a major overhaul of distribution mechanisms.

    Land Reforms & Elections: Self-defeating

    On the subject of land reforms, the specific examples of West Bengal, Brazil and South Africa—where ruling authorities are, in fact, committed to a transformation of the agrarian milieu—should serve as ample testimony to the fact that land reallocation propositions under constitutions which solidly entrench the right to private property are, in every material respect, self-defeating exercises. The discussion over the concept of private property can be left for another day; however, the evils flowing from the private property rights must be targeted for removal as a matter of priority in any revolutionary agenda.

    Arguably, political power can be acquired by a revolutionary party through participation in elections. But, as Nicaragua, Bolivia and even Venezuela are proving, constitutional authority is no guarantee of anything constructive. It cannot be; unless the constitutions themselves are thoroughly revised, to remove (a) the negatives generated by private property and (b) the ability of a state’s bureaucratic and law enforcement arms to defy the very constitutions they are pledged to follow, and to collaborate openly with those in control of capital accumulation in cities, small towns and villages.

    The central issue confronting Nepal’s revolutionaries today should not be shaped by the debate over the near-term fate of the Monarch. On the contrary, the central issue needs to be directed by the question: should the CPN (M) reject the Nepalese Constitution altogether and revert with renewed vigour to the armed struggle, or should the party proceed to test the scope of Nepal’s parliamentary process in the foreseeable future?

    All those currently working towards compromise solutions in Kathmandu are equating the electoral process with democracy; nothing could be further from the truth. A revolutionary movement can only commit itself to a voting system under which the masses chose their own agenda and their own representatives if such a system includes broad participation in villages, working class districts and slums, if such participation is founded on educational campaigns concerning the issues at stake, if voters are not facing threats and are not being induced by money and, finally, if there is sufficient accountability, even criminal accountability, for those politicians who make campaign promises without knowing how and when those promises will ever be fulfilled.

    In other words, the term democracy needs to be redefined within the context of Nepal, and dozens of other third world nations. Deeper analysis of the facts will show that no genuine democracy is possible unless the issue of land is conclusively resolved; before one talks of democracy, the people must be in a position to make knowledgeable decisions, free of the oppressive constraints which are firmly in place today, and which have remained in place for over six decades. At the risk of over-emphasis, the constraints cannot be removed unless the land question is resolved.

    Far reaching implications

    The CPN (M)’s strategic and tactical approach in forthcoming weeks will have a direct impact upon the revolutionary movements in India, Bangladesh and Bhutan. The region’s revolutionary movements are under attack from a range of political entities; depending upon who is doing the attacking, revolutionaries are being accused of terrorism, extortion or extremism.

    While condemnation from right wing, centrist and mainstream communist parties has to be addressed on the ideological plane, the concerns of independent human rights groups must be reviewed, as a matter of urgency, from a slightly different perspective.

    At its roots, the fight over land in Nepal is a fight for human dignity, and demands must be made on human rights organizations to understand (and explain) who exactly are the terrorists, and what exactly is terrorism in the regional context; borrowing western definitions, which may or may not apply to Islamic radicals, is utterly misleading. Definitions applicable to Nepal and the region must first incorporate the inextricable connection between exploitation and terrorism.

    The CPN (M)’s return to the mountains needs to be accompanied by the public declaration of a revolutionary human rights charter, which must expand upon the individual rights specified in international covenants, e.g. the right to default on loans carrying exorbitant interest rates, the right of defence against criminal gangs sponsored by powerful landholders, the right to cancel unfair sharecropping arrangements and the right to defy the authority of corrupt law enforcement entities; in brief, the right to live in dignity.

    Also, at its roots, the fight over land is also the fight for true democracy, in which all members of a dynamic unit (a village, working class district or a city slum) are allowed to deliver verdicts on urgent, relevant issues on an ongoing, localized basis, without the fanfare associated with general or state elections. Moreover, without an acceptable degree of political consciousness and the freedom to express an intention following that political consciousness, voting in any form is a non-productive, often counter-productive exercise.

    Comment by Rakesh S | November 7, 2007

  8. very good effort. please let me kmow, if there is any way to contribute content to this website also.


    Comment by Farah Aziz | January 17, 2008

  9. dear aziz you can mail us
    we will love if you conribute.

    Comment by parisar | January 19, 2008

  10. Great website…
    I can’t understand why i found it so late.

    I am Harjot Singh….Did my engineering from Thapar, Patiala…Left Job n joined some NGOs to work for Narmada Bachao n Bhopal Gas Peedit Andolans…

    These days, i have floated this new website- which has collaborations with many other NGOs and our aim is to spread awareness about various social issues….

    Am preparing for Civil Services Examination and am residing in Delhi these days.


    An article got printed about our website in The Tribune on 22nd december 2007


    If i have your permission, can i add this site to ‘Like minded websites’ list on our website.

    Comment by Harjot | January 27, 2008

  11. My Question remains unanswered.
    Please consider.
    If i have your permission, can i add this site to ‘Like minded websites’ list on our website???

    Comment by Harjot | January 29, 2008

  12. dear harjot ofcourse you can add us.we will be very happy if you contribute to our blog
    you can mail your post to us at-

    Comment by parisar | January 29, 2008

  13. kuldeep bhaiya, u have written av. good and heartening poem.

    Comment by pradeep | January 31, 2008

  14. Hi,

    Great to see this site. Don’t know how I missed it for so long. Do spread the word and let more people know about this site.

    I am an activist working on human rights issues mainly, but my areas of interest also include education, health, scientic temper, rural economy, psychology, cultural anthropology, sports, media etc. Do let me know how I can link up with this site regularly so that it helps the children we are working with. Also how could I contribute?


    Comment by Geeta Charusivam | June 7, 2010

  15. dear geeta,
    thanks for your comments.
    but the blog is defunct now.
    because i am finding hard to update it.

    Comment by parisar | June 8, 2010

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: