Paper tigers?
Apr 16th 2008
From Economist.com
Nepal goes Maoist: How worried should we be?
“A REVOLUTION”, Mao Zedong famously observed, “is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery. It cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous.”
毛泽东有一段著名的论述：“革命不是请客吃饭，不是写文章，不是绘画绣花，不能那样雅致,那样从容不迫,文质彬彬，那样温良恭俭让。”
Nor, he might have added, is it an election—even if a party calling itself “Maoist” appears to win, as happened in Nepal’s elections of April 10th.
他也许应该加上一句，革命也不是一场选举--即使一个自称“毛派”的政党可能赢得尼泊尔4月10日举行的选举。
For Mao, “a revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another.” And the job of a communist party is to be its vanguard.
在毛泽东看来，“革命就是暴动，是一个阶级推翻一个阶级的暴力行动。”而共产党充当着领导者。
Yet the old boy might have approved of the way the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has managed to become the dominant force in Nepali politics. Mao also believed in “united-front” tactics, which require nothing more sophisticated than “uniting with all the forces that can be united with”. Stalin also thought communists could use bourgeois parties to gain power and then cast them aside “like squeezed lemons”.
虽然，他可能认可尼共（毛派）设法取得尼泊尔政局主导力量的方式。另外，毛泽东还坚信“统一战线”策略，即“团结一切可以团结的力量”。斯大林也认为共产主义者可以利用资产阶级政党来夺取政权，然后把他们像“挤过的柠檬”一样抛弃。
So the gloomiest interpretation of the Maoists’ apparent electoral triumph in Nepal is that it marks a tactical pause in a longer-term strategy of monopolising power and violent class warfare. That, after all, is what “Maoist” suggests. But in fact, the term blends two different contributions by Mao to revolutionary thought.
因此，对尼泊尔毛派的明显胜利，最悲观的解读是，它标志着权力垄断和暴力阶级斗争这一长期战略的战术性停顿。毕竟，那是“毛泽东主义”提议的。但事实上，它混合了毛泽东对革命思想的两种不同的贡献。
The first is that, contrary to the theories of Marx, Engels and Lenin, the revolution need not be led by the urban proletariat. It could start in the countryside and then go on to encircle the cities.
首先，与马克思、恩格斯和列宁理论相反，革命不一定要由城市工人阶级领导。它可以在农村开展，然后逐渐包围城市。
This is of obvious appeal to revolutionaries attracted by communism’s egalitarianism, but put off by its original theorists’ idea that industrialisation must come first. So insurgent communists in poor, largely rural countries such as India, Nepal and Peru are naturally inclined to style自称 themselves Maoists. As a revolutionary inspirer, at least, Mao was a success.
对于受共产主义的平均主义所吸引、但被工业化必须先行的原始理论所劝阻的革命家而言，这显然是有吸引力的。因此，在像印度、尼泊尔和秘鲁等贫穷、拥有大片农村的国家，起义的共产主义者自然倾向标榜自己是毛泽东主义者。至少，作为革命启发者，毛泽东是成功的。
Mao’s second big contribution is not now seen as such even in China. It was the Cultural Revolution, based on his notion that vicious class struggle persists even after communists take political power. In that sense, the Khmers Rouges of Cambodia were the ultimate Maoists.
毛泽东的第二大贡献是文化大革命（如今，即使在中国，文革也不被视为贡献）。根据毛泽东的观点，即使在共产党取得政权以后也要继续阶级斗争。从这个意义上讲，柬埔寨的“红色高棉（Khmers Rouges）”是极端的毛主义者。
So what sort of Maoists are Nepal’s? Are they still closet revolutionaries, who, having failed to win power after ten years of bitter fighting, have turned to the ballot box instead? If so, expect them to use their political strength to edge out all their opponents, gradually tightening their grip on the country until it becomes suffocating.
那尼泊尔的毛派是哪一种呢？他们是否仍然是密室革命家？经过10年奋战，仍无法夺取政权，最终转向了选举途径？若然如此，可以预见他们会利用政治力量挤走对手，逐渐加强对国家的控制，直到国家透不过气来。
Or are they, as they now claim, committed pluralists and democrats, anxious to make friends not just at home but with India and China, too?
或者他们会像目前所说的那样，致力于多元化和民主，渴望和国内各党以及和印度中国建立友好关系？
There are grounds for optimism. The surprisingly big vote for the Maoists probably owed something to coercion and intimidation. But it also represented a huge protest vote against the monarchy and the mainstream parties.
我们有乐观的理由。毛派出人意料地赢得众多投票，很可能跟胁迫和恐吓脱不了关系。但它也代表了选民对君主制和主流政党的强烈抗议。
These parties, when they had power in the 1990s, became known mainly for feathering their own nests and for bungling. They did little to improve the lot of the mass of poor Nepalis in the countryside.
这些政党在九十年代掌权时，就以中饱私囊、成事不足败事有余著称。他们没有改善尼泊尔大量农村穷苦百姓的生活。
To retain support, the Maoists must show that they can do better. If they really are pragmatists, they will have noticed that Maoist economic policies have failed. To ensure economic growth they will need peace at home and decent relations with Nepal’s neighbours and aid donors. That argues against extremism.
为了获得支持，毛派必须显示他们可以做得更好。如果他们真正是务实派，他们会看到毛泽东主义经济政策的失败。为了保障经济增长，他们需要维护国内和平，并与邻国与援国建立良好关系。那就意味着反对极端主义。
Indeed, some Nepalis, viewing the record of Maoist ministers in the interim government that organised the election, worry more that the party will turn out to be just like the others: corrupt, self-serving and swift to forget the voters.
本次选举由临时政府组织。这些毛派部长在临时政府中任职。事实上，一些尼泊尔人查看了毛派部长们的从政记录后，更加担心，毛派最终将走上其它政党一样的道路：腐败、中饱私囊、迅速脱离群众。
网摘收藏posted on 2008-04-25 11:08
sjjanet 阅读(147)
评论(1) 编辑 收藏 所属分类:
日积月累