The Eighteenth September of Burmese Bonaparte

By Ye Kyaw Swa

Written: 20 July 2010 - 20 October 2010

Prelude

On September 18 1988, the followers of General Ne Win , led by

General Saw Maung, took the State power by a coup d'etat and
established the military dictatorship in the name of SLORC. The
mass uprising of the August 8 1988 was crushed. However, given
the synonymous title of the past, those who captured the leading
role of the mass uprising proclaimed it as the second
independence struggle of Burma as in 1947. Though, the majority
described it as democracy movement for Burma from Socialist
One party ruling.

The Mass Uprising

The mass uprising was occurred as spontaneous outburst in

August 1988. There was no single solid vanguard as the head of
the revolution. Many leaders and many revolutionary
organizations as Unions attempted to take the role of leadership
of the mass uprising. But, none became the sole leader as the
revolutionary vanguard, both in theory and practice, to drive the
revolution to the end of its goal, the state power.

In truth, and honestly saying, the revolution was failed. It was

unable to overthrown the ruling class but was brutally crushed,
and having been soothed by the ruling class with a multi-party
election.

General strike committee was formed, after the sudden outbreaks

in nearly all towns of the country where city strike unions were
formed and led the situation of day to day anti-government
movements. The outstanding major organizations were the
Student Unions which could really lead the most of the uprising
as center position.

As the ruling class had attempted to appease the nation of chaos

to become normal condition, it provided with an election. General
strike committee with various splintered groups, agitated gangs
and disunited unions as politically revolutionary organizations
later became to form political parties. There were, unbelievably,
more than 200 political parties, soon after the stepping down of
BSPP as politically totalitarian and economically centralization
party in power. Among which, NLD, its separated party, UNDP
and Democracy and Peace Party and the adopted party of BSPP,
NUP were only publicly well-known and had enough capacities to
take nationwide participation in the election given by the SLORC.

The greatest wonder was no asking of a single question to the

SLORC by the oppositions or no explanation to the people about
what sort of the coming elected House of Representatives would
be, by the oppositions as well as by the existing government,
SLORC. The terms, single or duel house, presidential or
premiership; no precise a word was made. At the time, by virtue
of the coup d'etat, the entire 1974 Constitution was dead.

People were bullied not only by the ruling class as they said later
but also by the self-made vanguard of the revolution, the pseudo
representatives of the people, the political parties. They were
indeed accomplices of the counter-revolution.

All after the election, the need of the Constitution was proposed
by the ruling class and the landslide victory of the NLD was
denied to be in power. The voters trusted and crowned NLD to go
forward to do for their sakes. The major political conflict was
started not between the government and the opposition but
between the opposition and the people; how NLD would walk
further as a revolutionary vanguard, after that counterfeit role
had been entitled by the voters. For such title, it had itself hastily
attempted to mount onto the stallion of the revolution very
recently. The rein of the stallion was received in the hands of
NLD. But, the question is whether it could handle the rein of a
revolutionary bridle successfully or not.
In fact, it was too inexperience and lacking of class representative
support to take the power. The question is again whether it was a
true representative of the people in class nature although it had
gained the landslide votes.

Votes show people’s hearts but not their brains. And, the
representation of the class nature cannot be evaluated by a single
election.

NLD was the winner of the election and actually larger opposition
party but it was not the sole and single vanguard of the recent
revolution. NLD was cheered up by the majority but it was not
unanimously supported by the nation as a whole.

It is not an argument over the acceptance of the majority votes

and democratic representation. It is merely the statement over
the assessment of the class representation and the process of the
development of the class struggle of the society.

Understand that, the ruling class was doing its own business and
would be doing so forever. No ruling class should easily and
quickly step down. It maybe a fantastic hallucination if one thinks
it is so easy to be in power.
The ruling class will suppress, oppress and dominate; it is its job.
This is nothing but a class struggle that we are being challenged
since mankind originated on earth.

The Society

Burma, only a single part of the global society, was a monarchy

before the complete colonization of the British in 1885. Under
British, the society was analyzed as semi-colonial semi-capital
society. That was done by most of the leading generation of the
land who were Marxist-Leninist as they described themselves.

During the Second World War, Burma was occupied by the

Fascist Japanese whom the thirty comrades, formed by the
underground leaders of the Do Bama Asi Ayone, had brought into
the motherland with the hope of Independence.

Then, again, Burma became Independence, after the

accomplishment of the Second World War, given by the British
Labour Party government which had pushed the little young
inexperienced country to become the Socialist State and
negotiated to agree legally seceded from the union by the
nationalities in ten years.

The Civil War was taken into place within three months after
Independence. It was soon widespread in a year becoming into
multi rebellions against the socialist AFPFL government, also with
major and minor ethnic groups. The demand for secession,
known as federalism in misinterpretation of the term, was the
cause of the insurgency by ethnic groups. Communist insurgents
had fought for proletarian dictatorship (not for Democracy),
claiming to gain freedom for workers and peasants.

In fact, that Civil War was what the British really wanted to be for
Burma. To be weak in wealth and disunity in strength of the
nation is their true political objective. The British favoured the left
wing political forces and suppressed the right wing political forces
in Burma was also another aim to become disunity between the
two major political forces to be at war in politics forever.

The history had developed and changed in many steps forward,

but the characterization of the society was unchanged and
underdeveloped. Semi-colonial semi capital society, as it termed
since the British era, had still been expressed.

Is it true? No, it is untrue.

The society of Burma is a Feudal Autocratic one. Burma since the

time of monarchy and throughout under British and Japanese and
after Independence, up to now, is politically in autocracy and
economically in feudalism. Burma never went under capitalism at
least in .01 percent. The sayings of full-fledged capitalism are
totally wrong.
Ye Kyaw Swa

Yangon, Myanmar

Sunday, October 31, 2010

……………… Part One finished :……………………………….