Talk:Shining Path/Archive 1

message: Originally I posted this to my Talk page in response to a note from Kewertii then realized it really belonged here.
"Terrorism" is a lot more than just a technical term; it carries emotional baggage and implies a moral judgement. Passing moral judgements on subjects is obviously incompatible with NPOV. Moreover, if we label Shining Path or Al Queda or bin Laden "terrorist", whether we do directly or indirectly (see: Wikipedia:Avoid weasel terms), the case can also be made for labelling our governments and leaders terrorists. For example, because of the mining the harbor of Managua in the 1980s, or destroying the Al Shifa pharmaceuticals plant in Sudan in 1998, or causing 500,000 Iraqi children to die of malnutrition during the 1990s by means of sanctions, many millions of people in the world consider the US government and George Bush terrorists, and they could rightfully insist the phrase "many people consider this a terrorist organization" inserted at the top of the article on the United States, the US State Department, or the CIA. Passing moral judgements can go both ways.
I am tempted to say that "terrorist" doesn't belong anywhere but under Terrorism, but that may be unnecessarily restrictive. Still, if it is to be used, I would ask what purpose it serves. In the middle of ChrisO's superb article Binational solution, he included in the narrative that the Israeli government in the 1960s regarded the PLO as a "terrorist organization", and he did so for a purpose; it was an integral part of the historical development. He wasn't simply indirectly including a moral judgement. At the moment, Chris's addition of the US and UK government position in this article is IMO an improvement over simply stating "many people think..."; but Chris, I would still ask you to consider the fact that the assessment of an organization as "terrorist" is hardly just a technical, bureaucratic matter, and that many of the governments which do so have no right to take the high moral ground.
In any case, Shining Path's atrocities are copious, unambiguous, and well-documented. Why can't we simply present the facts as such and avoid all forms of passing moral judgement? -- Viajero 00:06, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with Viajero. The facts of the conduct of Sendero Luminoso speak for themselves. I do think, however, that it it wikipedia-worthy that they are on the US gov't's official list of terrorist organizations. For whatever it is worth, I think it is appropriate (but perhaps not in an encyclopedia article) to label the Senderistas' conduct as "terrorist"; ditto for the US government and its proxies in the war against Nicaragua in the Sandinista era. Yes, the US gov't has engaged in conduct that can reasonably be called terrorist, and in some contexts it can be relevant to report accusations of terrorism against the US government. -- Jmabel 10:16, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the important point is that it makes a material difference if the UK and EU label Shining Path a terrorist organisation. We could call it terrorist until we're blue in the face, but it would make no real difference to the organisation. On the other hand, if governments label organisations terrorist, it can have massive consequences. Just look at al-Qaeda for an example! -- ChrisO 20:58, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: the term "terrorism"

message: A link,  was added with the description "Peruvian web page of "Bandera Roja", the Communist party of Spain, registered by Edith Pena Dominguez, in Leon, Spain." The link appears relevant, but the description was actively misleading. I'll changed it to something more accurate. Yes, the home page of that site claims it to be the "Organo Central del Comité Central del Partido Comunista de España", but it clearly is not. It's the site of some Maoist party, but almost anyone referring to "the Communist party of Spain" means the PCE, whose website is at http://www.pce.es/. I'm not sure if this was an active attempt to mislead, an innocent confusion, or what. -- Jmabel 01:03, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)
*Honest mistake.  Your correction is perfect.--AAAAA 01:14, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recently added link: dubious description 

message: DoD considers Shining Path a terrorist group, which the article says in the appropriate place, but per Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Terrorist that doesn't mean it belongs in the lead, unqualified even by who used the term. I'm not sure who may have requested protection on this matter; I didn't. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:10, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
:How about mentioning other groups, in addition to the DoD, that consider Shining Path a terrorist group? — J3ff 09:53, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Terrorist" in the lead 

message: shows up from googling, that the full, official name of the PCP is:
Partido Comunista del Peru en el Sendero Luminoso de Jose Carlos
Mariategui (Communist Party of Peru on the Shining Path of Jose Carlos Mariategui)
This is in the URL that links to the frozen article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partido_Comunista_del_Peru_en_el_Sendero_Luminoso_de_Jose_Carlos_Mariategui
Not in text?User:139.62.229.249
*I think you are INCORRECT.
**In the About.com article by the US State Department, Office of Counterterrorism, you can read as a title: Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso, SL) a.k.a. Partido Comunista del Peru en el Sendero Luminoso de Jose Carlos Mariategui (Communist Party of Peru on the Shining Path of Jose Carlos Mariategui), Partido Comunista del Peru (Communist Party of Peru), PCP, Socorro Popular del Peru (People's Aid of Peru), SPP, Ejercito Guerrillero Popular (People's Guerrilla Army), EGP, Ejercito Popular de Liberacion (People's Liberation Army), EPL.  So, as you can see, Sendero has been called many names.  Some of them are names that they like to use (PCP, Partido Comunista del Peru).  Some have been put by the media or by the people. But that doesn't mean they are called that.--AAAAA 12:35, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Relying on US State Department has its limitations. SPP/EGP/ELP are names of fronts of PCdelP, not different names of the party itself. --Soman 22:30, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official full  name of Shining Path 

message: This is just me thinking out loud, and I apologize for writing so much on this article since I'm only a newbie, but there is a recent picture of Guzmán on Abimael Guzmán, which I assume was taken during the more recent hearings at the Callao Naval Base.  Should that picture replace the current "hamburgerler," as someone else called it, picture?  The hamburgerler picture has the definate drawbacks of being fuzzy and having been taken during what was essentially a staged media spectical.  However, it is the iconic picture of Guzmán that everyone thinks of when they hear his name. Descendall 08:39, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture of Abimael Guzmán

message: Recent change by AAAAA, italicized in the following quote: "Its stated goal is to replace Peruvian bourgeois institutions with a communist peasant revolutionary regime, through any means possible, including terrorist tactics." While I personally agree that they use terrorist tactics, you are claiming here that this is a stated goal. If you have a citation of an overt endorsement of terrorism by the party, I would welcome it. It would certainly simplify the issue of whether they are terrorist. However, unless you have such a citation, this claim is totally out of line and should be removed. I don't want an edit war, so I will give you at least 48 hours to respond before I delete on this basis. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:31, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
*I think Jmabel is right.  Maybe the mention should not go in the "stated goal".  However, I think there should be a mention in the first section about the group's use of terrorist tactics.  Not only that they are considered terrorists, but that they have extensively used terrorist tactics to intimidate the civilian population.  How do you suggest we write it?--AAAAA 03:30, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Terrorist" redux 

message: "Sometimes the tail of a live cat will be set on fire and then the animal will be let loose on a field of corn ready for picking."
Is it just me, or does this sound just a tad bit apocryphal?  Is this really a tactic that Sendero "sometimes" used?  As someone who grew up right next to a huge cornfield, I can tell you that "corn ready for picking" isn't dry and probably wouldn't ignite.  And if you really did want to ignite it, there would be methods a hell of a lot more reliable than lighting the tail of a cat on fire and then hoping it would run into some cornstalks.  The suggestion that Sendero did this with any luck throws the whole quote into doubt for me. Descendall 11:23, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahhh, I'd forgotten that that text was in the quote from her article. Now I understand the question. Offhand, I don't know of any way of contacting Ms. Guillermoprieto directly; the last time I looked, she didn't have a website. Perhaps via the New Yorker; I will take a look later. -- Viajero 13:05, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, the obvious compromise would be to remove just the bit about cat, which seems implausible. -- Viajero 15:04, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree to User:Viajero's solution.--AAAAA 05:16, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: It has since been deleted, although not by me.  I'm not going to put it back it; we'll see if someone else does. --Descendall 18:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lighting Cats on Fire - A Good Method of Making Popcorn? 

message: A few questions about the remaining factions of Shining Path:
Does anyone know the difference between Sendero Rojo and Proseguir?  Both of them are of the "leftist" line that advocates continued people's war.  I believe that the organization led by Comrade Feliciano was called "Sendero Rojo."  I'm not sure if it simply changed its name with Feliciano's capture, or what.  
Also, I have noticed some media claim to know the identity of Comrade Armetio.  They are saying that it is a guy named Filomeno Cerrón Cardoso.  Has that been verfied at all?
One last thing -- I'm not so sure that it is factually correct that "In April 2004, a man known as Artemio and identifying himself as one of the last free Shining Path leaders gave a media interview."  I distinctly remember watching that interview on "Cuarto Poder" in Cusco, and I was in Cusco in January and February of 2004.  I have a feeling that the BBC article about the interview was simply a few months too late. Descendall 05:14, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree on that. PCP-SL is used for example in Amnesty reports. --Soman 09:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remaining Factions of Shining Path 

message: Okay, I think I have reworded the intro in a way that should please all parties. I didn't remove anything, I just explained the name based on a comment Descendall made a while back that sounded familiar. However, I don't have a source for it so I put a citation needed stamp.--Cuchullain 19:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm almost positive that Gorriti's book mentions that, but I don't have it handy at the time.  Oddly, I don't think I've ever seen it written anywhere other than Gorriti's book, and I have seen some other explanations on how they got the name Shining Path.  Descendall 17:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: The first paragraph in the section Guerilla war refers once to Chuspi and once to Chuschi, obviously referring to the same place. Which is it? And, given that it is a place name, it should be linked as a possible topic for a future article. - Jmabel | Talk 15:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This was recently changed.  I've only seen it in a couple different sources, but I think that it has always been "Chuschi."  Furthermore, google image search picked up this photo, which seems to be to be pretty definitive, assuming that it's the same place. --Descendall 17:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've restored Chuschi consistently. - Jmabel | Talk 22:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chuspi or Chuschi? 

message: An IP address edited this to say that the paper that had the Shining Path phrase on it was El Diario.  Is this actually true?  I've never seen it on El Diario, and I was under the impression that it was actually on some tiny MOTC paper.  Does anyone know for certain? --Descendall 22:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of Shining Path name 

message: Someone took this out of the category for political parties.  I assume, perhaps incorrectly, they did this because status as a political party might confer some sort of legitimacy on them.  Political party says that "a political party is an organization that seeks to attain political power within a government, usually by participating in electoral campaigns. Parties often espouse a certain ideology, but may also represent a coalition among disparate interests."  The Shining Path certainally abhored electoal democracy, but they were an organization seeking political power."  What do everyone think about putting this article back in the category for political parties? --Descendall 00:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see the problem. The definition says that parties usually participate in elections, but it is not the criteria for being a political party. --Soman 13:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  If participation in electoral democracy was a nessessary condition for being a political party, then we'd have to take the Communist Party of the Soviet Union out of the category as well.  There are plenty of non-democratic and even anti-democratic political parties, and the Shining Path was one.  I believe, however, that wikipedia has a policy saying that categories must be uncontroversial, so I wanted to ask here. --Descendall 18:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't know about that.  Sendero didn't want to change politics, they wanted to take total control of the government.  --Descendall 03:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Status as a political party