Talk:Shining Path

Archive

I have archived the entire page because much of the discussion was years old and none of it was being followed up on. --Descendall (talk) 09:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

Absent a new peer review of this article, I really can't think of much more to do, except, perhaps, add a new "ideology" section or something like that. Peer review might be a good way to come up with fresh ideas. --Descendall (talk) 09:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

This article needs to be updated. Shining path is having a ressurgence and is now entangled in the drug trade. New estimates are 800+ fighters. I read this on an AP article dated 5-30-2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.253.198.79 (talk) 16:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

terrorists

calling them "terrorists" is very biased, the people in the American revolution are not referred to as "terrorists".........

I would call "terrorist" to any group which attacks innocent people. Revolution is the excuse, but that would be against the government, not the people. Sergioag (talk) 04:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This isn't a discussion forum so please leave your political discussions out of this. With regards to any use of the word "terrorist" it should be stated that this is a title designated by a government (e.g., Peru, U.S, etc.. designate the Shining Path as a terrorist organization). The article does that so there is nothing to argue about here.--Jersey Devil (talk) 10:14, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This not a matter of a title designated by government, it is a matter of definition. Both from wikipedia:

Terrorism is the intentional use or threat to use violence against civilians and non-combatants "in order to achieve political goals".

Guerrilla warfare is the unconventional warfare and combat in which a small group of combatants use mobile tactics in the form of ambushes and raids to combat a larger and less mobile formal army.

Here in the same articles says: 'Widely condemned for its brutality, including violence deployed against peasants, trade union organizers, popularly elected officials and the general civilian population'.

You can read all that you want in the CVR webpage http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ingles/pagina01.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paranoidhuman (talk • contribs) 04:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I would like to add that the Peruvian military are the real terrorists who burn villages to the ground and slaughter innocents in their bid to retain their oppressive regime's power. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.154.217 (talk) 06:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I would like to add that Sendero Luminoso are real terrorists too, who burn villages to the ground and slaughter innocents in their bid to attain their oppressive regime's power. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.42.92.188 (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding these comments, I added a fact in the first paragraph: "It has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union, and Canada". That is a fact and not an opinion. If you decide to add opinions, they will be deleted. However, you can add "opinions" of institutions and cite them, as I did. Even better, look for other Wikipedia entries (I looked at how terrorists groups are described) to get ideas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.85.178.205 (talk) 19:35, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Recent activity section

This article has become totally static except for updates every time the Shining Path does takes a shot at some passing government troops. It's probably not a good thing to just tack on every single action the Shining Path takes, but I don't know what should be done instead. --71.163.199.217 (talk) 14:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Someone please rewrite!

This page is grossly biased. An encyclopedia must not contain entries with a POV! If I had the knowledge to rewrite this article I would do so. It needs a complete overhaul. If any of you are capable of taking this on, please do and fast. As it stands, the page is useless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.115.245.174 (talk) 21:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Seeking consensus about correctly naming the organization

According to the Wikipedia edition guidelines, there are words whose use should be avoided (but not excluded); those words can be used, however, when they best approach a definition of something and provided that certain conditions are met. One of these words is "terrorist". The official Wikipedia guidelines state:

"If a reliable source describes a person or group using one of these words, then the word can be used but the description must be attributed in the article text to its source, preferably by direct quotation, and always with a verifiable citation."

In the case of Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso), a reliable source, in this case the Peruvian "Comision de la Verdad y la Reconciliacion", (Truth and Reconciliation Commission), which was a commission created to inquiry about the conflict in Peru, made by representative members of the Peruvian society who witnessed the conflict, states in its final report that Sendero Luminoso is a terrorist group. I will quote the first paragraph of the first page, word by word, in Spanish:

"El Partido Comunista del Perú, conocido como Sendero Luminoso (PCP-SL), es una organización subversiva y terrorista, que en mayo de 1980 desencadenó un conflicto armado contra el Estado y la sociedad peruana. La CVR ha constatado que a lo largo de ese conflicto, el más violento de la historia de la República, el PCP-SL cometió gravísimos crímenes que constituyen delitos de lesa humanidad y fue responsable del 54% de víctimas fatales reportadas a la CVR. En base a los cálculos realizados, la CVR estima que la cifra total de víctimas fatales provocadas por el PCP-SL asciende a 31,331 personas"

An approximate translation into English:

"The Communist Party of Peru, known as Sendero Luminoso (PCP-SL), is a terrorist and subversive organization, that in May 1980 started an armed conflict against the Peruvian state and the Peruvian society. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission has verified that during the conflict, the most violent in the Peruvian republican history, the PCP-SL commited grave crimes constituting crimes against humanity and was responsible of 54% of fatal victims reported to the commission. In basis on the estimations effectued, the commission estimates that the total number of fatal victims caused by the PCP-SL reaches 31,331 people"

The Commission does describe other actors in the conflict, including guerrilla groups, clearly classified as such, e.g. the Movimiento Revolucionario Tupac Amaru. It is open and valid to anyone to incriminate the Peruvian military for state terrorism, according to the guidelines.

I therefore ask the word "terrorist" be used in this article, quoting the proper source and more, quoting the entire paragraph referring this group's definition.

I have seen that formerly quoted sources included the US government, which is deemed to have anti-Communist prejudices. Therefore I also suggest mediation. Contacting Peruvian sources, the Commission, some of their members, or maybe the Peruvian courts of justice could shine light upon these matters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.42.73.116 (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

The article, and even the introduction, already indicates who considers Shining Path to be a terrorist organization, and why. No need to overstate it.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:11, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

That would not be overstating it: only stating. Who does not consider that organization as a terrorist organization, and why?

Perhaps the most neutral term would be not naming it with any adjectives at all: for an organization it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.160.63.182 (talk) 20:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Recent changes have made to the page directly naming Sendero Luminoso as an "insurgent guerrilla" group:

According to the insurgent definition by Peruvian law: (Constitucion Politica del Peru, available at the Peruvian Constitutional Tribunal website at http://www.tc.gob.pe/legconperu/constitucion.html) (in Spanish)

(Title II, Chapt. I, Art. 46) (highlighting the second paragraph defining the right of insurgence) (Original) Artículo 46°. Nadie debe obediencia a un gobierno usurpador, ni a quienes asumen funciones públicas en violación de la Constitución y de las leyes. La población civil tiene el derecho de insurgencia en defensa del orden constitucional. Son nulos los actos de quienes usurpan funciones públicas.

(Approximate translation): Article 46º Nobody owes allegiance to an usurper government, not to who assume public office violating the Constitution and the laws. The civilian population has the right of insurgence in defense of the constitutional order. The acts of whose usurp public office are null.

Sendero Luminoso does not fit to this description.

Concerning the definition of Sendero Luminoso as a guerrilla group, and distinguishing its actions from other groups, namely the MRTA (quoting the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission):

Unlike Shining Path, and like other armed Latin American organizations with which it maintained ties, the MRTA claimed responsibility for its actions, its members used uniforms or other identifiers to differentiate themselves from the civilian population, it abstained from attacking the unarmed population and at some points showed signs of being open to peace negotiations. Nevertheless, MRTA also engaged in criminal acts; it resorted to assassinations, such as in the case of General Enrique López Albújar, the taking of hostages and the systematic practice of kidnapping, all crimes that violate not only personal liberty but the international humanitarian law that the MRTA claimed to respect. It is important to highlight that MRTA also assassinated dissidents within its own ranks.

Because of the generalized and systematic nature of these practices, the TRC points out that members of the PCP-SL, and especially its national directors and its designated leadership, have direct responsibility for the commission of crimes against humanity in the form of armed attacks against the civilian population, carried out on a grand scale or as part of a general strategy or specific plans. In the judgment of the TRC, these actions likewise constitute grave violations of the Geneva Conventions, which were obligatory for all the participants in the hostilities. The perfidy with which the PCP-SL acted on the ground, using the civilian population as a shield, avoiding the use of uniforms or other marks to identify themselves, and attacking traitors, among other similar methods, such as recourse to terrorist actions, constituted a calculated mechanism that sought to provoke brutal reactions from the security forces against the civilian population, increasing to an extraordinary extent the suffering of the communities in whose territories the hostilities took place.

http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ingles/ifinal/conclusiones.php

Sendero Luminoso does not fit in the definition of a guerrilla warfare group.

It does, however, fit in the description of a terrorist group, as stated above in this same discussion page: however, as to avoid NPOV conflicts and the very use of the word "terrorist" as a potentially biased word (or a word that could lead to a potential bias), it should be named as an organization without further definition.

I notice that the Spanish Wikipedia article at http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sendero_Luminoso does name Sendero Luminoso a terrorist organization.

I also suggest mediation, and contacting the actors of this conflict. However I say that simply naming Sendero Luminoso an organization without specifying the type of organization is a valid, neutral point of view solution until a more detailed consensual solution is found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.118.80.52 (talk) 23:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you post some evidence that Sendero Luminoso is neither an insurgent group nor a guerrilla organization? None of the stuff you posted above was anything other than a non-sequitur. Otherwise, I'll just reinstate the article as it was. --72.83.101.171 (talk) 00:15, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Under that logic, it would equally be called a terrorist group, unless you post some evidence Sendero Luminoso is not a terrorist group. (be sure to post 1. the definition of terrorist and 2. sound arguments backing why it is not a terrorist group, as have been posted about why it is not an insurgent group). But again, as we can not call it terrorist we will not. So I will remove the "insurgent" tag and again ask for mediation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.118.87.137 (talk) 20:09, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Partido Comunista del Perú

The first line of this article claims that Sendero Luminoso and the Peruvian Communist Party are one in the same; this is not true. The Peruvian Communist Party was founded in the 1920s by José Carlos Mariátegui. PCP is a branched party organization, and Guzmán belonged to a branch called PCP-Bandera Roja (PCP-BR). When he began to advocate violent resistance to the state, Guzmán was expelled from PCP-BR and began his own branch of the party, which he called Sendero Luminoso (PCP-SL). If no one objects, I will change the opening line of the article to reflect that distinction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.253.154.69 (talk) 14:47, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

You're getting your parties mixed up. The article does not say that Sendero Luminoso is the same as the current Peruvian Communist Party (frequently known as "Unidad," and the Peruvian Communist Party is a different party than the Peruvian Communist Party – Red Flag. One was Pro-Moscow and the other was Pro-Beijing. The Shining Path does call itself the Communist Party of Peru, however. --71.163.201.34 (talk) 04:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Hanging dogs

Someone added in that the Shining Path hanged dogs as a warning to "capitalist dogs." While it's true that the Shining Path did famously hang dogs in Lima, I believe that every book I've read on the Shining Path (and I've probably read nearly all of them that are published in English), has said that the dogs were hanged with a placard that said "Deng Xiaoping, son of a bitch." I am in possession of a photograph of a hanged dog where those words are visable. The hanged dogs weren't a warning to "capitalists" but rather to "revisionists," who are represented by Deng Xiaoping by orthodox Marxists. I think that the article about "capitalist dogs" is simply incorrect. --71.163.70.174 (talk) 04:22, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

There's a famous photograph here of a hanged dog in Lima with a placard that appears to say "Teng Siao Ping." --71.163.70.174 (talk) 04:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I removed the sentence for this reason. --72.83.93.136 (talk) 06:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Recent changes

For what it's worth, I support Descendall's changes here. We need to stick with neutral language when describing the facts. The facts concerning the actions of this group speak for themselves; we don't need to reinforce the point with colored language.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Problematic text

The following passage contains,

Abimael Guzmán stated that "the triumph of the revolution will cost a million lives" - at a time when Peru's population was only 19 million. To that end, the Shining Path attempted to eradicate elements of the political and social order, attacking community leaders, teachers and professors, and political leaders. The first case of "popular justice" was the assassination in December 1980 of Benigno Medina, a landowner. In January 1982, two teachers were executed in front of their students. Several months later, 67 "traitors" were subjected to public execution. In addition, they set about demolishing all government installations and infrastructure. In August 1982, they destroyed the Center for Agricultural Research and Experimentation in Allpahaca and killed the animals

In what document did Guzman talk about a million lives? Please provide the original Spanish so that I can verify it. From what sources do the allegations about executions and assassinations originate? A controversial, polemical source like the Black Book of Communism cannot be cited because there are peer-reviewed sources written by scholars of better quality than this. Nor is the source appropriate because it devotes no more than a 5 pages or so about Peru. We've got numerous works from academic publishers about the Shining Path, which makes the citing of editorials from the popular media and pop-history like the Black Book of Communism inappropriate in this article. SadSwanSong (talk) 03:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Shining_Path/Archive_3#Black_Book_of_Communism.2C_Courtois.2C_Guzman_quote from five years ago. It looks like Luis Arce Borja was quoted as saying this, rather than Guzman. No idea if Arce Borja really did say it or not. --Descendall (talk) 04:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: User:SadSwanSong has been found to be a sockpuppet of the banned User:Jacob Peters. Any edits to the page made by him may be reverted without any further reason. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 17:28, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Bill on denying the violence that took place?

Present Humula recently proposed a bill to make it a crime for anyone to publicly 'approving, justifying, denying, or minimizing' the crimes of terrorism (those that took place during the Internal Conflict). Should this be mentioned?

It is based on the bill passed in Germany making denial of Nazi Germany's atrocities a crime.