Chairman Mao's Little Red Book

[The Man]

I was thinking of picking one up. What's it even about? Is it any good?

[Paulappaul]

I got a copy for 50 cents. It's a collection of quotes from Chairman Meow. It's not that impressive unless you want to dazzle your comrades with quotes about how awesome the Chinese Communist Party is.

[Red Future]

Its an interesting read
The Marxists Internet Archive have volumes 1 to 6 uploaded

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/index.htm

[Proukunin]

It has some great quotes about imperialism and just wars. Also, I like the quotes on revolution.

[praxis1966]

Mao was the Chinese Ross Perot (not in terms of politics but in the way he spoke). I have a book of his poetry which proves this, lulz...

[RED DAVE]

It makes a great lining for the bottom of a bird cage or a cat box.

RED DAVE

[Per Levy]

well i read a couple of years ago, wasnt impressive at all(to me at least). and maybe it was just the copy i had(bad translation and all) but the lyrical value wasnt that interesting either.

[Rooster]

It's good if you want to be able to spout out slogans to impress your friends and co-workers.

[Kassad]

Who needs that when a book of Bob Avakian's quotes is coming out next month? I'm serious: http://revcom.us/avakian/About-Basics-en.html

But in all sincerity, it's a good read with a lot of powerful quotations. It's nothing insanely theoretical, but it gets to the core of some of Mao's influential writings before he became anti-Soviet and started preaching a shitty political line.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Who needs that when a book of Bob Avakian's quotes is coming out next month? I'm serious: http://revcom.us/avakian/About-Basics-en.html


I think that you're underestimating (http://revcom.us/a/209/BAsics-en.html) him:


Simply put, BAsics will be a key part of repolarization for revolution. Imagine what it would mean for people in the neighborhoods struggling with questions of "how do we change all this?" to turn to Avakian's words about the potential to transform the youth into the backbone of a future revolutionary state—or a college student sitting in a dorm room employing Avakian's insights on democracy while talking with friends late into the night. The form of this book will make Avakian's leadership accessible in a powerful new way and has the potential to really break through in all levels of society. It will represent a major leap toward accomplishing all three goals of the campaign "The Revolution We Need... The Leadership We Have," especially the second objective, to make Avakian "someone known throughout society, with growing numbers checking out, getting into and supporting his work, his thinking and his leadership."

Well, there you have it: this book is essential for the revolution's success. Seems pretty convincing to me.

re: the OP - It has some good novelty value (like "lol guyz i own mao's little red book") but pretty much no value at all beyond that.

[Robespierre Richard]

I can't wait until Avakian comes back from France in a sealed compartment of an armored train to finally deliver the revolution to the workers.

[ChrisK]

A must have for the revolutionary who likes a good laugh.

[x359594]

Quotations from Chairman Mao aka The Little Red Book is of historical interest. It was compiled by Lin Biao.

The first English language edition was published in 1966 and available from the PRC's Foreign Language Bookstores, usually found in any US city that had a large Chinese population. (I bought my copy at the store on Stockton Street in San Francisco's Chinatown.)

The Black Panther Party for Self Defense also sold Quotations from Chairman Mao at its bookstores and at rallies; BPP copies had a stamp on the flyleaf of the Party logo.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

I know someone (democrat) who has the original English version from 1966 (as noted in post above this). Next time I see him, I'll take a closer look and see if it has a BPP stamp (don't remember one).
It's a pretty cool, little book to have. But I wouldn't recommend it unless you like having some good, generic one-liners.

[RED DAVE]

Since the ones you could buy in the 60s were printed very cheaply, they were good for toilet paper.

RED DAVE

[mosfeld]

It's an excellent book and a great introduction to Maoism. Selling it is a win-win situation too -- people might get interested in communism and your party raises funds.

RED DAVE's posts are spam.

[Kuppo Shakur]

It makes a great lining for the bottom of a bird cage or a cat box.

RED DAVE
Dude, the paper's too small. A Trotskyist newspaper would work much better.

[Pirate Utopian]

Why is it weird when Avakian releases a book full of quotes but when Mao does it, it's a must read?

[Rooster]

I can't see how usefull it would be to learn anything. It's basically a collection of quotes taken out of context. Can you imagine just taking all the quotes from Marx out of context and just complining them into a book without context? How would you know what he was talking about? Or if you were to collect a bunch of lines from MacBeth, how would you know what the story was?

[RED DAVE]

It makes a great lining for the bottom of a bird cage or a cat box.
Since the ones you could buy in the 60s were printed very cheaply, they were good for toilet paper.
It's an excellent book and a great introduction to Maoism. Selling it is a win-win situation too -- people might get interested in communism and your party raises funds.

RED DAVE's posts are spam.
I can't see how usefull it would be to learn anything. It's basically a collection of quotes taken out of context. Can you imagine just taking all the quotes from Marx out of context and just complining them into a book without context? How would you know what he was talking about? Or if you were to collect a bunch of lines from MacBeth, how would you know what the story was?This is precisely my point. Politically, it's the equivalent to a collection of yells for a cheer-leading team. Compare it with the kind of material the bolsheviks used.

RED DAVE

[ChrisK]

The Black Panthers sold it therefore it must be awesome. :p

[Sir Comradical]

It makes a great lining for the bottom of a bird cage or a cat box.

RED DAVE


Since the ones you could buy in the 60s were printed very cheaply, they were good for toilet paper.

RED DAVE

Don't hate the playa hate the game, brah.

[Ms. Max]

Mao's "little red book" is essential. I keep a well thumbed copy next to my worn copy of the Manifesto.

I also plan on getting hold of a copy of this latest thing on Avakian, BAsics. Always find him a breath of fresh air. There are lot of good thinkers and writers out there today, but as far pulling it all together, what happened in the 20th century (failures as well as success's), and what the path ahead is, I really think Avakian sums it up best overall.

[Pirate Utopian]

Mao's "little red book" is essential. I keep a well thumbed copy next to my worn copy of the Manifesto.

I also plan on getting hold of a copy of this latest thing on Avakian, BAsics. Always find him a breath of fresh air. There are lot of good thinkers and writers out there today, but as far pulling it all together, what happened in the 20th century (failures as well as success's), and what the path ahead is, I really think Avakian sums it up best overall.

http://nolifing.com/thumbs/e3f292844a15.jpg

Anyway, Avakian is probably a perfect Maoist in the sense he also has books released to show the world "how remarkable and revolutionary" he is. Much like Mao. Seriously, most Maoist texts would be RCP stuff if you replaced all Mao references to Avakian.

[mosfeld]

http://nolifing.com/thumbs/e3f292844a15.jpg

Anyway, Avakian is probably a perfect Maoist in the sense he also has books released to show the world "how remarkable and revolutionary" he is. Much like Mao. Seriously, most Maoist texts would be RCP stuff if you replaced all Mao references to Avakian.

When did Mao ever boast about how "remarkable and revolutionary" he was? In fact, I'd argue the opposite.

When asked by an interviewer whether or not the RCP,USA was trying to build a personality cult around him, Avakian replied "(...) I certainly hope so — we’ve been working very hard to create one."(1) (http://kasamaproject.org/2008/01/12/bob-avakian-on-bob-avakian/). Contrast this with Mao, who was exceptionally humble, did not want to be chairman and complained about the personality cult to Lin Biao, who was a chief proponent of it.(2) (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-9/mswv9_88.htm)

Avakian has also often blamed the masses for the RCP,USA's own failures in campaigns. Mao never did such a thing and always blamed the Party, or himself, such as in the aftermath of the Great Leap Forward, for failures and staunchly upheld that the masses were the makers of history, not great men.

There was a tradition after congresses that the chairman should always be the first to stand up and leave. During one congress, Mao decided that he should be the last to leave, humbly defying this tradition.(3) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw8TYm8EU9U)

You write that Mao, much like Avakian, wrote books to talk about how remarkable he was. I challenge you to find one writing where Mao made any statement like that. I'll actually make it very easy for you -- he didn't, and you're full of shit and don't know what you're talking about. To quote Mao, "no investigation, no right to speak" :)

[Pirate Utopian]

I really don't care either. Like fuck I'm gonna investigate Mao.

To quote some random dude I say was humble and had no cult of personality yet I quote all the time wether it's appropriate or not; "This is a randomass quote but it sounds kinda radical. Like power from gunbarrels and shit. Revolution swag."

[The Grey Blur]

Like fuck I'm gonna investigate Mao.
/end thread.

[mosfeld]

Like fuck I'm gonna investigate Mao.Okay, then don't make statements that you don't know shit about and can't back up with facts.

[RED DAVE]

I really think Avakian sums it up best overall.could you, perhaps, enlighten us with a sample of quotations from chairman bob, that we may, perhaps, partake of his wisdom because frankly, many people around here, myself included, consider him to be an asshole.

RED DAVE

[mosfeld]

I can't be bothered to provide you with any specific quotations but "Summing up the Black Panther Party (http://www.archive.org/details/SummingUpTheBlackPantherParty)", which is a pamphlet with a transcribed speech of his, is very good. I've heard that his books "Phony Communism is Dead, Long Live Real Communism!" and "Mao's Immortal Contributions" are very good too, and two books which I intend to read.

I've read that Nepalese Maoists often state, when it comes to Avakian, that he's "a good writer" but a "bad leader", or "organizer", or something. I can't remember. Nonetheless, it's something I tend to agree with. Organizing in the USA, and the west, is in general very hard anyways. There was one event organized by the RCP which was very notable though -- a major protest against Deng's visit to the USA in 1979 with the purpose of showing Maoist worldwide that they were not alone. The protests turned into a bloody fight between Maoists and the police and made it to the news worldwide. Later, during the formation of RIM, which was, by the way, a tremendous achievement in the ICM, lots of Maoists noted that after the 1976 coup in China, they had felt that they were isolated but that that riot confirmed that they were not alone -- which meant that the RCP had succeeded in their goal.

Avakian might be considered a fringe and irrelevant leader in the USA communist movement, but to Maoists worldwide, he was always considered relevant -- at least until very recently. One of the items in Chairman Gonzalo's hideout included a Bob Avakian poster and, if I remember correctly, his works have been translated in some languages, including Spanish.

Avakian and the RCP went wrong when they..:

*Started polemicizing against the Nepalese, as if they were in any position to judge other revolutionary movements from their pedestal when their own achievements were fairly minimal.

*Organized the "World Cant Wait - Drive Out the Bush Regime" campaign, which had an overtly reformist character.

*Deliberately started promoting a cult of personality around Avakian, even though the CPI(Maoist), from their own experience concerning Charu Mazumdar, have pointed out how harmful these personality cults are. You can also, obviously, analyze personality cults and their harms -- for example in Peru. Most often, though, personality cults emerge not because the leaders promote them, but because someone else does. Both Stalin and Mao disliked their personality cults, but Khrushchev and Lin Biao, amongst others, and respectively, promoted them. But, Avakian promotes his own personality cult. Concerning the whether or not the RCP promotes a personality cult around him, Avakian replied: "(...) I certainly hope so — we’ve been working very hard to create one."

*Started parroting the imperialist slander concerning Iran. Their initial argument was that they supported neither the Iranian regime nor the imperialists, but that they supported their marginal puppet party CPI(MLM).

and so on.

I don't really expect that you give a shit and neither do I expect you to comprehend that the world isn't black and white and that characters aren't either 100% good or bad, so I guess this post is rather intended for some other people. Avakian and the RCP needs to be properly analyzed. Knee-jerk comments like "he's an asshole" and that the RCP "is a cult" are not real arguments.

[ChrisK]

I can't be bothered to provide you with any specific quotations but "Summing up the Black Panther Party (http://www.archive.org/details/SummingUpTheBlackPantherParty)", which is a pamphlet with a transcribed speech of his, is very good. I've heard that his books "Phony Communism is Dead, Long Live Real Communism!" and "Mao's Immortal Contributions" are very good too, and two books which I intend to read.

I've read that Nepalese Maoists often state, when it comes to Avakian, that he's "a good writer" but a "bad leader", or "organizer", or something. I can't remember. Nonetheless, it's something I tend to agree with. Organizing in the USA, and the west, is in general very hard anyways. There was one event organized by the RCP which was very notable though -- a major protest against Deng's visit to the USA in 1979 with the purpose of showing Maoist worldwide that they were not alone. The protests turned into a bloody fight between Maoists and the police and made it to the news worldwide. Later, during the formation of RIM, which was, by the way, a tremendous achievement in the ICM, lots of Maoists noted that after the 1976 coup in China, they had felt that they were isolated but that that riot confirmed that they were not alone -- which meant that the RCP had succeeded in their goal.

Avakian might be considered a fringe and irrelevant leader in the USA communist movement, but to Maoists worldwide, he was always considered relevant -- at least until very recently. One of the items in Chairman Gonzalo's hideout included a Bob Avakian poster and, if I remember correctly, his works have been translated in some languages, including Spanish.

Avakian and the RCP went wrong when they..:

*Started polemicizing against the Nepalese, as if they were in any position to judge other revolutionary movements from their pedestal when their own achievements were fairly minimal.

*Organized the "World Cant Wait - Drive Out the Bush Regime" campaign, which had an overtly reformist character.

*Deliberately started promoting a cult of personality around Avakian, even though the CPI(Maoist), from their own experience concerning Charu Mazumdar, have pointed out how harmful these personality cults are. You can also, obviously, analyze personality cults and their harms -- for example in Peru. Most often, though, personality cults emerge not because the leaders promote them, but because someone else does. Both Stalin and Mao disliked their personality cults, but Khrushchev and Lin Biao, amongst others, and respectively, promoted them. But, Avakian promotes his own personality cult. Concerning the whether or not the RCP promotes a personality cult around him, Avakian replied: "(...) I certainly hope so — we’ve been working very hard to create one."

*Started parroting the imperialist slander concerning Iran. Their initial argument was that they supported neither the Iranian regime nor the imperialists, but that they supported their marginal puppet party CPI(MLM).

and so on.

I don't really expect that you give a shit and neither do I expect you to comprehend that the world isn't black and white and that characters aren't either 100% good or bad, so I guess this post is rather intended for some other people. Avakian and the RCP needs to be properly analyzed. Knee-jerk comments like "he's an asshole" and that the RCP "is a cult" are not real arguments.

In other words, he's an asshole.

[mosfeld]

What a useless garbage "contribution" that was. Reported for spam.

[Gorilla]

Why is it weird when Avakian releases a book full of quotes but when Mao does it, it's a must read?

Why was it awesome when Pablo Neruda wrote poetry but everyone hates my dirty limericks?


I can't see how usefull it would be to learn anything. It's basically a collection of quotes taken out of context. Can you imagine just taking all the quotes from Marx out of context and just complining them into a book without context? How would you know what he was talking about? Or if you were to collect a bunch of lines from MacBeth, how would you know what the story was?

Aphoristic literature (collections of "out of context" quotes) have played an important role in Chinese society for a very long time. And good Chinese stylists (which Mao was, whatever you think of his politics) make an effort to write and speak aphoristically. I.e. in a way that you can validly take quotes "out of context" and they stand on their own.

[Pirate Utopian]

Mao is Pablo Neruda? Hmm. With poetry (I guess, I have no interest in poetry) it's about skill.

Are Avakian and Mao duking out their quotablity skill with overrated one-liners about gunbarrels and dinnerparty's?

[Gorilla]

With poetry (I guess, I have no interest in poetry) it's about skill.

Same with dirty limericks. Fukn haters, man.


Are Avakian and Mao duking out their quotablity skill with overrated one-liners about gunbarrels and dinnerparty's?

I have tried to make it through a couple of Avakian essays and I do not believe the man is constitutionally capable of writing a one-liner, overrated or not. Seriously, here is a paragraph at random from "A Materialist Understaing of the State and its Relation to the Underlying Econonomic Base, Part 2":


So here "the John Stuart Mill principle" comes in, in a certain way—within the framework of proletarian rule and not raised as some kind of absolute, outside of and above the relation of classes and the class character of the state. I don't have time to go into a whole discussion of Mill, but in the "Democracy" book (Democracy: Can't We Do Better Than That?) I made the point that in fact Mill did not insist on and apply a principle of unrestricted liberty in some universal and absolute sense—he didn't think it applied to workers on strike; he didn't think it applied to people in "backward countries" who, as he saw it, were not yet ready to govern themselves, and he implemented that by being an official in the East India Company, a major instrumentality of colonial depredation and ravaging in Asia and other places. But nonetheless, leaving those contradictions aside here, there is a point that Mill is raising, about how people should be able to hear arguments from their ardent advocates. And I think one of the ways in which this should find expression in the governing of socialist society is that—within the framework where, first of all, the state is firmly controlled by the proletariat, and second, there is consultation between the party and the masses and the implementation of forms, such as those that were developed through the Cultural Revolution in China, forms that combine basic masses with people from administrative posts or technical or educational professionals, or people in the arts who are professionals, etc., in decision-making and administrative tasks on all the different levels and in all the different spheres of society—while that should go on as a foundation, there should be a certain element of contested elections within the framework of whatever the Constitution of the socialist society is at the time. And one of the reasons why this should happen is that it will contribute to implementing what is positive about this John Stuart Mill point—that people need to hear positions not just as they are characterized by those who oppose them but as they are put forward by ardent advocates of those positions—what is positive about this in relation to our strategic objectives, of continuing the socialist revolution toward the goal of communism, the ways in which the implementation of this principle will contribute to political and overall intellectual ferment in socialist society and to the flowering of critical and creative thinking and, yes, of dissent, within socialist society—which will make that society more vibrant and will overall strengthen not only the willingness but the conscious determination of the masses of the people, including among the intellectuals, to not only preserve and defend that society but to continue revolutionizing society toward the goal of communism, together with the revolutionary struggle throughout the world.

It's built like fucking Fort Knox. Just try and get anything out of it: you lose every time.

[Pirate Utopian]

I'm saying that as dirty limericks being a part of poetry. A good part.

Man from Nantucket > Anything by Shakespeare.

[praxis1966]

Man from Nantucket > Anything by Shakespeare.

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

I don't know if it's greater, but I have a hard time deciding which I like more.

[x359594]

...Aphoristic literature (collections of "out of context" quotes) have played an important role in Chinese society for a very long time. And good Chinese stylists (which Mao was, whatever you think of his politics) make an effort to write and speak aphoristically. I.e. in a way that you can validly take quotes "out of context" and they stand on their own.

At last we have some cultural context.

While I personally find little of value in "Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-Tung Thought" I think the "Little Red Book" has historical value in as much as tens of millions of people once looked to it for ideological inspiration.

[mosfeld]

Well, there exist 820 million copies of the book worldwide and it's the second most read book in the world (ahead of the Quran and only surpassed by the Bible).

[Ned Kelly]

Well, there exist 820 million copies of the book worldwide and it's the second most read book in the world (ahead of the Quran and only surpassed by the Bible).

I am a maoist, but dude..not great measuring sticks!

[Ms. Max]

I think both are a good read.

[Red_Struggle]

I have a copy and I used to read it all the time to philosophize on his statements. He did say some pretty inspiring things, like "Women hold up half the sky." But when it comes down to it, its just a bunch of one-liners and simple statements. But I do like his explaination of democratic centralism, with democracy correlating to freedom and centralism correlating to discipline. I think that's a good way to explain it to someone who is new is Marxism or just curious about the Leninist government structure.

That being said, I don't think the Red Guards actually put democratic centralism into practice.

[Prairie Fire]

(Double post)

[Prairie Fire]

I read it back in high school,when I was a Maoist. Hell, I used to carry it on me in my bag, pull it out and quote it.

That is the both the strength and the weakness of the Little Red book.

As far as the positive aspects of it are concerned, some of the quotes are elegant and straight-forward in the same sense as expressions and figures of speech are in english. For example, there are many expressions in english that convey wisdom in the form of a saying, ie.) "Fool me once, shame on you...", "The early bird gets the worm", " Don't count your chickens before they hatch"... basically easy sayings to help teach complex lessons to aid in the implementation of daily tasks.

In a country where large strata of the population were still in the midst of climbing out of centuries of illiteracy (especially womyn,), Mao applied the same technique to political education, as had already been applied for Centuries in China by previous scholars.

In this sense, I still find some of the quotations of Mao useful in conveying a complex subject or truth in a simple expresion, ie.) "No investigation, no right to speak", "Political power grows out of the barell of a Gun", "All reactionaries are paper tigers"

Some of these metaphors are obtuse and don't quite make the translation into english, but no more so than the ones that we are accustomed to. I'm sure that those not raised in english speaking culture would find it just as bizzare and incomprehensible if I told them not to look a gift horse in the mouth.

The weakness of the LRB is that for every witty truism, there are dozens upon dozens of unwitty instructions from the great helmsman, with no rationale or explanation. In this way, the quotations assume a Confucian quality, with the book presented as a set of answers to all questions.

Whether or not some of the stances taken by Mao in abstraction are generally correct in application is not the point. The point is that as materialists, action proceeds from an analysis of the conditions at hand. With the LRB, action proceeds in abstraction from the game plan comitted to pages of the book, and the only rationale given is that Chairman Mao said so.

No discussion, No context. The "Why" is rarely present, if at all, in the little Red Book.
This encourages dogmatism and truly discourages any sort of materialism in theory and practice, and leads to comedic blunders (ie. Maoist organizations abroad calling for a 'joint-dictatorship of the Proletariat and Peasantry', when their country has no Peasant class, etc) as well as tragic failures.

One could argue that most of the "Why" could be found by reading the works in question, most of which are sourced in the LRB. In this case, the LRB is largely rendered useless as a theoretical document, as even Maoists searching for tactical strategies and gained experience from revolutionary situations could simply read the works of Mao in the first place and put them into practice.

As with most ostensibly revolutionary literature, it has aspects that are tactically useful to the development of revolutionary politics, and those that are harmful.

Kassad


Who needs that when a book of Bob Avakian's quotes is coming out next month? I'm serious: http://revcom.us/avakian/About-Basics-en.html (http://www.anonym.to/?http://revcom.us/avakian/About-Basics-en.html)



They already did that a long time ago. It was a book released by the RCP-USA called "Bullets", and that's all it was; quotations from Chairman Bob Avakian, in the same style as the Quotations from Chairman Mao, taken from his various writings and speeches.

Even the format was the same, up to and including the plastic coated- cover. While Mao had the little Red book, Avakians was the little silver book.

I happen to own both, having aquired "bullets" from a collection of an old Maoist who parted with his rare books (including many late 70's-80's publications from the RCP-USA, and other Maoist/MLM parties around the world).

The Little Silver Book is a bit more of an interesting read, because those who know Avakian know that he swears casually in his political speeches and writings. For this reason, some of the quotations in "Bullets" begin with "Those fucking...", and other profanity that seems anachronistic to a political document.



before he became anti-Soviet and started preaching a shitty political line.


The only part that was shitty was that he became anti-Soviet at the expense of being pro-American.




Aphoristic literature (collections of "out of context" quotes) have played an important role in Chinese society for a very long time. And good Chinese stylists (which Mao was, whatever you think of his politics) make an effort to write and speak aphoristically. I.e. in a way that you can validly take quotes "out of context" and they stand on their own.


Yes, but while this had it's uses, depending on this lead people to fall back into Confucian rote behaviour. This is anathema to dialectical materialist analysis and practice.

P.S. My persynal LRB makes a guest appearance in a trailer for my friends independent film that I had a large part in writing and producing (before irreconcilable creative differences, and I walked off the project)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk2hMI8hWvU

[Kassad]

I have noticed Revolution Newspaper and Bob Avakian's writings throwing in the occasional swearing, which I think is a part of Avakian's continual attempts to appear hip. I don't like to paint it as so simplistic, but when his poem "All Played Out" is talking about "homies in the hood", I think it's relatively easy to see what he is trying to do.

I do recall the Bullets book, but I never saw it in person or got a chance to get one. Since you're a lot more informed on the topic than I am, why do you think the BAsics publication will be any different?

[Prairie Fire]

I do recall the Bullets book, but I never saw it in person or got a chance to get one. Since you're a lot more informed on the topic than I am, why do you think the BAsics publication will be any different?


It probably won't. Perhaps "Basics", in application, will be Bullets Volume 2.

Avakian has said a lot of shit since "Bullets" (my copy was printed in 1985). In order to remain current (and adhear to the same plan of action,wether or not it is yielding results,), they need a newer volume of quotations from his more contemporary speeches.

[Kassad]

It probably won't. Perhaps "Basics", in application, will be Bullets Volume 2.

Avakian has said a lot of shit since "Bullets" (my copy was printed in 1985). In order to remain current (and adhear to the same plan of action,wether or not it is yielding results,), they need a newer volume of quotations from his more contemporary speeches.

Frankly, I think they're taking a pretty chauvinistic line with their "you can't change the world if you don't know the BAsics" phrase. What about the Russian Revolution and the Chinese Revolution? The revolutions were led (and continue to be led) by people who don't know the "BAsics." It reminds me of their whole "communism is hanging by a thread -- that thread is Bob Avakian" shit.

[Prairie Fire]

Well, that's not "chauvenism", per se. It is pretty standard fare for every political organization to tout their line as superior. The difference with the RCP is that they attribute their line entirely to a single individual (without which, presumably, their organization would cease to exist?).

[Diello]

I found it unbearably tedious, full of things in the spirit of, "The party is the great hope of the proletarian revolution, and must strive forward with uncompromising strength in Marxism-Leninism! To do otherwise is wrong and will cause the bourgeois counterrevolution to triumph!" etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Then again, I only got about forty pages in; maybe it gets better from there.

And there were a handful of good quotes, but most of them just struck me as claptrap.