Is this shit about Mao's wife true?

[Os Cangaceiros]

(well, the most famous of his wives, anyway)



Jiang relentlessly persecuted those she believed had wronged her. At a mass rally in Beijing, Jiang directed a "struggle session" against a woman, Fan Jin, who had married Jiang's second husband after Jiang separated from him in 1931. According to Jiang, Fan had published satirical essays portraying Mao as a megalomaniac, and Jiang herself as a "semi-prostitute", but Fan's real crime was her marriage. Fan was arrested and died soon afterwards.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiang_Qing#cite_note-Fox2-5)

Jiang's rivalry with, and personal dislike of, Zhou Enlai led Jiang to hurt Zhou where he was most vulnerable. In 1968 Jiang had Zhou's adopted son (Sun Yang) and daughter (Sun Weishi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Weishi)) tortured and murdered by Maoist Red Guards (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Guards_(China)). Sun Yang was murdered in the basement of Renmin University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renmin_University). After Sun Weishi died following seven months of torture in a secret prison (at Jiang's direction), Jiang made sure that Sun's body was cremated and disposed of so that no autopsy could be performed, and so that Sun's family could not have her ashes. In 1968 Jiang forced Zhou to sign an arrest warrant for his own brother.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiang_Qing#cite_note-9) In 1973 and 1974, Jiang directed the "Criticize Lin, Criticize Confucius" campaign against premier Zhou because Zhou was viewed as one of the Jiang's primary political opponents. In 1975, Jiang initiated a campaign named "Criticizing Song Jiang, Evaluating the Water Margin", which encouraged the use of Zhou as an example of a political loser. After Zhou Enlai died in 1976, Jiang initiated the "Five Nos" campaign in order to discourage and prohibit any public mourning for Zhou.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiang_Qing#cite_note-10)

When given free rein, Jiang also wreaked vengeance on Mao's family. Jiang confined Mao's third wife, Jiang's predecessor, to a mental hospital for several decades. When Mao's eldest son was killed in the Korean War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War), his widow accused Jiang of feeling "immense ecstasy". Jiang had several of Mao's children, and/or their spouses, arrested. Jiang forced her own daughter with Mao to divorce her husband because her husband was only a farmer, causing Jiang's daughter to go insane.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiang_Qing#cite_note-Fox2-5)

:ohmy:

[Ostrinski]

Note to self: never marry

[The Jay]

I don't know if it is true or not, but whatever the case it will have the greatest impact upon my politics of my life.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Petit-bourgeois Communists, folks.

[Zealot]

I hope the Revleft academics realise that Wikipedia isn't considered a realiable source anywhere in academia. You would do well to browse the sources used next time. This article should not be taken seriously at all. One of the sources used is a "biography" that literally uses gossip and anecdotes as its source material. Another source used was Jung Chang's and Jon Halliday's book, which has long been discredited. I could go on but you get the picture.

[Rafiq]

Speaking of which, today, I was reading Wikipedia's article on Ivan Pavlov. According to the article, of which is supposed to be historically objective and free from any ideological bias, Lenin praised Pavlov because according to Pavlov, in short, the brain is similar to a machine of which can be changed in every way in accordance to different environments. Instead of pointing out that Lenin as a materialist would of course praise such a development, as it simply re assures the validity of Dialectical materialism, the article stated that "Lenin, as a tyrant, perhaps was aroused by this prospect because he wanted to be able to brainwash people". I'd literally hit the man who wrote that.

[Omsk]

They actually described Lenin as a tyrant? Thats a new low even for wikipedia.

As for the information about Mao's wife, these things, are objectively, not important, since they tell us little about the nature of the society and the economical structure of the country, which is the information we are after, not some obscure half-truths about his wife, or children.

The method of historical materialism is important here, since if we avoid it, we will end up in a cess-pool of bourgeois mystifications, lies, and propaganda.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

I don't think it's really relevant. Even Maoists (M-L-M types I mean) don't worship Mao and some of them are quite critical of him, they only think that the "ism" attached to Mao is valuable and that there is no reason to resurrect the cult of Mao. Especially in the modern world where Maoists are leading the most important movements in Nepal, India, and the Philippines, are influencing other movements in Turkey, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh, and are experiencing a revival in Peru.

So be critical of Maoism, but first find out what "Maoism" means in the modern context (MLM). Because most maoists don't give a crap about the nitty gritty of China.

[Ostrinski]

I don't think OP asked if it was relevant, he asked if it was true.

[Omsk]

This is where i got when i followed the listed sources used in the creation of this article: http://www.nytimes.com/1984/03/04/books/lust-revenge-and-revolution.html?pagewanted=1

There we can find this paragraph: Indeed, if Mr. Terrill's rendering of Jiang Qing is correct, much of the Cultural Revolution - one of the great disasters of modern Chinese history - can be explained by her willful, vindictive personality and tempestuous relationship with Mao. For her, the Cultural Revolution, during which millions of Chinese were persecuted, had no ''deep meaning'' but was only a chance for revenge on the people she felt had wronged her, dating back to the 1930's.

See, this is why we don't need bourgeois journalism and bourgeois historiography.

More examples of journalism demonstrating that we should not trust bourgeois authors who try to lure people by popular stories.

After several affairs, she set her sights on Mao, clapping ostentatiously at his lectures and inviting herself into his cave. One evening Zhou Enlai, according to a source Mr. Terrill calls ''close to the Mao family,'' was searching for Mao to answer an urgent cable and stumbled on the Chairman in the bushes with Miss Jiang. Ever the diplomat, Zhou blew out his lantern and sent Mao's bodyguards away.

See?

This is not adequate historiography. Leave it be.

Keep in mind that i am not defending the wife of chairman Mao, i'm just suggesting that some of the sources listed in the article and not to be blindly trusted.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I would guess, given its playing on trite mysogenistic tropes, that it's probably not true. I have no particular political investment in the issue, or in defending Jiang, but, really, that reads like bathroom graffiti. "Petty wimmin! Always fighting over men! What a terrifying world we'd live in without rational patriarchs!" Gag me with a fucking spoon, amirite?

[Os Cangaceiros]

I would guess, given its playing on trite mysogenistic tropes, that it's probably not true. I have no particular political investment in the issue, or in defending Jiang, but, really, that reads like bathroom graffiti. "Petty wimmin! Always fighting over men! What a terrifying world we'd live in without rational patriarchs!" Gag me with a fucking spoon, amirite?

You got all that from that excerpt? Both sexes have innumerable examples of people with vindictive and petty personalities.

And yeah, Wikipedia is sometimes vandalized, or has blatant untruths inserted into it...I remember reading the Communist Party of Italy article, and it said that Snooki was the one-time chairman of the party. :lol: Who knows, it may still say that, haven't checked in a while.

I think that, in general, Wikipedia's good aspects far outweigh it's bad aspects, though.

Anyway, this wasn't at all about the usefulness of Maoism, or the fit of madness that was the Cultural Revolution, lol. I'm simply interested in the personality of this one individual. Interesting people in history interest me.

[Yuppie Grinder]

Speaking of which, today, I was reading Wikipedia's article on Ivan Pavlov. According to the article, of which is supposed to be historically objective and free from any ideological bias, Lenin praised Pavlov because according to Pavlov, in short, the brain is similar to a machine of which can be changed in every way in accordance to different environments. Instead of pointing out that Lenin as a materialist would of course praise such a development, as it simply re assures the validity of Dialectical materialism, the article stated that "Lenin, as a tyrant, perhaps was aroused by this prospect because he wanted to be able to brainwash people". I'd literally hit the man who wrote that.

The idea that the values of bourgeois society are innate in our minds and we can never escape them is a lot more tyrannical.

[The CPSU Chairman]

Wikipedia also says that Mao decided to reconcile with America because he was mad at Kim Il Sung for being nice to Brezhnev.

I'm not saying Jiang Qing wasn't responsible for some nasty shit. I'm just saying, take anything you see on Wiki with a grain of salt. Always check the sources. You'd be amazed at the kind of garbage people use as sources when they edit Wikipedia articles.

[Take The Long Way Home]

I stopped reading when i saw
Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Don't trust wikipedia too much. Just trust things you can hold in your hands like books

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Just trust things you can hold in your hands like books

In your hands a book by a conspiracy nutter; in your hands, the Black Book of Communism, and what's what? Robert Conquest, why I never thought I'd see that vomit in print! Books are, by definition, just as liable to being nonsense, riddled with lies, as Wikipedia (some of them much more so, and historical biographies is one of those subjects that are often very... thin on truth. In a store I once skimmed through this Stalin biography that had written out extensive, novel-style dialogue between the various characters! And surely that was not the only time that happened.)

[Hiero]

Jian Qing is often potrayed as a melodramatic person, not interesed or driven by politics but her emotions. Which is typical male and western analysis of women in public, and Jiang Qing being a chinese women of high importance in Chinese history often cops alot of flak. The source paints Jiang Qing as a lustful hartlet, how is any of this a fair analysis of a female politician and revolutionary?

You really need to read "The battle for china's past" by Mobo Gao, Gao challenges alot of the presentation of the Chinese cultural revolution in that book, including how Jiang Qing is treated.A perspective I was given of her, was that her and the rest of the gang of four ( Zhang Chunqiao (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Chunqiao), Yao Wenyuan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yao_Wenyuan), and Wang Hongwen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Hongwen)) clashed with Lin Biao over how the cultural revolutions hould continue. Lin Biao wanted to continue the cultural revolution under the cult of personality of Mao (which Lin Biao was primary responsibile for) and Jiang Qing wanted to continue it under the context of the "the people". This lead them to clash, but the Chinese state deal with them as the same, labeling them as 'counter-revolutionary'. But that is all history, lets talk more about sex and bullshit.

Also note you just called her Mao's wife, not even using her real name. She was more then Mao's wife, she was a leading in the cultural revolution.

[Geiseric]

So when Wikipedia calls the USSR, Eastern Germany, and China "Communist states," is that also untrue? It must be according to the posters above, since wikipedia is full of bourgeois propaganda. ;)

[Os Cangaceiros]

Guess I'll just assume that the aforementioned stuff is false.

[Omsk]

Well i basically proved that some of the sources used come from biased auhors who obviously wanted profit. Although i can't judge the entire book, maybe it has some positive sides.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Yeah, a lot of books about communist figures are slanted pretty heavily against them. Got to take some of what they say with a grain of salt.

And I freely admit being interested in the "scandalous" nature of these allegations, and not nearly as much in Jiang's public policy or whatever. That has nothing to do with her being a "vengeful harlot", though...I have the same interest in male vindictive paranoids, too, like J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon. Machinations of power and cloak-and-dagger politics...love that shit.

[Omsk]

You are not the only one, but when you read from such sources, you have to be careful not to adopt a wrong picture of the situation, you have to filter the bourgeois content. For an example, some years back, i loved to read interesting stories about Stalin, and certain conspiracy theories, but when i bought actual biographies, i found sooo many mistakes in the works i read before.

[Robespierres Neck]

Wikipedia also states this:



On the afternoon of September 7, Mao took a turn for the worse. Mao had just fallen asleep and needed to rest, but Jiang Qing insisted on rubbing his back and moving his limbs, and she sprinkled powder on his body. The medical team protested that the dust from the powder was not good for his lungs, but she instructed the nurses on duty to follow her example later.


The next morning, September 8, she went again. This time she wanted the medical staff to change Mao's sleeping position, claiming that he had been lying too long on his left side. The doctor on duty objected, knowing that he could breathe only on his left side. Jiang had him move Mao nonetheless. As a result, Mao's breathing stopped and his face turned blue. Jiang Qing left the room while the medical staff put Mao on a respirator and performed emergency cardiopulmonary resuscitation.


Eventually, Mao was revived and Hua Guofeng urged Jiang Qing not to interfere further with the doctor's work. However, Mao's organs failed and the Chinese government decided to disconnect Mao's life support mechanism.


Everything I read on Wikipedia, I take with a grain of salt. Sometimes less.

[Hiero]

Lol at the "Chinese Government decided". So it went through the process of becoming policy?

[black magick hustla]

well that wiki article is sourced so you could always look up the reference.

some of it is probably true, or at least based on some sort of fact but given a strange interpretation. i mean people involved in politics, especially massively titanic figures like her are generally fucked up. case given, richard nixon. normal people don't have the drive/obsession/malice tendencies to slough their way through the disgusting world of politics.

[Rafiq]

So when Wikipedia calls the USSR, Eastern Germany, and China "Communist states," is that also untrue? It must be according to the posters above, since wikipedia is full of bourgeois propaganda. ;)

They were "Communist states". They had a ruling Communist party and were governed by self declared Communists. Ideologically there was "Communist" rhetoric. That is what is meant by "Communist" state, not a mode of production external from capitalism.

[hetz]

Probably not, as the previous posters pointed out, but such controversial things are often good selling points.