Log in

View Full Version : On Our Style of Work and Study



red_che
18th November 2005, 06:08
In transforming backward agricultural China into an advanced industrialized country, we are confronted with arduous tasks and our experience is far from adequate. So we must be good at learning.

"Opening Address at the Eighth National Congress of the Communist Party of China" (September 15, 1956).

Conditions are changing all the time, and to adapt one's thinking to the new conditions, one must study. Even those who have a better grasp of Marxism and are comparatively firm in their proletarian stand have to go on studying, have to absorb what is new and study new problems.

Speech at the Chinese Communist Party's National Conference on Propaganda Work (March 12, 1957), 1st pocket ed., p. 8.*

We can learn what we did not know. We are not only good at destroying the Old World, we are also good at building the new.

"Report to the Second Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee of the Communist Party of China" (March 5, 1949), Selected Works, Vol. IV, p. 374.

Now, there are two different attitudes towards learning from others. One is the dogmatic attitude of transplanting everything, whether or not it is suited to our conditions. This is no good. The other attitude is to use our heads and learn those things that suit our conditions, that is, to absorb whatever experience is useful to us. That is the attitude we should adopt.

On the Correct Handling of Contradictions among the People (February 27, 1957), 1st pocket ed., p. 75.

The theory of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin is universally applicable. We should regard it not as a dogma, but as a guide to action. Studying it is not merely a matter of learning terms and phrases but of learning Marxism-Leninism as the science of revolution. It is not just a matter of understanding the general laws derived by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin from their extensive study of real life and revolutionary experience, but of studying their standpoint and method in examining and solving problems.

"The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War" (October 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, pp. 208-09.

If we have a correct theory but merely prate about it, pigeonhole it and do not put it into practice, then that theory, however good, is of no significance.

"On Practice" (July 1937), Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 304.

It is necessary to master Marxist theory and apply it, master it for the sole purpose of applying it. If you can apply the Marxist-Leninist viewpoint in elucidating one or two practical problems, you should be commended and credited with some achievement. The more problems you elucidate and the more comprehensively and profoundly you do so, the greater will be your achievement.

"Rectify the Party's Style of Work" (February 1, 1942), Selected Works, Vol. III, p. 38.

How is Marxist-Leninist theory to be linked with the practice of the Chinese revolution? To use a common expression, it is by "shooting the arrow at the target". As the arrow is to the target, so is Marxism-Leninism to the Chinese revolution. Some comrades, however, are "shooting without a target", shooting at random, and such people are liable to harm the revolution.

Ibid., p. 42.

Those experienced in work must take up the study of theory and must read seriously; only then will they be able to systematize and synthesize their experience and raise it to the level of theory, only then will they not mistake their partial experience for universal truth and not commit empiricist errors.

Ibid.

Reading is learning, but applying is also learning and the more important kind of learning at that. Our chief method is to learn warfare through warfare. A person who has had no opportunity to go to school can also learn warfare - he can learn through fighting in war. A revolutionary war is a mass undertaking; it is often not a matter of first learning and then doing, but of doing and then learning, for doing is itself learning.

"Problems of Strategy in China's Revolutionary War" (December 1936), Selected Works, Vol. I, pp. 189-90.

There is a gap between the ordinary civilian and the soldier, but it is no Great Wall, and it can be quickly closed, and the way to close it is to take part in revolution, in war. By saying that it is not easy to learn and to apply, we mean that it is hard to learn thoroughly and to apply skillfully. By saying that civilians can very quickly become soldiers, we mean that it is not difficult to cross the threshold. To put the two statements together, we may cite the Chinese adage, "Nothing in the world is difficult for one who sets his mind to it." To cross the threshold is not difficult, and mastery, too, is possible provided one sets one's mind to the task and is good at learning.

Ibid., p. 190.

We must learn to do economic work from all who know how, no matter who they are. We must esteem them as teachers, learning from them respectfully and conscientiously. We must not pretend to know when we do not know.

"On the People's Democratic Dictatorship" (June 30, 1949), Selected Works, Vol. IV, p. 423.

Knowledge is a matter of science and no dishonesty or conceit whatsoever is permissible. What is required is definitely the reverse - honesty and modesty.

"On Practice" (July 1937), Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 300.

Complacency is the enemy of study. We cannot really learn anything until we rid ourselves of complacency. Our attitude towards ourselves should be "to be insatiable in learning" and towards others "to be tireless in teaching".

"The Role of the Chinese Communist Party in the National War" (October 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 210.

Some people have read a few Marxist books and think themselves quite learned but what they have read has not penetrated, has not struck root in their minds, so that they do not know how to use it and their class feelings remain as of old. Others are very conceited and having learned some book-phrases, think them terrific and are very cocky; but whenever a storm blows up, they take a stand very different from that of the workers and the majority of the peasants. They waver while the latter stand firm, they equivocate while the latter are forthright.

Speech at the Chinese Communist Party's National Conference on Propaganda Work (March 12, 1957), 1st pocket ed., pp. 7-8.

In order to have a real grasp of Marxism, one must learn it not only from books, but mainly through class struggle, through practical work and close contact with the masses of workers and peasants. When in addition to reading some Marxist books our intellectuals have gained some understanding through close contact with the masses of workers and peasants and through their own practical work, we will all be speaking the same language, not only the common language of patriotism and the common language of the socialist system, but probably even the common language of the communist world outlook. If that happens, all of us will certainly work much better.

Ibid., p. 12.


Took this from www.marxist.org (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/ch33.htm)

redstar2000
18th November 2005, 15:40
Another collection of Mao's banalities.

*yawns*


Originally posted by Mao
To put the two statements together, we may cite the Chinese adage, "Nothing in the world is difficult for one who sets his mind to it."

A fine example of the idealist core of Mao's thinking.

Just "set your mind to it" and you "can do anything".

This is (as a historical materialist would expect) proto-capitalist ideology -- our "modern version" appears daily in the Opposing Ideologies forum:

Anyone who really works hard and wants to become rich can do it.

Or in slightly different words...

In America, you can be anything you want!

One would imagine that "western" Maoists would be embarrassed to post this sort of thing.

But when it comes to "the red sun in our hearts" they are completely shameless.

Sad...or hilarious?

You decide.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

The Garbage Disposal Unit
18th November 2005, 17:51
Mmm. I think one of the most interesting parts of Mao is sorting out the good from the bad - and there is some good - I carry a copy of "Quotations From Chariamn Mao Tse Tung" with me all the time. Sometimes, he made some really valuable, practical, insights on Marxism - really pushed dynamic thinking, and emphasized Marxism as fluid rather than stale.
At the same time, Mao said some really idealistic, ill-founded crap - and I think personally my thinking has advanced in leaps and bounds by criticizing the fuck out of him. Apply Mao to Mao, and tear him to shreds - I figure that's why this thread has potential value. If more people took Redstars lead and responded to specific mistaken ideas in Mao's ideas (or rhetoric, depending . . . ) instead of screaming "Mao is teh suck!" than I think we'd arrive at some great conclusions.
That's all.

red_che
19th November 2005, 01:28
Originally posted by Virgin Molotov [email protected] 18 2005, 05:56 PM
Mmm. I think one of the most interesting parts of Mao is sorting out the good from the bad - and there is some good - I carry a copy of "Quotations From Chariamn Mao Tse Tung" with me all the time. Sometimes, he made some really valuable, practical, insights on Marxism - really pushed dynamic thinking, and emphasized Marxism as fluid rather than stale.
At the same time, Mao said some really idealistic, ill-founded crap - and I think personally my thinking has advanced in leaps and bounds by criticizing the fuck out of him. Apply Mao to Mao, and tear him to shreds - I figure that's why this thread has potential value. If more people took Redstars lead and responded to specific mistaken ideas in Mao's ideas (or rhetoric, depending . . . ) instead of screaming "Mao is teh suck!" than I think we'd arrive at some great conclusions.
That's all.
I think you were not familiar with Mao's writing style. He's poetic and thus his writings appear as though it is some type of a "romantic" literature or in your understanding, "idealistic". But taking the gist out of it, it does make practical application of Marxism universally. It has nothing idealistic in it. It is based on the actual practices and situations they have experienced in the Chinese revolution that can be applied to several countries, even in the west.

Redstar's criticisms were unfounded. It is just his opinion, though I respect it as it is. However, I can say that redstar really mistook Mao, and because Mao is an Asian (from the east, lived in a different environment), he did not want to take Mao seriously as a revolutionary.



(redstar)

A fine example of the idealist core of Mao's thinking.

Just "set your mind to it" and you "can do anything".

This is (as a historical materialist would expect) proto-capitalist ideology -- our "modern version" appears daily in the Opposing Ideologies forum:

Anyone who really works hard and wants to become rich can do it.

Or in slightly different words...

In America, you can be anything you want!

One would imagine that "western" Maoists would be embarrassed to post this sort of thing.

But when it comes to "the red sun in our hearts" they are completely shameless.

Sad...or hilarious?

You decide.


Wrong analogy. Your analogy is terrible.

To revolt is really hard. It cannot be done without determination. This is what Mao is saying.

Your analogies are tricky, certainly, and it looks as is if it's really what was said. But to critical minds, they simply were trashes.

You can't understand Mao because you are not of his class. :cool:

cph_shawarma
19th November 2005, 06:22
You can't understand Mao because you are not of his class.
Well, I certainly hope RS2K isn't a petty-bourgeois academic with a boner for idiocy. Or wasn't Mao a petty-bourgeois academic? To you he was probably "proletarian", but he was simply an idiot.

However he has a quote, which would be suitable for you to hear:


Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn't that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?

It won' t do!

It won't do!

You must investigate!

You must not talk nonsense!

Mao Tse-tung, Oppose Book Worship, 1930 (my emphasis added)

redstar2000
19th November 2005, 06:30
Originally posted by red_che
You can't understand Mao because you are not of his class.

:lol:

Evidently, you have "grasped" Mao's "methods" better than perhaps even you realize.

Mao's method of dealing with his critics was to send them off to a fate that he personally labored so diligently to escape.

You know, shoveling hog turds in the countryside! :o

This was called "re-education"...teaching Mao's critics what it was like "to be in Mao's class".

And it worked! No one who had been through it ever criticized Mao again; they "understood" Mao "perfectly".

No doubt you envision a similar fate for "assholes" like me.

Don't bet your rent money on it. :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

YKTMX
19th November 2005, 10:58
Fortune cookie bullshit.


Mao's method of dealing with his critics was to send them off to a fate that he personally labored so diligently to escape.

Maybe if some comrades had listened to what was being said at the time, he might not have been able to get away with it.

I guess it's just a case of 'once I was blind, now I can see'.

red_che
22nd November 2005, 04:44
Well, I certainly hope RS2K isn't a petty-bourgeois academic with a boner for idiocy. Or wasn't Mao a petty-bourgeois academic? To you he was probably "proletarian", but he was simply an idiot.

No doubt Mao was a proletarian, a communist. I don't know what you mean by proletarian or a communist, however, Mao, though of peasant descent, a proletarian and a communist by deeds. He led the Chinese socialist revolution, right? He led millions, not just thousands of Chinese revolutionaries. He led the socialist construction in China, and he consolidated the gains of socialism against revisionists.

As for the quoted one, yeah, probably best for you to read it again and again and try to internalize it. You will see who's talking nonsense.


Evidently, you have "grasped" Mao's "methods" better than perhaps even you realize.

Mao's method of dealing with his critics was to send them off to a fate that he personally labored so diligently to escape.

You know, shoveling hog turds in the countryside!

This was called "re-education"...teaching Mao's critics what it was like "to be in Mao's class".

And it worked! No one who had been through it ever criticized Mao again; they "understood" Mao "perfectly".

No doubt you envision a similar fate for "assholes" like me.

Don't bet your rent money on it.


Okay, what are you trying to point out then? What is wrong with these Mao quotations? Or maybe they were wrong for you because someone from a peasant descent said this? But if somebody else could have said these same words, would it be correct for you then?