who would be a maoist - Who would want to be a maoist

[crazy comie]

Who would want to follow mao after the cultural revoloution.

[nz revolution]

Heaps of people, in Nepal the Maoists there want to be Maoists, although they aren't going to go around and smash everything that is religious in their society, they are going to turn them into landmarks and places of interest.

I know fuck all about the Cult. Rev. what happened?

[crazy comie]

The cultural rev was when all the academics got beatan the shit out of, as well as that the red guard where alowed to kill and tourture any one they liked. Oh and the nepales maoists are only maoist in there gorilla tactics.The Nepales don,t know what they are going to do when they get into power, well acording to channel four news.

[Nobody]

The cultural Revolution was a power play by Mao to oust those who opposed his policies. Mao also felt that everyone shoould experiance the revolution, and by launching the cultural rev. those to young to have fought with him could exeriance the "joy" of the revolutionary sprirt. Did not work out.

[Nobody]

(Edited by LevTrosky at 8:45 pm on May 29, 2003)

[Umoja]

Ask the Black Panther Party why anyone would want to be Maoist.

[nz revolution]

Not just for the guerilla tactics, but for his Marxist theory also.

A comrade of mine just got back from Nepal, he spent a month with the Maoists. GOt lots of great photos.

I got Mao's "little red book" yesterday, it's wonderful, I like it :)

"Political power comes from the barrel of a gun"

"Without the peoples' army, the people have nothing"

[synthesis]

When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called "The People's Stick."

[synthesis]

(That was Bukanin.)

[nz revolution]

Anarchist right?

[Ian]

Yes, Bakunin was anarchist...

What I admire about Maoism, although I do not consider myself a maoist, is the belief in allowing a revolutionary workers movement independant of the government (unlike the USSR), however this (the Red Guards) was awarding a carte blanche and caused a lot of problems.

"Letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend is the policy for promoting the progress of the arts and the sciences and a flourishing socialist culture in our land. Different forms and styles in art should develop freely and different schools in science should contend freely. We think that it is harmful to the growth of art and science if administrative measures are used to impose one particular style of art or school of thought and to ban another. Questions of right and wrong in the arts and sciences should be settled through free discussion in artistic and scientific circles and through practical work in these fields. They should not be settled in summary fashion." -Mao Zedong

(Edited by Ian Rocks at 12:56 pm on May 30, 2003)

[Sandanista]

Stalinists, state capitalists, maybe some chinese ppl, i dunno y people think these wankers a socialists.

[Cassius Clay]

On the Cultural Revolution.

Ultra-leftism at it's worst. Telling a bunch of kids to go around and smash up whoever they don't like has what to do with Communism? Then there's the other point of view, Mao betrayed the CPCR, it was he who shut down the Shanghai commune. While the people were rightly struggling to fight against revisionsim and the 'Capitalist roaders' Mao was making sure the PLA were loyal to him. The CPCR had many good ideals, it didn't go so well in practice never the less the good parts of it Mao stopped, he was scarred of example's like the Shanghai commune and shut it down. Also when he declared that all should be criticised he forgot to include himself, he became a virtual god, his word was final.

Anyway the PLP has some excellent stuff on this which I'm sure is more detailed than the above. Other criticisms of Mao. In 'Mao Tse Tung Thought a anti-Marxist Theory' (that may not be the correct title my minds gone blank) Enver Hoxha pointed out that in 1955 at the Party Congress it was declared 'U$ Imperialism was the number one enemy', in 1968 it was both 'Soviet Social Imperialism and U$ Imperialism' who were equally bad and by 1973 it was just 'Soviet-Social Imperialism'. While Vietnamese workers and peasants were dying Mao was making friends with their butchers Nixon and Kissenger. And what is all this 'Let 100 Flowers bloom, let 100 ideas compete'? It's signalling that we will allow Capitalist ideas not only in thought but in practice. Somehow a alliance of the National-Capitalist class and workers can build Communism in China.

On the plus side Maoism is progressive and it can't be denied that the majority of stuggle's going on in the world today are Maoist infulenced or outright Maoists. Mao together with Hoxha was the first to see through Khrushchev and how he was restoring Capitalism and he fought against it refusing to bow to Soviet Imperialism. The ideas of the CPCR were correct and honourable that it failed in practice merely means we have to study where it wen't wrong and it's mistakes. He liberated China from Feudalism and foriegn domination, if he had lived there's no way China would be like it is today.

[Cassius Clay]

Hmm I may of appeared to of contradicted myself there.

Basically what I was saying was that in practice the CPCR evolved into ultra-leftism, the idea of gettting rid of the beuracrates, revisionists and others was wholly correct.

Another point Mao and Maoists today say that people like Hoxha are wrong to say that bourgesie wont exist in a party if the party is not revisionist and therefor a CPCR is needed to rid the party of these elements. But two points must be made, first look at China now it's as Capitalist as uncle Sam. Where the CPCR might of succedded Mao prevented it from and second of all who was it who allowed bourgesie ideas into the party in the first place?

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Quote: from DyerMaker on 2:23 am on May 30, 2003
When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called "The People's Stick."


Wow nice quote, i'll use it as my signature.

[Som]

Might want to spell his name right.

Bakunin.

Maoism does seem to have a large armed movement around the world. Mostly in nepal where the Maoists control about 80% of the country, and two other marxist-leninist parties that have a strong vote in parliament are supporting the government repression of the maoists, and voted in favor of declaring martial law over parts of the country.
Not that the parliament really matters in that country, I'm not even sure its still around anymore.

Theres also Maoist rebels in the phillipines, a few left in peru, that weren't too nice to begin with.

Alot of maoism seems to supposedly include criticism, but it seems to be a lot of idle talk in authoritarian power structures. Its nothing special.

[atlanticche]

Maoism is stupid
the Cultural revolution was anarchy in its purist form