What is Maoism ?

[Zostrianos]

The troops that actually started expelling people at gunpoint appear to be KR though.

Has any movement in history every sought to create a worse society? Have they have explicitly stated that "we're here to fuck things up even more"? Just about every political group or movement, left, right, third position or whatever else claims to seek to create a "better society".

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

[milk]

ComradeMan's position is that they never sought to build a better society, though. They were just evil, lunatics and psychopaths who killed for the sake of it, piling up skulls. His reactions to my arguments for example. In that agreeing they were seeking to build what they thought was a better society, means that I agree with the methods they mistakenly used to go about doing that. That in saying so, makes me an apologist or supporter of the KR.

[ComradeMan]

Some of the people shown in that clip weren't actually Khmer Rouge, but belonged to a group called the Monatio. Also, here.

How do you know they hadn't captured the flag? Source, evidence, proof.....

According to Sihanouk the Monatio did welcome the KR initially anyway, so they had even more support from the "old/new" people.... of course they too were rounded up and dealt with promptly. But as you yourself say- we don't know much about them.

Even if they were, a lot of the other ones were not....

ComradeMan's position is that they never sought to build a better society, though.

No, never said that at all- not once. ComradeMan's position is that "good intentions" are not a "good defense"- especially where awkward little details like up to 2 million people dead and/or genocide are involved....

[Zostrianos]

The intentions are irrelevant. It's the outcome that matters in the end.

[milk]

Indeed outcomes matter the most, but intentions aren't completely irrelevant.

Where have I said that the outcome/s don't matter?

[ComradeMan]

Indeed outcomes matter the most, but intentions aren't completely irrelevant.

Where have I said that the outcome/s don't matter?

It's not always what's said, but what isn't said that matters. You tend to focus exlusively on intentions and belittle the analysis of the outcomes.

[Zostrianos]

I think what's even more important than the outcomes, are the processes whereby those "good intentions" are put into practice. The transitional phase between an idea and its practical application. I think that's the heart of the problem.

[ComradeMan]

I think what's even more important than the outcomes, are the processes whereby those "good intentions" are put into practice. The transitional phase between an idea and its practical application. I think that's the heart of the problem.

Yeah, you're right . Good point. If I want to plant a tree with good intentions, but refuse to listen to any advice or opinion and plant the seed in cement so the seedling dies.... do you follow...?

It takes more than a red flag to make a leftist.... I have always been of the opinion that the KR as whole were political opportunists and not necessarily leftist other than in name or some influences at best.

[Zostrianos]

Now, coming back to Maoism specifically, and the Cultural revolution, there is a very interesting historical parallel between the events in 1960's China, and another totalitarian institution nearly 1500 years before: the Church. When the Church was hard at work with its own revolution to convert the masses, destroying synagogues, temples, and beating Christianity into the people, more often than not the agents of this terror were monks, who in late antiquity were not virtuous ascetics, but more akin to street gangs. They were usually armed and terrorized cities and the countryside, robbing citizens under the guise of giving to the poor, demolishing non Christian monuments, burning books and houses, and oftentimes resorting to murder as well (q.v. Hypatia of Alexandria). They behaved exactly like the Red Guards would in the Cultural Revolution. What's even more interesting is that the Christian byzantine emperor Theodosius, who actively persecuted non Christians, was forced to admit that "the monks commit many crimes" and in 390 AD he passed a law expelling monks out of the cities into the desert; life had become intolerable for citizens in the cities, with gangs of monks terrorizing everyone, and the authorities were finally forced to act. Much like in 1968 Mao finally decided to send the Red Guards into the countryside. History repeats itself...

[ComradeMan]

...

Most groups when they get in power go bad.... (if they weren't rotten to start with)- damn, I'm feeling misanthropic and pessimistic.

Your reference to Hypatia of Alexandria, however, concerns me- I hope you're not relying too much on Agora... there are issues there. We actually know very little about Hypatia other than she lived and died in Alexandria and was killed by a mob... and that's about it. Perhaps this is a good subject for another thread in religion...

[Zostrianos]

I've been wanting to watch that movie for a while now, but I still haven't. I do know she was killed by a mob of monks at the service of bishop Cyril. But anyways, yeah, we can discuss it in the religion forum.
I was just pointing out that totalitarianism is a valid concept. In spite of ideological differences, different totalitarian systems do have more in common than what separates them.

[ComradeMan]

I've been wanting to watch that movie for a while now, but I still haven't. I do know she was killed by a mob of monks at the service of bishop Cyril. But anyways, yeah, we can discuss it in the religion forum.

Actually, that doesn't really have a strong basis in any historical fact- the idea originates from a 19th century writer by the name of Mangasar Mugurditch Mangasarian- who was quite anti-Christian it seems and also seems to have picked up on the writings of an anti-Christian, Damascius (who was born about twenty years or more after Hypatia's death).

According to Socrates of Constantinople (who was contemporary), the mob was actually led by a minor figure called Peter and there is no evidence to suggest they were monks and was connected to the fighting between Alexandrian Christians and Jews at the time... It's interesting to note that Socrates speaks highly of her and also seems to regard the whole incident as shameful- yet does not involve St Cyril.

Yet even she fell a victim to the political jealousy, which at that time prevailed. For, as she had frequent interviews with Orestes, it was calumniously reported, among the Christian populace, that it was she who prevented Orestes from being reconciled to the bishop. Some of them, therefore, hurried away by a fierce and bigoted zeal, whose ringleader was a reader named Peter, waylaid her returning home, and, dragging her from her carriage, they took her to the church called Caesareum, where they completely stripped her, and then murdered her by scraping her skin off with tiles and bits of shell. After tearing her body in pieces, they took her mangled limbs to a place called Cinaron, and there burnt them. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/hypatia.asp

John of Nikiû repeats the same story much later and there is no mention of monks or St Cyril.

I was just pointing out that totalitarianism is a valid concept. In spite of ideological differences, different totalitarian systems do have more in common than what separates them.

Agreed on that one.

[Zostrianos]

I don't have time now, but I'll start a thread in the religion forum later.

[tradeunionsupporter]

Are there many Maoists here ?

[ComradeMan]

Are there many Maoists here ?

In this poll from November 2010 at RevLeft, 8.33% responded as "maoist"- NB the poll allowed multi-votes, so really Maoism, got 8.33% of the votes- if you see what I mean?.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft-te...=tendency+poll

[Paul Cockshott]

Maybe its not Maoism that is the problem, maybe its authoritarian regiems pretending to be socialist.

No the problem is that the capitalist class does not roll over and die, but fights to regain power. Simply expropriating shareholders does not yet abolish the class system.

[Nihilist Scud Missile]

Communsim will NEVER arise out of the 'third world' or undeveloped nations. The people in the most advanced economies/most powerful nations gotta make it happen. End of story. Have a nice day.

Here's some lol'z material

http://youtu.be/cgZ5k2n8k4s

[Paul Cockshott]

yes that was the ortodox SPD position based on one phrase in the communist manifesto but you should recognise that what you call third world countries are in many case far more economically advanced than those that Marx considered as advanced in 1848

[Nihilist Scud Missile]

yes that was the ortodox SPD position based on one phrase in the communist manifesto but you should recognise that what you call third world countries are in many case far more economically advanced than those that Marx considered as advanced in 1848

And would be CRUSHED by the most advanced capitalist nations if some sort of "communist" state arose not to mention the lack of enlightenment values. Yes I'm saying many nations are not culturally prepared for worker control of society . Call it eurocentrism if you will. Look at the attempts at socialism in the middle east - culturally, by in large, the people in the middle east arent ready for a materialist world view AND the capitalist powers also sabotaged such efforts. Marx was aware that it takes more than industry for communism to exist. It has to be global. Even if any region were culturally ready and had industry Marx vever saw global communism arising by smaller less advanced nations forcing communism on the larger more advanced nations. This was (to some extent) Lenin's theory, then Stalin and then Mao. It will never happen. All that HAS happened in such attempts has been great propighanda for capitalists to use to "show how weak" communism is. No one wants to live in Stalins Russia or Mao's China. Well, maybe some of us do Marx and Engles works were 'edited' so to speak, to fit the circumstances in Russia and China. Historacle materialism was almost thrown out of the window and we have seen the results.

An island of communism in a sea of capitalism sounds great but it can't happen. We've also seen the outcome of Stalin's plan to spread communism around the globe in dirrect competition with the most advanced capitalist nations. How'd that work out? So, some Maoists think a dirrect invation of te first world by the 'third world' is the ticket. It would be a slaughter and may even end humanity itself. End life on earth as we know it. The most powerful and advancd nations are key to communism, I don't like it any more than you I suppose.

[Flying Purple People Eater]