Results 1 to 15 of 15
Mao Against Liberalism
Now if I understand it correctly, Mao was against liberalism. This seems horribly wrong to me. Its possible that my idea of liberalism is wrong. As far as I could tell liberalism is free thought. So my question is, how could anyone on the message board be against free thought. If no one had free-thought then this message board wouldn't have been started and we would all still be nomads hunting and gathering.
"It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees."
-Emiliano Zapata
"At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you ****."
-John McCain
"While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State."
-Lenin
Personally, I believe liberalism to be "capitalism with a smiley face". It doesn't advocate the end of the capitalist system nor are liberals progressives. Liberals may make some progress, but to the working class they are nothing but antibiotics for capitalism.
Well what would you consider Mao to be against? Free thought or both liberalism and free thought.
"It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees."
-Emiliano Zapata
"At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you ****."
-John McCain
"While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State."
-Lenin
He was authoritarian,so I would probably say both, although I'm not basing that on anything than he was authoritarian. As he was a revolutionary communist, he would have been against liberalism anyway.
Well Mao was by an large an idiot. But being against liberalism is hardly being against free thought. Liberalism was a progressive force two centuries ago, but it holds us back now. It depends exactly what branch of liberalism you are talking about, but it ranges from being out and out reactionary to simply not going far enough
Jesus christ. More people who have never read Mao talking shit. Red_anarchist...ALL REVOLUTIONARIES ARE AUTHORITARIAN. We demand the authority of the masses of people, we are for the authority of the proletariat! There is no such dichotomy between "authoritarian communists" and "libertarian communists". We are for the liberation of humanity, but that means revolution against this oppressive system....so we gotta use the state and use the authority of the masses to destroy capitalism and imperialism. That's how it is man.
Anyway, to say Mao (or Maoists) are against "free thought" is *absolute* bullshit and is actually very harmful to our movement. The reason we are so fragmented on the left is because we don't try to understand each other. If you are serious about making revolution, you gotta be as critical of your own ideas as you are of the ideas of others.
Anyway, where do you think the slogan "It's right to rebel" came from? Does that sound like something a megalomaniacal power-hungry blood-thirsty dictator would say? On what basis do you say that Mao was an authoritarian who was against free thought? For real man...back your shit up or don't say it at all.
Liberalism is a bourgeois ideology that doesn't advocate proletarian revolution or the overall liberation of humanity. That doesn't mean we shouldn't work with liberals or that we have to be nasty to them. When Mao wrote "Combat Liberalism", he was referring to struggling against liberal tendencies among communist revolutionaries. Mao says:
Here is a link to the whole polemic:
http://marx2mao.com/Mao/CL37.html
You're certainly right, I have never read Mao's work. I accept that my use of authoritarian in the above post was wrong.
I agree that we should try to understand each other, and my post proves that, personally, i need to understand Maoism. I also accept that dogmatic belief in an idea ia bad for the movement as a whole.
Where did I imply that he was a blood-thirsty dictator? I don't think I've ever described Mao like that.
I agree that we shouldn't block out liberals entirely, whilst ensuring that we don't allow liberalism to evolve within our movement. I haven't read anything by Mao, so I wouldn't have known that.
Ummm... No. Not at all. Liberalism is a political and economic approach to global capitalism that emphasizes neo-imperialism and easier economic exploitation under the guise of progress. While it often blows hot air about "human rights" it has nothing to do with freedom of thought. In fact, Liberals don't have any problem with proping up totalitarian regimes in the interests of their own economy.
No, it isn't. It is free enterprise, and the belief that free thought can only exist as a subproduct of free enterprise.
I am for free thought, and I am against liberalism, because liberalism is, in the end, against free thought.
Luís Henrique
The world is not as it is, but as it is constructed.
Falsely attributed to Lenin
Thanks for the help guys. I appreciate it, I'm just having a hard time understanding the different Marxists thoughts like Leninism, Trotskyism, and especially Maoism.
"It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees."
-Emiliano Zapata
"At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you ****."
-John McCain
"While the State exists, there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State."
-Lenin
Actually, 'liberalism', 'individual rights', 'the rule of law' and all the rest are just trivial decorations for the bourgeois dictatorship, if threatened by the working class they will as quickly dispense entirely with them.
They are currently in the process of doing just that here in America.
formerly Brick
formerly COMRADE CRUM
"To defend Stalin requires more courage than making the Revolution." -Hafizullah Amin
Join the Midwest Marxist-Leninist group.
I think there's some confusion in this thread.
Mao's essay "Combat Liberalism" is about the practice of individual revolutionaries. Liberalism is defined essentially as being unprincipled. He discusses 11 instances of liberalism. Anyone who's been involved in political work long enough will recognize what he's talking about.
SovietPants posted a link to the essay. I highly suggest people read it. It's very short. Here it is again:
http://marx2mao.com/Mao/CL37.html
Mao's essay has nothing to do with being for or against "free thought," which Marxists would argue is just as much an ideological concept as "free market".
"I learned during [the fight against the colonial war in Algeria] that political conviction is not a question of numbers, of majority. Because at the beginning of the Algerian war, we were really very few against the war. It was a lesson for me; you have to do something when you think it's a necessity, when it's right, without caring about the numbers." - Alain Badiou
The essay is somewhat hard to interprete. When Mao says liberalism is seems what he is actually talking about is pascifism or passivity, not so much freedom or even classical liberalism, which is capitalist. In any case, it is fair to say he is not talking about free thought, but free market.
The word "liberalism" has many different meanings, including:
- the bourgeois ideology of political "freedom" based on private property (John Locke was a liberal);
- the bourgeois ideology of "economical freedom", ie, free market, regardless of political freedom (Ludwig von Mises was a liberal);
- the practice of free love (Joe Next Door is liberal, he doesn't mind his wife sleeping with other men);
- irresponsible behaviour from activists in a leftist organisation (Comrade John is liberal, this is the third time he gets late for a meeting of the Regional Committee this month);
- the opposite of miserliness (Mr. Moneybags is liberal, he donates generously to varied charities);
- etc.
I suppose Mao was talking about the fourth acception above, but leftists should oppose the first and second ones as well.
Luís Henrique
The world is not as it is, but as it is constructed.
Falsely attributed to Lenin
