Maoism General

>Maoism
>Communism in general

It's quite sad that all those millions of people had to die but at least we got this out of the deal:
youtube.com/watch?v=0hq2rOEwnIU

What am I fucking watching?

A Maoist Third Worldist Analysis of Interracial Cuckold Porn

Speak English

>Maoist Third Worldist Analysis of Interracial Cuckold Videos

Some faggot watching BLACKED videos and talking about them.

>tfw you've actually encountered marxists so stupid that you can't tell if this is ironic or not

It would be real fucking ironic if the faggot that made this video was a white male.

>No one calls themselves a maoist anymore
Except for half of the South American and Asian insurgencies.

Even the Chinese ones.

No one in the West at least. Thats my point. What happened to 'listening to minorities' about their struggle?

Western Maoists are just liberals who like the color red

Maoism is absurd -- it's the exaltation of the third world simply for being the this world. As an intensely revisionist system, it's incredibly easy to degenerate into capitalism.

The modern PROC is still intensely Maoist. They just use the non-Marxist bullshit of Maoism to justify capital exploitation.

Communism in general has been a meme in the west for a while, let alone specific forms of communism like trotskism or maoism, but it was a pretty big thing among Western Communists in the 70's, 80's. Speaking as to why Maoism didn't catch on in the West, you can thank the USSR vs. China conflict. The USSR was interested in exporting Soviet Communism, not Chinese Communism. Influence peddling more or less.

However, outside the West the left certainly does take Maoism seriously, Mugabe's party for example was Maoist (mostly because of Chinese aid), there's a Maoist insurgency in India that's been going on for the past 17 years and has killed >10,000 people, Iran had a Maoist insurgency, various African rebel groups etc.

/thread

WHY are people responding?

Retards like to pat themselves on the back while they think
>Man X group sure was dumb to believe in Y after all I sure dont like X or Y
They then proceed to shitpost. This has been the entire website for 13 years.

The Maoists took Nepal in 2005 or so, notably.

What exactly IS Maoism? I understand that he believed that the peasents were the revolutionary class instead of the workers but is that really that much of a change to Marxist thought. At least, is it a change bigger than the current Left thought which is that 'minorities' are the revolutionary class?

Have Zizek to confuse you further:
lacan.com/zizmaozedong.htm

Mao had been a chinese anarchist (a mixture of french theory and ming revivalism), taken into an orthodox stalinist party, taking what seemed to work for the peasantry and giving it a synthetical language and theory.
Or, in short, a clusterfuck to our occidental minds. It made sense for the chinese, but this shit is just too convoluted, and putting that convoluted shit into a little book of quotes to be interpreted by later generations with different motivations has only made the matter more difficult.
In short, it was everything that seemed to work for mao retroactively made to sound marxist. Because if it works it's gotta be in words somewhere. Somehow.

Because Mao was illiterate faggot and a sellout. Hoxha warned us.

Mao didn't build enough bunkers?
?????

>illiterate
He literally spent all his free time reading and writing. And fucking, I suppose. He apparently gave himself a classical education which is more than 99% of the NEETs in this miserable shithole can pretend to.

At the time Mao was recruited the CCP was a party of urbanites, mostly clerks and functionaries who were, yeah, pretty literate.
the kmt had the original cadres offed tho

he was token maoist to appear othodox enough to keep support of the party

lol yeah
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Pests_Campaign

The Great Sparrow Campaign (Chinese: 打麻雀运动; pinyin: Dǎ Máquè Yùndòng) also known as the Kill a Sparrow Campaign (Chinese: 消灭麻雀运动; pinyin: Xiāomiè Máquè Yùndòng), and officially, the Four Pests Campaign was one of the first actions taken in the Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1962. The four pests to be eliminated were rats, flies, mosquitoes, and sparrows.[1] The systematic extermination of sparrows led to an upset of the ecological balance, and enabled crop-eating insects to proliferate.
>kill all swallows
>eliminate the bases of all foodchains
>what could go wrong?

>In the TVB drama series Rosy Business (aired 2009 but set in mid-1800s China), a peasant came up with the idea of killing the sparrows to improve agricultural output. It was meant to be a prank used to trick the peasant owners into starvation and poverty.

>In Episode 20 of the children's animated television series, Sagwa, the Chinese Siamese Cat (aired 2001–2002 but set in China around 1900), the mistress of the house declares that certain useless animals are banned from the compound. After the animals – the episode's eponymous birds, bees, and silkworms – are driven out, the family discovers the consequences. The mistress' fancy banquet is ruined by the lack of food and clothing, and she learns a valuable lesson.

Whilst I am not a Communist, I do consider Mao and Lenin to be two of the greatest revolutionaries in modern history. I mean just look at the CCP's massive comeback against the KMT.

The CCP were almost all but wiped out before the Long March and the near defeat only inspired the CCP to fight even harder. That weird idea rose where the Chinese felt that pure zeal alone could win any battle.

It's quite astounding to think that if Mao had died just before the Great Leap forward, he would have been hailed as one of the greatest leaders ever. Problem was he lived too long.

>I mean just look at the CCP's massive comeback against the KMT.
You mean right when Stalin invaded Manchuria and gave it to Mao, then assisted him with weapons and training?

Pretty much. But those things would have been useless had the CCP been unable to remain unified and strong after the Long March.

>/maogen/
Now this I can get behind

>You mean right when Stalin invaded Manchuria and gave it to Mao, then assisted him with weapons and training?

No.

The Communists were already gaining moment in northern China. And Stalin invaded the Japanese puppet state of Manchuko, not the former state of Manchus called 'Manchuria' which only existed for a decade before the Qing dynasty was proclaimed.

Maoism is just fascism for brown people

>And Stalin invaded the Japanese puppet state of Manchuko
Which consisted solely of the region commonly known as "Manchuria".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchuria

That was near the end of the second world war, the communists were already on the up and up in China. It isn't such a simple answer as "Stalin did it".

Without Stalin, China would still be a retarded shithole right now. You should respect him and be grateful.

Without Stalin, maybe the Nationalists would have gotten more support from the Western powers and it would be like Taiwan is now instead of slowly climbing out of nearly half a century of complete governmental lunacy.

This. They guy could have been on the level of Jesus

>gooks
>respectful & grateful
thats like asking an ant to make you a sandwich.conceptionrecognition

Not really. Lenin already named the peasants as members of the proletariat. What is defining for Maoism according to Kolakowski is, indeed kinda as says, the Asian interpretation of Leninism. This means a kinda weird focus on the 'will of the people's as the instrument in order to create the social change to a true Maoist society. So it is basically Lenin mixed with The Secret (you can reach something if you truly want it! xD). Add a snuff of disapproval for intellectual thinking on top of that (you can only understand something if you practice that in a material way instead of a theoretical way, you only 'get' a car once you build one, so a classical example of 'vulgar materialism') and you got Mao's thinking

Mao was dogshit as a theorist anyway, so don't try to get too deep in his philosophical thinking as he himself didn't even do so. Mao was a staunch anti intellectual and even though he encouraged the Chinese to learn how to read, he claimed that one should never read more than a dozen books during their life, as it would only muddy ones thinking for instance.

If anything the guy was amazing as an organizer and political strategist, which is why he was able to stay in control all the time, but you should see him more through the lenses of a ruthless dictator than a Marxist thinker.

They are not pro-colonial because they are racist. Racism comes after colonialism.

So we can thank Stalin for the fact that we aren't all speaking Chinese yet?

How did that work out?
How communist were they in power?

>This means a kinda weird focus on the 'will of the people's as the instrument in order to create the social change to a true Maoist society.

I see it as a more democratic form of Leninism then that which was practiced in the Soviet Union. Instead of having the vanguard run the country, Mao intergrated the vanguard within the people who would react to the vanguard.

I think the contrast between the Stalinist purges and Cultural Revolution are a great example of this. While Stalin used the force of government to get rid of his enemies, Mao relied on the people themselves. In essence, while Stalin was an absolutist with a strict sense of law, Mao was an anarchist in that the peoples will surpassed the law.

Naming peasants as proletariat is completely against Marxist thinking and Lenin did not at all think this. There was a lot of debate in the Soviet Union before the revolution and in the 20s about the role of the peasentry. Proof that all the Bolsheviks say them as a different class than the proletariat

bump

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepalese_Civil_War

They went full democracy and lost a lot of favor in the last decade, but they are still in power in coalition with other communist parties against more moderate socialists:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislature_Parliament_of_Nepal

Is Veeky Forums turning into leftypol

Nah, it's just that reading history gives you a left-wing view on the world.

>Lenin did not at all think this
He did. It is one of the core aspects of Lenin's work. Lenin really butchered the original marxist concepts by re-imagining the proletarian paradise as the russian Mir, the ancient russian village community. Russia itself was largely an agraic society while Marx demanden (based on Hegel of course) that the development of society would eventually lead to a situation in which the (indeed as you say, a crucial idea of marxism) proletariat would throw over the bourgeoisie. But of course there should be enough proletarians at that point in order to create a revolution. Lenin, seeing the russian society in his time and at the same time having the mir as his paradise, decided to artificially speed up the revolution process by making use of the peasants to create his revolution.

The inclusion of peasants as a revolutionary force isn't something Mao came up with, which was the point I tried to make.

After reading Mao's actual ideas I honestly doubt that the guy had some grand plan behind his work, I honestly think thinks like the cultural revoltion were more of a result of his strategical , pragmatic thinking than because of an underlying theoretical concept which he saw as the reason to undertake such endeavors.

Really, Mao's theoretical works are high school tier. Just read On Practice and On Contradiciton if you want to see why I think this guy's theoretical works are such blank spaces

...

Kek no

Do you actually believe this?

>triggered weenies

>I was only pretending to be a retard! Ha ha, jokes on you guys! :^)