>>> Brad De Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 06/28/99 08:25PM >>>
>Yes, it seems something of an exaggeration to say Lin Biao was
>saying that all are to think as one ABOUT EVERYTHING as, Brad sort
>of implies.
No.
It is not an exaggeration.
Go reread your copy of the little red book:
Mao Zedong thought is Marxism-Leninism of the era in which
imperialism is headed for total collapse and socialism is
advancing to world-wide victory. It is a powerful ideological
weapon for opposing imperialism and for opposing revisionism
and dogmatism. Mao Zedong thought is the guiding principle
for all the work of the party, the army, and the country.
Note. Not *some* of the work. *All* of the work. Not the work for the
party. The work for the party, the army, and the country.
((((((((((((((((((
Charles: Seems to me you are leaving out the meaning of "guiding principle". That is
like "broad outlines". Your phrase "thinking as one" from a previous post , is a
serious distortion of the passage you quote above. The above sounds like a perfectly
logical expression of the organization of society as a whole in it main or broad
principles based on Mao's broad principles. Your "thinking as one" sounds like a Jim
Jones religious cult. Maoism and Marxism Leninism emphasize dialectics and materialism
, which is the complete opposite of religious, cult and dogmatic thinking.
(((((((((((((((((
>Thus, interpreting "thinking as one" in a less absolute sense, in
>other words, using common sense, makes it seem like not an insult
>to the Chinese people or Chinese people , as I said. It is rather
>impressive to others seeking unity and self-determination against
>racism and imperialism.
Nope. You are wrong.
In the little red book--and even more so in the context of China
during the Cultural Revolution--it is not impressive, it is really
scary.
Charles: Where is "thinking as one" in the passages you quote ? The connotation of
"thinking as one" is a distortion of what you have quoted. "Mao Zedong thought as the
guiding principle of all the work of the army, party and country" sounds like
"national unity" to me , much more than the religious cult connotation of "thinking as
one".
How about the U.S. pledge of allegiance to the flag, republic and God ? Is that
promoting thinking as one about everything ?
((((((((((((((((((
>
>Some of the other "paraphrases" or translations , such as all that
>is good originates from the mind and blessings, etc. sounds like a
>distortion and exaggeration.
Nope.
Have you ever *read* the little red book?
(((((((((
Charles:
A long time ago. Are you saying your words "all that is good orginates from the mind
and blessings.." (your words) is a quote from the Red Book ? I don't recall that.
))))))))))
>Is that what Lin Bao said, or is that the Brad D. translation?
It is the officially-sponsored translation.
Charles: But you have said somethings that are not in the translation from what I can
tell . Is "thinking as one" from the Red Book or is that your characterization of the
translation ?
(((((((((((((
You should know that if you ever read the little red book.
I don't distort translations. And I don't accuse people of distorting
translations just because I'm having a bad day.
>I think the more likely correct translation is more like "on some
>main principles of the revolution and politics and economics, and on
>major strategies for hundreds of millions of people, Mao was the
>paramount correct thinker at that time in history, not that on every
>subject under the sun he was the source of truth "
You are wrong.
Certainly the *officially* *sponsored* translation was... infelicitous.
Charles: From what you have said in this post and the last, my paraphrase above
sounds better than "thinking as one" and the other commentary you have done on the
translation. "Guiding principle for all the work of the army, party and country"
sounds like what I am saying above, not a mysterious "thinking as one".
((((((((((((
But there are political reasons that the officially-sponsored
translation was... infelicitous: the Cult of Personality has its own
logic, and one piece of that logic is to sacrifice political
effectiveness vis-a-vis foreigners in order to demonstrate one's
bootlicking servility to the autocrat. It is a very old story.
Charles: "Bootlicking servility to the autocrat" is clearly Brad D. , not in the
translations you have given.
(((((((((((((
>
>To imply as Brad D. does that so many Chinese would be in Brad D's
>version of a 800 million person mindcontrol cult or that the Chinese
>leaders could get away with such a ridiculous pronouncement is in
>itself an insult to the Chinese people. Only the imperialist enemy
>would characterize unity and self-determination as an insult to the
>Chinese people.
>
>Charles
But they did it. They did get away with it--for years. In fact, they
are getting away with it now (albeit only on the very limited field
of this list). You couldn't say that Lin Biao was merely advocating
"unity and self-determination" if you had ever read the little red
book.
Charles: I do not agree that you have demonstrated that your interpretation of the
very words you say are the translation of Lin Bao propose "bootlicking servility to
the autocrat" or a religious-like "thinking as one". If those were the words, then
there might be a getting away with something, but those aren't the words or their
connotation.
I see what has been happening in China since the revolution as an enormous achievement
in unity and self-determination. So, I think most people in China must be interpreting
the Red Book and Mao's other writing, such as On Contradiction and On Practice, more
like I am than the way you are.
Charles Brown
