Anda sudah bilang saya orang yang radikal, dan sudah tahu saya menggunakan 
pandangan dunia Marxis dan MDH. Itulah yang membedakan kita secara ideologi dan 
membuat kita selalu bertentangan pendapat. Dulu anda bilang perdebatan dan 
perbedaan pendapat saya dengan Chan adalah masalah ideologi. Nah, dengan anda 
sama!!! Juga masalah ideologi. Semakin lama anda  membuka diri anda sendiri 
sebagai orang yang bertentangan dengan saya secara ideologi .. Itu kelihatan 
jelas dalam masalah yang menyentuh Indonesia dan Tiongkok. Kelihatan mereka 
yang mendukung statusquo dan rezim Jokowi tak terhindarkan juga akan membela 
rezim kapitalis Tiongkok. Makanya Chan senang sekali mendapat kawan seperti 
anda. Kalau anda mau debat dengan saya dan mengerti argumentasi saya, anda 
harus belajar menggunakan MDH dan pandangan dunia Marxis. Dan itu tidak akan 
pernah terjadi. Anda tidak mau berkomentar tentang kenyataan yang diajukan Bai 
Di. Soalnya Bai Di juga menggunakan MDH dan Marxisme yang diterapkan dalam 
kondisi kongkrit Tiongkok. Anda kuwalahan menghadapinya. Sudah petantang 
petenteng mengejek pendapat saya bahwa soal drug, prostitusi dan kejahatan 
lainnya berhubungan erat dengan sistim ekonomi yang berlaku di negeri itu. Anda 
tidak percaya bahwa di tiongkok jaman Mao betul-betul diatasi penyakit-penyakit 
sosial yang menjangkiti masyarakat kapitalis. Ya itu masalah anda, hak anda 
untuk tidak percaya. Bai Di dilahirkan dan dibesarkan di Tiongkok. Itulah 
kesaksiannya.Silahkan membantahnya.. Dan itu sebetulnya tidak sulit untuk 
dimengerti kalau orang bertitik tolak dari materialisme. Kalau orang bertitik 
tolak bahwa materi menentukan ide , berarti juga basis ekonomi yang menentukan 
bangunan atas dan bukan sebaliknya, maka orang dengan mudah mengerti basis 
ekonomi sosialis akan melahirkan manusia-manusia dengan mentalitas dan 
nilai-nilai moral yang sama sekali berbeda dari mereka yang dilahirkan dan 
dididik dalam sebuah masyarakat berdasarkan pada penghisapan dan penindasan. 
Baca dengan seksama pengalamannya Bai Di yang mencerminkan mentalitas, 
nilai-nilai moral dan etik manusia yang sedang dilahirkan oleh masyarakat 
sosialis tiongkok ketika itu sangat berlainan dengan manusia yang dilahirkan 
oleh masyarakat kapitalis Tiongkok sekarang.
Soal orang miskin tidak peduli dengan ideologi. Betul!! Karena dia belum 
sadar... Anda saja yang orang pinter tidak tahu apa sebetulnya ideologi itu. 
Seorang buruh tidak otomatis mempunyai ideologi proletar atau pandangan dunia 
proletar. Ideologi proletar dia dapat melalui belajar Marxisme dan praktek 
perjuangan kelas... Makanya kaum borjuasi berkepentingan untuk tidak membuat 
pintar kaum miskin,,, terus dibikinnya gobloooook  supaya tidak ngerti politik 
dan bisa terus dikibulin dan ditindas dan diisap!!! Sejak Suharto sampai 
Jokowi, tidak pernah diprioritaskan pendidikan... bukannya membangun sekolah 
dan meningkatkan kwalitas pendidikan dengan memberi gajih layak kepada tenaga 
pengajar, tapi membangun megaproyekinfrastruktur yang menghancurkan pertanian, 
memperluas kelapa sawit yang merusak ekosistim.....Hanya orang miskin yang 
sudah sadar akan kondisi kemiskinannya dan mengerti siapa dan mengapa dia 
miskin, maka baru dia bisa melakukan perlawanan. Perlawanan inilah yang 
ditakuti orang-orang seperti anda yang berpihak kepada para penguasa!!!!
Tak perlu diperpanjang lagi perdebatan ini, karena kita menggunakan titik tolak 
dan pandangan dunia yang bertentangan. Persis seperti dulu ketika anda berdebat 
dengan bung Tan sie tik. Tan sie tiek bisa mengerti argumentasi saya karena 
kami sama-sama menggunakan titik tolak Marxis. Kan chan juga pernah berdebat 
dengan Tan Sie tik. Chan tak pernah bisa menjawab argumentasinya dan tak pernah 
ketemu. Karena titik tolak pandangan dunia yang bertentangan.  Anda, sama 
seperti Chan, tidak akan pernah mengerti.. Bisanya hanya ngeyel!!

    On Wednesday, June 12, 2019, 7:50:48 PM GMT+2, 'nesare' [email protected] 
[GELORA45] <[email protected]> wrote:  
 
     


Bung kan yg mau orang lain belajar MDH dll. Ini kan dasar jalan pikiran bung yg 
radikal, makanya bung berpendapat bahwa semua manusia itu selalu ada 
ideologinya (Ha....ha.. ya inilah orang yang tidak tahu bahwa semua pikiran 
manusia ADA CAP IDEOLOGINYA!!!!).

  

Saya mengkoreksi pendapat bung itu dan mengatakan banyak rakyat miskin gak 
pusing dgn segala ideologi itu. Mereka prihatin dgn kemiskinannya. Ini bagi yg 
mengerti ttg duit. Bagi mereka yg gak pusing dgn kemiskinan (orang2 agamais 
dll) ya duit gak menjadi masalah. Jadi gak ada cap2 ideologi didalam pikiran 
mereka. Wong dari dulu juga begitu koq, manusia itu hidup miskin sebelum ada 
konsep2 ideologi yg bung koar2kan sekarang ini. Kan ideologi politik yg bung 
koar2kan itu baru dan belum lama kan? Paling lama diurut2 ya paling2 jaman 
renaissance dimana manusia melek akan science. Dulunya mah ya semua manusia 
hidup komunal dan miskin.

  

Bung gak sadar ketika membela orang miskin itu, titik beratnya adalah duit. 
Ketika bung bicara dgn duit, gak akan bedanya bung ngomong ttg kapitalisme.. 
Bagi saya orang yg ngomong ideologi2 itu semuanya ngomongin duit hehehehehe. 
Jadi jangan teriak2 bela yg miskin seakan2 membenci duit dan menghajar sumber 
duit (perusahaan, negara dll) kalau bung masih mikirin duit!

  

Ceritera Bai Di itu tidak mendukung pendapat bung bahwa semua manusia sudah ada 
cap ideologinya!

  

Nesare

  

  

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 1:10 PM
To: [email protected]; nesare <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: AW: Re: [GELORA45] Telusur tvOne: Kertajati Bandara 'Mati Suri' 
(29 5 2019)

  

  

Ha...ha.. mau cari siapa yang memberi cap??Pertanyaan  orang yang tidak ngerti 
MDH...Pasti menolak kalau diusulkan belajar dulu Marxisme dan fikiran Mao 
Zedong... Tak usahlah... Orang tak perlu didorong-dorong belajar Marxisme dan 
Fik. MTT  Kalau orang merasakan kebutuhannya, pasti akan dipelajarinya...Bantah 
dan jawab saja penjelasannya Bai Di tentang perubahan dalam kiprah dan 
mentalitas manusia-manusia yang terlibat dalam perevolusioneran masyarakat Tkk 
yang tak ada duanya di dunia ini. 

  

On Wednesday, June 12, 2019, 5:51:51 PM GMT+2, 'nesare' [email protected] 
[GELORA45] <[email protected]> wrote: 

  

  

  

Koq semua pikiran manusia ada cap ideologinya?

Maksudnya cap itu dicap sama siapa?

Banyak rakyat yg bung bela itu gak pusing dengan ideologi. Tahu dan sadar ndak 
bung hal ini? Yg mereka butuhkan itu adalah bisa kerja dan bisa makan dgn 
tenang. Masalah ideologi mereka mah gak pusingin. Moso’ bung gak tahu mereka2 
ini mana ngerti komunisme, sosialisme, kapitalisme dlsbg?!!!

 

Bung silahkan membela Mao dalam menghapuskan pelacuran dan percanduan dan ini 
memang fakta, tetapi bung jangan mengklaim bahwa tidak ada pelacuran dan 
percanduan di jaman Mao. Jangankan dijaman Mao dijaman siapapun, diideologi 
apapun, diagama apapun semua problem social ini akan selalu ada..

 

Ngerti pendapat saya?!

Kalau gak ngerti ya memang susah utk bisa berdiskusi.

Kalau ngerti ya coba direnungi pendapat orang lain itu.

 

Nesare

 

 

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> 
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 4:44 PM
To: [email protected]; nesare <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: AW: Re: [GELORA45] Telusur tvOne: Kertajati Bandara 'Mati Suri' 
(29 5 2019)

 

  

 

Ha...ha.. ya inilah orang yang tidak tahu bahwa semua pikiran manusia ADA CAP 
IDEOLOGINYA!!!!  Sudah berdebat bertahun-tahun masih nggak sadar bahwa 
ideologinya jelas bertentangan dengan ideologi saya...Orang yang berpihak 
kepada statusquo alias rezim anti-rakyat Jokowi jelas bertentangan dengan orang 
yang berpihak kepada mereka yang terus menerus ditindas dan diengkuk-engkuk 
oleh para penguasa/tuan tanah/kabir dan komprador. Sikap yang berbeda ini 
berasal dari bedanya ideologi ... Soal pelacuran dsb di Tiongkok Mao, sebelum 
jeplak, pelajari dulu bagaimana perubahan dan kehidupan di Tkk sosialis jaman 
Mao. Di bawah ini cerita dan pengalaman orang Tiongkok sendiri. Bertandinglah 
dengan Bai Di dalam soal pengetahuan tentang kehidupan di Tkk jaman Mao.

 

Interview with Bai Di

Growing Up in Revolutionary China

Bai Di grew up in socialist China (before capitalism was brought back after the 
death of Mao in 1976) and participated in the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). 
She is a co-editor of the book, Some of Us: Chinese Women Growing Up During the 
Mao Era and is the Director of Chinese and Asian Studies at Drew University. 
The following interview with Bai Di was done in February 2009 by Revolution 
correspondent Li Onesto.

The entire interview is posted online here, and is being serialized in print.

Li Onesto: A young person who heard you talk about your experiences growing up 
in socialist China told me that before this they had no idea at all what it was 
like during the Cultural Revolution, including what it was like to be a woman 
during that time.

Bai Di: In my generation, most of the women hoped to accomplish great things. 
When we were young, when we were teenagers, there were revolutionary ideals. We 
worked for some goals. We felt that our lives were full of meaning, not for 
ourselves but for all these larger goals of society. That is what we were 
discussing at that moment. We were idealistic about the world that we 
envisioned. We were about 15 years old when we went to the countryside, around 
1972. At that point I graduated from high school. The school was reopened after 
about a year of closing in 1966. We spent most of the time studying Chairman 
Mao’s works, and some math, chemistry and physics. Later on we were digging 
tunnels in the school yard because of the Soviet threat of war. We were trying 
to protect our country.

Our class had more than a thousand students and four of us, all women in our 
high school, got together and decided to write an epic of the history of the 
Red Guards. We were very ambitious at that moment, now to think about it. There 
were two guys who tried to join us and we interviewed them. I remember that 
each of them presented something poetic written by them, and the four of us 
looked at them. We decided not to have them in this writing group because they 
were not good enough. We just laughed at their writings because they were not 
up to our standards. We totally rejected them. The four of us, we thought we 
were the best. We wanted to record our deeds of trying to educate other people 
with Chairman Mao’s teachings. We organized the first “Chairman Mao Thought 
Propaganda Team” in the school.

Li Onesto: When most people hear the term, “propaganda team,” they don’t know 
what that is and/or they look at it like a negative thing, like it’s about just 
telling people what to think, that it goes against critical thinking.

Bai Di: The Mao Zedong propaganda teams in the beginning of the Cultural 
Revolution were organized by the revolutionary Red Guards so that educated 
people, students, armed with all the songs and poems, could go to the 
neighborhoods in the cities and later on in the countryside to spread knowledge 
to the not so well educated. They tried to teach the so-called “less educated 
people” about the party’s directives and Chairman Mao’s ideas. Our propaganda 
team taught people revolutionary songs and read the current events from the 
newspapers to them. We organized our school’s students to go to clean up the 
neighborhoods and after that we performed dances and songs and called on people 
to clean up the neighborhood because sanitation was very important. We felt 
that was part of building a greater society..

Li Onesto: How did you see that in relation to the ideals that you had?

Bai Di: The idea was that we could make a change, that there were all these 
opportunities. We were going to change the world; we were going to change 
China. That was the mission of my generation because we lived in a very special 
era: the great 1960s and 1970s. We called that moment the dawn of communism, 
that’s the point. We were working to build up this great society and we felt 
that everyone in that society should have education. Because we students could 
read and we could write so we used this to try and inspire other people—to 
teach them to sing and teach them sections of Mao’s works. That was what the 
propaganda teams did. Something gets lost in the translation of this concept to 
English. In Chinese right now this phrase still refers to what is considered a 
very positive thing. The phrase propaganda team is not a negative thing, it is 
to let everybody know what they need to know, the ideas of the party’s central 
committee, what they are doing. During the Cultural Revolution everybody needed 
to know that. China at that point, it was such a large country, and the 
government organization at each level had a propaganda department, you needed 
this at every level. There was a lot of illiteracy. And Chairman Mao’s 
teachings aren’t all very easy and they are open to interpretation. If you 
change one line, it changes the meaning. You can’t just teach the words, you 
have to explain it.

Take something like what was called the “constantly read three articles” by 
Mao: “Serve the People,” “The Foolish Old Man Who Removed the Mountains,” and 
“In Memory of Norman Bethune.” Look at the old story about the foolish old 
man—why do we have to talk about that? That is an ancient Chinese fable that 
everyone already knows. It is about an old man who called on his sons to dig 
away two big mountains that were obstructing their way out. Others made fun of 
him saying it was impossible for them to dig up these two huge mountains. But 
the Foolish Old Man replied, “When I die, my sons will carry on; when they die, 
there will be my grandsons, and then their sons and grandsons, and so on to 
infinity.” This resilience impressed the God so much that God sent down two 
angels, who carried the mountains away on their backs. But Chairman Mao changed 
it and said it was the hard working people who moved the mountains. He said, 
right now, we the communists, the party are like the Old Foolish Man. We will 
try to move all these three mountains—imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucrat 
capitalism—but we cannot do that. So we have to impress the Chinese people; 
they are the God. Only they can move away the three mountains that are 
oppressing us. And we have to entrust the people. Do you get that? So we have 
to move them, we have to understand what we are doing. You have to explain that 
to people, why that is very important. We have to keep doing something and we 
have to keep letting people know what we are doing. We have to politically 
educate people—that is our job. When I think back—that was our whole mission. 
We were so lucky that we were able to get the ability to write and understand 
things and others didn’t understand that, didn’t see the connection. So that’s 
what we were doing and when I think about it, what confidence we had.

Li Onesto: What effect did the Cultural Revolution have on the status of women?

Bai Di: One example is what I told you before, that young women changed their 
names. At the beginning of the Cultural Revolution in 1966 Chairman Mao would 
greet the Red Guards at huge rallies in Tiananmen Square, for about eight times 
I think. At one of the rallies, one girl went up to Tiananmen and put a Red 
Guard armband on Mao. He asked her what her name was. She said, Song Binbin. 
Mao said, that is very Confucianist, Binbin means prudence and modesty. And 
Chairman Mao said, why be prudent, why be modest? You should Aiwu; you should 
love that militancy in women. So she changed her name from Binbin to Aiwu that 
stood for loving militancy, fighting. Then there started a trend: the girls who 
had feminine names like flower or jade or whatever, changed their names.

According to Chinese culture, your name means something. My name never had 
gender connotation and this was due to my parents. Bai is my family name; it 
means cypress, like the tree. It’s a great surname in the first place. I was 
the first born and my parents were very progressive at that moment in the 
1950s. They were checking out the dictionary to get a name. My father grew up 
in the communist system and he was among the first class in the Foreign 
Languages School run by the Communist Party in 1946, when the Russian 
Department of that school was moved, Yenan moved to Harbin. He was in the class 
with children of many famous communists including Chairman Mao’s second son. He 
and my mother were very revolutionary. So they went to the dictionary and they 
found “Di” which means wood, which is not very assuming but very easy to 
survive. And it seems that I have lived up to the name. When young women were 
trying to change their names from these girlish names to something 
revolutionary, I didn’t have to change my name because it meant independence 
already. Girls tried to change their girlish names if they weren't 
revolutionary or were too feminine - they would change it into something 
fighting and strong like the men’s names. After capitalism came back, I can 
give you three instances where women changed their names back. One of my 
friends, before the Cultural Revolution, her name was very womanish, so she 
changed it to Wenge which literarily means “cultural revolution.” But recently 
I heard from her and she changed her name back. I have another friend who is an 
editor in a Beijing publishing house and her name was “red” and she changed it 
back to “little flower.”

Li Onesto: You’ve written a lot about the role of women in revolutionary China. 
Can you compare the status of women before 1949, then 1949 to the Cultural 
Revolution, then during the Cultural Revolution and then what it is like now 
for women under capitalism?

Bai Di: I always like to look at the differences among the three generations of 
women in my family as an indicator of how China had changed under the Communist 
Party. Both my grandmothers were born at the turn of the 20th century and they 
both married early, one at the age of 14, the other at 15. They both had bound 
feet and each of them gave birth to 14 kids. They were in arranged marriages. 
They were both illiterate. They did nothing for their whole life but giving 
birth and having kids, seeing some of the newborns die helplessly. My mother’s 
life is very different. She was born in the ’30s so basically in 1949 when the 
People’s Republic of China was founded, she was in middle school and in the 
early ’50s she went to college to study Russian, dreaming to be a diplomat. 
Both my parents were the first generation of college educated in their 
respective families. My mother was a translator and researcher in Russian 
literature before her retirement. Then I think of my generation, I am a college 
professor with a Ph.D. degree. I have been traveling around the world teaching 
and writing. Compared with my grandmas and my mother, I am more ambitious, more 
idealist and more confident. I am very grateful that I grew up in an extremely 
special moment in Chinese history. The dominant ideology was that women hold up 
half of the sky; what men can do, women can do. Those may sound now as hollow 
slogans; but I lived through that period really believing in myself, in my 
ability in bringing about changes in my own life and the lives of other people. 
And then I think of the fourth generation of the family.. I do not have a 
daughter, so I will use my niece as an example. She is now about 26 years old, 
having a college degree and a very high paid job in China. It seems that all 
she is interested in are brand name bags and clothes. She likes to talk about 
who has money, who has brand name bags, what kind of husband is there. And I 
just look at her now and I see that there is another generation right now, it 
is called “post-’80s” in China; a generation that puts most of their energy 
into this consumer culture. When I was young, the social ideal was to do 
something good for other people, to work to change the world into a better 
system. We were willing to sacrifice. And we all believed in fair and equal 
distribution of social wealth. But right now for young people growing up in 
China, it’s me, me, me. And the whole culture buttresses that. And also the 
women’s role today, you can see it ingrained, basically that you should be a 
good wife and then right now the Chinese popular culture is full of this kind 
of discussion. On CCTV, on the women’s programs, both the hosts and guests will 
focus on what kind of husband you will be happy with; how one can be more 
feminine so that she is more attractive. The famous women in every realm of the 
society are invited in to talk about this. Can you imagine a program that 
famous men were on to talk about how to be a good husband? They never ask the 
guys this kind of question.

Li Onesto: One of the things during the Cultural Revolution was refutation of 
Confucian thinking and how this is oppressive, especially to women, the feudal 
and patriarchal thinking. Can you talk about that and compare this to now?

Bai Di: This kind of criticism of feudalism was going on back in the May 4 
Movement at the beginning of the 20th century. But the real legal reform 
started in 1930s in the Red Soviet areas controlled by the Chinese Communist 
Party. After the founding of the People’s Republic of China, the first law that 
the new government passed was not the Constitution, the Constitution was passed 
in 1954. The first law passed by the Communist government in 1950 was the 
Marriage Law—for the first time it abolished the concubinage system, abolished 
arranged marriages, saying men and women should be partners in marriage and 
that women should get equal inheritance and divorce rights, banned polygamy, 
child brides and also the concept of “illegitimate” children. That was a great 
moment in history.. Think about how the government saw the role of gender 
issues in changing people’s minds and lives.

In order to build a new world, women have to be liberated. Like Marx said, for 
the liberation, you have to liberate everybody. And if women are not liberated 
you cannot say that the nation is liberated. This showed the progressiveness of 
the Chinese Communist Party. So the first law passed was the Marriage Law and 
the second law passed a month later was the land reform law.. So basically you 
can see in 1950, the next year after the founding of the People’s Republic of 
China, two laws basically representing the new government’s focused agenda.. 
First, the change of superstructure—because families were so ingrained in 
Confucian family hierarchy, this was so ingrained in Chinese culture, that you 
had to change it. So I think that was a symbol of the change of culture.

Secondly, the change in the infrastructure of the economic base, that is of the 
poor peasants and their ownership of the land. You were not only changing the 
economic structure, you had to change the superstructure, including people’s 
ideas. And law is a part of superstructure. So that’s Mao’s great idea, 
changing both sides, rather than just the economy. On the other hand, those who 
wanted to bring capitalism back, like Deng Xiaoping, said that if you just 
change the economy, everything else will change. But at the beginning, the 
Chinese Communist Party saw that you have to abolish the old things that are 
oppressive.. There is a dialectic, you can see this in anything. Like the 
problem with the Marriage Law. There was great resistance all along. Because 
it’s not like you will just have a law and then all the people will follow 
that. There were still a lot of women’s issues for the 17 years after 1949 from 
the start of the new socialist government until the start of the Cultural 
Revolution in 1966.

When new China was founded in 1949, the new government met so many challenges: 
prostitution, concubinage, drug problems. And miraculously, within two or three 
years, all the prostitutes were reformed and all the drug addicts got treated. 
My grandmother told me about how there was this place in Harbin where there was 
this neighborhood for prostitution and it then became a normal residential 
area. Unfortunately today that area has gone back to its “tradition” of 
prostitution.

Li Onesto: A lot of things were changed in the first 17 years, but what made it 
necessary to go further? What problems was the Cultural Revolution trying to 
address, including around the woman question?

Bai Di: There was the newly emerged elitist group within the Party and the 
government. They were called the capitalist roaders in the Cultural Revolution 
and they were the targets of the revolution. But I think “capitalist roader” 
may be a misnomer. They were people who were trying to return back to the old 
hierarchy in the society. Also the social idea was emerging that those who were 
educated should stay in the cities and then they looked down on their parents 
in the countryside. This was one of the symptoms in that 17 years and then the 
Cultural Revolution tried to get rid of this.

The peasants said of their children who were lucky enough to go to the 
university in the cities: The saying went—the first year they are country 
bumpkins, the second year they catch up with the other people, the third year, 
they will desert their parents in the countryside. So that’s a change in the 
peasant children sent to the cities. This was used to talk about the larger 
problem and social issues.. The Communist Party came also from the peasant 
base. It represented peasants’ interest. So people send them to govern the 
country, they go to Beijing right? First, they’re fine. They keep their basic 
color, their values, and their mission.. But after a while, the second period, 
they catch up with all the people there, they try to “get in,” they forgot why 
they were there in the first place.

Li Onesto: You’re saying this was an analogy to those who were supposed to be 
serving the people but then ended up somewhere else. And the reason why Mao and 
others started calling them capitalist roaders was because there were two roads 
that China could go on, one to socialism, one to capitalism. And there were 
those like Deng Xiaoping who were saying China should be capitalist and this is 
why they were called “capitalist roaders.”

Bai Di: But I don’t think these people wanted to go to capitalism, they were 
trying to take people back to old [feudal] tradition, and they were trying to 
retrench back to feudalism. Before China didn’t really have capitalism. But 
Deng Xiaoping was really a capitalist roader who wanted to emulate the 
capitalist system. Liu Shao Qi was trying to emulate the capitalist system too.

Li Onesto: What about the role of model operas, the role of women, the 
importance of the superstructure—the Confucian superstructure had a certain 
image of women—the mummies, beauties, etc. on the stage.

Bai Di: Jiang Qing gave a speech in 1965 and said we have to reform the opera 
and literature; that signaled the official start of the Cultural Revolution.

Li Onesto: Why was it so revolutionary what they did with the model operas?

Bai Di: That is what my research is all about. I feel that before the Cultural 
Revolution, even though the Chinese Communist Party was very aggressive 
politically, but culturally the Party still carried a kind of conservative 
bend. The Marriage Law was passed and was a great moment in Chinese history, a 
very progressive thing. But culturally, at the same time it carried something 
very traditional—why a marriage law, it is still thinking that women need to 
get married. That’s my argument. What Jiang Qing did was more radical than 
that. I’m writing a paper on this that I will present this summer on the opera 
and literature of the Cultural Revolution. What I want to say is that compared 
to the old works, the gender roles changed in the model operas and ballets.

The model theaters have to be highlighted—this was how the revolution should 
be. We can’t idealize the Cultural Revolution but this addressed the problem of 
the fact that there were 600 million people who still carried a lot of old 
baggage with them. Chairman Mao said you cannot carry out the revolution in one 
generation. You have to have a second and third generation; there is still 
baggage that the people carry with them. Right now it’s very difficult to speak 
out about this, the people who study Cultural Revolution say that model operas 
have created all these false images and stereotypes. Yes, so what? Any artistic 
work creates and promotes certain images and stereotypes.

Li Onesto: And they are used to promote certain ideas...

Bai Di: Exactly. What’s wrong with that compared to promoting some other kinds 
of ideals? If you look at Swan Lake, that is a certain view of women’s beauty. 
Then what is in the Red Detachment of Women where you use the same form of 
ballet but a different image of women. There is that comparison, contrast. 
Jiang Qing used Beijing Opera which is very, very abstract—she used this form 
to carry a certain message, a certain image. People say, oh those women are not 
real—they don’t have a family. But that’s the point.. That the woman being 
portrayed isn’t burdened down by a family.. So in that cultural sense, Jiang 
Qing was more advanced. And you look at things now in China under capitalism. 
The family is totally disruptive for women. And in terms of women’s total role, 
the liberation of themselves and their social roles—you have to get out of the 
family. Especially in Chinese culture, the word family is a loaded word, a 
loaded concept, you have a role and obligation.

Li Onesto: It’s true in U.S. culture as well—there are unequal relations, 
obligations, there’s patriarchy...

Bai Di: Exactly. Women can never be equal in the family structure. That’s Jiang 
Qing’s very radical feminism right there. So women can be revolutionaries and 
can be great leaders only when she is liberated from being a mother, from being 
a wife. Those are the images the model theater in the Cultural Revolution has 
built.

Li Onesto: Can you talk more about what the Cultural Revolution accomplished 
and what it meant to grow up in a socialist society?

Bai Di: I grew up there, and for me, I always had a purpose. That was what 
education was about. And you didn’t have to worry about something like the kind 
of financial crisis that capitalism will always have periodically. We never had 
that much—two sets of clothes, but we never felt we should have more. You don’t 
have that kind of crazy desires for everything, like the need to go shopping 
all the time. I feel that capitalism is very good at creating a void in 
people’s psyche. It will teach you that the only way you feel okay is to want 
more. It is so consuming. When I grew up, I did not put much time at all in 
material stuff. So we had energy to do other things for greater good. We 
studied all kinds of subjects, and we thought our presence was very much a part 
of the future. Yes, we were very future oriented and our focus was also wider 
than only on China. It was about the whole human kind. It is what inspired us. 
That’s what I feel education has to be about.

Some people believe in individualism. But if you think that you are the most 
important, then that is really a boring life, because your existence is 
irrelevant to others; that is how I feel. You can’t survive that long. You have 
to put yourself into human history. Then your life, your existence will carry 
some meaning. That is what Chairman Mao said. In his memorial to Doctor Norman 
Bethune, he said everyone has to die. But the meaning of death is different. 
Somebody dies a worthy death so that death is as weighty as the Mount Tai. Some 
other’s death is as light as a feather. And because Bethune put his life into 
this communist cause, we all remember him—his death was weighty. We were all 
trained this way. You feel that you become part of something. And this makes 
your life and death more meaningful. Now to think about it, we were pretty 
profound as teenagers. We were already coping with the existential questions 
for all humankind: life and death.

I had never lived in a capitalist society then so I didn’t know how to compare 
it to socialism. But looking at the things now both in China and U.S., I feel 
that there was, back then, an optimism that was always in the air, we were 
always optimistic. People didn’t complain. Right now everyone is complaining 
even though he/she has already so much. Under capitalism there is all these 
desires for all kinds of things. Right now when I go back to China everyone is 
complaining and it’s just money, money, money. But back under socialism, the 
purpose in life was not money. As Lei Feng said succinctly: We cannot live 
without food, but our lives are not for food. It is for making a better 
society. That pretty much sums up the spirit. Lei Feng was an ordinary soldier 
in the People’s Liberation Army and died manning his post. He spent his short 
22 years of life helping other people. And Chairman Mao called on the whole 
nation to “Learn from Comrade Lei Feng” in 1964..

On Tuesday, June 11, 2019, 9:58:45 PM GMT+2, 'nesare' [email protected] 
[GELORA45] <[email protected]> wrote: 

 

 

  

Coba saya nimbrung disini.

Saya rada setuju sama bh jo ttg homeless di usa yg malas dgn mengganti malas 
dgn bermasalah. Ini di usa dimana system sosialnya ada. Orang gak ada pekerjaan 
bisa pergi ke SSA utk mendapatkan pekerjaan. Gak ada duit bisa minta makan dan 
juga duit. Gak ada tempat tidur bisa pergi ke penampungan sementara. Gak ada 
asuransi kesehatan aman pasti diobati dan malahan dikasih obat.. Masalahnya 
kenapa masih ada yg bergentayangan dibawah jembatan, didepan gereja dll? Ini 
karena mereka2 ini ada problem/bermasalah. Ada yg drug addict, kecanduan 
alcohol, mental disorder dll dimana mereka ini gak bisa/mau ikut system social 
yg sdh ada itu. Apakah malas? Bisa jadi ttp kebanyakan ya itu problematic.. 

 

Di negara berkembang dan miskin termasuk Indonesia kasusnya mungkin lain. Kalau 
orang Indonesia malas ya jelas tidak. Wong kerjanya keras begitu tahan banting.

 

Masalah ada buruh cina yg kerja diindonesia itu gak benar masalahnya adalah krn 
buruh cina lebih pintar atau lebih rajin. Bukan ini. Ini masalah bisnis dan 
masalah imigrasi. Coba baca dulu yg teliti masalah ini.

 

Koq bisa ya drug addict berasal dari kapitalisme? Teori apa yg bung pakai?

Bung dgn kata lain mau mengatakan komunisme gak akan ada drug addict?

Aduh jangan begini bung sampai2 masalah orang doing drug, bung bawa keideologi. 
Sadar ndak bung ngomong begini radikal dalam arti apa2 saja bung kait2kan ke 
ideologi. Moso’ drug bisa gak ada didunia komunisme.. Saya gak usah nulis 
sosialismelah ya krn bung sdh tahu sekarang ini dinegara sosialis drug itu ada. 
Apalagi bung sudah bawa2 jamannya Mao yg seakan2 bisa gak ada pelacuran, 
pecandu. Aduh jangan begini bung. Saya yg bukan ahli cina saja tahu gak mungkin 
ini. Shanghai itu dari dulu, jaman Mao s/d sekarang sudah terkenal dgn 
modernisasinya termasuk semua penyakit social yg bung klaim gak ada dijaman Mao 
itu. Gak usah susah2, coba saja ikutin ceritera shanghanthan 1920an bagaimana 
Chinese brotherhood yg adalah pelarian shaolin bikin komunitas yg akhirnya 
disebut triad dihongkong. Walaupun film shanghaithan ini fiktif ttp begitulah 
wajah kehidupan metropolitan di shanghai tahun2 itu. Setelah Mao menang memang 
pelacuran ditutup habis2an ttp bukan berarti tidak ada pelacuran bung! Inikan 
alasan agamais Islam dipakai utk membangun khilafah. Emangnya siapa yg bisa 
menerima permasalahan social dapat ditanggulangi dgn suatu system agama maupun 
ideologi. Gak ada itu bung! Sayang bung masih percaya dgn komunisme dapat 
menghapuskan pelacuran, percanduan dll. Disinilah letak radikalisme bung. 
Mengerti kenapa saya menyebut bung radikal?

 

Nesare

 

 

 

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> 
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 2:45 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: AW: Re: [GELORA45] Telusur tvOne: Kertajati Bandara 'Mati Suri' 
(29 5 2019)

 

  

Bukan pertama kali saya dengar orang dengan serta merta menyalahkan dan menuduh 
rakyat, orang miskin atau homeless sebagai orang-orang yang malas, pemabuk, 
drug-addict, tidak berdisiplin dsb....Sudah tentu di segala bangsa terdapat 
orang yang malas. Tapi kita bicara soal malas, pemabuk, drug-addict sebagai 
penyakit sosial, bukan HANYA SOAL INDIVIDUAL.  Dulu juga ketika krisis melanda 
Yunani, kontan media Eropa mencekoki rakyatnya dengan tulisan-tulisan rasis 
yang merendahkan dan menghina rakyat Yunani sebagai rakyat yang malas, maunya 
enak-enak, etc. Di Indonesia pun banyak orang yang menyalahkan dan bilang bahwa 
buruh atau orang Indonesia bawahan itu malas bekerja....Sekarang juga ada orang 
yang membenarkan "import" tenaga kerja Tiongkok karena dianggap  buruh tiongkok 
kerjanya lebih baik/trampil dari pada buruh Indonesia. Itu saya anggap 
penghinaan terhadap buruh Indonesia. Seperti anak seorang teman yang kaya raya 
juga mengeluh dan bilang pembantunya malas... Saya tanya berapa gajih pak 
Slamet itu yang sudah berkeluarga dan punya dua anak? Satu setengah juta 
rupiah!!! Saya bilang kalau kamu kerja dan digajih satu setengah juta rupiah, 
akan bersemangatkah engkau bekerja?? Diam seribu bahasa!!! Dulu saya pernah 
berdebat tentang soal hukuman mati bagi mereka yang terlibat dalam soal drug... 
Saya bilang soal drug-eddict, dan juga banyak soal kejahatan lainnya adalah 
penyakit sosial yang bersumber pada kapitalisme. Soal itu tidak dapat 
diselesaikan dengan hukuman mati.. Orang harus mau mempelajari akar dari 
masalah sosial itu.. Kalau memang serius mau melenyapkan , akarnyalah yang 
harus dihilangkan yang menjadi sumber dari penyakit sosial itu. Orang tidak 
dilahirkan untuk menjadi drug-addict atau pemabuk, atau penjahat, pelacur, 
dsb...Mengapa dulu, di masyarakat sosialis Mao, pelacuran, pencandu, dan segala 
macam penyakit sosial dapat dilenyapkan dalam waktu tidak lama??? Sekarang 
muncul kembali semua penyakit sosial itu dengan dibongkarnya sistim sosialis 
dan diganti dengan kapitalisme yang menempatkan kaum buruh dan tani di tingkat 
paling bawah dari piramid dan dihisap untuk menghasilkan kekayaan yang hanya 
dinikmati oleh kelas-kelas borjuasi Tiongkok!!!

 

On Monday, June 10, 2019, 11:49:46 PM GMT+2, [email protected] [GELORA45] 
<[email protected]> wrote: 

 

 

  

Kita mengetahui keadaan seperti ini di kota2 besar di Amerika. Namun, yg harus 
disalahkan bukan pemerintah nya saja, tetapi rakyat nya yg miskin (homeless) yg 
"malas" dan tidak mau "berdipsiplin". Mereka, tidak sedikit atau kebanyakan, 
adalah para "pemabuk dan drug addict". Angka pengangguran di Amerika adalah 
rendah sekali, barangkali satu yg paling rendah di dunia sekarang ini yaitu 
3.6%. Banyak perusahaan2 atau tempat2 yg memerlukan pekerja2 tetapi tidak bisa 
mendapatnya. Dan tempat2 kerja yg kosong ini di isi oleh imigran2, yg legal 
maupun yg tidak legal. Misal, di tempat2 pekebunan buah2 an dan sayur2 an, 
hampir semua pekerjanya orang dari Mexico. Orang2 Amerika sendiri tidak mau 
bekerja di tempat2 begini dan malas atau tidak mau "bekerja kasar" dan lebih 
baik mendapat social welfare atau menjadi "homeless people".

 

Saya sendiri bukan orang/WN Amerika dan juga tidak mau dikasih atau mengambil 
WN Amerika walaupun bisa mendapat dgn mudah sebab banyak point2 yg saya tidak 
senang atau tidak setuju dgn Amerika. Namun, banyak fasilitas2 pekerjaan dan 
akademik yg nomor wahid di dunia sekarang ini adalah di Amerika. Sampai baru2 
ini saya bekerja di Amerika (tetapi keluarga tidak saya pindah ke AS tetapi 
saya sering pulang balik ke dan dari AS). Sistim "survival of the fittest" yg 
berlaku di AS adalah prinsip yg ada segi positif nya, misal, yg sangat 
mendorong kemajuan. 

 

Kalau orang AS bisa menjadi homeless adalah "salahnya mereka sendiri" dimana 
imigran2 atau orang LN saja bisa mendapatkan pekerjaan apa saja dan bisa 
mendapat posisi tinggi di AS dimana angka penganguran sangat rendah disana 
seperti tsb diatas. Dulu saya belajar di Jerman dan bekerja di Jerman, tetapi 
utk kemajuan utk orang LN (Auslaender) lebih baik di AS daripada di Jerman.

 

Salam, 

BH Jo

 

 


  #yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348 -- #yiv4889215348ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid 
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-mkp #yiv4889215348hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-mkp #yiv4889215348ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-mkp .yiv4889215348ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-mkp .yiv4889215348ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-mkp .yiv4889215348ad a 
{color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-sponsor #yiv4889215348ygrp-lc #yiv4889215348hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-sponsor #yiv4889215348ygrp-lc .yiv4889215348ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv4889215348
 #yiv4889215348activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348activity span 
.yiv4889215348underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv4889215348 
.yiv4889215348attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv4889215348 .yiv4889215348attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 .yiv4889215348attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv4889215348 .yiv4889215348attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv4889215348 .yiv4889215348attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv4889215348 .yiv4889215348bold 
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv4889215348 
.yiv4889215348bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 dd.yiv4889215348last 
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv4889215348 dd.yiv4889215348last p 
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv4889215348 
dd.yiv4889215348last p span.yiv4889215348yshortcuts 
{margin-right:0;}#yiv4889215348 div.yiv4889215348attach-table div div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 div.yiv4889215348attach-table 
{width:400px;}#yiv4889215348 div.yiv4889215348file-title a, #yiv4889215348 
div.yiv4889215348file-title a:active, #yiv4889215348 
div.yiv4889215348file-title a:hover, #yiv4889215348 div.yiv4889215348file-title 
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 div.yiv4889215348photo-title a, 
#yiv4889215348 div.yiv4889215348photo-title a:active, #yiv4889215348 
div.yiv4889215348photo-title a:hover, #yiv4889215348 
div.yiv4889215348photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 
div#yiv4889215348ygrp-mlmsg #yiv4889215348ygrp-msg p a 
span.yiv4889215348yshortcuts 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv4889215348 
.yiv4889215348green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv4889215348 .yiv4889215348MsoNormal 
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv4889215348 o {font-size:0;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348photos div div {border:1px solid 
#666666;min-height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348photos div label 
{color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv4889215348
 #yiv4889215348reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv4889215348 .yiv4889215348replbq 
{margin:4px;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-actbar div a:first-child 
{margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-mlmsg 
{font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv4889215348 input, #yiv4889215348 textarea 
{font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv4889215348 code {font:115% 
monospace;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-mlmsg * 
{line-height:1.22em;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-mlmsg #yiv4889215348logo 
{padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-msg p a 
{font-family:Verdana;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-msg 
p#yiv4889215348attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-reco #yiv4889215348reco-head 
{color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-reco 
{margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv4889215348ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-sponsor #yiv4889215348ov li 
{font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-sponsor #yiv4889215348ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 
8px;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-text 
{font-family:Georgia;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 
0;}#yiv4889215348 #yiv4889215348ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv4889215348 
#yiv4889215348ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none 
!important;}#yiv4889215348   

Kirim email ke