Tambahan:Anda sudah lupa untuk apa saya ajukan cerita Bai Di?? Sudah tentu
bukan untuk mendukung argumentasi tentang semua pikiiran ada cap ideologinya,
tapi untuk membuktikan bahwa pada jaman Mao penyakit sosial seperti pelacuran,
drug-addict, dilenyapkan!! Itulah sebetulnya yang menjadi pokok perdebatan...
bahwa penyakit sosial itu akarnya terdapat pada sistim ekonomi di negeri itu.
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.
Masalah duit, disini kita tidak sedang berdiskusi tentang peran duit dalam
masyarakat. Anda membelokkan diskusi menjadi debat kusir karena mempersoalkan
pandangan dan titik tolak teori yang saya gunakan dalam menganalisa hal ihwal,
yaitu masalah penyakit sosial. Saya radikal, saya membela Mao tse-dong...dll
itu adalah hak saya, seperti juga anda punya hak untuk membela dan berpihak
kepada rezim Jokowi dan kapitalisme. Masalahnya, argumentasi dan fakta yang
saya ajukan yang berdasarkan pada pandangan hidup dan teori Marxis, sulit
sekali untuk anda bantah.. Itu sudah dibuktikan berkali-kali dalam perdebatan
kita. Akhirnya anda selalu melencong dan mengatakan pendapat saya begitu karena
saya radikal.. So what?? Radikal atau tidak, yang penting bantah argumentasi
dan fakta yang saya ajukan.. Itulah yang gagal anda lakukan...
Anda nimbrung dalam perdebatan saya dengan orang lain tentang kemalasan,
pelacuran dsb. Sekali lagi pengalaman Bai Di menunjukkan fakta lenyapnya
penyakit sosial yang dilahirkan masyarakat yang berdasarkan pada penghisapan
dan penindasan. Makanya saya bilang bertandinglah anda dengan Bai Di dalam hal
pengetahuan dan pengalaman kehidupan kongkrit di Tkk sosialis. Mau percaya atau
tidak pada cerita dan fakta yang diajukan Bai Di, itu bukan soal saya... Saya
sendiri juga pernah tinggal di Tiongkok.... Sebaliknya anda, apa fakta dan
buktinya bahwa di Tkk jaman Mao ada pelacuran, drug-addict dsb....Hanya
asumsi...yang bertitik tolak dari pandangan dunia yang anti-sosialis dan
anti-komunis!!!
On Wednesday, June 12, 2019, 9:05:24 PM GMT+2, Tatiana Lukman
[email protected] [GELORA45] <[email protected]> wrote:
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
#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641 -- #yiv1780303641ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-mkp #yiv1780303641hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-mkp #yiv1780303641ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-mkp .yiv1780303641ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-mkp .yiv1780303641ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-mkp .yiv1780303641ad a
{color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-sponsor
#yiv1780303641ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-sponsor #yiv1780303641ygrp-lc #yiv1780303641hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-sponsor #yiv1780303641ygrp-lc .yiv1780303641ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641activity span
.yiv1780303641underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1780303641
.yiv1780303641attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv1780303641 .yiv1780303641attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641 .yiv1780303641attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv1780303641 .yiv1780303641attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv1780303641 .yiv1780303641attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv1780303641 .yiv1780303641bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv1780303641
.yiv1780303641bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641 dd.yiv1780303641last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv1780303641 dd.yiv1780303641last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv1780303641
dd.yiv1780303641last p span.yiv1780303641yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv1780303641 div.yiv1780303641attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641 div.yiv1780303641attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv1780303641 div.yiv1780303641file-title a, #yiv1780303641
div.yiv1780303641file-title a:active, #yiv1780303641
div.yiv1780303641file-title a:hover, #yiv1780303641 div.yiv1780303641file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641 div.yiv1780303641photo-title a,
#yiv1780303641 div.yiv1780303641photo-title a:active, #yiv1780303641
div.yiv1780303641photo-title a:hover, #yiv1780303641
div.yiv1780303641photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641
div#yiv1780303641ygrp-mlmsg #yiv1780303641ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv1780303641yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv1780303641
.yiv1780303641green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv1780303641 .yiv1780303641MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv1780303641 o {font-size:0;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641photos div div {border:1px solid
#666666;min-height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641photos div label
{color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv1780303641 .yiv1780303641replbq
{margin:4px;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-actbar div a:first-child
{margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-mlmsg
{font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv1780303641 input, #yiv1780303641 textarea
{font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv1780303641 code {font:115%
monospace;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-mlmsg *
{line-height:1.22em;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-mlmsg #yiv1780303641logo
{padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-msg p a
{font-family:Verdana;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-msg
p#yiv1780303641attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-reco #yiv1780303641reco-head
{color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-reco
{margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-sponsor
#yiv1780303641ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-sponsor #yiv1780303641ov li
{font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-sponsor #yiv1780303641ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0
8px;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-text
{font-family:Georgia;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em
0;}#yiv1780303641 #yiv1780303641ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv1780303641
#yiv1780303641ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none
!important;}#yiv1780303641
