Mao Zedong - On "Brainwashing"
Some foreigners say that our ideological reform is brainwashing. As I see it, they are correct in what they say. It is washing brains, that’s what it is! This brain of mine was washed to become what it is. After joining the revolution, it was slowly washed, washed for several decades.What I received before was all bourgeois education, and even some feudal education.
- Mao Zedong
Dessalines
in reply to Dessalines • • •More from Roland Boer - Socialism with Chinese characteristics:
Mao was speaking to Chinese students studying in Moscow in 1957, but his words are still resonant today. For me at least, the in-depth study of Chinese Marxism, of socialism with Chinese characteristics,has required a washing of my brain, a washing that has taken a dozen years or more. Why? When I first came to China, I thought I was open-minded, thought that I did not assume the frameworks and assumptions with which I had been brought up and educated. How wrong I was.
Like other foreigners, I had developed an opinion about China that was quite erroneous. This is particularly so for those from the small number of countries that make up the ‘West’ (containing about 14% of the global population). I have found that those who have grown up in socialist countries–past and present–find it much easier to understand socialism with Chinese characteristics. This is also the case for the many who come from developing countries, for there too is a living memory of the experience of colonial
... mostra di piùMore from Roland Boer - Socialism with Chinese characteristics:
Mao was speaking to Chinese students studying in Moscow in 1957, but his words are still resonant today. For me at least, the in-depth study of Chinese Marxism, of socialism with Chinese characteristics,has required a washing of my brain, a washing that has taken a dozen years or more. Why? When I first came to China, I thought I was open-minded, thought that I did not assume the frameworks and assumptions with which I had been brought up and educated. How wrong I was.
Like other foreigners, I had developed an opinion about China that was quite erroneous. This is particularly so for those from the small number of countries that make up the ‘West’ (containing about 14% of the global population). I have found that those who have grown up in socialist countries–past and present–find it much easier to understand socialism with Chinese characteristics. This is also the case for the many who come from developing countries, for there too is a living memory of the experience of colonial depredation at the hands of the ‘West’.
So if you are like me, having been brought up and educated in one of the few Western countries, then you may well need to engage in a process of washing your brain so as to be able to understand socialism with Chinese characteristics, or sinified Marxism.
𝗖 𝗔 𝗧
in reply to Dessalines • • •Dessalines
in reply to 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 • • •Its a bit tough to answer that question, because it assumes that there's such a thing as "pure socialism", and that any deviation from that is a betrayal, compromise, or revision to what socialism is. We should view socialism not as a dogmatic religious text that can never be changed, but as a science, which can grow, adapt, change, and we can build upon through experience and experimentation. What works and uplifts people should be our measuring stick, not dogmatic adherence to texts.
You're right that SWCC could be considered similar to the NEP, in their acceptance of markets and allowing private capital to exist in a limited form under the thumb of a socialist government. But most modern socialists don't view market socialism as a "betrayal" or "revisionist"; Socialist countries like Vietnam, Cuba, DPRK, and the PRC, have all learned through experience and adopted different flavors of socialist market economies, while still being run by communist parties, who try to remain flexible in their approach to solving their specific country's problems, and always making
... mostra di piùIts a bit tough to answer that question, because it assumes that there's such a thing as "pure socialism", and that any deviation from that is a betrayal, compromise, or revision to what socialism is. We should view socialism not as a dogmatic religious text that can never be changed, but as a science, which can grow, adapt, change, and we can build upon through experience and experimentation. What works and uplifts people should be our measuring stick, not dogmatic adherence to texts.
You're right that SWCC could be considered similar to the NEP, in their acceptance of markets and allowing private capital to exist in a limited form under the thumb of a socialist government. But most modern socialists don't view market socialism as a "betrayal" or "revisionist"; Socialist countries like Vietnam, Cuba, DPRK, and the PRC, have all learned through experience and adopted different flavors of socialist market economies, while still being run by communist parties, who try to remain flexible in their approach to solving their specific country's problems, and always making sure that private economic power can't rise above political power.
SWCC was formulated as a set of ideas, strategies, tactics, and after the overthrow of the gang of four in the late 1970s, learning from the lessons of the ultraleft turn of the cultural revolution. Most other countries don't have that experience, and weren't able to learn those lessons. SWCC also underwent a lot of changes after the overthrow of the eastern bloc, trying to not repeat the same mistakes the USSR made (a great topic, but too long to go into here).
The best longer book I've read (only about 70% done now) which goes over all the thinking and strategies behind SWCC, is Jin Huiming - Marxism and Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, but here are some good introductory articles that go over SWCC:
The Myth of Chinese Capitalism
TGP STAFF (The Greanville Post)𝗖 𝗔 𝗧
in reply to Dessalines • • •Dessalines
in reply to 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 • • •