Why there are so few commentaries about the 50 years of the Cultural Revolution?
Is it because dwelling so much upon it would undermine the narrative of the left? After all, the Cultural Revolution in China was the moment in history where humanity has come closer to True Communism, and it was absolutely horrible. Besides, too much of the terminology and practices of that era are similar to modern terminology and practices of the hegemonic left for them to feel safe talking about it.
I ask because I want to see a documentary about it and I can't find none. On Netflix the only political documentaries are about leftist obsessions such as Nazis and mass killings of communists in the Third World (which are totally justifiable when you study the Cultural Revolution by the way).
wow, just wow.... i can't even
just go back to your containment board neckbeard nazi >>>/pol/
>>1132252
How does criticism of the Cultural Revolution automatically makes one a Nazi?
Mao did literally nothing wrong
He just killed a few gay artists and smashed a few tacky pottery
who cares? its all water under the bridge amigo.
The cultural revolution was a great event and advanced China hundreds of years into the future industrially.
But you are probably some butthurt ex pat Chink living in the west or Singapore and won't listen to reason or the facts.
Here's your answer:
>>1132249
>>1132270
>>1132271
the media (much like this board) is full of commie faggots who need to take a helicopter ride
>>1132282
nice ad hominem answer faggot
If commies are so weak and pathetic, why did Mao analy rape Kai Sheks western funded army?
And why did Stalin and Soviet Russia bitch slaped Hitler and raped half of Germany?
Maybe some enriching is in order for you.
If people talked about how radicalized students subjected their colleagues to humiliation based on politicized racial identities, it would be too uncomfortable for the modern left.
I mean, what is going on in Western universities is not that different. Instead of the "Five Black Categories", you have "Cis White Males". Instead of struggle sessions you have ritual humiliations such as what happened to Matt Taylor over a stupid shirt. Instead of self-criticism you have "check your privilege", but overall the feeling is the same.
What is lacking, as of now, is the violence, but that's just a matter of time.
>>1132291
Because the United States supported the commies both in the Chinese Civil War and in the World War II.
Directly in the latter, indirectly in the former.
>>1132282
Aha! Another counter-culture 'chonner. You are fighting the good fight, my red-pilled friend, but for now, I suggest that we retire to our facebook meme page where we might laugh heartily at visual takedowns of cultural Marxism and cucks!
>campaigns against the "Four Olds" let to massive destruction of historical sources, both written and archeological, across all of China
>modern historians support it for political reasons
Communist historians shouldn't be considered historians. They are propagandists. They do not actually love history, as it can be seen for their support for a political movement that led to a massive destruction of historical knowledge, they merely use history for political purposes.
>>1132308
USA funded only Kai Shek in civil war, it was the Soviet Union that gave Mao and the Chinese communist all of their weaponry and ammo,
>>1132246
Because it was fucking class and Mao did L I T E R A L L Y nothing wrong.
Western fascists and assblasted Taiwanese can get the fuck out.
>>1132282
>Abloo bloo bloo why can't /his/ be a hugbox for me?
>>1132322
USA embargoed the Nationalists and gave indirectly support to the commies through the China Hands. Patrick Hurley resigned because he was tired of having all his pro-Nationalist efforts made null by State Department workers who were all pro-communist.
>>1132321
being a historian isn't loving "old things" for the shake of their age.
Julius Caesar burned the library of Aexandria, but hardly anyone mentions that little fact when mentioning him. There have been social transformations and revolutions since the beginning of recorded history. Deal with it.
>>1132334
nice sources faggot, give me sources that explicitly state that the state department armed and funded Mao during the Civil War.
>>1132335
There have been reactions and counter-revolutions since the beginning of recorded history too. I will remember that the next time some commie begins crying about anti-communist purges in a random Latin American shithole.
>>1132268
Too be fair to MaoistRebelNews as much of an edgy faggot he is, he absolutely pales in comparison to ADFfuensalida in the Autism department.
>>1132341
“Wedemeyer Reports” by Albert C. Wedemeyer
There is no doubt that the current chinese government has the best interests of the nation at its heart, more so than our leadership, but that is simply not the case. the cultural revolution was a horrific consolidation of power for the communist party so it could carry out its reforms unopposed. China will become the most powerful country in the world but at the expense of the people murdered by the communist party since the civil war
In the end, I just want to watch a good documentary about the Cultural Revolution, I'm curious about the whole "schoolkids killing each other while quoting Chairman Mao" but I can't find none.
I'm sure that if that shit went on in a right-wing dictatorship, there would be no end to documentaries about it.
>>1132363
That's because it didn't happen.
What did happen is university students became ultra-critical of their teachers, sometimes violently.
>>1132353
>Wedemeyer Reports
Never mention funding to Mao by the US during the Civil War, and Wedemeyer was chief of staff in Kai Sheks army.
Nice propaganda fagget.
>>1132379
I never mentioned funding either. I mentioned "indirect support". The only commies the US funded directly where the Soviets.
>>1132371
Why are leftists so delusional? They literally can never take responsability for their actions, they either say "it wasn't true communism" or say "it didn't happen".
>>1132389
Even you have found 0 sources for it happening.
Just because you heard some fascist on Youtube say it doesn't make it true.
>>1132385
Neither was it indirect support, don't shift the goal field.
US foreign policy officially supported Kai Shek, it shifted when it became apparent that the Japanese were going to win China. And support for Kai Shek shifted to indifference.
>>1132258
Except that photo is of nationalists executing a communist during the Sino civil war?
>>1132397
Then why did the U.S. embargoed the nationalists during the Civil War?
Why so many State Department officials were pro-communist, such as John Service and Owen Lattimore?
Why did the Dixie Mission get fooled so easily? They went to Yenan during the Rectification Movement, when Mao was killing everyone who opposed him in the Party, and yet they came back talking of the communists as "pacifist agrarian reformers".
>>1132308
No, because almost the entire population of China eventually found Mao and his ideas much more interesting than Chiang and his impositions.
>>1132303
This.
It just hits way too close to home.
It's a good thing these cucks are terrified of firearms.
>>1132385
Holy shit, you aren't moving the goalposts, you're trying to move the entire goddamn football field.
You claimed that the US supported the chicoms. You were asked for a source, and provided one that didn't back up your statements. Now you're trying to claim that what you meant by 'support the chicoms' was actually 'fail to support a decisive action to wipe them out'.
Are you also going to try to claim that the US supported the USSR because America didn't try to invade Russia?
>>1132414
>Hey, if the US supported Kai Shek that would make all this anti-communist propaganda untrue. Explain that.
>>1132389
>Why are rightists so delusional? They literally can never take responsibility for their actions, they either say "interventionism dindu nuffin" or say "WE WON BECAUSE WE KILLED MORE OF THEIR CIILIANS" desu could go on much more but nah.
Leaving aside your political views, there's an audiobook on Audible on modern China which goes crazy in depth. Enjoy paying for it!
PS: Nobody cares about the cultural revolution outside China because it has shit-all to do with anything outside China + nobody actually got to see it outside of China. SSA? Easy journalistic credit. Nazis? Fucking guess. Who went into China during the CW? No westerners for fucking certain. The next time anyone in the English speaking world entered the country legally was Nixon, and whatever you think of conservatives in general Nixon wasn't going to let a little thing like widespread humanitarian catastrophe distract him from trying got fuck with Russia. Cue Dengs political reordering complete with concerted attempts to sweep it under the rug (made easy with Chinese media control). Nobody in the west actually knows what the fuck happened except for Sinologists.
PPS: If you want to make a documentary, where are you getting the footage, interviews and other evidence? Expatriates? Interviews, definitely, but not much . Journalism? How much media survives from the time that doesn't bleed Maoism? Or how about the Chinese government? They're the only people with access to the records and they're fully aware of the horrors of the CW. They're much happier having the west think of it as the quaint story where Mao has a bunch of peasants turn their tools into slag rather than a civil war that killed ~1% of the population. No access = no movie.
PPPS: How old are you? How much do you actually know about "leftist"' discourse? Do you think people in academia still endorse socialism? Cause they fucking don't, the theory du jour is Libertarianism or Social Dmocracy, which amounts to capitalism with higher taxes and social welfare (SDs gave up the myth of reaching true socialism decades ago). All the old Marxists dies years ago.
PPPPS: What about the killing fields and the DPRK?
>>1132414
>Then why did the U.S. embargoed the nationalists during the Civil War?
Because by 1947 the Nationalist army was a disgrace and it was clear Mao was going to win. Truman forced reforms on Kai Shek and imposed an embargo until he would follow them through.
>Why so many State Department officials were pro-communist, such as John Service and Owen Lattimore?
Both accurately predicted what everyone was saying, that Chinese Communist guerillas equiped with Soviet weapons were going to win. It doesn't take a genius to understand or see it from the conditions at the time. The rest is Mcarthyst cold-war , paranoid propaganda that you are replicating like an idiot.
>They went to Yenan during the Rectification Movement, when Mao was killing everyone who opposed him in the Party, and yet they came back talking of the communists as "pacifist agrarian reformers".
None of that happened at the time, you are very much brainwashed and don't even replicate correct information.
How old are the leftists on this board?
I grew out of it at 21 because of the political climate on my campus. It was my fourth year. It's even worse now 4 years later, and is quickly approaching Red Guard levels.
I just don't really see how so many people can buy into leftism once they distance themselves from academia and popular media.
>>1132394
It's not like factionalism in the Red Guards is a conspiracy theory. The problem is that, for obvious reasons, historical archives in China, specially concerning political sensitive events, are of limited access. The few historical sources available are concerned with factionalism in the big cities, such as Beijing (Andrew G. Walder) or Guangzhou (Stanley Rosen).
Mostly you have to rely on memoirs, such as Born Red, by Yuan Gao, with all the problems it entails. Which is why I was interested in a documentary.
>>1132452
>Nobody cares about the cultural revolution outside China because it has shit-all to do with anything outside China
That's where I disagree with you. I think the Cultural Revolution is extremely relevant because something similar is happening in the West.
>Do you think people in academia still endorse socialism?
It depends on the country, I guess. In Latin America and Continental Europe they do. And in the U.S. Maybe they do not endorse socialism directly, but they certainly do not oppose with the same strenght they oppose fascism.
>>1132466
>uh oh people actually support a position I personally find dislikeable
>Better call them [BUZZWORD]
>Leftist/Liberal, Pol/Nazi/Sotrmfag etc etc
>AD HOMENIM
>Imply your opponents are ubderaged and immature for taking positions other than your own
>Phew look how enlightened I am
>Now, where's my hugbox gone to?
>>1132466
nobody cares
this isn't your blog, go to livejournal if you want to talk about yourself.
>>1132487
That would imply socialism is just as worthy of being opposed as fascism.
It is not.
>>1132495
Considering that socialism killed more people and is more dangerous of coming back in the West than fascism, I'd say that opposing socialism is way more urgent than opposing a dead ideology of no hope of being relevant again.
>>1132466
what do you mean by leftist? are you refering to SJW's and communists idealogues or are you including people that prefer to vote democrat over republican?
>>1132430
>Now you're trying to claim that what you meant by 'support the chicoms' was actually 'fail to support a decisive action to wipe them out'.
But isn't it?
Let's be honest. Communists are always more popular anywhere in the world. In countries like South Korea, all of Latin America, even Italy and Greece, communists were only defeated because the U.S. lended massive support to anti-communist regimes and groups, including giving support to extermination policies.
They didn't do such in China, which led to the communist victory. Considering the role of communist spies in the Institute of Pacific Affairs and in the State Department (see the Amerasia affair), I can't attribute this failure to anything but malice.
People like Edgar Snow, Owen Lattimore and Brooks Atkinson should have been court-martialed and shot, instead of living peacefully until old age and never punished for the dozens of millions of deaths they caused.
>>1132497
Fascism always has a chance to come back again. This is why it's so dangerous, whereas far-right ideologies that only appeal to neckbeards like anarcho-capitalism are not.
Not to mention there's more to socialism than Stalin-Mao level carry on. And even then the fact that lots of people starved to death in those developing countries isn't as worrying as the fact that fascists would indiscriminately murder people based on ethnicity.
>>1132507
Fascism can only come back if you call anything to the right of liberal conservatism "fascism".
Fascism as it actually existed as a historical phenomenom, a radical nationalist, modernizing cult of violence, cannot hope to win without the sympathy of the police and justice system, which it will never have again as it had in the early 20th century.
>>1132291
>If commies are so weak and pathetic, why did Mao analy rape Kai Sheks western funded army?
>Implying the Communist didn't sit back and let the Nationalists do all of the heavy lifting against the Japanese, strike the Nationalists while they were weak from war with Japan, and then run around in the 70 years since screaming, "Rook! Communist China beat the Japanese!"
You commies have a very selective memory when it comes to history.
>>1132517
It can. Fascism is essentially militarized, nationalist social democracy. It doesn't need to win the support of the police and justice system, it just needs the right conditions to make a return appealing. As has happened to a minor extent in Greece.
Fascism is what happens when capitalisms own propaganda and contradictions start to cannabalize eachother, that's bound to happen again.
>>1132495
Why not?
>>1132420
it's like they haven't even seen the little red book before.
Political power grows from the barrel of a gun, my man.
The most sublime controlled opposition in the history of power is being crafted before our eyes.
>>1132540
Fascists are hardcore nationalists at best and explicit imperialists at worst.
Socialists seize control of the means of production.
>>1132498
>republican
>democrat
people who think in these terms don't understand civics to begin with, they're just ignorant.
>>1132506
Not really.
If communism was popular, communist countries wouldn't be orwellian.
>>1132537
>Fascism is what happens when capitalisms own propaganda and contradictions start to cannabalize eachother, that's bound to happen again.
You know that's this whole "fascism is degenerated capitalism" is just what Stalin told Georgi Dimitrov to come up with for political reasons, and has no theoretical basis outside of Stalinist propaganda, right?
>>1132551
...and?
>>1132566
Okay.
How is it not degenerated capitalism?
>>1132568
Being racist is bad.
>>1132565
They are always more popular before they take power, then people realize how shitty living in a communist country actually is.
>>1132569
There is no reason to believe that capitalism in Italy during the 1920s was more degenerated than anywhere else in the world.
>>1132580
Yes there is because Italy, like Germany and Spain, was a hotbed of socialist activity with not the best economy.
>>1132574
No.
You see, if racism was a harmful trait, it would have been naturally deselected from the population already.
Racist organisms seem to breed more often and with greater success than racially unaware organisms.
>>1132597
Okay, how did you find this out?
>>1132466
so you never actually cared about the actual ideas you supported? amazing
>>1132506
I understand your perspective, and I think that there's a certain amount of truth to it. But I still don't think 'failure to stop' is the same as 'support'.
The US has historically undermined all sorts of communist regimes, if only from the end of WW2 onwards, and there may be many reasons why they didn't stop the chicoms, such as pressures of resource allocation and the fact that it was basically an irrelevant part of the world whilst there were bigger concerns during the period.
It doesn't necessarily mean that the US as an institution supported Chicommunism.
>>1132551
>We need to seize all the power over the means of production and other national powers to fix the government and nation, but once we do, we'll totally give it back to the people!
Francisco fucking Franco, a fascist, handed more power over back to the royal family of Spain, as he promised, than a commie government has ever handed to its people.
>>1132551
What's wrong with nationalism? It is a good thing.
Why is seizing the means of production a good thing? Private property is a right people shouldn't be deprived of. Besides, it's always a communist bureaucracy ruling over people in a tyrannical regime. The best countries are capitalist.
And imperialism is a trait that was very present in the history of communism.
Fascism is not imperialist, by the way.
>>1132614
>He handed power to the royal family guys, that basically makes him a hero of the people.
>>1132618
1. It is a spook, and not just any spook but a very pointless and counter-productive one.
2a. Because it allows the workers to manage their own affairs without a portion of the value produced being leeched off by someone just on an abstract notion of prviate property.
2b. That's true to an extent, but that's not how it necessarily has to be.
2c. And likewise the worst countries are capitalist. Whilst the seats of capitalist power are very well off (albeit the working class still suffer from capitalism induced problems) the overwhelming majority of the planet is capitalist and the overwhelming majority of the planet is dirt-poor.
3. I'm not convinced it is, communists fought very few expansionist wars when compared to capitalists in the 20th century.
>Fascism is not imperialist, by the way.
Okay, how do you know that?
>>1132334
The Vernona Project did find that communists had been in the US government as early as 1943, and that's just what we know of. People scoff at McCarthy, but that list he had has been proven right many times ever since the Soviet archive was opened to the public, (I wonder how much of the Intel was destroyed before being opened to the world?).
Don't expect communist to do anything short of fling McCarthy red scare memes like shit, and ignore all of this.
>>1132642
This thread is about a political event where workers were allowed to manage their own affairs. They were actually encouraged to seize the means of production from the communist bureaucracy and take the government on their hands.
They ended up killing each other while quoting the Little Red Book.
So much for seizing the means of production as a panacea for all social problems.
>>1132621
>Implying socialist were not waging a war to take the power from the Spanish Crown, which made Franco's efforts even necessary in the first place.
Again, a fucking fascist could be trusted more than communists to honour his word to relinquish the absolute power he held over a nation. The fucking promise is even in the communist ideology, so it's not like it's a leader going back on their own word, but on the gospel of their own ideology they proclaim to adhere to.
>>1132679
The cultural revolution was a good thing, famm.
The only thing that went wrong was not taking it far enough, maybe if they did Deng wouldn't have betrayed the revolution because some Red Guards would have already killed him.
>>1132646
>People scoff at McCarthy, but that list he had has been proven right many times ever since the Soviet archive was opened to the public
LOL
NO
He was literally so bad for the anti-communism movement that people seriously suspected he was a Soviet plant sent to discredit them.
>>1132679
>This thread is about a political event where workers were allowed to manage their own affairs.
The Cultural Revolution was a top down affair. So many of Mao's foes being eliminated during it while he and others who counted as part of the government bureaucracy remained unscathed was no coincidence.
>>1132330
>people on the right are annoyed by what a giant hugbox society as a whole has become for lefties
>call out lefties for circle jerking
>"g-go back to your hugbox"
LOVE this meme.
>>1132755
>Society is a hugbox for communists.
>Implying people who like helicopter memes don't already have a hugbox called /pol/ if the sight of communists offends their delicate sensibilities so much.
>>1132766
>posting a picture about being assblasted by the word cuck
>whining about /pol/
>"delicate sensibilities"
I remember my first year of college.
>>1132646
McCarthy was most likely a Communist considering how much he helped them.
>>1132707
>people seriously suspected he was a Soviet plant sent to discredit them.
Yeah, because the people he's investigating, members of the government, wouldn't help that thought along at all.
He was one man with the task of investigating potential communists within the government, the government he worked for. He was also the only one cleared to view the Vernona Project list and have any knowledge of the program's activities. Sure, he became zealous at times, but it was a very overwhelming task, especially when you see how many communists and strongly suspected communists there were in the government.
Also, there were not attempts to discredit him until he went after members of the security apparatuses of the US, in which he was fed false info to make him look like a fool in some instances, and suddenly, journalists who just happened to be part of the COINTELPRO program, started smearing him in the media.
Hmm, fucking coincidence there, I guess.
>>1133025
Are you actually defending him?
It is historical fact that he was lying his ass off. He even later admitted to it.
>>1132707
>>1133016
Also, both of you attack the man, but ignore the fact that his list, the names of people who were confirmed or strongly suspected of being Soviet agents, was proven right for the most part when cross referenced with files from the USSR's archives, (the documents people were allowed to see, anyways).
He was blocked from investigating many of the ones with tons of power within the government, and his reputation destroyed by their lap dogs and sympathisers. He was fighting an uphill battle from the beginning, and it was getting to him with how quickly many had become entrenched within high offices of the US.
Being tasked with taking on members of your government, using their rules, AND having knowledge that they're potentially aiding a foreign nation to bring yours down, would drive many people insane.
>>1133042
>He even later admitted to it.
I have never found any such claim by him.
If there is, what were the circumstances in which he supposedly admitted he made the whole thing up?
If it's secondhand knowledge, then who said he did?
>>1132642
> implying workers aren't spooks
> implying capitalism and communism aren't spooks
>>1132246
>I ask because I want to see a documentary about it and I can't find none.
There's shitloads of Chinese documentaries about it you nig.
And all condemn it. Including the official one from the CCTV Government Channel. Except the government places the blame on fanatical proles rather than the central government.
Do your fucking research you nig.
I am a Bolshevik and a Jacobin.
Even I know that the anti-intellectual far left IS VERY DANGEROUS.
The cultural revolution directly motivated Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.
It took a generation to recover from the damage done by Mao trying to regain power.
Long live the Bolshevik Revolution!
As a quite hard leftist, I can't help but be worried that leftism seemingly always attracts violent tyrant types who want to use violence as a means to an end.
Right is even worse, but at least they don't pretend.
This thread is awful. Are there really people here saying there was nothing wrong with the Cultural Revolution?
>>1132246
>50 years of the Cultural Revolution?
Wasn't it more like 10 years max?
>>1132246
do people actually think the cultural revolution is a good thing? even china nowadays think its a bad thing and an embarassment
http://thediplomat.com/2015/09/the-important-anniversary-china-wont-celebrate-in-2016/
>>1133450
Fuck off
>i can't into news so I'll make my own narrative up instead
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/26/world/asia/qi-benyu-mao-aide-with-no-remorse-afterchinas-cultural-revolution-dies-at-84.html
tl;dr China really doesn't want to remember it because they found out it was horrible and retarded and imprisoned most leaders of the CR in the 80's.
>>1133906
>But you capitalist idiots don't understand, making farmers work in factories and factory workers farm, when neither knows the intricacies of the others job, wasn't a retarded idea!
>It's capitalist propaganda that Mao encouraged everyone to thin the sparrow population, which kept the locust populations in line! What? Yeah, of course he shared the remaining food with the people and totally didn't take it all for himself and let them starve!
If this thread wasn't evidence enough, commies enjoy ignoring the flaws of their ideology and those in the actions of its champions. Just look at all the instances, even here, they shift the goal post when criticised, or just flat out never address them.
Why would be interested in writing?
>First party
The Chinese. They can't because their speech is restricted.
>Second party
>The foreigners living there.
They also can't if they want to continue living there.
>Chinese living overseas
They watch their local state Chinese TV and have their local state represantive watching over. Didn't you read the news about the Chinese police patrolling Greece? Or see the 2008 Olympics rampant nationalism from the overseas Chinese? The propaganda is still there.
>Third party
Foreigners relying on sparse data without many first party or second party data will have little interest.
>>1132466
>quickly approaching Red Guard levels.
>>1133993
Tl;dr, learn some fucking 华語?
Since there are primary sources in Chinese and all?
>>1132303
As if the students were the primary cause of the CR. Mao wanted to take back power and he did so using the students since they loved him
>>1132860
>whines about leftists
>get mad at other people whining about /pol/
>>1133450
>Implying the Bolshevik Revolution wasn't as damaging to Russia's society in its own ways.
There's a reason that If you talk to many people who have lived under communism and have lived to see the alternatives, they never want to return to that life. Only fucking Westerners have this ignorant, romanticised view of communism.
>>1134064
Actually according to polls they do, and just about every relevant metric shows they're worse off under capitalism.
>>1132252
Fuck off you commie sack of shit, you're no better than those fucktarded /pol/tards, you fucking pea brained cum guzzling cunt
>>1134067
Russia was never really a capitalism not when the mafia was running everything. Now its supreme leader putin
>>1134110
This.
Even today, you don't get anywhere near a position or level of success without the blessing of the Russian government. It's the same people in charge that were in charge of many facets of the Soviet government. And those who were no longer part of the government, joined the mafia and continued working with their old colleagues, and having influence. Did anyone really expect it to get better?
They "denazified" the shit out of Germany, and still continue today in many ways, to ensure the same type of people never again gain influence. And the Nazi government was in existence for only 12 years. There was nothing near that level done against members of the Soviet government, a government that had existed for 70 years by that point.
