Luftmensch on maoism

Rolf Martens rolf.martens at mailbox.swipnet.se
Tue May 7 15:57:00 MDT 1996


Hello Chris,

Here you're touching on something important (I hope you won't mind
my saying, for once!):

>They were receptive to "public opinion" expressed also in indirect ways.
>The spontaneous mass mourning at the death of Zhou Enlai, who very
>significantly died just before Mao, was treated by all sides in the
>Chinese leadership as a signal of hostility towards Chiang Ching and Co.

>Chris

The mass protests on Tienanmen Square on 05.04.76, essentially,
*were* a protest against Jiang Qing's and the other "G 4" peoples'
*suppressing* the manifestations of mourning for Zhou Enlai. There
were some other forces mixed up in the whole thing also, some
supporters of the *other* anti-Mao fraction, that of Deng Xiaoping,
which tried to take advantage of the situation, but, if you read the
issues of Peking Review from that time carefully, you can confirm
the above pretty well. (Btw, *are* those issuses available to
you, for instance? I have them, in English and in German. Does anybody
know where to get issues 1973-77 in Spanish? *Please* in that case tell
me about it, and how to get copies of articles!)

I read about the events at the time but didn't then understand them
although I had already been enaging in political activity for some
years. There was one thing in PR that made me wonder, even at that
time, however: The people in Beijing were asked over the radio *not*
to go out into the streets; it was said that there "were disturbances
by some bad elements, which were being taken care of by some
militia units". Today I realize how this *stunk*: The masses
of course must have supported the revolution, so why would the
people then controlling that radio station want them to stay home
instead of going out - in which case they of course would have seen for
themselves what was really going on and would have supported the
correct line; "bad elements" of one kind or another would not have
been able to fool them.

Funny business; obviously a "Gang of Four" controlled station.
On 07.04.76, after that incident, there were two decisions by the
CC of the CPC: 1) Dismissal of Deng Xiaoping from all posts
2) Appointment of Hua Guofeng (*not*, for instance, the "G 4"
meber Zhang Chunquiao, who had "higher rank") as First Vice
Chairman of the CPC - effectively, as successor to Mao. Both decisions
were on Mao Zedong's proposal. Here it can be seen that he combated
*both* groups, both the Deng group *and* the "Gang".

However, the incident on 05.04. was proclaimed by the CC of the
CPC to have been "counterrevolutionary". IMO, that must have been
a mistake. *In the main*, they must have been revolutionary, with
pro-Deng forces only playing a *secondary* part. Other information
supports such an analysis, too.

This whole subject, as one of the important points in the history of
the years 1973-1977, i.e. the history of the overthrow of socialism in
China, is an important subject for further investigation today.

Those who maintain that the "Gang of Four" were *real* leftists,
and not phoney ones, at least are dead wrong, as many facts show,
not only those mentioned above.

There's a brief discussion on this in my "UNITE! Info #3en" posting.
Much more will have to be written on that subject.

The line of the "Gang of Four" correspond very closely to
that of the recently exposed Avakian-Quispe-TP impostor gang!

The PCP comrades should be advised on this point, too, and this
whole matter discussed with them; they're certainly making a
big mistake in supporting Jiang Qing as a consistent revolutionary,
and not as the hypocritical Rightist she turned into at least in
the 1972-76 period, for which she was also rightly criticized by
Mao Zedong. All information show how *jubilant* were the masses
in China, and in Shanghai in particular, when the "G 4" fell in
October 1976. Only, shortly later, in November, the Deng people
started to take advantage of the masses' hatred for the
"G 4" and *now* were joined by Hua Guofeng who then commited his
treason. In October, he still had said: "We also must continue
criticizing Deng Xiaoping".

These historical issues have a not unimportant bearing on the
political issues of today.

Rolf M.



     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---




More information about the Marxism mailing list