[Marxism] Who is interested in Mao ?

Daniel Koechlin d.koechlin at wanadoo.fr
Thu Oct 8 18:39:25 MDT 2009

As to where I picked up all the info on Mao.

Well, from THE book, the definitive book on the subject. I am referring 
of course to Jung Chang's biography of Mao ("Mao : The unknown story"), 
which he wrote after consulting surviving friends, family members and 
all the available archives he could find. Most of these archives were 
from the ex-Soviet Union, because China does not allow access to Chinese 
archives on Mao. That is why his material on the 1920-1950 period is so 

It took him twelve years to assemble the necessary documentation. And 
given Mao's tendency to obliterate all traces of his past, it is quite 
remarkable that such a biography exists at all. Mao constantly lied 
about his  activities in the 1920s. He claimed to have been present at 
the founding meeting of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), but that was 
just a big lie, because it was founded two years before Mao even took 
interest in Communism. Of course, he had all the school books re-written 
so as to include him as one of the founders of "Chinese Communism".

Mao also lied as regards his involvement with the Kuomintang. Later in 
life, he denied ever having anything to do with the Nationalists. All 
these interesting snippets of info were also systematically deleted from 
Chinese archives.

We are left with the testimonies of hundreds of surviving Kuomintang 
officials (in Taiwan) who all testify to the fact that Mao was indeed a 
member "at one point". The problem is, they can't agree on the dates. It 
seems Mao was a registered "spy" for the Kuomintang at one point, and 
then became a "special informant" (briefly), before becoming "the leader 
of communist activities in China".

Well, I'll leave you to that excellent, aforementioned book on Mao.

As for modern maoists (Are ? Kya aap mere doste hai ? Mai hindi bolte 
hu...  ye bahut mushkil hai, hindi bolna.... Lekin, merelie, saach bahut 
important hai ). I am currently learning Hindi (is lie / that's why) I 
don't want to shock honest people.

All I can say is, you had better devote your energies towards the true 
emancipation of the working class. Guns are only useful to unionism 
(trade-unionism) if they can bring about a change in society. I mean 
there are currently 12 000 naxalites in India (well actually, the number 
is closer to 9 000). The total population is 1 300 000 000 people. 
Naxalites can annoy the central authorities by regularly killing 10 
members of the security forces (every week). There are 400 000 members 
of the security forces.

The 10 000 to 20 000 naxalites (or 50 000 when one includes the "red 
bases") depend for their survival on local turf-wars. That's why they 
arm one group against another. In the 90s it was Christian tribes 
agaisnt Neo-Hindu tribes. Now, it is Advaisi agaisnt Advaisi. Local 
feuds are being settled through 12 bore shotguns, localy produced 
(that's all the weapons they have).

The PCI(M) does posses a hard-core staff of dedicated revolutionists. 
They also have access to very advanced weapons (including a dozen or so 
SAM missiles). But heir hold on the vast territory of the Consolidated 
Revolutionary Zone is tenuous.

I would really call on all anti-capitalists to work within their class, 
to create working-class alternatives to capitalism and definitely not to 
forget the importance of working-class democracy. Maoism, as all 
Marxist-Leninist ideologies, dismally fails on this account - providing 
genuine working-class support for would-be revolutionists. Maoists will 
find their own support, out of the barrel of a gun and out of 
indoctrination of 12 year-old Advaisis (peasents).

More information about the Marxism mailing list