Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by janrinok on Saturday April 01 2023, @07:04PM   Printer-friendly

If you still want your Mao memorabilia, you better hurry down to Tiananmen Square, Beijing, while you still have the chance.

In China, the State Council is somewhat comparable to the Cabinet. Headed by the Prime Minister and consisting of the heads of the various Ministries (Defense, Commerce, Education, Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Justice, Civil Affairs, State Security, Public Security and so on), it handles the day-to-day running of the country while formulating economic policy.

Its operational procedures are described in a document, conveniently titled "Working Procedures for the State Council". On March 18, an updated version of that document was published, and it has a couple of changes.

First off, the State Council now has to "report any major decisions, major events and important situations" to the Central Committee "in a timely manner." Previous edition sentences like "administration according to law, seeking truth from facts, democracy, openness, pragmatism and integrity" have been scrapped, as has the requirement for the State Council "to correct illegal or inappropriate administrative actions", or to "guide and supervise" the bureaucracy. In other words, its wings have been seriously clipped.

Secondly, any and all references to Marxism/Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, the thought of Deng Xiaoping and the ideologies of former presidents Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao are now verboten. Only references to Xi Jinping Thought are allowed, as that is "the essence of Chinese culture and the spirit of the times".

To drive the point home, the Central Committee of the CCP launched another nationwide disciplinary campaign among its 96 million members.

This round will check them for loyalty to supreme leader Xi Jinping, weeding out "black sheep" and "two-faced" officials.


Original Submission

This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by cosurgi on Saturday April 01 2023, @07:22PM (3 children)

    by cosurgi (272) on Saturday April 01 2023, @07:22PM (#1299356) Journal

    This prima aprilis joke is actually a little bit funny.

    --
    #
    #\ @ ? [adom.de] Colonize Mars [kozicki.pl]
    #
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2023, @07:36PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2023, @07:36PM (#1299357)

      2023.03.29

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2023, @07:53PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2023, @07:53PM (#1299360)

        What happened on March 29?

        I've still got a copy of Mao's Little Red Book and I really doubt that anyone from the CCP is coming to my US suburb to confiscate it... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotations_from_Chairman_Mao_Tse-tung [wikipedia.org]

        • (Score: 2) by Mykl on Sunday April 02 2023, @10:28PM

          by Mykl (1112) on Sunday April 02 2023, @10:28PM (#1299469)

          March 29 is not April 1, so this is not an April Fool's joke.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by RamiK on Saturday April 01 2023, @08:10PM

    by RamiK (1813) on Saturday April 01 2023, @08:10PM (#1299362)

    Why stick to past mass-murderers when there's so much to look forward to from Xi?

    --
    compiling...
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Mojibake Tengu on Saturday April 01 2023, @08:19PM (22 children)

    by Mojibake Tengu (8598) on Saturday April 01 2023, @08:19PM (#1299363) Journal

    Deletion if crufted ideologies is fine. That's a necessary prerequisite step before reunification of the nation.

    --
    Respect Authorities. Know your social status. Woke responsibly.
    • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 01 2023, @08:31PM (21 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday April 01 2023, @08:31PM (#1299364) Journal

      nationwide disciplinary campaign among its 96 million members.

      So, another Cultural Revolution? How many died in Mao's cultural revolution? How many are going to die in this one? Are the youth on board? Are they going to betray parents, grandparents, teachers, etc etc again?

      • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Mojibake Tengu on Saturday April 01 2023, @09:10PM (20 children)

        by Mojibake Tengu (8598) on Saturday April 01 2023, @09:10PM (#1299366) Journal

        So, what's really happening in USA currently with all of these BLM, CRT, LGBTQ, ... movements, that smells bad like a real Cultural Revolution.

        Same model: some ideology-driven ignorant youngsters kicking around the established societal structure just like Red Guards for hidden interests of who-knows-whom.

        China has already grown up of that, now it's America's turn.

        --
        Respect Authorities. Know your social status. Woke responsibly.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2023, @09:37PM (14 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2023, @09:37PM (#1299367)

          > now it's America's turn.

          What??!! You youngsters must have forgotten the '60s. After the 1950's and early 1960's Civil Rights movement the USA had one "revolution" after another -- anti-Vietnam war, sexual, women's and probably a few others I've forgotten.

          The French were even more serious about student-led social revolution(s) at about the same time (so said one of my college profs in the mid-1970s, she was on the front lines in Paris ~8 years earlier).

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by RamiK on Saturday April 01 2023, @09:54PM (13 children)

            by RamiK (1813) on Saturday April 01 2023, @09:54PM (#1299371)

            It's only a revolution if the people in power and/or the system of government was forcibly changed. We can debate the "and/or" and the "forcibly' parts, but since neither the people in power not the system of government changed in the US / France...

            --
            compiling...
            • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 02 2023, @11:33AM (10 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 02 2023, @11:33AM (#1299414)

              By that definition, the "Cultural Revolution" wasn't a revolution, and this thread is pointless.

              Though TBH this thread was pointless from the initial reply, because the OP is a CCP shill (tip: there can be no "reunification", because the CCP has never governed Taiwan or the Taiwanese people), and they very quickly pivoted to whataboutism to deflect the conversation from legitimate criticism of the CCP.

              • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday April 02 2023, @04:59PM (9 children)

                by RamiK (1813) on Sunday April 02 2023, @04:59PM (#1299439)

                Literally every stage of the Cultural Revolution centered around breaking apart existing power structures and governing bodies and following up with purges in the military and the local governments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution#History [wikipedia.org]

                There's even an established and explicit reference point for historians when discussing the power transition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seizure_of_power_(Cultural_Revolution) [wikipedia.org]

                --
                compiling...
                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 02 2023, @06:51PM (8 children)

                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 02 2023, @06:51PM (#1299445) Journal

                  Literally every stage of the Cultural Revolution centered around breaking apart existing power structures and governing bodies and following up with purges in the military and the local governments:

                  Neither the people in power nor the system were changed.

                  • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday April 02 2023, @08:43PM (7 children)

                    by RamiK (1813) on Sunday April 02 2023, @08:43PM (#1299457)

                    senior officials, most notably Chinese president Liu Shaoqi, along with Deng Xiaoping, Peng Dehuai, and He Long, were purged or exiled

                    ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution [wikipedia.org] )

                    Liu Shaoqi: "...He was Chairman of the NPC Standing Committee from 1954 to 1959, First Vice Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party from 1956 to 1966 and Chairman of the People's Republic of China, the de jure head of state, from 1959 to 1968, during which he implemented policies of economic reconstruction in China..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Shaoqi [wikipedia.org]

                    Deng Xiaoping: "...under Chairman Mao Zedong and Vice Premier under Premier Zhou Enlai in the 1950s, Deng presided over the Anti-Rightist Campaign launched by Mao and became instrumental in China's economic reconstruction following the disastrous Great Leap Forward (1958–1960). However, his right-leaning political stance and economic policies eventually caused him to fall out of favor with Mao, and he was purged twice during the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976). Following Mao's death in September 1976, Deng outmaneuvered the late chairman's chosen successor Hua Guofeng and became China's de facto paramount leader in December 1978..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping [wikipedia.org]

                    Peng Dehuai: "...China's Defense Minister from 1954 to 1959...Peng became critical of Mao's leadership. The rivalry between Peng and Mao culminated in an open confrontation between the two at the 1959 Lushan Conference. Mao won this confrontation, labeled Peng as a leader of an "anti-Party clique", and purged Peng from all influential positions for the rest of his life...Peng lived in virtual obscurity until 1965, when the reformers Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping supported Peng's limited return to government, developing military industries in Southwest China. In 1966, following the advent of the Cultural Revolution, Peng was arrested by Red Guards. From 1966–1970, radical factions within the Communist Party, led by Lin Biao and Mao's wife, Jiang Qing, singled out Peng for national persecution..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peng_Dehuai [wikipedia.org]

                    He Long: "...one of the ten marshals of the People's Liberation Army...served as China's vice premier. He did not support Mao Zedong's attempts to purge Peng Dehuai in 1959 and attempted to rehabilitate Peng. After the Cultural Revolution was declared in 1966, he was one of the first leaders of the PLA to be purged. He died in 1969 when a glucose injection provided by his jailers complicated his untreated diabetes..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He_Long [wikipedia.org]

                    There's thousands more lower ranking and/or local officials but the language barrier and the censorship are in the way. Regardless, the ranks were purged and the power structures shifted towards Mao.

                    --
                    compiling...
                    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 02 2023, @10:22PM (6 children)

                      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 02 2023, @10:22PM (#1299468) Journal

                      Regardless, the ranks were purged and the power structures shifted towards Mao.

                      Which isn't saying much since he was already in charge and the structure of the Chinese government didn't change a bit. Purges aren't revolution in themselves.

                      • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Monday April 03 2023, @12:27AM (5 children)

                        by RamiK (1813) on Monday April 03 2023, @12:27AM (#1299482)

                        he was already in charge and the structure of the Chinese government didn't change a bit

                        Both Hitler and Caesar were similarly in charge and the structure of the governments didn't change much after they took over.

                        Also, the CCP changed a LOT during the those years. For instance, the Central Committee was more or less disabled in 66' as one of the first moves: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Committee_of_the_Chinese_Communist_Party [wikipedia.org]

                        There were also a few preparatory moves like the new 1954 constitution... And then there's the Red Guards being put together and broken apart (on paper) in a very short span of time... The legal, social and personal changes were all intermixed like you'd expect from a revolution.

                        --
                        compiling...
                        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 03 2023, @02:09AM (4 children)

                          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 03 2023, @02:09AM (#1299487) Journal

                          Both Hitler and Caesar were similarly in charge and the structure of the governments didn't change much after they took over.

                          Mao took over in 1935 [wikipedia.org].

                          The Long March began the ascent to power of Mao Zedong, whose leadership during the retreat gained him the support of the members of the party. The bitter struggles of the Long March, which was completed by only about one-tenth of the force that left Jiangxi (about eight thousand of some hundred thousand), came to represent a significant episode in the history of the CCP, and sealed the personal prestige of Mao and his supporters as the new leaders of the party in the following decades.

                          The Cultural Revolution started in 1966.

                          And it's silly to insist that the structure of government didn't greatly change in the transitions from Roman Republic to Roman Empire or Wiemar Republic to Third Reich. Those changed who was in control of the society as well as the goals of the society. The Wiemar Republic transition was particularly abrupt and radical as Germany went from a peaceful relatively democratic neighbor overnight to a fascist aggressor and with a decade to a superpower that was at war over the entire world.

                          Keep in mind that Nazi Germany had similar purges of leadership (for example, following the July 20, 1944 assassination attempt on Hitler, about 5000 people were executed). Should we consider each of those a revolution? Similarly, imperial Rome routinely had wars fought over succession? Are those revolutions?

                          or instance, the Central Committee was more or less disabled in 66'

                          And then reinstated in 1969 with normal operation after Mao's death (apparently by 1978).

                          • (Score: 1) by visiblink on Monday April 03 2023, @02:53AM (1 child)

                            by visiblink (6609) on Monday April 03 2023, @02:53AM (#1299492)

                            You know that he was shunted aside after the Great Leap Forward, right?

                            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 03 2023, @11:12AM

                              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 03 2023, @11:12AM (#1299520) Journal
                              It's not much of a shunt if he was able to purge all rivals a few years later.
                          • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Monday April 03 2023, @09:25AM (1 child)

                            by RamiK (1813) on Monday April 03 2023, @09:25AM (#1299512)

                            Should we consider each of those a revolution? Similarly, imperial Rome routinely had wars fought over succession? Are those revolutions?

                            Yes. All those instances are revolutions because the change of power itself was sudden and forceful. Similarly, the French Revolution lasted for decades to cement (the ol' Rule of Terror) and it also took Adams a decade to put down the first constitution from when Washington took office and the articles of confederation started getting through.

                            Mao took over in 1935

                            As mentioned in another post, Mao was ousted from office after he failed in the Great Leap forward so he rallied up his public support to forcefully purge his opponents and get him back into office and pass the laws necessary to keep him there for life.
                            In fact, the Great Leap Forward itself was a revolution as well as the various rival revolutions in China following 69'. Different historians like to break it apart under different waves [wikipedia.org] but no one questions whether the cultural revolution itself was a revolution in and by itself since it involved a forced change in power structures.

                            reinstated in 1969 with normal operation

                            No they weren't as clearly spelled out in the wiki article:

                            Mao did not hold absolute power over the Central Committee, as evidenced by the debates surrounding the policies of the Great Leap Forward, as well as the economic policies of the early 1960s. However, Mao used Central Committee meetings as a platform to project authority or legitimize decisions which have been made in advance, such as at the Lushan Conference of 1959, when the Central Committee ratified the decision to denounce Peng Dehuai, who had spoken out in opposition of the Great Leap Forward.

                            During the early stages of the Cultural Revolution, the Central Committee essentially ceased to function; it was convened in August 1966 (11th Plenum of the 8th CC) to cement decisions already made by Mao on launching the Cultural Revolution. Mao faced some opposition at the 11th Plenum but ultimately most delegates were goaded into ratifying Mao's decisions. Many members were politically disgraced or purged thereafter. The committee was then convened again in October 1968 (12th Plenum) to ratify the decision to expel then head of state Liu Shaoqi from the Party. At the 12th plenum, less than half the members actually attended, as many had fallen victim to the Cultural Revolution. In a letter to Mao "evaluating" the members of the Central Committee at the time, Kang Sheng wrote that some 70% of CC members were considered "traitors, spies, or otherwise politically unreliable".[6] The Central Committee membership at the 9th Party Congress in April 1969 was largely handpicked by Mao and a small group of radical allies. The decisions at the Congress were later deemed to be "wholly and absolutely wrong" by official party historians.

                            ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Committee_of_the_Chinese_Communist_Party [wikipedia.org] )

                            --
                            compiling...
                            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 03 2023, @11:08AM

                              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 03 2023, @11:08AM (#1299518) Journal

                              All those instances are revolutions because the change of power itself was sudden and forceful.

                              No they're not. Changing of power is not a revolution in itself. The system has to change as well. The Cultural Revolution didn't change the system. It's just a label for a purge.

                              Similarly, the French Revolution lasted for decades to cement (the ol' Rule of Terror) and it also took Adams a decade to put down the first constitution from when Washington took office and the articles of confederation started getting through.

                              The actual Rule of Terror lasted a year from 1793-1794 with a significant portion of the executions during a two month period in late summer of 1794. And I find it bizarre that you claim something is a revolution because it is "sudden and forceful" and then follow up with two examples that weren't sudden. I grant they were forceful, but "decades" and such is not sudden.

                              As mentioned in another post, Mao was ousted from office after he failed in the Great Leap forward so he rallied up his public support to forcefully purge his opponents and get him back into office and pass the laws necessary to keep him there for life.

                              Mao was never ousted from office - he retained supreme power and used it in the Cultural Revolution to maintain his power. Using the term "office" is very tenuous in the first place since such concepts were ill-defined and as I note in the previous sentence, the alleged revolution just preserved the status quo of Mao on top.

                              In fact, the Great Leap Forward itself was a revolution as well as the various rival revolutions in China following 69'. Different historians like to break it apart under different waves [wikipedia.org] but no one questions whether the cultural revolution itself was a revolution in and by itself since it involved a forced change in power structures.

                              None of your examples in that paragraph changed power structures and hence were not revolutions. As I noted in my post, the end result was that the 1978 system looked very much like the 1959 system with no real change.

            • (Score: 2) by jelizondo on Monday April 03 2023, @12:58AM (1 child)

              by jelizondo (653) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 03 2023, @12:58AM (#1299486) Journal

              I don't know why you mention France.

              The British, after their Glorious Revolution and Cromwell, had the Restoration, which brought the Monarchy back. France didn't.

              Read the news, French people are on the streets fighting police over an increase in retirement age of two years, while most US citizens don't even have a government provided pension plan...

              What change has BLM, Occupy Wall Street and other movements have achieved? None and they will never. So I agree, revolution means a forced change in social structures, but the French did indeed change their structures.

        • (Score: 5, Informative) by mcgrew on Saturday April 01 2023, @10:13PM (3 children)

          by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Saturday April 01 2023, @10:13PM (#1299375) Homepage Journal

          It's something started by failed third party presidential candidate Ross Perot in the 1996 presidential elections. It's nonsense picked up by the Trump crowd, the untaxed billionaires who hate "woke" because if you woke up you'd see that the real threat isn't gays, or blacks, or abortionists, or Aunt Jemima, but the untaxed billionaires who have been stealing your labor since 1980 when the Patron Saint of Billionaires was elected president, with an anti-poverty agenda (they hate the poor), who want government to be small enough for them to walk all over and ignore at will.

          In 1940, the minimum tax bracket was four times the median income. In 1965 an hour at the minimum wage bought ten McDonald's hamburgers, today it buys two. They don't want you woke to those FACTS you can easily look up like I did.

          They want 1936 Italy.

          --
          mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
          • (Score: 2, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 01 2023, @11:27PM (1 child)

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday April 01 2023, @11:27PM (#1299387) Journal

            the real threat isn't gays, or blacks, or abortionists, or Aunt Jemima,

            You can say that, because you've never met Aunt Jemima. That is one dangerous woman, right there! You do realize that she and Annie Oakley were contemporaries? What you don't know is, they were conspirators! Aunt Jemima took the front in the kitchen, while Oakley stormed America with her constitutionally protected assault rifle!

            • (Score: 3, Troll) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday April 02 2023, @03:38AM

              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday April 02 2023, @03:38AM (#1299401) Journal

              Figures you start moaning about a black person with a gun. That's what it took to get ol' Raygun to consider gun control laws too. Maaaan, even your jokes are dumb.

              --
              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 02 2023, @07:54PM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 02 2023, @07:54PM (#1299450) Journal
            In other words, you're just another kid who woke up. Scary billionaires? Fascists partying like it's 1936? Add it to the pile.

            For me, there's a lot more woke out there than the narrow class of smelly ideological movements that triggered poor ole Mojibake. A lot of people have that one big insight that everyone else is too sleepy to see. Unfortunately, they don't agree on what it is.

            And while it might stretch the analogy a bit, being woke forever is unhealthy. Woker has to sleep sometime. Maybe they'll wake up with a better insight next time after they had a chance to dream on it.
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 02 2023, @07:59PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 02 2023, @07:59PM (#1299452) Journal

          China has already grown up of that, now it's America's turn.

          That's why China is going through this pointless personality cult refurbish?

          Nobody ever grows up out of that. But at least in the US, we don't put someone in charge of picking the single right flavor of loony.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by istartedi on Saturday April 01 2023, @09:53PM (4 children)

    by istartedi (123) on Saturday April 01 2023, @09:53PM (#1299370) Journal

    The essence of a good ideology for achieving total control, is that it's plausible enough to fool people at the right time.

    --
    Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by mcgrew on Saturday April 01 2023, @10:17PM (3 children)

      by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Saturday April 01 2023, @10:17PM (#1299377) Homepage Journal

      Lincoln said "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."

      He neglected to add "But you don't have to. The first two will suffice."

      --
      mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2023, @10:48PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 01 2023, @10:48PM (#1299382)

        You only need a plurality, if even that.

      • (Score: 4, Touché) by krishnoid on Saturday April 01 2023, @11:13PM

        by krishnoid (1156) on Saturday April 01 2023, @11:13PM (#1299385)

        Don't forget he also said "You can't believe every quote attribution you read on the Internet."

        Now that 1984 has recently made it into the UK public domain [theguardian.com], this guy made it into an audiobook/radio play [youtu.be].

        On another note, the book (upon relistening) clarifies how important personal journals and paper records [csmonitor.com] and being able to observe the progress of edits via revision control can be, but not for the initial reasons that might come to mind.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Sunday April 02 2023, @01:50AM

        by Thexalon (636) on Sunday April 02 2023, @01:50AM (#1299394)

        I can't help but think of Adlai Stevenson, who while running for president had this exchange:
        Supporter: "Every thinking person in America will be voting for you!"
        Stevenson: "I'm afraid that won't do — I need a majority."

        And he indeed lost, in no small part because Richard Nixon had popularized calling him an "egghead".

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by jb on Sunday April 02 2023, @07:13AM (1 child)

    by jb (338) on Sunday April 02 2023, @07:13AM (#1299407)

    "the essence of Chinese culture and the spirit of the times"

    Ah, I see. So in other words: Volksgeist und Zeitgeist

    ...now where have we heard that before?

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by krishnoid on Sunday April 02 2023, @10:09PM

      by krishnoid (1156) on Sunday April 02 2023, @10:09PM (#1299467)

      I haven't. But the next time someone asks, I'll say "I heard it here first!"

(1)