Chinese Atrocities Visible and Invisible find that most criticism of atrocities in the former Soviet Union, China, and Korea is foremost insincere.
For example, it is inaccurate to compare the standard of living in the USSR with the US. The US comprises, in fact, the Western hemisphere. The average standard of living in America and political liberty falls well below that of the Socialist bloc as soon as we include everyone between the Rio Bravo and Tierra del Fuego.
Without control over two continents, most whites in the US would have a far lower level of consumption. The West’s overall standard of living was based on virtually unlimited exploitation of the original inhabitants of four continents in return for nothing.
Both Chinese Atrocities Visible and Invisible and the Soviet Union industrialized without the benefit of piracy, plunder, and slavery beyond their borders. They also undertook to feed, clothe, house, educate, and employ all their people- goals the West has never pursued. The US only aims to supply those who can pay. The USSR and China sought to provide at least all those who work- a fundamental difference.
The potential to love or feed everyone in the absence of the will to do it is not a virtue; it is hypocrisy- worse than that, it is a crime.
The French in Santo Domingo did not kill anyone…
Europeans and Americans are only concerned about mass killings to distract from their own.
If one considers that the US murdered about 6 million people by aerial bombardment between 1951 and 1974, people who never even came close to US territory, and that is just a rough estimate.
But we have to tolerate the obscenities of French fascists telling us how many people died in civil wars (primarily caused by the West) as the death toll of “communism”.
I think we have to stop wasting our time educating stupid white folks.
Let us talk about Western crimes. The Chinese Atrocities Visible and Invisible can take care of their own- we are the ones who obviously cannot stop mass murder, not the PRC!
I read this article and then looked at the bibliography.
Westview is an academic press that specializes in work from people close to the national security state. I always take its titles with a grain of salt as the Establishment view. Harvard is more ambiguous as a publisher but also not an imprint known for deviations.
I find the mixture of numbers for “struggled” with the numbers allegedly killed to be highly questionable. It is a device for subtle distortion. The reader is led to aggregate figures of two very different categories based on an insinuation that “struggling” was part of the killing.
There is a disclaimer about foreign attacks. However, this was a period of massive covert action in Asia by the US. To allege a KMT ring in Hubei is by no means wild, then or now.
Interestingly several of the foci of alleged mass killings are in autonomous regions and historically strong KMT areas.
Finally, the author refers once to Mao’s idealism as the basis for the Cultural Revolution. Thus the author contradicts himself. If it was Mao’s idealism, it could not merely be reduc to personal power aggrandizement, as the overall tone implies. At no time does the author attempt to explain either the ideals or the policies. Without that information, it is impossible to say what the actual conflicts involved.
In the West, it is common to call a conflict by some platitudinous name, e.g., ethnic or religious, when the real struggles are about control over wealth and population. The Crusades are the best example of this persistent deceit in Western scholarship.
In Shanghai, we visited the old part of the city, the family’s estate that founded the city several hundred years ago. The estate has been preserved and restored and is a trendy tourist spot. This family-owned all of Shanghai and the city residents worked in shops and farms this family-owned.
It was classic feudalism. The people were not slaves, but their labour was in the service of the landlords. The story is told in placard around the old estate. You see the same things all over Europe. Versailles is only the biggest one. These are palaces of the ruling elites.
Revolutions need to change all of this, and the oligarchs don’t give up easily. Many moved themselves and their wealth to Taiwan – all protected and facilitated by the US 7th Fleet.
We often told that all of this monument was destroy in the Cultural Revolution and all the Buddhist temple, which was all covered in gold. That’s not true in my experience. Chinese Atrocities Visible and Invisible were all kept and maintained as trendy places for people to visit. They just lost their power. Buddhist monks used to have the same power as Catholics do now in Latin America. But now they are just tourist sites and very popular.
We stayed pretty close to the Jing An Temple. Several thousand monks were living there at its highest point, and it was a powerful as any Bishop’s cathedral. Today it still has monks, but it is a tourist site.
In some revolution, I wonder if too little force was used. The rich prove time and again that they are subversives.
I always thought Mao’s idea was correct: people have to learn to fight their own battles. To tell a generation, it has to live a modern revolution and not just consume the previous one is brave but conceptually correct. The State makes “mistakes” all the time, and rarely is that a reason we are allowed to change it.
Just like land reform works if the land is taken by those who use it but less so when redistribut bureaucratically.
Capitalists always insist that it is their (violent) appropriation that gives them title.
De: Robert Merrill <email@example.com>
Data: 10 de Julho de 2020, 13:37:13 WEST
Para: “Dr. T. P. Wilkinson” <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Assunto: RE: bodycounts
Yes, this is true. At the time of the Cultural Revolution, the US was fully engaged in its scorched earth wars all over SE Asia. There was no question in anyone’s mind that the SE Asian wars’ real goal was China – on one level, to contain the Chinese revolutionary model and, on the other, possibly to expand the war into China’s territory.
There was a Cultural Revolution in Indonesia at this time – 1965-70. Indonesia was a communist society, not by communist doctrine but by culture. Sukarno was elected president because he was a hybrid of traditional Indonesian communalism and Chinese style communism.
So the US murdered him and installed a military dictator. Over the next few years, the US killed well above a million people and nearly exterminated communism from Indonesia. It was a straightforward ideological cleansing of the nation.
The same things happened in Thailand, Cambodia, and it was tried in Vietnam.
Phoenix Program was a cultural revolution at its heart. And in SE Asia in the 50s through 70s, probably 40 million people were killed, and that many more were displaced and had their lives destroyed. The US’s SE Asian wars are a Counter-Cultural Revolution and vastly more deadly. Just like what happened in France in the 1789-1799 period.
I also just recalled an article Peter Hallward sent me several years ago, which showed that even in the French Revolution, the number of deaths on the Jacobin side was exaggerated and the vastly more deadly white terror minimized or ignored.
The effect of establishment propaganda on historical memory has been immense and constant.
I think one can debunk most of this so-called research and scholarship just by close reading. The sensationalism and distortion are often apparent in the words and the narrative.
Which, if applied to know Western massacres, would cause outrage- but are never used in the same way.
I know of no Western descriptions of the Korean War. Which describe the kind of violence necessary to leave only chimneys standing in the North. The death toll is not even deemed worth mentioning – and few bodies were remaining to count.
These people obsessed with the deaths in China never count the deaths from the Opium Wars to 1949 as their murders ought to at least embarrass serious scholars.
But then there are enough readers like Annette for whom Western mass murder can never be compared with that of the enemy.
Another point you might consider lies with the terminology:
With its thousand-year-old culture, China was struggling to overcome imperial subjugation and much of the “habit” which had preserved it so long. It could no longer rely on anything like continuity. The Cultural Revolution, conceived as an existential praxis, was a way to democratize the Revolution and teach it. But made it a lived experience– which, of course, generates different social attitudes and practices than “taught” ideology.
But aside from that, it is assumed that the industrial Revolution (the West has a general antipathy toward anything like “culture”– it prefers religion) and “progress” were natural, historical phenomena.
Even in the West now, one has such slogans as “industry 4.0” as if the reorganization of the industry without people has no consequences.
However, it is a fact, as Eric Williams also documented, the Industrial Revolution not only involved working millions of people to death in the Western peninsula. It could not have been financed without the slave labour and virtually free resources stolen from two entire continents.
Progress brought untold Congolese their torture and death for the benefit of Leopold’s wealth, tires, and the only wholly illuminated national motorway network in Europe. No one knows for sure how many lives rubber wealth cost because most of the record of the Societe Generale were burn before its transfer to the Belgian State.
Leopold, along with all the extant royal families of Europe, profited (and still profit) personally from “progress”– the Western “leaps forward”. Mao derived no dynastic or personal benefit from his attempts to democratize the Revolution and modernize Chinese Atrocities Visible and Invisible from within.
3 thoughts on “Chinese Atrocities Visible and Invisible”
Pingback: Mao's Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution - Here Comes China!
Pingback: The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution - Here Comes China!
You are so full of shit… just like China itself. China is trying to be something it isn’t. A diversified, free nation like the great nation of America. China will never be like that… ever. It’s toi frightened of Its own shadow.