Henry
Chris Burford wrote:
> At 16:14 01/06/99 -0400, you wrote:
>
> <large snip>
>
> >But on the question of Mao's alleged murder of 30 million of his fellow
> >citizens, the problem is a matter of logic rather than the mere absence
> >of evidence.
> >
> >Henry C.K. Liu
> >
> >
>
> It is problematic copying material from discussion on one list to another,
> and I cannot remember whether Brad de Long is on this list, and he may not
> consider it appropriate to pursue the question here, which certainly looks
> ahistorical to me.
>
> I recollect a book was published in about '97 presenting the case
> apparently pretty authoritatively, and I spent 10 minutes fingering it
> before deciding not to buy. It seemed to me inevitable that these ideas
> would circulate into academia and be regarded as received wisdom until they
> could be refuted.
>
> I have not read the extracts that Henry has posted in detail but I do agree
> it is a question of logic and approach as well as of clarifying facts.
>
> There have been famines in Cuba and in North Korea. Famines are actually a
> normal phenomenon of history in many human societies, depending also on
> climate. They may be seen as the fault of the emperor or whatever power
> there is, and perhaps even a judgement by God. There is a human problem of
> managing surplus for years when it may be needed in unexpectedly large
> quantities.
>
> It is also normal part of bourgeois politics to blame disasters on enemies
> and expect them to have foresight.
>
> But human beings are really conscious of everything that with hindsight
> they may come to hold in clear consciousness.
>
> There is a lot of serious argument about the leftism and idealism of the
> great leap forward and about Mao's mishandling of internal party debate. A
> CEO would have been sacked, but to use shorthand implying he was a mass
> murderer is logically a category error but also of course has a much wider
> political significance.
>
> People may not want to pursue this debate here, but Doug's broad moderation
> policy is right in permitting it to be mentioned. It is better if ideas
> such as this circulate as received wisdom they are permitted on lists such
> as this where in due course they can be tested.
>
> Chris Burford
>
> London