I'm glad you asked that question. Indeed nobody has recognized that your parody was lifted directly from the sacred texts. I had a feeling because it was too long to have absorbed that much of your time, and it was too perfect. I can't say I recalled the text, since I did read it a long time ago. By contrast, our erstwhile revolutionary colleagues took the manifest stupidity of the language as a slur on their heroes and their races.
> How can anyone who has ever read the preface to _Quotations
from Chairman
Mao_ deny that Maoist thought is characterized by a lack of
critical
capacity? How can anyone deny that Maoist thought is
characterized by
mindless brainwashed utterances? >
For some it comes from an idea of mass revolutionary consciousness as sheep-like behavior. The economic crisis hits, people face destitution, they get religion, they follow the Party. This sort of petit-bourgeois fantasy is buttressed by a lack of experience engaging actual working people in organizing. Said lack of experience gives rise to or is associated with low estimation of the intelligence of workers, hence the felt need to speak in baby-talk. In other words, it is fundamentally patronizing or, to employ some lingo, "classist." It may be recalled that Liu spoke approvingly of the practice of "brainwashing (but without the derogatory connotation)" (sic).
The other unreality about this discussion is the contrast between the assertiveness of our purported Maoists, and the manifest lack of any organizational affiliation that would logically be the vehicle for their politics. Communists without a party are like the old joke about consultants -- they know a hundred sexual positions, but they've never had a date.
mbs