> I did. And it reads like something written in another
> place and another time that has very little relevance
> to the US of 2006.
I don't think that's true at all. I don't care what you think of his actual accomplishments and/or crimes; he has a practical revolutionary's keen insight into real intra-group dynamics in organizations fighting for social change. A few turns of phrase here and there are specific to the time and place from which it emerges, but I recognize from personal experience just about every "type" of liberal that Mao lists. For example:
***** "To let things slide for the sake of peace and friendship when a person has clearly gone wrong . . .
"To indulge in irresponsible criticism in private instead of actively putting forward one's suggestions to the organization. To say nothing to people to their faces but to gossip behind their backs, or to say nothing at a meeting but to gossip afterwards . . .
"To let things drift if they do not affect one personally; to say as little as possible while knowing perfectly well what is wrong, to be worldly wise and play safe and seek only to avoid blame . . .
"Not to obey orders but to give pride of place to one's own opinions. To demand special consideration from the organization but to reject its discipline . . .
"To indulge in personal attacks, pick quarrels, vent personal spite or seek revenge instead of entering into an argument and struggling against incorrect views for the sake of unity or progress or getting the work done properly . . .
"To work half-heartedly without a definite plan or direction; to work perfunctorily and muddle along . . .
"To regard oneself as having rendered great service to the revolution, to pride oneself on being a veteran, to disdain minor assignments while being quite unequal to major tasks, to be slipshod in work and slack in study . . . " *****
Who here has not witnessed stuff like this? Who here has not had to fight off one's own personal inclination to behave like this in some situations? The whole point of "combatting liberalism" is to recognize and counter trends and attitudes like this both among others and within oneself (criticism/self-criticism). This pithy classic has bearing on the article that Michael Yates cited at the beginning of this thread; it shows that these problems are well-nigh "universal" in movements for social change. The general point I'm trying to make -- or rather, to unite with, since other people have made the same point -- is that revolutionaries have a responsibility to work in collective activities with others and to follow collective discipline. This does not at all mean blindly following orders from on high; on the contrary, part of your responsibility is to speak up when things are going wrong, as both the right and duty of a cadre in a democratic context. But you also have to speak up in an informed way ("No investigation, no right to speak"). You don't get to lightly and easily slough off your duty because not every course of action was decided in exactly the way you wanted.
- - - - - - - - - - John Lacny http://www.johnlacny.com
Tell no lies, claim no easy victories