Print

Print


[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> Forgive me, but I was hoping for a little more specificity.  Googling did me little good, suggesting that something other than what the search engine regards as "elections" determined the extent and duration of the Chairman's power.  But then, anyone who reads the paper knows those Google folks are capitalists, so perhaps they have biased the result to The Great Man's detriment.
>
> Tom K

I just pulled the quote in to illustrate a point, & did not mean to drag
its whole context with it. What you ask could only be answered in
several thousand pages. The context I intended it for (on this list) was
simply to argue that stupid acts _don't_ necessarily connote stupid
actors, and that before most people can avoid being stupid they need a
context in which not being stupid makes sense.

To go back to our language thread -- how do the 300 million people (or
120 million voters) differ from those ancestors who invented language.
Or the peasants of Attica who invented democracy? (See Ellen Meiksins
Wood, _Peasant-Citizen & Slave: the Foundations of Athenian Democracy_,
or Martin Ostwald, _Nomos and the Beginnings of Athenian Democracy_.)

Carrol

P.S. And if you want to know something -- not necessarily about Mao, but
about the Chinese people in struggle, see William Hinton, _Fanshen_.