I hate to be divisive among leftists, but why is Maoism so popular whenever I go to leftist groups in real life...

I hate to be divisive among leftists, but why is Maoism so popular whenever I go to leftist groups in real life? I live in America and it seems odd for a non-agrarian society to have so many. Does it have to do with the Black Panther Party adapting it? Or is there some other reason?

Other urls found in this thread:

ciml.250x.com/news/dwm3.pdf)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Can only guess about the US, but in general Maoism is still relatively active worldwide because it has really good and effective praxis.

Their theory is shit, but they have excellent praxis.

Its appeal in the West is that it requires no action (since a real revolution is impossible in the first world currently) and it needs less theory than left-communism.

Many people from the New Left have embraced it after feeling disillusioned with USSR and saw China as being capable of taking the mantle of proletarian revolutions. This is why Badiou, Black Panthers and edgy students on twitter have all been Maoists, it's essentially a legacy of 1968.

they're just edgy liberals

I don't understand why they don't flock to theory instead. I'm hypercritical of leftists who identify their ideology with a leader. The most acceptable to me is Leninism.

I suppose this makes sense, but industrialized countries definitely have a different environment which don't quite allow it to work out

not exactly but a lot of radical leftists in the west adopted maoism in the late 60. Most of what the radical left today says and does is based on 1968 stuff.

It's more about Mao not being a sellout like the USSR with its doctrine of peaceful coexistence, which naturally attracted many radically-minded people from the New Left. Also remember the information about the happenings inside of PRC were rather limited, so people didn't see what a clusterfuck it was.
It was kind of fashionable as well.

There is, Maoism is ultra-democratic and, dare I say it, even anarchistic in its outlook. Those living in advanced democratic nations actually find that it suits many of their concerns and already established prejudices–which is ironically, the opposite you'd expect from a theory emerging from some rural backwater.

It's very populist and light on the theory, literally anyone can become a Maoist. I'm not anti-action but its very well suited to the current activist culture where one is always taking this or that position in permanent opposition always in the name of "the people" instead of the class etc.

On the panthers:

It is obvious that all these mistakes and deviations had much to do with the Maoist nature of the BPP which prevented it from becoming a veritable revolutionary party and from ever being a true menace to the North-American monstrous capitalist-imperialist plutocracy.(ciml.250x.com/news/dwm3.pdf)

Ok, ok, I get it, I'm using a Hoxhaist source that agrees with me and it just announces its perspective and doesn't really cite anything beyond general knowledge etc. Let's see what one left-wing historian sympathetic to the RU and other Maoists in the 60s documents:

Leonard, Aaron J. “Heavy Radicals: The FBI's Secret War on America's Maoists: The Revolutionary Union / Revolutionary Communist Party 1968-1980.” (pg 62)

See, I never got that impression. Maybe in the literature I misread it, but the cultural revolution seems to really be against democracy and anarchism. Not being free to create something because it doesn't adhere to the ideology is a very totalitarian trait.

Fred Hampton attempted to unite many leftist parties, but the mass assassination of leaders including him definitely led them back down that road with new leadership.

Thanks for the sources though, it does provide more insight to the Panthers since it is hard to find information outside of the usual diatribe about them being a gang.

Every Maoist I met was some kind of control freak.
Even former ones, who are no longer political but, let's say, in charge of your department. They gave up on the good things it may have had but fully implement the bad things upon their environment.

Criticism and self-criticism? Fuck you man, I read that part. I know what you are up to!

...

Read "Against Identity Politics" by Dragonowl.

Fucking hell that is cringy. You anarkids are fucking stupid.

its hippie bullshit. Anarcho-Socialists and Anarcho-Syndicalists are at least redpilled on the jq. whats even funnier is standard age Western urbanite Marxist-Leninist trash get mad if you name the jew, even though Ol' Uncle Karl been there done that.

...

you do realize I'm too socialist for Holla Forums

that's why I never make threads there.

in fact jews are the only ethnic minority I hate. I'm ok with Arabs, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc.

Hitler is too socialist for Holla Forums…your point?

It amazes me how much salt you can mine over some idpol liberal woman who makes youtube videos about video games. Literally why do people care?

the majority of Holla Forums users are children who play video games incessantly.

Hahahahahahahaha How The Fuck Is GamerGate Real Hahahaha Nigga Just Walk Away From The Screen Like user Close Your Tumblr Haha

Considering how many Chinese products are you using already, it's hardly surprising to have an overabundance of cheap Chinese Stalinism knock-offs.

Are you hypercritical of Pythagorean theorem, Archimedes Law, Newtonian mechanics, Lorentz transformations as well?

It's more about China being semi-allied with USA, while anything directly connected with USSR was stamped out with extreme prejudice.

have you read assata: an autobiography and huey newtons's "revolutionary suicide"? both were pretty essential in my radicalization and are both available online as PDFs/for free - i don't know how much the BPP (not the more recent NBPP) is talked about on leftypol in general because i don't use this board often, but i feel like it's pretty essential to know a good amount about it & its actions etc, and really teaching/talking about it has helped radicalize friends who started out as obama / BLM liberals who love deray mckesson.

irt your question - along with what everybody else has said, the little red book is not very long and rather simple to understand, making the foundations of mao zedong thought relatively more accessible - it was printed in pocket-sized editions so it could be read anywhere, etc. it's kind of a zero point, i mean, but yeah.

None of that dictates how a society should be run by the person who is running it

Maoism is popular in the US because of the of the sino-soviet split. Maoism stopped being directly associated with the USSR, allowing for the americans to say that they are communists while distancing themselves from the USSR.

Terrible theory, terrible praxis. A lot of it is basically because some shitty idpols in the 70s and 80s tried to adopt some Maoist elements because it basically allowed them to reformulate their "radicalness" in a way that was basically liberalism. "Intersectionality" and other forms of idpol bullshit are basically just watered down Maoism applied to the First World. It's a shit ideology and we should treat adherents how we treat fascists.

Literally the only Maoists I know IRL are spoilt porkies from 1% backgrounds who have been banned from all the other leftist groups, they are not working class, they're liberals.

You are strawmanning so hard, I don't even understand what it supposed to mean, nor what it refers to.

Mao literally allied with the US

What did Mao actually mean by this?

That the purpose of philosophy isn't just to interpret the world, but to change it.

I was talking about the theoretical autism, Mao's "antagonistic contradiction" vs le corn man's "peaceful coexistence".
Also Nixon's visit was in 1972, no?

He misspoke. He meant to say 'I am a massive fucking hypocrite.'

He spent months in his villa retreats, especially later in his life, just reading and thinking. Meanwhile, the rest of the Chinese were essentially denied these books due to the combination of censorship, book burnings, destruction of libraries and ransacking of houses during the Cultural Revolution. New works also stopped being written due to the persecution of intellectuals from the Hundred Flowers campaign onwards. Mao seems to have mistaken his ass for his mouth because that quotation is just pure shit.

I want the bohemian cosmopolitans to leave.

Weren't the main targets of the Anti-Rightist Campaign lolberts and libshits?

Because the IRL far left that hasn't been COINTEPRO'd by liberals is still stuck in the 20th century.

How does any of this have to do with ideology? Furthermore, were any of these people political leaders? I was criticizing political leaders who write theory because it is to fulfill specific agendas specific to that group of people and to give themselves the most power. You gave me the literal worst examples and you expected them to hold some water

And I was talking about Maoist popularity in US having nothing to do with theory.

China was moving away from USSR (and, consequently, towards US) long before that. For example, trade with USSR in 1967 was less than 7% of trade in 1960.

Nixon visit was formal recognition of the fact, not an initiation of the process.

What does scientific nomenclature has to do with nomenclature in the field of political economy? I don't know. Maybe convenience has something to do with. Wild guess, yes.

Furthermore, are you deliberately retarded or genetically? It's not about politics.

Since I belong to specific group of people, I don't mind having political leaders who write theory to fulfil my specific agenda.

You'd have to be violently insane to demand something different. Oh, wait. SMASHIES.

I think some proving of statements is in order.

Examples of what? Using names of people for convenience sake? The most heinous crime against humanity.

You morons can't even agree on what Anarchism is. Fucking AnCap are still crawling all over the place, pretending to be Market Anarchists. Using words like Proudhonists or Bakunist would simplify things immensely - but no. You go whining about Evil Communists who dare to introduce some clarity to their ideas.

Why should I prove anything when you made a lazy and one dimensional response to me at first, what did you even mean by what you said? Are you a Bolshevik from pre-revolution Russia? Are you Chinese in 1945? Being a Leninist, a Marxism-Leninist, a Trotskyist, and a Maoist literally benefits you 0. It isn't general like Marxism or Luxemburgism. Also, I wouldn't care if we called it Proudhonists or Bakunists(Which by the way aren't even popular now, before you start criticizing our theory, get familiar with what we actually ready). My issue isn't with naming something after theorists. It's after basing your theory on a country which was experiencing a different context than we are now.

Also, really, you're going to get autistic about AnCaps? We have a shitty ideology associated with ours, you have Asser and National Bolshevism. They're jokes and we all acknowledge that.

That was the "official" set of targets, but quite a large number of theorists were targeted for critiquing the party at all. There were rightists for sure, but a large number of intellectuals were actually giving Marxist critiques of the system.