To facilitate everyone reading each other’s self-criticisms, I want to start a thread dedicated to collecting the reports from our self-criticism meeting and everyone’s self-criticisms. Everyone can post their self-criticisms in this thread, and after the meeting, any revisions to the self-criticisms should also be posted here.
Self-Criticism Meeting Report
It has been several days since the reading group, spontaneously organized by forum members, was suspended. During these days, only five or six members actively made detailed self-criticisms in the forum, while some members have not realized the seriousness of not doing self-criticism and have discussed how to restart the reading group without solving the problems first. The reading group was originally held to help everyone with theoretical study and ideological struggle. If ideological problems are not resolved, restarting the reading group will only make things worse. Therefore, we decided to hold a self-criticism meeting at 8 p.m. on May 31 to move forward better.
At the beginning of the meeting, we actively tried to solve the microphone issues. Everyone spoke as much as possible to share their ideological problems, and those who could not speak due to objective limitations helped read out the self-criticisms. Some members wrote relatively complete self-criticisms with sincere attitudes and well-prepared thoughts; others had some parts that were not fully written, and after being pointed out, they planned to supplement them after the meeting. Additionally, members Sanshui and Hongzheng had more serious ideological problems. Sanshui still showed avoidance of the problems; although he wrote a detailed self-criticism, when Chuyang pointed out his issues in previous reading groups, he spoke with a “not too bad” attitude and was angrily interrupted and questioned by meeting members. Hongzheng treated the problems very unseriously; although he exposed his own problems, he was unprepared for the self-criticism meeting and took a rather frivolous attitude during his self-criticism, speaking subjectively, for example, “I feel the self-criticism meeting is not very sharp, not like the one held by Fenghuo.” In short, he spoke little about his own problems and tended to shift blame onto others. Subsequently, everyone detailed the criticisms of Sanshui’s problems. Although Sanshui said he had nothing to add at the meeting, he expressed willingness to continue as the main speaker. Hongzheng was criticized for his lax attitude and reflected on his lifestyle, resolving to write a good self-criticism. The issue of Hongzheng’s insufficient sharpness exists, mainly in the previous reading groups we held. Today’s self-criticism meeting also had some “harmonious” issues. But overall, everyone made sincere and comprehensive criticisms of themselves, others, and the past collective, which was widely recognized by attendees. However, we must also note that we should not give up or let the ideological atmosphere cool down just because some members were harshly criticized today. Our criticism is not to completely deny past reading groups, nor to undermine enthusiasm and confidence. On the contrary, we should understand that criticism from a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist standpoint, no matter how fierce, is better than the bourgeois honeyed words with a dagger. We should not let criticism extinguish revolutionary enthusiasm; if it does, it is not the revolutionary spirit dedicated to the collective but the ugly fanaticism for personal interests. One criticism is not enough, and we should not think that holding one meeting and submitting a report is the end. Everyone should continue to criticize and reform themselves in future activities. Moreover, we should realize that only by mustering spirit and courage to take the lead can past mistakes be prevented from recurring. Striving for collective activities and fighting against one’s indulgent lifestyle will help better eliminate the stench in one’s thoughts.
The past reading groups mainly had problems of individualism, leading to subjective activity arrangements, and sectarianism caused members to ignore each other’s problems, making activities worse and worse. After initially solving ideological problems, the group continued to discuss specific arrangements for restarting the reading group. First, the choice of books should not be as random as before; it should be collectively considered whether it fits current study and struggle needs. Regarding the arrangement of main speakers, everyone should actively overcome difficulties and take responsibility. Second, during the preparation phase, it was suggested to try dividing into two groups based on the main speaker: a hosting group and a materials group, choosing members and assigning tasks according to actual circumstances. 1. The hosting group is responsible for confirming a general outline after selecting the book, preliminarily sorting the article’s structure, and analyzing the main theme. 2. Then the hosting group communicates with the materials group, which searches for and filters materials helpful for understanding or expanding knowledge and discusses with the hosting group how to insert these materials. 3. The hosting group further organizes a rough reading group script and confirms the general explanation process. These three steps are the tentative workflow, which will be gradually improved. As for work format, it can be divided according to actual conditions; for example, the materials group can work separately with each person responsible for a small part; the hosting group can be more centralized, holding meetings when possible, but still with division of labor. The materials group can also be somewhat dispersed but should have some centralization. The two groups should not be separated fundamentally; they are one group. After each reading group session, a brief summary should be made, reviewing the preparation phase, the actual meeting effect, and individual performances, summarizing strengths and weaknesses. Tomorrow, everyone will reread the “Guide to Ideological Struggle.” Sanshui also volunteered to be the main speaker, which everyone welcomed. One meeting cannot solve all problems; ultimately, it depends on subsequent actions. We feel ashamed of past mistakes but are full of enthusiasm for upcoming activities. We must unite more closely and strive to run our reading group well!
Self-Criticism of the Shovel (Also the Opening of the Self-Criticism Meeting)
A reading group spontaneously organized by some members of the forum has been held for a week. During this week, there have been many problems. The bad atmosphere among us has not dissipated; instead, due to various petty-bourgeois thoughts among us, the reading group has become increasingly worse and chaotic. Such problems should have drawn everyone’s attention, but until yesterday, most members participating in the reading group were completely unaware, even indifferent and ignoring them. From the exposure of Sanshui’s problems yesterday to today’s overall criticism in the meeting, we have only just begun to seriously face the various ideological issues that appeared in this reading group. These ideological problems are not just Sanshui—the main speaker’s problem alone, but everyone’s problem. It is the stench of petty-bourgeois thoughts that we, as a revolutionary collective, each indulge in, and the attitude of detachment and indifference toward collective activities and others’ mistakes that have caused these problems. After mutual criticism, everyone agreed that the reading group should first be suspended, and the so-called report writing should be stopped, and we should first reflect on our own problems.
I should first reflect on my own problems. First, regarding the choice of the main speaker, I did not take enough responsibility: our school indeed has a dormitory curfew after 10 PM, but during holidays, it is much more relaxed. Many times, even if returning around 11 PM, the dormitory supervisors would turn a blind eye. I could have found a relatively safe empty classroom to hold the reading group, but I did not take this opportunity to take responsibility. To be honest, I have made many excuses for myself: afraid that preparing for the reading group would affect my studies, worried that if the meeting runs late past 11 PM, I might not get back in time. But I know best: am I really so overwhelmed by studies that I cannot even lift my head? Can’t I plan my time and adjust flexibly? Is it really the “objective conditions” that limit me? No, it is entirely my own ideological problem. I am afraid of hardship and fatigue, unwilling to take on this responsibility, and still want my own little personal space. I was also careless about the process of holding the reading group. A spontaneously organized reading group requires everyone’s joint effort and preparation to run well, but I was only satisfied with previewing the reading content daily. Before the meeting, I did not actively collect materials helpful to the meeting, which led to my inability to contribute to the discussion. Because I was unfamiliar with some literary works or certain video games discussed, I felt I had nothing to say, often unable to provide even emotional material, mostly just summarizing a section’s content. During the meeting, I did not pay attention to whether the meeting’s pace was reasonable, whether the discussions were correct, or whether the speaker interpreted and analyzed certain points. Many times, I noticed some mistakes but did not point them out, worrying halfway through that “maybe my way of speaking is not good” or “maybe I will disrupt the rhythm.” In fact, I was just trying to keep the peace, ultimately tolerating others’ mistakes and not confronting my own. For example, yesterday when Hong Zheng and Bei Xi publicly mentioned that I still play games, I did not point it out in time; sometimes I felt Sanshui deliberately said some frivolous things but did not criticize him face to face. After the meeting, I did not think about these issues but adopted a passable attitude, as if just “getting through” these two weeks was enough, since it was “just a transition,” so I let things slide, excusing myself with being busy and quickly leaving. I was the one who proposed holding the reading group, yet I became a deserter of collective discipline, sliding completely into petty-bourgeois individualism in action and thought. Originally, this should have helped everyone with theoretical study and ideological struggle during this special time, but instead, it encouraged the spread of bad atmosphere, which is entirely my fault.
Holding a reading group is essentially an organizational and disciplinary issue, reflected in each of us as a struggle against individualism. We all know our theoretical level is not high, our ideological situation is not advanced enough, and many have objective limitations. Moreover, holding a reading group is not simply having someone read the book list mechanically; there are many issues we all need to pay attention to. Many people may develop a fear of difficulty toward the reading group because of this and are unwilling to take responsibility. But ultimately, this is not the reason for our careless attitude toward the reading group; the root cause lies in ideological struggle, in allowing individualistic thoughts to run rampant, until the reading group gets worse and worse. Moreover, we not only tolerate our own individualistic stench spreading but also tolerate others’ individualistic thoughts developing. When others’ mistakes appear, either we keep the peace and avoid criticism, or we fail to focus on the main points and let minor issues slide. If this continues, it will not only spoil our own thoughts but also spoil everyone’s thoughts, eventually leading us down the path of sectarianism. Our attitude toward the reading group is probably very unserious; we do not treat it as a task to help us with theoretical study, ideological struggle, and learning organization and revolutionary discipline, but as some kind of private club, coming when we want and speaking as we please. We cannot be like this. Take Sanshui as an example: he has been the most criticized person recently, but our criticism is in the hope that he can notice these problems and correct them, not that he gives up and indulges his individualism more after hearing the criticism. At first, given everyone’s objective limitations, we recommended Sanshui to host. Although he was a bit nervous initially, he took responsibility, which deserves praise. But Sanshui used work as an excuse not to prepare well for the reading group, even forgetting the duties and role of the reading group, and then messed things up in the reading group, which is very wrong. Therefore, now we should all make self-criticisms, first criticize ourselves, seriously think about where we went wrong and what thoughts caused these mistakes. After we clearly understand our own self-criticisms, we can better criticize others on what they have not reflected on or what has not been mentioned. Finally, we should reflect together on what should be improved from the beginning until now and what to do next. In short, everyone should first pick their own faults, then others’ faults, and finally the collective’s faults. We still have one week left. The previous week was very bad; I wonder if we can resolve to make this week better? I believe we can do it, as long as we uphold Marxism-Leninism-Maoism anytime and anywhere, clearly understand and correct our mistakes, we can definitely run the reading group well.
Adding a suffix here to show off my style is too strong. If I weren’t emphasizing that I am the first to do self-criticism, I wouldn’t add this.
Because I wanted to explain why I wrote the first and last paragraphs: the first paragraph was a general summary of the situation that week, and the last paragraph was to casually discuss with everyone in the meeting the general steps of the self-criticism session. Looking back, only the middle paragraph was my own self-criticism, so I wrote this subtitle to explain it to everyone.
Self-Criticism for the Reading Group
During these past few days of the temporary reading group, I have made many mistakes. The main mistakes are being lazy and not attending, and when I did attend, being lazy and not participating in discussions. Even when I participated, most of my comments were boasting or talking about wanting to be an official. Additionally, there was a serious patriarchal ideological problem revealed on the 30th/yesterday, so I am making this self-criticism here.
First, even before the first day of the reading group on Lu Xun’s works, I insisted on discussing Lu Xun’s works because I thought it was a story-like topic that didn’t require preparation, allowing me to be lazy and indulge myself. I believe others probably thought the same because everyone unanimously agreed to discuss Lu Xun. I gave up collective activities for personal reasons, even to the extent of disrupting the group’s content to suit my own indulgence and masturbation habits. This is an extreme expression of individualism, is highly reactionary, and corresponds with my pornographic thoughts because I wanted to finish early to masturbate sooner. These all reflect my serious errors of individualism, patriarchy, and hedonism, corresponding to the trough period of my petty-bourgeois fanaticism. The root cause is that I did not engage in ideological struggle and allowed myself to fall into peaks and troughs.
Then, during the reading group, my behavior became even more outrageous—I directly switched screens to watch short videos on Bilibili, occasionally switching back to boast a little. This is even more reactionary. Even if I played tricks with the reading group’s topic selection, secretly indulging myself during the reading group is a complete betrayal of Marxism, sabotaging the reading group, and showing extremely reactionary individualism by not seriously listening. On the second day, during the ideological struggle guide, it was the same. Then, on the third day, my mother overheard the reading group, and the supervision was strengthened. I did not want to struggle, so I used this as a justification to stop attending the reading group and did not offer any suggestions, spending every day indulging and masturbating.
My above behaviors have caused a bad influence on the reading group because, first, I did not participate in discussions, meaning I did not join collective discussions. Second, I did not seriously listen to the reading group and instead indulged myself, which deviates from the original purpose of the reading group. Moreover, when problems arose in the content, I did not point them out because my own problems were even more severe. After causing problems, I did not immediately criticize myself or the reading group but continuously avoided participating in discussions in the People’s Square. When I saw improvement plans for the reading group there, I skimmed through them quickly without caring about comrades, not participating in discussions, not thinking about how to improve, but instead indulging myself. Also, I only checked messages in the People’s Square to avoid message accumulation and losing track of the latest updates, treating it as something to just get by with.
In summary, my mistakes are completely reactionary individualism overriding collective activities. The reason is that I did not engage in ideological struggle, allowing my thoughts to enter peaks and troughs, indulging myself. After each masturbation, I would say “this is the last time” and then continue again, fully embodying the image of the leftist circle. To correct these mistakes, I must participate better in collective activities, attend seriously, actively discuss, offer suggestions, point out errors, and care about comrades. At the same time, I must engage in intense ideological struggle, not trying to gloss over mistakes when pointed out but analyzing the essence of errors and then struggling against them. For example, in recent days, I have been trying to quit masturbation by reading articles on women’s liberation and, when feeling the urge, thinking about these articles and the impact masturbation has on me, including the irreparable harm it caused to that girl.
The above is my self-criticism. I hope everyone will offer suggestions, and I will strive to improve.
I found the original texts of the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist works cited in the ideological struggle guide
Summary of citations and annotations for Mao Zedong’s works:
| Quotation | Page and Location | Original Source Link |
|---|---|---|
| “Spirit of selflessness and dedication to others” | Middle of page 4 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-19391221.htm |
| “Opposing liberalism: frankness, fidelity, proactiveness…” | Footnote 4 on page 4 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-19370907.htm |
| “On Practice”: “In a class society, every individual lives within a certain class position…” | Footnote 1 on page 22 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-193707.htm |
| “On Contradictions”: “The principal contradiction determines the development of other contradictions…” | Footnote 3 on page 22 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-193708.htm |
| “Rectification of the Party’s Style of Work”: “Punish the past, prevent future problems, cure diseases and save people” | Footnote 4 on page 14 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-19421201.htm |
| “On the United Front”: “The Communist Party does not rely on intimidation to eat…” | Footnote 1 on page 14, end of main text on page 16 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-19450424.htm |
| “On Certain Problems of Leadership Methods” | Footnote 1 on page 23 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-19430313.htm |
| “The Work of the Youth League Should Consider the Characteristics of Youth” | Footnote 2 on page 23 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-19570205.htm |
| “Speech at the Yan’an Literary and Art Symposium” | Top of page 2 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-194205.htm |
| “Conversation with Anna Louise Strong” | Footnote 1 on page 13 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/maozedong/marxist.org-chinese-mao-19460830.htm |
Summary of citations and annotations for Lenin’s works:
| Quotation | Page and Location | Original Source Link |
|---|---|---|
| “What Is to Be Done?”: “The unity of the three forms of struggle is the great task of the Social Democratic Party…” | Middle of page 2, Footnote 3 on page 4 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/lenin/marxist.org-chinese-lenin-1902.htm |
| “Left-Wing” Childishness in the Communist Movement: “The masses are divided into classes…” | Footnote 1 on page 10, beginning of page 12 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/lenin/works/1920/leftwing/index.htm |
| “Conclusion of the Report of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist (Bolshevik) Party” | Footnote 2 on page 14 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/lenin/marxist.org-chinese-lenin-1922.htm |
Summary of citations and annotations for Engels’ works:
| Quotation | Page and Location | Original Source Link |
|---|---|---|
| “The Movement for the Defense of the German Empire’s Constitution”: “This class always brags…” | Footnote 2 on page 13 | https://www.marxists.org/chinese/marx-engels/07/index.htm |
Self-criticism: During this period, I have always approached the reading group with an attitude of individualism and liberalism.
First, I have been irresponsible towards the reading group. At the beginning, when Chanzi proposed to start a mutual aid study group, at a time when there was a lack of hosts to speak and discuss specific arrangements, I did not step up to take on some of the work. In fact, compared to other members who work or study during the day, I had little to do during the day. But I was selfish and did not want the collective work to affect my leisurely, carefree life. I was also afraid that if I took on some work and did it poorly, I would be criticized. Actually, thinking this way means I did not want to invest effort in the collective work; from the start, I did not want to run it well, so I was afraid of criticism. Therefore, after Sanshui took on the role of host, I stopped caring about how the reading group was prepared. I even knew that Sanshui would start the reading group right after work without preparation, and I thought it was fine. I used various objective reasons as excuses, such as being busy at work, our low theoretical level, and just casually doing it. But I never tried to take the initiative to run the reading group well. Subjectively, I was doing whatever I wanted. Even when reading theory, I only chose philosophy that I had been reading all along, and the purpose was to improve my personal knowledge capital, not to serve the collective. Also, I could sleep whenever I wanted, watch meeting videos whenever I wanted, without any collective obligations or psychological burdens. In short, I prioritized personal interests.
Second, I treated the reading group according to my personal preferences. As mentioned above, I never intended to run the reading group well from the start. On the first day, reading “Biography of Lu Xun,” which was like a novel and not theoretical study, I liked it. Because of this personal preference, I even looked for related materials. But when we switched to reading “Guide to Ideological Struggle” and “Dawn,” I lost interest. I basically did not prepare before the reading group and even deceived myself with excuses that I had read it before, but even if I had, I had long forgotten it. During the reading group, I often digressed to chat about other things, often not listening to Sanshui’s talk, only looking at the comment section and using it to chat and gossip. So I was indifferent to what Sanshui specifically said, which was extremely irresponsible.
Finally, I developed a desire for officialdom and wanted to show off. This was reflected in me usually calling people to the reading group, participating in discussions about how to organize the reading group, and communicating within the group. When calling people and discussing how to manage the reading group, it made me feel important. I felt like I was planning collective activities and doing leadership work. But I only spoke verbally; I did not actually do the work of the reading group. I was truly a typical bureaucrat. Also, during the reading group discussions, especially the first “Biography of Lu Xun” session, I kept expressing some opinions and posting related materials, but I digressed a lot. Seeing that some of my comments were liked by everyone, my individualistic desire to show off was greatly satisfied. I treated Marxist knowledge as capital for showing off, but in reality, it was just “top-heavy, bottom-light, and shallow.” I treated the reading group like a casual chat session, and to show off, I didn’t even listen when Sanshui was speaking, thinking about how to say something to flaunt myself. This casual, self-showing attitude meant I didn’t care how Sanshui spoke. Sometimes, during serious ideological discussions, Sanshui would make some jokes, like asking Hong Zheng, “What fun games have you been playing recently?” I also joked, “Hong Zheng, recommend some fun games,” thinking I was just joking, using a light tone to get Hong Zheng to talk about his video games. But at that time, we were conducting a serious reading group criticizing video games, so this completely disregarded the ideological struggle and made video games, a reactionary thing, seem trivial. No wonder later Hong Zheng said he still wanted to play video games after the meeting.
The root of these problems is that I have been living a parasitic and indulgent life. Recently, after dropping out, I have done nothing at all, and under these circumstances, I did not set higher standards for myself. I still acted at will, lying in bed whenever I wanted, eating and drinking to enjoy my own little life. I completely neglected the collective matters and did not care about the ideological state of other forum members. I did not achieve mutual supervision and mutual progress but instead engaged in petty bourgeois vulgar socializing, treating Marxism as a topic for casual conversation and not taking it seriously. This attitude turned the reading group, a serious theoretical study and ideological struggle activity, into something like chatting and gossiping. Treating collective activities this way will only turn them into empty talk sessions like the leftist circles. From now on, I should strictly demand myself according to Marxism, so that I will not treat others with liberalism either.
Self-criticism of the reading group:
I am responsible for the poor organization of this spontaneous reading group because I was not attentive to it. When participating in the reading group, I adopted the attitude of a listener and had a personalistic mindset of wanting to show off my knowledge to some extent. Even though I had nothing to do at home all day, I did not take the time to look up supplementary materials or propose to host the reading group. Instead, I let Sanshui, who needs to work, take on this responsibility voluntarily. Sometimes, I was so absorbed in discussions in the comment section that I did not listen to what the main speaker, Sanshui, was saying. I also made the mistake of liberalism during the reading group, such as one or two times when I didn’t want to listen halfway through and used the excuse of having something to do to leave, wanting instead to indulge in entertainment or sleep. The most serious instance was when we were watching the revolutionary Beijing opera “Battle on the Plain”; halfway through, I found it very boring and then went to browse reactionary ideological collections, fanfiction comics, anime commentaries, and short videos, which caused me to miss the later part when there were network issues. Last night during the self-criticism meeting, I even switched screens to play Minesweeper for a while, only returning to listen attentively when Shovel and Chuyang criticized confusion and the Hongzheng.
By the way, shouldn’t Bexi also reflect on openly saying during a group activity that they wanted to go play games (and it was even a book club criticizing video games)?
I was switching screens to play Minesweeper during the self-criticism meeting, not at a book club criticizing video games. However, this kind of petty bourgeois behavior is indeed inappropriate. I will directly edit and improve my self-criticism here later.
These are two different things. Hong Shu was referring to the book club session that discussed criticizing video games.
That time I didn’t switch screens to play games, did you misunderstand?
It’s not about switching screens to play games; it’s during the final communication when someone asks if you will still play games afterward, and you and a few others say you will.
Yes, but now it has changed from Dou Di Zhu to Minesweeper and Sudoku. I’m not sure if these games are also a form of petty bourgeois entertainment.
It is recommended to take another good look at the guide on ideological struggle regarding the definition of lowbrow taste.
Vasily’s Self-Criticism:
Regarding the many problems that have appeared in the recent reading group, although I am a participant, the reading group is after all a collective activity. The poor management of the reading group is largely my responsibility and there are significant issues on my part.
First, even though I attended the reading group every day and gave other comrades the impression of being very enthusiastic, in fact, in the recent reading groups, I only showed a facade of being attentive—more accurately, a facade of hypocrisy. I never truly cared about this reading group, treated myself as an outsider, and shifted what should have been a collective activity onto others. From beginning to end, I was almost a bystander. These selfish and self-interested thoughts are inseparable from my petty-bourgeois bad habits. Specifically, the bourgeois worldview I uphold as a petty bourgeois: “do less work, earn more money, exploit others.” I did not take the daily content of the reading group seriously; it can be said that I did not treat it as important. These problems stem from my petty-bourgeois lax lifestyle habits, lack of discipline and organization, and also from not fully adhering to the ideological struggle line and becoming lax with myself.
Then, during a reading group session led by Sanshui, some problems arose. For example, when public indulgent activities were criticized by comrades in the association, I did not investigate clearly and, disregarding the facts, made some nonsensical remarks to defend Sanshui’s mistakes, saying things that avoided the main issues. In fact, I was defending my own private interests in indulgence. Only after other comrades pointed it out did I understand. In this matter, I made the subjective mistake of speaking without basis and stubbornly continuing to fabricate. This is also a petty-bourgeois habit: criticizing what I dislike and fiercely resisting anything that touches my private interests. For example, I have my own interests in public indulgence and did not recognize the seriousness of openly spreading some spiritual opium, so I even defended this principled mistake and said some biased words.
In these matters, I relapsed into hedonism and abandoned principles in political activities.
Finally, after each daily reading group, after participating, I would go watch videos for indulgence, thinking that having done something meaningful (participating in the reading group) gave me the right to indulge. Once my hedonism flared up, I would vigorously watch videos for indulgence.
The above problems of mine are not fully written out; there are definitely other overlooked problems, and I have not thoroughly criticized these issues in myself yet. But I think this criticism meeting was quite good because it is a style of responsibility for everyone’s political life.
I have been too indifferent to the reading group; everyone has seen that I often don’t go, and when I do attend, I don’t speak but just hang in the background listening—this is a lax and careless approach. Although I still have some unrelated academic and trivial matters to handle, I ultimately have time available, yet I waste too much of it watching videos. If I had the right attitude, I could manage it.
This behavior stems from my mindset of “doing nothing and not being responsible if problems arise.” This is actually very harmful—it is complete irresponsibility. To proletarianize and participate in collective life, one must take responsibility within the collective, so this poison of individualism must not be retained.
My wasting time watching videos is also caused by individualistic thinking. Besides having to spend some time on academic matters (which is basically over now), I have been worried about how to break away from a bourgeois family and bourgeois speculative path, and I haven’t even gone to People’s Square to ask (actually just putting on a “intellectual” pose). So at that time, on one hand, I didn’t want to spend energy on academic work but still had to somehow piece together a “thesis”; on the other hand, I was worried about the upcoming struggle and wanted to escape by watching videos. At the criticism meeting, comrades asked me what videos I was watching, and I couldn’t answer immediately—I couldn’t even remember what I had been watching. When I checked my history, I found all kinds of videos: games, pets, “鬼畜” (a style of remix videos), even cooking videos, totaling three to four hours a day—going to video sites to escape reality, no matter what, as long as it could attract my attention.
However, I also knew this was avoidance, and after a week, I gradually stopped watching so much. After all, these are just personal trivial matters; excessive complaints can be harmful, and in the grand revolutionary scheme, these things are insignificant—even looking back a year later, they won’t seem like a big deal—how could I be stuck here day after day? Later, I saw Chuyang also discussing breaking away from the old family at People’s Square, so I quickly brought up my difficulties, and indeed the power of the collective is greatest; we quickly found a solution.
I must eradicate my individualism and sweep it out from every corner of my mind. Since last week, I have started replacing short videos with socialist-era films (such as “Dr. Norman Bethune” and “Song of Youth”). From now on, I will devote more time to collective activities and cannot waste my life as I did before!
When will afterburner go for labor reform? When will they apply to join the organization?
Handle school affairs on Thursday and then pack up. If I can find a job quickly, I will start working next week, which is one week earlier than previously estimated.
Today, I will preview the reading group and then write the application.
News that embody the worldview of the three classes
Proletariat worldview: 1. The 2009 Tonggang Steel Workers Protest Incident
In July 2009, Jilin Province Tonghua Steel Company triggered strong dissatisfaction among workers due to the planned control by Jianlong Group. Previously, Jianlong Group had cut wages and laid off workers, damaging the interests of the working class. On July 24, about 30,000 workers and their families held protests, during which they beat to death Chen Guojun, a dog manager dispatched by Jianlong Group, in a clash. Afterwards, the Jilin provincial government announced the termination of Jianlong Group’s controlling plan.
News link:
- The 2022 Zhengzhou Foxconn Workers Protest Incident
In November 2022, due to pandemic lockdowns and salary issues, Foxconn Zhengzhou factory triggered large-scale worker protests. The illegal company changed contracts, delayed bonus payments, and mishandled pandemic prevention. During the protests, workers clashed with police, with some injured. Foxconn then promised to pay salaries according to contracts and offered subsidies to departing employees.
News link:
富士康郑州超级工厂爆发示威 苹果此前称iPhone14交货受影响 - BBC News 中文
郑州富士康工人与警察混战，苹果手机生产遭遇新风险
https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/jingmao/bx-11232022112317.html
Petty Bourgeoisie: Attitude of the Victims’ Families in the Pucheng Incident
In December 2024, a student studying at Shaanxi Province Pucheng Vocational Education Center died after falling from a building. The family suspected that he had been subjected to corporal punishment and bullying by the school before his death. The school refused to release surveillance footage, sparking widespread public dissatisfaction. Authorities attempted to block the news, but instead triggered large-scale protests. The student’s family initially compromised with officials, leading to the failure of the movement.
This incident reflects the petty bourgeoisie’s wavering and shortsightedness when facing conflicts of interest. To protect their personal interests, the victims’ families betrayed the broader people, showing selfish tendencies and a lack of recognition and adherence to the overall class interests.
News link:
https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/yataibaodao/shehui/20250106/sha-01062025123456.html
Bourgeoisie: The 2023 Hengda Group Founder Xu Jiayin’s Investigation Incident
Overview: In September 2023, Hengda Group founder Xu Jiayin attracted the displeasure of the Chinese authorities and was subjected to coercive measures by the police. Specifically, Xu Jiayin’s reckless actions led to damage to the interests of China’s real estate industry. This reflects the bourgeoisie’s focus on利益合作 (interest cooperation) with official capital and the internal conflicts that arise after interests are damaged.
News link: