The purpose of this post is to record everyone’s summaries and reflections on their preparation phase and during the meeting after each temporary reading club session
2 Likes
In this meeting, I basically listened carefully and participated in the discussion. When it came to the part about lowbrow interests, I was called downstairs by my parents for dinner, so I didn’t listen carefully. The improvement was that the discussion at the reading club was a positive one, not boasting or making silly jokes. What needs improvement is the low participation in the discussion, which also reflects my insufficient theoretical level. Overall, this meeting was better than before because the content was no longer just Sanshui reading articles awkwardly by himself, but he had prepared a script in advance and expanded on other content, such as the initial concept of class struggle, the lowbrow interests part, and even quoted things from the Chinese Communist Youth League. The discussion also became a positive theoretical discussion combined with some practical examples. So overall, everyone is making progress. However, there was a drawback: during the discussion at the end about whether to adjourn and what to do after the meeting, Sanshui’s ideological issues became apparent—he was wavering and hesitant about whether to sacrifice personal interests for the collective interest. This caused some time to be wasted in the post-meeting discussion. The final result was to open a separate thread after the meeting for each participant to write down their thoughts.
Regarding suggestions, I want to mention that the host should not stutter too much or speak too rigidly and directly. They should relax because everyone is a comrade here to discuss and learn, so the conversation should be open. Also, during the discussion, if someone has nothing to say, they should not drag it out and waste time. For example, Sanshui could say, “I have nothing to say at the moment,” and let Chuyang speak first to avoid wasting time waiting for him to answer questions.
4 Likes
I’m a bit unclear here, should I speak first or should Sanshui speak first?
If he doesn’t speak, you just speak directly. It’s best if he replies immediately; if he doesn’t reply, just keep talking.
1 Like
I have a question. Sanshui mentioned that his female coworker served in the US military, and the comment section started discussing that this kind of thinking is caused by inferior men. But why did Sanshui just sigh at the end and listlessly move on to the next topic? After the meeting, I brought up this question, but Sanshui didn’t answer.
3 Likes
I didn’t fully express everything I had prepared. I didn’t dare to do self-criticism on the spot. The female coworker was influenced by the reactionary views of the Chinese revisionist romantic dramas and romance novels because she served in the US military. But when I talked to her about these topics, I still put on a hypocritical front, saying that I wasn’t interested in these things at all and wouldn’t be like her. On one hand, I was putting on an intellectual facade, acting as if I were superior and not tainted by these “lowbrow tastes.” In reality, the fascist, male chauvinist, pornographic spiritual opium I indulge in daily is hundreds of times more reactionary than the Confucian dramas she watches. Previously, I even tried to talk to her about such private topics to satisfy my lust, betraying my coworker’s sincerity. In fact, what I did is the same as the male workers or the mechanic foreman who sexually harass her, or even worse. Because I am better at disguising myself. But the blatant, crude men are hated by women from the bottom of their hearts; my skill at disguise makes it more likely for me to deceive women, making them think I care deeply about women’s issues, which allows me to carry out more thorough mental control and sexual harassment. Women, due to the Chinese revisionist indoctrination of the “Three Obediences and Four Virtues” and various spiritual opiates, may not even see me as problematic. The reason I sigh is that I originally wanted to say these things but lacked the courage to speak them out, and hurriedly moved on to the next part.
5 Likes
This time, the reading session in Sanshui was much better than before, but there were some typos and missing words in the middle. The preparation was also much improved, but relatively speaking, the preparation was more sufficient at the beginning and the end, while the middle part was not as well prepared. Sometimes there were some far-fetched explanations, for example, when giving the example of Xu Jiajin, some words sounded like they were put together on the spot. However, since this was a spontaneously organized reading session and the speaker’s theoretical level was not very high, the expectations should not be too high. It feels like the sentence about the bourgeoisie’s poisoning of workers’ thoughts could be elaborated in more detail, for example, regarding the two-dimensional culture and online literature. Also, the explanation of how ideological struggle can be applied to personal lifestyles was not extended. It seems this part could be elaborated to facilitate everyone’s understanding and discussion.
7 Likes
Today’s book club content was the first two sections of “Guide to Ideological Struggle,” with Sanshui as the main speaker. During the preparation phase, everyone enthusiastically participated; not only did they read the original text, some found supplementary materials, and others offered their own interpretations. However, due to the formalistic division of labor, the preparation process was somewhat hindered. After today’s meeting, everyone reflected and discussed, agreeing to create a dedicated thread where members can share their understandings and materials, and the main speaker can interact and organize within the thread. After the meeting, specific feedback was given on Sanshui’s performance in today’s book club, summarized into three main points: 1. Sanshui’s attitude was much more serious than before and he made corresponding preparations. 2. Sanshui still showed signs of nervousness and stammering, often rereading the original text and pausing suddenly several times during explanations. 3. Sanshui’s integration of materials with the original text was insufficient; on one hand, some selected materials were not closely related to the original text, and on the other hand, there was inadequate analysis and critique of real-world materials. After the meeting, Sanshui also showed avoidance in accepting others’ criticism, which was criticized by everyone afterward. Tomorrow, everyone decided to continue reading “Guide to Ideological Struggle,” finishing the third section.
5 Likes
I still feel there are issues with Sanshui.
Before criticizing others, one should first criticize oneself. I did not prepare adequately for the reading group; I spent about 40 minutes reviewing the article and found an outline in the section on the three steps of ideological struggle as material, which was about Marxism’s founding and development by Marx, Engels, and Mao. After that, I just skimmed through it. This was a problem with my time management, reflecting a lack of discipline and individualism. I self-criticize and also accept criticism from other members.
However, I believe Sanshui’s ideological issues have not been resolved, especially evident in the discussion after the reading group session ended. Sanshui’s attitude was: “If there’s nothing else, let’s adjourn!” But in fact, nothing had been asked or elaborated on yet. Suggestions for the presenter, post-meeting activities, and meeting summaries were all unresolved. Was Sanshui impatient because his issues were pointed out? Later, when I opened the mic for discussion, Sanshui even typed, “Uh. It’s already been fifteen minutes.” I kept asking Sanshui if he had something important to do, but he did not answer directly. When I asked if he had any opinions, he replied “No,” but his speech was hesitant and he paused for a long time. Later, he typed that he had no opinions, which seemed less like having no opinions and more like passive acceptance. I think Sanshui’s attitude toward collective activities is problematic. Even today, he still emphasizes that the reading group doesn’t need to be so thorough. So, does Sanshui think the reading group should be conducted as before, just completing tasks by going through the content and then ending?
Of course, we all acknowledge the effort you have made. We can imagine that you spent a lot of time and energy preparing for the reading group today, and the fact is you hosted it much better than before. We affirm all of this. Criticism is meant to unite you and correct your erroneous tendencies, to engage with the reading group seriously rather than just completing tasks and disbanding. Criticism is not meant to attack you. You should think carefully and take your ideological issues seriously.
3 Likes
At that time, there really wasn’t anything important. The reason for wanting to end the meeting rather hurriedly that day, as Shovel said, was because of a rather pessimistic and dismissive attitude towards the reading group, feeling that no matter how the specific format was changed or refreshed, there wouldn’t be much difference. In fact, after criticism, the reading group has made considerable improvements, and everyone actively offers their opinions, making it better in every aspect. When you asked me if I had anything important to do, I didn’t respond directly because I was timid. I also understood that even if I had something to do, I couldn’t put it ahead of the collective. I was just using the excuse of public matters to serve private interests, thinking that the collective’s way of holding discussions was a waste of my time and hoping to end it quickly so as not to delay other things. Saying it was so as not to delay everyone waiting here together was actually just me not caring about the collective’s development and wanting to slip away. The pessimism and indifference towards the collective both stem from an attitude of detachment from collective activities, deciding that I am not a member of the collective. If I always thought about working harder for the betterment of the collective, then upon seeing problems, I should have engaged more actively. This matter shows that my petty bourgeois private ownership mindset is quite serious and I need to pay more attention and work hard to correct it in the future.
3 Likes
Posted in the wrong thread
For this book club meeting, I feel that Sanshui’s materials were relatively unsatisfactory in preparation; these expansions seemed to be content expanded just for the sake of expansion. Secondly, when flipping through other books, Sanshui’s language became stammering, which might be due to relatively poor preparation. However, Sanshui’s language organization at the beginning and end became somewhat more normal, which is a significant improvement compared to before. During this book club meeting, apart from glancing at Bilibili once, I did not get distracted much and listened attentively throughout the process. I hold reserved opinions about the post-meeting discussion topics and will not express too many views. When preparing for the book club, my reading effectiveness was poor, resulting in very slow efficiency. This might be because I have become accustomed to being free and undisciplined, causing my reading to become scattered as well, which led to low quality and failure to achieve the expected results. During the reading period, I also engaged in a period of indulgence. This is a reflection of my free and undisciplined behavior and deserves criticism.
1 Like
Why do you speak so fast and unclear ()
2 Likes
[Post-Meeting Reflections] “Guide to Ideological Struggle” Section 3 - Social Practice Determines the Worldview of Each Class
Post-Meeting Suggestions:
This time, Sanshui’s preparation and expansion were much better than last time! Today’s comrades suggested that Sanshui’s tone could be more emotional and that safety awareness should be improved.
Reflections: (Some parts are from unsaved preview notes)
This section elaborates on the ideological content of three classes from seven aspects. My reflection is on how these seven parts (overall perspective, public-private view, sacrifice view, interaction view, authority view, truth view, struggle view) interlock to present the content of ideology.
- Overall perspective refers to the understanding of society as a whole and the understanding of social movements. To achieve a comprehensive understanding, one must analyze society by dividing it into several classes and then understand it through the interests of each class. Who can do this? The petty bourgeoisie only cares about their small-scale production, the bourgeoisie needs to maintain its shameful exploitative life, only the proletariat can see the various social movements and their long-term interests.
- Public-private view: This answers the question of the relationship between the individual and society. Since ideology requires the human body as its carrier and guides the person’s actions, it must answer the relationship between oneself and society. The public-private view must be based on a clear overall perspective.
- Sacrifice view: This is the public-private view’s answer to the question of how a person’s life should be spent.
For the bourgeoisie, they know they are at war with the proletariat and are also in a deceitful relationship with other capitalists. Their exploitative practice tells them to continue pursuing private interests—otherwise, they will be defeated in competition and lose their exploitative lifestyle. This private interest, even if harmful to the entire bourgeoisie, does not matter; the losers and the proletariat bear the consequences (a typical example is environmental protection issues).
The conscious proletariat, on the other hand, are united and selfless because they see how fragile individuals are; they also have a long-term vision because they see and bear all the harmful consequences caused by the bourgeoisie’s selfishness (environmental protection is also a good example here).
(Writing here, my computer is about to run out of power, so the rest will be briefer. The 1967 preview has already summarized these aspects well and supplemented examples; see the reading group preview post for details.)
Next, the fundamental differences in the public-private view within and between classes also bring about fundamental ideological differences.
Within the class:
- Interaction view: How to get along with members of the same class.
- Authority view: How to relate to the authority within one’s own class, which is very important for establishing a centralized and powerful revolutionary organization.
In the struggle between classes:
- Truth view: Each class has its own truth, and this view of truth is closely related to class struggle.
- Struggle view: Truth must guide practice, especially the struggle between classes.
I have a question: why only these seven aspects? My answer is:
Finally, we arrive at the authority view and struggle view—one about building organization, the other about conducting struggle. Here, ideology provides guidance for practice. The relationship between cognition and practice is cognition-practice-re-cognition-re-practice-…. The process of analyzing ideological content in the text also shows the development of ideology. As ideology progresses to this point, ideological understanding must transform into practice. Therefore, the description of ideology itself is sufficient here—it is now time for revolutionary practice.
3 Likes
At yesterday’s reading meeting, I made a few suggestions:
Regarding the host Sanshui, I think there’s no need to deliberately avoid certain topics or people. If there are problems present and they are relevant to the content being discussed, they should be brought up for discussion and criticism. Learning the guidelines of ideological struggle is meant to deeply analyze each person’s issues and carry out criticism and correction. Avoiding them would render the effort ineffective.
For other participants, I believe they should not only talk about what they understand and know but also mention what they don’t understand, their doubts, as well as their mistaken thoughts and viewpoints, so these can be referenced and criticized. If issues can’t be resolved during the meeting, they can be addressed afterward, either at People’s Square or through posting online, at least exposing the problems. Appearing perfect and positively motivated is actually abnormal; on the surface, it seems calm, but beneath the water, waves are surging. Ideological struggle is about bringing problems to light, applying learned methods on the spot, and with voice communication available, efficiency is also high.
2 Likes