The ideological issue of my contempt for the masses

free discussion
1

October 29, 2025, The Issue of Looking Down on the Masses

Recently, in my interactions with classmates, I increasingly feel that I have a philosophical problem: looking down on the masses.
The material of the problem is: I only have basic respect for the masses I want to promote; for other masses, I do whatever I want, whatever I like, regardless of whether it might affect them or not.
And if I find that the masses I want to promote are not suitable for promotion, I will also abandon this respect, and switch to doing whatever I want without respecting the masses.
This is a utilitarian, pragmatic form of respecting the masses.
Moreover, I am not honest, have personalism, and even do not follow basic rules like not cutting in line or flushing the toilet in school.
It’s just that I do whatever I want, without putting the masses in my eyes.
I kept dropping my book, making loud noises that disturbed my deskmate, and then my deskmate and the teacher reported it.
I thought to myself: You lowly person, just wait, dare to report me, do you know I am a revolutionary?

I have a few doubts:
First, what is the correct way to interact with petty bourgeois classmates, and should I consider their feelings?
Can I look down on them and do whatever I want just because I am interacting with petty bourgeois classmates?

9 Likes
2

How to properly view the backward aspects of the masses?

7

The backward thoughts of the masses are a product of the reactionary society imposed on them. I believe we should be more tolerant of the masses and help them correct their ideas, while constantly reminding ourselves that our own thoughts are not mature and we should remain humble.

1 Like
3

And students of petty bourgeoisie should carry the view of interactions from Legalism, under the guidance of Marxism, using ancient Chinese and foreign ideas, as well as modern bourgeois democratic thoughts as a shell. For example, when talking about petty bourgeois love, you can mention Wei Zheng’s attitude towards romantic interactions, etc. When they show backwardness, such as indulging in games and pleasures, you can talk about the affairs of Emperor Zhu Yunwen of the Ming Dynasty, who was addicted to pleasures. Pay more attention to how revolutionaries delve into the masses and communicate with them in historical deeds.

Furthermore, based on studying Marxism, learn more about modern Chinese history, using the slogans of advanced bourgeois democratic and revolutionary factions within it as your learning material. When they deny you, tell historical anecdotes, look at historical events in ancient and modern Chinese history, and then relate them to the real society, attempting to analyze with Marxism, and establish some principles and bottom lines for yourself. Moreover, petty bourgeois students should have an understanding of contemporary history and Chinese politics.

In games and personal pleasures, observe a few classmates more, see which class and worldview their individualistic enjoyment ideas come from. Consider the philosophies of modern bourgeoisie that promote such worldviews. Finally, when discussing future prospects, promote Marxism to them.

Then, communicate more in daily life, eat together more often, and ideally gather after class, in a collective living and exchange format, to understand your classmates’ ideological state roughly. Learn how to interact with them, help them struggle against academic pressures, parents, parasitic lifestyles, and their nostalgic longing for capitalism. Use a solid philosophical foundation and comprehensive Marxism to explain to them the process of their ideological changes. To understand them, first have a clear understanding of your own ideological state, perhaps by writing a school diary to let the collective better understand your thoughts.

2 Likes
12

I feel that the view of interaction advocated by the Erxinji School of Legalism is also incorrect. Legalism is merely a rising class with progressive significance, a exploitative class, ultimately detached from the masses. It is too strange to use the view of interaction from Legalism to explain social relations. Liu Yuxi was a Legalist, but he also said, “Talking and laughing with scholars, no common folk in the exchanges”; Bai Juyi was also a Legalist, but he also said, “Are there no mountain songs and village flutes? Mumble and chattering are hard to listen to.” Ultimately, Legalism is also a ruling class, and the landlords of Legalism also discriminate against the working people. This view of interaction is no fundamentally different from the Confucian landlord class’s “out of the mud yet untainted, washed clean but not bewitching.” I don’t understand why the Erxinji School emphasizes learning from Legalism and bourgeois democrats; shouldn’t they first learn from the proletarian revolutionaries? Since we are followers of Marxism, of course, we must take the proletariat as our behavioral standard and the proletarian view of social relations as our learning direction. This is reflected in the “Guidelines for Ideological Struggle,” which describes the proletarian view of social relations:

In terms of social interaction, the proletariat is united, the bourgeoisie is scheming against each other, and the petty bourgeoisie is indifferent and ruthless. The differences among these classes in this regard are all determined by their most fundamental ideological differences—the differences in their views on public and private interests. Because the proletariat has no private interests and no private property concepts, and often takes unified action and forms a unified ideology in collective activities, the proletariat always emphasizes unity in interpersonal relations and can truly maintain unity.

3 Likes
15

Why use the landlord class ideology and petty bourgeoisie interaction in modern capitalist society? And I feel it’s very conflicting. This sentence mentions the worldview of the landlord class, the proletariat, and the bourgeoisie, and I don’t understand why it’s analyzed this way.

Studying modern Chinese history should involve analyzing historical events from the perspective of historical materialism, clearly understanding the claims of different classes under different social conditions. Comparing progressive and erroneous claims with Marxist viewpoints, to further learn Marxism? Also, I feel this sentence has an economicist tone because economicists say that workers should be taught economic struggle, but workers in capitalist society will spontaneously grasp economic struggle. You say you want to guide yourself with bourgeois democratic ideas, but petty bourgeoisie activities in capitalist society will spontaneously generate democratic ideas.

Instilling morals and bottom lines in oneself cannot be achieved solely through technical means, because morals and bottom lines reflect a person’s worldview and stance, ultimately a manifestation of class nature. This can only be changed through ideological struggle, and cannot be solved simply by technical means of understanding historical events.

1 Like
16

Because I incorporated part of the bourgeois revolution at the end of the Qing Dynasty, that is, the part where the bourgeoisie overthrew the feudal landlords, at that time many reform figures appeared. The Legalists are because of their simple materialist worldview, and in ancient society, peasant revolutions transformed Legalist materialism. Becoming an advanced part of peasant revolutionary thought. I think democracy should be a social trend, a political faction with a systematic worldview. It should, like the bourgeois revolution, transform democratic ideas into a systematic worldview of democracy. During this period, student freedom and student liberation are linked to social liberation, which should involve a process from contact with democratic ideas to the pursuit of individual democratic freedom. Additionally, I believe students, as petty bourgeoisie, should have practices that align with the petty bourgeoisie worldview.

Another point is the combination of Marxism with the workers’ movement. Without contact with Marxism, how can democratic ideas be transformed into school-based democratic factions? For example, students exploited and oppressed with poor academic performance are easier to understand. From what I know, the so-called ‘Student Marxist Society’ on QQ groups was operated by those from bourgeois or petty bourgeois upper-class families. They were praised by the old nine for their opportunistic achievements since childhood, and in school, they were still the so-called student union presidents with various privileges given by the old nine. It seems that they are lightly oppressed in the bourgeois academies. How could they then turn to studying Marxism? It’s only possible if they pursue individual democratic freedom. From a student’s perspective, how do they develop a perceptual understanding of exploitation, the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, wage slavery, strikes, and imperialism? Since students themselves haven’t worked, their narrow small-scale production practices and lack of contact with workers, and the worldview formed by socialized large-scale production practices are absent. Indirect experiences come from their student circles and the knowledge from textbooks in bourgeois academies, which do not promote these ideas. I don’t understand, and that’s where I think history should inspire their democratic ideas, transforming personal student democracy into collective pursuit of bourgeois democracy and freedom, student equality. The way out is Marxism. That’s roughly the idea. The thinking is wrong, but I’ve given you the thought process.

18

The oppression students face in school mainly comes from feudal parents and the education system of the Zhongxiu (Reform) movement (although these feudal patriarchs, the economic reasons behind this kind of parents, are not due to China’s so-called feudal land system, but rather the Zhongxiu’s repressive capitalism, which uses Confucian patriarchalism as its means of rule). Feudal parents demand that children constantly engage in speculative activities to inherit and expand their family businesses, and schools are places where Zhongxiu performs these functions. It is evident that the ideological weapons needed by the vast majority of students in China are not the Legalist ideas that represent the interests of small and medium landlords under feudal society in China.
Moreover, even according to modern Chinese history, the Legalists had already become irrelevant; they placed China’s future on an enlightened emperor, hoping to implement reforms without touching the foundation of feudal land ownership. On this basis, they were extremely hostile to the people. When Lin Zexu was ordered to suppress the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Revolution, he recited two lines of poetry: “If the interests of the nation require life and death, why avoid risks due to blessings or misfortunes?” He died on the way, preserving his integrity. It can be seen that during China’s modern national democratic revolution, the Legalists no longer represented the direction of social progress. If the revolution does not break free from the restrictions of the Legalists and does not touch the feudal land system, success is impossible. The later Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Revolution completely negated the feudal land system and organized the revolution with the utopian ideal of agricultural communism. From this, it can also be seen that your statement that farmers transformed the Legalist worldview into an advanced part of peasant revolutionary thought is completely incorrect.

5 Likes
19

I was talking about how bourgeois revolutionary figures act, how they understand the masses, the advanced ideas of each bourgeois revolution, their slogans and programs, which is essentially the part where the bourgeoisie overthrows feudal landlords. At that time, many reformist figures appeared, and Legalism was because of its simple materialist worldview. In ancient society, peasant revolutions transformed Legalism’s materialism, becoming part of the advanced peasant revolutionary thought. I think democracy should be a social trend, a political faction with a systematic worldview. It should, like the bourgeois revolution, transform democratic ideas into a systematic worldview of democracy. During this period, the connection between student freedom, student liberation, and social liberation was made, implying a process from contact with democratic ideas to the pursuit of individual democratic freedom. Additionally, I believe students, as petty bourgeoisie, should have practices aligned with the petty bourgeoisie’s worldview.

Another point is the combination of Marxism with the workers’ movement. Without contact with Marxism, how can democratic ideas be transformed into a school-based democratic faction? It’s easier to understand for students exploited and oppressed, with poor academic performance. From what I know, the so-called ‘Student Marxist Society’ on QQ groups was operated by people from bourgeois or petty bourgeois upper-class backgrounds, who were praised by old nine (a nickname or term) for their opportunistic achievements. They were also the student council presidents or enjoyed various privileges granted by old nine, seemingly under light oppression in the bourgeois universities. How could they pursue Marxism then? It was only about seeking individual democratic freedom. From a student’s perspective, how do they develop a perceptual understanding of exploitation, bourgeois dictatorship, slave labor, strikes, and imperialism? Since students themselves have never worked, their narrow small-scale production practices do not contact workers, and their worldview formed by socialized large-scale production is absent. Their indirect experience, through student circles and knowledge from textbooks in bourgeois universities, does not promote these ideas. The misunderstanding lies here. I think we should use history to inspire their democratic ideas, transforming individual student democracy into collective pursuit of bourgeois democracy and freedom, student equality, etc. The solution is Marxism. Students, being petty bourgeoisie, have a strong bourgeois worldview. They replace their decayed bourgeois worldview with the progressive bourgeois worldview, then use the Marxist worldview to replace the incomplete bourgeois revolutionary worldview. That’s roughly the idea. The thinking is flawed, but I’ve given you the thought process.

20

And what about the bourgeois pursuit of freedom and democracy during the early bourgeois revolutions? I don’t understand how students transitioned from being exposed to spontaneous democratic ideas to becoming democrats; aren’t democrats political groups with political platforms?

22

From the relationship between form and content, a systematic political view is just an elaboration of some viewpoints, revealing the connections between various elements of thought. In other words, the idea of pursuing individual democratic freedom does not arise simply because the viewpoints expand. Moreover, petty bourgeoisie will have demands for personal liberation, which are connected to their oppression in capitalist society, dissatisfaction, and narrow lifestyles. According to the “Guidelines for Ideological Struggle,” the fundamental contradiction in petty bourgeoisie ideological struggle is the “contradiction between personal liberation and personal enjoyment.” The resolution of this contradiction cannot be achieved by maintaining a narrow lifestyle or merely upholding democratic ideas; it can only be achieved through changing one’s practice, combining labor, the people, society, and practice, adhering to the Marxist path, and transforming the desire for personal liberation into a desire for social liberation.
Later, it mentions being praised by Lao Jiu and so on; the relationship of oppression and being oppressed is an objective social relationship that does not change its nature because of one or two Lao Jiu. Then it says that because students have never worked, they cannot change their understanding, only stimulate democratic ideas. In fact, this is a vulgar view of practice, limiting the three great struggles (economic struggle, theoretical struggle, ideological struggle) only to the economic aspect, ignoring the possibility that the broad student population, being oppressed, can accept Marxist transformation of worldview and engage in ideological struggle. Ultimately, it still boils down to the logic of the economic camp: on one hand, limiting revolutionary struggle to narrow economic struggle like the economic camp; on the other hand, submitting to students’ spontaneity, believing that students can only develop democratic ideas and only feed them political porridge of democratic ideas. In reality, it is looking down on students from a high position while following their spontaneity.

4 Likes
23

Even if the early bourgeois worldview had progressive elements, it does not mean it is reasonable now. This is because: first, the progressive significance of freedom and democracy is relative to feudal social systems; second, this kind of equality is based on the logic of equivalent exchange, superficial equality, and fundamentally unequal views.
Finally, I think you should respond to my rebuttal rather than diverting the topic elsewhere.

1 Like
24

It is still necessary to look at the issue from the content perspective. Forming a platform only means that the development of democratic ideas is relatively sufficient, and that there is a systematic understanding of future goals and the means to achieve them. If we only base on whether the viewpoints are sufficiently developed and systematic, then we will fail to grasp the essence of democratic thought, and we won’t see that the petty bourgeoisie, on one hand, because of small private ownership, develops selfish and self-interested tendencies, and on the other hand, because of their close ties with the people’s status, also has a sympathetic side towards the people. Therefore, it is natural that they do not understand why students spontaneously develop democratic ideas.

1 Like
28

Practice is the process by which people actively transform the material world. Students, due to the oppression they usually face, tend to have a compassionate side towards the people. For example, a dormitory supervisor at a university previously died from heatstroke because there was no air conditioning, and many students spontaneously commemorated this person and condemned the barbaric behavior of capitalist universities. In the Pucheng incident, many students also joined protests, rushed into the school, and fought with police dogs. At the same time, the school is not a utopia; as a tool of dictatorship, it is also part of the social structure. Students oppressed within the school develop emotional experiences related to the bourgeois social system. Moreover, many major national events force students to care about politics. Saying that students are just opportunists and lack emotional experience is completely unreasonable. Furthermore, it is strange to say that after forming collective bourgeois democratic ideas, one should then point out the Marxist way out. Not to mention, there is no explanation of the collective bourgeois democratic outlook; bourgeoisie driven solely by profit cannot form any collective consciousness. If someone develops a systematic bourgeois democratic thought, it would mean a deepening of the bourgeois worldview and an increase in the forces opposing Marxist proletarian worldview. How could this be conducive to accepting Marxist worldview?

1 Like
29

I am talking about how reactions to social observations in modern Chinese history have been opposed, arriving in a new form, and then dividing class relations from that new form—such as what Confucianism was like in the past and what its current form is now. Then, incorporating the ancient experiences of opposing Confucianism into modern society. I am referring to learning the fundamentals of Marxism while absorbing historical knowledge. From what you said, my point is that it is incorrect to transition from democratic ideas and individual resistance to democracy to Marxism. Instead, we should directly use the highest achievements of social movements—Marxism—to evaluate measures taken by various classes in past history. I understand now; that is, the transition from spontaneous democratic ideas to Marxism cannot be achieved, and Marxism must be combined with ideological struggle and labor practice.

4

I think it is good to cultivate the virtue of helping others first, and to think more about the interests of students.

1 Like
5

Wunong’s思想, is a kind of bourgeois精神贵族思想. I myself have had similar situations to Wunong before, because I read a little and understood a little truth, I felt good about myself and considered myself a so-called hero above the masses. Conversely, I looked down on the masses, thinking that they needed me, this enlightenment figure, to awaken them. This bourgeois精神贵族, the思想 of only我独革, is actually a manifestation of detachment from society and the people. In fact, it is quite the opposite; it is precisely oneself who needs to combine labor, connect with events, humbly learn from those oppressed people across various social strata and the broad masses of workers, and transform one’s own petty bourgeoisie shortcomings in思想.

6 Likes
9

Yes, even university students have elitist ideas, believing that they create history and dominate everything.

17

Not all college students have this mindset, right? It should be analyzed based on specific situations. Saying that all college students have elitist ideas is a bit strange, as it’s a broad generalization that lumps everyone together.

1 Like
21

There are indeed college students who have not undergone Marxist ideological transformation; however, they are not elites because of their grades. They might be elites in some electronic competitions or robotics contests, or in petty bourgeois love affairs as emotional mentors. Most college students are just trying to opportunistically take civil service exams or work for state-owned enterprises to exploit others. Ordinary college students are very decadent.