This post is dedicated to recording some of the questions I encountered while reading and my reflections. Currently, I have decided to mainly study Historical Materialism and Marxist Philosophy at school, reading the “Outline of Marxist Philosophy” and the concise history books that the reading group is currently studying. During the holidays, I will shift my focus to Political Economy.
4 Likes
In future reading, for some unfamiliar terms and concepts, I will look up information myself and mark the results as footnotes; for questions about the original text, I will quote the main text and ask questions afterward. My reflections are mainly related to practical applications, such as criticism and self-cultivation. (Thanks to Comrade Screw for the post, I express my gratitude here.)
《Marxist Philosophy Outline》 pages 8 to 9 (the book titles not noted below are the same as above):
… Becoming the fundamental question of all philosophy is not an accidental phenomenon, nor is it arbitrarily stipulated by people, but is determined by the special nature of philosophy itself and the development law of human cognition history.
I don’t quite understand what the development law of human cognition history means.
《Marxist Philosophy Outline》 pages 11 to 13: The fundamental outline of idealism
Does subjective idealism have a trend toward approaching objective idealism? If so, is it because [“my” feeling] evolves into absurd solipsism that cannot be self-justified, so a “god” or absolute spirit is used to remedy it? I saw related discussions in 《Popular Philosophy》 before.
Some thoughts on the pseudo-Marxism of the middle revision:
In the high school version of Political Science required course four by the People’s Education Press, the purpose of philosophy is absurdly said to be “pursuit of wisdom,” completely discarding class nature! In a class society, there is no wisdom or purpose beyond class, only class-based wisdom and purpose. The middle revision here begins to engage in idealism. Later, the middle revision says “Marxist philosophy is the philosophy of the people…” and again abandons class nature. Logically, if according to the middle revision’s definition of the people as “citizens except enemies,” then it can be concluded that “Marxism is both proletarian and bourgeois,” which is such an absurd conclusion! It is evident that the so-called “Marxism” of the middle revision is completely fake.
What does “Popular Philosophy” say? There is no real trend of approaching in reality. For example, the development of Confucianism in China, initially it was objective idealism, with God first, then after being corrupted, it was reinterpreted as Heaven, and later Zhu Xi turned it into “principle”. But there are branches, such as Lu Jiuyuan’s School of the Heart, Wang Shouren’s School of the Heart, etc. However, the objective idealist philosophy that advocates the Three Bonds and Five Constants has always existed. It is more like choosing which doctrine to promote based on the class struggle situation, depending on what can deceive people better under that historical condition. Generally speaking, subjective idealism can sometimes flatter the exploiting classes more because it allows any explanation to be given to justify it. For example, when Zen Buddhism appeared, it said things like letting go of the butcher’s knife and immediately becoming a Buddha, which in reality was to prevent the people from rebelling; once they realized internally, they could become Buddhas and reach the Pure Land. This kind of subjective idealism does not require any Buddhist doctrines to be memorized or understood, so it was very popular when it appeared. But this also effectively canceled out the existence of Buddha and others, affecting the interests of large temple landlords, so later some teachings of Buddhist chanting and recitation were restored.
1 Like
The original statement is as follows, but I misunderstood the meaning of the original text at the time:
However, the cunning subjective idealists sometimes also find this conclusion [Note: referring to solipsism] truly unreasonable, and dare not openly push their reasoning onto solipsism. They want to find another source for the world outside of my subjectivity. Where do they look? Of course, they are unwilling to say that the world exists independently outside of my subjectivity, because that would make it materialism rather than idealism. So, how should we respond? Berkeley of Britain [Note: i.e., George Berkeley]'s answer is a very good example. He cleverly and somewhat reluctantly replaces “my” subjectivity with God’s subjectivity, saying: “The world is in God’s perception, it is produced by God’s perception. My perception is just a small part of God’s perception.”
Questions on Section 3 of Chapter 2, Part 2 of “Ancient Chinese History”:
The text only discusses the fundamental reason for the fall of the Shang Dynasty (intensified class contradictions) and external causes (invasion by the Zhou tribe), but does not detail the specific process of the Shang Dynasty’s demise. I happened to hear before that at that time, during the battle between the Shang and Zhou armies, Shang slaves defected at the critical moment, leading to a major defeat for the Shang Dynasty, and Zhou took the opportunity to seize the victory. I’m not sure if this is accurate.
There are two versions of the story. The first says that King Zhou gathered slaves to confront the Zhou army, but the slaves could not endure King Zhou’s brutal rule and defected at the last moment, leading the Zhou army to attack the capital as the vanguard. The Zhou king took the city without bloodshed, and ultimately King Zhou committed suicide by fire. This is the account in the “Spring and Autumn Annals.”
In the “Records of the Grand Historian,” it is recorded that the Zhou king once held a rally in a certain place, where eight hundred vassals unexpectedly gathered, and it is also said that King Zhou’s army numbered in the hundreds of millions, with a fierce general named A Lai leading the vanguard. During the battle, blood flowed freely, and finally, the army reached King Zhou himself.
According to later historians during the Qing Dynasty, the claim that King Wu of Zhou defeated King Zhou without bloodshed was fabricated by the official histories.
There is a brief summary in the next section
1 Like
“Outline of Marxist Philosophy” pages 23~27, Idealism and Religious Alliance
Heretical sects are essentially religions. While Zhongxiu openly suppresses heretical sects, where exactly do the conflicts between heretical sects and Zhongxiu lie?
There are also conflicts of interest within the bourgeoisie over sharing the spoils; for example, Li Hongzhi wants a share of the official and capital interests, but most other religions are basically controlled by Zhongxiu, and other religions are also suppressed.
2 Likes
Yes, it can be seen from the official statements of the Chinese Communist Party regarding Li Hongzhi’s “Falun Gong.” The people hate these bloodsucking cults, but the CCP shelters cults like Falun Gong. However, Li Hongzhi wants to split the cake with the CCP to exploit the people, so he openly confronts the CCP institutions, hoping to force the CCP to compromise. As a result, the CCP had no choice but to ban Falun Gong. The same goes for Shi Yongxin of Shaolin Temple in Henan.
2 Likes
Pages 33~40 of “Outline of Marxist Philosophy”: Basic views of agnosticism:
Is there any trace of agnosticism in the theories of revisionists?
Did the north wind attend the reading club today? Do you have the conditions to participate in the reading club at school?
1 Like
@Advance Today there is no class. I have evening class 2 from 8:00 to 8:45, and evening class 3 from 8:45 to 9:50. If my seat is at the back of the classroom, I might have a chance to take out my phone. But now I can’t borrow too much of my classmate’s data, so I can only go back to the dorm to borrow online. In the classroom, I can borrow the computer hotspot, and I can access the reading club link from the email without logging into the forum, but I’m not sure if that’s possible. Also, my headphones are too obvious now, so it’s best to find a hidden pair of headphones.
Page 59 of the “Outline of Marxist Philosophy”:
“……that is, the science of existing things, which still cannot clarify the position of the objects they study within the total connection of the world.”
I’m not quite sure I understand “the position of the objects they study within the total connection of the world.” Could someone explain?
A series of previous lessons made me realize the serious consequences of not studying, and the need to solve the problem of reforming my worldview and ideological struggle, so I will continue to study before and after planning to participate in reeducation through labor. I currently plan to reread “Guide to Ideological Struggle” and “The Chinese Road and the Revolution” (The text may refer to specific titles; I will translate as given) and take good notes.
What is ideological struggle? Why perform ideological struggle?
Ideological struggle (theoretical struggle) is part of the class struggle within the social three major revolutionary practices. It includes: “establishing socialist theory, persisting in socialist theory in practice, developing socialist theory according to circumstances.” Ideological struggle can help the revolutionary class transform its worldview under the guidance of Marxism, making it revolutionary and scientific, and improve its ideological consciousness and ability to act. Because of differences in class basis and class practice, ideological struggle has different significance for each class:
For the proletariat, due to its class position and class practice, having no private property, there is no private consciousness in itself, so it is easy to accept Marxism as a weapon of combat; but as the bankrupt bourgeoisie supplements into the proletariat’s ranks bringing bourgeois ideology, and as the bourgeoisie uses various bourgeois ideologies to poison the proletariat, the proletariat greatly needs ideological struggle.
For the petty bourgeoisie, because of its lingering attachment to private ownership under capitalism, even under capitalist oppression, the petty bourgeoisie opposes capitalism for the sake of personal liberation and the defense of small private property. Ideological struggle can reform the worldview of the petty bourgeoisie and bring them into the revolutionary camp; and the extremely decayed cultural life of imperialist countries is grounded in the petty bourgeoisie detaching from practice and from the people’s life; the bourgeoisie also poisons the petty bourgeoisie with bourgeois ideologies, further intensifying the corruption of the petty bourgeoisie. Therefore, ideological struggle for the petty bourgeoisie is urgent.
Ideological struggle is also called “theoretical struggle.” This is not only reflected in the forms of movement in political activities and political events, but also in personal life. Logically speaking, a person who lives in decay and is selfish will certainly have a worldview permeated by bourgeois individualism, and such a person will never wholeheartedly participate in the revolution to serve the people. Especially now, the cultural life and moral standards in imperialist countries have collapsed and decayed. Ideological struggle must be intensified, requiring analysis of every person’s life from the perspective of class struggle.
What is the object of ideological struggle?
In a capitalist society, only bourgeois ideology and socialist ideology exist, and there is an ideological struggle between them. Standing on the Marxist position, the object of ideological struggle is certainly bourgeois ideology. The core of bourgeois ideology is individualism, while the core of socialist ideology is collectivism, so ideological struggle must “break private property to establish public property,” firmly eliminate all personal-ism in society and in individuals’ thoughts and actions. To confirm the progress of ideological struggle, one must see whether one’s communist spirit is established and solid, whether it has “broke away from low-level tastes,” erasing all personal-ism in thought, and whether one’s personal-ism in behavior has been overthrown.
Low-level tastes are self-serving behaviors that start from individualism; and spiritual opium is a product of spiritual life that starts from individualism, spreading bourgeois ideology as spiritual products. Low-level tastes include the consumption of spiritual opium. All spiritual opium is a tool for monopolistic capital to poison the proletariat and the petty bourgeoisie; today’s imperialist cultural life is utterly decayed, and these spiritual opiums play a decisive role. Therefore, ideological struggle must eradicate low-level tastes, including the consumption of spiritual opium, and wholly embrace high-level tastes. Comrade Fenghuo once said, “The highest form of entertainment is to strive to liberate all humanity, to transform this distorted reality, that is, to revolution.” Fully embracing high-level tastes means fully devoting oneself to the revolution and fighting for the happiness of the many.
1 Like
Social Practice Determines the Worldview of Each Class
Ideological struggle is a fundamental form of class struggle. Although it manifests as a movement of understanding, it requires a certain material basis—the “practice of the struggling classes” in reality. This is grounded in the epistemology of materialist dialectics. Leftist militants often attack the association and comrades of Fenghuo for pursuing a “idealistic” line, calling it “revisionism” and “only revolution in their minds.” But this only proves their ignorance and shows precisely who is “revolting in their minds.”
Ideological struggle is based on social practice. Class position determines people’s class practice, and the worldview is formed within class practice. In social practice, a person’s worldview can be transformed; for the petty bourgeoisie, there is the possibility of transforming the worldview into a proletarian worldview, to devote themselves to socialist revolution.
In different social formations, ideological struggle has different class content and political content. In capitalist society, it is the struggle between proletarian and bourgeois ideas. At the same time, as a non-basic class, the petty bourgeoisie also participates in this. The opposition between bourgeois and proletarian ideas arises from the antagonism of the practices of these two basic classes. And the petty bourgeoisie, due to its intermediate position in revolution, exhibits intermediate ideological features.
Specific contents of the worldviews of each class:
Big-picture View:
- The proletariat’s big-picture view is broad-minded and long-sighted. In the practical struggles of production and class struggle within capitalist industry, the proletariat has mastered the most advanced production technologies and observed the activities of various class groups in society. Therefore the proletariat has developed the habit of thinking about things from the perspective of class groups and can foresee long-term interests.
- The bourgeoisie’s big-picture view is ambitious and grasping at more. The bourgeoisie often sees only the immediate profits, not the long-term interests. Moreover, the bourgeois worldview is inherently idealist and metaphysical and cannot foresee historical development trends.
- The petty bourgeoisie lacks a big-picture view. Its production base is dispersed, isolated, and small, leading to a narrow life and narrow scope of existence, which easily forms a habit of only caring about one’s own life and property, while being ignorant of society’s fierce struggles. Students as a full-time petty bourgeoisie group are likewise.
Public-Private View:
- The proletariat’s public-private view is selfless. The proletariat has no private property and does not need to defend or operate private property, thus inherently lacking private ownership notions. Moreover, in collective production and life, due to equal status and mutual aid, a spirit of selfless public-spiritedness forms.
- The bourgeoisie’s public-private view is profit-seeking (extreme self-interest). The bourgeoisie’s sole activity is exploitation; within the cycle of capital movement, it extracts surplus value from the proletariat, seeks profits to satisfy extreme luxurious consumption; the bourgeoisie also engages in life-and-death competition with other bourgeoisie and small producers. Therefore the bourgeoisie is an extremely self-interested class that would sacrifice others without hesitation for itself.
- The petty bourgeoisie’s public-private view is selfish. Its ideological basis is bourgeois individualism; as a non-basic class, it is influenced by the bourgeoisie, but its ideology differs from the bourgeois. Because the petty bourgeoisie has dispersed and narrow production and living scope, it is selfish but does not possess the bourgeoisie’s ambition of “the common people bear all.” Moreover, subjected to bourgeois exploitation and oppression, it will oppose the capitalist system, but not to defend small private property or avoid its own ruin; instead it seeks “class ascension” to the bourgeoisie or its henchmen, and to live in luxury by exploiting workers. Therefore, the petty bourgeoisie must be transformed.
Sacrifice View:
- The proletariat’s sacrifice view is selfless sacrifice for others. This worldview is based on the proletariat’s selfless public-spirited ideology, formed through long-term production and life mutual aid among workers.
- The bourgeoisie’s sacrifice view is “sacrificing others for oneself.” As the most greedy exploitative class in history, its pursuit in capitalist production (the most developed commodity production) is not use value but value. The bourgeoisie’s desire to extract surplus value from the proletariat is not bound by physiological needs but is insatiable. Thus arises the most reactionary worldview in history—the bourgeois worldview.
- The petty bourgeoisie’s worldview is “not worth a penny.” Although the petty bourgeoisie does not form an extremely reactionary bourgeois sacrifice in exploitation, its focus on its own life and property means it is unwilling to sacrifice for others’ happiness. In revolution, this manifests as wavering positions and even betraying the revolution. For example, the ultra-reactionary petty-bourgeois right (the “pink-sheep”) would not risk death for the mid-revision, would they? The answer is no.
Communication View:
- The proletariat’s view of interaction is united; the bourgeoisie’s is scheming; the petty bourgeoisie is cold and indifferent. The differences in interaction across classes are determined by various public-private views. The proletariat, having no private property and no private concept, always thinks and acts in unison in collective life, emphasizing unity and mutual defense. The bourgeois worldview is fundamentally materialist, and interactions with other bourgeois and petty-bourgeois groups are based on individual interests. These “interactions” are either scheming or involve unequal exchanges with added conditions.
- The petty bourgeoisie’s view of interaction is closer to the bourgeoisie. Its right-wing groups, seeking to ascend to the bourgeoisie and get rich, display bourgeois characteristics in their interactions; most petty bourgeois individuals, when their own interests are at stake, also display bourgeois traits. However, due to the narrow production and living scope, the petty bourgeoisie is not adept at the bourgeois wheedling and deception, tending toward a more indifferent attitude.
- “The relationship between people must be managed.” It is necessary to severely criticize the bourgeois interaction creed represented above, and to establish genuine revolutionary friendship among comrades to serve the revolution.
Authority View:
- The proletariat’s authority view: Under the leadership of proletarian authority, uphold principles, act in unity, and obey discipline. Proletarian authority is established by winning the affection and support of the proletarian ranks through the leader’s “clear class stance, profound theoretical level, and outstanding organizational ability,” with no private interests and the ability to consciously unite around the leader, making the individual subordinate to the collective.
- The bourgeoisie’s authority view: Build bourgeois authority through artificially created means, and use violence and deception against revolutionary people and internal dissidents to intimidate the people and maintain rule. But bourgeois authority is a paper tiger; once the people fully strike, it will collapse.
- The petty bourgeoisie outwardly opposes authority but in fact acknowledges and supports bourgeois authority. Its long-standing narrow life production and individualistic thought produce a freedom from obedience to any authority and a scatterbrained attitude, yet it has no means of production (nor spiritual means of production) and thus must support bourgeois authority. The petty bourgeoisie’s authority view in revolution manifests as disobedience to the collective and revolutionary interests, and as dreams of seizing power for personal gain. This is the “fifth column” inside the proletarian fortress and must be highly vigilant.
Previously, Qian Renling used technical issues in a discussion article as an opportunity to attack and smear “Soviet articles are too long for the workers to read,” and “the article is long, (Fenghuo) smugly content,” targeting the proletarian authority and the association led by comrade Fenghuo with extremely malicious assaults, aiming to topple proletarian authority and establish his own personal authority to seek official positions. But with comrades’ fierce counterattacks, Qian Ren’s attack was defeated. This is the expression of bourgeois individualism and hierarchical thinking, and also a true portrayal of petty-bourgeois authority. Thus, it can be seen that the petty-bourgeois authority that follows the bourgeois authority lineage is also a paper tiger.
Truth View:
- The proletariat fully adheres to truth. The proletariat is the most progressive and revolutionary class in history, achieving the unity of ideological science and class practice. The proletariat, out of the need to guide revolution and the needs of its production and life practice, must fully reveal objective truth without any concealment.
- The bourgeois truth view is fickle. The bourgeoisie pursues profit, not true truth. In the rising stages of history, the bourgeoisie can propose some progressive and correct propositions to oppose the feudal system and meet the people’s needs; but once it seizes power, it must oppose truth for class interests, culminating in the extremely reactionary utilitarian philosophy of imperialism.
- The petty-bourgeois truth view wobbles. Sometimes the petty bourgeoisie’s position wobbles between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, producing revolutionary fanaticism: during revolutionary upswings, it zealously shouts; during revolutionary troughs, it sighs, spreads idealist poison. Usually ignorant and not mastering theory in practice, failing to draw a clear line with bourgeois fallacies—this is the petty-bourgeois truth view. Only by participating in revolutionary life, transforming worldview, and taking part in revolutionary practice can “the petty bourgeoisie become a useful class for the revolution.”
Struggle View:
- In human society, contradictions are universal. Humans are the sum of social relations, in which contradictions arise, leading to struggle. In class society, the form of this struggle is class struggle. The proletariat’s view of struggle is fearless. In class struggle, the proletariat has no private interest; only by liberating all humanity and abolishing the class itself can the proletariat be liberated. For momentary private interests, one might fight briefly, but when it harms personal interests, compromise and surrender occur. Only when one fights for the happiness of millions can one break out of the self-centered framework and achieve ultimate victory in the struggle.
- The bourgeoisie’s view of struggle is outwardly strong but internally weak. As the ruling class, the bourgeoisie exploits and oppresses the people in economy, force, and culture. In long-standing exploitation, it has become arrogant, appearing formidable in struggle; however, this is built on violence and deception and is unpopular. When revolutionary people converge into a mighty army to fight the bourgeoisie, the bourgeoisie becomes helpless and surrenders.
- The petty-bourgeoisie is timorous and cautious. Although they are a productive class, due to bourgeois oppression, they can generally be rallied by the proletariat to join the struggle against the bourgeoisie, even becoming proletarianized. But because the petty-bourgeoisie is productive, its ideological foundation is bourgeois individualism, the dream of wealth and advancement persists, and its struggle is weak among middle and upper layers. The petty-bourgeoisie tends to “strike at everything” when personal interests develop, targeting the masses and other petty-bourgeois struggles, with the struggle among the spontaneously acting petty-bourgeois being even stronger against the bourgeoisie. For example, traitor Cheng, when the association helped him fight against the capitalist school, did so to punish the bully and to escape the school to pursue revolution. But once victory is achieved and he cannot continue to indulge, he sacrifices his own interests and adopts opportunist lines, harming the broader force that helped him. This is an example of petty-bourgeois struggle view. When the struggle departs from the capitalist school, one must abandon the petty-bourgeois struggle view, clearly understanding whom the struggle is for—the broad working people and oppressed students, who can then fight with confidence to the end.
1 Like