Today is my 6th day of integration into the work. I haven’t done self-criticism for a long time, and some issues haven’t been exposed or resolved thoroughly. Sometimes I just think casually in my mind and assume it’s solved; in my own view, it seems like nothing serious, but in reality, it seriously hinders my proletarianization.
Why do I say “hinders proletarianization”?
Chairman Mao, in “On the Ten Major Relationships” (?), said that one must proletarianize to make friends with the proletariat. Only then can socialist ideas be instilled into the masses of the proletariat. I personally have a very deep understanding of this. When I arrived at this factory, honestly, I haven’t deeply interacted with true proletarians; most are part-time students or temporary workers during winter break (I don’t want to specify which class these temporary workers belong to). So, it can be said that this integration is very unsuccessful because I haven’t really encountered or talked much with any proletarians, or there’s a kind of barrier—this is actually the reason why proletarianization is not deep enough.
This is my main contradiction at the moment. Next, I will analyze the specific manifestations of this main contradiction in production practice.
- The issue of knowledge privatization.
This issue must be discussed separately before and after integration, because its manifestation differs in different periods. The differences in practice lead to different facts being reflected. Here, I discuss the situation after integration.
Knowledge privatization ultimately still stems from bourgeois ideology. Having this idea does not necessarily mean one is petty-bourgeois, because petty-bourgeoisie only privatizes knowledge to climb the social ladder, while bankrupt petty-bourgeoisie privatizes knowledge to maintain their class status, which in essence is still about “climbing upwards.” Knowledge privatization in revolutionary organizations sometimes manifests as opportunism, such as “exploiting work” theory. My personal issue with knowledge privatization before integration was opportunism; after integration, the manifestation is not obvious, but it can be said that this mindset hinders proletarianization. Because I rarely or almost never interact with proletarians, today I happened to encounter an incident: after work, workers caused a commotion over clocking out, and I left on the spot without saying anything because of my own interests. I even had an impulse: to maintain bourgeois “order.” - The issue of political leadership.
My understanding of political leadership is: combining Marxist thought and practice, viewing problems from a Marxist standpoint. Combining theory with practice. In reality, this is very difficult to do well at present. On one hand, my theory is weak; on the other hand, I have little practice and limited experience. This is the main difficulty hindering political leadership.
Why do I bring this up? Here, I also briefly share an incident during my integration process.
When I was packing, a “Sanhe” (a nickname or nickname-like term) from my team started working with me. At first, he told me many things, chewing betel nut and talking about how to slack off, indulge, and so on, also spreading a lot of poison. I just smiled and said nothing. When I realized he was actually a “Sanhe,” I thought of this point: we must uphold political leadership because if a person goes to work alone, ignoring the influence of past social relations, it is very difficult to have proletarian thoughts, because the bourgeoisie constantly uses its propaganda weapons to spread poison. It’s hard to resist. Once I realized this, I immediately took action.
Someone might ask: why not clearly state your stance to criticize his ideas or promote Marxism?
I have never opposed propaganda of Marxism, but based on past lessons, we must oppose those who promote without principles, without prerequisites, without clear understanding of their own situation, and without fully understanding the object of propaganda. For example, I met a student, and after less than five minutes of conversation, I started promoting; this is naive and ridiculous because you don’t even know if what he says is true. Another example is someone who has known another person for nearly ten years, but on some critical points, such as whether they are opportunists, they may not even understand clearly. So, making propaganda without knowing the specific situation is reckless.
Back to the main topic, later when I was working, I joked with the “Sanhe” from my team and two other "Sanhe"s about things like the Delta, then they asked me to help move materials. I initially moved a few times, but they became more and more aggressive, eventually directly ordering me to move materials. I should be helping (“assist” according to the line leader’s words), but they completely treat me as a soft persimmon to squeeze. I refused. I asked the “Sanhe” from my team who asked me to help: why don’t you go move?! He got angry (ridiculous, whether I move or not has nothing to do with him), threw something and was furious. He said I was lazy and didn’t work (ridiculous, he himself just slack off every day and only want easy tasks). I didn’t get scared because of his aggressive attitude (in the past, I would have been terrified), because I remembered what Marx said:
“(**Revolutionaries) should not be like many who, when faced with enemy attacks, flee, retreat, whimper, cry, or beg for mercy, saying we have no malice. We must fight back with teeth and claws, retaliate with double or triple the force for every attack from the enemy.”
I immediately argued with him (although there was some sophistry involved), and he directly asked another “Sanhe” to have the line leader reassign my position, then he took over my work to sideline me. I simply looked at my phone. He cursed and yelled, but I ignored him because political weakness and incompetence can only be cursed and yelled at; “If you can’t take up clean weapons, pick up dirty ones.” After a while, the “Sanhe” who called the line leader came back and said “he’s asleep,” then after messing around for a while, I was told to go sweep waste behind.
I thought a lot behind the scenes. I failed in this struggle and was sent to the back (later I was also refused to transfer to this line), but failure does not mean surrender (“Jiang Qing Biography”), surrender would change the nature entirely. Later I found out that these "Sanhe"s and the line leader are actually in the same gang—gangsters. The “Sanhe” who cursed me worked for three months and even boasted about checking circuit boards, saying “I can’t read them,” which is actually a capitalist running dog. Another “Sanhe” (not the one who asked the line leader to handle things) I saw today was teasing two girls. The line leader who handles things is a second-dimensional (anime) fan. As for the line leader of this line, there’s nothing much to say.
At first, I was afraid I did something wrong, but after class analysis of the class, I believe they are my enemies. The more they are enemies, the more I support. Those "Sanhe"s’ frantic anger just proves I was right. I think: “The era of bullying the small with the big, of the strong oppressing the weak, and of the survival of the fittest should end with our generation.” This is our mission! (Writing this much for now)
