Yeah.
As Mao said, "Without the Communist Party, there would be no new China."
That quote summarizes the importance of vanguardism, no matter the ideology.
Exactly, you can't just expect a bunch of workers to do something without organisation or actually knowing what they're supposed to do
Like an army with no generals, no officers
Even anarchist movements need some level of organization at a local level. It makes sense.
Or for populism, an army with one general but no in-between subordinates.
Who's more likely to win? An organised citizens militia with a vanguard to organise and arm, or the same thing except the state controls it
And if it's guerrilla warfare for the citizens militia, then it's likely they would victor
We saw how the Chinese Civil War went down....
Now, I do have huge problems with how poorly communist China was ran, but the revolution was as close to clean victory as it gets.
The CCP were just basically armed peasants but organized by a vanguard. The Nationalist Republic was basically an confederation of armies led by a strongman.
And who won?
The ones who knew the land.
The ones who had more to lose.
Not to mention the Nationalist generals squabbling on each other.
And the CCP was 'blessed' with the former Manchukuo as their staging ground. The Nationalists have war-torn land to start with.
iirc, the American Revolution was only possible because the British generals acted like children with too much power, whereas Washington listened to his subordinates, who in turned listened to him.
Manchukuo used to be Imperial Japan's spoiled child.
@Foxadee yeah.
that and french aid but we gloss over that in class
Too bad that the revolutionary zeal would fade over time.
That's where the idea of Perpetual Revolution comes in.
I'm talking of Mao's idea basically.
Trotsky's version is basically not to cease pursuing the enemy until they have nowhere to run.
Mao's version is constant vigilance to avoid slipping back and replacing your enemy.
Also, one problem why African revolutions failed to bear fruit unlike Latin American or Asian ones?
They were too impatient.
They already implemented their socialist programme while their opponents are still a relevant force to deal with.
African revolutionaries can't hold until they attain total supremacy, like the communist victories in China, Cuba, and Vietnam.
Soygon cucks beware
whoa, that looks radical in the literal sense
@Foxadee Radical Authoritarian cultural nationalism
Assimilate or be eliminated
Way too much markets
Too much religion too
Not enough tradition
"He who does not work has no bread." -- Vladimir Lenin
Even the Communist Chinese find ways for everyone, even the disabled, to be useful to society.
Even though they lost the spark after Mao died.
