Black Lives Matter 2020 — Traumatized By Antifa Treachery

Defiling the Tiananmen

The Tiananmen, Tian’anmen, or Gate of Heavenly Peace is in Beijing, the capital of China.

Two of the pictures in the above slider are from the notorious 1989 Tiananmen Square freedom demonstrations. One photo shows a lone patriot standing in the path of the tanks suppressing the protest. The other photo shows most of the tank column and many more tanks in its upper-right corner waiting to join the convoy. There is superb irony in using dozens of tanks against a lone freedom seeker at a place called The Gate of Heavenly Peace.

China is now violating its promise to allow freedom and the rule of law in Hong Kong. In this new environment, anyone who says something that Beijing dislikes is in danger of being “disappeared.” This environment is like what one might find on a slave plantation run by a benevolent but all-powerful slave master. Because his slaves are valuable, the master will be kind to them as long as they are useful and as long as no slave needs to be “disappeared.”

Does Mao’s plan and Antifa control BLM?

The answer to this is Yes, No, and Maybe. Our friends in BLM are dealing with an American version of the Tiananmen tank column, albeit with some differences. One needs to understand Mao’s thinking to sort through what happened in the Chinese revolution and is similarly going on today in BLM.

Mao Tse Tung had a three-stage theory of revolutionary war, which is different from a guerrilla war. Guerrilla operations can be part of a revolutionary war, but the final objective is a social revolution.

Over 100 years ago, Lenin envisioned a vanguard party or revolutionary elite that would create the conditions for revolution. Believing that capitalism contained the seeds of its destruction, Lenin felt it would only be a matter of time until conditions would be right for workers to rise and take control via a revolution.

Lenin believed that revolutionary events must run their proper course. He decided he could kick-start the process by adding a plan to speed things up. Planning was the first contribution to the theory and practice of revolution.

The second contribution was the concept of the popular front. Before the vanguard group gains authority, the tactic is to form coalitions to oppose a common enemy. Once in the good graces of the other coalition members, the vanguard party infiltrates its allies. The vanguard then takes over and insidiously rules in its own right, often followed by violent purges. Turning on its partners is the stage where the Maoists in BLM appear to be now.

Mao made an essential contribution to the Marxist revolutionary struggle theory by realizing that the social revolution didn’t have to start with industrial workers. Industrial workers were not numerous in China and hardly mattered. The more populous Chinese peasants did not worry about overproduction or alienation. A Chinese peasant’s dream was having land, which Mao understood well. 

Mao criticized those in China who knew only the history of ancient Greece and knew nothing about their own country. He understood the importance of respecting a group’s cultural identity and using it to manipulate the group.

The Chinese revolutionary movement advocated re-establishing trade and cultural interchange between China and other Asian and African countries. This trade had been influential in the dynamics of Chinese history before colonialism disrupted it.

Mao’s rallying cry was for land reform, but that alone would not create a social revolution. Hence, Mao’s three-stage theory of revolutionary war.

Organization and consolidation

The revolutionary cadres begin their work in remote rural areas [or urban ghettos?]. It’s easier to hide there because governments tend to ignore such areas or, even better, discriminate against their inhabitants. That helps to recruit. Maoist cadres came to villages to live, work, and socialize with the locals. Over time the Maoists become trusted.

In this fertile ground, they develop a program, the party line, and recruit followers. Simultaneously, the government has to fight often losing battles to root out and apprehend the revolutionary cadres.

In remote areas, the peasant population is small, and they all know and keep tabs on one another. Maoist infiltrators can move around among the peasants once they make friends with them. Strangers stand out immediately, making it harder for government operatives to infiltrate the group to get intelligence.

The Communists did not always co-mingle with the locals in positive ways. Sometimes they coerced villagers, but the tactics in China, Vietnam, and elsewhere usually involved cooperation rather than intimidation. This was the primary way the revolutionaries dealt with the peasants during this early phase. The next stages are less benign.

Terror and attacks on isolated enemy units

Phase two is a shift to guerrilla warfare and armed struggle. In Mao’s guerrilla warfare strategy, the fighters move among the people “like fish in water.” In this guerrilla warfare, attacks are primarily planned for their effect rather than for military purposes. [destroying statues and monuments?] Phase two revolutionaries are mainly interested in using military force for political purposes. [Read Minneapolis, Portland, and Seattle.]

[Samantha Mandeles has done some excellent research into the founders of Black Lives Matter. Those folks do not appear to be letting their proletarian ideals interfere with feathering their nests. 10/26/2020 ed.]

In this low-intensity warfare, the first target will likely be an individual or a small group, a police chief, a village chief, or maybe a province chief or council. Kidnapping and assassination are the tools of the trade. Such actions are to make a resounding point first and secondarily to get rid of the person. All this demonstrates that the insurgents can hit the enemy, are a growing force, and cannot be ignored. Moreover, it shows that crossing the front’s leadership would be dangerous.

The first attacks may do little physical damage to the enemy, but they make the enemy fear that there may be mayhem just around the corner. Formerly comfortable officials begin to fear for their safety. They may then pull their forces further inward for personal protection, which encourages the villagers and gives the insurgents more extensive areas from which to work. 

An important reason behind these first attacks is to get the enemy leadership’s attention. As people read about the attack in the newspaper or hear about them on the radio or by word of mouth, they initially will be curious about what is happening. Even if they’ve never heard of the revolutionary movement, they may start thinking about it and seek to learn more.

Engaging in that initial act of violence or terrorism demonstrates that the revolution is real, that its agents are here, that they mean business, and can win. For villagers already opposed to the government, or even for those who were neutral, this represents a development worth watching that can spark hope for something new and better.

The initial purely political statement slowly evolves toward the third and final stage.

Defeating or destroying the enemy

The military objectives of the third stage carefully escalate fear through violence. Successfully ambushing a patrol might net a weapons cache. Overrunning a police station at night can net more weapons and ammunition and perhaps information like informants’ names. Eventually, they accumulate enough weapons and money that supporters are willing to give information on government officials and local families. The supporters are now more willing to hide communist troops.

Over time, more and more locals take up arms and join the combat operations, making insurgent military operations bigger and deadlier. Ultimately a regular military force emerges that can engage government forces on the field of battle. That’s the third phase.

In this ideologically driven world, Mao’s thoughts on “correct” thinking control the agenda. There is no tolerance for dissenting views. This is particularly ironic considering that the Yin-Yang concept of opposing ideas that generally (but not always) work together has been a part of Chinese culture for millennia. 

Mao’s idea of correct thinking seems to reject the Yin-Yang idea of opposing but essential pieces. The concept that there could be constructive biodiversity in differing views is not recognized. The combination of an almost feudal society with a high technology society lends itself well to Neo-puritanism and witch hunts to ferret out incorrect thinking. 

Monuments must be destroyed in the Maoist world because they can be the rallying points for “incorrect thinking.” BLM’s smartest approach to take toward monuments would be to let them stand and insist on an open discussion about what is both good and bad in the history of each specific memorial. Monuments can help generate understanding and healing, or they can be used to incite a civil war.

It can’t happen here

The hell it can’t. Nobody thought it could happen in Russia, China, Cuba, or Venezuela either, but it did.