Chairman Mao Tse-tung.
leaders and dictators of the twentieth century, Mao
takes a special place. In spite of the fact that after its death have passed
three decades of rough events, historical role Mao
has not been subjected to cardinal revision, and he still is popular among a
considerable part of intellectuals of all world. And
In general, Mao resembled country leaders of the Chinese antiquity
and the Middle Ages. To win,
such leader should use, on the one hand, «the revolutionary theory» (for
instance Buddhist White lotus), with another - to use an improvised material of
an old society (“specialists” - landowners - Confucians, elements of classical
culture, an infrastructure, etc.). In some old photos Mao reminds Russian
anarchist Nestor Makhno (knowingly Mao
was named "partisans"). It speaks
that, in some alternative history, the
peasant-anarchist leader of
Therefore, it is not surprising, that attitudes between Komintern and Mao reminded attitudes of ancient and medieval Chinese sects (“Yellow bandages”, the “White lotus”, etc.) with successful «field commander» to which repeatedly managed to base a new dynasty. These commanders used ideology and the some people organization of sects, but were guided, first of all, by interests of a practical policy, instead of dogmas. Therefore Mao attracted on itself frequent charges in "voluntarism", though (except for some very serious miscalculations, entailed monstrous mass famine in the Chinese village) he was closer to a reality, than rested workers Communistic International.
And still, there
was a tragically Chinese-Soviet antagonism. To that there were many
reasons. Were also subjective: expansionism of Komintern tops, imperial politics of the Soviet management,
at last, Khrushchev’ s silly,
who was not understanding, what great civilization is China. And, on the other hand - aspiration of leaders of the
But Mao has
got the big respect in the West owing to own creative,
abilities to not trivial decisions. These qualities are respected by western
intelligence. We can see that, despite of all horrors and excesses of history,
a way of Communist party of
can see wellknown "cultural revolution" for instance. Mao realized, what danger bears degradation of bureaucracy, turning into «a new class»
(especially, in such country traditionally inclined to servility, as
With positions of the today's researcher observing process of feudalization ex-Soviet nomenclature, thick corked all alive channels of a society it is visible, that the Chinese variant of rotation of elites appeared was many batter. Mao has kept in the Chinese elite the creative beginning which has managed to lead useful reforms (instead of their destructive imitation).
And, that is
especially interesting, the Chinese Cultural Revolution whose moving force was
becoming frequent youth, occurred almost during one time to student's
excitements of the end of the sixtieth in
It is curious to note that great value which Mao
gave to "creative role of Chaos». It sounds is extremely modern. From everywhere
we hear about theories of Chaos, about management in conditions of "controlled chaos”, than adores to be engaged modern
In comparison of both leaders - Stalin and Mao the certain sense is hidden. The first (on Charles Jung's classification) was the representative of "imperial type” the policy, got used to lean on power structures, and usually not loving improvisation. The second was «the political shaman», use of «collective unconscious». Our time has more and more a kind feeling to last type, especially in connection with steadily growing power of the information structures capable incredibly to increase shamanistic influence on a society.
Perhaps the interest for the Chaos which has come in the western establishment from the left philosophy has been thrown Maoism, popular in European intellectuals. And many Russian philosophers lifting toasts in glory of “a creative role of Chaos” would be much embarrassed, having learned, that this rate is laid by the Chinese communists.