So what was the reason for Mao’s decision to turn on Lin? From everything I’ve heard, Lin was a pliant puppet who would never have actually led a conspiracy or tried to take over. This is probably the reason Mao designated Lin as his successor in the first place; Lin was a harmless safe choice. So I can’t buy the official story.
So what was the real story? Was Mao just getting senile and paranoid and lashing out at non-existent enemies? Did Mao have Lin killed as a warning to other more dangerous opponents, turning on the guy who should have been safe in order to show people that he was willing to turn on anyone? Or was there a genuine conspiracy involving Lin - not as a leader but as a planned figurehead for some other group that wanted to replace Mao?
I would be very surprised if anyone could uncover the facts behind this mystery. Those who did know are gone, or avoiding that fate. His death may have been nothing but an accident allowing him to become a convenient scapegoat.
Well, when you get to the level of Mao in terms of power and craziness, how do you tell the difference? Or in this case, during the Cultural Revolution, do we even know if Mao was actually involved? The Cultural Revolution has to be one of the craziest times in modern history. It was filled with political purges, and then was followed by more to try and erase it from history.
Anyway, if there are some answers to this or the mysteries of the time and place they will be very interesting and enlightening.
There’s supposedly a custom in China when talking about who was to blame for the excesses of the Cultural Revolution. The official story is that it was all the responsibility of the Gang of Four.
But supposedly, a lot of times when people talk about the Gang of Four they hold open their hand with all five fingers extended. This is an unspoken recognition that the four identified guilty parties couldn’t have done all they did without the tacit approval of a fifth person: Mao.
The same principle applies to Lin’s downfall. Lin had been Mao’s handpicked successor and one of his loyal supporters. Anyone other than Mao who moved against Lin would have been challenging Mao as well.
The problem with the official story is that like any official story it is written by the victors, and in this case every Chinese leader since Deng has come from the class that were persecuted and victimized during the Cultural Revolution, thus today one only ever hears about the negatives and the excesses of the period, while the positive aspects of the Cultural Revolution are downplayed by the official Chinese line.
This is interesting. I spoke with someone born in China this weekend. He admitted up front he had no interest in Chinese history so couldn’t tell me anything about Lin Biao, but he made your point above quite clearly, no one in China hears anything but the official story which has been carefully tailored to satisfy Mao’s successors.
There were positive aspects to the Cultural Revolution?
Interesting statement. I noted this passage: “These erroneous “Left” theses, upon which Comrade Mao Zedong based himself in initiating the “cultural revolution”, were obviously inconsistent with the system of Mao Zedong Thought, which is the integration of the universal principles of Marxism-Leninism with the concrete practice of the Chinese revolution. These theses must be clearly distinguished from Mao Zedong Thought."
If I’m following the argument correctly, they’re saying Maoism is right and the problem was Mao’s failure to follow Maoism. Which strikes me as being like the early Church fathers denouncing Jesus for not being a good Christian.