Monday, October 25, 2010

Mao's Cannibalistic Economic Theory and the Willfully Blind

Mao's Great Famine: The History of China's Most Devastating
Catastrophe, 1958-62 By Frank Dik├Âtter (Bloomsbury 420pp £25)

Mao strikes a poseLiterary Review: In 1936 Mao Tse-Tung, then a cave-dwelling revolutionary, told Edgar Snow his life story. Snow recorded Mao's self-serving autobiography in Red Star Over China, which for decades made the American's name as the leading reporter in China.

Back in China twenty-four years later, Snow was pestered by news agencies enquiring about mass starvation. The Snow of the 1930s had gone into the field to see for himself a prolonged drought in the north-west, where people were rumoured to be selling their children. But this time he relied on his access to top officials such as Premier Zhou Enlai, and foreigners who flacked for China such as the New Zealander Rewi Alley. In the book he wrote about that trip, The Other Side of the River, Snow stated, 'I saw no starving people in China ... Considerable malnutrition undoubtedly existed. Mass starvation? No.' And most positively: 'Whatever he was eating, the average Chinese maintained himself in good health, as far as anyone could see.'

In brutal fact, between 1959 and 1962, at least forty-three million Chinese died during the famine Snow didn't bother to see. Most died of hunger, over two million were executed or were beaten or tortured to death, the birth rate halved in some places, parents sold their children, and people dug up the dead and ate them.

The cause of this disaster, the worst ever to befall China and one of the worst anywhere at any time, was Mao, who, cheered on by his sycophantic and frightened colleagues, decreed that before long China's economy must overtake that of the Soviet Union, Britain and even the US. Mao suggested that 'When there is not enough to eat people starve to death. It is better to let half of the people die so that the other half can eat their fill,' and declared that anyone who questioned his policies was a 'Rightist', a toxic term eventually applied to thirteen million Party members.....Read it all, (emphasis mine; economic ineptitude turned into one of Mao's forms of population control, food as a weapon!)

---> Apropos of the above see also
Liberal Intelligentsia Sleepwalking to Ruin...

Warning, let he who has an ear, let him hear--->Police State 2.0 - China's All-Seeing Eye by Naomi Klein. "Remember how we've always been told that free markets and free people go hand in hand? That was a lie. It turns out that the most efficient delivery system for capitalism is actually a communist-style police state, fortressed with American "homeland security" technologies, pumped up with "war on terror" rhetoric. And the global corporations currently earning superprofits from this social experiment are unlikely to be content if the lucrative new market remains confined to cities such as Shenzhen. Like everything else assembled in China with American parts, Police State 2.0 is ready for export to a neighborhood near you..."

--->"War Does This to Your Mind" by Kathy Kelly...

--->The assassination of JFK: A parable for our times by Claire Schaeffer-Duffy...

--->America for Sale By Matt Taibbi: "America is quite literally for sale, at rock-bottom prices, and the buyers increasingly are the very people who scored big in the oil bubble. Thanks to Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley and the other investment banks that artificially jacked up the price of gasoline over the course of the last decade, Americans delivered a lot of their excess cash into the coffers of sovereign wealth funds like the Qatar Investment Authority, the Libyan Investment Authority, Saudi Arabia's SAMA Foreign Holdings, and the UAE's Abu Dhabi Investment Authority...Read it all

--->Mark Zwick of the Houston Catholic Worker on the Immigration Problem: NAFTA and Neoliberal policies are what force peoples of the southern hemisphere to migrate to the north. Listen to the talk (Click) given to the St. Martha Adult Faith Formation

--->RT report: "Vatican (reportedly) rejects "chosen people" claim, calls on Israel to end "occupation'" Note: This is just one report and it remains to be see if this is an accurate retelling.

--->Google's Schmidt: Don’t Like Google Street View Photographing Your House? Then Move...

--->Google finally admits that its Street View cars DID take emails and passwords from computers...

---> NYC bedbugs scaring off NYC tourists... Note: I should say so.

--->DN Video report: WikiLeaks Iraq War Logs Expose US-Backed Iraqi Torture, 15,000 More Civilian Deaths
, and Contractors Run Amok...

--->RT video report: Water is the new oil...

--->To fodder or not to fodder...Not all homosexuals pleased with US repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell..." military policy. See DN video report...

--->Jerusalem Post: New provocative photos of IDF soldiers on Facebook

--->Trickyleaks? SSPX Superior General Bishop Fellay [explains] that the Holy See has been pursuing a two-pronged policy – an official de jure policy contradicted by de facto actions...There is a wonderful scene in the film A Man for All Seasons where St. Thomas More convinces his good friend the Duke of Norfolk to publicly feign a quarrel with him. More understands that for his friend’s own good, Norfolk must be seen as his enemy. This is a great sacrifice for both men who truly love one another Brian McCall (Click).

Update: 10/ 26 This approach (or analysis) cannot be recommended. Silence is better than what this analysis suggests and which has never been the way of the Church, Thomas More's dire straights notwithstanding. We should, we are taught, let our yea be yea and nay, nay. Or say nothing at all. I think it is the analysis here that is faulty. Aspects of Vatican II in retrospect may have been terribly ill-advised, also terribly ambiguous in places, and certainly poorly implemented; Cardinal Ratzinger said as much long ago. The reform of the reform is seeing to changes I trust. Catholics have no other choice, because there can be no revolution within the mystical body of Christ wherein we storm the barricades and put miters on our own heads like clowns. Far more is at stake here, and it is called indefectibility. I think Bishop Fellay understands that. Whether other SSPX bishops do I cannot say.

As Catholics we have the right to criticize aspects of Vatican II in any serious way, but we cannot call it heresy. We can say aspects inadvertently opened the floodgates to many woes, but we cannot call it heresy. Because the Holy Spirit, according to the Lord's promise, protects the Church from heresy (what the fathers called the gates of Hell) always and forever. See John 16:13 and Matt 28:18-20, etc.

The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1917 gives the following definition of the Church's indefectibility:

"By this term is signified, not merely that the Church will persist to the end of time, but further, that it will be preserved unimpaired in its essential characteristics. The Church can never undergo any constitutional change, which will make it, as a social organism, something different from what it was originally. It can never become corrupt in faith or in morals; nor can it ever lose the Apostolic hierarchy, or the sacraments through which Christ communicates grace to men."

So-called Sedevacantism

The Church is visible and hierarchical. In a Council the Evil One could conceivably fool a Pope or some bishops, but he cannot fool a Pope and all the bishops together in a Council at once. That is the protection of the Church's constitution and the Holy Spirit. You can fool some of the bishops some of the time in a Council, but you cannot fool not all of the bishops all of the time; and at Vatican II not one bishop---not even Archbishops Lefebvre or Thuc---detected or accused the Church of heresies. All signed / ratified that Council as free from all heresies. After the Council is closed it is too late. It is what happened in Council which alone is the Faith. It can later be criticized and improved, reformed, but not accused post-facto of heresies.

If all the bishops in Council went astray into heresy, the Pope would check them. If a Pope in Council went astray the bishops would check him. Nothing of the kind happened at Vatican II (whatever its problems) else it would have been openly checked. Therefore no heresy is today "notorious and mainfest" as would be required for the Church to act.

--->Karzai confirms report of cash payments from Iran

--->It's getting corny out there...

---Sisters in the School of Love...

"Anyone who stops learning is old, whether at twenty or eighty"---Henry Ford

"Give me a fruitful error any time, full of seeds, bursting with its own corrections." ---Vilfredo Pareto

1 comment:

  1. There was cannabalism during the Culteral Revolution too. It was actually encoraged by some members of the Commnist Party leadership as a way to get rid of preceived enemies. The revolution devours its own!