Battle for China's Past : Mao and the Cultural Revolution

clergy, bourgeoisie, peasants, artisans, and women’ (Berenson 1995: 96).
This was ‘not history from the bottom up, no concern with everyday life
and popular culture, and nothing about the production of grain, subsistence
crisis, or the economy in general, save for some brief entries on
taxes, assignats, and nationalized land.’ ‘In the effort to break with the
Marxist social interpretation, Furet and others have created a history with
the society, economy, and popular culture left out’ (Berenson 1995: 96).
But all these do not matter. Furet and others like him were in line
with the intellectual trend and they therefore drew unusual media
attention. The French media crowned Furet in 1989 ‘the King of the
Bicentennial’ (Berenson 1995: 96) and American publishers brought out
his books immediately after they appeared in French.
In this global intellectual climate, the Chinese revolution cannot be
tolerated. The foremost leader of this revolution Mao is a symbol, a
metaphor, a battle cry of an alternative set of values that is still threatening,
or at least offensive, to the capitalist domination of the globe.
Now we are inundated with arguments and comments by China’s
‘neoliberal dynasty’ (Kwong 2006) that the spread of liberal market
capitalism is not only good for the Chinese but also for humanity;
burial of revolution is the watchword.
In any case, one can afford to bury the revolution after it has done
its job.
Is revolution inevitable?
THE BATTLE FOR CHINA’ S PAST
Revolution in human history is not the manifestation of a design by
someone, Deity or human, but a process in which some events, though
not necessary, become inevitable at a certain point whether one likes it
or not. Collective actions take place under certain circumstances in
spite of any particular person’s wish. In an insightful socioeconomic
ecological study of Huaibei peasant rebellions Perry argues that
peasant insurrection is a ‘sustained, structured, and sensible form of
collective action’ (Perry 1980: 2) and that ‘under conditions of scarcity,
violence against fellow competitors is often a rational strategy’ and
‘Denial of essentials to others is seen as contributing directly to one’s
own chances for survival’ (Perry 1980: 3). In other words, persistent
worsening of socioeconomic conditions will lead to violent collective
actions. The difference between rebellion and revolution is whether
these actions are guided by a politico-socioeconomic programme.
At least two revolutions in modern China are events of such
inevitability, the Republic Revolution of 1911 and the Communist Revolution
of 1949. The process that fermented the Chinese Communist
Revolution ran for a long time. According to the London-educated
anthropologist and sociologist Fei Xiaotong (1987 and 1992), traditional
[ 94 ]