Daoxian Massacre (1967)

Sun Aug 13, 1967

Image: A map of China with Hunan province highlighted

Note: most of the following entry comes from the scholarship of Song Yongyi, a Chinese-American historian who specializes in the study of Chinese Cultural Revolution, currently employed by California State University in Los Angeles.

On this day in 1967, violence broke out in Dao County, Hunan Province, China against alleged counter-revolutionaries during the Cultural Revolution. The violence, now known as the Daoxian Massacre, killed 4,519 people over 2 months, hundreds of whom were forced to commit suicide.

Approximately 90% of the victims were alleged members of the "Black Five Categories", a term used by the state to label enemies of the communist revolution - landlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries, "bad elements", and right-wingers. Family members were also targeted, with the youngest recorded death being a 10-day-old infant.

During the "Boluan Fanzheng" period following Mao Zedong's death, the Chinese government opened an investigation into the massacre, which it concluded in 1986 by denouncing the violence and imprisoning some of its participants. In Dao County, 43 people who involved in the massacre were punished, with only 11 being prosecuted, receiving between 3 to 10 years in prison.

• Date: 1967-08-13
• Learn More: www.sciencespo.fr, en.wikipedia.org.
• Tags: #Massacre.
• Source: www.apeoplescalendar.org

Is this what they decided to include rather than the tiananmen massacre? Is that massacre something that the people do not want to commemorate, because it isn't currently acknowledged by the CCP? Or is it simply that this massacre could be labeled as "90% members of the 'black five'", so none of the lives matter, while to acknowledge that this massacre was part of a regular practice of purging would damage the idea that the CCP's China is the perfect communist state, rather than an authoritarian and now-state-capitalist hegemony? I feel like there's a lot of struggling with acknowledging where working-class movements have failed in the past, so that we can do better in the future. Perhaps we need to have a struggle session with the people choosing to ignore the failings of authoritarian states in favour of a more rosy narrative, so that we can eliminate the "bad elements" in the worker's movement?

Edit to add context: The Tiananmen riot was not in a 13 august.

Firstly, what an excellent meme.

In response to your edit: the reason I pointed out the distinction was that I was surprised to see any mention of wrongdoings by China, then I read the equivocating apologia, and checked the people's calendar website to see if there were any instances of the word "tiananmen". Of course, there are not, and I found it suspect, since that was also an uprising of the people violently out down by an authoritarian state, just like all of the other violent quellings against people in the united states.

In order for it to be anticommunist, the system I'm criticising would have to actually be communist in the first place. Whatever China was or has become, it is definitely not that. As someone who at least has respect for what Marx was trying to argue (though I see myself as more of a syndicalist socialist), it's insulting to see people claiming to be communists defending horrible actions of China and the USSR as if they were or are pillars of "communist" virtue in all things. The way this is worded is clearly equivocating, like "Let's call it a massacre, but make it clear that 90% of them were the 'bad guys'. Let's point out that some of the perpetrators were eventually punished with light sentences, too! Let's make the very first sentence a disclaimer that all of this was probably made up by an american, but then only point out at the end that the CCP actually copped to the crimes."

It's either a massacre or it's not, so whoever wrote this needs to quit the apologia. The way this commemoration deals with it is paltry. I've never seen another entry of the people's calendar which starts with a disclaimer implying that everything you are about to read is from a single american source. That's weird and suspect, given the later acknowledgement that the Chinese government eventually decried the violence.

Maybe I overreacted by the 2 common anticommunist tropes: Tiananmen Massacre and CCP instead of CPC. Sorry.

In order for it to be anticommunist, the system I’m criticising would have to actually be communist in the first place.
I disagree, with that argument anticommunism could not exist. But it exists, and historically has targeted Cuba, USSR, China, Vietnam…

I don't think that upstream OP is defending “horrible” actions, it uses the same tone as, for example, the Tulsa Race Massacre (1921) and I don't think that OP is defending white people mass-killing black people.

Also, I think that you view the upstream OP as a Marxist-Leninist doing apology of ML. But there are posts that are clearly critical with ML States ^[e.g., East Germany Uprising (1953) and Poznan Revolt (1956)].

Huh, I've never seen it abbreviated as CPC, but TIL!

I disagree, with that argument anticommunism could not exist. But it exists, and historically has targeted Cuba, USSR, China, Vietnam…

Oh, absolutely, but there is no part, in either of these chinese massacres, that has to do with communist ideology. They're pogroms. Simple as.

After reading the Tulsa race massacre, I disagree that it is presented with the same tone, and still maintain my claim of bias on the part of the People's Calendar in this article. There is no equivocation in the Tulsa race massacre. Were they trying to demonstrate any positive change, they would have pointed out that the state of Oklahoma has established a reparations programme, which provides scholarships to descendants, and also officially established teaching the history of the massacre as a required part of the state curriculum. These tiny mitigating factors do nothing to dampen the horror of the event, but are notably absent in the people's calendar entry, while the mitigating factors for the massacre in question here are many, including specific justifications for 90% of those purged. It is heartening to see that there are other acknowledgements of similar failures, but when you look at things like the article on the polish Solidarity union, it focuses solely on the later corruption, and not on the fact that it implemented one of the few successful general strikes, and had to actively fight against the autocratic regime. The Jacobin article which the people's calendar cites is more balanced, pointing out the lessons we can learn both from its early successes and later corruption. Also, the calendar article mistakenly labels NATO as the "North American Trade Orgabization", which in an interesting Freudian slip which very conveniently mischaracterises the entire purpose of the compact. I maintain that there is significant bias being demonstrated in favour of specific autocratic and authoritarian regimes, making only tacit claims to the ideals of communism.

(I picked Solidarity as an example because it is a clear example of when Workers and a People's movement stood against a supposedly ML-aligned government)

Yes, the brave PLA soldiers who were murdered by the US-funded and -directed attempted color revolution in the June 4 incodent absolutely should be memorialized.

But it sure does seem like your want to accept the US State Department lies about a massacre at face value, which is absolutely an idiotic position to take on the incident.

Lol

Huh, I've never seen it abbreviated as CPC,

Then you haven't done nearly enough study on the subject of China to have any valid opinion on anything about it. You don't know if it's communist or not. Because you've never been exposed to any information not written by western anti-communists. SeeSeePee is their way of putting "Chinese" first to engage the Yellow Peril mindset on Western audiences.

Despite the fact that you are breaking the community rules around being polite in this comment thread, I will respond to your trolling:

If you would prefer that I refer to it as 中国共产党, I would be happy to do so. If, however, you are complaining about my ignorance of the order of an acronym in a language which does not have a prescribed word order in such cases, then I am not the one who is ignorant. Your ridiculously polemic stance is laughable. Now that I have been informed, I have been able to find an English source from the government of the PRC which indicates the preference. If you are complaining that I did not recall encountering that, then you need to calm down and reflect. This is literally equivalent to someone calling OTAN "NATO" and being confused, since they had not encountered the non-english-ordered acronym of OTAN before, but some Francophone online decided it prudent to pretend to be intellectually superior. It's just sad. While I have been happy to be educated by the mod of this community, you have contributed nothing but your own spite. Go and reflect on your piteous state.

Tell me, oh impolitic troll: what source, precisely, do you take as authoritative on the "June 4th incident"? I'm having trouble finding anything which corroborates your claim, since, you know, any mention of it seems to get heavily censored by the PRC. As such, I only see references to the Tiananmen square protest and massacre.

If you had any interest in actually correcting the record, you would have done so, but no. Polemics are all you have provided. If you are incapable of being polite, do the world a favour and be silent. I have reported your impolite trolling to the mod, who has actually been helpful in addressing my concerns, unlike yourself.

Except that NATO/OTAN are both accepted acronyms in the various languages of NATO members. If one of those versions has been deliberately used to demonize and other NATO for decades, you'd probably be a lot less sanguine about people casually using it.

Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn't that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak?

And Mao was right. You haven't investigated, so you speak nonsense.

I'm having trouble finding anything which corroborates your claim

Have you tried looking places other than US State Department or Billionaire controlled media?

https://www.hamptonthink.org/read/debunking-the-tiananmen-square-massacre

Here's a well-sourced English-language breakdown, which did actually require rewording the search a few times to find because search engines are generally part of that "billionaire controlled media".

This is the problem with Mao's words: it gives anyone who wishes an excuse to simply claim that all thought critical of their current notions is simply insufficiently considered, moving the goalposts for response. It's just sad how many people fail to perceive the fallacy. Of course anyone who disagrees with you must simply be stupid! Truly pitiful. If you don't want to have to respond to me, then don't pretend like it's some great triumph of your intellect to cite those sad little words.

And are you pretending that NATO isn't CONSISTENTLY demonized? There are valid reasons to criticise any human system, from Mao Zedong Thought to NATO to Capitalism to Veganism. If you are unable to engage with criticism of your pet system, then you should, as the great Mao says, stay silent.

Ah! A source! I'm having even more trouble vetting the source, since I can't seem to find anything about this Hampton Institute other than from its own websites and publicity pages, but the article you've posted makes many claims and cites specific names. THOSE, I can check out for myself, at least.

I don't think dismissing someone who demonstrably doesn't even know the most basic facts on a subject, such as the name of the political party they're actively criticizing, is really an example of anything you just said.

Maybe you should actually read up on things before assuming that the drivel you heard from a YouTuber with a CIA handler is factual.

NATO isn't demonized, it is an actual demon.

NATO is how the Nazis wound up winning the war they lost on the battlefield.

Is this what they decided to include

To include in what? And who is “they”?

I do not know the name of the editor of a people's calendar, so I feel that "they" is the correct pronoun for gender-neutral English, yes? I don't mean "they" like some bogeyman, if that was your implication. As far as "this", I thought it was pretty clear that I was referring to this article, which I perceive to be worded in a weirdly equivocating way which gives too much of a pass to a state-capitalist dictatorship which completely undermines the ideals of communism and socialism on a daily basis. I believe that the mod has addressed my concerns largely to my satisfaction, though it still seems weirdly-worded compared to the Tulsa Race Massacre, as I'm sure you can read in my comments below. As far as Tiananmen, I'm currently attempting to vet the weird source given to me by the other dude who's being such a shining example of what ML has to offer. I try to give the chance to learn something for myself when someone actually corrects me, but boy do people like THAT one make it hard. I just hope that I encounter fewer like that one, and more like the Mod here. It's a shame that some people feel it necessary to act like a troll and quote Mao, Lenin, or some other visionary to shut down any argument they dislike, as if the mere mention of these people is some apotropaic against the evils of capitalism sufficient to silence all criticism, including from those who also hate capitalism.

To explain my accusations of polemics and, generally, being an impolite troll: If someone is going to so thoroughly overreact as to call someone an idiot, brainwashed by a "YouTuber with a CIA handler" (the fool thinks I use YouTube) because I used an abbreviation which is used in the vast majority of English-Language sources, including style guides and the two most common encyclopaedias available on the internet, neither of which is owned by the "billionaire-owned media of america" or the "CIA", then the cause they espouse doesn't sound like a very worthwhile revolution to join, does it?

Hope that answers your questions! I leave you to form your own opinion. I stand by what I have said from my knowledge at the time of the saying. Always a pleasure to gain the attention of one of the Great Elders of the Fediverse! orz

I'm done dignifying you with reasoned responses. I'll spend my time talking to others, who don't use polemics or assume that everyone but themselves are ignorant children. You do whatever makes you feel powerful. You can even tack this one up on your scorecard as a "win", if you'd like! "I Concede". Happy? Now go bother someone else.

Always a pleasure to gain the attention of one of the Great Elders of the Fediverse!

I’m just a guy who the Lemmy developers delegated some of the lemmy.ml admin work to, so they could focus on development. And like most people, I’ve only been here since the Reddit APIcalypse three years ago.

Cool. Stay ignorant and happily serve your billionaire masters by dutifully repeating their lies at every opportunity.

Slightly off-topic, but why does my filter of everything *.ml not work? Using Boost for Piefed.

Anyway, fuck the totalitarians, and double fuck them if they also claim to be on the people's side! That's right, tankies are almost equivalent to fascists except for fascists actually admitting what they stand for.

Haha, fair enough! I guess I misunderstood when I read that somewhere else on here. Thanks for correcting the record. Seems you and I are in similar boats (though I hadn't heard of Lemmy when the APIcalypse happened, so I just left Reddit for a couple years, then found this place)