When you he that Green MPs are protesting New Zealand's historic free trade deal with China, don't you find it strange to reflect that when Mao was murdering Chinese by the millions these same people wore Mao's portrait proudly on their badges and T-shirts, but now that China wants to take over the world's cheap T-shirt market they're protesting any deals being done.
Really strange. When the Chinese were up their eyes in death and destruction the likes of Sue Bradford and Keith Locke had Mao's portrait on their bedroom walls and sent their murderers only praise, but now that the winds of freedom are beginning to blow away the violence, they themselves are now violently opposed to NZ sending the Chinese anything apart from protests.
Odd, don't you think. And instructive.
4 comments:
Greens are the haters of life. They love the destructive- killers, rapists, looters, torturers like Mao. Of course they'd never voluntarily choose to live under such a monster. They prefer to leave that fate to others. Others, others, always others fated to suffer for the entertainment and pleasure of the green sickos.
Would that they were consistent and stopped adding CO2 into the air themselves. It would be very good for the environment if they all stopped breathing.
LGM
I am sure the Greens would love this Tory election poster from a Century ago which attacks Free Trade..http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/04_02/poster30604_800x625.jpg
(Amused at how the Chinaman looks like Tony Blair!)
Peter, you are misrepresenting Keith Locke. He was never a Maoist or a supporter of Mao. In his youth he was a Trotskyist and, as such, highly critical of other leftists who were soft on Mao. His view would more likely have been influenced by prominent Chinese Trotskyists like Peng Shu-tse:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/peng/index.htm
The Trotskyist position on the Maoist regime at the time of the Cultural Revolution is well articulated in this Open Letter to Members of the Chinese Communist Party, written by Peng Shu-tse in early 1967.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/peng/1967/openletter.htm
See in particular their position on Tibet and national minorities at that time (proposal 7). While Keith is no longer a Trotskyist, there appears to be a consistency in his defence of the rights of Tibetans today and the ideas of the movement he belonged to 35 years ago.
While you’re at it you might consider taking a look at other material from a Trotskyist position on the Cultural Revolution and its effect on literature and art, such as these interviews with Peng Shu-Tse and his life partner Chen Pi-lan.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/peng/1967/interviews.htm
http://www.marxists.org/archive/chen/chenongpcr.htm
One can disagree with Keith's position on free trade with China today without resorting to making things up about his past. Ill-informed criticism (and pure conjecture about what ideological messages people displayed on their lapels or bedroom walls in their youth) has about the same intellectual value as Mao’s quotations in the Little Red Book.
Oh please...gosh..Keith Locke, like his Mother, is a Communist.
A Communist is a Communist is a Communist...there is no difference between Trotskyists and Maoists and Stalinists and any other -ist you care to invent.
They still want to murder people they dislike, prevent businessmen making profits and lock up people who are intelligent enough to see what a bunch of murderers they are.
Post a Comment