Ian_Lee Posted July 26, 2004 at 08:52 PM Report Posted July 26, 2004 at 08:52 PM Did anybody notice that one of Chen's aging daughters -- died in an apartment in NYC for days without anybody knowing it late last year? Even though the PRC paid tribute to the death of Mme Chiang Kai Shek in NYC, its embassy personnels were numb to the death of descendant of their party's founding father. Frankly speaking without Chen, there might not be May Fourth Movement at all. Without his editor-in-chief magazine "New Youth" that published articles from the best of best in China at that time (i.e. Hu Shih), Chinese youths might have not been so inspired. But after 1927, he was denounced by CCP as Troskytes. In Communist classification, Troskytes were the worst of worst -- even worse than their archrival KMT. So that might be the reason why Mme Chiang got the tribute from PRC embassy but not Chen's daughter. Quote
holyman Posted July 27, 2004 at 02:26 AM Report Posted July 27, 2004 at 02:26 AM thats probably bcos 1, she's not influencial enuff, unlike soong meiling. 2, she escaped out of china during the cultural revolution, probably shamed the ccp. she and her 2 sons trained swimming for yrs and they finally swam to hk during the cultural revolution. courageous, yeah? probably a tight slap to mainland, they rather drown than continue living there. Quote
Xuan Yuan Posted July 27, 2004 at 04:12 PM Report Posted July 27, 2004 at 04:12 PM Chen is still regard as the founder of ccp in mainland. However, just like every party secretary before Mao, he is denounced for his political stance. Quote
Jose Posted November 23, 2004 at 08:59 PM Report Posted November 23, 2004 at 08:59 PM How come Chen Duxiu has not been rehabilitated by the Communist Party? After all, being a Trotskyite is hardly a crime these days, and, as Ian Lee said, he was a paramount figure in the early history of Chinese communism. Surely one would expect the current Communist leaders to find inspiration in his figure. Instead, he seems to have been condemned into oblivion by the official historiography on the mainland. Quote
bhchao Posted November 23, 2004 at 09:28 PM Report Posted November 23, 2004 at 09:28 PM Surely one would expect the current Communist leaders to find inspiration in his figure. and why not Li Dazhao Quote
Jose Posted November 23, 2004 at 11:06 PM Report Posted November 23, 2004 at 11:06 PM and why not Li Dazhao Well, from what little I've read I would say both of them should be entitled to more recognition as historical figures than they are accorded in China. Although Li Dazhao is officially regarded as a communist martyr, he's not mentioned much in mainland history books either, probably because of his close association with Chen. I find it strange that the Communist Party, nowadays so detached from the old Maoist orthodoxy, never dares to revise its official stance on former leaders. I think Liu Shaoqi was one of the very few whose memory was officially rehabilitated. Maybe they fear that if they start questioning past deeds, others might start questioning their current actions? Quote
Ian_Lee Posted November 23, 2004 at 11:34 PM Author Report Posted November 23, 2004 at 11:34 PM Did Mainland historians ever mention Zhang Guotao in their party history? Zhang's autobiography was published in Hong Kong in 1960s. But now even its English version is hard to find. Quote
wushijiao Posted November 23, 2004 at 11:46 PM Report Posted November 23, 2004 at 11:46 PM I think the CCP has something to lose but nothing to gain by reminding people that it is a communist party. As Jose noted, historical revisisionism can increase, leading to present historical revisionism. Old people would remember past promises and feel betrayed. Finally, young people, who know nothing about communism (most have never even read Marx even though they can all recognize his picture), might feel interested in this revolutionary idea. Quote
roddy Posted November 24, 2004 at 12:00 AM Report Posted November 24, 2004 at 12:00 AM I find it strange that the Communist Party, nowadays so detached from the old Maoist orthodoxy, never dares to revise its official stance on former leaders. But once you start - where do you stop? A lot of Party legitimacy comes from its historical achievements and I really don't think that's a foundation they wants to risk rocking . . . Roddy Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.