Rightwing and Anti-Russia Agenda of ‘StopFake.org’



StopFake.org is a fairly obvious rightwing attempt in the West to manufacture support for the ‘Maidan’ neo-Nazi regime currently active in Western Ukraine. It pursues an anti-Russian agenda and is responsible for generating ‘disinformation’ disguised as unmasking ‘fake’ news. It strives to protect neo-Nazi Western Ukraine by attempting to down-play news articles that reveal the fascist nature of this regime, but never addresses the ‘fake’ nature of news article written in the West that ‘deny’ the ‘Maidan’ regime is neo-Nazi. obviously, for ‘StopFake.org’, the apparent ‘revealing’ of fake news is a one-way street, favouring the rightwing over the leftwing. This is a pro neo-Nazi site very much hidden in plain view, which attempts to mislead the public through its self-proclaimed sense of self-righteous morality – as if it has the public interest at heart. Its articles need to be assessed and debunked as rightwing propaganda disguised as mainstream ‘liberal’ commentary, when it is nothing of the kind. Whilst attempting to reduce all Nazi German swastikas flown in Maidan Ukraine to films made in the Ukraine that depict the Nazi German occupation of the USSR during WWII, ‘StopFake.org’ says nothing about these films ‘glorifying’ this terrible event in history, or that many citizens of Maidan Ukraine openly fly Nazi German swastikas or the modern Maidan equivalent. This is because those nefarious individuals behind ‘StopFake.org’ know full well that support for German Nazism in the West is a touchy subject at best, and if the general public truly understood the nature of the neo-Nazi ‘Maidan’ regime, protests could bring-down the US and UK governments and cause discontent throughout the EU. StopFake,org, through its actions, wants to protect neo-Nazi ‘Maidan’ Ukraine, but does not want the truth about that fascist regime spreading throughout Europe or the US – as this would undermine diplomatic support, as well as financial and military aid. Of course, ‘StopFake.org’ is absolutely ‘silent’ about the massacres committed by ‘Maidan’ supporters against Ukrainian Socialists. Use critical thought against this website and think clearly for yourselves.

What is Fabricated News?


The mainstream media in the West represents bourgeois political and cultural views which not only exclude the working class, but also serve to portray that class in a negative and underhand manner. The bourgeois media ‘tells’ the working class what to think and how to view events, whilst continuously disempowering that class and preventing the apparatus of the media from being used in a substantive proletariat manner. Where a distinctly leftwing newspaper does exist, it is starved of funds and mainstream exposure, and kept very much on the periphery of the public perception. The irony is that the bourgeois media exists to represent a privileged minority within society that retains political, fiscal and cultural control of society from generation to generation, whilst the leftwing media (although portrayed as a ‘minority’ interest) in fact represents the majority of ordinary people living within a capitalist society. This is the dishonest and topsy-turvy world of the bourgeois media.

The bourgeois media lies all the time as a means to misrepresent what might be called ‘neutral’ events happening in the world, so that these events are presented only from an unquestioned middle class perspective. This might be termed the ‘base lie’ from which all the other dishonesty and sleight of hand emerges. Having established this skewed (and anti-working class) view of reality, it is a simple matter of perceptual manipulation to extend this narrative from a distorted view of material events, to fabrication of immaterial events. Or to describe it another way, the bourgeois practice of ‘inventing’ news stories that have either not existed, not happened as stated, or a combination of both these states. A material fact, for instance, might well be augmented by two immaterial falsehoods, with the falsehoods entirely defining the ‘event’ and steering the minds of those who ‘consume’ the news into a definite direction of interpretation. Of course, another type of reporting involves an entirely fabricated news event, whereby there is no central fact to hang the bourgeois lies from. This type of manipulation has intensified from within the United States since the end of WWII, and usually involves the generation and sustaining of entirely false news narratives designed to interpret world events. Lies for mass consumption issued by the mainstream media, constituting a kind of ‘fact’ religion.

Today, ‘fake’ news refers to the bourgeois practice of issuing entirely ‘false’ news reports, whilst ‘disinformation’ tends to be a ‘misrepresentation’ of a central fact – with both types of distorted news spread more or less instantaneously through social media (via the internet). The Judeo-Christian concept of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ remains a central tenet of the Bourgeois State, with the idea that the working class must be kept in a position of fear and apprehension by some ‘unseen’ or ‘obscure’ enemy – ‘somewhere’ other ‘there’ – and be ready to ‘fight’ for their country if the need arises (warfare is good for capitlism). This is why racism and nationalism are used hand in hand with religious faith as a means to prevent the working class in one country from developing an ‘Internationalist’ class consciousness, and cognitively ‘linking’ with working class people from around the world. Such a transformation would render the Bourgeois State obsolete, and this is why the middle class must keep an iron grip on the mainstream media and prevent any development of Socialist thought within it. Hatred of all difference, coupled with the deliberate misrepresentation of those differences is not only an unnatural state to maintain, but it is unscientific in the sense that it contradicts the driving force behind human evolution.


Rejecting the Bourgeois Publishing Industry



As an academic specialising in the subjects of Chinese history, culture and philosophy, and also the study of actual Soviet history, I decided some years ago to have nothing to do with the bourgeois publishing industry. This is despite having numerous academic and journalistic article published in newspapers, journals, magazines and books (both online and as paper articles). My experience has been that the bourgeois publishing industry works in collusion with capitalist governments, and perpetuates ‘official’ versions of history that have little or no association with established fact. These publishers are always seeking new ways of exploiting writers and their work – attempting to make money whilst they propagating ‘fake history’ and ‘fake news’ as if it was ‘real’. The lies about Communism, China and the Soviet Union are so huge that the truth of the matter is eclipsed by this industry that ruthlessly controls the publication of books to both the general public and the academic community. Individuals are left to research subjects for themselves, which invariably requires ever more ingenious methods for establishing the truth that by-passes the ‘fiction’ that circulates as ‘fact’. The rise of the internet has made it easier for progressive and free thinkers to seek-out and share alternative sources of reliable academic information, and distribute research that counters many of the official but false narratives that the media, academic community and government choose to ignore. This is not alternative history but rather ‘real’ history, with the official narratives constituting the ‘fake’ paradigm. The USSR used to have an internal publishing facility that allowed any Soviet citizen to write and publish a book that could be read by any other Soviet Citizen in the USSR. The publishing and distribution were entirely free, and encouraged to develop ‘free thinking’. Alexander Werth (the BBC correspondent) mentions this means of Socialist communication a number of times in his books. Do not bow-down to the bourgeois dictatorship of knowledge – strike out on your own and establish the real facts of the matter!

Exposing a ‘Fake’ Story About China – the Case of the Poor Farmer and Educated Son


Communist China is continuously misrepresented in the West, as part of a US-led drive to demean the Chinese people and denigrate their Socialist System. This policy is pursued in a number of ways, one of which is the ‘planting’ of ‘fake’ news articles within a compliant and unquestioning Western media. These articles state untruths such as China is not ‘Communist’, Tibet is under ‘Chinese’ occupation and that the Falun Gong is a ‘peaceful’ organisation (rather than a very dangerous cult). Chinese people are considered racially inferior, and their culture a matter of practised stupidity. The Chinese Socialist state is continuously misrepresented as ‘oppressive’ and ‘failing’, when nothing could be further from the truth.

The photographs above were doing the rounds a few years ago in the West, claiming that an impoverished farmer in China had saved every penny to give his only son a university education – implying that people in China are poverty-stricken and desperate for education. This is completely untrue. ALL education in China is completely free for ALL Chinese citizens – including farmers from economically deprived areas! However, even in areas of relative poverty, finance and resources are extensively pumped into the area so that no one in modern China suffers like in old China. Finally, it has been recently revealed that this photograph and story are not from Communist China – but rather ‘capitalist’ Thailand, where much of their population lives in abject poverty, and ALL education is paid for (as it is in the USA).

English Language Reference:


Chinese Language Reference:


The Fabrication of Burma in the Western Mind


Author’s Note: As a Scientific Socialist, I do not unquestionably support the bourgeoisie system – but until we achieve a Socialist Revolution in the West, we are stuck with it, and must find some use for it. Although I am scholar specialising in Chinese philosophy and religion – and a practising Chinese Buddhist – I must state that I am irreligious and profess a support for science premised upon the study of a material universe (which includes Quantum Mechanics). Although I do not possess any notion of ‘faith’ in religion, and believe that religions should not hold political power, I am not opposed to religions per se. As long as it follows the law and does not cause harm to others, people are free to do as they will with their minds and bodies. However, as both a Socialist and a Buddhist, I consider myself a friend of Islam, and am perfectly aware of the Islamophobic lies and disinformation that currently emanates from the West. On a Muslim organised ‘peace march’ through London recently, my family and I were the only non-Muslims present. However, the polarised fashion the Western press is treating the situation in Myanmar (i.e. ‘Burma’ – I use the names interchangeably), both the wisdom systems of Buddhist and Islamic scholarship are being compromised and side-lined for the establishment of a purely Eurocentric (and racist) paradigm which has its foundations within the Western, imperialist presence in Asia. Obviously, I reject ALL Buddhist and Islamic derived violence, and would call upon the Burmese Government Authorities, the Buddhist Burmese Authorities, and the Islamic Authorities (both within and outside the Rohingya community) to defuse the situation and take a step-back from psychological and physical violence, and let traditional Asian wisdom and knowledge take the place of Western-inspired race-hate. ACW (9.9.2017)


The West – that is Europe and the US – has been dominated for hundreds of years by the the capitalist economic system, and its supportive (middle class dominated) liberal, democratic system. Freedom is defined as any and all socio-economic, political or cultural expressions that directly benefit the middle class, and which legally facilitate the unbridled ability to exploit the working class. Invariably, the middle class is numerically small, but retains most of the political power, and controls the majority of the finance. It guarantees this power from generation to generation by its iron grip on the military and the police, and a bourgeois legal system that only theoretically extends rights to all citizens. In reality, the bourgeois legal system only extends those rights that an individual can financially prove should be applied to themselves and their situation. This amounts to the situation (for the numerically superior working class) of no money equals no rights. As capitalism requires an ever expanding market of exploitation to furnish its insatiable thirst for profit, the Western bourgeoisie eventually exported their capitalist system all over the world. Although challenged here and there in the 17th and 18th centuries, it was not until the 19th century (and the rise of Marxism) that its progress was seriously (although temporarily) checked (as seen in the 1848 Europe-wide uprisings, and the 1871 Paris Commune). It was not until the Russian Revolution of 1917 (led by VI Lenin), that saw a large swathe of humanity reject predatory capitalism for Scientific Socialism – soon to be join by Mao Zedong’s China in 1949. Obviously, the Western bourgeois world, in an attempt to retain its economic, political and military hegemony over the world (particularly after WWII), began a disinformation campaign that involved the media (in all its aspects) as well as the professional and amateur academic establishment, to fabricate an ‘alternative’ history and interpretation of world history and current affairs, that was designed to denigrate Socialism amongst the exploited workers of the West (with racism toward non-Whites being a major component), so that these Western workers voluntarily ‘distanced’ themselves from those elements of the International Working Class that already lived ‘freely’ in Socialist countries (falsely and inaccurately termed ‘Communist’ by a Western media that remained entirely ignorant of the philosophy of Scientific Socialism). This disinformation campaign inverted reality, and presented working class freedom as working class enslavement – with the implicit threat that should the Western workers over-throw the oppressive capitalist regime they currently suffer under, life would be worse for them, rather than better. An extra layer of bourgeois security was generated through the tolerance and selective support of fringe far-right political groups in the West that blamed all the inequalities within the capitalist system upon immigrants, and which encouraged race-hate and racially inspired violence and murder. These fascists groups were designed to operate within working class communities and use race-hate to stop those communities being infiltrated by Socialist propaganda and organised working class movements that aimed to over-throw the British capitalist system either by force of arms, or through the ballet box. These rightwing groups have been very successful in convincing working class people to vote for parties that advocate policies which are against their own class interests, or to boycott the voting system altogether, and refuse to vote for parties that represent working class interests. Whilst inappropriately voting or not voting, the working class is stripped of all its militancy and conscious awareness, and sits passively on the political sidelines suffering terribly from oppressive government policies – whilst doing nothing constructive about it.

Who will save the Rohingya?

What does this have to do with Burma (Myanmar)? The question that has to be asked is this; If the domestic working class in Britain can be manipulated to perceive the world in a manner that is against its own class interests, how easy is it for the Western media (and mainstream academia) to use racism, prejudice and discrimination to misrepresent what is happening in Burma? The answer, of course, is highly likely. The British East India Company – operating out of India – used the British Army in a number of invading wars against the indigenous Burmese people between 1824 and 1885 (during the three so-called Anglo-Burmese Wars), effectively (and actually) annexing the country in 1886, making Burma an extension of the British imperialist rule of India. This administration continued until 1948 – when the British Labour Party granted Burma full independence from British colonial rule. However, under British rule, the Burmese people were used as a virtual slave-labour force, with Christian missionaries being imported by the British to convert the predominantly Buddhist population (a standard model of destroying indigenous cultures to make the ethnic people easier to control). Any ethnic Burmese who resisted was harshly punished with imprisonment, torture or even execution. Just as the British had imported en mass Tamil (Hindu) workers into the predominantly Buddhist Sri Lanka, they also imported (en mass) Bengali Muslim workers into Burma. The point of this enforced migration and settlement was the deliberate propagation of ethnic tensions between the subjugated peoples of the British empire, so that they could not ‘unite’ against British rule – being too busy fighting one another’s presence. Of course, the Bengali Muslims are not ethically Burmese (or ‘Buddhist’), and today refer to themselves as ‘Rohingya’ – a term not recognised by the Myanmar government since 1982. During WWII, the imperial Japanese invaded Burma, and the British Authorities armed and trained the Bengali Muslims – making them a distinct fighting unit of the British Army in the resistance to the Japanese presence. However, the ethnic Burmese people, by and large, welcomed the invading Japanese as ‘liberators’ from British colonial rule. This led to a conflict between the ethnic (Buddhist) Burmese fighting for the Japanese, who opposed the British-supported Bengali Muslims who were attempting to annex the Arakan area of Burma, and integrate it with the Bengal part of India (or today’s Bangladesh). It is this British arming and encouraging of Bengali nationalism that is seen as the historical origin of the ‘violent’ and ‘murderous’ ethnic tensions that exist today between ethnic (Buddhist) Burmese and ethnic (Muslim) Rohingya in the Rakhine State of Western Myanmar. The Burmese Authorities take the position today that it is Rohingya nationalism that is driving the inter communal violence, and that the Rohingya resistance to ethnic Burmese rule is now funded (in-part) by Saudi Arabia, and other Islamic States that finance and train the various elements of Islamic extremism and Islamic terrorist groups that exist in the world. Perhaps one of the biggest (and saddest) ironies regarding this matter is the video clip of Hilary Clinton admitting during an interview that the US ‘manufactured’ Islamo-fascism (i.e. ‘Al Qaeda’) as a means to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan (the same ‘Al Qaeda’ that would carry-out the 911 attacks in New York).

Who will save the Rohingya?

Burmese Buddhists living in the Rakhine State view themselves as ‘ethnic’ inhabitants of Myanmar, and state that Islamic militants regularly attack their villages and Buddhist temples, carrying-out acts of rape, torture and murder. The point of this activity is to ‘cleanse’ the area of the ethnic Burmese and their Buddhist culture. In response, the Burmese Authorities have deployed the military to carry-out punitive expeditions into the Rohingya areas. Before examining whether any of this is true or not, Burma’s modern history has to be understood. After gaining its independence from the British in 1948, Burma refused to join the British Commonwealth (viewing it as a means for Britain to retain political influence and power throughout its former empire), and declared itself a ‘Socialist State’, with close political and economic ties to the Soviet Union – and later Communist China. As the Cold War developed, and the US anti-Communist disinformation spread throughout the world, Burma was presented not as a former British colony that had suffered terribly under British imperialist rule and was now attempting to independently re-build its economy (and culture) from the base-up, but rather as a despotic and ‘failed’ State that ‘oppressed’ its people, and applied ‘racist’ policies toward the Rohingya. In fact, the propagation of Rohingya nationalism by the British, ensured that the Bengali Muslims in Arakan remained firmly opposed to Socialism, acting as a pro-Western, pro-capitalist destabilising force in Burma. Unlike the pro-capitalist 14th Dalai Lama and his unrepresentative pro-Tibetan Movement, the Burmese Socialist Authorities (many of whom were Buddhist), as well as the Buddhist monastic community, remained (quite naturally) opposed to capitalist greed and oppression. As a philosophy, Buddhism at its base remain anti-capitalist a priori – but has become associated with immense wealth in the West due to movie stars, rock stars and the middle class embracing various aspects of distorted Japanese Zen and corrupted sects of Tibetan Buddhism, etc. Asian Buddhist temples that teach non-greed, non-hated, and non-delusion, are generally ‘ignored’ by many Westerners who have no interest in the associated Asian culture through which this genuine Buddhism has been transmitted. As a consequence, Burma has been misrepresented to the Western mind very much in a racist and mythological manner, following the bourgeois blue-print used to misrepresent Tibet as a means to destabilise Communist China. As a result, up until 2011, Burma was a ‘brutal’ military regime that oppressed its people – an interpretation encouraged by the US and its mouth-piece the United Nations (UN). The problem the West now has is one of transition for its previously anti-Burma rhetoric, with regards to its former media darling in the form of Burma’s now de facto leader –  Aung San Suu Kyi (the 1991 recipient of the Noble Peace Prize) – who (rather embarrassingly for her Western bourgeois supporters) remains resolutely ‘anti-Rohingya’ in the face of the capitalist world’s criticism of her leadership and her government’s punitive actions against the Rohingya people. The Chinese language press has reported that Aung San Suu Kyi personally requested that the US not use the term ‘Rohingya’ in its diplomatic communications, and that as reported in today’s Morning Star (9.9.2017) and the Chinese language press (see links below), Aung San Suu Kyi has also stated that videos and reports purportedly recording and showing the torture and abuse of Rohingya’s, are in fact the product of ‘fake’ news. Although Aung San Suu Kyi is a supporter of Western-style capitalism (which has only impoverished the Burmese people), and the liberal, democratic process, (as opposed to the centralised democracy of the Socialist System), her attitudes and behaviour appear to mimic those of the previous ‘Socialist’ Burmese leaders who continuously referred to the Rohingya as ‘invaders’ from India. In fact, Aung San Suu Kyi (agreeing with other Burmese officials), has routinely stated that Myanmar is currently under a sustained Islamo-fascist attack from a Rohingya-led Al Qaeda insurgency (funded by Saudi Arabia – an ally of the US and Israel), which aims to annex the Rakhine State – purging it of its Buddhist culture and ethnic Burmese people – and replacing it with an Islamic culture. In this regard, Aung San Suu Kyi cannot understand why the West refuses to support Myanmar in its fight against Islamic extremism, when it supports Israel without question, and any other movement in the world that opposes Islamo-fascism. Just because Aung San Suu Kyi might be an expressed ‘anti-Socialist’, does not mean that she automatically supports the Western Cold War rhetoric that privileged the Rohingya people when Burma was a Socialist State. The fact that she will not ‘bow’ to international pressure to alter her stance on this issue, demonstrates the strength of the anti-Rohingya feeling throughout the country she now leads.

Malaysia Myanmar Protest

The West has used Buddhism in the past as a means to try and destabilise the Tibetan part of China – probably since 1949 – and it would seem that a Western presence in Burma might well be up to its old tricks again. Just as it is well documented in Western sources that the CIA armed and trained Buddhist monks in Tibet that had taken vows of non-violence, it would seem that Buddhist monks that have taken vows of non-violence and non-hatred have been influenced in Myanmar to propagate race-hate amongst Muslims in that country. Why would protesting Buddhist monks hold-up placards in English – a language very few Burmese or Rohingya’s could read? Who are these placards meant to inform? Are Burmese Buddhist monks really leading protests against the Rohingya people? The answer appears to be ‘yes’ with the caveat that not all Buddhist monastic orders in Myanmar support protests or agree that Muslims should be demonised. The Buddhist lay and monastic vows form a psychological and physical barrier to any violent production of thought or action. Of course, the Western press ignores the Myanmar Buddhist establishment that continuously calls upon the Burmese Buddhist population to meditate upon loving kindness, and to act with charity, wisdom and compassion toward all beings – including the Rohingya Muslim community.  Just as important (and as equally ignored by the Western press), is the Rohingya representatives that continuously call for ‘peace’ from Burmese Muslims, and not to respond with violence to any provocation (this latter point is even ignored by the Islamic press in the West, which remains wedded to representing the Rohingya people as a disempowered and oppressed ‘ethnic minority’ in Myanmar – that is currently suffering a ‘genocide’). This one-sided and poorly informed viewpoint has even been endorsed by the leftwing British politician George Galloway recently, through his social media. This situation is unfortunate and appears to be representative of a ‘hidden’ agenda preferred by forces operating outside of Myanmar. Consider this; the 14th Dalai Lama lives a life of luxury in the West, selling books and charging large amounts of money for study courses conveying the distorted form of Buddhism he teaches, (whilst calling for the destruction of the Communist government of China, and for young people in China to ‘self-immolate’) all of which breaks the monastic rules he took in his youth, but the Western press maintains a continuous support for his antics and remains ‘silent’ about his excesses and hypocrisy. This is the same Western press that misrepresents an overwhelmingly ‘peaceful’ Buddhist establishment in Myanmar as being a hot-bed of extremist terrorism. This reads very much like the usual Eurocentric ‘divide and conquer’ strategy in effect.


Are the Rohingya Muslims terrorists? Certainly not. Did they exist in Burma before their mass importation into the area? Undoubtedly ‘yes’. What, then, is the problem? The problem is the historical Western, imperialist interference in the internal affairs of Burma (Myanmar) – an interference that is continuing today and causing all kinds of suffering in Rakhine State. It is reasonable to assume that the West wants Burma to rip itself apart using ethnic and religious disputes to fuel the fire of hatred and violence. Have certain Buddhist monks incited violence between ethnic Burmese and ethnic Rohingya? The answer is ‘Yes’. However, as these monks broke their monastic vows of ‘peace’ to do this, they should have been expelled from the Buddhist monastic Order (the ‘Sangha’), and then tried in a civilian court and imprisoned. This is what usually would happen in a Buddhist country, and it is telling that this action was not taken in Burma. Of course, it may be that Aung San Suu Kyi – who received moral support from the Buddhist Sangha whilst under house arrest – is reluctant to move against the Buddhist monastic establishment which has a very powerful influence over the opinions and actions of ordinary Burmese people. If the Buddhist Sangha called for the over-throw of Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese people would make short-work of ousting her from office. This explains her reluctance to ‘officially’ moderate the Burmese government’s stance on the Rohingya. Have innocent Rohingya been murdered? Yes – just as innocent Burmese Buddhists ave been murdered. Does the UN correctly reflect the problem in Burma? No. The UN is a mouth-piece for the neo-colonial policies of the US government, and its official announcements are always in line with current US foreign policy directives. Whilst advocating Islamophobia across the world, the US wants the Rohingya in Burma to appear to be a one-sided ‘victim’ in the ethnic violence perpetuated there. This is probably a hang-over from the days that the US wanted to bring-down the Socialist State in Burma – but just like the Al Qaeda the US developed in Afghanistan – the Islamic militants it created in Burma have now assumed a life of their own, and are effectively out of control. Although the Rohingya as an ethnicity are not terrorists, there is a minority that definitely uses violence to pursue political objectives. The problem has been that the Burmese military has attacked and punished large swathes of the Rohingya population – many of whom have had no connection with Islamic extremism or terrorism in Burma. This is an unjust situation involving both sides – but the Burmese people and the Rohingya must realise that they need to throw-off the destructive influence of the West, and in so doing reject the divisive politics of race and religion. Buddhists and Muslims can live together in peace in Burma, but this will take time, self-discipline, and an altruistic approach to social well-being.

Chinese Language Reference Articles:



http://we-share-everything.com/遭緬甸軍隊屠殺 「羅興亞人」向翁山蘇姬政府宣/




China: Myths Surrounding the Anti-Sparrow Campaign (1958)


A Typical Sparrow Hunt

The West is awash with (primarily US-derived) Anti-China (and anti-Communist) stories, that depict Mao Zedong as an insane leader of a racially inferior and morally deficient Chinese race. Furthermore, so these maniacal narratives inform, but so stupid was this policy that 40 million Chinese died of a result of a famine caused by an influx of insects (which were no longer eaten by the sparrows). Even if the more obviously race-hate related issues are removed from these fictional narratives, the fact remains that it is the details contained within this mosaic of distortion, that provides the ‘accepted’ version of events in the West. The primary myths are:

  1. Mao Zedong was an insane dictator – not true – he was the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China – which practised centralised democracy, and which regularly elected delegates to sit on various committees from the local level up to the national government. Just as ‘capitalism’ cannot be voted-out in the West (through the liberal, democratic process), ‘Communism’ cannot be voted-out in China (through the elections associated with centralised democracy).
  2. Communist China practises an insane type of ideology that is illogical – not true – Communist China pursues the path of ‘Scientific Socialism’, which advocates the society is governed solely by secular science and evolutionary theory. This approach rejects religious theology and ignorant superstitions as political ideologies as they arise from an ‘inverted’ bourgeois mind-set that has its origin in the false idea that a ‘god’ construct (or disembodied ‘thought’ in the head), created all of reality. Scientific development is for everyone and everything within a ‘Communist’ society, and not just the privileged or chosen few as is the case in bourgeois, capitalist societies.
  3. Mao Zedong conceived and initiated an insane agricultural policy in 1958 that ultimately led to a famine that killed millions – not true – not only was there no famine (an opposite reality to that suggested by various skewed bourgeois accounts), but Mao Zedong was not responsible for this policy.
  4. The Chinese people are an inferior race that act in a stupid and sub-ordinate manner to the superior ‘White’ race – not true – not only has science (particularly the genetics part of it) proven the fallacy of ‘race’ as a biological entity, but Karl Marx pointed-out that the bourgeoisie – the middle class that owns the means of production and which exploits the workers – invented the notions of ‘race’ and ‘nationalism’ as a means to keep the Working Class from uniting. It achieves this by instilling a sense of racial discrimination in the minds of the workers, so that various groups of proletariat spend their time fighting one another, rather than targeting the real architects of all their troubles – the bourgeoisie.
  5. Western agriculture does not use dangerous chemicals to kill and control insects, birds and rodents, as a means to keep designated ‘vermin’ off of farming land – not true – the capitalist Western farmers (which manufacture food for profit and not the well-being of humanity), use dangerous chemicals and highly questionable farming methods to kill insects and other animals all the time.
  6. Mao Zedong hated animals – not true – Mao Zedong (and his family) had been associated with Buddhism, and as a consequence of its proscription against harming any living creature, Mao was not naturally in favour of hurting animals.
  7. A final salient point is that whether in the capitalist West, or Communist China – exactly the same agricultural science is pursued (albeit driven by different motivations and objectives), that aims to maximise yield and minimise waste. In this pursuit, the profit driven West has come in for criticism over many decades, for its environmentally unfriendly policies, animal cruelty and poorly researched genetic modification of crops. Communist China, on the other hand, is well known throughout the world today for its sustainable farming methods, and regulations to protect farm-animal welfare.

From an academic position, however, virtually all these assumptions are incorrect and lacking any genuine Chinese language source material or references. As this is the case, this article references ‘three’ Chinese language papers, all covering different aspects of the 1958 anti-sparrow campaign. As most Western sources are bias and deficient, this article will provide the historical facts as experienced and preserved within Chinese academic sources.

The name of the 1958 ‘anti-sparrow campaign’ in the Chinese language is expressed as ‘打麻雀运动’ (Dǎ máquè yùndòng), – ‘Attack Sparrow Movement’ – or as ‘消灭麻雀运动 ‘ (Xiāomiè máquè yùndòng), which translates as ‘Eradicate the Sparrow Movement’. This campaign was part of the broader ‘Great Leap Forward’, which was announced by Mao Zedong during February, 1958 (and was planned to run until 1962). Four ‘pests’ or ‘vermin’ had been identified by the Chinese government as severely interfering with farming in China, and the production of good or ample harvests (particularly in relation to grains and cereals). To be eliminated alongside the sparrows were the rats, flies and mosquitoes. Although controlling or eradicating animals, birds and insects deemed ‘pests’ in the West is common-place (usually through the use of dangerous chemicals), China’s similar policy is treated with a racist scorn that ignores all the facts.  For instance, attributing this policy to Mao Zedong is historically and politically incorrect. On January 18, 1957, an article was published in the ‘Beijing Daily’, authored by the then Deputy Minister for Education – the renowned biologist – Zhou Jianren (周建人) and entitled ‘Do Not Doubt that the Sparrow is a Harmful Bird’ (雀是害鸟无须怀疑 – Què shì hài niǎo wúxū huáiyí). Zhou Jianren, speaking with the authority of a biologist, stated that the ‘Sparrows are a threat to farming, and should be eradicated without hesitation.’ This caused a debate at the highest levels of the government, with Mao Zedong being given different advice. On the one hand there was Zhou Jianren, who advocated ‘revolutionary’ action against the sparrows, whilst on the other, there were advisers (such as Zhu Xi – 朱洗) quite rightly stated that in different places and times in the West (including Czarist Russia, the USA and Australia) this kind of farming experiment had already been tried – and it had failed every-time. However, although Mao Zedong was not completely sure about this policy, (in his youth, Mao had advised peasants not to kill their oxen so that rich people could eat beef, but instead to keep them alive and well-fed to work as ‘living tractors’ for work on the land), others argued that the West had failed due to its decadence and emphasis upon selfish individualism, and that China could succeed due to its collectivist attitude and ideal of serving others. As matters transpired, the anti-sparrow policy did go ahead, but despite killing tens of millions of birds, the species simply managed to survive and adapt. Mao Zedong himself called a halt to the anti-sparrow campaign on March 16, 1960, switching to a policy of eradicating bed-bugs. This policy reversal was a result of the general insect population growing beyond normal bounds because the sparrows were no longer eating them. As regards the lies of huge famines, in reality people were eating the millions of sparrows that had been killed, providing a useful source of meat protein. At the time, this practice was wide-spread (until Mao effectively ‘protected’ the sparrows in early 1960), with the added bonus that sparrow meat was known to cure sore throats and chest infections.

Chinese Language References:




%d bloggers like this: