Out with the old, in with the new

In both of these examples for the textbook, chinese revolutionaries try to bring a new oder to China through violence. I believe that these 2 excerpts are very similar. In both, the peasants want to gain power and they do that by taking the wealthy out of power. In both these cases, the red guards and the peasants are doing what was previously unthinkable. In the first reading, a peasant hits an official and everyone freezes, because they don't know what to do. The reason that they freeze is that there is never a situation where someone of less power hits someone with more power. This is the same in the second reading, because she believes that since she is of higher power, she can control the angry red guards by showing them the constitution. This is clearly not the case, as they disregard her. In both of these situations, the peasants see a chance to get what they have never had, which is power, and therefore take it by following the revolutions.

Yes: they are the same

I believe that the measures taken have the same end goal. It is very easy to think otherwise as the measures taken were of two totally different ways of going for the goal. It's like, if two people had the same destination and while one person walked, another one took a plane. One of the ways the person got there might be totally different and may lead you to think that their "end goals" are different, but they are both going to end up in the same direction, even if walking is a lot slower and less reliable. What I do believe is that the less violent approach is a lot more affective in trying to reach the goal. When you take the violent approach, you are looked at as some radical group creating havoc, rather than a civilized party trying to make a point.

China

These stories are essentially the same thing.  The people wish to destroy the old, gentry way and establish a new way of doing things.  They take a more orderly route at first, but quickly ditch their initial plans after a few days of discussion and angst.  The second story begins violently and end violently.  The students wish to destroy the old government and culture.  They go so far as to ignore the Constitution of the People's Republic, claiming that it was abolished and that they only recognize the teachings of Mao Zedong.  The differences in the two stories are small and show the horrors on land reform in China.  The reformers often ignored any systematic, legal, and fair source to achieve justice, choosing to simply kill or torture whoever they please.  

China

Down with the old and up with the new. This cliche is so true throughout history, it is pretty much the one sentence definition of the word revolution. This revolution used violence kind of like the one in Algiers. The Red-Guards targeted the wealthy because they were against Mao and while they said that they were targeting all socioeconomic demographics, it didn't seem that way to me. I think that by destroying all of the artifacts the Red Guards were just trying to kill any memories of the old China. This 'revolution' was more like a a war that was just trying to erase history.

The repressed express

It is evident that in both of these cases the general population is rallied together to revolt against their old rules. Even though they are told from different perspectives, the main situation is quite evident. Like many of the other revolutions we studied, these are stories of repressed people that are rallied to speak out. They are encouraged by their new leaders, or governments and they take the opportunity to express their feeling about their prior leaders. They have been keeping these feelings bottled up and now they express them with little fear with they help of their new leaders. They both evidently have the same goals of letting the general population speak out and not feel repressed with their leaders, and also to make their prior leaders pay for not letting them speak.

Revolution in China

I think that in both of these sources, the people shared a similar goal, to destroy the old ways. In land reform in action, a peasant strikes an official. As the book says, "Not in living memory had any peasant ever struck an official." This is a type of revolution that the people have never seen before, one that involves using violence. This is further displayed in Make Revolution! The Red Guards violently invade the home of the official and one of them begins to smash old cups, which are essentially artifacts from old China. Also, it seems in both of these that Mao is attempting to rile up the lower to middle class. The Red Guards consisted of people from all social classes, however they specifically targeted any "anti-Maoist" elements, which is basically anyone who is rich.

The Resolution of Revolutions

In the text book we read about two particular instances where the people of china were starting a revolution against those who are in power.  One thing that struck me while I was reading was how much the past affected the revolution.  For instance in one, the people were afraid to rebel because they thought the government (which at the time were just figure heads), was still backed my military force like it was in the past.  In the other revolution it was interesting how the chinese Red Guards felt that in order to move forward and start a revolution, something new, you must first destroy everything old.  This makes no logical sense if the history you are destroying is porcelain cups.  cups hold virtually no historical value at all so why would they think its important to destroy there history which they spent so much time making in the first place.  Another thing that I began to notice was how unique Martin Luther King actually was, coming up with a non violent way of protesting, and starting his own revolution.  Revolutions thrive of feelings, anger being the strongest a human has, so to have a revolution without anger and in turn without violence is a crazy idea.  The reason this came to mind was because both of the stories of revolutions displayed anger.

Hmmmm.........

Both of these cases seem to have the same end goal: achieve a new form of governement by overthrowing the old. But although this is the case for both of them, the means are very different. The first case begins with a non-violent judicial way to change the way land is distributed, but through coaxing from the soon-to-be government, it soon turns violent. The second case begins as a violent act, much like the ending of the first act. The students, rifled up by the government's propaganda, seek to not only get rid of the past government, but also the culture. They view the destruction of the past culture as the only way to move forward, making the end justify the means.

Hidden Agenda

During the rise of Communism in China, the ideas and rhetoric that sounded beneficial to the country held a hidden agenda that created a corrupt society.  Communism's ideals of trying to create complete equality do not appear to be bad.  However, in practice, the rules and regulations lead to a mob like mentality that caused chaos and a reversal of power, rather than equality.  For example, the first excerpt clearly shows the reversal of power.  Instead of treating everyone equally, there is a complete switch, in which the peasants and government are abusing the former people who held power.  Although the communists say they are just trying to enforce equality and redistribute land, they are in fact creating an extreme imbalance of power in which one group holds complete control over the other.  The excerpt on page 769 also demonstrated the destruction of lives that happened through the rise of the Red Guards.  The Red Guards had a mob mentality - acting impulsively and taking the law into their own hands.  The excerpt reminded me of The Red Scarf Girl, a novel that I read in 8th grade.  In this book, a girl grows up through the time of the cultural revolution in China.  As the Red Guards gain more and more power, a sense of fear is instilled in the society. 

Communism in China is really not anything like the ideals of communism.  It created a way to change the mindset of  the proletarian population, flipping the positions of power.  It also created much chaos, anger, and destruction of social norms, making China dependent on other forms of government.  This gave the Red Guards along with Chairman Mao a chance to assume complete control, taking advantage of the chaotic situation.

In my opinion, although both stories are different situations, they both have the same intentions and outcomes. The first story was of peasants rising up against crime and throwing out the new order. They began with somewhat of a trial, asking for the evidence of the crimes committed by the person in question. However, as the meeting went on, it turned to violence. This is the same as in the second story, except that the red guards started with violence. They were both fighting against the oppression of the previous rule, and they both did so with violence (eventually).
The end goal is the same, which is that the previous rule will be abolished, and the ones responsible will be punished. The second one seemed harsher, because they stormed into a wife of an oppressors house, with no questions asked, and started to tear down her house. The first story was much more civil at first, even though it eventually turned to violence (it ends with the men charging at the ruler, ready to fight).

Communist Manipulation

The two excerpts in our textbook represent the consecutive stages of Communist policy implementation upon the peasant class of China. In a savvy move, Mao took advantage of the peasants' imminent hardships as the lowest class on the Chinese social pyramid. He introduced the Red Guard as an auxiliary force used to oust authority figures who were caught in a catch-22 that inevitably squeezed them out of the new communist equation. Mao realized that power laid in his ability to unify the majority of China by aligning them politically in his scheme of massive collectivization, whether or not he achieve this through deception or force. It is clear that the chairman was aware of his initial plan of social manipulation, yet it seems he became misguided in his second, more destructive phase of "The Great Leap Forward." As Mao grasped his new found power, gained from his control over the lower social classes, he could officially establish his movement as a nationally backed force in greater China. It seemed he ultimately used this as an excuse to target components of capitalism and traditionalist values that were destroying the integrity of China's new identity. After mishandling his "experiment" in communist collectivization, Mao was left with a disgruntled majority and and officials  with a bad taste in their mouth from the Red Guard's brutality. Mao's plan certainly worked to some effect in garnering support from those he wished to exploit, but the obsolete Communist machine combined with abuses of power caused the downfall of the era of Mao.

Land Reform v.s. Red Guards

Both the Land Reform in Action and the Red Guards have the same end goal in mind, which is to get rid of "old-school" China. However, with both acts trying to accomplish the same goal, they surprisingly have complete opposite effects on their targeted people. The Land Reform in Action piece is about a revolution in a chinese village by the common working peasants against the village head. In this instance, one man led the fights against another by getting the villagers to expose the crimes of Te-yu. At first, the villagers didn't want to speak, because usually if they spoke out against their "boss", even if it was for justice, they were the ones to be punished. But Tien-ming attempted to get rid of the fear in these people and inspire them to fight their ruling power. This is an instance of the new government forming in China, but just one effect it had on the people. Unlike in Land Reform, the Red Guards went about their end goal by instilling fear in others. The Red Guards went into people's homes, destroying their home and all possessions that were a part of "old China." This caused the people to be fearful of the new government. In any case, the end goal for both was to have the old Chinese government abolished so that a new, Communist government could take it's place. While one attempts to overcome fear and another puts more fear into the villagers, they both want to accomplish the same thing. 

Releasing The Will of The People

As differently as these two stories were told, I found that they fit nicely together. At first, the peasants, or the general population, are shown as timid and afraid to speak out. However, with a little push from the new leaders, it didn't take long for them to accuse the old leaders of their wrongs and demand punishments. I believe the same goes for the Red Guard. The peasants or general population, or in this case high school seniors, finally relinquished their anger after being encouraged by their new government. Although the second story is told in a more violent manner, it only seemed confusing to me at first because the second story was the aftermath of the encouragement from the new government. In both cases, the lower class or newly empowered people finally rose up after some nudging by their new leaders.

Communist China: What's the real deal?

After reading both boxes on pages 766 and 769 I am some what confused just because the articles are so different. They have similar goals, but do it in different ways. In the first article, the poor peasants at first fear the old regime and refuse to speak out. But after being reminded of the past oppression, these men and women articulated their argument and re-approached the officials. They did so in a some what formal manner in contrary to the second article. The second article discusses the extremist side of Chinese communism. These hooligans took Chairman Mao's word far too literal when he explains to destroy, in order to establish. It's hard to fathom, young men around my age destroying houses like these men did. The scary part is that they felt that it was completely justified. These two articles show the reader two different sides of Chinese communists: the rational side v. the extreme side.

Different Tactics

       I think that when the Communist Party in China implemented the land reform program and the Red Guards, they desired both different results and had different intentions for each tactic. When they began to enforce the land reform program, they used it as a way to appeal to the greater Chinese population, of peasants and farmers. It was their way of saying "we are on your side" and "we want the best for you." It was their intention to appeal to the public and downsize the power of the current people of status. The result of this tactic was unity under their cause and trust in their ideas. When they implemented the Red Guard program, their intention was more to cause fear in people and show how powerful they could truly be. Their violence and enforcement of power upon the people shows that they didn't care whether or not the people wanted to follow them and comply, just that they were forced into doing so. The result of this tactic was fear, and fear supplied them with power. Fear was what made the people not content with their former government. After the new party appealed to them by seeming to diminish this factor of fear, they also stooped to ruling in the same manner. 

       While both tactics strive for the overall same goal, gaining the support and power of the people, they are quite contradictory to one another. The land reform program promises revenge and equality, downsizing the power of those who were previously vicious. The Red Guard then simply redistributes that power to an equally vicious party. That is why overall each specific tactic gained different results in terms of followers. Both did result in erasing the previous government and way of life, and leading to a socialist rule. But it seems as though the land reform program was used to soften them up, and then the Red Guards regained power through fear.

China's Commie Revolution

Obviously, the Communist party in China was using both the Red Guards and the land reform to cement a stable power structure for themselves.  With the land reform, they gained the mass support that they needed to avoid too much complaining.  And to guard against letting the peasants get too powerful, they created the Red Guard to keep order through fear.

In a very zoomed-out view of things, both these moves by the Communists were made to accomplish the same goal: eliminate everything associated with the previous, Nationalist government.  These measures may have also had positive other results, but that was the main goal.  The land reform basically destroyed the widely-hated aristocracy in rural China, which had been a key element in the Nationalist government as the primary local tax collectors and rulers.  The Red Guard was assigned the task of removing all traces of the old China from people's lives, whether documents or art or people who just wouldn't shut up about it.  And in both measures, the government used the same tactics.  Inspire a mass following, especially among young adults, that is willing to partake in violence for your cause.

Polar Opposites

To build a little more off of what Caitlin said, I am havaing a hard time trying to compare these two things at all, due to the fact that the methods to bring about a result are so different from one to the other.  In "Land Reform In Action", I found it particularly powerful that fear against old ideology was what essentially kept people from speaking out originally, and that seemed to bring about a much more sincere and powerful result than to just instill fear in everyone for not cooperating.  This is what I found different in reading "Make Revolution!"  I saw that they were attempting to use tactics that remind me almost like the Nazis, in the sense of instilling such a mortal fear in the people. In that sense, I find it almost impossible to compare the two, but I guess it's arguable that they are both trying to bring about the same result, to instill and ideal in a group of people through certain tactics. 

Communism vs. Revolution

Patrick is right to agree with Caitlin, and he brings upon another important point: while these two situations are very different, one could argue that they both have similar goals to influence people to join a group. Fear is an important role in both of these situations, for they are the leading influence in the people. Generally fear is a good way to spark emotion, as we have seen in propaganda posters. Fear also implies that there is a higher power that you must follow, which is very important for the communists and the Red Guards to gain followers.

Collectivization for Communism

In both cases -- Land Reform in Action and Make Revolution! -- the goods of the people are being collectivized in the attempt to equalize the population under the Communist Party. Rather than giving your life, like in the Nazi Party, the populace of 1950-1970 China gave away their personal possessions in return for a Proletariat political system, which in the end was ultimately under absolute rule. In both accounts, there is a mob mentality, fueled by the "old regimes" of China. Their ambitions seem to arise from unrest concerning the militaristic and political tyranny, and revenge seems to be their mode of political justice. T'ien-ming explains how this is the time for an uprising against the traitors or "wicked landlords." This same emotion is shown in the Red Guards, and Mao was smart in using the unrest as a catalyst for his own way of reform. In both readings, the majority wants reform, and their ambitions are clear -- take down the past regimes and instate new ideals.

Red Guards & Chinese Communist's

In the broad sense these two articles seem very much alike, because of the underline meaning of a revolution with violence involved. However, if you look closely these articles also have differences, one had used trickery which resulted in violence while the Red Guards turned to violence first. The Red Guards had less of a thought out plan in case anyone was to escape or fight back, there only message was to relay violence on those who didn't believe in their leader Chairman Mao. While the others had a organized plan consisting of meetings with poor peasants.