The Story Wars of Hot Political Issues

Recommended Posts

The Story Wars of Hot Political Issues

I'm opening this thread to have a place to post interesting story wars material that crops up.

Story wars are fought with a lot of talent these days, but they lose their punch when examined as propaganda instead of gut message.

I'll be posting the ones I find deserving comment and I invite you to do the same. Later we might be able to categorizes them according to propaganda technique (in Objectivist jargon or otherwise) and use them as examples.

For my part, I will not restrict my examples to the Progressives or left, although I expect to show more from that side simply because they are way out in front in fighting story wars--and they produce some extremely talented stuff.

I'll start with one I found to be clever.

Climate Name Change

Even though I know how toxic this message is, I had to laugh when I saw it. I wish the other side were as creative. In the current media environment, this kind of crap will sway far more voters than any set of facts ever will.

Or, I should qualify that. If facts are presented creatively against non-facts presented creatively, the facts will win. But if non-facts are presented creatively against facts presented in the normal yawn-fest manner, the non-facts will win. Hands down. It won't even be a contest.

This particular example attempts to shame opponents of the Progressive climate change speculations by linking the names of conservative politicians to actual climate disasters.

The propaganda technique used is presupposition. When a person accepts the premise of naming hurricanes after conservative politicians, even as humor, he automatically accepts the hidden premise (the presupposition) that man-made events cause hurricanes--that is, he runs a serious risk of tacitly accepting it until he is aware of it. The proponents don't even need to present proof. They just say "science" and the viewer takes it as such.

This video was extremely well done. There's even a petition to sign to go along with it (see here). Granted, a formal petition is part of the humor, but as of this posting, over 50,000 people have signed it. And that's not so funny.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a very interesting case study about story wars from another culture: Thailand. The theme of the stories is racism.

Dunkin' Donuts criticized for 'racist' ad campaign
August 30, 2013
Associated Press (via MyFoxDC)

From the article:

A leading human rights group has called on Dunkin' Donuts to withdraw a "bizarre and racist" advertisement for chocolate doughnuts in Thailand that shows a smiling woman with bright pink lips in blackface makeup.

. . .

The campaign hasn't ruffled many in Thailand, where it's common for advertisements to inexplicably use racial stereotypes.

. . .

"It's absolutely ridiculous," said CEO Nadim Salhani. "We're not allowed to use black to promote our doughnuts? I don't get it. What's the big fuss? What if the product was white and I painted someone white, would that be racist?"

Salhani said that the Thai franchise of Dunkin' Donuts operates independently of the American operation and that doughnut sales have increased about 50 percent since the campaign was launched around two weeks ago, which he attributed to curiosity about the new advertisements.

"Not everybody in the world is paranoid about racism," said Salhani, a Lebanese expatriate in Thailand who said his teenage daughter was the model featured in the campaign. "I'm sorry, but this is a marketing campaign, and it's working very well for us."

Here is the advertisement that is causing so much outrage in human rights organizations:


What's funny about this story war is the absolute perplexity on both sides of the issue. People are astounded at each other.


Let's think about it.

The fact is there is no widespread story war against racial hatred of blacks in Thailand, so the people there are viewing this as a novelty. Sort of like the Aflac commercial in the USA with the duck. It's catching, quirky and entertaining and that's about it.

People elsewhere who have grown up on the stories of oppression against blacks feel shame and/or outrage when they see this ad and are in jaw-dropping disbelief that someone could be so callous as to sell donuts with it.

I'm not going to deal with the thought police who want to impose politically correct mind-control on everybody--both sides. God knows they are having a field day with this. My focus here is the impact story wars have on broad public attitudes.

People who have lived elsewhere other than the culture they grew up in know that there is no malice on either side of an issue like this (except for thought police, who are always malicious). This is something I became acutely aware of when I returned to the USA after more than 30 years in Brazil.

Here's a simple truth. Before Thais will feel there's anything wrong with that ad, they will have to digest a ton load of stories. No amount of stamping feet, shouting, pointing the finger of shame, sermonizing, tut-tut-tutting, UN Resolutions or anything else will penetrate. Just look at how this is playing out.

If people who believe racial stereotyping should be eliminated from the world and don't want these kinds of ads to run in Thailand, they will have to learn how to get shame injected into that culture through stories. And, given the rich story culture in Thailand, good luck with that.

The point is that stories are the carriers of emotions. Abstract concepts and reasoned arguments are not. Epistemologically, stories literally become conceptual referents that keep emotional loads attached to concepts within a society. Notice that when the stories are absent, people become dumbfounded at the emotions of others who grew up on--or adopted--a particular set of stories.

The reason I posted this is not to discuss racism per se, but instead to use racism's different impact on different cultures to highlight why story wars are so important.

Look at the different reactions and don't judge for a second. Just absorb the lesson. Does anyone think Thailand is like the Deep South in the USA circa 1950? That doesn't make any sense on any level. So before anyone evaluates (judges) the people reacting to this campaign with emotion-laden charges of racism or cultural cowardice, it would be a good idea to identify what is going on correctly. In other words, identify first, then judge. Not the contrary.

Identify the stories.

As an added thought, in today's media and Internet environment, the best storytellers get the most exposure. No longer is it possible to isolate them and shut them down. That means their stories--and the emotions their stories carry and attach to concepts--will literally shape the entire culture where they are popular.

Do you want to spread Objectivist and libertarian ideas effectively so they reach the mainstream and change the course of history? Learn to attach strong emotions to the core concepts through engaging stories--and learn how to tell the damn stories right. (The Left knows what I am talking about.)

Ayn Rand did it.

Glenn Beck is doing it with a religious slant, but he is doing it.

So can you (and I).


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a note, Michael, in all of Asia there is a widespread preference for "fair" skin, and a prejudice against dark skin, often caste and class related. I do not know about Thailand except for two teachers (Canadian, black) who went there to teach English and were often told that various schools "did not hire blacks".

Link to comment
Share on other sites


So think about the story. You claim they don't hire blacks. OK. Why? Is it because black-skinned people are inferior in their conception or because blacks just don't fit into that system at any level?

As a thought experiment, try injecting a Martin Luther King event in that society somewhere to make an "I have a dream" speech to talk about the color of a man's skin as opposed to the content of his character. What do you think the impact would be?

In my mind it would be zilch. Perplexity at most.

The story they need to have told for this avoidance of blacks to go away will have to deal with the class system, arranged marriages and so forth, not slavery and the civil rights of the descendants of slaves. And certainly not anything like Al Sharpton, who I believe would not be able to cause any trouble at all over there, only laughter.

The real oppressed people in Thailand are born into the lower class. (And probably all women.) I decided to do a quick Google search just now to check and here is something that popped up: Relationships in Thailand part 2. Here's a quote that stood out to me apropos my point (my emphasis):

What is the reason that so many Thai women prefer westerners over Thai men? Let’s look at Thai society. There is a class system in place which is not visible to the outside observer unlike the caste system in India. In the West we have our beloved Cinderella story. The rich and powerful prince finds a dirt poor but beautiful girl and carries her away on his mighty steed and they marry and live happily ever after.

There is no Cinderella syndrome in Thailand. Traditionally people marry within their “caste”, meaning a similar level of economic means and family status. Parents have the last word in the decision and few children will marry without their parent’s approval. Relationships between very unequal partners are not condoned and do not happen often. Thais are extremely status conscious, where someone comes from, how much money one has, what connections one has, what status the family has, what level of education one has. This is even expressed in the way people refer to each other and greet each other. The hidden class system is embedded in the Thai language.

I'm not sure if this is a credible source or not, but it seems sincere and genuine enough.

Notice that the fundamentals are given in terms of pure story. Cinderella. And notice that skin color is not even hinted at. Instead, you get "where someone comes from, how much money one has, what connections one has, what status the family has, what level of education one has."

In fact, I don't know for sure, but I would wager if a black Westerner showed interest in a Thai woman and wished to take her away, she would be just as receptive as if he were white. (If he wanted to live within the Thai society, my comment is probably not valid.) The idea of the Westerner to a mindset like that is not skin color, but escape from the class system. The main reason (in my opinion) that black isn't accepted much within that society--or is seen as a novelty like in the ad--is because black doesn't fit into the stories that hold that class system together.

It's not a superior or inferior anything black, like the human rights people think it is in that ad.

It's something that just doesn't belong. It's a mustache on the Mona Lisa so to speak.

Like I said above, you only start seeing things like this if you have lived outside your own culture for a while. If not, the force of the core stories in society are so great on a human psyche raised within it that imagining there could be different widespread emotions for everyday issues is very difficult. I know this from several years of trying to communicate things like the sexual attitudes of Brazilians, which practically excludes the sense of smuttiness and power games. But then, take a look at their biggest yearly storytelling event: Carnaval. We don't have anything on a national scale like that here.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another incident in the story wars that is a hard catch. But I found it fascinating.


Rachel Maddow let down her guard and told an astonishing truth if you know what to look for. (I originally saw this on Real Clear Politics here.)


Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


OK. She doesn't like Rumsfeld. That's clear enough. But with her stamping her foot like a petulant child over the Bush lied, people died meme, it's easy to miss the real meat.


In her anger, she blurted out and repeated a bit that Bush "broke" an argument.




How do you break and argument? Facts?


Is that what she's talking about?




Here is the "argument" she wants Obama to be able to use (my paraphrase): An evil dictator has weapons of mass destruction and is friendly with terrorists and other bad guys. So even if he doesn't use them himself, he will supply them to the bad guys. That's why we have to bomb him.


Maddow claims that Bush broke this argument so bad with the war in Iraq that no one will be able to use it again.


I beg to disagree. And I don't agree she is talking about an "argument" at all. She is talking about a story war. Not just any story war, either. A propaganda story.


Think about it. If someone like Ronald Reagan, or hell, even Bill Clinton, were to emerge as the next President, made that case and presented solid evidence for it, I don't see a problem at all. Some would grumble, but most people know that deadly weapons in the hands of terrorists does not end well. And they are at risk.


Maybe a Reagan-like character would be able to insinuate the evidence instead of present it. But Obama?


No way José. That ain't gonna happen any longer.


Let's be clear on the concept. It's not an argument like in a rational discussion or debate. That's not broken at all. Maddow wants Obama to be able to use this story to scare people whether it is true or not. She wants him to be able to lather up the public with it qua propaganda. And that's what Bush broke. The propaganda--the story as a replacement for reality. People want evidence now, not just a story.


But there's a deeper problem--the storyteller. In all story wars, you have to have the storyteller. Obama has been a great one so far, except in one respect. He has not bothered to link his stories to reality enough to keep the illusion of credibility. And now his enemy in the story wars is not the other side. It's reality. Even his own base is now turning against him on the invasion of Syria.


Here's one of the ways story wars work, the one Obama has predominately used up to now. The story the storyteller tells is a clear one of good guys and bad guys--and the public need to sanction a certain action in order to achieve a good-guy goal and defeat the intentions of the bad guys. Later, the story reality tells is a lot different. Since there is a time lag between one story and the other, the storyteller fills it up with distractions, story revisions, and so on.


This works, too. Big time. Just look at Obamacare.


But it only works in moderate doses. If the storyteller relies on it too much, he amputates the enchantment from his future stories. People will say he might be telling good stories, but they can no longer sanction actions based on them. They will need reality evidence, not manipulations that look like evidence.


That is exactly what has happened to Obama. Bush may have broken a good propaganda scare tactic like Maddow claims since the story later told by reality was far removed from the story he told at first, but he did not break himself as a storyteller.


Obama did.


Around the same day as Maddow's video, Neil Cavuto gave a surprisingly good breakdown of the different stories Obama tells once the story that reality tells emerges and is seen as different. The plain fact is he has told too many of them using this system. (Like with Maddow's video, I originally saw Cavuto's video on Real Clear Politics here.)



Obama, master storyteller, is now losing the story wars in the mainstream and he has done it to himself. The other side, with a few exceptions like Glenn Beck, has been gawdawful in putting out better stories at the time they are needed. 


I didn't expect Maddow to own up to the story manipulation as clearly as she did, but she was really pissed at Rumsfeld and lost her edge for a moment. I believe she knows what the real problem is. She's a pretty good storyteller herself.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a despicable ...hmm....can't use the "c" word...

However, can we never, ever again, hear her shriek her prevarivications disguised as news, ever again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Here's a story war exploding cigar if I ever saw one.

Progressive Senator Dick Durbin took to the floor of Congress to promote the Progressive core storyline about America and immigrants--and promote the Dream Act. He used a lady named Alaa Mukahhal as a fine example of this story based on her using the American flag and all.

Well, she practically spat in his face on her Facebook page. She basically gloated about pulling one over on everyone.

Read about it here:



17 Sep 2013


I started this thread with the aim to dissect the different core storylines in the culture (mostly political culture) and show where they inform behavior that seems odd or irrational from other perspectives, but work as reasonable within their respective storyline.

However, a new idea is forming. I'm beginning to think of creating an "Exploding Cigar" prize for cases like this.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a brilliant example of how to conduct a story war from the conservative side.

Opt Out - The Exam - Creepy Uncle Sam

Opt Out - The Glove - Creepy Uncle Sam

These things were posted on YouTube 3 days ago. The first has about 1.5 millions views and the second over 1.2 million.

And they are funny as hell.

The left is pissed and calling foul. But that's only because they got their asses whipped in this skirmish.

See one battery of complaints here on Bill Maher's show:

Bill Maher, Chris Hayes, Joy Behar Trash GOP: They Have 'Coke Addict's Obsession' With Obamacare

It starts with a normal boilerplate Obamacare discussion and how the Republicans are evil and stupid for opposing it, but then it turns to the ad. It's good to see them squirm as they are caught on the losing side in their favorite game.

Conservatives need to do more of this kind of stuff. These ads show that the problem is not due to lack of creativity. Finally they are "getting" what a story war is.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a post from a different thread that is all about the Story Wars.

Bill Whittle gets it.

I didn't at first because of the damn title. So I didn't even watch the video until now.

What an awful title for a talk about Story Wars. "Summit & Right Online"? Gimme a break!

Somebody needs to be advised that a title, when there is one, is an important part of the story.

You really should watch this. 21 minutes of pure gold.

I think Whittle is one of the premier anti-liberal anti-progressive spokesmen.

Ba'al Chatzaf

To give a summary of that Whittle said, he gave three Progressive messages embedded in the stories bombarding everyone daily in the pop culture:

1. Wealth is unearned.
2. Everybody is special.
3. We want to help you.

The reasons behind these messages:

1. If all wealth is unearned, then it's OK to take it from those who have it and give it to those who don't.

2. If everybody is special, then it's OK to be a slacker--you are just as good as someone who spent 20 years of hard work learning to be a brain surgeon. (Saying nobody is special sounds bad, so they frame it as everybody is special, which means the same thing.) In other words, it's OK to take government handouts.

3. They want you to take government help because that's the bait in the trap of becoming a serf dependent on the state.

Whittle wants conservatives to promote three messages of their own:

1. Freedom.
2. Property.
3. Virtue.

Except he says these words have become so vilified in Progressive storytelling, they need to be phrased differently:

1. You can do what you want to do.
2. It's your stuff and that's OK. It's your stuff.
3. Don't be a jerk.

The charming part of this talk is how Whittle adds details to these messages. He focuses on stories that resonate with the young by extracting details from their day-to-day lives like iPhones, skateboards, being told what to do at school and so on.

And his archetypal vision of the Progressive versus the conservative is priceless.


We are a nation of steely eyed missile men with our eyes on a far horizon. We believe in loud guns and hot women and fast cars. We want to do what we want to do all the time and we don't like a bunch of high school student council weenies telling us what we can do, when we can do, or how we're going to do it. We believe in freedom. We believe in prosperity. We believe in hard work. And if you work your tail off and you want to own seven houses, and if seven is the limit, then that's your business. If you want to smoke a blunt, that's your business, too. It's your business, not my business.


A family a 10,000 humans left on the earth sitting in thatched huts, sitting around burning cow pies, pulling parasites off each other, eating their sustainable algae cakes and raising money for the Guatemalan water snake.


That's the way to do it.

Whittle really does get it. Including his perceptive idea at the beginning of the talk that if you can automatically fill in the tag-line or song lyrics from a story, that story's message has penetrated into your brain. For example, "It's a bird, it's a plane, _________!" What a shame his other examples were not as good, but hell, it's just a matter of finding others. This is a powerful way to engage the audience and make the point.

Of course there are more messages than the six Whittle gave. And they will come out into the open as storytelling becomes more of a fad, then a habit, in our neck of the woods. I am glad to see this finally being discussed openly in conservative (and related) venues other than where Glenn Beck is.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


We are a nation of steely eyed missile men with our eyes on a far horizon. We believe in loud guns and hot women and fast cars. We want to do what we want to do all the time and we don't like a bunch of high school student council weenies telling us what we can do, when we can do, or how we're going to do it. We believe in freedom. We believe in prosperity. We believe in hard work. And if you work your tail off and you want to own seven houses, and if seven is the limit, then that's your business. If you want to smoke a blunt, that's your business, too. It's your business, not my business.

Fuck Yeah!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I don't have time to write something more elaborate right now, but this needs to be here.


There are videos, but sorry, they don't embed. You have to go to the link above at TheBlaze.

The group Glenn is talking about is called Imagining America. And it has tentacles into 90 top USA universities.

They basically want to foster Marxist-friendly American culture and rewrite American history through that lens.

Glenn interviewed Rafael Cruz (Ted Cruz's father) and he said the same thing I have seen USA immigrants from Communist countries and dictatorships say over and over.

They have seen this before. And it didn't work out well.

This is a quintessential story war.

The only way to win it is to tell better stories and get exposure for them. Maybe at those 90 universities, too.

Merely exposing what they are doing does not work. People mostly guide their minds by stories, not facts.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glenn Beck is pretty easily horrified these days.

History gets reauthored all the time, that is, examined by historians in the light of new evidence and theories.

Beck himself interviewed one such historian, whose theory was that the Founding Fathers intended the Republic to be a Christian nation. That theory has a lot of traction with a lot of conservatives.

That some leftist academics in a project started by Clinton and funded by Soros have started a magazine and are running seminars with other leftist academics, should hardly be shocking to Glenn by now. Right wingers, some even in public office, do those things too. Ron Paul for example.

Yet apparently this is a sign to "put our money and our heads together."

Waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I prefer to discuss the why and how of what is being done rather than try to play the game of besmirch Glenn, defend Glenn.

For the record though, Glenn is not horrified that this is being done. He knows people believe in crazy ideas and act on them. He is horrified at the extent it has penetrated the government, education, etc.

Back to point. A Ministry of Propaganda is being formed right now. It doesn't use that name, but that is its essence.

This is the substance of my interest. Maybe not yours.

Want to talk more about how foolish Glenn Beck is? What a silly man? Also, maybe how nobody ever, never, not a chance in hell, at no time, says the Tea Party is dead?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look Michael,

I like and respect you and you know that. Hell, I love you like a brother which as a Stuart you surely are. It is when you appear to not respect my critical thinking, or even critical thinking in general, within the overriding importance of Story that I get riled.

I do not care that much about Glenn Beck and I know that you admire him and I respect that.He has said a lot of true and important things. What I just said was in no way a smear and you know it. It was a comment on the facts as presented, obviously from my brainwashed progressive point of view but still logically defensible.

I know you are immersed in studying story and message but also dedicated to critical thinking. Are the two always compatible ? I know how all encompassing and compelling a course of study can be. Tell me do you still know yourself as well as thou didst before?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a toady who is totally brainwashed by the Progressive core storyline. I'm giving this example as a typical tactic of the story wars. Robert Redford said the same thing a couple of days ago. This stuff is orchestrated. Hollywood is doing its share to strike a mighty blow against the scapegoat. :smile:

(The video does not embed.)

"Good Wife" Actor Chris Noth: Tea Party Driven By Racism

Real Clear Politics

Watch that if you dare. The level of ignorance is awe jamming.

I used to like to watch Chris Noth in Law and Order. I'm sorry I saw this interview because I will remember it the next rerun I see and this political story will spoil the entertainment story.

What's worse, Noth knows he's speaking crap. When pressed if he really thinks it's racism, he said it's probably unconscious. That these people don't know they're racists.

Well, then. That must make his comment true. Huh... A regular mind-reader is he. :smile:

There is real hatred in this man.

And it's bigotry.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

In the story wars, here is an amusing danger that happens when you start believing your own bullshit. This has turned MSNBC into the TV Apology Station.

The narrative--the story war the Progressive side has been pushing--is that the rightwing is racist. Period.

This story has been agreed upon behind closed doors and has been orchestrated. That's my opinion, but I have seen enough signs to believe it.

But here's the deal with a propaganda campaign. It has to go in stages to work.

I think the first stage is over and they did what they had to do. For example, this rightwing racism story (especially focused on the Tea Party) has been properly seeded in the culture--like in the post above and lots of other places. I could give more examples, but I presume the reader has seen plenty in the mainstream. It's not like they hide it.

Also, notice that there is a virtual battalion of trolls that show up at pertinent high-traffic places on the Internet posing as rightwingers and posting all kinds of vicious racist nonsense. This has been going on for quite a while.

Now, propaganda campaign-wise, you can only do Stage 1 for so long and it loses it's appeal. So it's time to shove the knife in deeper and twist it a little.

But something weird has been happening in this second stage. Basically, the propaganda campaign did not work on the general public. Oh... the story amused the general public but it didn't take.

However, it did convince the Progressive media people. And it is exploding in their faces like a trick cigar.

For just a few examples, Martin Bashir said someone should pee in Sarah Palin's eyes and crap in her mouth like they used to do to certain black slaves because she compared debt to slavery. That didn't work out too well with the public. MSNBC had to apologize.

Melissa Harris-Perry and some guests mocked Mitt Romney’s adopted black grandson. That didn't work out too well with the public. MSNBC had to apologize.

That's just two, but there's a ton more crap with less profile.

The latest fiasco has to do with a second Cheerios commercial showing a biracial family. The first one was in May of last year and the food company had to disable comments on its YouTube channel because of the troll brigade. Lots and lots of really vile crap got posted.

Now there is a second similar Cheerios commercial and some idiot over at MSNBC Tweeted that the rightwing will probably hate it, but everyone else will go awwwww. The backlash this time was even worse than before.

Gobs of conservative biracial families started posting pictures of themselves all over the Internet. Lots of fury in comments, too. MSNBC deleted the Tweet, but it was too late. Sensing blood, Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus demanded a personal public apology and retraction from Phil Griffin, the President of MSNBC on pain of banning all staff from appearing on MSNBC shows and recommending all Republicans (and "surrogates") to do the same.

Griffin promptly did as told and fired the employee who made the Tweet. Talk about having your tail between your legs. But what else could he do if he wants to stay relevant?

This is all over the news, even front and center on Drudge, so here are just a couple of stories from TheBlaze for reference:



But I see something nobody is talking about. I don't believe all these MSNBC employees who are disgracing the station have acted dishonestly. They are actually victims of their own poison.

They now believe the bullshit they, themselves, helped to set up, knowing it was bullshit when they started.

And this is the danger of a core story when it is repeated over and over. It starts acquiring the power of fact in the minds of those who repeat it.

What's worse, I don't think this latest fiasco is going to change their minds. So I expect some more race-baiting like this to surface, especially as it becomes more and more apparent that the left seriously risks losing this upcoming election cycle big time.

Obama mocked the middle-class rightwingers by saying they cling to their guns and Bibles. Well, when people get desperate, they will cling to their core stories. I predict this racism core story mouth-off-and-backlash routine will get uglier and uglier for the left as the election time nears.

These Progressives kept feeding their subconscious bullshit over and over without realizing it. They laid out bullshit on purpose while thinking they were only influencing others to believe a lie--a false image, a smear. Now they are going to have to fight themselves before they can fight their opposition effectively because they believe this lie. They know it's is a lie, too, especially because it keeps biting them in the ass. But that's only in their head. They still believe it in their heart (where the story resides) because they taught it to themselves.

It's like reverse propaganda. And that's kinda cool.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a discussion by The Five on Fox about how MSNBC keeps doing this same racism narrative over and over and keeps falling flat on their faces.

I'm not sure it occurs to them that the MSNBC people sincerely believe their own fabricated story (due to a propaganda fluke), and that's why they keep screwing up.

This is one story war outcome I didn't expect when I started this thread.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


What I have grudgingly dragged the ethical piece of my mind into, is that, apparently, they know that it is a lie/falsehood.

It still serves their purposes...


it does because it creates a complete league of "Brown Shirts," Maoist marxists who, well, let's see how much fun they have when they seize power...

The Revolution was launched in May 1966. Mao alleged that bourgeois elements were infiltrating the government and society at large, aiming to restore capitalism. He insisted that these "revisionists" be removed through violent class struggle. China's youth responded to Mao's appeal by forming Red Guard groups around the country. The movement spread into the military, urban workers, and the Communist Party leadership itself. It resulted in widespread factional struggles in all walks of life. In the top leadership, it led to a mass purge of senior officials who were accused of taking a "capitalist road", most notably Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping. During the same period Mao's personality cult grew to immense proportions.

Millions of people were persecuted in the violent factional struggles that ensued across the country, and suffered a wide range of abuses including public humiliation, arbitrary imprisonment, torture, sustained harassment, and seizure of property. A large segment of the population was forcibly displaced, most notably the transfer of urban youth to rural regions during the Down to the Countryside Movement. Historical relics and artifacts were destroyed. Cultural and religious sites were ransacked.

Mao officially declared the Cultural Revolution to have ended in 1969, but its active phase lasted until the death of the military leader Lin Biao in 1971.

Wow! It is party time in the Ukraine today then????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now