Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Socialist site links mass murderer Mao to Dugin's traditionalism

Mao: An unknowing traditionalist? 

Claudio Mutti was, in the 1970s, involved in the Italian nationalist-revolutionary movement then in full intellectual effervescence. Resolutely Evolian, he writes an article which attempts to link Chairman Mao's thought to the traditional influence of the Tao. Bold thesis but not unfounded after reading this article. 

For Mutti, Maoism was not born above ground, it is the product of the long history of Chinese thought. It would be wrong to believe that Mao's theoretical work is only a superficial re-reading of Marxism to adapt it to the archaisms of Chinese society. On the contrary, he proposes a “Chinese way” towards a communism which passes by the integration of the Tradition to the Revolution.

The theory of contradictions is, according to the Italian intellectual, a reinterpretation of the Taoist teaching of Yin and Yang, in the light of the desire of the "Great Helmsman" to lead China into a radical revolution: "It is what happens with all opposites; in certain conditions they are opposed to each other, in others they are reciprocally connected: they complement each other, they are reciprocally permeable, they are interdependent; this is what we call identity” (Mao, on the contradiction). 

If we were to follow Mutti, the identification of Mao with the solar figure of the ancient emperors, the "overvaluation" of the warrior voluntarism of Maoism and the affirmation of the ancestral power of blood in the Chinese peasantry classifies this Asian experience in the category Bellatores dear to Evola. “Maoism testifies to a recognition for heroic, precious values, he wrote, and opposes to pacifism a warlike conception of life, with its spirituality, its values ​​and its ethics. This conception leaves no room for individualism, but preaches that active impersonality which, in a climate free from subjective suggestions(?), gives rise to heroic sacrifice, which by definition is disinterested and even anonymous”.

This text is certainly of an enthusiasm that should be strongly cooled (moderated) in the light of the excesses of the forced modernization that Mao imposed with the “Great Leap Forward” up to “market communism”. It is above all the expression of the intellectual boiling then in progress, in the protesting youth (both leftist and "traditionalist-revolutionary"). Youth which, in these post 68 years, was not afraid to make explosive syntheses. 

Brochure available at Ars Magna: