O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida;

Meu Twitter: https://twitter.com/PauloAlmeida53

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paulobooks

Mostrando postagens com marcador Partido Comunista. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador Partido Comunista. Mostrar todas as postagens

domingo, 9 de dezembro de 2012

Tirania maoista: o maior desastre da historia

De fato, nunca antes, na história humana registrada, alguém, uma guerra, ou qualquer outro acidente ou catástrofe natural, tinha conseguido eliminar tanta gente, em doses tão concentradas, em tão alta proporção, nos quatro anos em que durou, quanto o "Grande Salto Para a Frente" do tirano Mao Tse-tung. Ele conseguiu superar Stalin, a Primeira e a Segunda Guerra mundiais, matando 450 vezes nais gente do que as bombas de Hiroshima e Nagasaki.
Este é o tirano ainda cultuado pelo Partido Comunista Chinês, pelos seus companheiros do Brasil, assim como ele era o "queridinho" do maior idiota que o Brasil já teve, o arquiteto stalinista que acaba de morrer.
Bem, só sobraram quatro ou cinco stalinistas no mundo, e pelo menos um deles ainda está no Brasil, embora condenado a poucos meses de prisão...

Unnatural Disaster

Tombstone: The Great Chinese Famine, 1958-1962,’ by Yang Jisheng


Keystone via Getty Images
A rice field in what is now Guangdong Province, 1958.



In the summer of 1962, China’s president, Liu Shaoqi, warned Mao Zedong that “history will record the role you and I played in the starvation of so many people, and the cannibalism will also be memorialized!” Liu had visited Hunan, his home province as well as Mao’s, where almost a million people died of hunger. Some of the survivors had eaten dead bodies or had killed and eaten their comrades. In “Tombstone,” an eye-­opening study of the worst famine in history, Yang Jisheng concludes that 36 million Chinese starved to death in the years between 1958 and 1962, while 40 million others failed to be born, which means that “China’s total population loss during the Great Famine then comes to 76 million.”

TOMBSTONE

The Great Chinese Famine, 1958-1962
By Yang Jisheng
Translated by Stacy Mosher and Guo Jian
629 pp. Farrar, Straus & Giroux. $35.

Related

There are good earlier studies of the famine and one excellent recent one, “Mao’s Great Famine” by Frank Dikötter, but Yang’s is significant because he lives in China and is boldly unsparing. Mao’s rule, he writes, “became a secular theocracy. . . . Divergence from Mao’s views was heresy. . . . Dread and falsehood were thus both the result and the lifeblood of totalitarianism.” This political system, he argues, “caused the degeneration of the national character of the Chinese people.”
Yang, who was born in 1940, is a well-known veteran journalist and a Communist Party member. Before I quote the following sentence, remember that a huge portrait of Chairman Mao still hangs over the main gate into Beijing’s Forbidden City and can be seen from every corner of Tiananmen Square, where his embalmed body lies in an elaborate mausoleum. Despite this continued public veneration, Yang looks squarely at the real chairman: “In power, Mao became immersed in China’s traditional monarchal culture and Lenin and Stalin’s ‘dictatorship of the proletariat.’ . . . When Mao was provided with a list of slogans for his approval, he personally added one: ‘Long Live Chairman Mao.’ ” Two years ago, in an interview with the journalist Ian Johnson, Yang remarked that he views the famine “as part of the totalitarian system that China had at the time. The chief culprit was Mao.”
From the early 1990s, Yang writes, he began combing normally closed official archives containing confidential reports of the ravages of the famine, and reading accounts of the official killing of protesters. He found references to cannibalism and interviewed men and women who survived by eating human flesh.
Chinese statistics are always overwhelming, so Yang helps us to conceptualize what 36 million deaths actually means. It is, he writes, “450 times the number of people killed by the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki” and “greater than the number of people killed in World War I.” It also, he insists, “outstripped the ravages of World War II.” While 40 to 50 million died in that war, it stretched over seven or eight years, while most deaths in the great Chinese famine, he notes, were “concentrated in a six-month period.” The famine occurred neither during a war nor in a period of natural calamity. When mentioned in China, which is rarely, bad weather or Russian treachery are usually blamed for this disaster, and both are knowledgeably dismissed by Yang.
The most staggering and detailed chapter in Yang’s narrative relates what happened in Xinyang Prefecture, in Henan Province. A lush region, it was “the economic engine of the province,” with a population in 1958 of 8.5 million. Mao’s policies had driven the peasants from their individual small holdings; working communally, they were now forced to yield almost everything to the state, either to feed the cities or — crazily — to increase exports. The peasants were allotted enough grain for just a few months. In Xinyang alone, Yang calculates, over a million people died.
Mao had pronounced that the family, in the new order of collective farming and eating, was no longer necessary. Liu Shaoqi, reliably sycophantic, agreed: “The family is a historically produced phenomenon and will be eliminated.” Grain production plummeted, the communal kitchens collapsed. As yields dived, Zhou Enlai and other leaders, “the falcons and hounds of evil,” as Yang describes them, assured Mao that agricultural production had in fact soared. Mao himself proclaimed that under the new dispensation yields could be exponentially higher. “Tell the peasants to resume eating chaff and herbs for half the year,” he said, “and after some hardship for one or two or three years things will turn around.”
A journalist reporting on Xinyang at the time saw the desperation of ordinary people. Years later, he told Yang that he had witnessed a Party secretary — during the famine, cadres were well fed — treating his guests to a local delicacy. But he knew what happened to people who recorded the truth, so he said nothing: “How could I dare to write an internal reference report?” Indeed. Liu Shaoqi confronted Mao, who remembered all slights, and during the Cultural Revolution he was accused of being a traitor and an enemy agent. Expelled from the Party, he died alone, uncared for, anonymous.
Of course, “Tombstone” has been banned in China, but in 2008 it was published in Hong Kong in two mighty volumes. Pirated texts and Internet summaries soon slipped over the border. This English version, although substantial, is roughly half the size of the original. Its eloquent translators, Stacy Mosher and Guo Jian, say their aim, like the author’s, is to “present the tragedy in all its horror” and to render Yang’s searching analysis in a manner that is both accessible to general readers and informative for specialists. There is much in this readable “Tombstone” I needed to know.
Yang writes that one reason for the book’s title is to establish a memorial for the uncle who raised him like a son and starved to death in 1959. At the time a devout believer in the Party and ignorant of the extent of what was going on in the country at large, Yang felt that everything, no matter how difficult, was part of China’s battle for a new socialist order. Discovering official secrets during his work as a young journalist, he began to lose his faith. His real “awakening,” however, came after the 1989 Tiananmen massacre: “The blood of those young students cleansed my brain of all the lies I had accepted over the previous decades.” This is brave talk. Words and phrases associated with “Tiananmen” remain blocked on China’s Internet.
Nowadays, Yang asserts, “rulers and ordinary citizens alike know in their hearts that the totalitarian system has reached its end.” He hopes “Tombstone” will help banish the “historical amnesia imposed by those in power” and spur his countrymen to “renounce man-made calamity, darkness and evil.” While guardedly hopeful about the rise of democracy, Yang is ultimately a realist. Despite China’s economic and social transformation, this courageous man concludes, “the political system remains unchanged.” “Tombstone” doesn’t directly challenge China’s current regime, nor is its author part of an organized movement. And so, unlike the Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, Yang Jisheng is not serving a long prison sentence. But he has driven a stake through the hearts of Mao Zedong and the party he helped found.
Jonathan Mirsky is a journalist and historian specializing in China.

A version of this review appeared in print on December 9, 2012, on page BR22 of the Sunday Book Review with the headline: Unnatural Disaster.

terça-feira, 17 de maio de 2011

Existe democracia e ilusocracia, na China - Claudia Trevisan

Democracia e eleições com ‘características chinesas’
por Cláudia Trevisan
Blog Estadão, 16.maio.2011

“Esta é uma eleição do Partido Comunista e não uma eleição americana”. A frase foi dita por um policial na semana passada no momento em que ele comandava a prisão de Liu Ping, desempregada e candidata independente ao Conselho de Representantes de sua cidade, na província de Jiangxi. Seu crime foi fazer campanha durante a eleição, algo absolutamente banal em vários lugares do mundo, mas inconcebível na “democracia com características chinesas”. Liu foi carregada pelos policiais e teve sua casa vasculhada.
Advogados chineses ressaltaram que não há nada na legislação do país que proíba candidatos de divulgarem seus nomes e propostas, mas o que menos conta quando os interesses do Partido Comunista estão em xeque é o que diz a lei.
A infeliz frase do policial se transformou de maneira instantânea em um hit da versão chinesa do Twitter, que é bloqueado no país. Chamada de Weibo (microblog), a ferramenta do site Sina tem 140 milhões de usuários registrados e, apesar da censura, se transformou em um importante canal de denúncia contra abusos de poder por autoridades desde que foi criado, em 2009.
É claro que o Weibo também está sujeito aos limites oficiais, o que se reflete no fato de que a frase “Esta é uma eleição do Partido Comunista e não uma eleição americana” foi deletada pelos censores e não podia mais ser encontrada ontem. Mas o nome “Liu Ping” continuava popular e havia se transformado em um símbolo da defesa dos direitos de voto dos cidadãos.
Contra todas as evidências, os líderes chineses repetem com frequência que seu país é uma democracia, diferente da ocidental, mas uma democracia. Entre os argumentos que utilizam estão os de que existem outros partidos além do Comunista (dos quais ninguém nunca ouve falar) e que há eleições para todos os órgãos de base da sociedade (realizadas em circunstâncias que restringem a liberdade de escolha dos eleitores, como os fatos recentes demonstram).
A mensagem implícita em “Esta é uma eleição do Partido Comunista e não uma eleição americana” é a de que nenhum resultado que contrarie os interesses dos ocupantes do poder é admissível. Os eleitores não precisam saber em quem estão votando, não há apresentação de propostas e tudo é absolutamente controlado pelo governo, que na China se confunde com o Partido. No fim, são “eleitos” aqueles previamente escolhidos pelos comunistas, que deixam mais uma vez clara sua falta de disposição para afrouxar o controle sobre o sistema político chinês.
Quanto a Liu Ping, ela continuava presa ontem, sob a suspeita de “esconder material de propaganda perigoso”, supostamente o mesmo que ela distribuía abertamente na porta do supermercado onde foi detida. A polícia revistou sua casa, confiscou o material “perigoso” e dois celulares. A eletricidade e a conexão de internet do local foram cortados.

quinta-feira, 2 de dezembro de 2010

Cuba: sinizacao em curso (ditadura capitalista)...

Os dirigentes cubanos pretendem "achinesar" -- ou sinificar -- um pouco o seu sistema, ou seja: manter a ditadura férrea do Partido Comunista (que hoje é apenas uma nomenklatura gerontocrática) ao mesmo tempo em que brincam de capitalismo.
Não tenho certeza de que vai dar certo, pois existem várias outras variáveis que tornam a pequena ilha caribenha muito diferente do gigante asiático.
Em todo caso, o debate vai revelar uma maioria de descontentes, muitos "capitalistas" potenciais e uma exasperante lentidão do poder em introduzir as mudanças requeridas.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida 


Cuba begins public debate on economic reforms

People walk past a poster of Fidel Castro on a bookshop window in Havana  
What do the Cuban people think?
Cuba has launched a public debate on plans to transform its socialist economy by reducing the role of the state and boosting private enterprise.
Ordinary Cubans are being encouraged to discuss the changes so their views can be taken into account at a ruling communist party congress next April.
The government says everyone should have a free say on the future of Cuba.
But it also insists that the "socialist character" of Cuba's political system will not change.
Under the headline "It is the people who decide", the official Communist Party newspaper Granma said everyone in Cuba should take part in the economic debate
It urged people to discuss the changes through Communist Party organisations, trade union meetings and community groups.
"Nobody should remain with an unexpressed opinion, much less be prevented from expressing it," it said.
"At stake is the future of the Cuban nation."
However, Granma also stressed that the "socialist character" of Cuba's political and social system was "irrevocable."

Analysis

Cuba is entering a period of potential social upheaval.
Half a million workers are due to lose their jobs in the coming months as the government attempts to overhaul the island's struggling state-run economy.
President Raul Castro is also encouraging people to become self-employed or set up small businesses to help take up the slack.
The government has publicly released a 32-page report listing in detail the proposals, and this is intended to form the basis of the discussions.
These debates will not touch on the political shape of Cuba's one-party state nor on replacing the centrally-controlled command economy with a return to capitalism.
Economic problems
The three-month debating period is presented as the opportunity for the public to participate in decisions to be taken at the ruling communist party's sixth congress in April, the first to be held in 14 years.
President Raul Castro called the congress in November, saying it would "concentrate on solving problems in the economy and updating the Cuban economic model."
But many details of the economic changes have already been announced, so it is not clear how much influence the public debate will really have.
In September, President Castro announced plans to lay off around up to a million state employees - about a fifth of the workforce - and encourage them to find work in the private sector.
Half of those posts are to go by the end of March, just weeks before the planned congress.
Restrictions on private enterprise are being eased, with small businesses allowed to employ staff, borrow money, and sell services to government departments.
They will also have to pay tax.
Thousands of Cubans have already been given licences to set up private businesses, and more are registering every week.
Since taking over from his brother Fidel in 2006, Raul Castro has taken steps to reduce the state's almost total control of the economy, which has has been gripped by a severe crisis in recent years.
It has suffered from a fall in the price for its main export, nickel, as well as a decline in tourism.
Growth has also been hampered by the 48-year US trade embargo.

Related stories