page 23

Another side of Maoism

[unclear: as] disappointed with the two reviews of [unclear: Pe-uck] Soup which appeared in you 16 July

[unclear: a] start they did not pick the political [unclear: ap-n] of the film Martin Brown claimed it [unclear: out-che] "French Trotskyist movement's view", Jonathan Scott said "it remains quite [unclear: un-a] who made this film and why." At least [unclear: admits] that the film "swipes" Trotsky, obviously indicates the film was not [unclear: cyist].

[unclear: e] attack on Trotsky related to his [unclear: involve-in] the suppression of the Kronstadt uprising Lenin and Trotsky were the two main [unclear: lea-] of the Bolsheviks. Anarchists are [unclear: traditio-] the people who beat the drum for Kronstadt. [unclear: he] film's refusal to see any socialist content Chinese revolution, and its portrayal of [unclear: Cul-] Revolution Maoism as a variety of fascism, [unclear: o] typically anarchist.

contrast, Trotskyists defend the socialised my of China, and the tremendous social and [unclear: mic] gains that this has brought, while at the time Trotskyists are very critical of [unclear: bureau-] for holding back the full flowering of the [unclear: tion].

[unclear: e] expose of the bureaucracy was the most [unclear: e] feature of Peking Duck Soup, even if some intepretation of the factional intrigues was [unclear: airy]. The smiling pictures of Mao with [unclear: chev], Lui Shao-chi, Lin Piao, etc., [unclear: contras-ith] the repeated purges, could only have [unclear: ood] for Salient readers, who have been [unclear: a] pretty heavy diet of Maoist mythology [unclear: he] years.

[unclear: gree] with Jonathan Scott that the film is on explanation, but it does provide a mass [unclear: dence] on the completely unprincipled [unclear: in-g] within the Chinese bureaucracy, where [unclear: n] move from being a revolutionary hero apitalist roader and back again (as Deng [unclear: ping] has twice). The Chinese people, who [unclear: m] rightly portrays as tools in the purge [unclear: pro-ve] never been more than a cliched [unclear: expla-a] of what is going on within the bureaucracy.

[unclear: re] the film does not give a deep analysis of [unclear: blem], but it should interest viewers in [unclear: del-nto] some of the Marxist source material, it [unclear: rchist], Trotskyist or from the Chinese [unclear: di-novement]. The criticisms raised by the [unclear: di-its] bear a strong resemblence to those which [unclear: r] in the film.