Chairman Mao s dialectics, 10 examples!

of dialectics, 10 examples!

1. After reading your speech, I think it is very good, and it can be said and should be said like that, and it is not overdone.

It can be a possibility, it should be a need, and possibility, and need, constitute a set of positive and negative, which is both possible and needy.

Everything should be decided from the possibility and need, and if you have both sides, you can become a reality.

2. From the worst possibility, don't suffer.

A year ago, the policy was already given to you, and if you do not carry it out under the pretext of developing to the north and behind enemy lines, I am afraid that you will suffer great losses in the future.

Good possibilities and bad possibilities constitute a set of positive and negative sides, which is the principle of dialectics to solve positive problems by starting from the negative side - that is, the principle of basing itself on the negative side and moving towards the positive.

In other words, think about the worst possible situation, and never lose. For the sake of good possibilities, we will suffer a big loss in the future.

3. To see whether a number of cooperatives can be consolidated after they are established, first, we should see whether the preparatory work before the establishment of the cooperatives is done well, and second, whether the rectification work after the establishment of the cooperatives will be done well.

When preparing, prepare for the worst-case scenario so that the preparation can be done best. When rectifying, we should also proceed from the worst possible scenario.

If you start with a good possibility, then you will not be able to consolidate. It also shows the importance of preparation.

4. If we do not lead the peasants to set up one or several agricultural production cooperatives in every township and village, we will ask where the "experience level of cadres" comes from and where can we improve it?

This is the positive and negative of action and knowledge, one is that knowledge leads to action, and the other is that action leads to knowledge, that is, this is the contradiction between the prophet and the first to know.

This is also a different answer to where cognition comes from, one from practice and the other from cognition. From the cognition, it will be put forward - the point of view that exceeds the level of experience of the cadres.

For a great practitioner in the whole field like ***, of course, it is believed that knowledge comes from practice and is known before it.

5. Obviously, the idea that the current state of development of agricultural production cooperatives "exceeds the level of experience of cadres" is an erroneous idea.

Since this argument cannot be established from practice, it is an erroneous thinking. On the contrary, it is more necessary to develop agricultural production cooperatives and provide sufficient opportunities for practice, so as to gain and improve the experience of the department.

Knowing before knowing and cognition comes from practice, and judging by this theory and viewpoint, such an idea is an erroneous thinking.

The normal thing is that it is always beyond cognition, and through a lot of practice and practice, this gap is shortened, and in practice, the level of experience required is getting higher and higher, not lower and lower, so it is not in line with the needs of reality to be prophetic and backward, which is theoretically denied".exceeds the level of experience of cadres".

6. They believe that the current situation of the cooperative movement is very dangerous, and they advise us to "get off the horse as soon as possible" from the current road of cooperation. They warned us: "If we do not dismount quickly, we are in danger of undermining the workers' and peasants' union." "We believe that on the contrary, if we do not get on the horse quickly, we are in danger of undermining the workers' and peasants' union. It seems that there is only a difference of one word, one wants to get off the horse, and the other wants to get on the horse, but it shows the difference between the two routes.

Why do you arrive at the exact opposite decision?

It is still the difference between the prophet and the prophet, ** in the case of the correct general direction, insist on the first and then the second. And they are bound by the process, and they are frightened by the deviations and mistakes in the process, and they want the prophet to follow the way—so, to cross the river by touching the stones, and to follow in the footsteps of others.

What they want is to be right all the time, and what they believe is that as long as they go right, they are right. Obviously, the more initiative and flexibility, there must be mistakes and deviations in practice, and the higher the tolerance for errors.

7. In addition, there are a few more points to be made clear about the question of who to rely on in the countryside. We should rely first and foremost on party members. It is not right for our leading organs at and above the district party committee level or the cadres sent to the rural areas to guide the work not to rely first on the party members in the rural areas, but to confuse the party members with the masses who are not party members. Second, we should rely on the more active elements of the non-party masses, which should account for about 5 percent of the rural population (for example, a township with a population of about 2,500 should have about 125 such activists), and we should strive to train such a group of people, and we should not confuse them with the general masses. The third is to rely on the broad masses of the poor peasants in general and the middle peasants in both parts. If we do not get hurt on the question of who to rely on and how to rely on the Fa, the cooperative movement will make mistakes.

This is the positive and negative sides of self-help and other help, self-reliance is a kind of self-help, but also with other help, to achieve both self-help and other help.

There is a question of who to rely on. This problem needs to be solved -- the problem of striving for the majority and making oneself stand on the side of the majority, and we cannot be in the minority and stand in the minority.

The order is, 1) Party members, first of all, cadres among Party members.

2) League members, first of all, cadres among League members.

3) Activists among the non-party masses.

4) That part of the majority of the masses.

Relying on activists is a law of leadership, and this is the key to turning accidents into necessity.

8. Relying from the top down, there will be good governance, and relying from the bottom up, there will be corruption and lazy government.

Relying from the top down, there is the principle of everything that passes, and relying from the bottom up, there is the principle of everything bypassing. Relying on the people below, taking the needs of the people below as the needs, and passing them on layer by layer, they finally got in close contact with the masses and avoided being separated from the masses.

At this time, everything serves the following, can be practical, can be dense, can be done weekly-there is good governance.

Relying from the bottom up, we must figure out the needs of the above, and we will only pass on the top, the top, and the top, and pass it on layer by layer, and eventually we will forget the masses, detach ourselves from the masses, and rely on power for everything. This creates a disconnect between the leadership and the masses.

At this time, if everything serves the above, it will be difficult to be practical, secret, and weekly—there will be corruption and lazy government.

9. In this way, a big problem has occurred, the movement below is very wide, and the attention above is insufficient, of course, there will be some chaos. Instead of strengthening leadership and planning, we were looking at these chaos, but were passively trying to stop the movement or "chopping" some cooperatives as soon as possible. Of course, this is not right, and it will inevitably cause more chaos.

Because the movement below is very broad and the attention from above is insufficient, it is necessary to pay additional attention - strengthen leadership and strengthen planning. Instead of stopping the movement of the forward.

If the movement is stopped, there will inevitably be more chaos.

According to the dialectic method, between the positive and negative sides, it is necessary to supplement the missing side and the less side, which is the focus, rather than focusing on finding ways to make the more side less.

The so-called negative side of the connection, if there are not enough on one side and one side exceeds the other side, this side will not be visible, and there will be no need to connect the negative side and supplement the negative side.

10. When a new thing appears, they always disapprove of it, and first oppose it. Then it's about throwing in the towel and doing a little self-criticism. A second new thing arises, and they cycle through these two attitudes again. In the future, all kinds of new things will appear, and they will be handled according to this format. This kind of person is always passive, always stops at critical moments, and always needs someone to slap him on the back before he is willing to take a step forward.

Opposition and approval constitute a set of positive and negative, and approval is positive, so for new things, first approve and then oppose, which is more in line with the principle of dialectics that positive sides prevail over negatives, and in line with the principle that dialectics starts from positives.

If you agree with it first, you will support it, and you will understand this new thing better, and if you oppose it at this time, you will have more evidence and greater success.

If you oppose it first, then it will lead to a lack of understanding of this new thing, and if you oppose it without understanding, it will be easy to suffer.

There is no conflict between the principle of starting from the positive and the principle of dialectics based on the negative and moving towards the positive, and this starting point refers to the spiritual and the purposeful.

For example, in order to oppose it, I will approve of it first. Then, you can make yourself both against it and for it, and then you can build up the initiative.

That is, a choice can lead to more choices for yourself, and this choice is good, which is called initiative. And if a choice leads to more and more choice, this is called passivity.

List of high-quality authors