Talk:Bloodline theory

"conservative Red Guards"

Surely this is an oxymoron? Mosi Nuru (talk) 02:32, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Indeed no. This paper may help. JArthur1984 (talk) 02:45, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

The fact that others have used the oxymoronic label does not make it less oxymoronic.

"Anti-revisionist" might work, but it's not clear to me that this is appropriate either. Mosi Nuru (talk) 15:26, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

There are limitations in the English language works on these topics and expressing the different red guard factions can be a challenge. @Tokisaki Kurumi is knowledgeable and reliable in this area and may have suggestions so by this message, I will ping him. JArthur1984 (talk) 16:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

@JArthur1984 and Mosi Nuru: Thanks for the ping. The term "Red Guards" probably gives you the first impression of militant forces or something. In this context, the conservative Red Guards refer to the Red Guards who support the establishment as well as Mao, as opposed to the rebel Red Guards, who advocate that "to rebel is justified". To have a quote from the paper:

The conservative Red Guards enthusiastically criticized the bourgeois intellectuals and the 'class enemy', but otherwise carried out the movement under the leadership of the local Party committees or work teams. They did not agree with the rebel Red Guards' attack on the Party's organizations and leaders. After the organs of the local Party and government became paralyzed, they enjoyed and relied on the support of the local military in many parts of China.

Given the historical context, a useful (but inaccurate) set of analogies would be: the rebels would be the Cordeliers or the Enragés, while the conservatives would be the Girondins or the Feuillants. ときさき くるみ ^{not because they are easy, but because they are hard} 16:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

I understand that there are factions of Red Guards, but I still think labeling them "conservative Red Guards" is confusing and misleading in the same way that labeling the Strasserists (Strasserism) "liberal Nazis" would be.

To the extent that we're labeling them as "conservative Red Guards" to distinguish them from more radical Red Guards (sort of like the Right Opposition in Stalin's USSR), I still question whether this is accurate.

In that case, "conservative Red Guard" would be equivalent to "moderate or more moderate Red Guard," and it seems counterintuitive to me that bloodline theory was associated with the more moderate Red Guard factions. Mosi Nuru (talk) 20:45, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

What is it that you're questioning the accuracy of? The appropriateness of the phrase "conservative Red Guard" as rendered in English? Or does your last paragraph mean you question the accuracy of attributing the the bloodline theory to "conservative Red Guards"?

If it's the former, the best alternative I can suggest instead is "some non-rebel faction Red Guards." And I'm not sure that's better although we could wikilink to rebel faction.

If it's the latter, I assure you it's accurate and not surprising. Recall that these were the people who believed in conserving elements of the existing order, often the children of party officials or the like. It makes perfect sense, according to their self-interest, that they would argue for a theory of "born redness." JArthur1984 (talk) 21:53, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

How's this: "The bloodline theory (xuetong lun) or blood lineage theory was a political theory associated with the "Loyalist Faction" (Baohuang Pai) of the Red Guards during the early phase of China's Cultural Revolution. Opponents included the "Rebel Faction" (Zaofan Pai) of the Red Guards."

Here's a paper on the topic: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10670569208724156

Mosi Nuru (talk) 22:59, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes that reads well to me! I think it would be a nice improvement to the article. JArthur1984 (talk) 00:31, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Maybe later there could be a separate article detailing the loyalists. ときさき くるみ ^{not because they are easy, but because they are hard} 04:18, 16 August 2023 (UTC)