How often do I feel inclined to save, but not blog, a weblink related, directly or indirectly, to Maoism or Mao?
Accumulation of data towards a possible answer:
December 17, 2004
Links saved on this date seem to pertain to 60's radicalism in France, and include articles by Paul Berman and Richard Gombin.
subquestion: What was I thinking?
subanswer: Contemporaneous evidence suggests that I was temporarily delighted by the multifarious associations of the word "Spontex." I probably saw the word in Axel Madsen's Hearts and Minds.
[+ 165 days later, until . . . ]
March 31, 2005:
Link saved was to CNN article with inclusion of an RCYB spokesperson's comment on the Terri Schiavo controversy.
What was I thinking?
Like many others, I was probably swimming in and reacting to the non-stop Schiavo coverage. I probably found the blogs of the spokesperson, Sunsara Taylor, around the same time.
[+ 191 days, until . . . ]
December 8, 2005:
Link, now dead, to review of From Ike to Mao. The review is mentioned elsewhere by its author, Stan Ragouski, on the Red Flags website, which seems to be your one-stop shop for discussion of all things Avakian, for those who dig that sort of thing.
What was I thinking?
Heaven knows. I must have found the review interesting, informative or entertaining.
[+ 19 days, until:]
December 27, 2005:
Link to a news story from Massachusetts, USA, with details of a student's hoax tale about FBI agents who visited his home because of his library request for a copy of Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung.
What was I thinking?
Probably just updating my list of dangerous books to request from the library.
[+ 161 days, to:]
June 6, 2006:
Information-packed link saved, about some various stripes and factions of 60's campus radicalism in the USA, here.
What was I thinking?
I seemed to be curious about the work and ideas of a fellow named Mike Klonsky. I think I saw his name while catching up on some back issues of Monthly Review.
Explanatory links on Klonsky are here and here, and his quite informative blog (mainly about education) is here.
[+ 59 days, until:]
August 4, 2006
Links about intellectuals as belonging to the attention-grabbingly named "stinking ninth" class, here and here; and links about Mao's kids and their fates, here and here.
What was I thinking?
I was working my way through the then-current issue of Social Research, about "China in Transition," making notations of stuff I was curious about, then looking stuff up.
[+ 14 days, to:]
August 18, 2006:
Two links about Xia Minghan, who was an apparent early associate of Mao, who apparently became commemorated as a "martyr" to the revolutionary cause: one link here, the other now dead (now relocated here, I think). I was unable to find any detailed info on him. Also: link to a review of a book, useful as a possible lead for info about the "rustication" movement.
What was I thinking?
Still working my way through SR, this time probably through Yu Jianrong's article about the emerging political consciousness of peasants.
[+ 180 days, until:]
February 14, 2007:
Link to the "American Maoist Movement Family Tree," here. Found via McLemee.
What was I thinking?
Well, what could be more romantic to think about on Valentine's Day?
[+ 119 days, until finally:]
June 13, 2007:
Link to MIM's demonstration, among other things, that "Kristeva was never a Maoist" and "These intellectuals at Tel Quel were cosmopolitan travelers, translators and Freudians."
What was I thinking?
Just gathering links for possible future examination, from a variety of angles, to follow for leads on the history of the Tel Quel group.
Conclusion:
I feel compelled to save but not blog a weblink directly or indirectly related to Maoism or Mao approximately once every 113.5 days.
Practical application of this newfound self-knowledge:
I am due to find another Mao-related link worth saving on or about October 4, 2007.
Commentary on this newfound self-knowledge:
Are you kidding me?
What kind of bulls--t "self-knowledge"'is this?
The above is a lot of unnecessarily complicated stupidity about nothing. How can you possibly call this "self-knowledge" in any useful or meaningful sense? How pointless!
Who are you trying to kid? What do you take us for?
I'll bet the above post is just your lame attempt to find a clever way to find a thinly veiled, semi-amusing conceit to exploit to clean out some aging links from your notes.
Well, we saw right through it. We're onto you. You can't fool us. Come off it! Give it up.
We would take idiotic posts like the above a lot more seriously if you perhaps were trying to make some point: like maybe a point about:
how blogging, similar to journal keeping, perhaps can serve as a vehicle to try to notice things over time and make observations about one's own medium-term mental tendendcies;
and how maybe you're trying to present a quaint, very modest, semi-entertaining example of that;
and how such attempted observation occurs nevertheless within one's own ongoing internal dialogue
(tri-ologue? multi-logue?)
, one voice within which wonders about whether the discovies are worth anything or useful, after they are made;
and you're trying to make the point obliquely;
because how you'd rather demonstrate or dramatize than "explain";
because you don't like didactically hitting people over the head with a "point";
and because such discoveries [the deeper substance of which you're omitting from your post] might often come precisely through the method of catching indirect, oblique glimpses of phenomena the surface appearances of which make them look very modest and meaningless.
But you're obviously not doing that, are you? Because if you were trying to be subtle, that would be obvious. Obviously!
You freaking charalatan.
More generalizable implications of this newfound self-knowledge:
The above data also suggests that, if you keep your garbage around long enough, without discarding it in the trash can, eventually it becomes historically interesting, or even "archaeology," and you have the right to put a sign over it that says, "Museum."
