In defense of the Maoist

My esteemed colleague Mr. Polansky is displeased with Bill Kristol’s suggestion that the time has come to Let 1,000 Republican Flowers Bloom. David writes that Kristol’s essay is a “pedestrian call for greater diversity and creativity in formulating new Republican strategies.” But I think Kristol has a point that is hardly self-evident.

Kristol notes that a lot of Republicans want the party to have a clear message, a clear strategy and a unified leadership that can mount the best possible defense against an overwhelming Democratic majority. With good reason, a lot of Republicans are happy about the GOP House delegation refusing to cast a single vote for the stimulus package. But unity shouldn’t come at the price of suppressing internal discussion. The real driver of unity and success is a compelling vision, not discipline for its own sake.

David is also displeased with Kristol because the title of his essay is an example of

“hackish, cliched writing, recasting a political catchphrase that has already been appropriated to death. Second, it betokens a callousness (hardly limited to Kristol) to other peoples’ historical horrors: I can’t imagine him calling for a journalistic ‘night of the long knives’.”

It’s not the most original title ever, but I think it gets the point across. As for the history, the Hundred Flowers Campaign represented a brief moment of optimism when Mao gave China hope that freedom of thought and conscience would be part of the revolution. As David points out, this was a false hope, since the Campaign was a trap to lure dissidents into the open. Yet Mao’s hypocrisy doesn’t undermine the ideal he cynically invoked. China is still waiting for what Mao once promised. Thus, I consider the metaphor of one hundred (or one thousand) flowers as more of a tribute to that ideal than a callous disregard for the consequences of Mao’s betrayal.