Rhyen Staley, a researcher known for her work with Parents Defending Education, recently drew a stark comparison on social media, likening an unspecified current societal trend to historical Maoist propaganda. In a tweet, Staley stated, > "This is like straight out of the Maoist propaganda playbook. 'Learn from Lei Feng' and 'Never Forget Class Struggle'." Her commentary suggests a perceived ideological similarity between contemporary movements and the Chinese Communist Party's historical indoctrination methods.
The phrase "Learn from Lei Feng" originates from a pervasive propaganda campaign launched in 1963 by Chairman Mao Zedong. Lei Feng, a soldier in the People's Liberation Army, was posthumously glorified as a model citizen embodying selflessness, modesty, and unwavering devotion to the Communist Party and Mao Zedong Thought. While the campaign aimed to instill communist ideals and civic virtues, historical accounts suggest that many details of Lei Feng's life, including his diary, were largely fabricated for propagandistic purposes. The campaign was used to promote loyalty and collective spirit, particularly after the economic setbacks of the Great Leap Forward.
"Never Forget Class Struggle" was another foundational slogan of Maoist ideology, particularly prominent during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). This directive emphasized the ongoing conflict between the proletariat and perceived class enemies, serving as a constant reminder to maintain revolutionary vigilance and purity. It was instrumental in mobilizing the masses for political campaigns, often leading to purges and persecution of those deemed disloyal or ideologically incorrect. The slogan underscored the importance of ideological conformity and the elimination of dissenting views to safeguard the revolution.
Staley, associated with an organization that critiques certain educational and social ideologies, frequently voices concerns about what she perceives as neo-Marxist influences in modern society. Her tweet, while lacking specific context on the contemporary trend it references, aligns with her broader critique of what she views as coercive or ideologically driven narratives. The comparison to Maoist propaganda highlights her concern that similar methods of ideological enforcement or social engineering may be at play in current discourse.