It seems to just be like a general mutation of western Maoism after the death of Mao and the resulting political developments in China, Im sure if you spent enough time the lineage of this kind of rhetoric could be traced.
Its sort of like how western Trotskyism has its own weird lingo and rhetoric that has mutated forth from all the splits and internal conflicts here. Plus both Trots and Maoists generally have their own minor theorists and leaders for each specific tendency that interpret and add onto each respective core theorist.
Theres also weird western MLs and other tendencies of course, the common characteristic appears to be trying to run socialist revolutionary movements in the West, somewhere in that fucked up existence all of this weird shit springs forth.
It's because they're all divorced from the living experiences of workers (ie normal people) as well as being ultra sectarian. And since they're completely divorced from normal people as well as similar people of their subculture (because let's face it, that what politics degrades to without being connected to normal people), they start talking like cultist weirdos. The same process has also occurred to a lesser extent in academia. The only difference is that academia at least has a fresh wave of underclassmen and graduate students every semester and fosters some form of interdisciplinary collaboration through conferences.
Imagine if researchers in early medieval poetry only socialize with other researchers in early medieval poetry and do nothing but write polemics directed at researchers in late medieval poetry. They'll sound like fucking weirdos real quick.
It seems to just be like a general mutation of western Maoism after the death of Mao and the resulting political developments in China, Im sure if you spent enough time the lineage of this kind of rhetoric could be traced.
Its sort of like how western Trotskyism has its own weird lingo and rhetoric that has mutated forth from all the splits and internal conflicts here. Plus both Trots and Maoists generally have their own minor theorists and leaders for each specific tendency that interpret and add onto each respective core theorist.
Theres also weird western MLs and other tendencies of course, the common characteristic appears to be trying to run socialist revolutionary movements in the West, somewhere in that fucked up existence all of this weird shit springs forth.
It's because they're all divorced from the living experiences of workers (ie normal people) as well as being ultra sectarian. And since they're completely divorced from normal people as well as similar people of their subculture (because let's face it, that what politics degrades to without being connected to normal people), they start talking like cultist weirdos. The same process has also occurred to a lesser extent in academia. The only difference is that academia at least has a fresh wave of underclassmen and graduate students every semester and fosters some form of interdisciplinary collaboration through conferences.
Imagine if researchers in early medieval poetry only socialize with other researchers in early medieval poetry and do nothing but write polemics directed at researchers in late medieval poetry. They'll sound like fucking weirdos real quick.
The oldest place I've seen Maoist Vernacular English is in Assata's memoir