Quote:
Originally Posted by InChristAlone
Do you believe it was an accident that China became a breeding ground for Marxism-Leninism, while the USA rejected that political and economic theory?
These formulas work fine for the CPC and the LRC:
Mao = Communist party of China (CPC)
Communist Party of China (CPC) = Mao
WL = LRC
LRC = WL
If you don't subordinate yourself to Mao (WL), that means you don't subordinate yourself to the Communist Party of China (LRC).
BTW, in the USSR, they used a similar formula for one of the Party slogans: “We say 'Lenin' and mean the Party. We say 'the Party' and mean Lenin.” All sects, cults, and totalitarian regimes have similar characteristics. They just need a breeding ground.
|
I don't know. "Breeding ground" is a nebulous term. Anywhere that communism took over may be supposed to be a breeding ground. It's a truism. But then, the LRC took hold among some indigenous Americans. Was there something Asian about us as compared with those that rejected the LRC?
I did find some support for the OP thesis in this article,
http://www.develop-top-talent.com/ta...or-styles-asia that states "This research showed that cultural difference do indeed show up in self-expressed behavioral preferences by leaders. However, within each culture there is still room for a diversity of styles and approaches even where one or a cluster of styles is preferred more often than others." But, whether a leadership style is a matter of cultural difference or individual difference is going to be a judgment call in every case, isn't it?