MIM hears this opinion a lot, perhaps thrown in with "He's dead and even the Chinese don't follow him."

MIM has two answers: 1) the nature of theory and ideology; 2) the nature of racism and national chauvinism.

Our first question is: "Have you ever studied Jesus or Plato?" Once we ask about parallel figures from other times and places, sometimes this resolves the problem.

Most often though, the problem arises because people do not understand the nature of the scientific method and theory. When we say that Maoism is "universal," it means that it can be adapted for every culture on the planet today and it has truth to it. It does not mean we plan to adopt a peasant struggle for socialism in the United $tates. In fact, the irony is that many accuse us Maoists inside imperialist country borders of wanting that, but a careful reading of Mao shows that just like Stalin, he wanted a different strategy and tactics for the imperialist countries than the oppressed countries. Hence, this accusation is completely without basis in Mao's writings, because Mao himself instructed that there was a difference in each country and there was an especially large difference between imperialist countries and oppressed countries: Mao did not generally want to see his theory of protracted People's War tried in an imperialist country, since Mao constructed the theories to defeat imperialist invaders, imperialist lackeys and feudal landlords.

Maoism is not the concrete struggle of China from say 1921 to 1976, because Maoism has some aspects which expand on Marx and Lenin on how we arrive at truth in the whole world, the scientific method itself. Most people in China today in fact learned the scientific method from Mao and no one else--thanks to the lack of universal education prior to Mao. So imperialist country people have to remember that not all cultures are the same in how universal education came about. Just before he died, Mao said he wanted to be remembered just as "teacher." Whether he wanted it or not, that is in fact how he was going to be remembered.

Beyond the scientific method for producing truth, there is also the question of concrete realities that are global in nature. For example, today we talk about "globalization." How the world is connected together and the truth about "globalization" affects everyone to one degree or another. This is another area where Mao made contributions--the nature of imperialism, how in general the international proletariat fights it, etc. Obviously such contributions do not apply just to China of Mao's day. Those who read Mao's writings will find that his military writings found use throughout the Third World when Africa and Asia liberated themselves from colonialism in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. Mao's works were also translated and studied by the likes of Che in Latin America. Quite simply, Mao was the largest single influence on Third World national liberation fighters and that influence continues today. Inside U.$. borders, the most popular revolutionary movement in U.$. history since the liberation from the British based itself in Mao under the Black Panther Party's leadership.

There is a very poor education on the difference between facts and theory in the united $tates. Chinese trained in Mao's thought are more likely to know the difference than many poorly educated Amerikkkans. Some Amerikkkans would ask what Jesus or Buddha have to do with our world today and mean it literally as opposed to metaphorically when they mean that these thinkers are useless. People who would literally ask what do Jesus and Mao both have to do with us in the united $tates today belong in this category of people who simply cannot think beyond one concrete context at a time. Such people having a difficulty with all theory or all general moral or political reasoning are another source of the problem when we hear this question.

Finally, in one scenario, sometimes our critics ask this FAQ question knowing full well what the difference is between theory and the history of one country. For example, we meet people who would never ask such a question about Marx but still ask it about Mao. Others would not ask it about Marx and Lenin but still ask it about Mao. For these people, the problem is often racism and national chauvinism. There is no rationally arguing with them why they would not ask this question with regard to Jesus and Marx but they do ask it for Mao. For these critics asking us what relevance Mao has, relevance is racially tinged. Since Marx was white, they assume he is somehow relevant; even though Mao was a more recent figure and actually had experience with fighting imperialism successfully and building socialism.

Although the government of China rarely applies Mao's scientific method to anything and approves of capitalism, few bourgeois academic observers believe that Maoism is dead among the people of China. Most do not ask whether it will stage a comeback, but when and in what aspects.

With regard to the Chinese people's not following Mao as much as they used to, there is nothing new to that. Marxism was most influential in Germany in the late 1800s, but it ended up being much more influential in Russia and China in the 1900s. In the 1980s, the Communist Party of Peru took up Maoism and nearly toppled the regime. Today, Maoism continues to be the guiding force of revolution throughout India, Nepal, Turkey, the Philippines and Peru. MIM is adapting Maoism to apply in U.$. and other imperialist conditions and the conditions of their internal semi-colonies.

For those who think all communism is dead, well OK, that's probably by your definition of communism. Not only is Mao's brand of communism alive and well, but also it remains the solution to our planet's problems including war, starvation and environmental destruction.