Strong, Anna Louise (1885-1970) friendly w/Mao

Strong, Anna Louise (1885-1970)

Daughter of a Nebraskan missionary and pastor of the Congregational Church, Strong was a headstrong child earning a PhD in philosophy at the University of Chicago aged 23. She came to public attention as an advocate for child welfare, touring an exhibition exposing child poverty throughout the US and overseas.
In 1916, Strong was a journalist for the New York Evening Post reporting on the Everett Massacre, a conflict in which the IWW was involved, and thereafter Strong became a socialist and advocate for labor. She opposed US participation in the First World War as a pacifist. After the October Revolution, Strong became a prominent advocate of the young Soviet government in the liberal press.
In 1921, she traveled to Poland and Russia in a trip aimed at providing relief to famine victims, and she was then appointed as Moscow correspondent of the International News Service, during which time she became a strong supporter of the Soviet Union.
In the late 20’s and into the early 30’s Strong traveled in China and parts of Asia, and throughout the Soviet Union, interviewing ordinary workers and people in the street as well as senior Soviet leaders; she visited Spain in 1937 and accompanied the Red Army into Poland and Berlin in 1945, and visited China during the latter stages of the war of liberation.
After World War Two, Strong was arrested on espionage charges. She returned to the USSR in 1955, but settled in China until her death in 1970, where she was on close terms with Chou En Lai and Mao Tse Tung.

See Anna Louise Strong Archive.

Mao Zedong w/Friends etc..

Latest Updated by 2003-12-26 11:00:32

Mao, American writer Anna Louise Strong and American scholar W.E.B.Du Bois Mao and Banchan Erdeni Qoigyi Gyaincain,  Ngapoi Ngawang Jigme Mao and children Mao and Deng Xiaoping,1960 Mao and his eldest son Mao Anying ,1946 Anna's Talk with Mao Date: August, 1946 Source: Selected Works of Mao-Tse Tung Vol. IV, Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1969; Transcribed: by Sally Ryan for Marxist Revolutionaries in 2002. Strong: Do you think there is hope for a political, a peaceful settlement of China's problems in the near future? Mao: That depends on the attitude of the U.S. government. If the American people stay the hands of the American reactionaries who are helping Chiang Kai-shek fight the civil war, there is hope for peace. Strong: Suppose the United States gives Chiang Kai-shek no help, besides that already given,[1] how long can Chiang Kai-shek keep on fighting? Mao: More than a year. Strong: Can Chiang Kai-shek keep on that long, economically? Mao: He can. Strong: What if the United States makes it clear that it will give Chiang Kai-shek no more help from now on? Mao: There is no sign yet that the U.S. government and Chiang Kai-shek have any desire to stop the war within a short time. Strong: How long can the Communist Party keep on? Mao: As far as our own desire is concerned, we don't want to fight even for a single day. But if circumstances force us to fight, we can fight to the finish. Strong: If the American people ask why the Communist Party is fighting, what should I reply? Mao: Because Chiang Kai-shek is out to slaughter the Chinese people, and if the people want to survive they have to defend themselves. This the American people can understand. Strong: What do you think of the possibility of the United States starting a war against the Soviet Union? Mao: There are two aspects to the propaganda about an anti-Soviet war. On the one hand, U.S. imperialism is indeed preparing a war against the Soviet Union; the current propaganda about an anti-Soviet war, as well as other anti-Soviet propaganda, is political preparation for such a war. On the other hand, this propaganda is a smoke-screen put up by the U.S. reactionaries to cover many actual contradictions immediately confronting U.S. imperialism. These are the contradictions between the U.S. reactionaries and the American people and the contradictions of U.S. imperialism with other capitalist countries and with the colonial and semi-colonial countries. At present, the actual significance of the U.S. slogan of waging an anti-Soviet war is the oppression of the American people and the expansion of the U.S. forces of aggression in the rest of the capitalist world. As you know, both Hitler and his partners, the Japanese warlords, used anti-Soviet slogans for a long time as a pretext for enslavement of the people at home and aggression against other countries. Now the U.S. reactionaries are acting in exactly the same way. To start a war, the U.S. reactionaries must first attack the American people. They are already attacking the American people - oppressing the workers and democratic circles in the United States politically and economically and preparing to impose fascism there. The people of the United States should stand up and resist the attacks of the U.S. reactionaries. I believe they will. The United States and the Soviet Union are separated by a vast zone which includes many capitalist, colonial and semi-colonial countries in Europe, Asia and Africa. Before the U.S. reactionaries have subjugated these countries, an attack on the Soviet Union is out of the question. In the Pacific the United States now controls areas larger than all the former British spheres of influence there put together; it controls Japan, that part of China under Kuomintang rule, half of Korea, and the South Pacific. It has long controlled Central and South America. It seeks also to control the whole of the British Empire and Western Europe. Using various pretexts, the United States is making large-scale military arrangements and setting up military bases in many countries. The U.S. reactionaries say that the military bases they have set up and are preparing to set up all over the world are aimed against the Soviet Union. True, these military bases are directed against the Soviet Union. At present, however, it is not the Soviet Union but the countries in which these military bases are located that are the first to suffer U.S. aggression. I believe it won't be long before these countries come to realize who is really oppressing them, the Soviet Union or the United States. The day will come when the U.S. reactionaries find themselves opposed by the people of the whole world. Of course, I do not mean to say that the U.S. reactionaries have no intention of attacking the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is a defender of world peace and a powerful factor preventing the domination of the world by the U.S. reactionaries. Because of the existence of the Soviet Union, it is absolutely impossible for the reactionaries in the United States and the world to realize their ambitions. That is why the U.S. reactionaries rabidly hate the Soviet Union and actually dream of destroying this socialist state. But the fact that the U.S. reactionaries are now trumpeting so loudly about a U.S.-Soviet war and creating a foul atmosphere, so soon after the end of World War II, compels us to take a look at their real aims. It turns out that under the cover of anti-Soviet slogans they are frantically attacking the workers and democratic circles in the United States and turning all the countries which are the targets of U.S. external expansion into U.S. dependencies. I think the American people and the peoples of all countries menaced by U.S. aggression should unite and struggle against the attacks of the U.S. reactionaries and their running dogs in these countries. Only by victory in this struggle can a third world war be avoided; otherwise it is unavoidable. Strong: That is very clear. But suppose the United States uses the atom bomb? Suppose the United States bombs the Soviet Union from its bases in Iceland, Okinawa and China? Mao: The atom bomb is a paper tiger which the U.S. reactionaries use to scare people. It looks terrible, but in fact it isn't. Of course, the atom bomb is a weapon of mass slaughter, but the outcome of a war is decided by the people, not by one or two new types of weapon. All reactionaries are paper tigers. In appearance, the reactionaries are terrifying, but in reality they are not so powerful. From a long-term point of view, it is not the reactionaries but the people who are really powerful. In Russia, before the February Revolution in 1917, which side was really strong? On the surface the tsar was strong but he was swept away by a single gust of wind in the February Revolution. In the final analysis, the strength in Russia was on the side of the Soviets of Workers, Peasants and Soldiers. The tsar was just a paper tiger. Wasn't Hitler once considered very strong? But history proved that he was a paper tiger. So was Mussolini, so was Japanese imperialism. On the contrary, the strength of the Soviet Union and of the people in all countries who loved democracy and freedom proved much greater than had been foreseen. Chiang Kai-shek and his supporters, the U.S. reactionaries, are all paper tigers too. Speaking of U.S. imperialism, people seem to feel that it is terrifically strong. Chinese reactionaries are using the "strength" of the United States to frighten the Chinese people. But it will be proved that the U.S. reactionaries, like all the reactionaries in history, do not have much strength. In the United States there are others who are really strong -- the American people. Take the case of China. We have only millet plus rifles to rely on, but history will finally prove that our millet plus rifles is more powerful than Chiang Kai-shek's aeroplanes plus tanks. Although the Chinese people still face many difficulties and will long suffer hardships from the joint attacks of U.S. imperialism and the Chinese reactionaries, the day will come when these reactionaries are defeated and we are victorious. The reason is simply this: the reactionaries represent reaction, we represent progress.