A Hard Look at Katranjian Liberationism
| File:Katranjianbook.png Front cover of "A Hard Look at Katranjian Liberationism" | |
| Author | Gelai Antelope |
|---|---|
| Country |  Namor |
| Language | Namorese |
| Subject | Katranjian-style Liberationism, History of Katranjiev under Huankun Chen's rule |
| Genre | Ideological criticism |
| Published | NMR 2321 (1981 CE) |
| Media type | Print (paperback, hardcover) |
A Hard Look at Katranjian Liberationism (Namorese: Рендженсенси Кателанси Джикфанджуйи, literally "Conscientious Analysis of Katranjian-style Liberationism") was a book written by Namorese Liberationist leader Gelai Antelope in NMR 2321 (1981 CE). It was a criticism of Katranjian-style Liberationism as experienced in Katranjiev under the rule of Huankun Chen. In it, Gelai argued that Katranjian Liberationism was totalitarian, oppressive and chauvinistic in nature, and that the regime did not deserve the support of the Namorese government, which was exercising "real Liberationism." Gelai predicted that the Katranjian Liberationist regime would collapse in at most 10 years after the time of the book's writing, that is, the year 1990 or 1991.
The book was significant because it marked an official split in the outlooks of Namor and Katranjiev, which had actually begun shortly after the death of Yunglang Antelope but went mostly unannounced or downplayed.
Content
Gelai divided the book into (number) parts:
- On the beginnings of Katranjian Liberationism: Gelai argues that there is a difference between how the Liberationists gained power in Namor and how the Liberationists took over Katranjiev. While it is true that millions of lives were lost in the War of Liberation, the Liberationists had the support and backing of the Namorese masses, which legitimized its overthrow of the Republican regime and the establishment of the People's Republic. Huankun, meanwhile, used dishonest tactics to get power, ranging from "spreading fear" to "subverting democracy (citing the April 1951 elections in which Huankun rigged so that his party could obtain a majority in the National Assembly, and the December 11, 1951 referendum which was fraudulent)." Gelai concluded that "the so-called 'revolution' started by Huankun Chen succeeded without the support of the people, and thus it cannot be deemed as such. To call this coming to power a 'revolution' is a disgrace to Yunglang and all other older revolutionaries who seized power by popular will."
- On Huankun Chen's wild ambitions while in power: This part examined the oppression that followed Huankun Chen's seizure of power in Katranjiev. The Katranjian regime brutally suppressed an uprising in NMR 2299 (1959) against the government, which was "not exactly counter-revolution as some Liberationists want to believe, but merely a reaction to Huankun's illicit coup." Civil liberties were curbed to the point that they "were no longer considered liberties, but privileges," as the government pursued a "tyrannical" policy of placing some regions under martial law. While Huankun Chen could have behaved like a "people's leader" by caring for the welfare of the people, instead he "devoted his entire energy into making sure he keeps his power. He ruled thinking about his power, and died thinking about his power."
- On the chauvinistic nature of Huankun Chen's ideology: Gelai accused Huankun Chen of harboring chauvinism and racism while ruling Katranjiev. While the People's Republic of Namor reserved some autonomy to ethnic minority groups and even offered social benefits, stressing mutual reliability between Kannei Namorese and non-Kannei people, the Katranjian regime enacted a policy of favoring Namorese people over non-Namorese (Slavs, particularly Katranjians and Luziycans). Gelai wrote that "In Katranjiev, the Namorese and Slavs are all Katranjian people. But the regime's actions showed that it could do without the Slavs - a clear indication of chauvinism in the upper echelons of the leadership." He added that way before Huankun took power, he supported policies of collective punishment against Choreans, sending Choreans to labor camps and killing them en masse to the extent that only a few survived the ordeal. Gelai reiterated his predecessor Yunglang's staunch opposition to what he called "Kannei chauvinism" and that Huankun's endorsement of such proves that he is not a true Liberationist, but a "fascist in revolutionary's clothing."
- On whether the Recession is to blame for Katranjiev's present difficulties: In this part, Gelai explored the effects of the Recession of 1980 in Katranjiev. The recession led Katranjiev into a famine, but this was primarily caused by the regime's increasing exports of food and oil to the outside world, resources which could have been used to feed its own people. Gelai said that "[The Recession]'s devastating effects on the Katranjian people have much to do with the regime's lack of preparing its people for a market-oriented economy, where trade and industrialization is inevitably increasing and more interaction is required in order to achieve pinnacle status." Gelai concluded that had Huankun Chen never ruled Katranjiev, or if he had possessed "the qualities of a wise, visionary leader," the recession would not have had such an effect in Katranjiev. "Admittedly, Namor was hit by the recession too, but did we fall into famine? We did not. There must have been something that the regime didn't do which did do, or something the regime did that we didn't do. It shows again whose brand of Liberationism is correct - that of our country or that of Katranjiev's."
- Conclusion: Criticism keeps the ideology pure: Gelai maintained that he was not trying to cause a split in the Liberationist camp, because "Katranjiev was never part of that camp." The main reason behind his writing of this book is to make sure the Liberationist ideology is "kept pure from reckless deviation." He predicted that in no more than ten years after the time of writing, the Liberationist regime in Katranjiev will become unsustainable and collapse. He urged the Katranjian people to "take action immediately" to secure the true foundations of Liberationist ideology. He finally appealed to the Namorese people, urging Namor to stop identifying itself as being in the same camp with Katranjiev, and for Namor to continue along the "scientifically-proven successful ideology" of Minjuha.
Publication
The book was published on March 28, NMR 2321, on the 31st anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of Namor. A few days prior to that, Gelai mailed copies of the book to top Katranjian leaders, including Huankun Chen and Nuoju Zeng. This was accompanied by a letter that Gelai had handwritten, telling Huankun to "go to your bedroom alone and deeply consider what I wrote in this book," before wishing him good health and addressing him as "my comrade-brother (some believed this was sarcastic)."
Reception
In Namor
"A Hard Look at Katranjian Liberationism" quickly became a bestseller in Namor. The Liberator hailed it as a "great work of ideological criticism that is non-lacking in candidness," and recommended all Namorese to read it "to understand the real nature of the Katranjian 'Liberationist' system." Millions of copies were distributed and sold, and in Liberationist party schools the book was required reading material.
After the book's publication, criticism of Katranjian Liberationism by Namorese Liberationists increased.
In Katranjiev
Huankun Chen outlawed it after its publication, saying that "these false accusations lobbed at me by the revisionists who had taken power in Namor. Unlike what this book portrays, I care for the best interests of the people." However, it was relatively popular as samizdat, often circulating illegally among the intelligentsia.
A Hard Look at Katranjian Liberationism would remain outlawed until 1987 when Baikun Qing lifted the ban (due to the resolution of the 1984-1986 Katranjian political crisis). Immediately thereafter, it became a record best-seller, which would be used to advocate Minjuha-style reforms (and promote Qing's efforts to do so), and ultimately, an overthrow of the Liberationist government. The predictions did come true to an extent: the regime withered away in early 1989. Nowadays, in some duchies (notably Desislav), A Hard Look at Katranjian Liberationism is mandatory reading in high schools due to its somewhat important role in ending the Liberationist regime.