The DSA Platform vs. Mao’s Original Platform: A Side-by-Side Reading Plus Guangxi: A Case Study
www:
Both call for a single unicameral legislature. DSA: “proportional representation in a single federal legislature” — meaning the abolition of the U.S. Senate (
). Mao’s Common Program established the National People’s Congress as “the highest body of state power” — unicameral by design (
).
Both eliminate independent judicial review. DSA: “Limit the Court’s power of judicial review which it uses to effectively create and abolish laws outside the legislative process” (
). Mao’s Common Program subordinated all courts to “democratic centralism” (
).
Both nationalize the “commanding heights.” DSA: “the largest corporations are put under public ownership and democratic control” and “public ownership over major transportation and energy infrastructure and natural resources” (
). Mao’s Common Program: “development of production through socialist relations of production,” with the state prioritizing “the state-owned economy” while tolerating small private enterprises in a “mixed economy” transitional phase (
).
Both defend America’s geopolitical adversaries against sanctions. DSA: “End economic sanctions that impact the sovereignty of countries whose governments act independently of the United States, such as Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran” (
). Mao’s Common Program based its foreign policy on “respect for mutual sovereignty” — the identical rhetorical formula he used to justify supporting Kim Il-sung’s invasion of South Korea and every anti-Western regime that followed (
).
Both demand reduced U.S. military capability. DSA: “Greatly reduce the U.S. military budget, close overseas bases, and bring troops home” (
). Mao dissolved the Nationalist army and reoriented Chinese military doctrine around anti-imperial “self-reliance.”
