No, my views are easily understandable because they have been achieved before, in Mao’s China. Look at China now, a beacon of secular and modern ways of thinking, as opposed to the traditional, religion-influenced West.
Define culture, then. Explain how it's eraticatable, or how that would be beneficial. Or how it somehow opposes science. I don't think you realize the fact that we wouldn't have science if it wasn't for culture.
We do need to wipe out religion—but only temporarily. Clinging to these centuries old religions like Christianity and Islam is leading to more hate and pain in the world (as their outdated opinions are used to justify things like homophobia and transphobia), so if we dismantle the Old Faiths and replace them with new ones, they will be shaped to the world around them.
That shaping means they will most likely be more tolerant and progressive than the Old Faiths, and thus can be a tool to support us rather than oppress us.
Debate ideology all you want, but look at the stellar Atheism rates, the rapid development and quality of life improvements. Being held back by institutions from before the Cultural Revolution would have made none of that possible.
Culture is reflective of the more important social relations, ie. economic relations of past and present. The social relations we know of as culture will change when economic relations change as economic transformation is the most potent way of bringing about social transformation. Obviously some repression will inevitably happen amidst any great socio-economic transformation, but this is not nearly as consequential as economic transformation for social transformation.
Eradicating diversity will not make people less human. It will, in fact, bring them closer together. A boring togetherness, but a togetherness nonetheless.
That's a form of culture, and your plan is to force onto people who disagree with it. This is just western thinking applied to leftist politics. We cannot rank cultures as it misses the point on why people are in cultures. People join religions because they provide a clear source of morals to follow. However, some may find this aspect of religion too confining or may just disagree with the morals that the religion teaches and will leave. My point is you can dislike aspects of a culture while also admitting that there are aspects of a culture others would like to keep having and not be taken away from an alleged "greater good."
Diversity is good. Nationalism and Traditionalism is what holds it back. I like to call Mao “the father of wokism” in that he dismantled the evil old ways of thinking in favor of diversity, tolerance, and equality.
Eradicating fascism will not make people less human. It will, in fact, bring them closer together. A boring togetherness, but a togetherness nonetheless.
I'm saying this as a music student, yeah. I know how culture works. Forcing everyone to adapt the same culture will make life boring and empty. It's also physically impossible, but I guess this RMB just lives in willy wonky world anyway.
PFFFT the German Democratic Republic, Bulgarian People's Republic, USSR and even post-Mao China can all be considered to be infinitely better at what you brag about Maoist China being (progressive in social and economic relations)
I like cultures. I dislike “culture”, the word that is used as an umbrella term by Maoists to mean religion and traditional societal structures. I would’ve used a different word is “culture” wasn’t already established.