Examining the Mao Zedong Phenomenon Using Stock Technical Analysis Methods!
2006/3/11 22:02:02
Two years ago, this lady wrote on this topic and provoked strong dissatisfaction from the left, but I lost that post. Searching online, I only found rebuttals but not the original text. Those rebuttal people were really inconsiderate — they only cared about refuting but didn't bother to excerpt the original. So I have no choice but to rewrite it. As for their rebuttals, they were all wrong, and I have no interest in wasting time on them.
All we can ever know are phenomena; so-called "essences" are all human constructions. A phenomenon that can be phenomenalized is naturally of some importance. For example, in technical analysis, small fluctuations are basically meaningless. When a phenomenon enters the field of analysis, it is already acknowledged as not being a minor fluctuation — this point must be made clear. From the standpoint of technical analysis, the Mao Zedong phenomenon, though an individual stock performance, is clearly a heavyweight stock capable of moving the broader market. While the relationship between a heavyweight stock and the broader market isn't perfectly synchronized, the correlation is obviously much greater than that of ordinary stocks.
Following a similar perspective, one can see that the emergence of the Mao Zedong phenomenon naturally has a high correlation with the broader market — that is, the grand trend of Chinese history. It's like how a rally must have leading stocks, but having leading stocks doesn't necessarily mean a rally will ultimately materialize, whereas Mao Zedong did produce a rally. But even within an upward trend, rallies can be classified as large, medium, or small. Without Mao Zedong, the rally of China's historical broader market would at least differ in degree — this is quite obvious. Of course, the nature and extent of such differences can only be a hypothetical question, which is essentially a question of where your butt sits determining what your brain thinks. Such questions are actually false questions.
Mao Zedong's own individual stock movement clearly divides into a five-sub-wave ascending pattern. The first ascending sub-wave ended after arriving at Jinggang Mountain, which can be further subdivided into a smaller 5-sub-wave ascending structure, but I won't elaborate. The second corrective sub-wave ended around the time of the Zunyi Conference, which can be subdivided into a three-sub-wave corrective structure, details omitted. The third ascending sub-wave ended at the time of the Great Leap Forward, which can also be subdivided into a smaller 5-sub-wave ascending structure, details omitted. The fourth corrective sub-wave ended in 1966, which can be subdivided into a three-sub-wave corrective structure, details omitted. The fifth ascending sub-wave ended in 1976, also containing a 5-sub-wave ascending structure, details omitted. Here, the correction durations of sub-waves two and four are approximately equal, where the second was a deep correction and the fourth was a triangular convergence correction, conforming to the classic principle of alternation.
The above analysis only examines the trajectory as presented by the phenomenon. As for the subtle meanings behind the phenomenon, that is again a question of where your butt sits determining what your brain thinks. Such questions are actually false questions, so I won't continue the analysis. But I can mention a common phenomenon in stocks: when the leading stocks of the previous period diverge from the broader market's trajectory, it often signals the arrival of a structural shock. This principle is at least universal in stocks, and the change in 1976 actually conforms very well to this point.