Was Mao a bad person or were his policies during the great leap forward just a horrible disaster that ended in the deaths of many?

Was Mao a bad person or were his policies during the great leap forward just a horrible disaster that ended in the deaths of many?

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Mao was unironically the least evil of the communist leaders. Compared to Stalin and Misc Pot he was the purest. His policies just failed and he refused to admit it until he was nearly dead in the 70's.

  2. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I fell like Mao himself was less of an evil bastard and more like an amoral force of nature, a blind process of chaos and oblivion.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      This. Picrel describes Mao’s violent nature as passionate and primitive, not coldly ruthless like Russian Marxism. Mao styled himself as the singular physical manifestation of the instinctive, intellectually blind peasant masses’ boiling desire to tear everything down to build a utopia on the ashes. If you read Mao’s first long address to the CPC, 95% of it is long sentimental poetic meandering describing his downright Biblically-Puritan belief in the will of the Chinese peasantry, there’s only one direct reference to Marxism in all of it.
      >Maoist violence is a violence sucked from the very soil of traditional China and not Lenin-Stalin’s Machine violence of the Industrial Age: “We must wipe out the political power of the gentry, throw them to the ground and even trample them underfoot. The force of the peasantry is like that of the raging winds and driving rain. It is rapidly increasing in violence. No force can stand in its way. The peasantry will tear apart all nets which bind it and hasten along the road to liberation. They will bury beneath them all forces of imperialism, militarism, corrupt officialdom, village bosses and evil gentry. Every revolutionary comrade will be subjected to their scrutiny and be accepted or rejected by them. Shall we stand in the vanguard and lead them, or stand behind them and oppose them?” >The gap between this threatening rural violence and the icy coldness of Leninism was immeasurable.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Whoops, that’s a pic of the Chinese civil war, not a pic of the book I was quoting

  3. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Everybody who was "allied" to china promptly robbed from it and blockaded it after WW2, it would be like Britain suddenly blockading France after WW2, starving it to kill its population, dropping bioweapons in Paris during the Algerian civil war, etc. That China didn't implode defied everybody's expectations. In contrast, Singapore and Taiwan faced very favorable treatment from the USA. Everybody mentions Mao's purges, but nobody mentions the massacres in Taiwan. Today, the entire sinosphere is at a comparable living standard by coincidence, however the mainland Chinese faced neverending foreign aggression to get to where it currently is. Even today the situation has not changed; rather, bullying China has instead made China immune to bullying.

    Mao's activities led to the dispersal of rural medics and the publication of a nice little field-medic handbook you can buy on amazon. It contains better summaries comparing traditional Chinese medicine with modern Western medicine - the rural peasants usually could not assure western goods, so alternatives were necessary. Today, traditional Chinese medicine is recognized as more than merely palliative, and even the image Chi energy-healing stuff turns out to be (at least) a semi-obfuscated anatomy thingie (cf fascia network and VNB correspondence with acupuncture) - most of this research is in Chinese, Japanese etc so, unknown to the masses of westerners, the West has already lost its soft power to China. The knowledge was also preserved in Macau, HK, Taiwan etc but for whatever reason it was China that won the culture war. And why? Mao was a big part of why.

    The only reason China messed up was because of Mao's mistress. This is a natural character flaw of all men. You would make the same mistakes in his shoes if your mistress was hot enough.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      wtf swipe typing butchered my comment.

      oh well, all you need to know is Mao = GOAT as you as you ignore everything after 1949.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      wtf swipe typing butchered my comment.

      oh well, all you need to know is Mao = GOAT as you as you ignore everything after 1949.

      Isn't it also the case that the Mao numbers are like if you count almost every person to die and blame him
      Like when people were in traffic accidents and was counted as dying from covid?

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Most of the deaths attributed to him are like that. Literally tens of millions of attributed deaths are actually drought-induced decrease in fertility. More minor things like many of war-related deaths among the North Koreans in the Korean War come from the USA's biowar campaign. Myriad other details relate to pre-Mao China orienting itself toward the international market which backfired when everybody virtually blockaded or otherwise isolated China, which would have also affected fertility rates.

        However by the Cultural Revolution Mao was mostly unhinged and literally insane. Deaths during that period are sometimes carefully tracked and while violent death was rare (certain provinces has high death rate but over a very short time), the people killed were philosophers, monks, etc. Who knows what moronation gave Mao the idea that arming and officializing literal psychopaths (Red Guard) could in any way be a good idea.

        Cambridge history of China is a good source for some of this stuff (pic is volume 15, see library genesis). I'll try to find a more Chinese survey thingie for the late-1960s violence in particular... ill come back if i find it. Generally Mao's reign was little different from the dynasties that had come before, except that the peasants were uplifted. A natural evolution that has its philosophical origins in the late 1700s in Chinese philosophical history.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Mao is one of the few communists who liked the US moron

  4. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    All communists and fascists are bad people.

  5. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    He was really fricking moronic but seemed to genuinely think what he was doing was the right thing, from a moralistic standpoint and not a Machiavellian one. He was just really, really, really fricking moronic when it came to running a state. As a war leader? Genius? As the captain of the ship of state? Fricking mind-bogglingly moronic.

  6. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know if he was a bad person, but his policies were not optimal. Neither were the circumstances, but when are they ever?

  7. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Sometimes a world leader does something so righteous and heroic that I'm willing to forgive any of their failings and they'll always be a good person in my eyes.
    This is how I feel about the anti-landlord campaign.

  8. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    He was a morally self-righteous ideologically pure revolutionary prior to 1949, he even toyed with Anarchism in his youth. After 1959 or so he became a fat bitter paranoid mentally warped old frickwad.

    on a side note i find it interesting that his physical appearance directly corresponded with his mental state and the purity of his motivations. Most people see photos of him when he was fat and smelly and his mental state was in the toilet but that's after he won the civil war. Before taking power when he was still sharp as a whip, he was lanky with flowing hair and eyes that almost seem to burrow into your soul, like a Chinese Maxim Gorky.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      What a very queer edit to your post.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        i'm drunk right now, cry about it

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        also still not as queer as being a phoneposter THOUGH!!

  9. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    He tried to apply Soviet collectivization in China without learning from any of the mistakes the USSR made in the 1930s, it was more incompetence and unwillingness to admit that it was even possible for mistakes to have been made than anything else. A lot of unnecessary lives lost and collectivization could have still been a rousing success had a number of men simply put aside their egos, thankfully China has since learned from past mistakes and is a rising superpower as a result.

  10. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    The sparrows had it coming

  11. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    He was a mentally redundant frickwit but if we compare him to other frickwits like him he actually didn't like the whole idea of killing people, except he believed it had to be done but nothing to beautify in the whole revolution thing. Most dumbest thing about Mao was that he wasn't pragmatic until maybe the 70s when he got chatty with the U.S and repaired the friendship with Yugoslavia's Tito for example, who previously branded him as a revisionist.

  12. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    He wasn't a bad person. But man. Were his policies moronic.

  13. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >"Yes he was an incompetent, psychopathic moronic, clown but.."
    Ok, we've heard all the wumao arguments, anyone want to pitch in with something else

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      He was smart enough to make a policy that had a clear definable goal, but not smart enough to see the consequences of that goal ahead of time. Then again, literally all of the Maoist-adjacents and old lefties couldn't either except Sukarno somehow, so I don't think he can be faulted considering the whole socialist movement had collapsed into mass moronation at the time.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Well... you could start us off. What makes him evil?

  14. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Neither. Don't you have a plane to crash or something CIAboy?

  15. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >Neithel. Don't you have a pwane to clash ol somesing CIAboy?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *