| Author |
Message
|
| IAlexN |
 Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:56 am Post subject: How has Mao Zedong influenced the world? |
 |
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 24 Nov 2009
Posts: 77
|
We briefly discussed this in class, we never really came to a conclusion though, and it got me a little curious, so how did he actually affect the world.
Thank you in advance, |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| i_feel_tiredsleepy |
| Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2010 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Posts: 1740
Location: Montreal
|
| His effect in China, Nepal, Vietnam, and North Korea is significant. However, outside of countries that have had Maoist regimes, his philosophical effect is minimal. The effect of China's conflicts with the USSR and the West have had significant effects, however I wouldn't say we could attribute the nature of these conflicts to Maoism specifically. Not many people read Mao and are immediately bought over to his philosophy in the West, for some reason he doesn't capture the heart and the minds of Westerners in the way that figures like Marx and Engels have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| ishmaelblues |
| Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Junior
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 242
|
| Mao really stemmed the chances of the USSR officially running from east german to Vietnam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1110
|
Mao was a nasty little bastard who had an enormously negative effect on China. He held back its development and its impact on the wider world. If he had not lived, and China had become democratic, and global in its outlook, China would now be a world power of unbelievable proportions. The rest of the world would be much more in the shadow of that great nation.
Instead, China was insular under Mao, and backward, and is only now beginning to achieve its potential. We may yet see what would have been achieved without that nasty little dictator. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 4180
|
I think you ignore the nightmare of feudalism, poverty, and spiralling underdevelopment that was China prior to communism. Before Mao the country was descending backwards. I'm not gonna say he conjured instant prosperity. Try to understand things in their context.
If you absolutely must damn Mao, then I guess you might appreciate the Chinese people for developing China at an enviable pace despite this last of their nasty dictators.
_________________
A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1110
|
Pong
You can see the lost opportunities under Mao when you compare with Taiwan.
There was a struggle in the 1940's between Mao and his communists, versus Chiang Kai Shek and his democracy movement. Mao took the Chinese mainland, while the democrats took Taiwan. Taiwan, being democratic and outward looking, had substantial economic growth, leading to a high standard of living for its citizens.
http://www.gio.gov.tw/info/taiwan-story/economy/edown/3-5.htm
Meanwhile, mainland China had virtually zero economic growth, and a period in the early 1960's when Mao's insane policies led to 30 million deaths from starvation.
Mao died in 1976, and his successor began a 'capitalist' program in 1978. Economic growth in the areas where the Chinese government permitted capitalism ran rapidly to double digits, and an accelerating standard of living. It continues today, and wealth is becoming common in mainland China.
Mao held back the development of China from 1949 to 1976. Without Mao, China would now be a prosperous nation, and a world leader in both economics and the military. The USA might, by now, be second best!
We can only speculate how history might have gone. A resurgent and economically prosperous China 40 years ago would have meant massive competition to the west. China would be involved in everything from military action to space exploration. The west would have had to respond by becoming better and stronger. Whether this would have led to a better or a worse world, I do not know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 4180
|
| skeptic wrote: |
| You can see the lost opportunities under Mao when you compare with Taiwan. |
Ignoring that significant countries openly worked against China's success while supporting Taiwan. I'm sorry, that is like comparing Israel to Egypt - the world outside matters much! As a Kiwi you must understand this. Suppose we all sanction New Zealand and blame your insane government for depriving its own citizens? See how it works?
Again I'm not saying Mao was great. I actually think his importance was greatly exaggerated both inside and out. But try to understand things in their context.
_________________
A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Harold14370 |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 13 Apr 2007
Posts: 3061
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Pong wrote: |
| skeptic wrote: |
| You can see the lost opportunities under Mao when you compare with Taiwan. |
Ignoring that significant countries openly worked against China's success while supporting Taiwan. I'm sorry, that is like comparing Israel to Egypt - the world outside matters much! As a Kiwi you must understand this. Suppose we all sanction New Zealand and blame your insane government for depriving its own citizens? See how it works?
Again I'm not saying Mao was great. I actually think his importance was greatly exaggerated both inside and out. But try to understand things in their context. |
Well, Hitler inherited a bad economy, made the trains run on time, and had significant countries working against his success. Who knows what he could have accomplished. So there are a few parallels there, but Mao had him outclassed when it came to killing large masses of people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| i_feel_tiredsleepy |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Posts: 1740
Location: Montreal
|
| Harold14370 wrote: |
| Pong wrote: |
| skeptic wrote: |
| You can see the lost opportunities under Mao when you compare with Taiwan. |
Ignoring that significant countries openly worked against China's success while supporting Taiwan. I'm sorry, that is like comparing Israel to Egypt - the world outside matters much! As a Kiwi you must understand this. Suppose we all sanction New Zealand and blame your insane government for depriving its own citizens? See how it works?
Again I'm not saying Mao was great. I actually think his importance was greatly exaggerated both inside and out. But try to understand things in their context. |
Well, Hitler inherited a bad economy, made the trains run on time, and had significant countries working against his success. Who knows what he could have accomplished. So there are a few parallels there, but Mao had him outclassed when it came to killing large masses of people. |
Hitler was in a very different position though. State-Corporatism combined with Germany's existing economic influence on Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary allowed him to manipulate economies of central Europe in his favor. He also had the advantage of an educated and skilled work force with an existing industrial infrastructure.
Mao inherited a nation with no infrastructure, no skilled labour, no industrial framework, no access to outside markets, and near 20 years of perpetual war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1110
|
The impact of type of government on economic growth can be seen in a large number of other nations.
North Korea is economic disaster, while South Korea, with the same kind of people and culture, thrived, and is now wealthy. The only significant difference is the type of government.
Right across Africa, with corrupt governments, and despite many nations having massive natural resources (eg Nigeria and its oil), poverty and human misery rules. Reason? Corrupt and incompetent government.
Singapore had strong and non corrupt government, and led its people from economic ruin when the Japanese left in 1945, to incredible growth and eventually wealth.
A similar situation to Singapore in 1945 existed in the Phillippines. However, those poor people had a corrupt dictator to rule them. Result - continuing poverty.
Taiwan had good democratic government, and few natural resources. With good government, they grew into a wealthy nation, while mainland China, with massively more resources, under that nasty little bastard Mao, languished in poverty, and killed so many millions from starvation.
The final demonstration of the harm he did comes from the fact that, since he died, China has not slowed its economic growth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 4180
|
| skeptic wrote: |
North Korea / South Korea
The only significant difference is the type of government. |
You really believe that. I understand how that could make sense and yield a satisfying conclusion.
_________________
A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wangwy13 |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 95
|
| skeptic wrote: |
Pong
You can see the lost opportunities under Mao when you compare with Taiwan.
There was a struggle in the 1940's between Mao and his communists, versus Chiang Kai Shek and his democracy movement. |
If Chiang Kai Shek was so good, then why nearly every poor man who is now as old as my grandfather hates him?!
Chiang Kai Shek can never save China, so do Sun Yat-sen(Sun Zhongshan)--Chiang's guide and teacher, although Sun is one of the greatest man in China.
And differences of the type of governments tells only a little.
You can't assert a whale to be a fish for its shape.
Governments are generated by people!
Strange to see how you believe one man can completely influence one nation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 4180
|
Brainwashing.  Mao brainwashed everybody!
I'm sorry, I guess the theory of omnipotent dictators comes from the end of WW2, when people of defeated countries excused their actions: "Hitler made us do it." History is also written by losers.
_________________
A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wangwy13 |
| Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Freshman
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 95
|
| Pong wrote: |
Brainwashing. Mao brainwashed everybody!
I'm sorry, I guess the theory of omnipotent dictators comes from the end of WW2, when people of defeated countries excused their actions: "Hitler made us do it." History is also written by losers. |
Oh, that's really a extremely bad theory  ...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1110
|
Wang
I never said Chiang Kai Shek was good. What I said was that Taiwan, under democracy, and being outward looking, became relatively wealthy, and mainland China under Mao suffered with poverty and starvation. The strength of democracy is that it performs even when leaders are not great.
The original question, though, can be answered by saying that Mao influenced the whole world by keeping China poor and backward, and hence non competitive through that stage in world history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
