Notices
Results 1 to 40 of 40

Thread: How has Mao Zedong influenced the world?

  1. #1 How has Mao Zedong influenced the world? 
    Forum Freshman IAlexN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    90
    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,


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    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.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    266
    Mao really stemmed the chances of the USSR officially running from east german to Vietnam
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    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
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    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-st.../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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    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
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    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
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    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
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    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 :-D ......
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    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.
    Talking on poverty and starvation, there were several climate disasters in China between 1950s and 1960s. It's important, obviously.
    The original question can not be discuss isolated on government issues.
    Taiwan, its geographical advantages determined it's a good seaport and manufacture center. And remember Chiang took most of specialists to Taiwan.
    While mainland, after war last for one century, no industry, no modern agriculture, no modern economy system and during devaluation.
    If mainland was more relatively wealthy than Taiwan, that should be strangest thing.
    Mainland is too huge and Taiwan is too small, it's not so easy to compare them by any single criteria.

    And, democracy, I can't catch up with you on this word. Chiang ruled China for about 25 years. What about the period before he went to Taiwan? And is Taiwan 'democracy' pattern really necessary to became relatively wealthy? I doubt this.
    "I never said Chiang Kai Shek was good" I also got confused here. You compare Taiwan and mainland, one wealth vs one poor. The reason to this phenomenon is democracy to (?)Mao? Incomparable objects!
    I thought you were comparing Chiang and Mao, democracy and authoritarianism, two persons and two systems. But you are comparing one person to one system.
    And if you think system is more strong than its leader. So how Taiwan accepted democracy, there is a transition, but how?

    As I mentioned, whatever which politic system mainland really is, at least it is not the single reason for its poverty before Mao died. Go further, Mao, as a single person, is not the only one who is responsible to that system. To be honest, it's the responsibility of whole Chinese people.

    One history correction, during his life, Chiang make few efforts on 'democracy', I think you meant his son, Chiang Jingguo.

    Another idea I don't agree with you --"Mao died in 1976, and his successor began a 'capitalist' program in 1978. "
    Time will show us China is in a 'capitalist' program or something else.

    To the origin question of IAlexN:
    My answer: Mao influenced nobody.
    Strange? But I think so.
    Asia, Africa, south America, east Europe, people there all have their own beliefs and own needs.
    Asia needs to get modern, Africa needs to get independent, south America needs to get off the Military dictatorship system, east Europe needs to get off from pain of war.
    Mao, during his own experience, fight against every possible kinds of enemy in his life. Mao gave them confidence to get strong(or get violence).
    Without Mao, world still would become its shape now, but maybe quicker or slower.
    It's not Mao influenced somebody, it's the atmosphere of 20 century influenced whole world, including Mao.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Wang

    I probably should not have mentioned Chiang Kai Shek. The individual is not the point in relation to Taiwan. In a democracy, the system is what is important, not the individual leader. If the leader gets too important, or too powerful, then it is no longer a democracy. In the United States, the system prevents a president from serving more than two terms, which is a very sensible way of doing it. However, there was nothing stopping Mao from being the leader of mainland China for his whole life.

    When one person has too much power, then terrible things can happen, because no single person is always right. If that single person has the wrong motives, then even more terrible things can happen. This was true for Josef Stalin in the USSR. It was true for Adolph Hitler in Germany. Napoleon in France, and many other historical figures. Limiting individual power is vital for preventing such terrible outcomes. A democracy limits the power of the leader.

    Mao had no such limits on his power, and he applied policies that caused terrible things to happen. His agricultural policies in the early 1960's caused 30 million people to die of starvation. This disaster was NOT caused by climate problems. it was caused by lousy policy. Climate disasters happen all over the world on a regular basis. They lead to hardship, but not to 30 million dead unless there is very bad government policy being forced at the same time.

    In a democracy, if the leader proves to be the wrong person, for whatever reason, then he or she is voted out by the people at the next election. In Mao's time, in China, the only way he could have been gotten rid of would be through armed rebellion, which would have caused the deaths of many more millions of people. So which is better? Mao's way, or democracy?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    This moral digression to the value of democracy corroborates my point that China suffered isolation because it wasn't in the club of capitalist democracies. Skeptic please reflect on the value of the Commonwealth. I think your country gained much from this affiliation. What's Queen Elizabeth got to do with effective government?

    Economic isolation is decisive. You want to blame China for the result of striving for staple self-sufficiency. You think they did it for no good reason? Port of Vancouver overflowed with prairie wheat we weren't allowed to sell while Chinese starved. Whose game was that? Mao's?

    BTW Canadians have a long tradition of flying to Cuba in winter, via Mexico. Meanwhile the Yanks say Cuba suffers not because of the embargo but because Castro isn't dead yet. Don't you see what's going on here?
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    skeptic

    I known your point from your reply on Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:27 pm. It's quite clear to anybody who has read some about capitalist democracy.
    I think you believe some 'technology' called democracy can prevent leader from doing bad to his/her country. Am I describing properly?

    So still the question here, Taiwan, when under leading of Chiang Kai Shek, was at least not completely democracy. During the period of Chiang Jingguo's leading, Taiwan system became democracy. How the transition happens? The previous leader gave up his power voluntarily? And how possible Washington was a president instead of a king, the democracy? Before it born?
    There is the same question to mainland, how Mao became the leader? It's valuable since before 1930s, he didn't enter the center of the party.

    The history surely not completely determined by any leader's own willing. Not in China, not in US, not in UK, not in any countries.
    Nor any political system has that power.
    If capitalist democracy really is a effective 'technology' to doing good, there shouldn't be any war now. Truth is not that.

    Now people like you blame Mao for the death during Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. Oh, I think the only relationship of Mao and the two things is Mao was still alive at that time. Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution would happen sooner or later(maybe with other name) if he had been dead. No money, no technology, no specialists, no education, even not possible to anyone to hold a election, what you hope 0.5 billion people who get rid of emperor, warlord and intruders after one century to save themselves. Capitalist democracy can't bring bread. They thought they can get rid of intruders only by confidence, so they still thought they can get rid of hungry by confidence. That's logical and agrees to human emotion feelings.

    You described human society in a too human-feeling-less and too ideal way. A country is alive just like a life. His way is determined by many aspect, its people inside, other people outside, the productive power....
    Capitalist Democracy is good for it's good to most people's benefits at determined time period. It's not good for Chinese since 1800s. There were not so many possibilities. Destiny, maybe, depend on human and their environments. Mao did better than Chiang Kai Shek and the system did not prevent him to make bad efforts because people without fully education agreed to him. Capitalist Democracy would change nothing. If democracy is something like medical bill things now in US, worse maybe, before elephant and donkey talking over, Chinese people all died.

    I kept distance to moral problems, since everyone has own moral criteria. But Pong talked one important thing. I second him.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Wang

    You are correct in saying that the fate of a nation depends on many things, and not just on who is leader. Nor is democracy necessarily the key. A good leader can lead his/her country to prosperity, even if he/she is a dictator. The classic is Lee Kwan Yew in Singapore, who led Singapore to prosperity. Lee Kwan Yew was definitely not a democratic leader. In fact, he was quite totalitarian. Under him, Singapore suffered a serious lack of human rights, but grew in material wealth.

    However, there is little doubt that the 30 million people who died in China in the early 1960's died as a result of policies that Mao pushed very vigorously. Mao dominated the government so much that what he wanted is what happened.

    The greatest value of democracy is that a bad or corrupt leader is voted out. The Chinese people under Mao were not able to do that. Only after his death could mainland China introduce policies that lead to prosperity and a better way of life for the Chinese people.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    skeptic

    Past is past. Mao's fault only means to us and anyone who wants to learn something. I won't blame Mao for the death(he made the climate disaters more terrible but he did that not from bad start point and nobody else clearly realized what happened). The only problem is that he was clever enough to see the truth but failed.

    Well, we, at least I will never accept Capitalist Democracy and will prevent other Chinese to accept it since it's not so effective as it's said to be and not more effective than the current Chinese system.
    There is no Capitalist Democracy in ancient age. Surely it's not the final of human social system. There must be something better need us to find out. This system will also give an end to the power gmblings between conutries. We will ultimately find out we work to live a better life, not to make motherland stronger than others.
    Did you see Star Trek? Space need us to explore, to seek out new things. Not only space, we have a lot to do with ourselves. And, this is a birthright.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Wang

    I agree that we should not be all striving to the benefit of the motherland. I believe that our loyalty should be more to humanity as a whole than to our country. If any one country is left in poverty with people starving, that is a failure for all peoples.

    On democracy. Capitalism is not the same as democracy. You can have a democracy with capitalism, or a democracy with socialism. Both have been tried. Both systems have good and bad features.

    The mainland Chinese system is one that depends strongly on having good leaders. If the leaders are bad, as I believe Mao was, then the Chinese people suffer. If the leaders are good, then the people of China can prosper. It is when leaders are bad that democracy is vitally important. Because the people can vote those bad leaders out of office.

    On star trek and the future. I hope that one day we will explore space. It will not be done in the way star trek describes. This is mostly true because travel faster than light is theoretically impossible. Travel at speeds that can be attained will be less than light speed. It will take many decades to reach any other star system. As a result, the future development of interstellar travel will be very, very different to that described by star trek.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    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-st.../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.
    Maybe Mao paved the way indirectly for all of this. Taiwan allowed American capitalism to have a much stronger affect on it than it might have otherwise, because they needed American support in order to survive.

    Mao was able to create almost a paragon of Communist extremes during his lifetime that would have resulted in a backlash at the time of his death. Sometimes a backlash can be a very good thing, if it's the right kind of backlash.

    It's sort of like how they say in art, that the white space tells you just as much as the colored, or black areas. South Korea and North Korea probably drive one another to become extremes of their kind of systems as well. Better for South Korea, worse for North Korea, but the point is that conflict causes people to unite/cooperate and walk in step with each other. The better system will shine brighter, and the worse system will show its flaws faster.

    Quote Originally Posted by wangwy13

    And remember Chiang took most of specialists to Taiwan.
    Well, why do you think they chose to follow him instead of staying behind? Wasn't it because the Maoists would have oppressed them?

    That means it's the Maoists own fault the specialists left. They're to blame for that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    Well, why do you think they chose to follow him instead of staying behind?
    Money.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    kojax

    Do you really believe everything is dualistic?

    Yes, someone were oppressed. Did it complete prove that Mao never lead in a 'right' way? Did that proved it was all Mao's fault?

    Why comparing the good aspect of USA with the bad aspect of China?
    How do you explain this?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings

    Except Mao is a bad man...democracy is a good thing...what else you get? Nothing!
    You treat history like a play. Do you really care the Chinese dead during Mao's time?
    Like your other topics, what's your original intention?

    Do not be a hypocritical man. Please give me more evidences to change my opinion to you.

    And, I really hate the word 'Maoist'. What is the relationship between Mao and Maoist? A brand? A label?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    Well, why do you think they chose to follow him instead of staying behind?
    Money.
    "If you happen to be rich"? Right, because wealth is just something that happens by accident. "Money" doesn't make anything go round. More educated people coordinating the efforts of less educated people, and those people doing work is what makes the world go round. That and natural resources.

    Here's the problem with Maoist China:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution

    Elsewhere, the 10 years of the Cultural Revolution also brought the education system to a virtual halt. The university entrance exams were cancelled during this period, not to be restored by Deng Xiaoping until 1979. Many intellectuals were sent to rural labour camps, and many of those who survived left China shortly after the revolution ended. Many survivors and observers suggest that almost anyone with skills over that of the average person was made the target of political "struggle" in some way. According to most Western observers as well as followers of Deng Xiaoping, this led to almost an entire generation of inadequately educated individuals. However, this varies depending on the region, and the measurement of literacy did not resurface until the 1980s.[21] Some counties in the Zhanjiang district, for example, had illiteracy rates as high as 41% some 20 years after the revolution. The leaders denied any illiteracy problems from the start. This effect was amplified by the elimination of qualified teachers—many of the districts were forced to rely upon chosen students to re-educate the next generation.[21]

    Quote Originally Posted by wangwy13
    kojax

    Do you really believe everything is dualistic?
    No. But when two factions see one another as opposites, then they strive to be everything the other one isn't. In this case, I think people chose to make a dualism out of the situation deliberately.


    Except Mao is a bad man...democracy is a good thing...what else you get? Nothing!
    You treat history like a play. Do you really care the Chinese dead during Mao's time?
    Like a lot of Americans, I don't care about life and death. I only care about justice and injustice.

    If I had to choose between living as a slave, and dying free, I would choose to die free. The fact so many Americans agree with that sentiment is why we have freedom in this country. Nobody would dare try and take freedom away from a society that is willing to die over it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Kojax, the US and Canadian West Coast is called Gold Mountain in Chinese for a reason. In Vancouver stereotyping about the motives for leaving China is something of a taboo... but you may think what you like. :wink:
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    kojax

    Seems you see words by choice.
    Or I should assume there's no democracy in US until 1970s.
    How convenient! You are 'Watchmen' of China.
    For your own justice reasons, Chinese should go as your wish. I don't think this is freedom.

    Sorry, star trek again, although star trek can't go beyond your justice believes, it did a lot of fascinating tries. Never considered maybe other people may have different opinion of so called justice and democracy?

    Pong

    Whatever, you mentioned a good point.
    In China, to keep alive is always the first important thing. If you take a imagination of the huge population and not very fertile land, you will understand that.
    As I know, Gold Mountain saying start from Qing Dynasty in 19th century. Lots of Chinese believed they would get money there and go back home with a better future life.
    The bosses were always Americans, a few Chinese compradors took the charge of persuading people going there. Oh, of cause, no gold at all.
    I think the Chinese compradors are more guilt, our people has some deep rooted bad habits(? or word like scoundrelism, I find the semantic severity of English words is so hard to master), I should admit this.
    Recent years, the look of things changed, but the deep inside shadows still exist in some people. Vancouver is one example, I'm sorry they stained this city.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Wang

    Let me start by saying I admire you for joining this forum and this debate. I understand your difficulty with English, but my Mandarin is far worse! I respect your efforts to communicate, and I think you are doing a very good job.

    There is always a problem with understanding different cultures also. The culture of China is very different to Western culture, and it is difficult for each to understand the other. Americans put a very high value on individual liberty. As I understand it, the Chinese value the good of the community more highly. Am I wrong?

    Neither Chinese or Americans are wrong in setting their values in this way. The only place we would go wrong is if we did not try to understand each other. I hope you will continue to debate on this forum, and I hope you will help us to understand the Chinese way of thinking.

    Best regards.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Chinese weren't the only people coming for the Gold Rush. The "stain" as you say, was a small exodus of opium addicts from China... that evolved into Vancouver's modern heroin culture. Why we also call Vancouver "Lotusland" i.e. a paradise of drug users. Later generations rather forget that if it's family history. But most aspired to small business and truly built our economy from the ground up. Most of last century, Gold Mountain (and, I think Taiwan) got the people who saw less personal gain under communism.

    Those include skilled people who can earn good money in a capitalist country. For Vancouver during Mao's time, Chinese had to pay a special "head tax" to immigrate, and more lately have to bring skills (funded by Chinese government right?). Immigration judges basically demand a future job resume. This is a deliberate "brain-drain" on China.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by wangwy13
    kojax

    Seems you see words by choice.
    Or I should assume there's no democracy in US until 1970s.
    How convenient! You are 'Watchmen' of China.
    For your own justice reasons, Chinese should go as your wish. I don't think this is freedom.
    My point about Mao is that, even though he was wrong, he did a good job of being wrong. He got people united. A lot of countries are not united, and they do poorly because of it. He set things up so that future reformers would have the power they needed to make changes. Without him, there wouldn't be a unified country at all, probably.


    Sorry, star trek again, although star trek can't go beyond your justice believes, it did a lot of fascinating tries. Never considered maybe other people may have different opinion of so called justice and democracy?
    China is a democracy last time I checked, or at least a republic, isn't it? People vote for local leaders, and local leaders vote for the leaders above them.

    However, justice is another matter. For me, justice means that nobody has a strong reason to want to leave your country. If China had it, then there wouldn't be any people trying to smuggle themselves into the USA in shipping containers.



    Whatever, you mentioned a good point.
    In China, to keep alive is always the first important thing. If you take a imagination of the huge population and not very fertile land, you will understand that.
    As I know, Gold Mountain saying start from Qing Dynasty in 19th century. Lots of Chinese believed they would get money there and go back home with a better future life.
    Perhaps Confucius's biggest mistake: telling people to have a lot of kids. He was right about a lot of other things, so I think we can forgive him for it, but it still left quite a mess.

    The thing I respect most about China is it's willingness to take measures against population growth. Some people really hate the one child law, but I'm all for it. Again, something that's probably only possible in a highly unified country.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    skeptic

    Firstly, thank you and all other members! You are helping me too.:-D

    About 'Chinese value the good of the community more highly', I'm not quite sure.
    My personal opinion is every human-being is a selfish person in the first place, meanwhile, the culture teach everyone to respect each other. Western culture emphasize individual liberty as a respect. There is a common belief of Chinese that you can do yourself a favor by do the community a favor for you can't live alone without others in the community. So we have different ways to do one thing.
    Dr. Joseph Needham think this difference comes from the different agriculture structure. Chinese work on crop farming which need people work together for a quite long time, while western culture work mostly on animal husbandry which only need much less people(the Bible can be an evidence). (I can't remember in which chapter he talked about this, but surely it's one topic of the book Science and Civilization in China)

    Pong

    Eh, I don't know...maybe this is another bad habit...Good things never come out its door, while bad things can be heard even hundreds miles away. I(we) always like to notice the bad aspect which hurt much more than the benefits....

    kojax

    Yes, people is the master of themselves and their nation.
    But Cultural Revolution and Khmer Rouge gives examples when people all lose their mind. To talk about justice of a country or a leader is not easy for the people in the same or nearby time period. But it's certainly not right to put all responsibility on one person.

    I don't think Confucius told anything on kids. And, Confucius is exaggerated in west. One Chinese fable tells that no ancient believes can be inherit by next generations for the next generation have their own life and own ways to understand the sayings or any other else. Confucius had been forgotten for a long time. Nowadays, you only see the Confucius which people tell in their own way.
    Of cause, another important thing is in fact Confucius never affect China so deeply.

    Actually, the rapid increasing of Chinese population happens during Mao's time.

    Everybody have the right to talk about anything as his/her wish and it's always easy to talk about things that have no relationship with oneself. But maybe we should be responsible for the consequences.
    kojax, I think you didn't think twice and you forgot the consequences when you talked about giving everyone a gun, war between China and USA, the African falling behind, muslin problems etc.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by wangwy13
    Pong

    Eh, I don't know...maybe this is another bad habit...Good things never come out its door, while bad things can be heard even hundreds miles away. I(we) always like to notice the bad aspect which hurt much more than the benefits....
    I didn't want to rate good or bad. I could express my point better:

    How has Mao Zedong influenced the world?

    How Mao influenced Vancouver, was by the Chinese who rejected Maoist ideals and emigrated to Vancouver. Vancouver is a young city defined by the people who've come here over the last century. The largest demographic is Chinese, not ordinary Chinese but rather those who valued free enterprise more than communism.

    Within Vancouver this anti-Maoist diaspora inspired a backlash: a "backwards" political contest over government policies, where members of the Chinese community pushed capitalist values (anti-Mao), while other groups including European and even American immigrants argued to the contrary we need more public transit, more affordable housing, etc. (socialist values).

    Because Mainland Chinese are less than 30% of the voting population, the elected result was mostly politicians who promised "to protect average working families from greedy business interests". Vancouver citizens also elect federal politicians, with the same argument in mind.

    So thanks to Mao/communism Vancouver has anti-Maoists/anti-communists, and thanks to them Vancouverites have a tangible "other" to define Vancouver ideals against. Flip, flop. We see this through the lens invented by Marxist dialectics.



    Imagine, wangwy13, if China was a small young country, and waves of fanatical Pro-Maoist Americans moved in. Most Chinese would backlash against those mad idealists, wouldn't they?
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    128
    Pong

    Oh, I didn't mean you rated good or bad. I was just telling you why I used the word 'stain'...

    However, you really teach me a course. I will remember these. For now, I really don't know what to say...
    Thank you!

    PS on 3/16/2010:

    kojax

    Sorry, I don't want to open another new reply. Here should not be debate place between only us.

    Mao is not important. And war is not important too.

    If you don't think you are too logical and sane, just let it go.
    Seems you don't have some concepts I have.
    Okay, I don't understand you at all. I accept this.

    I just hope you can ask in another way.
    War is not only win and lose, it's about hungry, starve, disease, death...you may be logical, what about others? Won't this rise a opposition like it has been? If you just compare the power difference, I would say nothing.
    And African and Muslins, did you ever see any of them?
    From your post, I got that you put their problems for their own faults. I don't think an erudite man will think in this way. I respect and admire Muslins expect someone murdered innocent people.

    If you have other to say and wish to, please pm me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    I hope that you understand that I don't think Mao was 100% bad or 100% good. That is why I say both bad and good things about him.

    Quote Originally Posted by wangwy13

    Everybody have the right to talk about anything as his/her wish and it's always easy to talk about things that have no relationship with oneself. But maybe we should be responsible for the consequences.
    kojax, I think you didn't think twice and you forgot the consequences when you talked about giving everyone a gun, war between China and USA, the African falling behind, muslin problems etc.
    I guess I'd rather do like Mao, and move the world in some direction, even if it is the wrong direction, rather than just be quiet all the time. It's better for there to be some bad changes than no changes.

    As for my China vs. USA thread, what I was trying to say is that technological superiority is not the only important factor in war. I used China as an example because it is a good example of a country that has a strong military that is not as technologically advanced as the USA. But, even though we have better technology, if there was a war, the USA might not win. (Naturally I hope there won't ever be a war.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    9
    Actually for the post 80s in China, Mao is no longer a being like god. Our parents' absolute accolade of Mao has disappeared. Definitely Mao has insulated China from the outer world, thus bogging China's development pace,But at least in Mao's regime, India never succeeded in getting south Tibet and China never lost so many islands in the South China Sea.
    Mao is always a controversial topic, when we are rich, we talk about Deng Xiaoping, when the nation is in danger, moreover we call for a power like Mao.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37 Re: How has Mao Zedong influenced the world? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by IAlexN
    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,
    I must be much qualified to answer this question, for I'm now experiencing my life in China.
    U never understand what Mao had done without having some conceptions of the history of China.
    Before 1911, China was governed under the power of emperors, who had the power beyond the law. In 1911, Sun Zhongshan as the leader of the revolution defeated the force of emperor, and then built a democratic republic state. But the government was not powerful enough to defeat those local dictators in different parts of the country, and to defeat the invaders from abroad, and a new dictator governed the state after the death of Sun in 1925. The most important thing was that, the people were living in misery and unsafety. They could not feed themselves and easily be killed by those dictators who had strong forces.
    Many people including students, pesents, workers, professors in colleges, businessmen and all those like that started to do something to turn arround the situation. All their wishes was to have a democratic and powful nation.
    Communist Party was founded under that situation. And it was truely the most advanced association in human history. They made the correct decisions and were quiet talented in strategy and tactics. And what was the most important was that, they fight for the people and were supported by the majority. Mao had no bodyguard arround him at that time.
    After 1949, Mao made some mistakes in civil policy and diplomacy, because of his selfish and ignorence to build a democratic nation. And in fact everyone has his deficiency so did Mao. The point was that, people in China factually had no authority to vote, and no one can correct his mistakes.
    Maybe what I'm talking about is not what most interest you, and I have the details of China and Mao, and I can be sure of the facticity of those materials. U can ask me whatever u want to know about China.
    PS: I'm not a communist.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by wangwy13
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    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.
    I greatly agree with your viewpoint.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Actually, I never said Chiang Kai Shek was particularly good. It is democracy that is so much superior, rather than any single individual. The value of democracy is that it works with a wide range of leaders. And Taiwan became wealthy under democracy, while mainland China suffered under the Chinese version of communism, and suffered especially when Mao was leading.

    Admittedly, the other factor helping Taiwan was its international focus, as opposed to the insular mentality of Mao.

    The second example, of course, is Hong Kong, which also became relatively very wealthy because it had good government while the rest of mainland China suffered under very bad government. Again, the international focus was a major factor.

    Now that mainland China has broken away from the damaging policies followed by Mao's government, it is growing economically, and becoming much more wealthy also.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Sophomore An inconvenient lie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    florida orlando/daytona area
    Posts
    130
    Well he certainly is one of the favorite philosopher's of an American politician!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...alwarming.html
    Global warming is an inconvenient lie!

    Student
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •