| |
| How has Mao Zedong influenced the world? |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| wangwy13 |
 Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:22 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 101
|
| skeptic wrote: |
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| skeptic |
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1172
|
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? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 4188
|
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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wangwy13 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 101
|
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1172
|
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wangwy13 |
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 101
|
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1172
|
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kojax |
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 3136
|
| 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. 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. |
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.
| wangwy13 wrote: |
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 4188
|
| kojax wrote: |
| 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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wangwy13 |
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 101
|
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? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kojax |
| Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 3136
|
| Pong wrote: |
| kojax wrote: |
| 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
| Quote: |
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] |
| wangwy13 wrote: |
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.
| Quote: |
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 4188
|
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. 
_________________
A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wangwy13 |
| Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 101
|
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1172
|
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Pong |
| Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 08 Apr 2008
Posts: 4188
|
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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
