How many people were killed under Mao ?

[spiltteeth]

I'm not referring to the great famine or war, but how many dissidents were actually killed, disappeared, or imprisoned for long periods of time?
I've read so many different things I would greatly appreciate some clarity, thank you for the help.

[Ismail]

This seems like a good overview taking into account all possible sources: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Mao)




People's Republic of China, Mao Zedong's regime (1949-1975): 40 000 000 [make link (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Mao)]

Agence France Press (25 Sept. 1999) citing at length from Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism:

Rural purges, 1946-49: 2-5M deaths
Urban purges, 1950-57: 1M
Great Leap Forward: 20-43M
Cultural Revolution: 2-7M
Labor Camps: 20M
Tibet: 0.6-1.2M
TOTAL: 44.5 to 72M

Jasper Becker, Hungry Ghosts : Mao's Secret Famine (1996)

Estimates of the death toll from the Great Leap Forward, 1959-61:

Judith Banister, China's Changing Population (1984): 30M excess deaths (acc2 Becker: "the most reliable estimate we have")
Wang Weizhi, Contemporary Chinese Population (1988): 19.5M deaths
Jin Hui (1993): 40M population loss due to "abnormal deaths and reduced births"
Chen Yizi of the System Reform Inst.: 43-46M deaths


Brzezinski:

Forcible collectivization: 27 million peasants
Cultural Revolution: 1-2 million
TOTAL: 29 million deaths under Mao

Daniel Chirot:

Land reform, 1949-56

According to Zhou Enlai: 830,000
According to Mao Zedong: 2-3M

Great Leap Forward: 20-40 million deaths.
Cultural Revolution: 1-20 million

Jung Chang, Mao: the Unknown Story (2005)

Suppression of Counterrevolutionaries, 1950-51: 3M by execution, mob or suicide
Three-Anti Campaign, 1952-53: 200,000-300,000 suicides
Great Leap Forward, 1958-61: 38M of starvation and overwork
Cultural Revolution, 1966-76: > 3M died violent deaths
Laogai camp deaths, 1949-76: 27M
TOTAL under Mao: 70M

Dictionary of 20C World History: around a half million died in Cultural Rev.
Eckhardt:

Govt executes landlords (1950-51): 1,000,000
Cultural Revolution (1967-68): 50,000

Gilbert:

1958-61 Famine: 30 million deaths.

Kurt Glaser and Stephan Possony, Victims of Politics (1979):

They estimate the body count under Mao to be 38,000,000 to 67,000,000.
Cited by G & P:

Walker Report (see below): 44.3M to 63.8M deaths.
The Government Information Office of Taiwan (18 Sept. 1970): 37M deaths in the PRC.
A Radio Moscow report (7 Apr. 1969): 26.4M people had been exterminated in China.
(NOTE: Obviously the Soviets and Taiwanese would, as enemies, be strongly motivated to exaggerate.)


Guinness Book of World Records:

Although nowadays they don't come right out and declare Mao to be the Top Dog in the Mass Killings category, earlier editions (such as 1978) did, and they cited sources which are similar, but not identical, to the Glaser & Possony sources:

On 7 Apr. 1969 the Soviet government radio reported that 26,300,000 people were killed in China, 1949-65.
In April 1971 the cabinet of the government of Taiwan reported 39,940,000 deaths for the years 1949-69.
The Walker Report (see below): between 32,2500,000 and 61,700,000.


Harff and Gurr:

KMT cadre, rich peasants, landlords (1950-51): 800,000-3,000,000
Cultural Revolution (1966-75): 400,000-850,000

John Heidenrich, How to Prevent Genocide: A Guide for Policymakers, Scholars, and the Concerned Citizen: 27M death toll, incl. 2M in Cultural Revolution
Paul Johnson doesn't give an overall total, but he gives estimates for the principle individual mass dyings of the Mao years:

Land reform, first years of PRC: at least 2 million people perished.
Great Leap Forward: "how many millions died ... is a matter of conjecture."
Cultural Revolution: 400,000, calling the 3 Feb. 1979 estimate by Agence France Presse, "The most widely respected figure".

Meisner, Maurice, Mao's China and After (1977, 1999), doesn't give an overall total either, but he does give estimates for the three principle mass dyings of the Mao years:

Terror against the counterrevolutionaries: 2 million people executed during the first three years of the PRC.
Great Leap Forward: 15-30 million famine-related deaths.
Cultural Revolution: 400,000, citing a 1979 estimate by Agence France Presse.

R. J. Rummel:

Estimate:

Democide: 34,361,000 (1949-75)

The principle episodes being...

All movements (1949-58): 11,813,000

incl. Land Reform (1949-53): 4,500,000

Cult. Rev. (1964-75): 1,613,000
Forced Labor (1949-75): 15,000,000
Great Leap Forward (1959-63): 5,680,000 democides


War: 3,399,000
Famine: 34,500,000

Great Leap Forward: 27M famine deaths

TOTAL: 72,260,000

Cited in Rummel:

Li, Cheng-Chung (Republic of China, 1979): 78.86M direct/indirect deaths.
World Anti-Communist League, True Facts of Maoist Tyranny (1971): 64.5M
Glaser & Possony: 38 to 67M (see above)
Walker Report, 1971 (see below): 31.75M to 58.5M casualties of Communism (excluding Korean War).
Current Death Toll of International Communism (1979): 39.9M
Stephen R. Shalom (1984), Center for Asian Studies, Deaths in China Due To Communism: 3M to 4M death toll, excluding famine.


Walker, Robert L., The Human Cost of Communism in China (1971, report to the US Senate Committee of the Judiciary) "Casualties to Communism" (deaths):

1st Civil War (1927-36): .25-.5M
Fighting during Sino-Japanese War (1937-45): 50,000
2nd Civil War (1945-49): 1.25M
Land Reform prior to Liberation: 0.5-1.0M
Political liquidation campaigns: 15-30M
Korean War: 0.5-1.234M
Great Leap Forward: 1-2M
Struggle with minorities: 0.5-1.0M
Cultural Revolution: .25-.5M
Deaths in labor camps: 15-25M
TOTAL: 34.3M to 63.784M
TOTAL FOR PRC: 32M to 59.5M

July 17, 1994, Washington Post (Great Leap Forward 1959-61)

Shanghai University journal, Society: > 40 million
Cong Jin: 40 million
Chen Yizi: 43 million in the famine. 80 million total as a result of Mao's policies.

Weekly Standard, 29 Sept. 1997, "The Laogai Archipelago" by D. Aikman:

Between 1949 and 1997, 50M prisoners passed through the labor camps, and 15,000,000 died (citing Harry Wu)

WHPSI: 1,633,319 political executions and 25,961 deaths from political violence, 1948-77. TOTAL: 1,659,280
Analysis: If we line up the 14 sources which claim to be complete, the median falls in the 45.75 to 52.5 million range, so you probably can't go wrong picking a final number from this neighborhood. Depending on how you want to count some of the incomplete estimates (such as Becker and Meisner) and whether to count a source twice (or thrice, as with Walker) if it's referenced by two different authorities, you can slide the median up and down the scale by many millions. Keep in mind, however, that official Chinese records are hidden from scrutiny, so most of these numbers are pure guesses. It's pointless to get attached to any one of them, because the real number could easily be half or twice any number here.
Perhaps a better way of estimating would be to add up the individual components. The medians here are:

Purges, etc. during the first few years: 2M (10 estimates)
Great Leap Forward: 31-33M (14 estimates)
Cultural Revolution: 1M (13 estimates)
Ethnic Minorities, primarily Tibetans: 750-900T (8 estimates, see below (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Tibet))
Labor Camps: 20M (5 estimates)
This produces a total of some 54,750,000 to 56,900,000 deaths. The weak link in this calculation is in the Labor Camp numbers for which we only have 5 estimates.

Notice that many early body counts (such as Walker) completely miss the famine during the Great Leap Forward, which was largely unknown in the west until around 1980. There are two contradictory ways to assess those early estimates which ignore the famine:

"If these are the numbers that they came up with without the famine, imagine how high the true number will be once you add the famine deaths."
"Can we trust any of these numbers? After all, if they missed such a huge famine, they can't have known very much about what was going on inside China."

... so this line of reasoning will get us nowhere. In fact, the median of the 7 estimate that predate 1980 is 45.7M, which is almost the same as the median of the 7 estimates that post-date 1980 -- 58M. (At this scale, a 12M difference counts as "almost the same".)

Tibet (1950 et seq.): 600 000

Chinese occupation. (For the most part, it's already been included in the numbers above.)

Free Tibet Campaign [http://www.freetibet.org/info/facts/fact1.html]

Tibetans killed by the Chinese since 1950: 1,200,000
Died in prisons and labour camps between 1950 and 1984: up to 260,000
1959 Uprising: 430,000 died

K. in Reprisals: 87,000


Our Times: 1,200,000
Courtois: 600,000 - 1,200,000
Walker, Robert: 500,000-1,000,000 (all ethnic minorities)
Rummel: 375,000 democides inflicted on etnic minorities

... incl 150,000 Tibetans

Porter: 100,000 to 150,000.
Eckhardt:

1950-51 War: 2,000 civ.
1956-59 Revolt: 60,000 civ. + 40,000 mil. = 100,000

Harff and Gurr: 65,000 Tibetan nationalists, landowners, Buddhists killed, 1959
Small & Singer say that China lost 40,000 soldiers in Tibet between 1956 and '59.

[khad]

Jung Chang, Mao: the Unknown Story (2005)

Suppression of Counterrevolutionaries, 1950-51: 3M by execution, mob or suicide
Three-Anti Campaign, 1952-53: 200,000-300,000 suicides
Great Leap Forward, 1958-61: 38M of starvation and overwork
Cultural Revolution, 1966-76: > 3M died violent deaths
Laogai camp deaths, 1949-76: 27M

I think all of these figures overestimate the number of people who died in laogai (labor corrections). Supposedly, some 50 million people passed through the labor prison system (and that's up to & including the present-day!). To have 15-25 million dead for just the the Mao period is just astronomical. In order for that to be true, these prisons would have to have death rates comparable to Nazi extermination camps, with every single person going there ending up dead.

A more conservative value of 2-4 million in laogai would perhaps be more statistically plausible. I'm extrapolating from my knowledge of GULAG administered prison mortality under Stalin, which if you take out the statistical spike in ww2 (national famine due to German invasion) recorded about 800,000 deaths total over 20 years. Of course, China would have had its own statistical spike with the 1959-62 famine.

Typically these labor prisons operated like a revolving door, with people constantly going in and getting released. Sentences would be 1-3 years, and in any given year as many as half of the prisoner population would turn over. There are many, many survivors of the laogai system, and many of them didn't even think it was all that brutal. Obviously, different facilities had different standards and quality of life.

[New Tet]

[QUOTE=spiltteeth;1507116]I'm not referring to the great famine or war, but how many dissidents were actually killed, disappeared, or imprisoned for long periods of time?QUOTE]

I'm curious to know why is a body count so important?

Not that I want to minimize the suffering many people may have experienced, but why is a suffering index so important?

[Old Man Diogenes]

I'm curious to know why is a body count so important?

Well I think the bodycount under a certain politicians is important, because it serves as a warning not vote them in again.

[New Tet]

Well I think the bodycount under a certain politicians is important, because it serves as a warning not vote them in again.

Sorry, but that's not quite the way i see it.

For years now there have been people sliming the net promoting the so-called "black book of communism" which is supposed to list the number of people "killed" by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.

This is supposed to substitute for a reasoned discussion about communism and serves as a half-witted propaganda tool against socialism.

So, fuck the head count, comrade; capitalism has enough dead at its doorstep to build a stack high enough to reach the moon.

[scarletghoul]

It's near impossible to know how many people really died, due to the heavy amount of bullshit propaganda and the widely varying estimates.
I think the most reliable sources would be the official chinese statistics of the time (not from deng era), but obviously they could be distorted a little too

[Nwoye]

does it really matter whether he killed 10 million or 40 million or 100 million? Whatever way you slice it he was a murdering dictator.

[Ovi]

does it really matter whether he killed 10 million or 40 million or 100 million? Whatever way you slice it he was a murdering dictator.
Exactly.

Sorry, but that's not quite the way i see it.

For years now there have been people sliming the net promoting the so-called "black book of communism" which is supposed to list the number of people "killed" by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.

This is supposed to substitute for a reasoned discussion about communism and serves as a half-witted propaganda tool against socialism.

Actually it's not about socialism, but about Mao's crimes.


So, fuck the head count, comrade; capitalism has enough dead at its doorstep to build a stack high enough to reach the moon.
Nobody was comparing here the death toll of Mao with that of capitalism, so that's irrelevant.


It's near impossible to know how many people really died, due to the heavy amount of bullshit propaganda and the widely varying estimates.
I think the most reliable sources would be the official chinese statistics of the time (not from deng era), but obviously they could be distorted a little too
A little you say? :laugh:

[scarletghoul]

does it really matter whether he killed 10 million or 40 million or 100 million? Whatever way you slice it he was a murdering dictator.
Thats a stupid stance to take. There has never ever been a bloodless revolution. There has never ever been a regime in world history that people haven't died under. Its only logical that there would be some deaths under a revolutionary regime. To say that the leader of the revolution and regime is an evil murdering dictator is stupid. By your logic all revolutionaries and world leaders are murderers

[Schrödinger's Cat]

You have to be careful when trying to associate a political target with a death count. Be it Hitler, Mao, Gandhi, Clinton, or Blaire - "killed under X" and "died under X" are not synonymous. How many people die each year from natural causes? Typically, the "black back of communism" and similar works of propaganda don't even attempt to distinguish between someone getting shot in the head by a secret police force and another guy dying of syphilis.

[Shin Honyong]

You have to be careful when trying to associate a political target with a death count. Be it Hitler, Mao, Gandhi, Clinton, or Blaire - "killed under X" and "died under X" are not synonymous. How many people die each year from natural causes? Typically, the "black back of communism" and similar works of propaganda don't even attempt to distinguish between someone getting shot in the head by a secret police force and another guy dying of syphilis.

Not to mention a good portion of deaths involving Mao did not stem from systemic orders from Mao. Much of the deaths during Mao's era was caused by violence carried out at the local level by angry peasants and students. The Red Guard formed independently of Mao who eventually founded himself having to arrest many of its members who went far beyond what he expected.

[scarletghoul]

Yeah, a lot of the death toll attributed to Mao is down to grassroots activity, not top down state coercion. In this way it differs a lot from the Stalin death toll with which it is often lumped together with

[khad]

Yeah, a lot of the death toll attributed to Mao is down to grassroots activity, not top down state coercion. In this way it differs a lot from the Stalin death toll with which it is often lumped together with
Actually, a lot of Stalin's purges came as the result of lower-level pressure, ie people who used the purges as an excuse to get rid of personal enemies. Stalin himself at times had to restrain overzealous officials, though the blame goes with Stalin in the first place for setting them on that path.

I don't think it's particularly useful to differentiate these incidences of mass persecution in the sense of suggesting that one was better or more understandable than the other. While we should not believe outrageous lies that are promulgated by the capitalist press, we ought to look at this history objectively and not fall into the trap of offering explanations that almost suggest justification.

[spiltteeth]

Thanks so much for the responses. I wanted a more realistic view then the black book of communism -(Mao killed one gazillion babies by eating them raw etc) but really I'm interested in studying every manifestation of communism in the real world, discarding the terrible, and appropriating the useful.
Theory always sounds great on paper, but in practice what happened? Plus when revolution happens their will be many deaths, but how many is reasonable? This can only be estimated based on circumstances plus past experiences. Were these deaths due to Mao's Marxism? Or to circumstances beyond his control, at least partially -like famine, or village violence.
In other words, it speaks to just how violent or repressive a Maoist state can be expected to be.
Any other perspectives would be great.

[Howard509]

Sorry, but that's not quite the way i see it.

For years now there have been people sliming the net promoting the so-called "black book of communism" which is supposed to list the number of people "killed" by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.

This is supposed to substitute for a reasoned discussion about communism and serves as a half-witted propaganda tool against socialism.

So, fuck the head count, comrade; capitalism has enough dead at its doorstep to build a stack high enough to reach the moon.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

In A People's History of the United States, Zinn refers to Mao as the closest thing to a people's government that China had ever seen. Any thoughts on this?

[scarletghoul]

This is true. There was some direct democracy and extensive participation of the masses in the government during Maoist China. Certainly one of the most democratic regimes in world history

[spiltteeth]

This seems like a good overview taking into account all possible sources: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Mao)

[/LIST]
[/LIST]
[/LIST]


Thanks Ismail! But boy, these numbers really need analysis. I mean saying a 'safe number' to be between 42-58 million people killed based on all the estimates!!!
That is mind blowing.
I think I'm going to need to do some hard research.

[khad]

Thanks Ismail! But boy, these numbers really need analysis. I mean saying a 'safe number' to be between 42-58 million people killed based on all the estimates!!!
That is mind blowing.
I think I'm going to need to do some hard research.
You can probably subtract 15 million from that range. These estimates all rely on the supposition that 15-30 million people died in Laogai, which is demographically unsupportable.

The other numbers can probably be revised with closer analysis. The cultural revolution death for instance, probably contains everyone who was killed in that period, not just those in revolutionary violence. The decentralized nature of the CR makes it difficult to accurately attribute deaths.

[Shin Honyong]

Thanks Ismail! But boy, these numbers really need analysis. I mean saying a 'safe number' to be between 42-58 million people killed based on all the estimates!!!
That is mind blowing.
I think I'm going to need to do some hard research.

Remember this too; China is a giant fucking country so death counts are generally going to be high based on the high concentration of people in general.

[Ovi]

Thats a stupid stance to take. There has never ever been a bloodless revolution. There has never ever been a regime in world history that people haven't died under. Its only logical that there would be some deaths under a revolutionary regime. To say that the leader of the revolution and regime is an evil murdering dictator is stupid. By your logic all revolutionaries and world leaders are murderers
Saying that the revolution takes decades and that there can't be a bloodless one explains why millions of people got killed?

You have to be careful when trying to associate a political target with a death count. Be it Hitler, Mao, Gandhi, Clinton, or Blaire - "killed under X" and "died under X" are not synonymous. How many people die each year from natural causes? Typically, the "black back of communism" and similar works of propaganda don't even attempt to distinguish between someone getting shot in the head by a secret police force and another guy dying of syphilis.
Denial is the first step towards recovery from maoism :laugh:

This is true. There was some direct democracy and extensive participation of the masses in the government during Maoist China. Certainly one of the most democratic regimes in world history
The cultural revolution showing us the highest level of democracy attained in maoist china.

[Pol Pot]

Mao didn't kill anyone, they would have all died anyway, he just placed the timing of their deaths to a time frame that suited revolution.

[gorillafuck]

Mao didn't kill anyone, they would have all died anyway, he just placed the timing of their deaths to a time frame that suited revolution.
I'm also very skeptical about mainstream views of Mao, but seriously?

If you use that logic, nobody ever killed anyone.

[Pol Pot]

I'm also very skeptical about mainstream views of Mao, but seriously?

If you use that logic, nobody ever killed anyone.

under code s-22 of the revolutionary laws, only revolution allow for these "interferaces". :ninja:

[Nwoye]

Thats a stupid stance to take. There has never ever been a bloodless revolution. There has never ever been a regime in world history that people haven't died under. Its only logical that there would be some deaths under a revolutionary regime. To say that the leader of the revolution and regime is an evil murdering dictator is stupid. By your logic all revolutionaries and world leaders are murderers
This is partly true. Revolution is the most authoritarian action one can take. But there is a significant difference between violence in order to protect revolutionary institutions (legitimate) and indiscriminate violence against dissenters (Mao, Stalin, to a lesser extent Lenin).

[Nwoye]

Mao didn't kill anyone, they would have all died anyway, he just placed the timing of their deaths to a time frame that suited revolution.
omfg. i'm so glad you're banned.

[scarletghoul]

This is partly true. Revolution is the most authoritarian action one can take. But there is a significant difference between violence in order to protect revolutionary institutions (legitimate) and indiscriminate violence against dissenters (Mao, Stalin, to a lesser extent Lenin).
You're missing the point. I never said all the deaths were necessary to protect the revolution. The point is that the 'indiscriminate violence against dissenters' was largely due to grassroots peoples movements. While obviously it would be great if the revolution could happen without that, its not really possible. These deaths, however unneccesary, were part of the mass peoples revolutionary movement, and not just Mao killing all the opposition (which clearly didnt happen, as the opposition took power after Mao died).

[Nwoye]

You're missing the point. I never said all the deaths were necessary to protect the revolution. The point is that the 'indiscriminate violence against dissenters' was largely due to grassroots peoples movements. While obviously it would be great if the revolution could happen without that, its not really possible. These deaths, however unneccesary, were part of the mass peoples revolutionary movement, and not just Mao killing all the opposition (which clearly didnt happen, as the opposition took power after Mao died).
I understand that Mao didn't personally go around executing people, and that many deaths were a result of guerrilla attacks. But Mao was a murderer, and many many people died who didn't have to because of his rule. And that's bad.

[spiltteeth]

I understand that Mao didn't personally go around executing people, and that many deaths were a result of guerrilla attacks. But Mao was a murderer, and many many people died who didn't have to because of his rule. And that's bad.

Could you please back this up? I'm still learning, thanks.

[Coggeh]

Guinness Book of World Records:

Although nowadays they don't come right out and declare Mao to be the Top Dog in the Mass Killings category, earlier editions (such as 1978) did, and they cited sources which are similar, but not identical, to the Glaser & Possony sources:

On 7 Apr. 1969 the Soviet government radio reported that 26,300,000 people were killed in China, 1949-65.
In April 1971 the cabinet of the government of Taiwan reported 39,940,000 deaths for the years 1949-69.
The Walker Report (see below): between 32,2500,000 and 61,700,000.



Does anyone else think its weird that guiness book of world records has this under a catagory ... do they get one of them awards record breakers get ? :mellow:

[chimx]

I'm not referring to the great famine or war, but how many dissidents were actually killed, disappeared, or imprisoned for long periods of time?
I've read so many different things I would greatly appreciate some clarity, thank you for the help.

I believe there were upwards of 4.

[Forward Union]

32 billion.

[scarletghoul]

It's probably something between the 2 above estimates

[Forward Union]

It's probably something between the 2 above estimates

half way? are you saying he killed around 13billion people?

[scarletghoul]

When did I say half way?

[Big Red]

I'm not referring to the great famine or war, but how many dissidents were actually killed, disappeared, or imprisoned for long periods of time?
I've read so many different things I would greatly appreciate some clarity, thank you for the help.

Too many. Fuck Mao

[spiltteeth]

Without analyzed and backed up numbers, how can one really form an opinion on the Chinese revolution?
It' still quite confusing.
What numbers do the Maoist's here go by?

[scarletghoul]

Personally, I don't know how many died as it's impossible to know fo sure without doing loads and loads of research, and death toll isn't that important to modern class struggle or anything. Most of the deaths were due to the Great Leap Forward, which isn't exactly a policy any maoists are planning to emulate, especially in a first world country. In other words I haven't looked into the death toll thing enough becuase it's irrelevent

[Pogue]

I think the conduct of Mao is relevant to Maoists though. Seeing as they base their ideology on his ideas and actions. I think as a Maoist you'd have to deal with why it is that so many people died under Mao, and how your going to adapt your ideology to compensate for these errors. Simply saying 'We wont do that' doesn't really go deep enough.

[spiltteeth]

I have to agree with Poge on this. So, what about the death's that weren't due to the great leap forward, again I'm not interested in famine deaths, but deaths dues to policy's that turned out to have repressive, deadly repercussions.
I'm surprised Maoists haven't dug into this.

[el_chavista]

When it comes to "oriental despotism" mass murdering is a common place. What about the Japanese and the Kuomintang killings of Chinese communists, or Suharto in Indonesia? Or even just here in South América, Pinochet following orders from the CIA?

[Pogue]

I think massacres by dicators are brutal wherever they happen. It happens across all continents. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pinochet, Mugabe, the attitudes of some administrations in the US towards black people, etc.

[spiltteeth]

What I'm really trying to find out is how many deaths can be attributed to a Maoist type organizing of society in order to discover the policies that were good and beneficial and weed out the ones that weren't practical and lead to repression.
So this really includes only deaths that were specifically due to Maoist policies of repression. In other words, sift out the incidentals, the grass root killings, the famine etc etc and than see how many people had to die to create a functioning Maoist society.

[JimmyJazz]

You have to be careful when trying to associate a political target with a death count. Be it Hitler, Mao, Gandhi, Clinton, or Blaire - "killed under X" and "died under X" are not synonymous. How many people die each year from natural causes? Typically, the "black back of communism" and similar works of propaganda don't even attempt to distinguish between someone getting shot in the head by a secret police force and another guy dying of syphilis.

Yeah.

I have literally seen a high school history textbook that ascribed seven million deaths during the Russian Civil War period to Lenin personally.

[the last donut of the night]

Maybe Dear Chairman Mao can tell us how many he killed!:rolleyes:

[Communist Theory]

Just two Americans.

[LeninKobaMao]

Let me say this much less than estimated by capitalists I mean millions less.

[Howard509]

Most of the deaths were due to the Great Leap Forward

The Great Leap Forward not all bad
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FD01Ad04.html

Is it true that most of the famine was caused by natural disasters and the US trade embargo, rather than Mao's policies?

[bailey_187]

In 1936-38*, deaths per 1000 was 28.
Even at the height of the GLF, deaths per 1000** only reached 25.
Before and after the GLP (later 50s and early 60s), deaths per 1000 reached to about 10.
So,it would appear ,Mao actually saved peoples lives.
Now, if any would like to ad up the numbers how many Mao saved (based on the population and the number per 1000), that would be most useful. although i should probably get the exact per 1000 numbers, i will tomorrow

*Yes, they were in War years but they are from the Nationalist government taken in areas not affected and most likley the more economicaly better of.

**These might be the Deng statistics so maybe they are exaggerated

[bailey_187]

I think the conduct of Mao is relevant to Maoists though. Seeing as they base their ideology on his ideas and actions. I think as a Maoist you'd have to deal with why it is that so many people died under Mao, and how your going to adapt your ideology to compensate for these errors. Simply saying 'We wont do that' doesn't really go deep enough.

Its lucky you anarchists have never had to actually try to run a society(fuck of i dont care about a brief time in spain) so you can sit back and be horrified at the crimes of is evil Leninists

[mykittyhasaboner]

Mao didn't kill anyone. I killed them all, then he got the credit...:sleep::glare:.

[MarxSchmarx]

Its lucky you anarchists have never had to actually try to run a society(fuck of i dont care about a brief time in spain) so you can sit back and be horrified at the crimes of is evil LeninistsSo do you think repression and a murderous regime are inevitable for "running" a society? If so, why bother opposing capitalism in the first place?

BTW, for all the supposed benefits of Leninism, paid for at a very high price, every time it has been tried it has failed to achieve lasting communism, much less socialism. If Leninists had even one example of a prosperous, desirable and sustainable socialist society then MAYBE the atrocities committed in its name could at least be understood as a historical inevitability. No Leninist government has shown any indication that all the murders they commit has resulted in anything except an eventual resumption of the capitalist order. Even Cuba, I highly suspect, within a few decades if not years will resemble capitalist China if in fact it doesn't already.

[Lolshevik]

I don't know if anyone was killed directly under him, as I've done some research on the fellow and I don't think he was a necrophiliac...

[spiltteeth]

In 1936-38*, deaths per 1000 was 28.
Even at the height of the GLF, deaths per 1000** only reached 25.
Before and after the GLP (later 50s and early 60s), deaths per 1000 reached to about 10.
So,it would appear ,Mao actually saved peoples lives.
Now, if any would like to ad up the numbers how many Mao saved (based on the population and the number per 1000), that would be most useful. although i should probably get the exact per 1000 numbers, i will tomorrow

*Yes, they were in War years but they are from the Nationalist government taken in areas not affected and most likley the more economicaly better of.

**These might be the Deng statistics so maybe they are exaggerated

Thanks for this!
But, I really don;t know if 10-25 deaths per 1000 is alot or not, how does this compare to other countries?

[scarletghoul]

So do you think repression and a murderous regime are inevitable for "running" a society? If so, why bother opposing capitalism in the first place?
Repression is inevitable in any society. There has never been a society without repression and authoritarianism in some form, not even in 'anarchist' territories. Makhno done some pretty authoritarian shit, as did Durruti. Anarchist Ukraine, Spain, Shinmin, EZLN, all these examples you anarchists uphold, have been to varying degrees established and maintained by repression. This isn't a bad thing (the reactionary forces need repressing), but for some reason anarchists seem to be in denial about it. You have to understand that authoritarian repression is ever present. Our job as socialist revolutionaries is to replace reactionary oppression with progressive repression. If we do not exercise repression, then the reactionaries will and they will triumph.


I don't know if anyone was killed directly under him, as I've done some research on the fellow and I don't think he was a necrophiliac...
They were killed under him because he was so fat they got crushed. All two hundred million of them. (source: Mao The Unknown Story pages 56-470)

[bailey_187]

I cant be bothered to find the exact numbers, they are in Minqi Li's "The rise of China" and i think Joseph balls essay

[bailey_187]

Thanks for this!
But, I really don;t know if 10-25 deaths per 1000 is alot or not, how does this compare to other countries?

I dont know, look it up. the UN probably has stats about that stuff

The important thing, however, is the massive reduction

[bailey_187]

I think this quote from Bruce Franklin is relevant:

“Any historical figure must be evaluated from the interests of one class or another. Take J. Edgar Hoover, for example. Anti-communists may disagree about his performance, but they start from the assumption that the better he did his job of perserving ‘law and order’ as defined by our present rulers, the better he was. We Communists, on the other hand, certainly would not think Hoover ‘better’ if he had been more efficient in running the secret police and protecting capitalism. And so the opposite with Stalin, whose job was not to preserve capitalism but to destroy it, not to suppress communism but to advance it. The better he did his job, the worse he is likely to seem to all those who profit from this economic system and the more he will be appreciated by the victims of that system.”


(i know, its about Stalin but also applies to Mao)