What is Maoism and did it work?

[flaming bolshevik]

Can someone explain Maoism and how well it worked for china?
Btw if I mess up posting or anything I apologize

[A Song From Another World]

Yes it did work. If you want to find out about Maoist China read the fantastic book "Battle for China's Past: Mao and the Cultural Revolution" by Mobo Gao.

[The Intransigent Faction]

I'm probably gonna piss off some Maoists, Hoxhaists, and maybe others with the following, so let me make no apologies in advance. :grin: I know my own biases but it's a bit tough to give a thoroughly "tendency-neutral" overview without being even more long-winded. Seriously, though:

From someone who has read the book mentioned above (I do encourage you to read it, by the way), no, it did not "work". Modern China is evidence enough of that. Yes, things happen that can't always be predicted or prevented, but that China is what it is today is no unrelated accident that Maoism is guilt-free over. That's even if you accept vanguardism as a strategy.

I do not deny the advances made in medical technology and other positive steps (ending foot-binding, for example). That said, in other areas such as agricultural practices and the "backyard steel mills", there was, uh, mismanagement that the aforementioned book goes into some detail about. Though some might fault him for it, I honestly don't even blame Mao for wanting a nuclear deterrent, given some of the worst of the rhetoric from high-profile Americans about their "worst-case" plans for China.

----------------------

That said, Maoism itself meshes Leninism with an opportunism, or if you prefer, pragmatism. A key point (if not the key point) is the idea of a "joint dictatorship of the revolutionary classes", which began as a popular front against Japanese imperialism that at best succumbed to what Luxemburg warned of (emergency measures being transformed into mere matters of course) and at worst were always part of an opportunistic power-grab. The idea was that in that situation, the "particular contradiction" between Chinese nationals of all classes and the Japanese imperialists was more, for lack of a better phrase, immediately relevant than the "general contradiction" between the proletariat as the economic class that would "lead" in the 'transitional stage(s)', and that a period of state capitalism followed by a period of socialism would be the next steps.

In essence, Mao tries to use dialectics in a way that goes too far, in my view at least, in accommodating non-proletarians as part of a "joint dictatorship of the revolutionary classes", and that backfired horribly to the point that even he made a call to "bombard the party headquarters" later on. Some call it necessity, others opportunism, others of course reject the whole project from start to finish.

I did my best from memory but my own explanation will naturally be coloured by my "ultra-leftism", and you'll find more hard-line ("dogmato-revisionists" in Maoist parlance) Leninists such as Hoxhaists who oppose such a "joint dictatorship" for different, more vanguardist reasons. Hoxhaists see it as more or less an eclectical betrayal of Leninism, while others reject the idea of that joint dictatorship because, in short, they reject the Leninism of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

ASFAM made a good recommendation if you're trying to understand the relevant history, which is great. If you're trying to learn more about Maoist theory, though, I'd recommend going straight to the chairman himself with "On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People" or going here: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/index.htm

That and of course checking out critiques from a Hoxhaist and critiques from a more "orthodox" communist perspective about the role of the peasantry and "vanguard", but I remember how overwhelming it all is to take in so I won't throw more books at you. :grin:

Heh...sorry if that was tl;dr.

[reb]

Maoism was the ideology that developed around the capitalist development of China and for justifications for it's imperialist ambitions. It worked because capitalism now reigns in China and college kids in the United $nake$ of Amerikkka now go around thinking that Maoism is something worth defending at the expensive of the proletarian movement for self emancipation.

[flaming bolshevik]

Thanks everyone! I'm still pretty new to communism so it's kinda hard to understand especially with all the different opinions.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

One clarifying point is that "Maoism" in China, and contemporary Maoism (more often "Marxism-Leninism-Maoism") are pretty different, or at least have distinct histories. The former, of course, is best understood by reading Mao and looking at what when down in China. The latter (what people, I think, typically mean when they say Maoism in a contemporary context) refers to the ideas that developed out of a disparate set of circumstances, but especially the "People's War"s in Peru, India, and Nepal and various similarly aligned groups in the first world (though there are even some differences there, for example, between the PCR and RI in Canada, which might completely confuse an unfamiliar observer, myself included).

[Broviet Union]

Maoism was, in practice, Chinese nationalism with a rather inconvenient figurehead.