Chairman Mao - Opinions

[elijahcraig]

I was just wondering everyone's opinions of Mao. He killed millions, maybe indirectly, but he also did some great things.

Your thoughts???

[Kapitan Andrey]

Nothing good...

[commieboy]

okay, i like mao and the idea of communes, and i this...There's a billion chinese, in a situation like his there just wasnt enough food. If this was in a smaller country not as many people would have died. and he wouldn't seem to be that "Evil" of a person like i've heard him called. I think he made the best of a horrible situation and he handled it as best as he or anyone else could.

He's third on my list of favorite leaders. Next to Che and fidel.....Stalin lost his place as third.

[elijahcraig]

How can you put Mao above Lenin? And why the fuck is Stalin on there at all?

[commieboy]

i used to like stalin...that was when i was obsessed with WWII soviet union and he kept the fighting on even when the men were out gunned and outnumbered. But then i found out that he beat hitler in murders. and then i saw that picture of him and lenin together...i fucking hung it on my wall i thought it was like having marx and enstien on my wall. then i found out it was a fake made by stalin...then i found out lenin didnt even like stalin. So i not only took down the picture..i cut it in half and saved lenin and burned the part of stalin. Now the only reason stalin is still on that list where i think Ho Chi Minh is coming is because of the control he was able to keep even though he was so brutal and unmerciful. and i dont know enough about lenin to put him on my list, im still like an eighth through his biography...and still i like know nothing about him.

[redstar2000]

As always, it would be better not to "sanctify" or "demonize" the leading figures of 20th century proto-communism; we ought to try to understand their ideas, the material conditions in which they operated, and the historical circumstances of their rise to prominence.

Mao took an idea from Lenin--"the alliance of the working class and the peasantry"--and made the peasantry the "senior partner" in the alliance. He used this to promote a great uprising in the countryside (something that's happened many times in Chinese history) and became a new "emperor"...something that is usually the outcome of successful peasant revolutions. He was a "reforming emperor" (that's also happened in China more than once) and created the necessary conditions for the rise of capitalism there.

Unlike most Chinese emperors, he also had a global vision: world-wide peasant rebellion against the "first world" imperial hegemony. This vision has inspired millions of revolutionaries in undeveloped countries at one time or another...it generates a strategy of guerilla war that actually "works".

Towards the end of his life, he made an effort to renew his revolution in the "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution"...risking a civil war to promote the radicalization of Chinese society. There was, very briefly, a "Shanghai Commune"...an actual working-class based proto-communist formation. This was, however, "going too far", in the eyes of an aging emperor and the GPCR sputtered to an end...to be replaced, after Mao's death, with openly pro-capitalist policies.

Mao's legacy of peasant guerilla warfare exists to this day in many countries; in the advanced capitalist countries, Maoist groups are "cheerleaders" for those rebellions.

Mao and his associates were "Marxists" in the sense that they could use the tools of Marxism very adeptly...though for distinctly un-Marxist purposes. In his time, he understood peasant rebellion and guerilla warfare better than anyone.

In the end, I think that's how he will be remembered in history.

:cool:

[Comrade Raz]

I have huge respect for Mao as a revolutionary but as a leader im not sure. As Il Commy said there was huge food shortage as this lead to many deaths that Mao could not have helped.

In my opinion Maoism has many good ideas but by making the peasents the senior partner in the alliance with the proletariat (as Redstar said) maoism will fade into capitalism.

[Comrade Raz]

I have huge respect for Mao as a revolutionarybut as a leader i don't know. He had it tough with the food shortage like Il Commy said but towards the end of his reign when he went mad things got petty fucked up.

Maoism as an idea is good but flawed because by giving most power to the peasents and not the proletariat, maoism will, in the end become another capitalist system.

[CompadreGuerrillera]

well, Mao faced really hard situations, first his military skill was excellent, as a revolutionary he rules!

but his idea of a strong central committee, or party, i am against.

I would rather have workers councils=soviets
I am just against Autocratic Communism, like Mao had, altho, his revolutionary skill was excelent, id rather have Mao than Stalin(needless to be said), and id certainly take Mao over the current capitalist guy in China.

just my 2 cents

[Jesus Christ]

as a leader I can't put Mao any higher than Stalin
but, yes, revolutionary wise, he was a genius, but your goods cant overpower your evils

[CompadreGuerrillera]

primus, never spoken a truer word,

You are prescicely right, which is why, on a whole, i dislike Mao, but u have to respect his desicions, and i love his tactics, i think we should learn more about his revolution, IN A BIG POWERFUL country, like the US

but tactically and no further, he wasnt an angel, lets put it that way :)

He should be placed higher regard than Stalin tho, altho u have the right idea.

[elijahcraig]

i used to like stalin...that was when i was obsessed with WWII soviet union and he kept the fighting on even when the men were out gunned and outnumbered. But then i found out that he beat hitler in murders. and then i saw that picture of him and lenin together...i fucking hung it on my wall i thought it was like having marx and enstien on my wall. then i found out it was a fake made by stalin...then i found out lenin didnt even like stalin. So i not only took down the picture..i cut it in half and saved lenin and burned the part of stalin. Now the only reason stalin is still on that list where i think Ho Chi Minh is coming is because of the control he was able to keep even though he was so brutal and unmerciful. and i dont know enough about lenin to put him on my list, im still like an eighth through his biography...and still i like know nothing about him.

Ok, now I understand.

As always, it would be better not to "sanctify" or "demonize" the leading figures of 20th century proto-communism; we ought to try to understand their ideas, the material conditions in which they operated, and the historical circumstances of their rise to prominence.

I agree here.

Mao took an idea from Lenin--"the alliance of the working class and the peasantry"--and made the peasantry the "senior partner" in the alliance. He used this to promote a great uprising in the countryside (something that's happened many times in Chinese history) and became a new "emperor"...something that is usually the outcome of successful peasant revolutions. He was a "reforming emperor" (that's also happened in China more than once) and created the necessary conditions for the rise of capitalism there.

I've always thought that Mao originated the "peasent revolution" which is why he has his own -ism. Am I wrong here? I know Stalin spoke about it sometimes, but Mao made it his own. I don't think Lenin meant this the way Mao did.

Unlike most Chinese emperors, he also had a global vision: world-wide peasant rebellion against the "first world" imperial hegemony. This vision has inspired millions of revolutionaries in undeveloped countries at one time or another...it generates a strategy of guerilla war that actually "works".

I agree, most of the third world revolutions have been directly influenced by Mao's revolution.

Towards the end of his life, he made an effort to renew his revolution in the "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution"...risking a civil war to promote the radicalization of Chinese society. There was, very briefly, a "Shanghai Commune"...an actual working-class based proto-communist formation. This was, however, "going too far", in the eyes of an aging emperor and the GPCR sputtered to an end...to be replaced, after Mao's death, with openly pro-capitalist policies.

Yep.

Mao's legacy of peasant guerilla warfare exists to this day in many countries; in the advanced capitalist countries, Maoist groups are "cheerleaders" for those rebellions.

Example: "Revolutionary Communist Party" and Avakian.

Mao and his associates were "Marxists" in the sense that they could use the tools of Marxism very adeptly...though for distinctly un-Marxist purposes. In his time, he understood peasant rebellion and guerilla warfare better than anyone.

Agreed.

In the end, I think that's how he will be remembered in history.


The west has already pasted him in history books as a mass murdering evil pedophile, I hope this doesn't remain as his legacy.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

you guys all love che as i do,but how can u love che and dislike mao?che got his guerilla tactics from mao,and also openly praised mao and everything to do with red china!

[Kez]

Quote: from elijahcraig on 9:44 pm on July 22, 2003
[i]
I've always thought that Mao originated the "peasent revolution" which is why he has his own -ism. Am I wrong here? I know Stalin spoke about it sometimes, but Mao made it his own. I don't think Lenin meant this the way Mao did.


well the narodniks in russia were also for peasant revolution, however obviously they would never have had a chance, and merely played the role or dissolussionment within the workers movement. If im not mistaken Tolstoy was a narodnik too.

[MikeyBoy]

Mao should be remembered as a revolutionary. And therefore, in a good manner. But he was no better than Che, Fidel, or Lenin. They all had their roles to play and that's why we remember them.

[Abiyot]

Hello everybody, I just wanted to make a little contribution on this discussion on Mao and Maoism. I am sorry but I get the impression that Mao and Maoism have not been given proper consideration here.

Mao was an important Marxist-Leninist theoretician. His works such as, "On Practice", "On Practice" are important works in terms of grasping the introductory basics of the Marxian dialectic. His works such as, "Guerilla Warfare", "PROBLEMS OF STRATEGY IN CHINA'S REVOLUTIONARY WAR" where the notion of "protracted people's war" is introduced, are important models and frameworks for revolutionary warfare in the context of the under-developed world. Mao is also to admired for his stance of refusing to accept Marxian method and concepts as rigid dogma. He emphasized the necessity to utilize the Marxian corpus as a tool and methodology, to analyse, understand and instrumentally transcend social "reality". In this regard, his works such as, "ANALYSIS OF THE CLASSES IN CHINESE SOCIETY" and "REPORT ON AN INVESTIGATION OF THE PEASANT MOVEMENT IN HUNAN" are classic in this regard.

His important theoretical insights and contributions very simply could be said to involve the identification of sections of the peasantry as a possible revolutionary subject, the definition and theoretical elaboration of the methods and techniques of revolutionary insurgent warfare. Mao's contributions and insights in the area of Socialism and Socialist society are also very and extremely important. He pointed out that the class struggle does not cease with the coming to power of the revolutionaries and the expropriation of the property owners. The class contradictions and conflicts continue, they just shift their contours and configurations. Mao's notion of the "mass line" is an important corrective and a suggestion that would enable a Communist party never to forget that the party cannot be and should not "substitute" itself for, the proletariat and the peasantry. The notion of the "mass line" is an arguement for the necessity of and the creation of channels for direct participatory democracy.

Red star's notion of the "dependence" on the peasantry leading to the restoration of Capitalist relations of production is I feel somewhat simplistic. The peasantry even in the Maoist conception is never understood or viewed as a partner with the proletariat. The leadership and the vanguard of the revolution, in the Mao's conception is the proletariat. The emphasis on the peasantry and the novel insight of Mao is that in the context of the underdeveloped world sections of the peasantry are exploited and oppressed. These relations of exploitation and oppression, potentially render these sections of the peasantry, who form the overwhelming majority of the population of these countries a potentially explosive social subject, which the proletariat and the Communists can ally with. Lenin and Trotsky, in the context of the Russian Bolshevik revolution and in the Russain context, in terms of their notions of "revolutionary democracy" and the "permanent revolution" also acknowleged the same phenomena, even though they did not elaborate or further develop their contribution.

Capitalist restoration in the "PRC" and other "socialist" states, requires indepth and comprehensive analysis taking into account politics, international relations and internal social relations within these systems. In fact, the notion of class struggle within Socialism can be viewed as a starting point for this analysis.

UP THE REVOLUTION!!!

[TXsocialist]

Anybody ever read The Civil War in France?

Same thing happened here: Bonaparte took power at the helm of the peasantry, post-commune...

[Cobber]

If Mao Zedong had died in 1956 he would be remembered for his struggle and ultimate triumph and could be regarded as a great hero. If he had died in 1966 he would still be remembered for his reforms and regarded with due respect. Unfortunately, as a Chinese friend of mine has said, he died in 1976 and by that time had lost all that he had gained through the misuse of power.