Mao: How Bad was Bad?

[Josquius]

He was more crap than evil evil. He's not up there with Stalin and hitler.

Death tolls disagree with you.

No they don't. They agree with me perfectly.
Most dead under him were down to incompetence, starvation, crazy kids going out of control, etc... not death camps or efforts at world domination.

This was peacetime.

If you read a lot of the Nazi self-justification of the Holocaust, it was initially inspired by the idea that the Jews were biological enemies of the Reich and that their physical destruction was essential for the war effort, and later on as a kind of punishment for their role in what was increasingly obviously going to be the destruction of the Reich.  By contrast Mao should have presided over unprecedented prosperity after an uninterrupted century of madness and destruction, with China unified and free of both Manchu and Western oppression.  Instead the average Chinese person was worse off when Mao was dying than they were when the Japanese left.

The Nazis came to power in peacetime too. Going to war was central to their ideology and Hitler's evil.
Mao certainly wasn't all peace and love but none of his wars reached anything like the level of WW2.
The Chinese being worse off after Mao than before- highly debatable. But if true it was down to his crapness rather than him being somehow worse than Hitler.

[Gups]

While I knew that basically I still found it almost comically vile that he took the failure of the Great Leap Forward as a personal attack and launched the Cultural Revolution as revenge. As if reality would have to be held responsible for his loss of face.

IIRC it was more than just personal vindication but a political power play.  There is a reason Liu and Deng were early casualties.

Quite. Before reading the book, I'd kind of assumed that Mao was an untouchable dictator throughout. In fact, Deng and Liu had taken control of economic policy following the failure of the GLF.

[Valmy]

Wait you have to be worse than Hitler to be evil? That is quite a high bar.

[Valmy]

Quite. Before reading the book, I'd kind of assumed that Mao was an untouchable dictator throughout. In fact, Deng and Liu had taken control of economic policy following the failure of the GLF.

Well the reason Deng and Liu were in control was because Mao had been humiliated by the GLF. So of course part of his vengeance was to take revenge on them.

[Ideologue]

Their most positive contribution probably was prior to gaining full control in 1949. And the one-child policy isn't as bad as some seem to think.

The One Child Policy should be the law of Earth.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Their most positive contribution probably was prior to gaining full control in 1949. And the one-child policy isn't as bad as some seem to think.

The One Child Policy should be the law of Earth.

the One Child Policy came at a moment when the birthrate in China had already decreased to around 3 or so (maybe even less). iirc

[Ideologue]

We should be rolling back the human wave a lot faster than that.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

We should be rolling back the human wave a lot faster than that.

lead by example...

[The Brain]

He was more crap than evil evil. He's not up there with Stalin and hitler.

Death tolls disagree with you.

No they don't. They agree with me perfectly.
Most dead under him were down to incompetence, starvation, crazy kids going out of control, etc... not death camps or efforts at world domination.

Try to travel to the real world.

[Queequeg]

He was more crap than evil evil. He's not up there with Stalin and hitler.

Death tolls disagree with you.

No they don't. They agree with me perfectly.
Most dead under him were down to incompetence, starvation, crazy kids going out of control, etc... not death camps or efforts at world domination.

This was peacetime.

If you read a lot of the Nazi self-justification of the Holocaust, it was initially inspired by the idea that the Jews were biological enemies of the Reich and that their physical destruction was essential for the war effort, and later on as a kind of punishment for their role in what was increasingly obviously going to be the destruction of the Reich.  By contrast Mao should have presided over unprecedented prosperity after an uninterrupted century of madness and destruction, with China unified and free of both Manchu and Western oppression.  Instead the average Chinese person was worse off when Mao was dying than they were when the Japanese left.

The Nazis came to power in peacetime too. Going to war was central to their ideology and Hitler's evil.
Mao certainly wasn't all peace and love but none of his wars reached anything like the level of WW2.
The Chinese being worse off after Mao than before- highly debatable. But if true it was down to his crapness rather than him being somehow worse than Hitler.

Germany was the wealthiest, most powerful nation on by far the wealthiest, most powerful continent on the planet and the inheritor of 400 years of Prussian army tradition.  China had been shat on and misruled for 300 years and was in total chaos for a hundred prior to Mao taking power.

[Razgovory]

I always thought that Mao chaotic rule of China was similar to what Trotsky's rule of Soviet Union would be like.  A man who was infatuated with his own intelligence was disinterested in details and without the ability to maintain personal authority.

[Ed Anger]

Their most positive contribution probably was prior to gaining full control in 1949. And the one-child policy isn't as bad as some seem to think.

The One Child Policy should be the law of Earth.

Bite me

[Razgovory]

He's crazier then I am.

[Eddie Teach]

He's crazier then I am.

Mao or Ide?

[alfred russel]

Germany was the wealthiest, most powerful nation on by far the wealthiest, most powerful continent on the planet and the inheritor of 400 years of Prussian army tradition.  China had been shat on and misruled for 300 years and was in total chaos for a hundred prior to Mao taking power.

I'm not certain Europe was wealthier per capita than North America or Australia. The US and Canada were way ahead of western europe at the time, and southern and eastern europe were unstable (to put it mildly).

If we aren't talking per capita, North America and Asia might be able to have given Europe a run for its money (Asia just because of the massive population).