How on earth does one human man ruin china?

OP isn't talking about Deng

>Mao
>human

Is there a more JUST leader?
>great leap forward
>cultural revolution
both his biggest and produest policies led to widespread suffering, his regime even purged denge twice who was tge reason china isnt a shit heap

Um no, Chinas embracement of capitalism did it which happened after Maos death because he would probably never have allowed that

I refuse to believe the dude was a legit commie. But I feel bad about Hong Kong. This country has an actual expiration date (2047). Hopefully China reforms a bit by then.

nonsense, and the best thing is that even left-wing historians now admit it - the average peasant's life actually got worse during Mao's reign than it ever was under the Qing, the warlord era, the KMT or dare I say it, the Japs.

read Blanco for reference: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucien_Bianco

and in a way that neither benefits many Chinese nor anyone else, except consumers of cheap shit.

Technically it was always ruled by one man, since unification. That said, it always had a large (often ineffective) bureaucracy to actually run it.

This is how great Empires are born my friend: Mao was just unlucky enough to be born in the XX century, meaning that he was not able to openly use slavery in order to build the foundations of his empire.

>the truth is hard. Let us acknowledge unprejudicedly how every higher civilization hitherto has ORIGINATED! Men with a still natural nature, barbarians in every terrible sense of the word, men of prey, still in possession of unbroken strength of will and desire for power, threw themselves upon weaker, more moral, more peaceful races (perhaps trading or cattle-rearing communities), or upon old mellow civilizations in which the final vital force was flickering out in brilliant fireworks of wit and depravity. At the commencement, the noble caste was always the barbarian caste: their superiority did not consist first of all in their physical, but in their psychical power—they were more COMPLETE men (which at every point also implies the same as ‘more complete beasts’).

This is how you build civilizations.

>b-but muh sparrows
A mistake in a path that bought China from being the laughing stock of Asia to being the second most powerful country in history. In 150 years people will barely care about it, and will instead see all the other atrocities as some sort of compromise that was needed in order to reach greatness, just like we have pardoned Romans for having raped Sabine women in order to kickstart their society.

I'm not a commie, by the way

>destroys almost all trace of the oldest and most accomplished cultures in the world, making all adherence to their millenias-old traditions punishable by death
>replaces it all with one little red book
>Kill approximately 80 million of your own people

>Hitler is still seen as the ultimate ebil
how?

>how?

Dunno, there may be some ulterior info on your US propaganda book

>implying Deng managed to turn China around in only 20 years

I don't think you know how time works

>ulterior info

>leads several uprisings
>fights a guerilla war against an opponent superior in numbers and arms, avoiding defeat countless times and never giving up
>fights to defend his country even with chiang coward-chek trying to stab him in the back the back the whole time
>is far more effective at resisting the Japanese than the nationalists
>after victory in WW2 he easily crushes the pathetic American puppets ruling most of china
>unites the country, brings land into common ownership and brings on an era of prosperity
>intervenes to save best Korea and sends the US army on the longest retreat in its entire history despite being outnumbered bu US troops
>admittedly screws up bad with the great leap forward
>eventually leads china, a country that just 50 years ago was marred in civil war and strife, embarrassed by defeat at the hands of foreign powers, divided from within and seen as backwards and undeveloped to having nuclear weapons
>tells Stalin to fuck off and refuses to be a puppet

how does one man save china?

>>unites the country, brings land into common ownership and brings on an era of prosperity
>>kills 80 million of his own people
pick only one

>>intervenes to save best Korea
>>intervenes to save the only regime more cruel and totalitarian than his own, which today regularly threatens to kill millions in nuclear hellfire on a whim

>despite being outnumbered bu US troops
So false, I now wonder why I'm even responding to this bait.

>admittedly screws up bad with the great leap forward
Oh he just created the biggest starvation event in world history, but who hasn't had a little oopsie-dasie every now and then.
Not to mention he made it illegal for his own people to live by their own traditions, the oldest surviving culture in the world, full of richness we cannot guess at because it's mostly forgotten. But don't worry, he replaced it all with this really great little red book, full of propaganda, mental gymnastics and retarded nonsense he made up.

>eventually leads china, a country that just 50 years ago was marred in civil war and strife, embarrassed by defeat at the hands of foreign powers, divided from within and seen as backwards and undeveloped to having nuclear weapons
China was always great. It's history is filled with countless civil wars, and internal conflict, followed by periods of great bounty and renewal. When you have the highest IQ population in the world, they tend to make things work no matter how badly you handicap them.

Mao is not responsible for New China's Rebirth, only Old China's death.

>pick only one
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll

look at any of these lists, of course mao is on there but notice just how frequently china appears generally, huge amounts of people die in china all throughout history, you can hardly criticism the ruler who managed to also bring the country into the industrial era. might i remind you that industrialization has been accompanied by widespread strife in most of the countries where it has happened.

>muh tradition
when tradition oppresses millions its loss should not be mourned

>china was always great
this is admittedly true but mao pulled it out of arguably its worst period of existence

>notice just how frequently china appears generally
Yeah I fucking know. My own post said as much. Just because China has experienced massive death and chaos in the past doesn't lessen the evil of Mao's participation in those acts. He didn't just bring China out of it, he perpetrated it, and only brought peace through massive murder and destruction, which he followed with absolute tyranny, including things like the death penalty for practicing benign religious customs like burying the dead, and yet you talk about these cultural customs and traditions and call them oppressive. Fuck You, dude. Mao's China is the most totalitarian 1984 dystopian world on record except for North Korea. In Mao's China, the Red Guard would execute you if you couldn't recite Mao's little red book of made up little sayings.

I agree some traditions like the Emperor were oppressive, but that shit was already dead by the time Mao started his Red purges.

The Richness of China's thousands of years of history, culture, and tradition have been washed away by one man's insane attempt to bring about a utopian fantasy of common ownership, which led to the largest starvation event in history, but you wanna sweep it under the rug, because a generation after Mao died, China abandoned communism, and started privatizing, and as a result became a super power.

Mao didn't create all these magical benefits you think he did, that happened after him, after his retarded ideas were toned down, and people like Deng got into power.

>this is admittedly true but mao pulled it out of arguably its worst period of existence
Which he was responsible for making worse

Deng did very little as opposed to Mao.

What Deng did was change the administrative business structure, en collectivization effort and create the autonomous coast zones. But Industrialization was going full steam before under Mao.

So,

no Mao = no Deng

>This is what tankies actually believe

Mao derived his base of power from the enthusiam of the masses
coincidentally, the chinese masses were pretty fucking dumb
One prominent military figure went touring during the great leap forward, saw what was being done on the collective farms, and immediately declared it all to be really fucking dumb. He ended up saying something along the lines of "just because we're socialists doesn't mean we can ignore the basic laws of economics".
As soon as the cultural revolution kicked off the guy found himself being tortured day and night and a tiny cell by mediocre high school students.

This

*blocks your path*

Tankies aren't Maoist.

because of capitalism, in spite of almost everything he did

...

*destroys your food supply, economy, and culture*

>deng
>destroy chinese cultural
woah..............................so this.........................is the power.......................................of /leftypol/..........................................................

If I decollectived agriculture, would you die?

>destroys and defaces various temples
>murders and imprisons people for no reason
>removed both good and bad aspects of chinese culture so he can later sellout to capitalism
what a waste.

Sorry user, I'm drunkposting and thought I had clicked on a pic of Mao, Deng was based. He had to be, to fix the dumpsterfire he inherited

mega kek

It would be extremely gainful.

You're a big growth in the economy.

Because Hitler was white.

White people are supposed to shit rainbows and fairy dust, didn't you know?

Mao was a minority, it his god damn right to behave however he fucking wants you racist

Nah, he personally rehabilitated the "Capitalist Roaders" in the 1970s and Deng boy became his righthand man.

Lin Biao incident burnt him from the left of the party.

>the average peasant's life actually got worse during Mao's reign than it ever was under the Qing, the warlord era, the KMT or dare I say it, the Japs.

I find this very, hard to believe. The data itself doesn't support this at all and having spoken to quite a few Chinese people on the subject, pretty much all of them agree, Mao was shitty, but life for their peasant families got a lot better.

strongwindpress.com/pdfs/ebook/The_Battle_for_Chinas_Past.pdf

Professor Mobo Gao wrote this book about his experiences growing up in a rural peasant town during the Cultural Revolution and explained in detail how much better life had become with programs like the Bare Foot Doctors.

The war against Hitler brought ruin to the very [heart of the western world.

Mao killed a billion screaming chinese people... in the distant lands of China, far away from the eyes of western press, without an ounce of impact to the daily life of your average european or american citizen.

To the west, it's a historical curiosity that lacks the perceived struggle of life and death against nazism.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Life under the KMT was insanely bad and incredibly brutal. The KMT barely even ran a functional Government, outside of the urban areas, the entire country was controlled by competing psychopathic landlords running their own little feudal dystopian nightmares.

The Catholic Church in China would literally buy up girls, raise them as slaves to do work, then sell their virginity off to the highest bidders, the catch was, to bid, you had to "join the church". So millions of girls, in a giant child sex slavery ring, being protected by the KMT.

The peasantry were born into bonded labour and debt for life. Basically, when your born, it was chinese custom to buy dumplings for your first birthday, but for your parents to get dumplings, they had to take a loan out from the landlord, and this was the beginning of the end, you may take out a loan worth $1, but the interest is 100% a week and eventually, the parents would be forced to "sell" the child to the Landlord to "work off" the family debt, but say, you break a handle on a hoe, your landlord might add $10 to your debt, even though a handle would cost 50c and so on and so on (and you're only earning a $2 a year off your debt). You get sick? Oh well, we fed you some water with 2 grains of rice in it, another $10 etc etc. Oh you complain? Well you're a Communist, you and your entire family get executed.

This was the average life of the peasant. For women, even worse.

I would recommend you go read or listen to documentary accounts of peasants telling their stories of what life was like.

Even the most basic reforms Mao implemented, massively improved quality of life for your average rural workers. It's why even after the GLF, Mao is still basically worshiped in Rural China today.

The post you are replying to is complete trash, the whole reason mao was remotely tolerated is because he was best form of government china had had for 30 years. That guy is talking out of his arse.

>Oh he just created the biggest starvation event in world history

After his policies lowered the death rate to 1/4th of what it was, the death rate of the GLF (25.4/1000) was half of the death rate in 1948.

What makes the GLF so devastating is that it was a famine after so much progress was made. But decade and a half prior, that shit was basically the year to year life of people living in China.

More arguably, it was the only real Government China had. As I said above, the KMT barely could run a functional Government, the country was torn between competing essentially feudal landlords before.

It's not really his or anyones fault though. People in the west really have no clue about Chinese history because the quality of what is taught here is complete pop history trash that tries to paint China in the worst way possible. Any time you bring up Chinese accounts (or I do) I always get

"WELL OF COURSE THE CHINESE WOULD SAY THAT WOULDN'T THEY"

The thing is, modern Chinese view Mao as a very mixed figure. But for some reason the Chinese voice is completely ignored on this topic.

The official Chinese line these days is basically, Mao did 60% good, 40% bad.

civilization 5000 year gone in one generation

>Life under the KMT was insanely bad and incredibly brutal. The KMT barely even ran a functional Government, outside of the urban areas, the entire country was controlled by competing psychopathic landlords running their own little feudal dystopian nightmares.
Ancaps will support this

Not really, China has a long habit of basically burning everything that came before. Famously with Yongle Emperor who had basically all books and tomes written before destroyed. (15th century)

Arguably what you would call "Chinese civilization" died in the 1800s anyway.

belief has nothing to do with it: please look into Blanco's work and sources. anecdotal evidence is just that. bear in mind all the propaganda etc.

Wrong!

China is a superpower today because it went against everything Mao stood for.

Mao had to do that shit first for China to go against it

Correct but he also should've died in 1957.

>muh Ming

Meme dynasty, gets idolized for all the wrong reasons

>the average peasant's life actually got worse during Mao's reign than it ever was under the Qing, the warlord era, the KMT or dare I say it, the Japs.

[Citations needed]

what good are citations when you can't read, user?
>Lucien Blanco

The first half of Qing rule was pretty ok.

we're talking late Qing here, the period of mess that slides easily into the early republican period, that's what.

I think people are getting cause and effect mixed up here.

The question is a China today, which Mao obviously shaped significantly.
Or a hypothetical China without Mao.

The problem is that we don't know what would have happened without Mao. What's most likely is that China would be in a similar position today +- 50 million people.

Right wing people tend to downplay or not even acknowledge the things Mao did right.
1. Unified the nation.
2. Centralized the nation.
3. Removed most foreign control of the nation.
These were all things Mao did in the 30's-50's.

But Mao's problem was derived from three important traits:
1. He was a product of 35 years of civil war.
2. He was in power for so long that he suffered from the normal authoritarian downfall: paranoia.
3. Things really did go great for China under his rule until 1958. This deluded him into thinking he could do no wrong and his way was the only way.
In many ways, his successes led to his failures.

Too bad they didn't produce any culture of worth like every other empires did

Cont*

So in conclusion, I think it is too easy to overplay Mao's significance to China. Too many people believe the world is controlled by the actions of a few, and not the combination of the whole.
Mao didn't "ruin" China. Mao also wasn't China's "savior". Mao was a product of his environment, and his influence on China today is decidely mixed.

My citations are widely distributed and recognized statistics on vastly improved living standards, life expectancy, and literacy rates.

Okay. That leaves out Late Qing, Civil War era, and Japanese invasion. This "user" seriously believes that China under Mao was worse than 1937-1949.

55 million Chinese died of violent causes in this time period.

>muh 80 gorillion

If Mao fell down the stairs in 1952 and Deng took over the world would be a better place.

The question is who would have the balls to shove him?

It was already ruined when he got in charge.

>>The Catholic Church in China would literally buy up girls, raise them as slaves to do work, then sell their virginity off to the highest bidders, the catch was, to bid, you had to "join the church". So millions of girls, in a giant child sex slavery ring, being protected by the KMT.
That sounds like a isekai LN plot.

Where can I read more?

Even if what you said were true, which it isn't, it does nothing to rebut my point that Mao's China enjoyed an average growth rate of 6%. This is slower than Deng's China, but it is by no means bad. The party apparatus the PRC had set up after 1949 was functional. The problems came when Mao tried to sidestep this apparatus and rule the country directly, and you can see the resultant blips in the chart, but that certainly did not "ruin" China. Just slowed down its march to progress.

we're talking about the livelihood of the peasantry, the group of people most lionised by the CCP, not specifically the war.

again, why read the works of respected scholars when you gawk at a bloody pie chart?

Does Blanco, in his book, ever deny a growth rate of 6% for the years 1953-1978? Because if not, I don't see how reading him is relevant to the discussion at hand.

haven't got the book to hand (and there are more than one - this very topic as his specialty) but as I recall, he made the claim that the rise in living standards would have happened anyway in peacetime following the civil war. but it's been a few years since I've read it.

GDP is hardly everything either, just another statistic, just like your charts. but you seem fixated on them, to the detriment of anything else that might define a nation. in other words, you're a mental semite.

Literally not true. Deng transitioned the state of China from an attempt at socialism via maoism to a capitalist-communist society. He reestablished land ownership, re-incentivized laborers, updated the gov structure, disassembled communes, dealt with the red guard, etc etc etc

full steam? apt metaphor for smelting pots and pans, bud.

>the people who died in the civil war were not 99% peasants

...

China was 93% rural at the time and the vast majority of the deaths were due to starvation/disease among the civilian population. 45 million of the 50 million that died were peasants.

In no way was 1949-1976 worse for a Chinese peasant than 1937-1949.

Mao was the one who put Deng in the place to succeed him.

Why 2047?

Really wish Communist xenophiles would pull an Oswald and fuck off to China if it's so amazing.