Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: What would Mao Zedong think about modern China?

  1. Top | #11
    Contributor skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    5,463
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    18,439
    Rep Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tammuz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    Mao's principles were intended for the material conditions in which they were applied, when the peasantry had to be allied with in order to repel foreign invaders and establish a base of production that could meet the demands of China's growing population on its own terms. The China of today is in a different phase of development and is subjected to different conditions, so the tactics must also be different. Mao would not have wanted future leaders to take the same approach as he did simply because he was Mao, just as he didn't take the same approach as other communist leaders simply because they were successful in their own societies. Marxism is an applied science, not a one-size-fits-all rubric for every situation. Nobody was more keen on this than Mao himself, at least in the early years before the Sino-Soviet split.
    How come that the East Bloc of Europe never made that realization? After the West German economy had outperformed the East German economy for decades, why, according to Marxism, was it not time for a change of ways?
    I haven't read much about the GDR, so I can't speak about it with any conviction. But it's facile to simply compare the economies of two places as if those are the only constraints operating on them, and just pick the system that makes the most money. Metrics as vague as "the economy of x outperformed y" are nearly always used to obfuscate the material conditions of people living in those places, what pressures they were subjected to externally and internally, and what they were trying to achieve.
    I always considered that there was a fairly reliable metric for measuring how well a system serves the desires of its citizens. That metric being how much the citizenry wants to leave and the extent the system finds necessary to keep them from leaving. The controlling government in Worker's paradises like East Germany (pre-collapse), North Korea, and Cuba do not allow their citizens to leave except under very controlled conditions. Any citizen attempting to leave otherwise would be killed or imprisoned if caught. So far Venezuela hasn't resorted to such extreme measures to retain its population which has resulted in about 10% if its citizenry fleeing already, and more leaving daily.

    Personally, I don't even like to enter any country that requires an exit visa to leave though I have had to go to a few because of my work.
    Last edited by skepticalbip; 02-20-2020 at 05:32 PM.

  2. Top | #12
    Contributor PyramidHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,074
    Archived
    4,389
    Total Posts
    9,463
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post

    I haven't read much about the GDR, so I can't speak about it with any conviction. But it's facile to simply compare the economies of two places as if those are the only constraints operating on them, and just pick the system that makes the most money. Metrics as vague as "the economy of x outperformed y" are nearly always used to obfuscate the material conditions of people living in those places, what pressures they were subjected to externally and internally, and what they were trying to achieve.
    I always considered that there was a fairly reliable metric for measuring how well a system serves the desires of its citizens. That metric being how much the citizenry wants to leave and the extent the system finds necessary to keep them from leaving. The controlling government in Worker's paradises like East Germany (pre-collapse), North Korea, and Cuba do not allow their citizens to leave except under very controlled conditions. Any citizen attempting to leave otherwise would be killed or imprisoned if caught. So far Venezuela hasn't resorted to such extreme measures to retain its population which has resulted in about 10% if its citizenry fleeing already, and more leaving daily.

    Personally, I don't even like to enter any country that requires an exit visa to leave though I have had to go to a few because of my work.
    That's a shitty metric, because there are many reasons to want to leave a country that have nothing to do with how well the system serves its citizens. The conditions within a country are as much a factor of how that country is treated by the rest of the world as they are reflective of its own governance.

  3. Top | #13
    Contributor skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    5,463
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    18,439
    Rep Power
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post

    I haven't read much about the GDR, so I can't speak about it with any conviction. But it's facile to simply compare the economies of two places as if those are the only constraints operating on them, and just pick the system that makes the most money. Metrics as vague as "the economy of x outperformed y" are nearly always used to obfuscate the material conditions of people living in those places, what pressures they were subjected to externally and internally, and what they were trying to achieve.
    I always considered that there was a fairly reliable metric for measuring how well a system serves the desires of its citizens. That metric being how much the citizenry wants to leave and the extent the system finds necessary to keep them from leaving. The controlling government in Worker's paradises like East Germany (pre-collapse), North Korea, and Cuba do not allow their citizens to leave except under very controlled conditions. Any citizen attempting to leave otherwise would be killed or imprisoned if caught. So far Venezuela hasn't resorted to such extreme measures to retain its population which has resulted in about 10% if its citizenry fleeing already, and more leaving daily.

    Personally, I don't even like to enter any country that requires an exit visa to leave though I have had to go to a few because of my work.
    That's a shitty metric, because there are many reasons to want to leave a country that have nothing to do with how well the system serves its citizens. The conditions within a country are as much a factor of how that country is treated by the rest of the world as they are reflective of its own governance.
    That's quite humorous hand-waving bull shit. While there are many reasons that a person may want to leave a country, they can generally be boiled down to dissatisfaction with the country. More telling is that so many want to leave that the government resorts to 'imprisoning' its population by not allowing them freedom to leave and killing or jailing anyone who attempts to leave.

    Desirable countries are those that have the problem of too many aliens trying to break into them.

  4. Top | #14
    Contributor PyramidHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    5,074
    Archived
    4,389
    Total Posts
    9,463
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post

    That's a shitty metric, because there are many reasons to want to leave a country that have nothing to do with how well the system serves its citizens. The conditions within a country are as much a factor of how that country is treated by the rest of the world as they are reflective of its own governance.
    That's quite humorous hand-waving bull shit. While there are many reasons that a person may want to leave a country, they can generally be boiled down to dissatisfaction with the country. More telling is that so many want to leave that the government resorts to 'imprisoning' its population by not allowing them freedom to leave and killing or jailing anyone who attempts to leave.

    Desirable countries are those that have the problem of too many aliens trying to break into them.
    Like Libya before Gadaffi's overthrow, as compared to after. I agree

  5. Top | #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    454
    Archived
    5,525
    Total Posts
    5,979
    Rep Power
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PyramidHead View Post

    That's a shitty metric, because there are many reasons to want to leave a country that have nothing to do with how well the system serves its citizens. The conditions within a country are as much a factor of how that country is treated by the rest of the world as they are reflective of its own governance.
    That's quite humorous hand-waving bull shit. While there are many reasons that a person may want to leave a country, they can generally be boiled down to dissatisfaction with the country. More telling is that so many want to leave that the government resorts to 'imprisoning' its population by not allowing them freedom to leave and killing or jailing anyone who attempts to leave.

    Desirable countries are those that have the problem of too many aliens trying to break into them.
    Like Libya before Gadaffi's overthrow, as compared to after. I agree
    What is a red herring?

  6. Top | #16
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    5,769
    Rep Power
    15
    His actions led to mas starvation and anarchy with the Cultural Revolution. In the end he was an ignorant man in way over his head. Blind application of a rigid ideology based on his personality, a personality cult.

    As to foreign invaders if it were not for the western allies in the pacific Japan would have held China. Before Pearl Harbor FDR was covertly supplying aid to China before Pearl Harbor. The American Volunteer Group or Flying Tigers provided a crucial delaying actions to the Japanese advance. General Chennault. The Brits. The Australians.

    If it were not for the Allies in the Pacific Japan would have held China. Doubt if you see nay of that in Chinese history books.

    Mao would have been unable to cope with the changing world. As it was there was a period of regime changes until finally some stability and an opening with the west. The rest is history.

    The current Chinese lead4ership is still unable to publically acknowledge the modern reality and is acting in some ways ;lie pre war Japan. Ideology driven to conquest and acquisition in the face of an increasingly cooperative and interdependent industrialized west. Trump being an aberration.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •