China Law Blog

If you apply the scientific method...Mao comes out just plain stupid.

To Chinese communist party ,he's 100% nice.
To China, he's totally a nightmare. but Chinese ourself should also take part of responsibility for it , because I always think what kind of people lead to what kind of country and dictator.

I always feel so weird why some chinese think he's 70% nice, because he "create a new China"? let's think about it in this way regardless of every other terrible things: how much "Nice" a person should be to compensate the 30,000,000 lives lost in peaceful years without a "Great leap forward" ?

Heh, Steve, you are too kind, that would constitute an excuse, no?

Sean, I'm not sure I get what you try to say in your first paragraph. Surely you don't mean they deserved him? But I agree on the rest of it, though 30 million seems to be a rock-bottom estimate among historians. The top estimates go to 70+ million. Unless you refer solely to the Great Leap period?

Right and wrong are very different concepts from mean and nice to me. Post-1949 Mao is mean, there's no doubt, though he was somewhat stuck considering the circumstances (okay, no more excuses). Pre-1949 Mao was nicer, or at least was working hard toward a goal that was nice.

Okay, so there goes, I'm probably the only one who will come out that way. By the way, Dan, I'm hurt, I was so proud of my spot at the top of your blogroll, it hurts to no longer be on it at all, I guess I need to step up my game...

I love these things and I can't wait to see the results.

I will get you back on. The only reason I can think of for your falling off would be lack of postings. But not that you are posting regularly again....

yes, what I mean by " what kind of people lead to what kind of country and dictator" is We Chinese deserved him, China is kind of "hotbed" for dictators, even nowadays, most Chinese have no sense about democracy or human right or something like this, check out those chinese top university online BBS, you can alway find some students ,who are supposed to be the most educated guys in China, keep posting "what a devil the US is who want to bring down our China , which proves democracy is just a excuse for western world to rule the world" and something like this. do you know there was a really big carnival in the top 2 chinese universities when the 9-11 happened? I'm pretty sure if there was no Mao zedong, there would be Li zedong,Zhang zedong... to turn China into a nightmare, Chinese "needed" a dictator, so you can't say Mao is "mean", because he becomes a "mean" dictator with the help of all the Chinese.

Mao Zedong was 70% egocentric totalitarian emperor-dictator and 30% economic blunderer.

Some of his poems are nice;
some of his habits are "mean," according to the book of his private doctor.

Land reform is/was nice for farmers, mean to landowners.

For an entire generation of youth (zhiqing), according to many memoirs published in U.S., the impact of his policies are "mean," wasting so many lives and crushing so many dreams.

And for many in China, born after the Cultural Revolution, Mao is just another historical figure in the Chinese annals...

The only reason I used to like seeing his picture is because they put his face on the money. There is nothing good I can say about his messianic and paranoid leadership. This is the man who actually managed to make Chiang Kai Shek and his corrupt clique look good.

Quoting what the official Chinese government position is probably skews this too. It'd be uncool to align with the "propaganda"!

Mao is nice because his programs brought down a lot of Chinese communists. Even Deng was denounced 3 times.

I agree with commenter Mor that he was, "70% egocentric totalitarian emperor-dictator and 30% economic blunderer." He also fits the classical definition of mean denoting vulgarity, hotheadedness and overly simplistic thinking. I think China would have been better served had he remained in a military roll post-1949. He would have been a great non-com.

On the plus side he did have a fine hand for calligraphy. When I was at 哈工大 I always took a little extra time to admire the sign at the front gate that was written in his hand.

Can't wait for the next poll. Deng Xiaoping, I think, actually meets the 70% good 30% bad ratio.

Good post and a nice break from the law stuff.
-Not a lawyer ;)

I went for 70% mean. I think that was pretty nice of me.

It is very odd to judge the Great Helmsman in terms of "mean" or "nice". These concepts are irrelevant to his life, which was all about kicking asses and taking names. Personally, I do not know a single Chinese person (regardless of age, gender or where he or she comes from) who has a big bitch about the Chairman. Take a look at the line of people waiting to pay their respect in front of his memorial building on the TAM square. What qualities in him stir such reverence? Well, his son died on the battlefield in Korea, in a Chinese war. Has he had an American counterpart who made a comparable sacrifice for his country?

The Chairman died before I could understand his little red book. I know little about his politics. However I consider myself a student of Chairman Mao in personal life. His attitude, and his world view, had a particularly important impact on my life overseas, immersed in a foreign culture. His insights bear the hallmark of the practical clarity and depth of Chinese peasants. His philosophy of revolution can be easily translated into a philosophy of life.

The following insights are particularly important in my personal development.

1. "The revolution is no dinner party." Darn right. No significant and worthwhile life experience is a dinner party, except real dinner parties. Suck it up and move on.
2. "Political rights come from the gun barrel". Spot on. All freaking rights come from the gun barrel (metaphorically speaking). Kick their asses.
3. "Don’t be afraid of smashing some pots and bottles". Yeah, no matter who is screwing with you, make sure you do some damage before he makes you quit.

The next one is a real gem of an advice that I always try to follow.
"Fight with the haven, lots of fun.
Fight with the earth, lots of fun.
Fight with people, even more freaking fun." (These are non-authoritative translations.)
I have lost more fights than I have won, but it has been a lot of fun, no question about that. I hope we can all be good students of Chairman Mao.

How stupid is this? As if whether Mao was nice or mean (Dan, with the utmost respect to your mom, I must say this black and white approach is extremely stupid. What is the definition of "Nice" and "mean" anyway?) is up to a bunch of foreigners who may or may not have had some experiences with China. What's next? Are you going to ask some clueless Chinese people whether George Washington was mean or nice? How stupid is that?

If you guys are right that Mao was 100% or mostly mean, explain this: Many Chinese, if not the overwhelming majority, revere Mao for various reasons. If you people are right, then there can be only one explanation, that is these Chinese are just stupid who don't know better. Who are you to tell the Chinese, who live through Mao's reign, who gained and suffered, that they simply don't know better?

I understand why many Chinese love him. Despite everything he did in his later years and everything he was somewhat responsible for, he restored the sense of pride. China was no longer the little kid that bullies could beat up easily. No more.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion. But don't tell the Chinese what they should think about their own country, their own leaders and their own life. After all you are just a bunch of foreign expats who may or may not know a thing or two about China.

Speaking of propaganda, do you really think the average folks from the land of Joe McCarthy, Lou Dobbs etc. are any less brainwashed by propaganda than the poor Chinese?

Once again, who is next Dan? George Washington? Abraham Lincoln? TR? FDR? JFK? Make sure you make the "100% mean" option available. :-)

With the greatest respect to Pfeffer, I believe, from Dan's comments in the Zhou Enlai posting, that this poll is undertaken with tongue firmly in cheek and in the full knowledge that this is a grotesquely simplistic approach: that is rather the idea and what makes it fun.

It bothers me to see so many people love a man who didn't love any of them back. I can't remember who said it, but I recall a blog talking about how the typical chinese viewpoint of Mao has remarkable similarity to that of an abused child to their abusive guardian. Or that of Stockholm Syndrome.

And a lot of it is purely born out of the controlled society of China. Kaishek was a freak, and yet the majority of Taiwan "love him" during his rule and up until the early nineties. Suddenly, once martial law was dropped and freedom of the press was embraced, the "oow" and "awe" towards the Generalissimo suddenly dissapeared. I personally bet that in that day that the citizens of China are able to offer up ALL viewpoints of the Chairmen, is the day when his popularity remarkably drops.

"Speaking of propaganda, do you really think the average folks from the land of Joe McCarthy, Lou Dobbs etc. are any less brainwashed by propaganda than the poor Chinese?"

It is also about fear, not just brainwashing. People in the US feared McCarthy (and that fear led to the hunt for something he did wrong in the past, and didn't he get busted for tax irregularities?). Lou Dobbs is just another talking head (but pfeffer seems like the kind of person who believes the heads).

Bad, bad China and its bad, bad leaders.

The Chinese Communist party is by far the most insecure and self-doubting government on this planet. I wonder what mainland China would be like if the KMT had actually won the battle and destroyed Mao's forces.

BXBQ:

Well, his son died on the battlefield in Korea, in a Chinese war. Has he had an American counterpart who made a comparable sacrifice for his country?

Ted Roosevelt lost one of his sons in WWI (Quentin) and another in WWII (Ted, jr) while he was serving in France

Chip, it is exactly your kind of attitude that I was referring to. Assertive. I mean, how much do you really know about China, its history and Mao for you to make that kind of condescending judgment ("the typical chinese viewpoint of Mao has remarkable similarity to that of an abused child to their abusive guardian")?

Actually there are plenty of Chinese who dislike or even hate Mao already, in today's mainland China. Yet the fact remains the majority (my impression) revere him says something, doesn't it? There had to be legitimate reasons. You weren't there, you didn't know what the Chinese experienced, so who are you to be this assertive? Reading a few books (such as Jung Chang's and Holladay's crap) makes you think you really know him? No kidding!

I am fine with anybody saying Mao is 100% nice, 100% mean or anything in between. But when I see people suggesting how the Chinese should see him, I can't help wondering: When will the west ever stop preaching? It's their country, leave them alone!

If the KMT had had the strategic prowess of Mao, if there had been an elitist revolution instead of a proletarian one, well just look at Taiwan.

The KMT with the remaining Nazi-donated equipment and uniforms instated a dictatorship that was much bloodier than anything that happened in the Mainland.

I also think that the roots of historic events like the "Great Leap Forward" are much deeper seated in history and mass consciousness rather than figureheads.

Pffefer,

I've lived in China for the past 5 years. Nonetheless, you don't need to "know china" to know the basic fact that the cultural revolution and the great leap forward happened. I mean, how much context can legitimize that?? And yes, the majority do admire Mao, for the very reasons I gave. Fear, and propoganda. No, I wasn't there, neither were the vast majority of Chinese citizens (they were all born afterwards). And I've stayed away from Jung Chang's book. I'm not the west, I'm me. I'm not preaching, I'm stating my opinion. Yes, it's their country, but as long as Chinese people have opinions about Bush, or Lincoln, or Clinton (which they have every RIGHT to), then I shall have my opinion of Mao.

Amban,
"Ted Roosevelt lost one of his sons in WWI (Quentin) and another in WWII (Ted, jr) while he was serving in France."

Really? Hard to believe.　But I give him a thumb up for that. Is this Roosevelt the same dude who locked up all the Japanese people in America in concentration camps in WII? That was mean. That was not plain mean, but mean in poor taste. I give him a thumb down for that. I’d say Roosevelt is 50-50.

@BXBQ

No, I'm talking about Ted Roosevelt, not his nephew Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Ted Roosevelt was by no means a saint, but he was not responsible for the internment of Japanese-Americans.

Wish I had gotten in on this thread earlier.

Mostly mean Mao helped unify China, contributed to some Chinese people's pride in being Chinese, and helped some farmers.

I taught English to professional adults in China, one on one, and many of them discussed Mao at one point or another. Some loved him, others were disgusted by him. The ones who were disgusted by him often felt they could not comfortably express their opinions openly in public. My guess is that once the Chinese feel more comfortable expressing their opinions publicly on Mao, we will find that a lot more Chinese people dislike him than it now appears.

Alrite heres why I say Mao Zedong was 30% mean sometime while he was ruling he made a thing called the "Red Army" and he used it 2 kill off the old

It's hard to say. China is a very special country and she's different in many aspects from the western countries. Can you just tell that the western democracy is always good for China. I don't think so. It's wise to copy the western democracy pattern to China. And "King and Bandit" theory always works, even in the western developed countries.

Mao was a communist. That's a fact. If you were a communist your safe. If not you are dead/