RT: China’s🇨🇳 Meteoric Rise Impossible Without Achievements of Mao Era

[beijingwalker]

RT: China’s Meteoric Rise Impossible Without Achievements of Mao Era

On this episode, we speak to Chinese venture capitalist and political scientist Eric Li. He discusses why the 2008 economic crisis showed the West’s failure and China not understanding the gravity of the failure at the time, the importance of the Mao era in making China’s meteoric economic rise possible and the achievements during the period, why capitalists have no power in China, the need to tackle rising inequality in China, accusations of genocide in Xinjiang, mass censorship and negligible press freedom in China, measures of the Chinese people’s confidence in their government, superpower competition with the United States and much more!

 

[beijingwalker]

key excerpts from the transcript.

On the basic continuity between pre-1978 and post-1978 China

Since the Cold War, China is the only major country that has really prospered and delivered for a large number of people – delivered to them a better life.
This was not because China abandoned socialism. Some people misconstrue the history of modern China; they tend to divide it into the first 30 years under Mao, until the late 1970s and Deng Xiaoping’s market reform, which took China to what it is today. But I’ve always said that without the first 30 years, the market reforms would not have been possible.
In the first 30 years, obviously, we had a lot of problems and a lot of mistakes. But it was in the first 30 years that we took our life expectancy – which in 1949 was about 40 – to 67 in the late 1970s. Literacy rate went from negligible to just over 80%, 100% among young people, in the late 1970s. Industrial base was built in the first 30 years, and more importantly, national independence, because China acquired nuclear weapons so nobody could invade it. That allowed it to pursue its own path after the first 30 years of the People’s Republic.
So Deng Xiaoping’s reforms were successful, in many ways, because the foundation was laid in the first 30 years.

On whether China is a capitalist country

We don’t have capitalism. We have a market economy, we do have capital and we have people like me who manage capital. A market economy means that you manage capital in a way that it generates efficient returns, you allocate resources efficiently. Capitalism to me means the interests of capital rise above the interests of the society as a whole. And capitalists capture the political system for their own benefits. And that we don’t want in this country.

On the shift in China’s priorities over the last decade

We’ve seen a great transformation of China in the last 9 to 10 years. I think the paradigm shift occurred in 2012, with the 18th Party Congress. China shifted from the 30 or 40 years prior to that, which was the headlong pursuit of economic growth, at whatever the costs. And we’re shifting away from that and towards more balanced growth, or more balanced development, which really means common prosperity, so a more equitable society.
There are a lot of side effects of market economics that we had pursued. Inequality is one of them, environmental degradation is another, and corruption was another. So all these issues needed to be addressed. And I think there has been a great transformation within Chinese society and China’s self perception, and the national aspiration of the Chinese people. Especially among young people. In my generation, we were primarily concerned about China being poor and lacking development. But if you ask the younger generation, born post 1990, of course they want economic opportunities, but their primary concerns are about inequality, and sustainability for the future.

 

[Piotr]

RT: China’s Meteoric Rise Impossible Without Achievements of Mao Era

Mao Zedong was not only a great leader but also simply a good person:

"The simple facts of Mao’s career seem incredible: in a vast land of 400 million people, at age 28, with a dozen others, to found a party and in the next fifty years to win power, organize, and remold the people and reshape the land–history records no greater achievement. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, all the kings of Europe, Napoleon, Bismarck, Lenin–no predecessor can equal Mao Tse-tung’s scope of accomplishment, for no other country was ever so ancient and so big as China. Indeed Mao’s achievement is almost beyond our comprehension. – John King Fairbank, The United States and China.

Colleagues, rivals, academics and propagandists East and West have written much nonsense about Mao Zedong yet, when we correct for bias and discard patent falsehoods it becomes clear that, apart from the bloodshed that accompanies wars and revolutions, it’s doubtful that Mao killed anyone and indubitable that he gave life to billions. Indeed, no-one has done so much good for so many–and so little harm; no-one comes close."

https://www.unz.com/article/mao-reconsidered/

 

[Maira La]

Basically China got the right revolutionary leader at the right moment.

 

[casual]

Mao had great accomplishments but some of his policies were simply disastrous. He was good at unifying and revolution but not so good at governing.

 

[Rafi]

Mao laid the ground work and institutions including the PLA that made China a great world power again.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Mao had great accomplishments but some of his policies were simply disastrous. He was good at unifying and revolution but not so good at governing.

He was dealt a shit hand by the KMT tho.

 

[casual]

He was dealt a shit hand by the KMT tho.

ya but the great leap forward mess, that's all on Mao. probably set back china's scientific progress by a decade.

 

[tower9]

Mao was a great revolutionary and general but a terrible governor. He should've left economic/social and internal policies alone and stepped down from the 50s onward.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

ya but the great leap forward mess, that's all on Mao. probably set back china's scientific progress by a decade.

relative to the massive mistakes by the KMT, the Great Leap Forward doesn't seem like much. if Chiang Kai Shek did it it would've been just another "aww peanuthead screwed up again, how quaint".

 

[Song Hong]

Mao was a great revolutionary and general but a terrible governor. He should've left economic/social and internal policies alone and stepped down from the 50s onward.

All Mao economic policies are Zhou Enlai's and Liu Shaoqi's as well. Now Deng Xiaoping pushed all responsibilities to Mao. When Marshall Peng Dehuai attacked Great Leap Forward, Zhou and Liu factions went all out to attack Peng.

Then now everyone pretended that Mao coerced them.