Mao: A life by Philip Short

Gollevainen said:

Who are you refering to? For my behalf you all are free to discuss about this book, why wouldn't you?

Click to expand...

???

Then there must be a misunderstanding then, I thought you meant to talk about this book somewhere else.

As for the Napoleon reference sorry if that annoyed you in any way, because historyically Napoleon Bonapart was known as the "Little Corporal" I simply recognizing this.

It amazes me how out of touch the Shanghai Central Committee was when issueing its orders to Mao and Zhu, but I'm impressed in Mao's handling of the matter of being insuborninate for when the orders would mean the destruction of the Red Army and only obeyed when he had no choice but managed to make do in each situation. That is part of what makes a good commander. IMHO.

It's all big missunderstandment...you see i wasen't talking to you, but to Vincelee...Feel free to continue the discussion...

...tough it's propaply better not to call me napoleon in the future...or at least stay whit the napoleon...and not even think about the another famous corporal....

ok fair enough.

So far I've also learned that it was the Chinese that started the mentality of the purge in the "futian incident" 4 years before Kirov's murder in Leningrad. Facsinating how so many things associated wiht the Russians are actually of Chinese origin.

I think most books about mao glorify or demonize him. I haven't read this book so i cannot make a decision about it.

Anyways Mao was a man not before his time nor after his time. He was one of a kind. Who else could have united china after having nearly everything againest him. From his own communist party al the way to the american government. His stragery won the civil war for the communist and he pushed china from a country still in the middle ages into the industrial era.

But their is a dark side to this, Cultural revolution(i think a lot of them deserved it), Great leap forward (which pushed china back 10 years instead of propelling her 50years into the future). I understand why Mao did this but i wish china wasn't communist.

If america didn't brush china off after the communist took power then china today would be the big dragon guiding the littles tigers(instead of japan). Maybe a free democratic china

Regards,

Chinawhite

The book doesn't demonize or embellish him, its a completely neutral account and gives the benefit of the doubt in some cases were evidence is just too scarce.

The Great Leap Forward he had actually resigned as Party Chairman blaming the failures on himself dispite the fact that it was mostly natural disasters not his policy that causes those famines, also it should be remembered that when those communes were formed the prime difference was that in Russia alot of communes were forced, in China, they were mostly volunteers, and to be fair steel production did increase 45% only decreased in the "4 Black years" when the first famines struck and the population did INCREASE from 450-600 million people thus making some if not most of the death figures suspect even by western sources.

Also remember that Chiang-Kai-Shek would've been a far worse alternative, the KMT only gave up power due to US pressure, you can easily pressue a small island off the coast off of a slightly hostile island, in comparrison to a large and not so easily invadable mainland.

Mao was honored in China, why else will they preserve his dead body, and put his image on tian an men square? Mao has made a few mistakes but that was not his fault, there are some bad people who just want to sully Mao's reputation but he is still honored by China today. the cultural revolution was a good plan that went horobaly wrong as there were criminals who caused this. What i don't understand is what so many people have against the comunist party? I meen, it is not a evil form of government.