@@pjn2001 2 million people were murdered with impunity during the Chinese Cultural Revolution. How many people have been killed during the recent George Floyd related protests? Please tell me and compare that number to the Chinese Cultural Revolution.
@@henrimourant9855 If you interpreted OP's comments as the outcomes of and not the similarities in the beginnings of the CCR in laying the ideological groundwork for attacking and subverting the current American societal structures and cultural makeup , then you are even more moronic than I imagined.
To hear the opposite perspective of Cultural Revolution, read “The Unknown Cultural Revolution” by Dongping Han. Don't worry, it's not a propaganda book. It was a PhD thesis by a the writer. It cites lot of ground resources, interviews as well as party documents. I believe, viewers of this video would love to read about the opposite perspective before coming to a definite conclusion (because that's what supposedly a sensible person would do).
A fantastic book. I’d also recommend *Agents of Disorder: Inside China’s Cultural Revolution* by Andrew Walder. You know very well that these people don’t want to read anything that deviates from the reactionary and neoliberal narrative we’ve all been raised on. Let’s be honest - less than a handful of the people commenting here have read Dikötter’s introduction, let alone the book. The interview simply reinforces the narrative they already thought they remembered.
@@wafflepoet5437 I don't know what sort of reactionary or neoliberal narrative you have been taught or you suppose others have been taught. Here in the "decadent, corrupt etc etc" West (whatever that is supposed to mean) I was taught to put any narrative to the test of facts, to test the credibility of sources, and to keep an open mind. And I was taught that at a public school. 🤷🏻♀️
@@giulianalusso109 You wrote an entire paragraph without actually _saying_ anything, let alone addressing anything I said. You didn’t even _disagree_ with anything I said. Have you read this or any other work by Dikötter? Have you read _The Unknown Cultural Revolution: Life and Change in a Chinese Village_ or _Agents of Disorder: Inside China’s Cultural Revolution_ ? Do you have the requisite academic background to “test” Dikötter’s narrative and sources? That’s obviously a rhetorical question, but of course _I’m_ not qualified to make such determinations, either. It is precisely _because_ I have an “open mind” that I explored other works on the Cultural Revolution in general and academic responses specifically to “test” Dikötter’s work rather than accept what he argues at face value. Of course, none of the above even matters. You replied to me because you saw “neoliberal” and “reactionary”. If you think Dikötter or the Institute for New Economic Thinking especially would challenge being characterized as neoliberal, then you have no idea what neoliberalism is in the first place. It’s insulting when one talks so dismissively about facts, sources, and “having an open mind” when it’s evident those words amount to nothing more than platitudes. I have no doubt you do a lot of your own “research”, too.
"Not a propaganda book" lol, like you disingenuous Bolshies have any real credibility. His "research" and observations are cherry picked from a single county of Jimo. That book unironically tried to portray China as having any sort of real grassroots democracy during the cultural revolution, outright ignoring and downplaying the fact that the Party apparatus tightly controlled the sham elections and "local democracies" that you and that self-proclaimed "open minded" pseudo-intellectual apologize for. Only unironic Marxist-Leninist Bolshies like you are gullible or vile enough to carry water for the sick jokes that are "democratic centralism" and the so-called grassroots democracy of rural China. Your Marxist-Leninists' phony pretensions towards democracy have zero believability.
Frank Dikotter should be congratulated for writing this book on The Cultural Revolution. Sadly, not enough has been written on what I consider to be one of the most fascinating periods in modern world history. One can only imagine the chaos, violence & anarchy that took place during the 1966-68 period. To witness this period at street level in such a populous country would have been quite incredible. Its a shame there were not more foreign correspondents in China at the time to capture the 'true essence' of The Cultural Revolution.
There's a book by a woman who was a girl living in Shanghai in the 1960s. She talks about her recollection of her childhood during the Cultural Revolution. Children were shaming their teachers, denouncing teachers, denouncing parents as "enemies of the people". They'd make these ....I guess memes without the internet on this wall where they'd draw things and write messages in big characters. This girl's family was terrified, scared of getting arrested. Some of them did. The adults knew what was going on....the children were the ones being brainwashed into a cult....and the regime encouraged them to violence.... to rename places. The kids (including the author of the book) thought they were revolutionaries tearing down the old.
@@henrimourant9855 These people have been awaiting the Great Communist Armageddon with as much fear and misunderstanding as most of them do the Second Coming. For nearly a century and with increasing hysteria they’ve been terrified of the communists under their beds, the communists teaching their children, the communists next door. Reactionary media have only broadened the boundaries of communism’s definition to include literally anything that isn’t socially and economically conservative. Most of this nonsense is mutually exclusive. The archconservative William F. Buckley, Jr. would fall out of his chair at the bogeyman conservatives have built on his hideous legacy. Don’t you know? The communist-liberal radicals of the Democratic Party are arming the woke BLM-antifa super soldier brigades to burn down the suburbs and hunt white Christians for sport across middle and southern America. The communist President of the United States has been funneling George Soros’ (and the rest of the “globalist” cabal) billions through community outreach programs to arm urban hoodlums that they’ve radicalized through insidious and divisive history lessons. For the love of God, white Protestant children are being taught to hate themselves for the color of their skin, that they’re personally responsible for slavery, and that they now have to accept the inherent superiority of woke minorities!
Dokotter's book "The Tragedy of Revolution" is framed from a "Western ownership of China" perspective, which is built into the author's upbringing. If China had not thrown us UK capitalist interferers out, and Chinese oligarchs out, successfully liberating their own cities by 1948, their public living conditions now would likely be only marginally better than they were in 1948. Under Mao, literacy went from 15% to 90%, life-span from 45 to 70, with vastly more gains than their constantly advertised salvation setback (which amounts to about 2% of the population) during the transition period which led to far better agricultural output. The successful health reforms and vast improvements to literacy are so important. With broad public (Mao mere a symbol but the will coming from the public under their conditions) support to remove us, China’s history turned away from a direction towards what would now be akin to a place like Indonesia’s. This set the conditions for their excellent governance that follows Mao’s earlier but important and on the whole extremely successful, for their public not for us which is why we demonise them, transition period. The video fails to account for how bad the initial conditions were in the 1920s and what it is like to exist on the other side of our Empire. During 19th C we established not only the opium trade and setting impossible loan conditions and addiction, but invaded (England's initiative but US contractual and sharing of the benefits) China's ports twice, forced impossible contracts upon the public with ongoing bribery to officials, and the ordinary Chinese had terrible conditions of poverty and death, profoundly worse than the promoted set backs by Moa that have countless books written about it.
Dokotter's book "The Tragedy of Revolution" is not framed from a "Western ownership of China" perspective, which is certainly is not due to the author's upbringing. If China had been ruled under democracy instead of CCP's communism, the Chinese oligarchs will still be kicked out, Chinese will liberated from the evils of CCP communists, their public living conditions now would certainly be much better. Under Mao, literacy went from 15% to 90% but much of Chinese writing culture has been destroyed. If China is under democracy, the literacy rate would be 99%, instead of 90% now. If China is ruled by democracy, life-span would be higher than 70 now, probably matching Taiwan's 81 years old. CCP unsuccessful health reforms denied millions of affordable healthcare, and poor improvements to literacy are failures of CCP. Mao is not a symbol but is a god, so precious that his body is still being preserved for CCP's worship. Mao's madness set the conditions for CCP's bad governance. You failed to account for how China can make progress and advancement and improvements with democracy, despite bad conditions in the 1920s. During mid 20th century CCP established opium plantation and opium trading for Chinese consumption and set impossible economic condition for decent living forcing millions of ordinary Chinese to die of poverty and starvation and torture, profoundly worse than what the CCP dare to admit. These are the truth.
Would you rather have lived in Taiwan from 1949 until now or in China? The true answer is Taiwan; the dishonest, deranged one is China. No sane person would choose to live under Mao's horrible rule. Of course, if you believe that Chinese people are an inferior race that deserves genocide, cultural destruction, thuggish dictatorship and so on, then you are simply a racist. Either way, your views are repulsive.
One factor that is almost never talked about is the fallout between Russia and China in 1959. Russia terminated the 120+ industrialization aid programs in China and the result was instant 30 million unemployment. China was isolated from the entire developed world and with Russia breathing down it's neck to repay the gigantic debt. China was in disarray, and that was the background to the great leap forward and the culture revolution. I see the culture revolution as primarily an attempt for China to get through a very difficult situation rather than Mao's power craze. The culture revolution is a class war, much like the French revolution. Lots of craziness did happen, but it did get rid of the land owner class paving the way for Deng's reform.
I like that he critiques power and how we allow it to take hold but he fails to realise that we support unjustified power also such as cheering the combing of Vietnam, Cambodia, North Korea, Iraq, Lybia, execution cruel harsh sanctions and so on. As for the deaths constantly quoted under Mao, the exaggerate claims of deaths from starvation were not increased but decreased from the deaths *before* Mao’s reforms owing to Western imperialist interference with China prior to 1950. Look up life expectancy data from 1950 to 1970, and multiply that through the large population. Mao brought live expectancy from 45 to 70 over his career, literacy from 10% to 80%. I sympathize with you as I used to have similar notion but after a lot of work realized I was completely brainwashed within Australia. Upon a lot of research it turns out that Mao did exceedingly more for the people of China than he caused problems and without Mao and their liberation of China from capitalists in the early 1950s, the whole county of China would have followed a path similar to India or Indonesia which both had a similar (even slightly better) initial conditions. Now China has eliminated poverty and has far better health care, higher literacy, economic mobility and business than India or Indonesia and is even catching up to the West which it was exceedingly behind in 1950s when Britain was still bribing and calling the shots over there.
@@NoreenHoltzen A Chinese Communist Party bootlicker who shills for free whilst fancying herself some mighty anti-imperialist independent thinker. Ha! Do you realize that China was under decades of civil wars, strifes, political chaos, and not mention fighting the Japanese? How the hell do you directly compare the standards of living in a country at peace with a country that was nearly constantly at some kind of war and de facto fragmented into warlordism? That’s just one thing. Taking the official measurements of standards of living by the Chinese Communist Party-State seriously is another, especially when it’s already obvious that their economic figures are purely manmade as even some of their own officials admit as much. Either you’re yet another lying Bolshie (thank the gods that you and your misbegotten ilk are unlikely to ever have any real political relevance in Australia), or your senility has got the better of you. You are not as smart or "beyond it" as you fancy yourself to be, Miss Holtzen.
Hmm Mao Zedong. Chen Yun summed him up with the following comments "Had he died in 1956 he would have been immortal. Had he died in 1966 he still would have been a great man but flawed. Alas he died in 1976 and what can one say!" I have always regarded the Cultural Revolution as simply Mao Zedong trying to leave a great legacy. He was absolutely terrified of a Chinese "Khrushchev" who would denounce him just as Khrushchev had denounced Stalin in 1956. Hence his extreme hatred of Liu Shoaqi who had told him in 1962 "That people write books about canabalism you know!" I also believe that the death of Lin Biao had a prefound impact. As it finally freed Zhou and Deng from the Mao's control. Forcing the aging Mao to rely totally on "The Gang of Four". As Chen Yun noted had their policies been successful it wouldn't have been so easy to remove them from power!
I agree, he was absolutely terrified of what happened when Stalin died and the successors felt they had free rein to criticize him and underline his greatest flaws. I can see a parallel to this when the former USSR folded and an oligopoly of former communist cadres took over Russia. Modern China is struggling to keep it together to avert the same fate of Russia in the early 2000s.
Please see www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/researching-the-history-the-peoples-republic-china for what's available to researchers who can get approval, and what's available outside of China for those who can't.
@@henrimourant9855 the wokesters who blame western culture for imaginary "white supremecism" and "systemic racism". They are attacking the culture just as the red guard did. How can you not see this lol?
My impression is the moderator is greatly more insightful of the political history than the academic interviewee. One issue not addressed is the self preservation that motivated Mao to unleash the cultural revolution. It was a means of sideline his political opponents in the great tradition of the French Revolution.
@@TesterBoy Only Fascists think the French Revolution was a "bloody tragedy". All sensible, intelligent people realize that even though the french revolution itself was a failure it inaugurated an age of liberty, fraternity, and equality. And we still live under its shadow.
Mao: the people have to criticize the party or it will do wrong things This guy: this is literally an attempt at silencing all criticism of the leader.
Remember the hundred flowers campaing? Mao said the people should criticize the government but after a year everyone was criticizing the government and Mao just purged everyone that disagreed, and no, not all of the people killed were Capitalists counter revolutionaries, if they were, killing them would be a good thing, but they weren't. Even the ornithologist that warned Mao for his idiotic policy about the killing of sparrows that ended up fucking the ecosystem and played a great part in the famine, ended up being hunted by the red guards for speaking against Mao.
Mao's failings are grossly overestimated in contrast to his successes. This is a product of our Western framing of information. The successful health reforms and vast improvements to literacy (from 15% to 70%) are so important under Mao. Life expectancy moved from 45 years to 70 years by the time Mao retired.a With broad support amongst the Chinese public (Mao mere a symbol but the will coming from the public under their conditions) supporting to remove our Western interference, China’s history turned away from their default direction towards what would now be akin to conditions closer to Indonesia. The video fails to account for how bad the initial conditions were in the 1920s and what it is like to exist on the other side of our Empire. During 19th C we established not only the opium trade and setting impossible loan conditions and addiction, but invaded (England's initiative but US contractual and sharing of the benefits) China's ports twice, forced impossible contracts upon the public with ongoing bribery to officials, and the ordinary Chinese had terrible conditions of poverty and death, profoundly worse than the promoted set backs by Moa that have countless books written about it.
He equates Mao's encouraging the rooting out of "revisionists" in the Communist Party to democracy. These are two entirely different movements, aren't they?
The Cultural Revolution had a profound and far-reaching impact on Chinese society and national identity, affecting various aspects such as social structure, cultural heritage, legal system, and ethnic relations. Erosion of Social Trust and Moral Values: The Cultural Revolution, centered on class struggle, encouraged people to denounce and criticize each other, leading to a severe breakdown of social trust. People became suspicious and fearful of one another, and even family members, friends, and colleagues found it difficult to maintain basic trust. The moral values of traditional Chinese society, such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and integrity, were replaced by a new set of values. This collapse of social trust even led to extreme violent events, such as the brutal suppression of intellectuals and the destruction of cultural relics. Cultural Discontinuity and Distortion of Traditional Values: The Cultural Revolution's slogan "Destroy the Four Olds" (old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits) led to a massive attack on China's cultural heritage. Many ancient artifacts, books, and cultural relics were destroyed, and scholars and cultural workers were persecuted. Traditional values such as filial piety, respect for teachers, and social hierarchy were distorted, suppressed, or even demonized. This had a lasting impact on Chinese cultural heritage, causing a break in the transmission of traditional values and a sense of disconnection among younger generations. Collapse of the Legal System and Social Order: During the Cultural Revolution, the legal system was paralyzed, and the rule of law was completely destroyed. The public security system was dismantled, and the judiciary lost its authority, leading to a state of chaos. Violence and instability became rampant, and many ordinary citizens became victims of political movements. The planned economy also failed to function, and the government was unable to maintain social order, causing economic and social chaos. This disregard for the rule of law posed a significant challenge to the rebuilding of China's legal system. Deterioration of Ethnic Relations: The Cultural Revolution also had a devastating impact on minority ethnic groups. In Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and Xinjiang, minority cultures were severely destroyed, and tensions between local ethnic groups and the central government increased. The government forced the implementation of "revolutionary" ideas, suppressing minority customs, religions, and traditional ways of life. This destruction of minority cultures not only led to short-term cultural loss but also had a profound impact on China's multi-ethnic structure, leaving deep social fissures that still exist today. Strengthening of Collectivism and Suppression of Individualism: During the Cultural Revolution, collectivism was highly praised, and individual interests, thought, and autonomy were suppressed. In the extreme political struggle, individuals had to conform to the collective and prioritize self-preservation over personal creativity or critical thinking. This suppression of individual will limited the development of diverse ideas and social pluralism, leaving China's society struggling to rebuild individual values after the revolution. Distortion and Trauma of National Identity: The Cultural Revolution had a profound impact on China's national identity. The collective memory of the Chinese people was filled with suffering and trauma, and a sense of dependence on authority and fear of change emerged. People became wary of political movements and instability, which partly explains the high value placed on stability and order in contemporary Chinese society. Moreover, the trauma of the Cultural Revolution also affected China's innovative spirit and diversity development, contributing to the rise of social conservatism and political stability demands. The Cultural Revolution had a profound and complex impact on Chinese society and national identity, not only destroying social trust, the legal system, and cultural heritage but also fundamentally changing the collective memory and national psyche of the Chinese people. Although the Cultural Revolution is now decades past, its legacy continues to shape contemporary Chinese society and remains an important topic for reflection on national identity and social development.
Is anyone surprised that not everyone was with it, that many were only posing and acting as if they were? That a black market was tolerated? That democracy remained distrusted? I have studied this for the last 40 years and none of this is new. It isn't that I disagree with anything he is saying, but it is silly to act like this is fundamentally revelatory. Anyone who has worked there knows all of this.
What is such a revelation is that he is implying the cultural revolution led to the black market which led to the economic reform, Deng Xiaoping was Just going with the flow..... Who would have thought the Mao's cultural revolution led to the economic reform of China ???? I was truly shocked. But his theory makes perfect logical sense.
It's not appropriate to use "led" referring to the relation of such, since the flow was the eagerness from the people themselves, for a normal public order and economic development instead of the insane movements manipulated by the dictator.
A very good and impartial discourse. It shows that everything evolve, whether it be religious or political. You can equate the Cultural Revolution with Inquisitions- the religious/politcal history of Europe. China continues to evolve to meet the challeges of the 21st century.
After listening to him it seems that he is implying that Cultural Revolution was good thing for China in the long run. It is emotionally devastating for the people who experience it but afterwards it really helped people move forward. 1. Not too many people died, about 2 million people it is even less than one year from 1950 - 1951. 2. He said "the communist party came out of cultural revolution badly damaged". What exactly was "damaged" ? I believe he meant that the Legitimacy of communist party was badly damaged. And indeed it would, first Mao purged the party with mob rule (Red Guards). 1966- 68 Then he ask he ask the military to take over the government (1968 -1971) and purge the Red Guards. Then finally even the army got purged some people got reinstated. ( 1971 - 1976) Of course you go thru so many purges and later purge the people who did the purge you would loose legitimacy. 3. It sounds like because the party was "damaged" people begin to leave the collectives and start their own black market trade. (like North Korea after the famine) Indirectly he is implying that Cultural Revolution led the economic reform of China. Culture Revolution caused Communist party lose legitimacy, which led people to start Black market economy, which led the economic reform of China (Deng is just going with the flow). Very Very interesting conclusions.
Xiao 晓 Chen 陈 I've just finished reading 'Wild Swans' by Jung Chang. It's the history of her family from 1909 to present day through the Civil war, the famine and the cultural revolution.
Sebastian Grain most of Chinese intellectual are too biased and too emotionally involved to reflect on cultural revolution objectively. And usually it is easier for people from a different culture to analyze the problem of that culture, once they full learned of that culture. It is always harder to see oneself in a proper light. I don't have any good Chinese source I can think of.
I shall buy this trilogy of books. For anyone looking for a really well written firsthand account of the chaos of 20th century China, read ‘Wild Swans: Three Daughters of China’ by Jung Chang.
Na.... words can be translated. Its economics... theyre communist. They have never been liberalized. They have never experienced true freedom.and representative republican democracy. Thats HUGE. How can they understand freedom of speech anymore than we can understand their acceptance of conformity?
@@juanmccoy3066american freedom is the freedom to oppress those born less fortunate. china was an imperialised nation and would never succumb to the ideology that devastated its nation
@@juanmccoy3066 Communists. Right. That’s why eg 4 of the Forbes list of 50 wealthiest billionaires are from China. Because nobody embodies Marx like one the richest people on the planet.
It's unreasonable to see people's compliance as merely acting, and wrong to blame a single individual for large-scale social phenomenons. This also contradicts his claim that the cultural revolution was an act of democracy later on, a sign of political views dictating achademic thoughts. I would advise only listening to things discussed after 10 mins.
Basically what I get from the readings is that Mao himself caused the collapse of China's planned economy. All those 'capitalist roaders' and 'revisionists' usually were the best and ablest cadres who had overseen China's economic development under central planning. When they were purged they were replaced by people with no experience, who did not know what they were doing and were not promoted because they did not know what they were doing and sought no self improvement. Second, Deng's reforms were sharply criticised internally in the Party for being good in principle, but the execution leaving a lot to be desired. This resulted in China's fiscal system nearly collapsing as its economy boomed. It took Jiang and Hu working one after the other to put it back together again.
@Kokwah Tan Mao was getting paranoid of other members of party challenging his absolute role as "god king". As a "god" he would not accept any challengers to his heavenly throne on earth. Thus he orchestrated everything to cement his power and legacy. Quite typical if you think about all the emperors who came before him. He was not just an emperor but a god in his mind. And people died and people suffered and it didn't matter to him.
It's sad that the Chinese "leader" is so thin-skinned that they have to ban the latest Winnie The Pooh movie nationwide...simply because some clever Chinese commented about how fat Xi Jinping resembles the tubby make-believ bear! "Politics in Command," indeed! lol
Yeah, we must free china from revisionist and democrats, who protect the interests of the capitalists , and establish the people's power - the dictatorship of the proletariat.
The Cultural Revolution is still happening today? What? The CPC/PRC is horrible yes but I don't think China is currently still in the grips of the Cultural Revolution.
What prompted Mao to meet with Nixon? I think Mao later knew that cultural revolution was a mistake. Building a relationship with America would most likely save his legacy.
Relations gradually soured with Moscow, how did you not know this? Meeting Nixon was a strategic ploy to get the Soviets to remain a safe distance away, as they always become overbearing upon satellite states or nations they believe they have a right to tell what to do as a result of them bringing that political system's influence in the first place. It's a very dangerous thing to make yourself become beholden to an outsider's worldview, and that was the essence of why Mao would seek to forage relations with the West. Evolving interests, world events, and the inherent unpredictability of the future is why civilisations have fought, made amends, fostered unions and partnerships, and gone back and forth since antiquity. At that moment in time, it made more sense to Mao to distance himself from the Soviets by using the West as a geopolitical buffer. Everybody in the world behaves like this, generally. Standard protocol.
Trae Richthofen I'd argue it made more sense from the West (America's) perspective to seek a detente with the USSR, not China, at that juncture in history, though. It was Mao that had clung onto Stalinism and mass purges at that point, not Brezhnev. The Bolsheviks were still dangerous far left ideologues, but they were leaps and bounds less evil than under Stalin or Mao's CCP, and it's always better to encourage division amongst your adversaries, and not unity.
Looking back, it was actually a tragic mistake that Nixon went to China. He should have helped Taiwan militarily and enabled them to take back the mainland.
Reality Check Of course bloodthirsty imperialists would encourage a murderous civil war. People like you are why any independent countries are forced to maintain a police state.
Mao's failings are grossly overestimated in contrast to his successes. This is a product of our Western framing of information. The successful health reforms and vast improvements to literacy (from 15% to 70%) are so important under Mao. Life expectancy moved from 45 years to 70 years by the time Mao retired.a With broad support amongst the Chinese public (Mao mere a symbol but the will coming from the public under their conditions) supporting to remove our Western interference, China’s history turned away from their default direction towards what would now be akin to conditions closer to Indonesia. The video fails to account for how bad the initial conditions were in the 1920s and what it is like to exist on the other side of our Empire. During 19th C we established not only the opium trade and setting impossible loan conditions and addiction, but invaded (England's initiative but US contractual and sharing of the benefits) China's ports twice, forced impossible contracts upon the public with ongoing bribery to officials, and the ordinary Chinese had terrible conditions of poverty and death, profoundly worse than the promoted set backs by Moa that have countless books written about it.
west think The most disabled tyrant: "Inspired the Chinese population to increase from 400 million to 900 million, and the average life expectancy to rise 75 years from 35 years. Call on the people to fight against imperialism and capitalist oppression and exploitation, support the people's struggle for freedom, and achieve gender equality."😅
Mao connected with America towards the end of cultural revolution. This was a 180 degree turnaround. If China had not gone through some of the socialist mishaps that it did, the country could be on the development track much sooner, similar to Taiwan and South Korea.
Back then the Chinese was too irrational, lived in too much cult of personality to take on the development track of Taiwan or South Korea. It was after the cultural revolution that people begin to think on their own and became more rational. It was this change to rationality that put China on the path of reform and opening up.
useless from many directions. basic questions was not amswered. who made the revolution? against who and what? did ot succeed? did it fail? what was a outcome? this was a time wasting video containing some not-related facts (some might even be untruth) by someone who seems to be defender of capitalism.
what foreigners found surprising, Chinese are used to, a few examples cannot represent the whole picture. Chairman Mao laid the foundation for later economic developemnt China is achieving today. you cannot compare him with Hitler as you wish. what the latter left to Germen？ As for the great famine, Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping contributed much more while Deng did expand the anti-rightist compane that led to severe bureaucracy part of the reason of the great famine. Deng and Liu stood on piled rice field encouraging the bluff of yielding. shame biased scholar wastes years for nothing but misinformation.
A side effect of the cultural revolution was the total destruction of the STEM areas in the universities (except weapons researchers). A whole generation of scientists went missing as they worked in rice fields. I saw these impacts in 1984 with a lot of very young scientists and a few old scientists and none in between. Will our own "cultural revolution" that is underway do the same to the STEM areas?
@@kerrysanders6668 haha. To simplify, the Chinese are the heavenly mandated (chosen/elect) of the God of all God's. Confucius was/is Moses. The transliteration and etymology of names and Chinese history testifies to 'that which is' pure/righteous/clean (Qin/Sin/Chin). Shang Di Qin - Shalt not God Sin. And neither should the people known by his name Sino (China). Under the Northern star - the middle Kingdom, the land of mountains and valleys and dew of heaven. So looking at the old testament of the Bible, they are covenanted to the Laws statutes of God. If they don't follow and execute judgement, they are cursed with war, famine, pestilence. If they do...they rule the world!!!!!.
To simplify, the Chinese are the heavenly mandated (chosen/elect) of the God of all God's. Confucius was/is Moses. The transliteration and etymology of names and Chinese history testifies to 'that which is' pure/righteous/clean (Qin/Sin/Chin). Shang Di Qin - Shalt not God Sin. And neither should the people known by his name Sino (China). Under the Northern star - the middle Kingdom, the land of mountains and valleys and dew of heaven. So looking at the old testament of the Bible, they are covenanted to the Laws statutes of God. If they don't follow and execute judgement, they are cursed with war, famine, pestilence. If they do...they rule the world!!!!!.
Criticizing History is something like touring an mountain, the shape of mountain in our eyes really depends on the angle on which we choose or happen to stand. The only well-crafted content about this Frank Dikotter's wiseacre book is the sub-title only, which Frank himself narcissistically assumed that himself represented the people of people's republic. Well, he failed badly. After read this book cover to cover, I must concluded that one of the key arrangements in this book which the people started economic reform before government is an total false. The truth is that, even during the hardest period in Culture revolution, the private transaction had never been terminated. Some more Humiliating facts for our "history" "writer", Frank, even the CCP admitted that the achievement for the government is not starting the market but encouraging it to thrive. Frank intentionally manipulated the facts to form a weapon in order to undermine the political achievement of Deng Xiaoping, as all his book were. I must say that Frank has failed on his egotistical and self-assured purpose in his own abashment, again. Throughout his book, Frank's arguments are always based on the conditions which were conjectural and inauthentic, and his ambiguity logic behind critical arguments are always farfetched and paradoxical. But, another job done on China-bashing, Frank. Academically, I am glad Oxford and Cambridge rejected your admission, great insightful decisions. From the entertainment point of view, Frank is on a great leap forwards to China Uncensored level of entertaining.
Mr. Korean Mamba The truth is that China always want to eliminate the old culture since May 4th Movement in the 1910s. Mao was educated during the May 4th Movement, and Mao believed in May 4th Movement. If you use May 4th Movement as the start point of Modern China, you will find that The May 4th Movement failed by KMT, who believed in old Chinese philosophy. Unlike most Chinese communist leaders, Mao do not have an certain ideology which he think that China should follow, either capitalist or communist. We need to think Mao as a social experimenter of all the new ideas emerged during New Cultural Movement. To Mao, he think that he is the true decedent and believer of the May 4th Movement. You can find most policies of Mao had strong heritage from the principles of The May 4th Movement, including the nationalization of Capitalist, the mentality of nationalism, the bashing of Chinese old culture especially confusion, the simplify of Chinese writing characters, and the total revolution of every citizen instead of small activists. All those policies can be traced back to the popular ideology in 1910s during the New New Culture Movement promoted by earlier KMT elites. However, the movement was crashed after Chiang Kai-shek took office in the 1928. Chiang Kai-shek started to prosecute New Culture Movement activists, including KMT elites in Left wing and communists. Thus, historically, we can regard the cultural revolution in the 1960s is a natural echo of unfinished New Cultural Movement, but in a much larger national scale. So the critics of Cultural Revolution should never be done in the focus of Mao, as an individual, or Communist Party, as an government. The critics of Cultural Revolution should be focus on the origins of those principles which came from New Cultural Movement in the 1910s. Of course, after 100 years of the movement, we can conclude the wrongness and rightness of the movement. The Chinese cultural is an unpleasant treasure which requires individual to live in certain social pressures from traditions. Activist want to destroy the old cultural and adopt western or soviet values to give China a chance to thrive, in a way like modern Chinese activists. However, Chinese without Chinese cultural is not Chinese any more, the China without Chinese cultural is not China anymore. I believe that the activist want China not to be China in their agenda. However, they have underestimated the consequences of social and value disorders followed by their policy. Thus, according to this story line, you will establish a clear knowing of the modern history of China and you can understand the reason of Cultural Revolution in 60s, the abundant of Cultural Revolution in 70s, and the reemerge of neo confucianism in the last decade. Even Mao did not get to power, someone else will adopt similar policies. Just like the current anti-Chinese cultural movement in Taiwan, who did not experience the Cultural Revolution. We need to understand cultural movement in a sense of echo. All the movements is just unfinished businesses from the last one. But when the damaged from movement is too large to bear, the next one is unlikely to happen until the past generation passed by.
no, both May 4th movement and cultrue revolution has many different sides. Both of them have sides that succeed traditonal culture or destory old culture. What America has achieved has a lot to do with chinese culture revolution actually. Mao is the real one who tried to let the traditional culture suvive.
I think implementing ideas from the May 4th movement did not necessarily mean someone would have done the Cultural Revolution without Mao in power. He was obviously using it to cover up his failings in the Great Leap Forward to fight his political rivals in the CCP. Mao did what was best for him by using ideas from May 4th and Marxism to manipulate political power in the PRC because he was losing that power. Some of the things he had the Red Guards oppose were based on his own ideas. People he hated himself. It eventually evolved into Maoism. Say what you want about the book, but Mao was Mao.
@@stevenfenley9359 millions of corpses as evidence, EVERY SINGLE YEAR FOR THAT MATTER. capitalism is evil and single minded hate... The politics of resentment.
The argument about Peasants' desire for market is absurd. Communism is the most natural form of human being, as it exists in tribal society already where leaders and members come around to plan up what they decide to hunt or produce. Somehow peasants liberated from feudalism and have no direct contact with capitalism want to have a capitalist market for exchange is completely opposite to what Polanyi stressed the artificial and arbitrary characteristics of modern capitalism.
@Marcus-Aerilius Maximus whats up with a response like that? Say something substantial and stop swearing. Is capitalism working well for small farmers? I'm not saying communism in the answer but I surly don't think capitalism in the form it is today is working well for peasants.
@Marcus-Aerilius Maximus Thanks for a reasoned response. I don't know, the farmers don't need to be international corporations, at least not in Sweden. They just need to be big farmers and smaller farmers are getting a harder and harder time surviving. But I think it's irrelevant cause I don't think it has anything to do with this topic.I honestly don't know much about political ideologies anyways so I guess I shouldn't really comment on stuff like this xD
Communism is the most natural form of society?? How many Truely communist regimes do you know that have been successful for longer periods of time? I am not pro-capitalism. I am pro democratic socialism.
@@JohnSmith-iu3ui see... This is the exact reason I'm proud to have that hammer and sickle in my bio. Keeps fascists like you in check every now and then.
Sound familiar, America?
Yes.
No. There is absolutely no comparison. Stop being a hack.
@@henrimourant9855 henri hates the truth
@@pjn2001 2 million people were murdered with impunity during the Chinese Cultural Revolution. How many people have been killed during the recent George Floyd related protests? Please tell me and compare that number to the Chinese Cultural Revolution.
@@henrimourant9855 If you interpreted OP's comments as the outcomes of and not the similarities in the beginnings of the CCR in laying the ideological groundwork for attacking and subverting the current American societal structures and cultural makeup , then you are even more moronic than I imagined.
To hear the opposite perspective of Cultural Revolution, read “The Unknown Cultural Revolution” by Dongping Han. Don't worry, it's not a propaganda book. It was a PhD thesis by a the writer. It cites lot of ground resources, interviews as well as party documents.
I believe, viewers of this video would love to read about the opposite perspective before coming to a definite conclusion (because that's what supposedly a sensible person would do).
A fantastic book. I’d also recommend *Agents of Disorder: Inside China’s Cultural Revolution* by Andrew Walder.
You know very well that these people don’t want to read anything that deviates from the reactionary and neoliberal narrative we’ve all been raised on. Let’s be honest - less than a handful of the people commenting here have read Dikötter’s introduction, let alone the book. The interview simply reinforces the narrative they already thought they remembered.
thank you Aritra.
@@wafflepoet5437 I don't know what sort of reactionary or neoliberal narrative you have been taught or you suppose others have been taught. Here in the "decadent, corrupt etc etc" West (whatever that is supposed to mean) I was taught to put any narrative to the test of facts, to test the credibility of sources, and to keep an open mind. And I was taught that at a public school. 🤷🏻♀️
@@giulianalusso109 You wrote an entire paragraph without actually _saying_ anything, let alone addressing anything I said. You didn’t even _disagree_ with anything I said.
Have you read this or any other work by Dikötter? Have you read _The Unknown Cultural Revolution: Life and Change in a Chinese Village_ or _Agents of Disorder: Inside China’s Cultural Revolution_ ?
Do you have the requisite academic background to “test” Dikötter’s narrative and sources? That’s obviously a rhetorical question, but of course _I’m_ not qualified to make such determinations, either. It is precisely _because_ I have an “open mind” that I explored other works on the Cultural Revolution in general and academic responses specifically to “test” Dikötter’s work rather than accept what he argues at face value.
Of course, none of the above even matters. You replied to me because you saw “neoliberal” and “reactionary”. If you think Dikötter or the Institute for New Economic Thinking especially would challenge being characterized as neoliberal, then you have no idea what neoliberalism is in the first place.
It’s insulting when one talks so dismissively about facts, sources, and “having an open mind” when it’s evident those words amount to nothing more than platitudes. I have no doubt you do a lot of your own “research”, too.
"Not a propaganda book" lol, like you disingenuous Bolshies have any real credibility. His "research" and observations are cherry picked from a single county of Jimo. That book unironically tried to portray China as having any sort of real grassroots democracy during the cultural revolution, outright ignoring and downplaying the fact that the Party apparatus tightly controlled the sham elections and "local democracies" that you and that self-proclaimed "open minded" pseudo-intellectual apologize for.
Only unironic Marxist-Leninist Bolshies like you are gullible or vile enough to carry water for the sick jokes that are "democratic centralism" and the so-called grassroots democracy of rural China.
Your Marxist-Leninists' phony pretensions towards democracy have zero believability.
The interviewer seems to have had quite an interesting life.
The guy encountered the KGB in the year 2000? Something doesn't add up there....
@@timothycook4782
He misspoke, later he references the early 1990s in Russia.
Frank Dikotter should be congratulated for writing this book on The Cultural Revolution. Sadly, not enough has been written on what I consider to be one of the most fascinating periods in modern world history. One can only imagine the chaos, violence & anarchy that took place during the 1966-68 period. To witness this period at street level in such a populous country would have been quite incredible. Its a shame there were not more foreign correspondents in China at the time to capture the 'true essence' of The Cultural Revolution.
They wouldve been murdered!
There's a book by a woman who was a girl living in Shanghai in the 1960s. She talks about her recollection of her childhood during the Cultural Revolution.
Children were shaming their teachers, denouncing teachers, denouncing parents as "enemies of the people". They'd make these ....I guess memes without the internet on this wall where they'd draw things and write messages in big characters.
This girl's family was terrified, scared of getting arrested. Some of them did. The adults knew what was going on....the children were the ones being brainwashed into a cult....and the regime encouraged them to violence.... to rename places. The kids (including the author of the book) thought they were revolutionaries tearing down the old.
@@bradhirsch4845 It turned out well, I mean comparing China to the USA.
@@yuchichan4815 No, it didnt turn out well. What are you talking about?
China is a horrible country.
And now comes all of western civilization.
Read Martin Jacques if you think that
Total nonsense. That's an insult to all the victims of the Chinese Cultural Revolution.
@@henrimourant9855 These people have been awaiting the Great Communist Armageddon with as much fear and misunderstanding as most of them do the Second Coming. For nearly a century and with increasing hysteria they’ve been terrified of the communists under their beds, the communists teaching their children, the communists next door.
Reactionary media have only broadened the boundaries of communism’s definition to include literally anything that isn’t socially and economically conservative. Most of this nonsense is mutually exclusive.
The archconservative William F. Buckley, Jr. would fall out of his chair at the bogeyman conservatives have built on his hideous legacy. Don’t you know? The communist-liberal radicals of the Democratic Party are arming the woke BLM-antifa super soldier brigades to burn down the suburbs and hunt white Christians for sport across middle and southern America. The communist President of the United States has been funneling George Soros’ (and the rest of the “globalist” cabal) billions through community outreach programs to arm urban hoodlums that they’ve radicalized through insidious and divisive history lessons.
For the love of God, white Protestant children are being taught to hate themselves for the color of their skin, that they’re personally responsible for slavery, and that they now have to accept the inherent superiority of woke minorities!
Dokotter's book "The Tragedy of Revolution" is framed from a "Western ownership of China" perspective, which is built into the author's upbringing. If China had not thrown us UK capitalist interferers out, and Chinese oligarchs out, successfully liberating their own cities by 1948, their public living conditions now would likely be only marginally better than they were in 1948. Under Mao, literacy went from 15% to 90%, life-span from 45 to 70, with vastly more gains than their constantly advertised salvation setback (which amounts to about 2% of the population) during the transition period which led to far better agricultural output. The successful health reforms and vast improvements to literacy are so important. With broad public (Mao mere a symbol but the will coming from the public under their conditions) support to remove us, China’s history turned away from a direction towards what would now be akin to a place like Indonesia’s. This set the conditions for their excellent governance that follows Mao’s earlier but important and on the whole extremely successful, for their public not for us which is why we demonise them, transition period. The video fails to account for how bad the initial conditions were in the 1920s and what it is like to exist on the other side of our Empire. During 19th C we established not only the opium trade and setting impossible loan conditions and addiction, but invaded (England's initiative but US contractual and sharing of the benefits) China's ports twice, forced impossible contracts upon the public with ongoing bribery to officials, and the ordinary Chinese had terrible conditions of poverty and death, profoundly worse than the promoted set backs by Moa that have countless books written about it.
Dokotter's book "The Tragedy of Revolution" is not framed from a "Western ownership of China" perspective, which is certainly is not due to the author's upbringing. If China had been ruled under democracy instead of CCP's communism, the Chinese oligarchs will still be kicked out, Chinese will liberated from the evils of CCP communists, their public living conditions now would certainly be much better. Under Mao, literacy went from 15% to 90% but much of Chinese writing culture has been destroyed. If China is under democracy, the literacy rate would be 99%, instead of 90% now. If China is ruled by democracy, life-span would be higher than 70 now, probably matching Taiwan's 81 years old. CCP unsuccessful health reforms denied millions of affordable healthcare, and poor improvements to literacy are failures of CCP. Mao is not a symbol but is a god, so precious that his body is still being preserved for CCP's worship. Mao's madness set the conditions for CCP's bad governance. You failed to account for how China can make progress and advancement and improvements with democracy, despite bad conditions in the 1920s. During mid 20th century CCP established opium plantation and opium trading for Chinese consumption and set impossible economic condition for decent living forcing millions of ordinary Chinese to die of poverty and starvation and torture, profoundly worse than what the CCP dare to admit. These are the truth.
Would you rather have lived in Taiwan from 1949 until now or in China? The true answer is Taiwan; the dishonest, deranged one is China. No sane person would choose to live under Mao's horrible rule.
Of course, if you believe that Chinese people are an inferior race that deserves genocide, cultural destruction, thuggish dictatorship and so on, then you are simply a racist. Either way, your views are repulsive.
One factor that is almost never talked about is the fallout between Russia and China in 1959. Russia terminated the 120+ industrialization aid programs in China and the result was instant 30 million unemployment. China was isolated from the entire developed world and with Russia breathing down it's neck to repay the gigantic debt. China was in disarray, and that was the background to the great leap forward and the culture revolution. I see the culture revolution as primarily an attempt for China to get through a very difficult situation rather than Mao's power craze. The culture revolution is a class war, much like the French revolution. Lots of craziness did happen, but it did get rid of the land owner class paving the way for Deng's reform.
I like that he critiques power and how we allow it to take hold but he fails to realise that we support unjustified power also such as cheering the combing of Vietnam, Cambodia, North Korea, Iraq, Lybia, execution cruel harsh sanctions and so on. As for the deaths constantly quoted under Mao, the exaggerate claims of deaths from starvation were not increased but decreased from the deaths *before* Mao’s reforms owing to Western imperialist interference with China prior to 1950. Look up life expectancy data from 1950 to 1970, and multiply that through the large population. Mao brought live expectancy from 45 to 70 over his career, literacy from 10% to 80%. I sympathize with you as I used to have similar notion but after a lot of work realized I was completely brainwashed within Australia. Upon a lot of research it turns out that Mao did exceedingly more for the people of China than he caused problems and without Mao and their liberation of China from capitalists in the early 1950s, the whole county of China would have followed a path similar to India or Indonesia which both had a similar (even slightly better) initial conditions. Now China has eliminated poverty and has far better health care, higher literacy, economic mobility and business than India or Indonesia and is even catching up to the West which it was exceedingly behind in 1950s when Britain was still bribing and calling the shots over there.
@@NoreenHoltzen A Chinese Communist Party bootlicker who shills for free whilst fancying herself some mighty anti-imperialist independent thinker. Ha!
Do you realize that China was under decades of civil wars, strifes, political chaos, and not mention fighting the Japanese? How the hell do you directly compare the standards of living in a country at peace with a country that was nearly constantly at some kind of war and de facto fragmented into warlordism? That’s just one thing. Taking the official measurements of standards of living by the Chinese Communist Party-State seriously is another, especially when it’s already obvious that their economic figures are purely manmade as even some of their own officials admit as much. Either you’re yet another lying Bolshie (thank the gods that you and your misbegotten ilk are unlikely to ever have any real political relevance in Australia), or your senility has got the better of you.
You are not as smart or "beyond it" as you fancy yourself to be, Miss Holtzen.
Hmm Mao Zedong. Chen Yun summed him up with the following comments "Had he died in 1956 he would have been immortal. Had he died in 1966 he still would have been a great man but flawed. Alas he died in 1976 and what can one say!"
I have always regarded the Cultural Revolution as simply Mao Zedong trying to leave a great legacy. He was absolutely terrified of a Chinese "Khrushchev" who would denounce him just as Khrushchev had denounced Stalin in 1956.
Hence his extreme hatred of Liu Shoaqi who had told him in 1962 "That people write books about canabalism you know!"
I also believe that the death of Lin Biao had a prefound impact. As it finally freed Zhou and Deng from the Mao's control. Forcing the aging Mao to rely totally on "The Gang of Four". As Chen Yun noted had their policies been successful it wouldn't have been so easy to remove them from power!
I agree, he was absolutely terrified of what happened when Stalin died and the successors felt they had free rein to criticize him and underline his greatest flaws. I can see a parallel to this when the former USSR folded and an oligopoly of former communist cadres took over Russia. Modern China is struggling to keep it together to avert the same fate of Russia in the early 2000s.
@@azmodanpc Quite!
@@azmodanpcExactly!
Loads of archives on the "Cultural revolution"?
Which planet are you from
Please see www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/researching-the-history-the-peoples-republic-china for what's available to researchers who can get approval, and what's available outside of China for those who can't.
The Adam Smith of "The Theory of Moral Sentiment" would be delighted to hear about the re-evolution of markets in China.
why share your thoughts
More people need to see this. The vast majority of Americans are completely ignorant of history and are condemned to repeat the same stupid mistakes!
Total nonsense. What's happening in America is not at all comparable.
@@henrimourant9855 Oh it is
@@ksc7957 Please explain how.
@@henrimourant9855 the wokesters who blame western culture for imaginary "white supremecism" and "systemic racism". They are attacking the culture just as the red guard did. How can you not see this lol?
@@Alexander-qd7nj So you're saying that criticizing our culture is the same as mass murdering people?
Great . exactly what I today discussed in my two hour long lecture for the undergrads !
All of this this sounds very contemporary.
What are you talking about? Are there countries right now going through something similar? Because if so I haven't heard of it.
My impression is the moderator is greatly more insightful of the political history than the academic interviewee. One issue not addressed is the self preservation that motivated Mao to unleash the cultural revolution. It was a means of sideline his political opponents in the great tradition of the French Revolution.
“Great tradition” of the French Revolution? You must be joking! It was a bloody tragedy. Look at what the Jakobins did!
@@TesterBoy Only Fascists think the French Revolution was a "bloody tragedy". All sensible, intelligent people realize that even though the french revolution itself was a failure it inaugurated an age of liberty, fraternity, and equality. And we still live under its shadow.
@@user-uj1pm8tq5q so what you're saying is thousands dying is a good thing? Sounds like you're the fascist here!
@@CantoniaCustoms Stupidity or mental illness can not be cured by arguments so I wont be bother
3 major revolutions and a few minor ones, revolution is a "great" tradition of France indeed…
When you put a human who think he was a god into power, that "god" will inevitably go insane.
Well, the argument that insanity has already set in, in order to come to the conclusion that you’re a god in the first place. Just saying.
Just as when the Pope was adulated as God !
Mao: the people have to criticize the party or it will do wrong things
This guy: this is literally an attempt at silencing all criticism of the leader.
@SlypherSpoons no, he didn't. If he had killed all those people how could life expectancy have doubled as it did?
@Ruturaj Shiralkar "mao killed 100 gazillion people look it up!! oh but when statistics dont fit my narrative, then its forgery"
@SlypherSpoons yes
Remember the hundred flowers campaing?
Mao said the people should criticize the government but after a year everyone was criticizing the government and Mao just purged everyone that disagreed, and no, not all of the people killed were Capitalists counter revolutionaries, if they were, killing them would be a good thing, but they weren't.
Even the ornithologist that warned Mao for his idiotic policy about the killing of sparrows that ended up fucking the ecosystem and played a great part in the famine, ended up being hunted by the red guards for speaking against Mao.
@@1997lordofdoom 💯 accurate history
10 years of gruesome murders that's what it is
Mao's failings are grossly overestimated in contrast to his successes. This is a product of our Western framing of information. The successful health reforms and vast improvements to literacy (from 15% to 70%) are so important under Mao. Life expectancy moved from 45 years to 70 years by the time Mao retired.a With broad support amongst the Chinese public (Mao mere a symbol but the will coming from the public under their conditions) supporting to remove our Western interference, China’s history turned away from their default direction towards what would now be akin to conditions closer to Indonesia. The video fails to account for how bad the initial conditions were in the 1920s and what it is like to exist on the other side of our Empire. During 19th C we established not only the opium trade and setting impossible loan conditions and addiction, but invaded (England's initiative but US contractual and sharing of the benefits) China's ports twice, forced impossible contracts upon the public with ongoing bribery to officials, and the ordinary Chinese had terrible conditions of poverty and death, profoundly worse than the promoted set backs by Moa that have countless books written about it.
He equates Mao's encouraging the rooting out of "revisionists" in the Communist Party to democracy. These are two entirely different movements, aren't they?
He compares Mao's encouraging the people to criticize the party to democracy.
The Cultural Revolution had a profound and far-reaching impact on Chinese society and national identity, affecting various aspects such as social structure, cultural heritage, legal system, and ethnic relations.
Erosion of Social Trust and Moral Values: The Cultural Revolution, centered on class struggle, encouraged people to denounce and criticize each other, leading to a severe breakdown of social trust. People became suspicious and fearful of one another, and even family members, friends, and colleagues found it difficult to maintain basic trust. The moral values of traditional Chinese society, such as benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and integrity, were replaced by a new set of values. This collapse of social trust even led to extreme violent events, such as the brutal suppression of intellectuals and the destruction of cultural relics.
Cultural Discontinuity and Distortion of Traditional Values: The Cultural Revolution's slogan "Destroy the Four Olds" (old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits) led to a massive attack on China's cultural heritage. Many ancient artifacts, books, and cultural relics were destroyed, and scholars and cultural workers were persecuted. Traditional values such as filial piety, respect for teachers, and social hierarchy were distorted, suppressed, or even demonized. This had a lasting impact on Chinese cultural heritage, causing a break in the transmission of traditional values and a sense of disconnection among younger generations.
Collapse of the Legal System and Social Order: During the Cultural Revolution, the legal system was paralyzed, and the rule of law was completely destroyed. The public security system was dismantled, and the judiciary lost its authority, leading to a state of chaos. Violence and instability became rampant, and many ordinary citizens became victims of political movements. The planned economy also failed to function, and the government was unable to maintain social order, causing economic and social chaos. This disregard for the rule of law posed a significant challenge to the rebuilding of China's legal system.
Deterioration of Ethnic Relations: The Cultural Revolution also had a devastating impact on minority ethnic groups. In Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and Xinjiang, minority cultures were severely destroyed, and tensions between local ethnic groups and the central government increased. The government forced the implementation of "revolutionary" ideas, suppressing minority customs, religions, and traditional ways of life. This destruction of minority cultures not only led to short-term cultural loss but also had a profound impact on China's multi-ethnic structure, leaving deep social fissures that still exist today.
Strengthening of Collectivism and Suppression of Individualism: During the Cultural Revolution, collectivism was highly praised, and individual interests, thought, and autonomy were suppressed. In the extreme political struggle, individuals had to conform to the collective and prioritize self-preservation over personal creativity or critical thinking. This suppression of individual will limited the development of diverse ideas and social pluralism, leaving China's society struggling to rebuild individual values after the revolution.
Distortion and Trauma of National Identity: The Cultural Revolution had a profound impact on China's national identity. The collective memory of the Chinese people was filled with suffering and trauma, and a sense of dependence on authority and fear of change emerged. People became wary of political movements and instability, which partly explains the high value placed on stability and order in contemporary Chinese society. Moreover, the trauma of the Cultural Revolution also affected China's innovative spirit and diversity development, contributing to the rise of social conservatism and political stability demands.
The Cultural Revolution had a profound and complex impact on Chinese society and national identity, not only destroying social trust, the legal system, and cultural heritage but also fundamentally changing the collective memory and national psyche of the Chinese people. Although the Cultural Revolution is now decades past, its legacy continues to shape contemporary Chinese society and remains an important topic for reflection on national identity and social development.
Is anyone surprised that not everyone was with it, that many were only posing and acting as if they were? That a black market was tolerated? That democracy remained distrusted? I have studied this for the last 40 years and none of this is new. It isn't that I disagree with anything he is saying, but it is silly to act like this is fundamentally revelatory. Anyone who has worked there knows all of this.
He is the first person who pointed it out but you did Not, so shut up.
What is such a revelation is that he is implying the cultural revolution led to the black market which led to the economic reform, Deng Xiaoping was Just going with the flow..... Who would have thought the Mao's cultural revolution led to the economic reform of China ???? I was truly shocked. But his theory makes perfect logical sense.
It's not appropriate to use "led" referring to the relation of such, since the flow was the eagerness from the people themselves, for a normal public order and economic development instead of the insane movements manipulated by the dictator.
Excuse me, are you judging a 300 page book based on a brief one hour talk? Lord, I hope not! That would be absolutely stupid!
According to Radio Moscow Lin Piao was shot down trying to escape in a helicopter. Is he the master-mind of The Gang Of Four?
A very good and impartial discourse. It shows that everything evolve, whether it be religious or political. You can equate the Cultural Revolution with Inquisitions- the religious/politcal history of Europe. China continues to evolve to meet the challeges of the 21st century.
How does mao manage to use the people to join the cultural revolution?
China was in really bad shape then, and literally anybody who had some hope of unifying the country was welcome.
After listening to him it seems that he is implying that Cultural Revolution was good thing for China in the long run. It is emotionally devastating for the people who experience it but afterwards it really helped people move forward.
1. Not too many people died, about 2 million people it is even less than one year from 1950 - 1951.
2. He said "the communist party came out of cultural revolution badly damaged". What exactly was "damaged" ? I believe he meant that the Legitimacy of communist party was badly damaged. And indeed it would, first Mao purged the party with mob rule (Red Guards). 1966- 68 Then he ask he ask the military to take over the government (1968 -1971) and purge the Red Guards. Then finally even the army got purged some people got reinstated. ( 1971 - 1976) Of course you go thru so many purges and later purge the people who did the purge you would loose legitimacy.
3. It sounds like because the party was "damaged" people begin to leave the collectives and start their own black market trade. (like North Korea after the famine) Indirectly he is implying that Cultural Revolution led the economic reform of China. Culture Revolution caused Communist party lose legitimacy, which led people to start Black market economy, which led the economic reform of China (Deng is just going with the flow). Very Very interesting conclusions.
Xiao 晓 Chen 陈 I've just finished reading 'Wild Swans' by Jung Chang. It's the history of her family from 1909 to present day through the Civil war, the famine and the cultural revolution.
Sebastian Grain most of Chinese intellectual are too biased and too emotionally involved to reflect on cultural revolution objectively. And usually it is easier for people from a different culture to analyze the problem of that culture, once they full learned of that culture. It is always harder to see oneself in a proper light. I don't have any good Chinese source I can think of.
A good summary. I too found this talk a fresh approach to the era.
Xiao 晓 Chen 陈 b
". It is always harder to see oneself in a proper light."
No, that is YOUR opinion. Sometimes it's true. Sometimes it is not.
I shall buy this trilogy of books. For anyone looking for a really well written firsthand account of the chaos of 20th century China, read ‘Wild Swans: Three Daughters of China’ by Jung Chang.
hi Brendan. did you buy and read those three books. Interested in what you think.
Nah those are widely discredited by actual academics who study China.
The biggist barriers for westerners to understand China is probaly the language.
9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
Na.... words can be translated. Its economics... theyre communist. They have never been liberalized. They have never experienced true freedom.and representative republican democracy. Thats HUGE. How can they understand freedom of speech anymore than we can understand their acceptance of conformity?
中共反對規範！
@@juanmccoy3066american freedom is the freedom to oppress those born less fortunate. china was an imperialised nation and would never succumb to the ideology that devastated its nation
@@juanmccoy3066 Communists. Right. That’s why eg 4 of the Forbes list of 50 wealthiest billionaires are from China. Because nobody embodies Marx like one the richest people on the planet.
It is Culture revolution. Why somerhing else. It have name.
It's unreasonable to see people's compliance as merely acting, and wrong to blame a single individual for large-scale social phenomenons. This also contradicts his claim that the cultural revolution was an act of democracy later on, a sign of political views dictating achademic thoughts. I would advise only listening to things discussed after 10 mins.
Such an interesting conversation!
2 stupid ones in one room .
Very interesting discussion. I'll be buying Frank Dikotter's books on this period.
That's what the interview was for 😛🙈.
@@aritrakonar9203 if so, then it worked.
Great books they are too.
Moral of this talk: in order to become mean capitalist country should go through communism and cultural revolution!
Basically what I get from the readings is that Mao himself caused the collapse of China's planned economy. All those 'capitalist roaders' and 'revisionists' usually were the best and ablest cadres who had overseen China's economic development under central planning. When they were purged they were replaced by people with no experience, who did not know what they were doing and were not promoted because they did not know what they were doing and sought no self improvement. Second, Deng's reforms were sharply criticised internally in the Party for being good in principle, but the execution leaving a lot to be desired. This resulted in China's fiscal system nearly collapsing as its economy boomed. It took Jiang and Hu working one after the other to put it back together again.
@Kokwah Tan Mao was getting paranoid of other members of party challenging his absolute role as "god king". As a "god" he would not accept any challengers to his heavenly throne on earth. Thus he orchestrated everything to cement his power and legacy. Quite typical if you think about all the emperors who came before him. He was not just an emperor but a god in his mind. And people died and people suffered and it didn't matter to him.
It's sad this is still going on today.
It's sad that the Chinese "leader" is so thin-skinned that they have to ban the latest Winnie The Pooh movie nationwide...simply because some clever Chinese commented about how fat Xi Jinping resembles the tubby make-believ bear!
"Politics in Command," indeed! lol
Yeah, we must free china from revisionist and democrats, who protect the interests of the capitalists
, and establish the people's power - the dictatorship of the proletariat.
The Cultural Revolution is still happening today? What? The CPC/PRC is horrible yes but I don't think China is currently still in the grips of the Cultural Revolution.
@@henrimourant9855 It is in Xinjiang and Tibet, and to a lesser extent, Inner Mongolia.
What prompted Mao to meet with Nixon? I think Mao later knew that cultural revolution was a mistake. Building a relationship with America would most likely save his legacy.
Relations gradually soured with Moscow, how did you not know this? Meeting Nixon was a strategic ploy to get the Soviets to remain a safe distance away, as they always become overbearing upon satellite states or nations they believe they have a right to tell what to do as a result of them bringing that political system's influence in the first place. It's a very dangerous thing to make yourself become beholden to an outsider's worldview, and that was the essence of why Mao would seek to forage relations with the West. Evolving interests, world events, and the inherent unpredictability of the future is why civilisations have fought, made amends, fostered unions and partnerships, and gone back and forth since antiquity. At that moment in time, it made more sense to Mao to distance himself from the Soviets by using the West as a geopolitical buffer. Everybody in the world behaves like this, generally. Standard protocol.
Yes and some say it was in relation to the Kremlin turning their back on Mao in regards to nuclear weapons.
Trae Richthofen I'd argue it made more sense from the West (America's) perspective to seek a detente with the USSR, not China, at that juncture in history, though. It was Mao that had clung onto Stalinism and mass purges at that point, not Brezhnev. The Bolsheviks were still dangerous far left ideologues, but they were leaps and bounds less evil than under Stalin or Mao's CCP, and it's always better to encourage division amongst your adversaries, and not unity.
Looking back, it was actually a tragic mistake that Nixon went to China. He should have helped Taiwan militarily and enabled them to take back the mainland.
Reality Check Of course bloodthirsty imperialists would encourage a murderous civil war. People like you are why any independent countries are forced to maintain a police state.
Read Mao's Great Famine.
Mao's failings are grossly overestimated in contrast to his successes. This is a product of our Western framing of information. The successful health reforms and vast improvements to literacy (from 15% to 70%) are so important under Mao. Life expectancy moved from 45 years to 70 years by the time Mao retired.a With broad support amongst the Chinese public (Mao mere a symbol but the will coming from the public under their conditions) supporting to remove our Western interference, China’s history turned away from their default direction towards what would now be akin to conditions closer to Indonesia. The video fails to account for how bad the initial conditions were in the 1920s and what it is like to exist on the other side of our Empire. During 19th C we established not only the opium trade and setting impossible loan conditions and addiction, but invaded (England's initiative but US contractual and sharing of the benefits) China's ports twice, forced impossible contracts upon the public with ongoing bribery to officials, and the ordinary Chinese had terrible conditions of poverty and death, profoundly worse than the promoted set backs by Moa that have countless books written about it.
@@NoreenHoltzen 45 million Chinese died prematurely during Mao's Great Famine. Mao was one of the most evil men who ever lived.
중국.... 내 머리로는 이해하기 힘든 나라...
west think The most disabled tyrant: "Inspired the Chinese population to increase from 400 million to 900 million, and the average life expectancy to rise 75 years from 35 years. Call on the people to fight against imperialism and capitalist oppression and exploitation, support the people's struggle for freedom, and achieve gender equality."😅
Mao connected with America towards the end of cultural revolution. This was a 180 degree turnaround. If China had not gone through some of the socialist mishaps that it did, the country could be on the development track much sooner, similar to Taiwan and South Korea.
Back then the Chinese was too irrational, lived in too much cult of personality to take on the development track of Taiwan or South Korea. It was after the cultural revolution that people begin to think on their own and became more rational. It was this change to rationality that put China on the path of reform and opening up.
You missed on every single point - except that Mao did meet with Nixon.
@Qimodis Taiwan and SK aren’t dictatorships,atleast today .
useless from many directions. basic questions was not amswered. who made the revolution? against who and what? did ot succeed? did it fail? what was a outcome? this was a time wasting video containing some not-related facts (some might even be untruth) by someone who seems to be defender of capitalism.
This Floyd thingie reminded me of this
What??
@@Kruegerisgod GTFO commie
@@jamespong6588 Do elaborate on how this Floyd thingie reminds you of the failed Cultural Revolution
@@Kruegerisgod if your braincells weren't all burned up from weed you would know
@@jamespong6588 I don't smoke or drink. Nice try. Do elaborate
very nice book.
what foreigners found surprising, Chinese are used to, a few examples cannot represent the whole picture. Chairman Mao laid the foundation for later economic developemnt China is achieving today. you cannot compare him with Hitler as you wish. what the latter left to Germen？ As for the great famine, Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping contributed much more while Deng did expand the anti-rightist compane that led to severe bureaucracy part of the reason of the great famine. Deng and Liu stood on piled rice field encouraging the bluff of yielding. shame biased scholar wastes years for nothing but misinformation.
A side effect of the cultural revolution was the total destruction of the STEM areas in the universities (except weapons researchers). A whole generation of scientists went missing as they worked in rice fields. I saw these impacts in 1984 with a lot of very young scientists and a few old scientists and none in between.
Will our own "cultural revolution" that is underway do the same to the STEM areas?
To understand you must know the old testament of the Bible, and Confucianism as it relates to the Han Dynasty.Youre welcome!!
Thanks for nothing!
@@kerrysanders6668 haha. To simplify, the Chinese are the heavenly mandated (chosen/elect) of the God of all God's. Confucius was/is Moses. The transliteration and etymology of names and Chinese history testifies to 'that which is' pure/righteous/clean (Qin/Sin/Chin). Shang Di Qin - Shalt not God Sin. And neither should the people known by his name Sino (China). Under the Northern star - the middle Kingdom, the land of mountains and valleys and dew of heaven. So looking at the old testament of the Bible, they are covenanted to the Laws statutes of God. If they don't follow and execute judgement, they are cursed with war, famine, pestilence. If they do...they rule the world!!!!!.
Mao cleverly used "democracy" to defeat his enemies, well played Mao!
To simplify, the Chinese are the heavenly mandated (chosen/elect) of the God of all God's. Confucius was/is Moses. The transliteration and etymology of names and Chinese history testifies to 'that which is' pure/righteous/clean (Qin/Sin/Chin). Shang Di Qin - Shalt not God Sin. And neither should the people known by his name Sino (China). Under the Northern star - the middle Kingdom, the land of mountains and valleys and dew of heaven. So looking at the old testament of the Bible, they are covenanted to the Laws statutes of God. If they don't follow and execute judgement, they are cursed with war, famine, pestilence. If they do...they rule the world!!!!!.
Why no Chinese enlightened us? No dissidents there? Or they enjoy freedom of West but support Mao till this date. Shame on them.
Typical Western type propaganda
Ok bread liner
Frank Dikotter is still working at Hong Kong University without any problems though.
Criticizing History is something like touring an mountain, the shape of mountain in our eyes really depends on the angle on which we choose or happen to stand. The only well-crafted content about this Frank Dikotter's wiseacre book is the sub-title only, which Frank himself narcissistically assumed that himself represented the people of people's republic. Well, he failed badly. After read this book cover to cover, I must concluded that one of the key arrangements in this book which the people started economic reform before government is an total false. The truth is that, even during the hardest period in Culture revolution, the private transaction had never been terminated. Some more Humiliating facts for our "history" "writer", Frank, even the CCP admitted that the achievement for the government is not starting the market but encouraging it to thrive. Frank intentionally manipulated the facts to form a weapon in order to undermine the political achievement of Deng Xiaoping, as all his book were. I must say that Frank has failed on his egotistical and self-assured purpose in his own abashment, again. Throughout his book, Frank's arguments are always based on the conditions which were conjectural and inauthentic, and his ambiguity logic behind critical arguments are always farfetched and paradoxical. But, another job done on China-bashing, Frank. Academically, I am glad Oxford and Cambridge rejected your admission, great insightful decisions. From the entertainment point of view, Frank is on a great leap forwards to China Uncensored level of entertaining.
What is the truth?
Mr. Korean Mamba The truth is that China always want to eliminate the old culture since May 4th Movement in the 1910s. Mao was educated during the May 4th Movement, and Mao believed in May 4th Movement.
If you use May 4th Movement as the start point of Modern China, you will find that The May 4th Movement failed by KMT, who believed in old Chinese philosophy. Unlike most Chinese communist leaders, Mao do not have an certain ideology which he think that China should follow, either capitalist or communist. We need to think Mao as a social experimenter of all the new ideas emerged during New Cultural Movement.
To Mao, he think that he is the true decedent and believer of the May 4th Movement. You can find most policies of Mao had strong heritage from the principles of The May 4th Movement, including the nationalization of Capitalist, the mentality of nationalism, the bashing of Chinese old culture especially confusion, the simplify of Chinese writing characters, and the total revolution of every citizen instead of small activists. All those policies can be traced back to the popular ideology in 1910s during the New New Culture Movement promoted by earlier KMT elites.
However, the movement was crashed after Chiang Kai-shek took office in the 1928. Chiang Kai-shek started to prosecute New Culture Movement activists, including KMT elites in Left wing and communists. Thus, historically, we can regard the cultural revolution in the 1960s is a natural echo of unfinished New Cultural Movement, but in a much larger national scale.
So the critics of Cultural Revolution should never be done in the focus of Mao, as an individual, or Communist Party, as an government. The critics of Cultural Revolution should be focus on the origins of those principles which came from New Cultural Movement in the 1910s.
Of course, after 100 years of the movement, we can conclude the wrongness and rightness of the movement. The Chinese cultural is an unpleasant treasure which requires individual to live in certain social pressures from traditions. Activist want to destroy the old cultural and adopt western or soviet values to give China a chance to thrive, in a way like modern Chinese activists. However, Chinese without Chinese cultural is not Chinese any more, the China without Chinese cultural is not China anymore. I believe that the activist want China not to be China in their agenda. However, they have underestimated the consequences of social and value disorders followed by their policy.
Thus, according to this story line, you will establish a clear knowing of the modern history of China and you can understand the reason of Cultural Revolution in 60s, the abundant of Cultural Revolution in 70s, and the reemerge of neo confucianism in the last decade.
Even Mao did not get to power, someone else will adopt similar policies. Just like the current anti-Chinese cultural movement in Taiwan, who did not experience the Cultural Revolution. We need to understand cultural movement in a sense of echo. All the movements is just unfinished businesses from the last one. But when the damaged from movement is too large to bear, the next one is unlikely to happen until the past generation passed by.
no, both May 4th movement and cultrue revolution has many different sides. Both of them have sides that succeed traditonal culture or destory old culture. What America has achieved has a lot to do with chinese culture revolution actually. Mao is the real one who tried to let the traditional culture suvive.
That is a very good way to put it. Mao was influenced by the May fourth movement. That explains his anti-Confucianism stand.
I think implementing ideas from the May 4th movement did not necessarily mean someone would have done the Cultural Revolution without Mao in power. He was obviously using it to cover up his failings in the Great Leap Forward to fight his political rivals in the CCP. Mao did what was best for him by using ideas from May 4th and Marxism to manipulate political power in the PRC because he was losing that power. Some of the things he had the Red Guards oppose were based on his own ideas. People he hated himself. It eventually evolved into Maoism. Say what you want about the book, but Mao was Mao.
mao was good at mathematics!
Mao was good at everything except kindness
And at genocide!
got it no real critical historical analysis just bourgeois propaganda
Great conversation...insightful analysis, and millions of corpses as evidence...Communism is evil and single minded hate...the politics of resentment
@@stevenfenley9359 millions of corpses as evidence, EVERY SINGLE YEAR FOR THAT MATTER.
capitalism is evil and single minded hate... The politics of resentment.
Lot of commie apologists in this comment section.
The US reign of terror is over nazi boy
The argument about Peasants' desire for market is absurd. Communism is the most natural form of human being, as it exists in tribal society already where leaders and members come around to plan up what they decide to hunt or produce. Somehow peasants liberated from feudalism and have no direct contact with capitalism want to have a capitalist market for exchange is completely opposite to what Polanyi stressed the artificial and arbitrary characteristics of modern capitalism.
@Marcus-Aerilius Maximus whats up with a response like that? Say something substantial and stop swearing. Is capitalism working well for small farmers? I'm not saying communism in the answer but I surly don't think capitalism in the form it is today is working well for peasants.
@Marcus-Aerilius Maximus Thanks for a reasoned response. I don't know, the farmers don't need to be international corporations, at least not in Sweden. They just need to be big farmers and smaller farmers are getting a harder and harder time surviving. But I think it's irrelevant cause I don't think it has anything to do with this topic.I honestly don't know much about political ideologies anyways so I guess I shouldn't really comment on stuff like this xD
Communism is the most natural form of society?? How many Truely communist regimes do you know that have been successful for longer periods of time?
I am not pro-capitalism. I am pro democratic socialism.
Jochem Lambers USSR under Stalin and China under Mao.
Just go watch the video on Polanyi published by NEP, for anyone curious enough for the argument
Bourgeois propaganda.
Well , you would say that wouldn’t you ? Especially when you have a hammer and sickle in your About section.
@@JohnSmith-iu3ui of course. And I'm beyond proud to have it.
@@justamoteofdust not when I napalm your comrades .
@@JohnSmith-iu3ui see... This is the exact reason I'm proud to have that hammer and sickle in my bio. Keeps fascists like you in check every now and then.
@@justamoteofdust well you would say that wouldn’t you ? Anybody to the right of Mao is a fascist in your warped world view aren’t they ?
ANTIFA
MrMeanss moron
@@jamespong6588 make an actual intelligent point rather than swearing at people
ytt mi antifa is fake&ghhhhhhaaaaaaaaaay
Only way china became successful was by imitating capitalism minus uncomfortable democracy!