03-19-2003, 06:49 PM
Well, I'm going to go with the idea what "which side you sit on determines your views".
I sit in the middle, leaning slightly to the side that support what had happened in China, at least what had happened before WWII.
Yes, he _was_ responsible for the disfunctionality of China. However, would an incompetent leader have gained the support of millions, and steered the people to giving him total power?
Mao is just like Hiter: -- and I know people will hate me for saying this -- they were both brilliant politicians and leaders, but were simply misguided when it came to handling their newfound power.
Yes, "almost". What about the people who _WERE_ starivng to death?
Have you seen, first hand, the poverty that plagued, and still plagues China?
They may be poor, but you won't find too many of them starving out of the street. Why? Because a "tyrant" had lead the people to an age of socialist government.
Perhaps Mao was a "bloodthirsty tyrant".
But I hold on to my doubt and not simply dismiss him as some devil bent on bringing suffering to the people. Why? Because I see both sides.
My grandfather on my mother's side hasn't been paid by the communist party in decades.
My parents were held back from the education they so deeply wanted.
I myself was fed propaganda glorifying the accomplishments of the Communist Party.
Yet, on the other hand, I also see that my relatives in the countryside are not dying of starvation.
I recieved the glasses need to be able to see because there is a health care system in place that is avaliable to all.
And my family, as well as many others, were kept alive through the 60's to the 90's because there were "food tickets".
Maybe I'm just buying into the propaganda I was taught in elementary school. Then again, I was actaully in elementary school in China for only a brief period of two-weeks.
I sit in the middle, leaning slightly to the side that support what had happened in China, at least what had happened before WWII.
Quote:[Mao] was also one of the most incompetent and ironfisted men to rule that country, and is almost singlehandedly responsible for China's disfunctionality during the latter half of the last century.
Yes, he _was_ responsible for the disfunctionality of China. However, would an incompetent leader have gained the support of millions, and steered the people to giving him total power?
Mao is just like Hiter: -- and I know people will hate me for saying this -- they were both brilliant politicians and leaders, but were simply misguided when it came to handling their newfound power.
Quote:Hell, my father's parents were sent to the countryside to almost starve to death.
Yes, "almost". What about the people who _WERE_ starivng to death?
Have you seen, first hand, the poverty that plagued, and still plagues China?
They may be poor, but you won't find too many of them starving out of the street. Why? Because a "tyrant" had lead the people to an age of socialist government.
Perhaps Mao was a "bloodthirsty tyrant".
But I hold on to my doubt and not simply dismiss him as some devil bent on bringing suffering to the people. Why? Because I see both sides.
My grandfather on my mother's side hasn't been paid by the communist party in decades.
My parents were held back from the education they so deeply wanted.
I myself was fed propaganda glorifying the accomplishments of the Communist Party.
Yet, on the other hand, I also see that my relatives in the countryside are not dying of starvation.
I recieved the glasses need to be able to see because there is a health care system in place that is avaliable to all.
And my family, as well as many others, were kept alive through the 60's to the 90's because there were "food tickets".
Maybe I'm just buying into the propaganda I was taught in elementary school. Then again, I was actaully in elementary school in China for only a brief period of two-weeks.