Mao: A Reinterpretation by Lee Feigon (PDF)

Description

In recent years historians and political observers have vilified Mao Tse-tung and placed him in a class with tyrants like Hitler and Stalin. But, as Lee Feigon points out in his startling revision of Mao, the Chinese leader has been tainted by the actions and policies of the same Soviet-style Communist bureaucrats he came to hate and attempted to eliminate. Mr. Feigon argues that the movements for which Mao is almost universally condemned today―the Great Leap Forward and especially the Cultural Revolution―were in many ways beneficial for the Chinese people. They forced China to break with its Stalinist past and paved the way for its great economic and political strides in recent years. While not glossing over Mao’s mistakes, some of which had heinous consequences, Mr. Feigon contends that Mao should be largely praised for many of his later efforts―such as the attacks he began to level in the late 1950s on those bureaucrats responsible for many of the problems that continue to plague China today. In reevaluating Mao’s contributions, this interpretive study reverses the recent curve of criticism, seeing Mao’s late-in-life contributions to the Chinese revolution more favorably while taking a more critical view of his earlier efforts. Whereas most studies praise the Mao of the 1930s and 1940s as an original and independent thinker, Mr. Feigon contends that during this period his ideas and actions were fairly ordinary―but that he depended much more on Stalin’s help than has been acknowledged. Mao: A Reinterpretation seeks a more informed perspective on one of the most important political leaders of the twentieth century.

User’s Reviews

Editorial Reviews: Review A controversial biography with provocative arguments. ― BooklistIn a study bound to provoke controversy, Feigon makes his arguments lucidly…. Readers will find his new summary…helpful. ― American Historical ReviewThoughtful and thought-provoking reinterpretation that examines both his colorfully eventual life and the lasting effects of his ideals upon his nation and upon the world community. ― Wisconsin BookwatchAn interesting and accessible reinterpretation of existing knowledge. Expertly summarizes the life of a shining example in that category of human being now extinct as the dodo bird. ― Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists About the Author Lee Feigon’s earlier books, China Rising (on the Tiananmen Square uprising) and Demystifying Tibet, were widely praised for their authoritative presentation. Mr. Feigon is professor of East Asian Studies at Colby College, and lives in Waterville, Maine, and Winnetka, Illinois.

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐Lee Feigon’s work on Mao is largely a political biography, partially an intellectual one – the two can obviously not easily be separated. With the subtitle “a reinterpretation”, it explicitly sets itself against the dominant contemporary views on Mao both in China and the West, which are almost unrelentingly negative, generally in very ignorant, inaccurate, and childishly opportunistic ways (such as the works of Jung Chang). As such, this book forms part of a literature not just more nuanced and serious about Mao, which is a considerable one. It also forms part of a smaller literature which has sometimes been called ‘revisionist’ (although really orthodox Communists would call this ‘anti-revisionist’, oddly), and which is for varying reasons sympathetic to Mao to a greater or lesser degree. The ways in which the different authors support or defend Mao rather varies however, including the things they praise him for; and Lee’s work is somewhat unusual in this regard.Lee’s book makes the main points in defense of Mao that he should make, and that always should be made. These are the enormous development of China and Chinese living standards in the period of his ‘helmsmanship’, with growth rate and industrialization outpacing, at times, even the world-historical records of the USSR; further, the enormous increase in life expectancy and decrease in mortality in China during his rule, despite a brief dip during the Great Leap Forward; the unprecedented expansion of education, especially in the rural areas, in particular during the Cultural Revolution, which has actually declined now compared to its peak levels then; and the rebuilding of China’s independence against the imperialist powers. Of course, one should not in this day and age write hagiographical and silly treatises, and Lee rightly criticizes attempts to do so. But what differentiates this book from other works defending Mao’s legacy is not so much the recital of these enormous achievements, which literally allowed hundreds of millions to live and develop who otherwise would not have, but his angle on Mao and Chinese politics more generally. For Lee, Mao is a figure who originally took most of his inspiration and ideas from the Soviet Union, specifically Stalin, and who sought at first to rule in the style of an orthodox Marxist-Leninist Party (albeit in a way actually achieving collective rule to a considerable degree). However, the Great Leap Forward showed the failure of Stalinist policies and the dominance of the party bureaucracy, which Mao hated (according to Lee), and led him to unleash the Cultural Revolution, which Lee sees as a great democratizing movement. For Lee then, there are essentially a bad Stalinist period and a good post-Stalinist, decentralizing period, and more generally the positive achievements of Mao are for Lee always the result of a decentralizing impulse.While something can certainly be said for this, and the willingness to take politics from below seriously was always one of Maoism’s strengths against other Leninist styles of politics, this creates a somewhat muddled case. The book is often too brief and too superficial to properly empirically support the arguments that it was precisely decentralization which worked. For example, during the Great Leap Forward the greatest dislocations were the result of the contradictions between centralization and decentralization to some degree, as provinces competed with each other in delivering the greatest results to the centre. Similarly, the decentralized production systems, as in the infamous case of the backyard steel mills, was largely a failure. Lee does not sufficiently go into this to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff in terms of the achievements of Soviet-style central planning versus decentralized initiative within the framework of the very real overall achievements of Chinese society during this period. Similarly, he is somewhat too inclined to let the Chairman off the hook in terms of political and individual motives, perhaps due to the undue credibility given to unreliable sources like Li Zhisui, while at the same time perhaps underrating the party bureaucracy and party system. It is well possible Lee’s pro-decentralization thesis is right. It is undoubtedly true that Mao’s destruction of 4/5ths of the old party bureaucracy de-Stalinized, within a socialist framework, the party structure to a degree nowhere else achieved, and it imbued the masses with a sense of direct democratic power like never before. But this needs to be proven more systematically than Lee does here, and his presumption against the Party apparatus and in favor of localism is sympathetic, but in need of empirical support. This does not, however, diminish the importance of Mao as an impressive socialist reformer and inspiration, and the significance of a willingness to defend his legacy against fashionable demonization.

⭐Mao a ReinterpretationIn the ancient world there existed a genre in literature called, the “apology.” An apology was a systematic, sympathetic defense of a person, doctrine or movement, political or otherwise. This book is an apology for Mao Zedong.It is not so much that the memory of Mao is reviled, but he is considered a person not mentioned in daily conversation and best forgotten in most circles. It was not always so. Mao, or the image of Mao, was commonly seen, frequently mentioned, and occasionally emulated. He symbolized steadfastness and wisdom personified. The Cultural Revolution, or at least the facts of which once they were known, took care of that. After the Cultural Revolution, Mao, and what he symbolized, was condemned and the New (Capitalist) China, arose.Every story has two sides, and this book seeks to rehabilitate the life and deeds of Mao. But while this book definitely accentuates the positive, it does not always seek to eliminate the negative. In the author’s opinion, where blame is rightfully attributable to Mao, it is so given. There are many such instances in this book. On the whole, however, this book presents the challenges Mao faced at the time he lived and governed and the purposes he sought to carry out. It evaluates those actions by the contemporary forces at work, instead of judging his action by current standards.Of particular concern is the Cultural Revolution. At the time, far before the age of the internet, the specific events of the Cultural Revolution were practically unknown to the West. The West was aware something was happening, but that was the extent of its knowledge. This illusiveness unwittingly sparked a vibrant intellectual dialogue in Paris of 1968, which continues to this day. See, in this regard, the recent book, The Wind From the East. Once facts began to trickle through to the West, however, that enthusiasm evaporated. What was still unknown at the time was Mao’s goals. He was attempting to wipe out corrupt and entrenched government bureaucrats, decentralize the Chinese government structure and purge the Soviet elements from the current education system. Much of the havoc wrecked by the Cultural Revolution resulted from clashes between rival factions of the Red Guards, para-governmental cadres of students charged with carrying out Mao’s educational reforms. The author attributes the responsibility for the ensuing chaos squarely on Mao. The book explains that while they were not directly created by Mao, they were definitely inspired by his words and operated essentially with Mao’s acquiescence and approval. Ultimately no one, including Mao, was able to control the Red Guard. But when that moment arrived, he effectively stopped their activities. If anything, this book should be read to obtain a nutshell account of how the Cultural Revolution started, progressed and ended, and the results obtained.How does a leader govern a nation of one BILLION people? How does one effect political change on a diverse population consisting of one-third of the world? How does this happen when the overwhelming majority of those peoples are uneducated and poverty-stricken? This is a dilemma shared by leaders as diverse as Marshall Tito in the former Yugoslavia and Fidel Castro in Cuba. Leaders such as these should be evaluated under the conditions they experienced at the time and any criticism take with hindsight is unfair.There are few historical figures so despotic or tyrannical that they have no redeemable qualities. While in the nature of an apology, the focus of this book is balanced and fair and should be read by any student of Sinology.

⭐Lee Feigon has written an unconventional interpretation of Mao and his influence on China. Feigon makes a strong case that Mao’s directives, particularly during the Cultural Revolution, had a positive effect on the country. He also takes a sympathetic view of Mao’s actions and depicts a man who had a genuine desire to improve the lives of the citizens—especially for the disenfranchised, agrarian people in the countryside. Though this book will be of interest to scholars in the field, it will also be valuable to anyone who wants an overview of Mao and his role in the evolution of modern China.

⭐Arrived right on time and great quality for a good price. Will come back again for more books. Thanks alot.

⭐There are always those out there that state things like “At least Hitler kept Germany from turning Communist or Stalin turned a backward society to the future”. What these apologists are staying is that it was alright to murder and kill to turn society around. In this respect, it is the ends justify the means. Well, Mao may have done some things right, but he was a cold blooded killer who eliminated 30 million people in his great leap backward. Mao was a leader who was responsible for the deaths of millions. If he was not aware of what his policies did to his nation, that does not alleviate the guilt. I respect the authors opinions, although I don’t fully believe them. Mao has blood on his hands. I saw Mao (or at least his body) in 2008, so the fascination with this leader’s rule is as great as ever. We should just remember how many people died as a result of his rule.This is an interesting intrepretation of Mao. Although Feigon may be right on some points, he ultimate summary of Mao is wrong. An interesting read.

⭐Lee Feigon’s work on Mao is largely a political biography, partially an intellectual one – the two can obviously not easily be separated. With the subtitle “a reinterpretation”, it explicitly sets itself against the dominant contemporary views on Mao both in China and the West, which are almost unrelentingly negative, generally in very ignorant, inaccurate, and childishly opportunistic ways (such as the works of Jung Chang). As such, this book forms part of a literature not just more nuanced and serious about Mao, which is a considerable one. It also forms part of a smaller literature which has sometimes been called ‘revisionist’ (although really orthodox Communists would call this ‘anti-revisionist’, oddly), and which is for varying reasons sympathetic to Mao to a greater or lesser degree. The ways in which the different authors support or defend Mao rather varies however, including the things they praise him for; and Lee’s work is somewhat unusual in this regard.Lee’s book makes the main points in defense of Mao that he should make, and that always should be made. These are the enormous development of China and Chinese living standards in the period of his ‘helmsmanship’, with growth rate and industrialization outpacing, at times, even the world-historical records of the USSR; further, the enormous increase in life expectancy and decrease in mortality in China during his rule, despite a brief dip during the Great Leap Forward; the unprecedented expansion of education, especially in the rural areas, in particular during the Cultural Revolution, which has actually declined now compared to its peak levels then; and the rebuilding of China’s independence against the imperialist powers. Of course, one should not in this day and age write hagiographical and silly treatises, and Lee rightly criticizes attempts to do so. But what differentiates this book from other works defending Mao’s legacy is not so much the recital of these enormous achievements, which literally allowed hundreds of millions to live and develop who otherwise would not have, but his angle on Mao and Chinese politics more generally. For Lee, Mao is a figure who originally took most of his inspiration and ideas from the Soviet Union, specifically Stalin, and who sought at first to rule in the style of an orthodox Marxist-Leninist Party (albeit in a way actually achieving collective rule to a considerable degree). However, the Great Leap Forward showed the failure of Stalinist policies and the dominance of the party bureaucracy, which Mao hated (according to Lee), and led him to unleash the Cultural Revolution, which Lee sees as a great democratizing movement. For Lee then, there are essentially a bad Stalinist period and a good post-Stalinist, decentralizing period, and more generally the positive achievements of Mao are for Lee always the result of a decentralizing impulse.While something can certainly be said for this, and the willingness to take politics from below seriously was always one of Maoism’s strengths against other Leninist styles of politics, this creates a somewhat muddled case. The book is often too brief and too superficial to properly empirically support the arguments that it was precisely decentralization which worked. For example, during the Great Leap Forward the greatest dislocations were the result of the contradictions between centralization and decentralization to some degree, as provinces competed with each other in delivering the greatest results to the centre. Similarly, the decentralized production systems, as in the infamous case of the backyard steel mills, was largely a failure. Lee does not sufficiently go into this to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff in terms of the achievements of Soviet-style central planning versus decentralized initiative within the framework of the very real overall achievements of Chinese society during this period. Similarly, he is somewhat too inclined to let the Chairman off the hook in terms of political and individual motives, perhaps due to the undue credibility given to unreliable sources like Li Zhisui, while at the same time perhaps underrating the party bureaucracy and party system. It is well possible Lee’s pro-decentralization thesis is right. It is undoubtedly true that Mao’s destruction of 4/5ths of the old party bureaucracy de-Stalinized, within a socialist framework, the party structure to a degree nowhere else achieved, and it imbued the masses with a sense of direct democratic power like never before. But this needs to be proven more systematically than Lee does here, and his presumption against the Party apparatus and in favor of localism is sympathetic, but in need of empirical support. This does not, however, diminish the importance of Mao as an impressive socialist reformer and inspiration, and the significance of a willingness to defend his legacy against fashionable demonization.

Keywords

Free Download Mao: A Reinterpretation in PDF format
Mao: A Reinterpretation PDF Free Download
Download Mao: A Reinterpretation 2003 PDF Free
Mao: A Reinterpretation 2003 PDF Free Download
Download Mao: A Reinterpretation PDF
Free Download Ebook Mao: A Reinterpretation