Mao Zedong
Founding leader of the People’s Republic of China (1949–1976) and, within Chinese communism, the equivalent of Lenin rather than Stalin — the movement’s founder, and so a figure the party has never been able to formally denounce the way Khrushchev denounced Stalin. His rule combined a genuine adaptation of Marxist theory to a peasant society with two of the deadliest policy catastrophes of the twentieth century.
Historian Vejas Liulevicius presents Mao as having solved a problem Marx’s own theory left unsolved for non-industrialised countries: where Marx dismissed peasants as politically inert, ‘conservative sacks of potatoes’, Mao made the peasantry the revolution’s prime movers — an adaptation the Marxist historian Leszek Kołakowski found so far from Marx’s original design that he could barely classify it as the same tradition. Mao’s rivalry with Joseph Stalin shaped policy directly: resentful of playing junior partner in international communism, and determined to surpass Stalin once he died in 1953, Mao pursued the Great Leap Forward explicitly as an attempt to outdo Soviet industrialisation — with a death toll, by Liulevicius’s account, roughly 40 million, that outstripped anything Stalin achieved. The Chinese Communist Party’s own 1981 verdict rated Mao ‘70% correct’, a formula Liulevicius reads as evidence of a regime still needing ideological legitimacy even while conceding catastrophe.
Historian Jeffrey Wasserstrom traces the same rise to power from the other direction: Mao’s decisive theoretical break with orthodox Marxism was to make the peasantry, not the urban proletariat, the revolution’s vanguard, a position forged through the 1920s Communist–Nationalist alliance and split and consolidated by the 1949 civil war win against Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalists, who had retreated to Taiwan partly discredited by a widespread sense that they did not believe their own anti-corruption rhetoric. On the Great Leap Forward, Wasserstrom proposes a specific proximate mechanism alongside Liulevicius’s ideological account: officials afraid that admitting failure to meet impossible targets would read as personal political disloyalty instead passed unrealistic reports up the chain, starving the leadership of the information that might have forced a correction — a fear-driven information-distortion dynamic compatible with, and adding operational detail to, the negative-selection mechanism Totalitarianism already documents for the same catastrophe. Wasserstrom also supplies the fullest account in the wiki of how Mao’s legacy is managed today: Xi Jinping claims the nation-strengthening side of Mao — his 1953 ‘we will never yield’ Korean War speech is still invoked as evidence the standoff ended without defeat — while explicitly rejecting the Mao who prized chaos, mass mobilisation, and unpredictability, and while simultaneously rehabilitating Confucius, the tradition Mao himself denounced as feudal.
In the wiki
- Vejas Liulevicius on Communism, Fascism, and the Machinery of Totalitarianism — Mao’s adaptation of Leninism to peasant China, the Great Leap Forward’s Lysenkoist agronomy and backyard-furnace industrialisation, and the Hundred Flowers Campaign’s negative selection of independent thinkers
- Jeffrey Wasserstrom on Modern China, the CCP, and Hong Kong — Mao’s rise via the peasantry-as-vanguard departure from orthodox Marxism, a fear-driven information-distortion account of the Great Leap Forward, and Xi Jinping’s selective inheritance of the Mao legacy
- Totalitarianism — the comparative model this episode uses to place Maoist China alongside Stalin’s USSR and Nazi Germany
See also
- Vejas Liulevicius — historian
- Jeffrey Wasserstrom — historian
- Joseph Stalin — rival and model Mao’s Great Leap Forward was built to outdo
- Xi Jinping — successor who selectively inherits Mao’s legacy