What do you think?
Rate this book
Maoism
Since the heyday of Mao Zedong, there has never been a more crucial time to understand Maosim.
Although to Western eyes it seems that China has long abandoned the utopian turmoil of Maoism in favour of authoritarian capitalism, Mao and his ideas remain central to the People’ Republic and the legitimacy of its communist government. As disagreements and conflicts between China and the West are likely to mount, the need to understand the political legacy of Mao will only become more urgent.
Yet during Mao’s lifetime and beyond, the power and appeal of Maoism has always extended beyond China. Across the globe, Maoism was a crucial motor of the Cold War: it shaped the course of the Vietnam War (and the international youth rebellion it triggered) and brought to power the murderous Khmer Rouge in Cambodia; it aided, and sometimes handed victory to, anti-colonial resistance movements in Africa; it inspired terrorism in Germany and Italy, and wars and insurgencies in Peru, India and Nepal, some of which are still with us today – more than forty years after the death of Mao.
In this new history, acclaimed historian Julia Lovell re-evaluates Maoism, analysing both China’s engagement with the movement and its legacy on a global canvas. It’s a story that takes us from the tea plantations of north India to the sierras of the Andes, from Paris’s 5th Arrondissement to the fields of Tanzania, from the rice paddies of Cambodia to the terraces of Brixton.
Starting from the movement’s birth in northwest China in the 1930s and unfolding right up to its present-day violent rebirth, this is the definitive history of global Maoism.
Although to Western eyes it seems that China has long abandoned the utopian turmoil of Maoism in favour of authoritarian capitalism, Mao and his ideas remain central to the People’ Republic and the legitimacy of its communist government. As disagreements and conflicts between China and the West are likely to mount, the need to understand the political legacy of Mao will only become more urgent.
Yet during Mao’s lifetime and beyond, the power and appeal of Maoism has always extended beyond China. Across the globe, Maoism was a crucial motor of the Cold War: it shaped the course of the Vietnam War (and the international youth rebellion it triggered) and brought to power the murderous Khmer Rouge in Cambodia; it aided, and sometimes handed victory to, anti-colonial resistance movements in Africa; it inspired terrorism in Germany and Italy, and wars and insurgencies in Peru, India and Nepal, some of which are still with us today – more than forty years after the death of Mao.
In this new history, acclaimed historian Julia Lovell re-evaluates Maoism, analysing both China’s engagement with the movement and its legacy on a global canvas. It’s a story that takes us from the tea plantations of north India to the sierras of the Andes, from Paris’s 5th Arrondissement to the fields of Tanzania, from the rice paddies of Cambodia to the terraces of Brixton.
Starting from the movement’s birth in northwest China in the 1930s and unfolding right up to its present-day violent rebirth, this is the definitive history of global Maoism.
624 pages, Hardcover
First published March 14, 2019
About the author
Julia Lovell
23 books129 followersJulia Lovell has worked at Birkbeck since 2007. Before then, she was Junior Research Fellow at Queens’ College, Cambridge. She completed her undergraduate and graduate studies at Emmanuel College, Cambridge; she also studied for a year at the Hopkins-Nanjing Centre for Chinese Studies. She has translated many works, as well as writing insightful works into the history of China.
She has written articles in the Guardian, the London Times and the Economist on China.
She has written articles in the Guardian, the London Times and the Economist on China.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 169 reviews
April 4, 2022
After a lengthy and challenging introduction Julia Lovell analyzes Edgar Snow's 1937 'Red Star Over China' and its effects on the international spread of Maoism. Her appraisal of the book's propaganda power is tempered by a critique of it's romanticization. A history of Mao's thought during the developmental years of the Chinese Communist Party is given and then a worldwide tour of Maoist movements. Some examples covered are Ho Chi Minh's Vietnam, the Kmer Rouge of Cambodia and the Shining Path in Peru. Maoism appealed to rural populations in contrast to the Marxist focus on industrialized nations. Its influence continues with Maoist groups in India and Nepal.
Following the 30's and 40's cold war propaganda shaped western views of the red threat. Brain washing fears were a yellow peril to the post war generation and the Korean war introduced a domino theory. It was applied to the Indochina and Indonesia conflicts, more anti-colonial rebellions than communist revolutions. In the 50's CIA experiments with LSD and thought control accompanied by McCarthyism created an atmosphere of paranoia. During the 60's and 70's, when there was less known about conditions inside of China, Maoism became a popular cultural export to left wing elites and third world countries. Lovell shows how Mao was able to effectively further his political goals.
An important point demonstrated in this book was Mao's commitment to world revolution. Many rebels were schooled and funded directly by Beijing. Mao's agrarian based anti-western rhetoric had greater influence in Africa and Latin America than is typically recognized or written about by western historians. In the post-colonial world after WWII these areas were suspicious of US and Soviet intentions. Maoism wasn't a fixed system like Marxism or Leninism. It was flexible enough to be adapted by other cultures and regions but not a unified movement that would result in central control by Beijing. Unlike the Soviet empire it instead sought to exert power by money and ideology.
Is this book a fair assessment of Maoism? What were the aims of Mao, his philosophy and adherents? Lovell supports US and British analyses of the time but criticizes policies that resulted. Mao was actively promoting international revolutions. Engagement in Maoist conflicts, primarily in Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia, left over 20 million people dead. Infamous for his pronouncements of the people's expendability, Mao remains an enigma unresolved. 'It is your right to rebel.' 'Power comes from the end of a gun.' 'Revolution is not a dinner party.' These maxims don't sit well with current powers in either the west or the east. Class struggle is bad, the US and China now likely agree.
British author Julia Lovell introduces this work as a sort of unknown history. "In the west the global spread of Mao's ideas are only dimly sensed." "Why does this book not exist?". Yet the work covers mostly well known events from recent times. Wars were fought in Korea and Vietnam to contain communism. She writes that the record counters the party line of "China's peaceful rise". If you ignore these truisms they don't detract from the book. Lovell writes from a centrist political position. The many 20th century horrors aren't dwelled upon except as needed to describe events. Although not exhaustive, as a survey of worldwide Maoist movements it may be enough for most of us.
Following the 30's and 40's cold war propaganda shaped western views of the red threat. Brain washing fears were a yellow peril to the post war generation and the Korean war introduced a domino theory. It was applied to the Indochina and Indonesia conflicts, more anti-colonial rebellions than communist revolutions. In the 50's CIA experiments with LSD and thought control accompanied by McCarthyism created an atmosphere of paranoia. During the 60's and 70's, when there was less known about conditions inside of China, Maoism became a popular cultural export to left wing elites and third world countries. Lovell shows how Mao was able to effectively further his political goals.
An important point demonstrated in this book was Mao's commitment to world revolution. Many rebels were schooled and funded directly by Beijing. Mao's agrarian based anti-western rhetoric had greater influence in Africa and Latin America than is typically recognized or written about by western historians. In the post-colonial world after WWII these areas were suspicious of US and Soviet intentions. Maoism wasn't a fixed system like Marxism or Leninism. It was flexible enough to be adapted by other cultures and regions but not a unified movement that would result in central control by Beijing. Unlike the Soviet empire it instead sought to exert power by money and ideology.
Is this book a fair assessment of Maoism? What were the aims of Mao, his philosophy and adherents? Lovell supports US and British analyses of the time but criticizes policies that resulted. Mao was actively promoting international revolutions. Engagement in Maoist conflicts, primarily in Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia, left over 20 million people dead. Infamous for his pronouncements of the people's expendability, Mao remains an enigma unresolved. 'It is your right to rebel.' 'Power comes from the end of a gun.' 'Revolution is not a dinner party.' These maxims don't sit well with current powers in either the west or the east. Class struggle is bad, the US and China now likely agree.
British author Julia Lovell introduces this work as a sort of unknown history. "In the west the global spread of Mao's ideas are only dimly sensed." "Why does this book not exist?". Yet the work covers mostly well known events from recent times. Wars were fought in Korea and Vietnam to contain communism. She writes that the record counters the party line of "China's peaceful rise". If you ignore these truisms they don't detract from the book. Lovell writes from a centrist political position. The many 20th century horrors aren't dwelled upon except as needed to describe events. Although not exhaustive, as a survey of worldwide Maoist movements it may be enough for most of us.
July 11, 2020
Page 59 (my book)
Somehow, Maoism is the creed of winners and insiders, of losers and outsiders, of leaders and underdogs, of absolute rulers, vast disciplined bureaucracies, and oppressed masses.
Maoism is here to stay, more so with the current economic ascendancy of China. It was said during the 1980s and 1990s that as China was embracing economic capitalism, they would become more like us and embrace political liberalism; it now seems that the world is becoming more like China politically.
In contrast to the Soviet Union, China was a country who liberated itself from imperialist oppression with Mao as the leader. This had a vast appeal to Third World countries who had, like China, been dominated for centuries by European powers.
The start of the cult of Maoism began when an American journalist visited Mao in 1936 and then published his now famous book “Red Star Over China” which was translated into many languages, including Mandarin. Edgar Snow was duped by Mao and his cohorts – the book paints a very rosy picture of a utopian egalitarian communism of Mao’s revolutionaries. Mao edited much of what was transcribed in Edgar Snow’s book and Snow did not see all the hardships and problems that the Chinese communist revolution was enduring. It was true that at this time China was a very fractured state, in civil war with itself and the Japanese invaders. Also, several warlords were vying for territorial power. Over the decades this book influenced many revolutionaries (or would be revolutionaries) the world over. It and the “Little Red Book” became standard reading material for all leftists.
There were several characteristics common to all Mao groups that sprang up over the decades. One was the cultish atmosphere. There was a religious feeling to belonging to a Mao group. Just as in China, dissension or the questioning of the leader was not tolerated. Violence would always be an essential parameter.
One of the main axioms of the Chairman (aka the Great Helmsman) is “Power comes out of the barrel of a gun.”
Pol Pot of Cambodia took Maoism to its extreme end.
This also illustrates another appeal of Mao. His writings and expressions are accessible, simplified, and straight-forward – none of the complex dialectics of Marx and Lenin.
Maoism encourages dictatorship – a leader who is absolute, and ruthless in eliminating anyone perceived as an enemy.
This book examines Mao groups that sprang up in Indonesia, Peru (The Shining Path), Nepal, and India where there is a still a large swath of territory controlled by Maoist groups. The interesting feature of all these Maoists is that they were started and lead by university educated elitists (intellectuals for the most part). They were not poor and disenfranchised. It is similar in Western Europe and North America – however I kind of take issue with the author and feel overall that many who joined are more rebellious than Maoist. The Mao emblem was like a lure for these middle-class Europeans and North Americans (perhaps a similar parallel to joining a motivated religious group).
Page 137
A billion copies of the “Little Red Book” were printed in dozens of languages between 1966 and 1971.
The author also points out that China did play a significant role in foreign countries during Mao’s lifetime, even if China wants to minimize knowledge of this. Many of the “revolutionaries” from abroad made multiple visits to China and became more inspired, but not all.
Page 206 (John Hevi a student in China from Ghana)
“What sort of freedom can Africans expect from the hands of those who keep their own people in such subjection?”
China provided much aid to African countries like Tanzania over the years. This influence of China in Africa goes on to this day – with Africa being used as a resource for China’s vast manufacturers – for more on this see China's Second Continent: How a Million Migrants Are Building a New Empire in Africa by Howard French.
The author interestingly gives us the Vietnam War from the Chinese perspective, and the tensions that existed between China, Vietnam and Cambodia. Vietnam at war’s end minimized the aid provided by China during the long war – and was seen as ungrateful by China. The Vietnamese viewed the Chinese as meddlesome
Page 225
The Vietnamese feared that Indochina would become China’s domino, while the Cambodians and the Chinese were suspicious of Vietnamese ambitions to dominate the region.
Another appeal of Maoism was that it gave women, at times, a significant role.
Page 400 Kamala, a female in Nepal
As an individual disadvantaged by gender, ethnicity, and social class, from one of the most underdeveloped parts of the country, Kamala drew from the Maoist movement organizational, ideological, physical and moral support in her fight for self-realization.
The scope of this book is vast and Maoism and its many offshoots around the world are given a unique coverage.
Somehow, Maoism is the creed of winners and insiders, of losers and outsiders, of leaders and underdogs, of absolute rulers, vast disciplined bureaucracies, and oppressed masses.
Maoism is here to stay, more so with the current economic ascendancy of China. It was said during the 1980s and 1990s that as China was embracing economic capitalism, they would become more like us and embrace political liberalism; it now seems that the world is becoming more like China politically.
In contrast to the Soviet Union, China was a country who liberated itself from imperialist oppression with Mao as the leader. This had a vast appeal to Third World countries who had, like China, been dominated for centuries by European powers.
The start of the cult of Maoism began when an American journalist visited Mao in 1936 and then published his now famous book “Red Star Over China” which was translated into many languages, including Mandarin. Edgar Snow was duped by Mao and his cohorts – the book paints a very rosy picture of a utopian egalitarian communism of Mao’s revolutionaries. Mao edited much of what was transcribed in Edgar Snow’s book and Snow did not see all the hardships and problems that the Chinese communist revolution was enduring. It was true that at this time China was a very fractured state, in civil war with itself and the Japanese invaders. Also, several warlords were vying for territorial power. Over the decades this book influenced many revolutionaries (or would be revolutionaries) the world over. It and the “Little Red Book” became standard reading material for all leftists.
There were several characteristics common to all Mao groups that sprang up over the decades. One was the cultish atmosphere. There was a religious feeling to belonging to a Mao group. Just as in China, dissension or the questioning of the leader was not tolerated. Violence would always be an essential parameter.
One of the main axioms of the Chairman (aka the Great Helmsman) is “Power comes out of the barrel of a gun.”
Pol Pot of Cambodia took Maoism to its extreme end.
This also illustrates another appeal of Mao. His writings and expressions are accessible, simplified, and straight-forward – none of the complex dialectics of Marx and Lenin.
Maoism encourages dictatorship – a leader who is absolute, and ruthless in eliminating anyone perceived as an enemy.
This book examines Mao groups that sprang up in Indonesia, Peru (The Shining Path), Nepal, and India where there is a still a large swath of territory controlled by Maoist groups. The interesting feature of all these Maoists is that they were started and lead by university educated elitists (intellectuals for the most part). They were not poor and disenfranchised. It is similar in Western Europe and North America – however I kind of take issue with the author and feel overall that many who joined are more rebellious than Maoist. The Mao emblem was like a lure for these middle-class Europeans and North Americans (perhaps a similar parallel to joining a motivated religious group).
Page 137
A billion copies of the “Little Red Book” were printed in dozens of languages between 1966 and 1971.
The author also points out that China did play a significant role in foreign countries during Mao’s lifetime, even if China wants to minimize knowledge of this. Many of the “revolutionaries” from abroad made multiple visits to China and became more inspired, but not all.
Page 206 (John Hevi a student in China from Ghana)
“What sort of freedom can Africans expect from the hands of those who keep their own people in such subjection?”
China provided much aid to African countries like Tanzania over the years. This influence of China in Africa goes on to this day – with Africa being used as a resource for China’s vast manufacturers – for more on this see China's Second Continent: How a Million Migrants Are Building a New Empire in Africa by Howard French.
The author interestingly gives us the Vietnam War from the Chinese perspective, and the tensions that existed between China, Vietnam and Cambodia. Vietnam at war’s end minimized the aid provided by China during the long war – and was seen as ungrateful by China. The Vietnamese viewed the Chinese as meddlesome
Page 225
The Vietnamese feared that Indochina would become China’s domino, while the Cambodians and the Chinese were suspicious of Vietnamese ambitions to dominate the region.
Another appeal of Maoism was that it gave women, at times, a significant role.
Page 400 Kamala, a female in Nepal
As an individual disadvantaged by gender, ethnicity, and social class, from one of the most underdeveloped parts of the country, Kamala drew from the Maoist movement organizational, ideological, physical and moral support in her fight for self-realization.
The scope of this book is vast and Maoism and its many offshoots around the world are given a unique coverage.
Want to read
March 9, 2023
"Mao's great talent lay in turning the Chinese people into slaves, while making them feel like they were the masters of the country ... All the world's dictators have studied Mao."
【毛黑系列】毛泽东和朱元璋5大相似点（下）：心理变态的独裁者
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsgD7...
年表
日期
毛澤東與中國毛主義／中華人民共和國的歷史
全球毛主義
1893
毛澤東出生於湖南。
1819-20
毛澤東在北京經歷新文化運動，開始撰寫激進的文章。
在上海，他認識了中國共產黨的第一任領導人陳
獨秀，並受到他的影響。
1921
毛澤東是出席中國共產黨成立大會的十三名代表之一。
1923-27
毛澤東積極參加由共產國際斡旋在國民黨與共產黨之間的「
統一戰線」，並參與宣傳局及組織農會。一
九二七年三月，撰寫《湖南農民運動考察報告》。
1928
史諾抵達中國。
1928-34
蔣介石清黨後，毛澤東投靠江西的一支小隊，
並與軍事指揮官朱德一起建立一蘇維埃政府。一九三○
年，妻子楊開慧因拒絕譴責毛澤東，
在長沙遭到國民黨指揮官槍殺。不久，
他就與新伴侶賀子珍開始交往。
蔣介石企圖殲滅江西的共產勢力。毛澤東發展游擊戰術，
來抵抗相對優越的國民黨軍力。在一場內部叛變後，
毛澤東及其
支持者發起一場「反布爾什維克聯盟」的清洗運動。
1932
史諾會見宋慶齡。
1933
史諾與海倫．福斯特（Helen Foster，又名Nym
Wales）結婚，並從上海搬到北京。
1934
毛澤東加入長征，突破國民黨在江西的圍剿。在貴州遵義，
毛澤東取得中國共產黨的軍事領導權。
1935
長征的倖存者抵達中國西北部的陝西。
毛澤東與競爭對手爭奪中國共產黨的政治領導權。
1936
史諾造訪中共在中國西北部建立的共產國家。
1937
蔣介石同意與中國共產黨再次組成抗日「統一戰線」。
蔣介石對日宣戰。華北、華東、華中迅速淪陷在日軍手中。
史諾完成《紅星照耀中國》，中文版隨後即出版，
這本書也成為全球暢銷書。史諾為這本書做研究的過程中，
為他擔任口譯員的黃華成為在延安為外國訪客翻譯的傑出譯
者。
1938
十幾歲的陳平（未來馬來亞共產黨的領導人）
在讀了中文版的《紅星照耀中國》後，
開始熱中於閱讀毛澤東作品。胡志明造訪延安。
1938-41
毛澤東成功擊敗對手，獲得中國共產黨的政治控制權。
都市年輕人受到《紅星照耀中國》的啟
發，前往延安加入這個共產國家。
中國共產黨的黨員數從一九三七年的四萬人增加至一九四〇
年的八十萬人左右。
1940
《紅星照耀中國》中文版的編輯兼合譯者胡愈之前往新加坡
，擔任中國共產黨的臥底，
向有錢又有影響力的馬來亞華人宣傳共產理念的優點。
1942-43
毛澤東發起整風運動。
1943
史諾在蘇聯擔任戰地記者，
從三名年輕女游擊隊隊員口中得知，她們的團隊藉由閱讀《
紅星照耀中國》來學習如何與納粹作戰。
1945
日本投降。中國共產黨與國民黨之間的和平談判破裂，
中國再次陷入內戰。
1948
陳平領導的馬來亞共產黨組織襲擊及暗殺行動，
英國政府因此宣布馬來亞進入「緊急狀態」。
馬共從馬來亞的叢林裡對英國的殖民政府發動游擊戰。
馬共領導人阿成造訪
中國。
印度共產黨的一個派別在泰倫迦納邦領導一場受毛派戰略啟
發的起義，但遭到印度新政府的血腥鎮壓。
1949
中國共產黨在內戰中獲勝，國民黨政府逃往臺灣。
毛澤東宣布成立中華人民共和國，並同意與蘇聯結盟。
中共取得中國的政權後，美國出現「誰搞丟中國？」的爭論
。在麥卡錫指責共產黨的支持
者後，戰時的中國專家遭到譴責並邊緣化。
毛澤東及其副手在北京成立馬列學院，為國際的共產黨人（
大多來自亞洲）提供政治與軍事培訓。
波布前往巴黎學習無線電學，並在此接觸到毛澤東作品。
1950
毛澤東決定介入韓戰。中華人民共和國早期的兩大運動（「
思想改革」與「土地改革」）啟動。
五萬名參與過中共革命的北韓官兵返回北韓。在韓戰中，
約七千名美國大兵遭到中韓軍隊俘虜。中共成立中聯部，
負責打理中國與外國共產黨及左派叛亂分子的關係。
劉少奇派遣軍隊顧問前往北越，以協助胡志明領導的共軍。
1951
亨特出版《紅色中國的洗腦》。
馬共的內部宣傳文件強調起毛派戰略的重要。
在胡志明的領導下，北越啟動中共式的土地改革。
1953
停戰協議使朝鮮半島停止敵對行動。
數以千計的美國戰俘在韓國獲釋，
其中二十一人選擇前往中國，而不是遣返美國。
美國中情局的精神控制計畫「MK-Ultra」獲准實施。
非洲民族議會黨祕書長西蘇魯在曼德拉的指示下造訪中國，
並尋求中國為南非的革命提供物資援助。
1954
奠邊府戰役，法軍遭到北越共軍擊潰。
周恩來率領的中��代表團在日內瓦會議上達成把越南分成南
北的協議。
該會議也衍生出一個獨立、中立的柬埔寨，
先後由國王及西哈努克親王統治。
艾森豪總統在記者會上闡述東南亞的「多米諾骨牌理論」。
1955
周恩來在萬隆會議上倡議「和平共處五項原則」。
西哈努克卸下柬埔寨的王位，並在首相選舉中獲勝。
1956
「百花齊放」期間是中國政治短暫開放的時期。
赫魯雪夫發表祕密演講以及與西方「和平共處」的主張，
導致蘇聯共產黨與中國共產黨之間出現裂痕。毛澤東把「
去史達林化」稱為「修正主義」。
中共鼓勵馬共在華玲與英國殖民政府談判。
北越的土地改革結束，
胡志明政府為犯下的錯誤及過分的行為道歉。
1957
反右運動鎮壓對政府的批評。
1957-58
大躍進，
中國企圖在幾年內趕上西方工業國家及實現共產主義的烏托
邦計畫。毛澤東下令轟炸台灣。
1958
金日成緊跟著中國的大躍進，發起千里馬運動。
1959
中國的北越學生在家書中抱怨大躍進造成的貧困。
1959-61
饑荒主要是大躍進的政策造成的，
導致至少三千萬中國人死亡。
1960
毛澤東要求一個委員會撰寫〈列寧主義萬歲〉，聲明中主張
，中國在世界革命中的領導地位。
桑吉巴的革命者伊薩到中國進行政治訪問。
1961
陳平前往中國，鄧小平指示他恢復武裝抗爭。
在饑荒最嚴重的一年，
中國的外援比過去十年的年平均值高出百分之五十。
喀麥隆的游擊隊在中國受訓。
1962
劉少奇在「七千人大會」上批評大躍進，
批評集體化導致社會走回頭路。
波布當選柬埔寨共產黨（當時稱柬埔寨勞動黨）的黨委書記
。史坦福在美國與人共創革命行動運動（RAM）。
在中印邊境戰爭期間，印度共產黨（CPI）成員遭到監禁。
他們在監獄裡孜孜不倦地學習並討論毛澤東著作。
1963
印尼共產黨（PKI）的領導人艾地訪問中國，
並撰寫政治文章，而這些文章深受毛澤東全球革命的意
志論所影響。羅伯．威廉斯偕同妻子梅貝爾造訪中國。
毛澤東宣布美國黑人解放運動是全球反帝國主義抗爭的一部
分。
1964
毛澤東發起「三線建設」，
把工廠從中國東部移到遙遠的西部。
桑吉巴發生革命，
從中國受訓回國的學生是促成革命的部分原因。
在一次非洲之行中，周恩來宣稱「
整個非洲大陸是一片大好的革
命形勢」。辛巴威的叛亂分子到中國接受軍事訓練。
美國政府在越南部署地面部隊，
更進一步地介入北越與南越之間的戰爭。
史坦福開始接觸毛澤東的軍事文章。
1965
毛澤東的國防部長林彪發表〈人民戰爭勝利萬歲！〉，
宣稱毛澤東思想對革命與叛亂具全球戰略意義。
艾地、印尼共產黨（PKI）的一個派別，以及合謀的軍官，
一起合作突襲印尼軍隊的領導層，但以失敗告終。
蘇哈托將軍領導的軍隊控制了印尼，
並屠殺全國各地疑似左派的人。
獨立的坦尚尼亞的第一任總統尼雷爾造訪中國。
中國出資興建連接坦
尚尼亞與尚比亞的坦贊鐵路。波布前往中國，獲得熱情款待
，並見證文化大革命逐步完備的過程。
古斯曼身為新成立的祕魯共產黨親華派的一員而造訪中國。
馬宗達在孟加拉寫下深受毛澤東影響的革命宣言〈
歷史性八文件〉。
1966
啟動文化大革命。毛澤東在天安門廣場會見數百萬名紅衛兵
。「破四舊」運動展開。學校與大學關閉了。
劉少奇和鄧小平遭到肅清，被踢出領導層。
亞當斯是韓戰結束後「選擇留在中國」
的二十一名美國大兵之一，他決定返回美國。
尼雷爾在坦尚尼亞進行他自己的「長征」。
七名中國訓練的辛巴威非洲民族解放軍（ZANLA）戰士〔
ZANLA是辛巴威民族聯盟（ZANU）的武裝分支〕
發動游擊隊突襲，這場突襲日後被認為是奇穆倫加解放戰爭
（對抗史密斯的白人羅德西亞政府）的開始。
威廉斯遷居中國。
1967
紅衛兵開始在中國各地的組織中奪取權力。二月宣布成立「
上海人民公社」。紅衛兵派別、黨組織、
軍隊之間的鬥爭日趨暴力。「中國的赫魯雪夫」
劉少奇被軟禁在家中。內戰迫在眉睫。
蘇聯成立中國問題國際組織（InterKit），
這是一個泛蘇聯集團組織，
目的是對抗中國在世界上的影響力。尼雷爾推出烏賈馬（
ujamaa）計畫，這是以毛澤東的政策為藍本的集團化、
國有化、農
村化計畫。波布在柬埔寨宣布發動全國性的共產叛亂。
在巴黎，《他》雜誌推出一本隱晦的色情副刊〈小粉色書〉
，並引用毛語錄。古斯曼二度造訪中國，
見證文化大革命的清洗。
警方在納薩爾巴里開槍射殺平民抗議者，引發了
納薩爾派的叛亂。桑亞爾和三名印度同志造訪中國，
並和毛主席會面、參與培訓課程。
尼泊爾政府受到毛澤東要求青年下鄉的影響，發起「返鄉」
運動。
中國共產黨把那些在中國學習及工作多年的緬甸共產黨領導
人送回緬甸，去反抗緬甸政府。
1968
中國人民解放軍鎮壓激進的叛亂。紅衛兵遭到解散，
並送往農村接受「再教育」。
世界各地不約而同興起學生抗議活動。
歐美許多人借用文化大革命的說詞及作法。
杜契克被一個新納粹分子槍殺。
1969
黨的第九次全國代表大會確認新的文革領導人，
由林彪接替毛澤東。劉少奇遭批鬥為「叛徒」，死於獄中。
在毛澤東親自批准下，中國共產黨在湖南為馬來亞共產黨（
MCP）建造一廣播電台「革命之聲」。
中國與蘇聯軍隊在達曼斯基島／珍寶島發生邊境衝突，
數百名中國士兵喪生。尼克森下令轟炸柬埔寨，
以懲罰柬埔寨縱容越共築營。馬宗達與桑亞
爾創立印度共產黨（馬列）。
納薩爾派叛亂的支持者在加爾各答發動的城市恐怖攻擊日益
猖獗。
1970
毛澤東告訴史諾，他歡迎尼克森訪華。
西哈努克遭到龍諾廢黜，
毛澤東和周恩來在中國為他提供庇護。
中共撮合西哈努克與波布領導的柬埔寨共產黨結為聯盟。
在西德，巴德爾、邁因霍夫與其他人創立一游擊隊組織：
西德紅軍派（RAF）。在義
大利，卡戈爾、庫爾喬、弗蘭切斯基尼創立赤軍旅。在祕��
，古斯曼創祕魯共產黨—光明之路。
他們都借用毛澤東的用語和策略。
1971
林彪似乎正在計畫發動一場推翻毛澤東的政變。陰謀失敗後
，林彪試圖逃離中國時死於空難。
李昂尼在電影《革命怪客》的開場引用毛澤東的名言：「
革命不是請
客吃飯。」巴基斯坦在中國的支持下，
派兵至孟加拉鎮壓叛亂。
年輕的尼泊爾激進分子試圖在查巴縣複製納薩爾派叛亂。
1972
毛澤東親自接待尼克森總統的中國行，
正式確立了中美關係的和解。
史諾在日內瓦因胰臟癌過世，
臨終時由一組中國醫生在身邊照顧。馬法賢抵達尚比亞，為
「世界革命
」訓練該國的國軍。
女星麥克琳在導遊的帶領下遊歷中國六週。
馬宗達被捕後不久死亡。
1973
周恩來在中共第十次全國代表大會上，
揭露林彪意圖暗殺毛澤東的企圖。
毛澤東領導的中國與蒙博托統治的薩伊建立外交關係。
毛澤東與蒙博托談話時坦言，
多年來中國一直資助薩伊的游擊叛亂分子。
美國和北越簽署巴黎和平協約。美軍終於從越南撤軍。
在中共的精心策畫下，
西哈努克到柬埔寨北部的赤棉游擊隊基地進行了一次備受關
注的參訪。
1974
周恩來診斷出罹患膀胱癌。鄧小平回歸中央政權。
中共與越共之間的邊境衝突開始。
巴拉克利什曼創立倫敦馬列主義毛澤東思想勞工機構。
1975
周恩來估計，中國的外援支出占國家預算的百分之五以上。
蔣介石在臺灣逝世。金邊落入赤棉手中，赤棉突然廢除貨幣
，並把城市人口疏散到農村。西貢和南越落入越共軍隊手中
。共黨巴特寮（Pathet
Lao）在北越的軍事援助下接管寮國。
毛澤東在北京接見波布與英薩利時，興致高昂地談論赤
棉革命。中共為新成立的柬埔寨民主共和國（赤棉）
提供十億美元的援助，卻拒絕進一步援助越共。
西哈努克一回到柬埔寨，幾乎立即遭到軟禁。
波布贈送來訪的越南代表團一隻小鱷魚。
1976
周恩來於一月過世。毛澤東一過世，
文化大革命的政策也正式結束。
為毛澤東發動文化大革命的關鍵盟友「四人幫」
遭毛澤東指定的繼任者華國鋒逮捕。
張春橋（文革策畫者之一）協助民主柬埔寨（赤棉）
起草憲法。
1977
波布在造訪中國期間，
首次公開宣布柬埔寨的新政府是柬埔寨共產黨，
以及他是柬埔寨共產黨的領導人。在「德意志之秋」，
西德的紅軍派（RAF）犯下一起綁架案及一連串的謀殺案。
一巴勒斯坦團體在摩加迪休機場劫機，要求釋放RAF的囚
犯。劫機挫敗後，RAF的領導人在獄中自殺。
1978
華國鋒下台，鄧小平掌權。鄧小平呼籲迅速發展經濟。
鄧小平在新加坡會見李光耀，同意停止支持馬共。
1979
中共中央宣傳部禁止銷售小紅書，
並在七個月內銷毀所有現存的小紅書。建立在一九七○
年代早期非正式改革基礎上的人民公社亦遭解散。
越南入侵柬埔寨，把赤棉的領導人驅逐到泰國的游擊隊
基地，並對赤棉進行缺席審判。
一份越南白皮書譴責中國背叛越南。
鄧小平領導的中國在邊境戰爭中「教訓」了越南。
西哈努克再次流亡中國。
1980
四人幫在北京受審，四人都遭到定罪。
穆加比領導的ZANU在辛巴威掌權。祕魯共產黨—
光明之路向祕魯政府及鄧小平宣戰。印度的人民戰爭集團（
PWG）開始在恰蒂斯加爾邦建立基地。
中國共產黨促成緬共叛亂分子與緬甸政府之間的和平協定。
1981
中國共產黨發表了對文化大革命與毛澤東的官方評價，名為
「關於建國以來黨的若干歷史問題的決議」。鄧小平堅持「
四項基本原則」，其中包括堅持毛澤東思想。
1983
清除精神污染運動是針對來自西方的腐敗影響。
1984
革命國際主義運動（RIM）在法國成立，目的是「拯救」
並延續全球毛主義。
1986
光明之路的領導層協調利馬監獄內的囚犯起義，
釀成大規模流血事件。
1989
中國人民解放軍暴力鎮壓支持民主的示威活動。
江澤民接任中華人民共和國的主席，
但鄧小平繼續掌握最高權力。
馬共（MCP）與緬共（BCP）
分別跟馬來西亞及緬甸政府簽署和平協定。
1991
尼泊爾的民主制度暫停三十年後，又再次恢復。
尼泊爾共產黨一個激進的毛派派系決心發動一場「人民戰爭
」。
1992
鄧小平呼籲中國經濟加快市場改革。
光明之路在利馬的暴行越演越烈。九月，
古斯曼在警方的突襲中落網。
光明之路的領導層與叛亂運動迅速崩解。
1994
中國第一個網際網路建成。湖南的村民把毛澤東當成神，
供奉在廟裡。
1995
尼泊爾的毛派政黨改名為尼泊爾共產黨（毛主義）（CPNM
），並在尼泊爾西部展開游擊戰訓練。
政府放任警方對疑似毛派分子及被控支持毛派的平民施暴，
導致地方社區兩極分化。
1996
CPNM向政府提出四十項徹底改革的要求。
但CPNM中的幾個小團體在政府回應的期限還沒到，就發動
「人民戰爭」的第一次游擊突擊。
1997
鄧小平逝世，江澤民繼任中共最高的領導權。香港回歸中國
。
1999
北約轟炸中國在貝爾格勒市的大使館之後，
發生大規模的反美抗議活動。中國政府取締法輪功。
2001
尼泊爾王儲狄潘德拉槍殺了九名王室成員和自己。
已故國王的弟弟賈南德拉繼承王位，並以毛派叛亂為由，
宣布國家進入緊急狀態。
2002
江澤民逐步把權力移交給繼任者胡錦濤，
並關閉兩家極左派的印刷版雜誌。
瀋陽數千名遭到資遣的工人舉著毛澤東的肖像走上
街頭，抗議經濟貧困及腐敗。
2003
韓德強等人創立新毛派網站《烏有之鄉》。
印度政府放寬採礦合約的授權制度。
2005
《烏有之鄉》透過線上請願，動員輿論，
以支持一名中國西北偏遠地區的民工，
因他在雇主拒絕支付工資後殺了雇主。
印度政府動員地方自衛隊「和平行動」
去對抗恰蒂斯加爾邦的毛派影響。這導致侵犯
人權的可怕行為。
毛派突擊隊炸毀一輛載有幾名尼泊爾皇家軍隊士兵的巴士，
造成至少三十八人死亡。
賈南德拉國王同時宣布尼泊爾進入緊急狀態，
以及自己所擁有的專制權力。CPNM與反對黨同意合作，
共同打擊國王的獨裁統治；毛派承諾實行民主統治。
2006
印度總理辛格直指毛派組織是「對印度政府最大的國安威脅
」。經過數週的
暴力抗議後，賈南德拉國王同意恢復尼泊爾議會。
尼泊爾政府與毛派簽署《全面和平協議》。
2007
薄熙來獲任重慶市委書記。
尼泊爾議會廢除君主制。
2008
西藏爆發暴力抗議活動。
支持藏獨的示威者干擾奧運聖火傳遞。中國的都市居民認為
，西方對西藏的騷亂及聖火傳遞受擾的報導有偏見，
深表不滿。極左派的民族主義者上網加入抗議的行列。
約一萬兩千人在四川地震中喪生。中國主辦奧運會。
尼泊爾毛派在第一屆制憲會議選舉中大獲全勝。
CPNM的領導人普拉昌達成為總理。
2009
新疆爆發暴力抗議活動。
中��政府判處異議人士劉曉波十三年的有期徒刑，
原因是他參與起草宣揚民主的《零八憲章》。
普拉昌達因軍隊掌控權所引發的爭議，辭去總理職務。
2010
劉曉波榮獲諾貝爾和平獎。中國超越日本，成為僅
次於美國的世界第二大經濟體。
中國的吉尼係數達到零點六一（係數高於零點四零，
意味著極端的貧富不均），這表示自一九八○年代以來，
貧富不均的程度增加了百分之百以上。
2011
薄熙來的毛派文化復興達到顛峰，
十萬人聚集在重慶的體育場合唱「紅歌」。
英國商人海伍德被發現死在重慶一家旅館的房間裡。
普拉昌達同意把尼泊爾人民解放軍（NPLA）
併入尼泊爾皇家陸軍（RNA）。
尼泊爾共產黨的資深理論家巴特拉伊成為總理。
2012
薄熙來的公安局局長王立軍試圖叛逃到美國領事館。
他揭露了大規模的政治瀆職及洗錢行為，
並指控薄熙來的妻子谷開來毒死海伍德。
薄熙來和谷開來被捕，隨後被判處無期徒刑。習近
平獲任中共中央總書記。《烏有之鄉》被關閉。
韓德強在反日示威抗議中，
對一個貶抑毛澤東的老人甩了一巴掌。
一支主張武裝鬥爭的派別，脫離了普拉昌達的毛派政黨。
2013
習近平推出一毛式的「群眾路線」網站，
並發起一場聲勢浩大的反貪運動。
他在毛澤東冥誕一百二十週年前往毛主席紀念堂。
韓德強創立有機集體農場。
自由慈善機���協助三名婦女擺脫巴拉克利什曼的虐待及箝制
，陳平在曼谷過世，馬來西亞政府拒絕讓他的骨灰返鄉。
2014
習近平加強對公民社會的打壓，打壓的對象包括律師、
媒體言論自由、學術界。
2015
尼泊爾議會通過憲法。
2016
毛澤東發動文化大革命五十週年，中國媒體大多保持沉默。
女子團體五十六朵花在人民大會堂表演歌頌毛澤東與習近平
的歌曲。
普拉昌達二度擔任尼泊爾總理。
2017
中國共產黨第十九次全國代表大會在北京召開後，
習近平思想被寫進中華人民共和國的憲法。
中國媒體開始強調中國共產黨可以成為全球的政治典範。
2018
習近平與他的支持者取消了限制國家主席只能連任兩屆（
十年）的限制。
March 24, 2020
Somehow, Maoism is the creed of winners and insiders, of losers and outsiders, of leaders and underdogs, of absolute rulers, vast, disciplined bureaucracies, and oppressed masses.
It is remarkable how one man can change the course of history, inspiring millions and sparking revolutions across the globe. That man was Edgar Snow, whose 1937 book Red Star over China raised Mao Zedong from an obscure Communist leader, the most junior member of the Chinese politburo, to international prominence as the ideological guru for the downtrodden, disaffected, and marginalized. Mao had been looking for someone to raise his profile, and Snow was carefully groomed for the job, feted and given full access to the leader and his entourage. In exchange he gave up editorial freedom, allowing Mao’s people to review and approve everything he wrote, ensuring that the soon-to-be great leader was portrayed as a military genius and a kindly, compassionate champion of justice, freedom, and peace. In the 1930s, as democracies everywhere faltered under the pressure of dictatorships, and conventional politicians seemed craven and unequal to the dangers ahead, Mao looked like the savior the world was desperately seeing. Snow’s book was translated into dozens of languages and became a key part of the indoctrination of new members in communist movements worldwide.
Mao was indeed a brilliant general whose guerrilla tactics were widely adopted by insurgent movements. He was also ruthless and cruel, murderously purging anyone who might become a rival, and anyone who dared to criticize him or the party. His movement spent much of World War II keeping out of the way of the Japanese, occasionally even collaborating with them, growing opium to fund their operations, and waiting for the war to end. When that came the only surprise was that it took until 1949 to kick Chiang Kai-Shek’s nationalists out of the country. The nationalist movement was so riddled with corruption and incompetence it did not take much of a push for it to collapse.
This book takes a global look at Maoism as it manifested itself in various revolutionary movements, such as in Indonesia, Peru, and India, before circling back to China today. It also looks at how it influenced Western radical movements in the 1960s, sometimes to humorous effect as the pampered sons and daughters of conformist societies leveraged their opposition to the war in Vietnam to adopt a communist ideology they did not understand to further a future that would not have ended they way they expected.
In Communist theory history is just another branch of politics, and historical facts are whatever suits the current party line. Modern China wishes to present itself to the world as the leader of the oppressed nations and peoples. “Mao’s successor Deng Xiaoping told the world that China would ‘never seek hegemony’ and almost every foreign policy PR campaign since then has been devoted to arguing China’s status as victim, not activist or aggressor, in international politics.” Even though China was deeply involved in efforts to spread communism around the world from the 1950s through the 70s, providing arms and foreign aid, engaging in subversive efforts to bolster or destabilize governments, and applying pressure to affect political outcomes, that past is inconvenient now that China wishes to be seen as innocent of foreign machinations and neutral in the affairs of other countries, and it has vanished from history books and is vehemently denied by official media.
Similar efforts are underway to re-write China’s internal history. Mao was responsible for some of the bloodiest, most catastrophic political decisions of the 20th century, but you would never know that from seeing how China represents its history today. “The 1959–61 famine that killed tens of millions was described euphemistically as causing ‘serious losses’, while the Cultural Revolution was excused away as merely an error of judgment by a ‘great proletarian revolutionary.’” In addition, “neo-Maoists also repudiated any ambivalence about Mao’s historical record as revisionist conspiracy theories. They defended the 1957 Anti-Rightist Campaign as ‘far more humane than Stalin’s purges’, and furiously refuted any suggestion that tens of millions died as a result of human error in the Great Leap Forward. The persecution of ‘class enemies’ during the Cultural Revolution was ‘completely necessary.’”
The chapters on the influence of Maoism in other countries are particularly interesting. Malaysia was a tragedy; a primarily nationalist uprising was recast by the British authorities as Communist in order to get the support of the United States, and since the small indigenous Communist parties had no military wing they would have been forced to work out a solution with their rivals, so a peaceful outcome was possible. They overplayed their hand, however, resulting in a horrific purge with over a million deaths, all carried out with the enthusiastic support of western governments.
China’s historic rivalry with Vietnam resulted in their backing Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge, including large shipments of arms which the Chinese government now denies ever took place. By supporting the genocidal regime of Pol Pot, whose strategy of emptying the cities to create rural communist societies had echos of Mao’s own philosophy, China bears some responsibility for the genocidal catastrophe that followed.
The situation in Peru with the Shining Path is likewise a fascinating story, though painful to watch unfold in its horrific violence. Abimael Guzmán was a brilliant philosophy student who saw Maoist revolution as a way to transform his country, achieve equality, and purge corruption. His devotion to the cause was absolute and uncompromising so long as it was other people’s blood that was getting shed. “The objective was to destroy any alternatives to the party: thus they killed mayors and champions of slum welfare; they demolished rural development projects; they beheaded rival left-wing organisations.’” He was, however, not planning on becoming a martyr himself. “In 1986, Guzmán had instructed [Shining Path] prisoners to sacrifice themselves in order to force the state into a brutal response that would win sympathy and recruits. Now with his own safety at stake, he dissolved the entire movement.”
In India communism was pushed into the trackless forests where they took up the cause of the oppressed indigenous peoples. However, once this region came to be valued as a source for minerals corporations arrived with their private armies of thugs to extort, murder, and expropriate the land. The Indian Maoists seem to have accommodated themselves to the new reality, and now offer protection services to these companies, for a fee.
Maoism also had a complicated and unexpected influence on the countries of the west. When the Soviet Union switched from a doctrine of world revolution to one of co-existence in order to lessen the risk of global nuclear annihilation, Mao opportunistically took on the mantle of continuous revolution. The Soviet Union came to be seen as boring and accommodationist, while China was a dynamic revolutionary movement. “Across Western Europe and the US, Cultural Revolution Maoism stood not just for earnest anti-imperialism but also for youthful rebellion. In each of the countries in which Mao fever took hold, youthful protest movements had personal and local, as well as international, reasons for revolt.”
Eventually the Maoist tide in the west started to recede, partly because by the 70s people were tired of endless protests and partly because information started to reach the West about the scale of death and misery that Mao’s reckless programs had caused. The results of Western experimentation with Maoism were mixed.
There were, however, some positive developments which helped society move beyond its previously rigid hierarchical boundaries. “Mao-style criticism/self-criticism later blurred into the confessional habits of therapy and self-help. The Cultural Revolution–inspired dissent of the 1960s and ’70s contributed to reforms of secondary and higher education, to make teaching methods and curricula more participatory, more representative, more accountable to diverse communities.”
In China today, with a younger generation that does not have direct memories of Mao’s catastrophes, his reputation has been burnished and he is seen as a George Washington figure, the wise, bold leader of the new nation. Politicians, as always, have been quick to take advantage of this. “[Xi Jinping] has calculated (correctly, it seems) – like Bo Xilai – that there is now enough temporal distance between the present and the memories of bad times under Mao for it to be safe to deploy the helmsman’s fuzzy, father-of-the-nation symbolism. Xi’s big project is the ‘Chinese Dream’ – in English you might call it ‘Make China Great Again’: the restoration of China to its old, pre-nineteenth-century glory.
Maoism was enormously influential, dramatically changing China and affecting millions of lives outside it. It inspired revolutionaries, terrified governments, and seemed for a time like an unstoppable force of history. It was a complicated, often contradictory movement, with no regard for the bloodshed it left in its wake. It would be hard to make sense of the world today without understanding its influence, which makes this book useful for anyone interested in modern history.
It is remarkable how one man can change the course of history, inspiring millions and sparking revolutions across the globe. That man was Edgar Snow, whose 1937 book Red Star over China raised Mao Zedong from an obscure Communist leader, the most junior member of the Chinese politburo, to international prominence as the ideological guru for the downtrodden, disaffected, and marginalized. Mao had been looking for someone to raise his profile, and Snow was carefully groomed for the job, feted and given full access to the leader and his entourage. In exchange he gave up editorial freedom, allowing Mao’s people to review and approve everything he wrote, ensuring that the soon-to-be great leader was portrayed as a military genius and a kindly, compassionate champion of justice, freedom, and peace. In the 1930s, as democracies everywhere faltered under the pressure of dictatorships, and conventional politicians seemed craven and unequal to the dangers ahead, Mao looked like the savior the world was desperately seeing. Snow’s book was translated into dozens of languages and became a key part of the indoctrination of new members in communist movements worldwide.
Mao was indeed a brilliant general whose guerrilla tactics were widely adopted by insurgent movements. He was also ruthless and cruel, murderously purging anyone who might become a rival, and anyone who dared to criticize him or the party. His movement spent much of World War II keeping out of the way of the Japanese, occasionally even collaborating with them, growing opium to fund their operations, and waiting for the war to end. When that came the only surprise was that it took until 1949 to kick Chiang Kai-Shek’s nationalists out of the country. The nationalist movement was so riddled with corruption and incompetence it did not take much of a push for it to collapse.
This book takes a global look at Maoism as it manifested itself in various revolutionary movements, such as in Indonesia, Peru, and India, before circling back to China today. It also looks at how it influenced Western radical movements in the 1960s, sometimes to humorous effect as the pampered sons and daughters of conformist societies leveraged their opposition to the war in Vietnam to adopt a communist ideology they did not understand to further a future that would not have ended they way they expected.
In Communist theory history is just another branch of politics, and historical facts are whatever suits the current party line. Modern China wishes to present itself to the world as the leader of the oppressed nations and peoples. “Mao’s successor Deng Xiaoping told the world that China would ‘never seek hegemony’ and almost every foreign policy PR campaign since then has been devoted to arguing China’s status as victim, not activist or aggressor, in international politics.” Even though China was deeply involved in efforts to spread communism around the world from the 1950s through the 70s, providing arms and foreign aid, engaging in subversive efforts to bolster or destabilize governments, and applying pressure to affect political outcomes, that past is inconvenient now that China wishes to be seen as innocent of foreign machinations and neutral in the affairs of other countries, and it has vanished from history books and is vehemently denied by official media.
Similar efforts are underway to re-write China’s internal history. Mao was responsible for some of the bloodiest, most catastrophic political decisions of the 20th century, but you would never know that from seeing how China represents its history today. “The 1959–61 famine that killed tens of millions was described euphemistically as causing ‘serious losses’, while the Cultural Revolution was excused away as merely an error of judgment by a ‘great proletarian revolutionary.’” In addition, “neo-Maoists also repudiated any ambivalence about Mao’s historical record as revisionist conspiracy theories. They defended the 1957 Anti-Rightist Campaign as ‘far more humane than Stalin’s purges’, and furiously refuted any suggestion that tens of millions died as a result of human error in the Great Leap Forward. The persecution of ‘class enemies’ during the Cultural Revolution was ‘completely necessary.’”
The chapters on the influence of Maoism in other countries are particularly interesting. Malaysia was a tragedy; a primarily nationalist uprising was recast by the British authorities as Communist in order to get the support of the United States, and since the small indigenous Communist parties had no military wing they would have been forced to work out a solution with their rivals, so a peaceful outcome was possible. They overplayed their hand, however, resulting in a horrific purge with over a million deaths, all carried out with the enthusiastic support of western governments.
China’s historic rivalry with Vietnam resulted in their backing Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge, including large shipments of arms which the Chinese government now denies ever took place. By supporting the genocidal regime of Pol Pot, whose strategy of emptying the cities to create rural communist societies had echos of Mao’s own philosophy, China bears some responsibility for the genocidal catastrophe that followed.
The situation in Peru with the Shining Path is likewise a fascinating story, though painful to watch unfold in its horrific violence. Abimael Guzmán was a brilliant philosophy student who saw Maoist revolution as a way to transform his country, achieve equality, and purge corruption. His devotion to the cause was absolute and uncompromising so long as it was other people’s blood that was getting shed. “The objective was to destroy any alternatives to the party: thus they killed mayors and champions of slum welfare; they demolished rural development projects; they beheaded rival left-wing organisations.’” He was, however, not planning on becoming a martyr himself. “In 1986, Guzmán had instructed [Shining Path] prisoners to sacrifice themselves in order to force the state into a brutal response that would win sympathy and recruits. Now with his own safety at stake, he dissolved the entire movement.”
In India communism was pushed into the trackless forests where they took up the cause of the oppressed indigenous peoples. However, once this region came to be valued as a source for minerals corporations arrived with their private armies of thugs to extort, murder, and expropriate the land. The Indian Maoists seem to have accommodated themselves to the new reality, and now offer protection services to these companies, for a fee.
Maoism also had a complicated and unexpected influence on the countries of the west. When the Soviet Union switched from a doctrine of world revolution to one of co-existence in order to lessen the risk of global nuclear annihilation, Mao opportunistically took on the mantle of continuous revolution. The Soviet Union came to be seen as boring and accommodationist, while China was a dynamic revolutionary movement. “Across Western Europe and the US, Cultural Revolution Maoism stood not just for earnest anti-imperialism but also for youthful rebellion. In each of the countries in which Mao fever took hold, youthful protest movements had personal and local, as well as international, reasons for revolt.”
Eventually the Maoist tide in the west started to recede, partly because by the 70s people were tired of endless protests and partly because information started to reach the West about the scale of death and misery that Mao’s reckless programs had caused. The results of Western experimentation with Maoism were mixed.
[O]ver the long term, enthusiasm for the Cultural Revolution splintered the radical left and assisted neo-conservatives in consolidating power from the 1980s. One outcome of the instability of the late 1960s in the US and parts of Europe was the gradual shifting of consensus in favour of order and established power on the right – paving the road to Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher – a trend that has not significantly reversed itself since.
There were, however, some positive developments which helped society move beyond its previously rigid hierarchical boundaries. “Mao-style criticism/self-criticism later blurred into the confessional habits of therapy and self-help. The Cultural Revolution–inspired dissent of the 1960s and ’70s contributed to reforms of secondary and higher education, to make teaching methods and curricula more participatory, more representative, more accountable to diverse communities.”
In China today, with a younger generation that does not have direct memories of Mao’s catastrophes, his reputation has been burnished and he is seen as a George Washington figure, the wise, bold leader of the new nation. Politicians, as always, have been quick to take advantage of this. “[Xi Jinping] has calculated (correctly, it seems) – like Bo Xilai – that there is now enough temporal distance between the present and the memories of bad times under Mao for it to be safe to deploy the helmsman’s fuzzy, father-of-the-nation symbolism. Xi’s big project is the ‘Chinese Dream’ – in English you might call it ‘Make China Great Again’: the restoration of China to its old, pre-nineteenth-century glory.
Maoism was enormously influential, dramatically changing China and affecting millions of lives outside it. It inspired revolutionaries, terrified governments, and seemed for a time like an unstoppable force of history. It was a complicated, often contradictory movement, with no regard for the bloodshed it left in its wake. It would be hard to make sense of the world today without understanding its influence, which makes this book useful for anyone interested in modern history.
September 30, 2020
Julia Lovell’s account of the influence and the spread of what the West dubbed ‘Maoism’ (Mao Zedong thought) which took ideas developed by Mao and his circle and blended them with elements of Marxist-Leninist doctrine, which Lovell characterises as a curiously malleable framework, ideal for export. Lovell seeks to survey the history of Maoism’s development, its appeal to the disenfranchised, the impact of its spread, and its persistent legacy. Although Lovell’s sometimes disconcertingly vague on Maoism’s ideological underpinnings and complexities. Lovell’s book’s a conventional one, largely descriptive, there are elements of political and economic analysis but often overshadowed by an over-emphasis on key figures. Although part of the problem here’s the sheer scope of the territory she’s aiming to cover, which doesn’t support attempts at a more nuanced consideration – for example Lovell appears to conflate Marxism – in terms of fundamentals of Marx’s thought – Marxist-Leninism, Stalinism and socialism at various points. Lovell’s Mao seems to almost miraculously rise to power, there’s not a clear enough representation of the numerous forces that contributed to this, or the complex negotiations between Mao and his followers/supporters or wider geo-political issues. But Lovell does strive, not sure she always succeeds, to have a relatively impartial stance on historical events – and certainly there’s not as much overt pro-West bias as in histories like Applebaum’s Iron Curtain
The opening sections – around a quarter of the work – are taken up with a brief overview of the history of Mao’s ascendency and subsequent leadership, intermingled with elements of Soviet policy in the same period and U.S. Cold-War strategies. Unsurprisingly it’s dense, I’m not sure that this level of compression allowed enough space for Lovell’s arguments or provided a lucid portrait of China under Mao, I think if I hadn’t read a number of previous studies, I’d have found it hard to have any real critical engagement with the material.
Given the scale of the work some decisions are puzzling both structurally and in terms of emphasis, Lovell rightly points out the importance of American journalist Edgar Snow’s 1930s Red Star Over China which introduced a particularly flattering version of Mao to the outside world, as well as helped to recruit a generation of bourgeois Chinese youth. The book sold 100,000 copies in Britain alone. However, I’d have preferred an analysis of why Snow’s book was so successful (apart from his unique access) rather than finding out about his wife’s fashion addiction or the colour of his dog. Pankaj Mishra for example has argued that part of the resonance of Snow’s work outside China linked to the construction of Mao as a “Lincolnesque” leader who aimed to “awaken” China’s millions to “a belief in human rights,” introducing them to “a new conception of the state, society, and the individual.” so tying Maoism to a particular strand within American progressivism. There are similar sections, where attempts to enliven the discussion lead to awkward segues or digressions, the details of American brainwashing attempts for example. I’m all for a vivid anecdote but not when they affect the balance or the force of what’s being presented.
The rest of Lovell’s study’s more fragmented, a series of essay-like chapters broken down into the impact of Maoist-inspired movements on Indonesia in the 60s, Vietnam and Cambodia, Peru, India, and the West. Anyone who’s read about Indonesia’s killing fields, the Vietnam War, Pol-Pot’s Cambodia, or any of the other countries included, will immediately recognise that Lovell can only present a brief sketch/snapshot of these movements and events. What Lovell does convey is how a serious consideration of Maoism’s global impact challenges standard cold-war narratives, the ways in which Maoism seemed to open up alternatives to the imperialist policies and ambitions of America, Japan and Europe, aided by the fortuitous coincidence of Mao’s takeover of China during a period of post WW2 decolonisation. And how an established past history of providing training camps for outside revolutionaries and factions, as well as direct aid, undermines China’s official stance on its previous foreign policy or external, international interventions.
Lovell’s Maoism is well-researched, fairly accessible, sometimes fascinating and arguably most effective in shedding new light on China’s past global ambitions – and the present resurgence of support for elements of Mao Zedong Thought – and tracing the connections between seemingly disparate histories. It’s also a reasonable introduction to some of the movements she includes here, Peru’s Shining Path, for example, but it’s by no means a definitive account either of Mao, Maoism or the Maoist-adjacent movements included here.
The opening sections – around a quarter of the work – are taken up with a brief overview of the history of Mao’s ascendency and subsequent leadership, intermingled with elements of Soviet policy in the same period and U.S. Cold-War strategies. Unsurprisingly it’s dense, I’m not sure that this level of compression allowed enough space for Lovell’s arguments or provided a lucid portrait of China under Mao, I think if I hadn’t read a number of previous studies, I’d have found it hard to have any real critical engagement with the material.
Given the scale of the work some decisions are puzzling both structurally and in terms of emphasis, Lovell rightly points out the importance of American journalist Edgar Snow’s 1930s Red Star Over China which introduced a particularly flattering version of Mao to the outside world, as well as helped to recruit a generation of bourgeois Chinese youth. The book sold 100,000 copies in Britain alone. However, I’d have preferred an analysis of why Snow’s book was so successful (apart from his unique access) rather than finding out about his wife’s fashion addiction or the colour of his dog. Pankaj Mishra for example has argued that part of the resonance of Snow’s work outside China linked to the construction of Mao as a “Lincolnesque” leader who aimed to “awaken” China’s millions to “a belief in human rights,” introducing them to “a new conception of the state, society, and the individual.” so tying Maoism to a particular strand within American progressivism. There are similar sections, where attempts to enliven the discussion lead to awkward segues or digressions, the details of American brainwashing attempts for example. I’m all for a vivid anecdote but not when they affect the balance or the force of what’s being presented.
The rest of Lovell’s study’s more fragmented, a series of essay-like chapters broken down into the impact of Maoist-inspired movements on Indonesia in the 60s, Vietnam and Cambodia, Peru, India, and the West. Anyone who’s read about Indonesia’s killing fields, the Vietnam War, Pol-Pot’s Cambodia, or any of the other countries included, will immediately recognise that Lovell can only present a brief sketch/snapshot of these movements and events. What Lovell does convey is how a serious consideration of Maoism’s global impact challenges standard cold-war narratives, the ways in which Maoism seemed to open up alternatives to the imperialist policies and ambitions of America, Japan and Europe, aided by the fortuitous coincidence of Mao’s takeover of China during a period of post WW2 decolonisation. And how an established past history of providing training camps for outside revolutionaries and factions, as well as direct aid, undermines China’s official stance on its previous foreign policy or external, international interventions.
Lovell’s Maoism is well-researched, fairly accessible, sometimes fascinating and arguably most effective in shedding new light on China’s past global ambitions – and the present resurgence of support for elements of Mao Zedong Thought – and tracing the connections between seemingly disparate histories. It’s also a reasonable introduction to some of the movements she includes here, Peru’s Shining Path, for example, but it’s by no means a definitive account either of Mao, Maoism or the Maoist-adjacent movements included here.
June 10, 2019
This well researched, wide ranging book analyses the spread of Maoism; both as an independently transmitted ideology and as an plank of Chinese Foreign Policy in the mid 20th century. It provides a fantastic, wide lens perspective not only on the Chinese Revolution, but on the decolonizing process in Asia and Africa in general. The chapters on Indonesia and Cambodia, as well as the detailed discussion of the Sino-Vietnamese relationship will be fascinating for anyone seriously interested in this era.
Although Lovell is frank in her assessment of Maoism's many terrifying disasters, the book manages to avoid being a boring condemnation-by-numbers of Mao and his policies. It attempts a real look inside the forces that shaped the lives of billions; destroying many in the process, yet paradoxically creating the first Third World superpower. Lovell's background is in Chinese language, culture and especially literature, and the reverence with which she takes her subject, and the depth of her research, sets this book apart from the standard polemical denunciations of Mao and his era.
However, despite the breadth of her knowledge of, and enthusiasm for, China, the same depth doesn't extend to her analysis of communism and she treats Maoism as more of a cultural phenomenon than a political theory. For example, the chapter on Western Europe in 1968 spends a great deal of time discussing Maoist inspired "Marxist-Leninist" splinter groups, but never gets round to explaining what a Marxist-Leninist party actually is. The chapter also lacks any discussion of Eurocommunist and Trotskyist tendencies within the 60's European left, which leaves me feeling like the Maoist angle has been overemphasised - and a serious dissection of 1960s radicalism overlooked. This gap in her analysis is reflected again towards the end, when she paints a picture the Chinese system of government as an unfathomable and opaque monolith, underpinning a few important historical actors, rather than an extensively theorised political system. The final chapter makes a few intriguing observations on the rise of "neo-Maoism" under China's current administration, but tells us very little about how either the Maoist or Post-Maoist state is actually structured.
Lovell's narrative style is colourful and dynamic, and she is not adverse to painting historical "snapshots" in order to illustrate important moments from a humane perspective. Maoism, A Global History is therefore enjoyable, relatively easy to read and provides an invigorating, China centric perspective of the Cold War world. It is, however, much more a book about the Cold War than a book about Maoist ideology and theory, despite the title.
Although Lovell is frank in her assessment of Maoism's many terrifying disasters, the book manages to avoid being a boring condemnation-by-numbers of Mao and his policies. It attempts a real look inside the forces that shaped the lives of billions; destroying many in the process, yet paradoxically creating the first Third World superpower. Lovell's background is in Chinese language, culture and especially literature, and the reverence with which she takes her subject, and the depth of her research, sets this book apart from the standard polemical denunciations of Mao and his era.
However, despite the breadth of her knowledge of, and enthusiasm for, China, the same depth doesn't extend to her analysis of communism and she treats Maoism as more of a cultural phenomenon than a political theory. For example, the chapter on Western Europe in 1968 spends a great deal of time discussing Maoist inspired "Marxist-Leninist" splinter groups, but never gets round to explaining what a Marxist-Leninist party actually is. The chapter also lacks any discussion of Eurocommunist and Trotskyist tendencies within the 60's European left, which leaves me feeling like the Maoist angle has been overemphasised - and a serious dissection of 1960s radicalism overlooked. This gap in her analysis is reflected again towards the end, when she paints a picture the Chinese system of government as an unfathomable and opaque monolith, underpinning a few important historical actors, rather than an extensively theorised political system. The final chapter makes a few intriguing observations on the rise of "neo-Maoism" under China's current administration, but tells us very little about how either the Maoist or Post-Maoist state is actually structured.
Lovell's narrative style is colourful and dynamic, and she is not adverse to painting historical "snapshots" in order to illustrate important moments from a humane perspective. Maoism, A Global History is therefore enjoyable, relatively easy to read and provides an invigorating, China centric perspective of the Cold War world. It is, however, much more a book about the Cold War than a book about Maoist ideology and theory, despite the title.
October 29, 2020
Aim of the book as Julia Lovell puts it herself is to trace the history of Maoism - meaning Mao-influenced ideas and their implementation into revolutionary actions - throughout the 20th century, thus proving that the unbreakable legacy of Mao-era Communist China - conundrum of mistakes, contradictions and achievements - plays a significant role in today's world in general and in modern China in particular. This aim is achieved through the description of revolutions which directly or indirectly were caused by Mao Zedong Thought. Indonesia, India, Peru, Nepal; these are only few battlefields of ideologies represented in the book. By combining purely historical facts with elements of adventure novels Julia Lovell makes the narrative easy to compherend. Richness of material is fascinating; personal contemporary experience is masterfully intertwined with documentary extracts.
The only stand-alone in this stream is the chapter about Mao Zedong Thought's influence in Europe and the US. It seems disjointed and far-fetched leaving the impression that the author had to mention it in order not to ruin her own theory of Maoism's universality. She confesses in the introduction that Mao's ideas were present in the gay rights movement or in feminism movement, but they didn't define the cause and progress of the movements. Readers are left wondering why more important topics associated with direct Maoism like Malayan Emergency, mentioned several times and never fully described, or terrorist activities of The Communist Party of Phillippines were excluded from the book.
Introduction and conclusion form an alien frame of the work. When starting the book I was pushed back by the brighly expressed personal attitudes of the introduction which seemed to dominate over the factual material. One-chapter sketches of revolutions in the very beginning are meant to create an intrigue, yet, they only lengthen the narrative; aims and structure of the book are described later on in an academic language.
In contradiction to the lengthy introduction, short conclusion is based on the experience of author's travels to China and as in fiction the last page of the book is full of questions instead of the answers. Written this way, it doesn't provide the logical summary of the book. Combined with the personal introduction, it leaves an impression that the theory of Maoism's dominion over contemporary politics was formed before the whole research had been done, that the assigned task preceded the choice of material.
The above mentioned points notwithstanding, I recommend this book as a rich source of information on politics and Communism. Some chapters were read by me in one sitting, others took a little effort. I can't not applause the great amount of research in archives done by Julia Lovell.
The only stand-alone in this stream is the chapter about Mao Zedong Thought's influence in Europe and the US. It seems disjointed and far-fetched leaving the impression that the author had to mention it in order not to ruin her own theory of Maoism's universality. She confesses in the introduction that Mao's ideas were present in the gay rights movement or in feminism movement, but they didn't define the cause and progress of the movements. Readers are left wondering why more important topics associated with direct Maoism like Malayan Emergency, mentioned several times and never fully described, or terrorist activities of The Communist Party of Phillippines were excluded from the book.
Introduction and conclusion form an alien frame of the work. When starting the book I was pushed back by the brighly expressed personal attitudes of the introduction which seemed to dominate over the factual material. One-chapter sketches of revolutions in the very beginning are meant to create an intrigue, yet, they only lengthen the narrative; aims and structure of the book are described later on in an academic language.
In contradiction to the lengthy introduction, short conclusion is based on the experience of author's travels to China and as in fiction the last page of the book is full of questions instead of the answers. Written this way, it doesn't provide the logical summary of the book. Combined with the personal introduction, it leaves an impression that the theory of Maoism's dominion over contemporary politics was formed before the whole research had been done, that the assigned task preceded the choice of material.
The above mentioned points notwithstanding, I recommend this book as a rich source of information on politics and Communism. Some chapters were read by me in one sitting, others took a little effort. I can't not applause the great amount of research in archives done by Julia Lovell.
August 2, 2020
The establishment of a socialist state in the Soviet Union in 1917 sidestepped some lines in the theoretical recipe that Marxism had proclaimed for a country’s journey to socialism. Old Russia was not an industrial giant like Britain where Marxism had cut its teeth. Hoisting of a communist regime in China was an even larger aberration from theory since China was a feudal state and the sword that brought victory for the Communists was lowly peasants from the countryside. Mao Zedong coordinated the military effort and anchored the new movement on solid theoretical foundations. Mao’s thought thus acquired a practical legitimacy which even Marx could not claim. Maoism ruled the roost in China and was successfully exported to unstable regions of the world where it triggered civil war and insurrection in its bid to capture state power. Mao died in 1976 and the latter Chinese strongmen purged his economic ideas from the country. The growth of China has been unparalleled thereafter, but with affluence came back grateful remembrance of Mao as the helmsman of the country in its perilous journey through tough times. Maoism is a potent mix of party-building discipline, anti-colonial rebellion and continuous revolution grafted onto the secular religion of Soviet Marxism. It turned a fractious, failing empire into a defiant global power. Julia Lovell is a scholar and prize-winning author and translator on China.
Autocratic ideologies always yearn to obtain a firm footing on the intellectual soil of their opponents by cashing in on their liberal ideas of freedom of expression. Mao and his party were glorified in the skillfully crafted book ‘Red Star over China’, written by the American author Edgar Snow. Lovell describes the strict censoring of the manuscript by Mao’s accomplices. After Snow had completed his English language transcript of his conversation with Mao, it would then be translated back into Chinese for Mao to inspect. He might revise some portions which will then be re-translated into English for public consumption. Moreover, Snow only saw what his communist handlers wanted him to see. He was so minutely guided that he failed to meet a single, uncongenial individual in the communist state in Yanan. Even after the founding of the People’s Republic, Snow was engaged in intensely regulated visits to China. He refuted reports of a famine that we now know killed tens of millions. Establishment and consolidation of the PRC coincided with a global upsurge in decolonization across the world. Mao presented his country as the global headquarters of anti-imperialism.
This book gives a comprehensive coverage of the ways and means through which China exported its homegrown Maoist revolution all over the world. But they did not anchor too much on ideological rectitude. China's own national self-interest or convenience always trumps revolutionary theory when it came to supporting armed insurrections abroad. Political violence supported by China erupted in Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Chile, India and Nepal. These are narrated in detail. In the case of Africa, as de-colonization dawned, a host of new states were searching for political and economic models to fast track them into becoming modernized nations. As the years went by, China's focus on Africa also changed. Its presence in Africa today is focused on safe economic returns and political stability rather than on the kind of revolutionary upsurge that Mao cherished. The worst of Chinese revolutions abroad came about in Cambodia in the form of Khmer Rouge. It blatantly imposed slave labour on the ordinary people, with an ambition to turn the Khmers into rice- producing machines who consume no fuel and not too much rice. They abolished all currency and salary distinctions as well as killing millions of its own citizens. They forced people into collective communities like herds of cattle. With the creation of mess halls in such groups, they even abolished family dining in collective farms.
The author offers a clear argument on how the countercultural currents in western nations were so influenced by Maoism. In the 1960s, Soviet communism stood exposed and colorless with Khruzhchev’s disclosure of Stalinist terror. It had also fallen out of favour due to its repression of protests for democratic reforms in Eastern Europe and ossified bureaucracy. The chaos of Maoism appealed to the youth and Black activists of America. They showed little inclination to subject China to the same excoriating criticism applied to their own societies. Unlike in other countries, Lovell glorifies Maoist violence in India. She finds a prominent place to rebel voices like Arundhati Roy who depicts the Maoists as good-hearted, idealistic rebels with beautiful smiles, who laugh a lot and love poetry!
In a way, Mao’s death at the senile age of 83 in 1976 cleared China's unhurdled path to prosperity. Deng Xiaoping, who succeeded Mao to power, revoked his mentor’s theoretical injunctions one by one. In this de-Maoification of China, communes were dissolved, the sale of the Little Red Book was banned and all extant volumes pulped. To Deng, it was irrelevant whether the economic means were capitalist or socialist, provided that the political end of preserving party rule was achieved. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long abandoned the utopian turmoil of Maoism in favour of an authoritarian capitalism that prizes prosperity and stability. With the advent of XI Jinping however, Mao is being rehabilitated in appearances. He re-infused Maoist strategies into China’s national public culture which readily found a receptive audience. People claim to have observed therapeutic properties of Maoist anthems and miracles like prisoners being cured of their criminality by singing ‘read songs’.
This book also examines the reasons for the widespread popularity of Maoism, especially its chaotic Cultural Revolution, to the Western youth and oppressed sections of the society. As usual, rhetoric and individual practice varied widely. Mao famously declared that women can hold up half the sky, but continued his petty womanizing. When the need arose, the party even relied on narcotics to boost up their position. In the 1940s opium trade rescued the Communists from their trade deficit and was generating 40 per cent of the state’s budget. Mao shunned any trace of individuality among his cadres who looked like automatons coming out from the same mould. They were subjected to brainwashing by psychological moves and physical torture. Foreign journalists who visited Yanan in 1945 were surprised at the uniformity of thought among the common folk. The same question asked to twenty or thirty people elicited the same response. Even on questions about love, there seemed to be a point of view that has been decided by meetings.
The parting of ways between Soviet and Chinese communism served to cause a rift in the global socialist movement that might have contributed substantially to the eventual collapse of communism in the 1990s. Maoism essentially differed from Soviet communism in its veneration of the peasantry as a revolutionary force and its inclination to anarchic rebellion against authority. It sought to realize rebellion through state capture and claimed itself as an alternate model to the Soviet one which was too European for the Third World's taste. This huge book analyses Maoism’s ambivalent history and enduring appeal to power-hungry dreamers and dispossessed rebels all over the world.
The size of the book taxes the readers in many ways. Its wide coverage thereby nets a lot of subjects with characteristic lack of depth. At no point do the text raise above the level of journalism. A lot of monochrome plates are included but they are thoroughly ineffective.
The book is recommended only to serious readers of Maoism.
Autocratic ideologies always yearn to obtain a firm footing on the intellectual soil of their opponents by cashing in on their liberal ideas of freedom of expression. Mao and his party were glorified in the skillfully crafted book ‘Red Star over China’, written by the American author Edgar Snow. Lovell describes the strict censoring of the manuscript by Mao’s accomplices. After Snow had completed his English language transcript of his conversation with Mao, it would then be translated back into Chinese for Mao to inspect. He might revise some portions which will then be re-translated into English for public consumption. Moreover, Snow only saw what his communist handlers wanted him to see. He was so minutely guided that he failed to meet a single, uncongenial individual in the communist state in Yanan. Even after the founding of the People’s Republic, Snow was engaged in intensely regulated visits to China. He refuted reports of a famine that we now know killed tens of millions. Establishment and consolidation of the PRC coincided with a global upsurge in decolonization across the world. Mao presented his country as the global headquarters of anti-imperialism.
This book gives a comprehensive coverage of the ways and means through which China exported its homegrown Maoist revolution all over the world. But they did not anchor too much on ideological rectitude. China's own national self-interest or convenience always trumps revolutionary theory when it came to supporting armed insurrections abroad. Political violence supported by China erupted in Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Chile, India and Nepal. These are narrated in detail. In the case of Africa, as de-colonization dawned, a host of new states were searching for political and economic models to fast track them into becoming modernized nations. As the years went by, China's focus on Africa also changed. Its presence in Africa today is focused on safe economic returns and political stability rather than on the kind of revolutionary upsurge that Mao cherished. The worst of Chinese revolutions abroad came about in Cambodia in the form of Khmer Rouge. It blatantly imposed slave labour on the ordinary people, with an ambition to turn the Khmers into rice- producing machines who consume no fuel and not too much rice. They abolished all currency and salary distinctions as well as killing millions of its own citizens. They forced people into collective communities like herds of cattle. With the creation of mess halls in such groups, they even abolished family dining in collective farms.
The author offers a clear argument on how the countercultural currents in western nations were so influenced by Maoism. In the 1960s, Soviet communism stood exposed and colorless with Khruzhchev’s disclosure of Stalinist terror. It had also fallen out of favour due to its repression of protests for democratic reforms in Eastern Europe and ossified bureaucracy. The chaos of Maoism appealed to the youth and Black activists of America. They showed little inclination to subject China to the same excoriating criticism applied to their own societies. Unlike in other countries, Lovell glorifies Maoist violence in India. She finds a prominent place to rebel voices like Arundhati Roy who depicts the Maoists as good-hearted, idealistic rebels with beautiful smiles, who laugh a lot and love poetry!
In a way, Mao’s death at the senile age of 83 in 1976 cleared China's unhurdled path to prosperity. Deng Xiaoping, who succeeded Mao to power, revoked his mentor’s theoretical injunctions one by one. In this de-Maoification of China, communes were dissolved, the sale of the Little Red Book was banned and all extant volumes pulped. To Deng, it was irrelevant whether the economic means were capitalist or socialist, provided that the political end of preserving party rule was achieved. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long abandoned the utopian turmoil of Maoism in favour of an authoritarian capitalism that prizes prosperity and stability. With the advent of XI Jinping however, Mao is being rehabilitated in appearances. He re-infused Maoist strategies into China’s national public culture which readily found a receptive audience. People claim to have observed therapeutic properties of Maoist anthems and miracles like prisoners being cured of their criminality by singing ‘read songs’.
This book also examines the reasons for the widespread popularity of Maoism, especially its chaotic Cultural Revolution, to the Western youth and oppressed sections of the society. As usual, rhetoric and individual practice varied widely. Mao famously declared that women can hold up half the sky, but continued his petty womanizing. When the need arose, the party even relied on narcotics to boost up their position. In the 1940s opium trade rescued the Communists from their trade deficit and was generating 40 per cent of the state’s budget. Mao shunned any trace of individuality among his cadres who looked like automatons coming out from the same mould. They were subjected to brainwashing by psychological moves and physical torture. Foreign journalists who visited Yanan in 1945 were surprised at the uniformity of thought among the common folk. The same question asked to twenty or thirty people elicited the same response. Even on questions about love, there seemed to be a point of view that has been decided by meetings.
The parting of ways between Soviet and Chinese communism served to cause a rift in the global socialist movement that might have contributed substantially to the eventual collapse of communism in the 1990s. Maoism essentially differed from Soviet communism in its veneration of the peasantry as a revolutionary force and its inclination to anarchic rebellion against authority. It sought to realize rebellion through state capture and claimed itself as an alternate model to the Soviet one which was too European for the Third World's taste. This huge book analyses Maoism’s ambivalent history and enduring appeal to power-hungry dreamers and dispossessed rebels all over the world.
The size of the book taxes the readers in many ways. Its wide coverage thereby nets a lot of subjects with characteristic lack of depth. At no point do the text raise above the level of journalism. A lot of monochrome plates are included but they are thoroughly ineffective.
The book is recommended only to serious readers of Maoism.
August 19, 2020
Maoism: A Global History, by Julia Lovell, is a history on the idea and application of Maoism. Maoism is a form of communism that focused on Chairman Mao - founder of the People's Republic of China. Maoism features numerous proverbs and quotes from Mao, all put together into his Little Red Book - Mao's own book of proverbs. From the founding of the PRC up until Deng Xiaoping took power, China sought to export this form of governance throughout the world, promoting revolutionary governments, armies and rebels across the globe. Maoism's history is turbulent and violent. It is intensely focused on armed struggle, a leadership cult, constant revolution, and focuses on mobilizing peasants over workers. This communist ideology was popular in nations with low industrialization, and spread throughout the globe until the excesses and violence of the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution showed the world how twisted Maoism could be. Deng Xiaoping distanced the PRC from this ideology, instead focusing on "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and sought to bring Capitalism back to China in a limited form. Even so, Maoism remains influential in some areas - it is the main ideology of Peru's now defunct Shining Path movement, which fought a grueling, decades long civil war in Peru. The Nepalese Communists were heavily influenced by Maoism as well, and were semi-successful in creating a new shared government in Kathmandu, where they remain one of the countries main political actors to this day. The Indian Nalaxite movement is also Maoist, and has been particularly active in the past decade, fighting a war that is both classist and ethnic against an overbearing Indian state.
This book is one of the few books out there that focuses on this subject. Maoism has long been tarred in the West, both during the hysterical highs of the Red Scare, and up to today due to the brutality of Mao's revolution. The West often portrays Mao and his ideology as meglomaniac, mad, authoritarian and foolhardy. And truth be told, it largely was. But what is often overlooked is its impact on global events. Not so much the clown of communism, Maoism instead had a huge ad influential impact on global events. The Korean and Vietnamese Wars were both heavily influenced by Mao's ideology with its communist counterparts, and the ham-fisted responses against it by the Western bloc. Maoism is the most anti-colonial form of Communism, and was embraced by those fighting anti-colonial struggles. China, int turn, heavily supported regimes that adhered to Maoism (Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, Albania, Zimbabwe etc.). It was also responsible influential in mobilizing insurgencies that failed, such as in Indonesia and Malaysia. These revolutions ran out of steam, as they promoted people's war and mobilization of the peasants with little thought for logistical planning or political forethought.
Lovell notes the brutality of Maoism, but also why it was necessary. The excesses of Maoism in China and Cambodia are well know, and in many ways genocidal. Millions died during these massive experiments in economics, warfare and politics, both from direct killings, but also from starvation and poor management. Many of the issues with Maoism stemmed from its reliance on a personality cult to keep power, and its focus on slogans over practicalities. Folksy wisdom may work in some cases, but in most, it is not accurate enough to sustain itself. However, it was also a counterpoint to many injustices. Vietnamese Communists carrying the Little Red Book overthrew a brutal colonial regime. In Indonesia, these communists were killed in their hundreds of thousands by brutal, Western baked militias. In Africa, centuries of colonial suppression that also resulted in the death of millions due to poor planning and brutality had taken their toll, and the radical anti-colonialism and communism found in Mao's ideas were like mana from heaven. The brutality of imperialism and colonialism has had just as much of a negative impact, if not more, than Maoism, and Maoism was also a direct result of the former's brutality.
This is an excellent and detailed, academic account of Maoism as history. It stays firmly away from both the naive rhetoric of communist zealots, and the arrogant and ignorant capitalist/Western rhetoric on communism as a failed political ideology. Instead, Lovell looks at the practical history of Maoism and how it influenced movements across the globe that sought some form of a better life for the poorest in society, regardless of their success or exploitation from unscrupulous actors. Lovell has done an excellent job at showing just how influential this ideology was on global events in the 20th century, and how it still has the chops to influence anti-imperial struggles in India. This was a good read about an ideology that has been marred in violence and death, but also in misinformation and anti-communist rhetoric. Instead, what Lovell has shown is that, regardless of events, Maoism was, and remains, a powerful and important ideology, and one that must be understood well.
This book is one of the few books out there that focuses on this subject. Maoism has long been tarred in the West, both during the hysterical highs of the Red Scare, and up to today due to the brutality of Mao's revolution. The West often portrays Mao and his ideology as meglomaniac, mad, authoritarian and foolhardy. And truth be told, it largely was. But what is often overlooked is its impact on global events. Not so much the clown of communism, Maoism instead had a huge ad influential impact on global events. The Korean and Vietnamese Wars were both heavily influenced by Mao's ideology with its communist counterparts, and the ham-fisted responses against it by the Western bloc. Maoism is the most anti-colonial form of Communism, and was embraced by those fighting anti-colonial struggles. China, int turn, heavily supported regimes that adhered to Maoism (Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, Albania, Zimbabwe etc.). It was also responsible influential in mobilizing insurgencies that failed, such as in Indonesia and Malaysia. These revolutions ran out of steam, as they promoted people's war and mobilization of the peasants with little thought for logistical planning or political forethought.
Lovell notes the brutality of Maoism, but also why it was necessary. The excesses of Maoism in China and Cambodia are well know, and in many ways genocidal. Millions died during these massive experiments in economics, warfare and politics, both from direct killings, but also from starvation and poor management. Many of the issues with Maoism stemmed from its reliance on a personality cult to keep power, and its focus on slogans over practicalities. Folksy wisdom may work in some cases, but in most, it is not accurate enough to sustain itself. However, it was also a counterpoint to many injustices. Vietnamese Communists carrying the Little Red Book overthrew a brutal colonial regime. In Indonesia, these communists were killed in their hundreds of thousands by brutal, Western baked militias. In Africa, centuries of colonial suppression that also resulted in the death of millions due to poor planning and brutality had taken their toll, and the radical anti-colonialism and communism found in Mao's ideas were like mana from heaven. The brutality of imperialism and colonialism has had just as much of a negative impact, if not more, than Maoism, and Maoism was also a direct result of the former's brutality.
This is an excellent and detailed, academic account of Maoism as history. It stays firmly away from both the naive rhetoric of communist zealots, and the arrogant and ignorant capitalist/Western rhetoric on communism as a failed political ideology. Instead, Lovell looks at the practical history of Maoism and how it influenced movements across the globe that sought some form of a better life for the poorest in society, regardless of their success or exploitation from unscrupulous actors. Lovell has done an excellent job at showing just how influential this ideology was on global events in the 20th century, and how it still has the chops to influence anti-imperial struggles in India. This was a good read about an ideology that has been marred in violence and death, but also in misinformation and anti-communist rhetoric. Instead, what Lovell has shown is that, regardless of events, Maoism was, and remains, a powerful and important ideology, and one that must be understood well.
March 24, 2020
Having read this in the time of the Covid-19 virus, Lovells' introduction was timely, "Like a dormant virus, Maoism has demonstrated a tenacious global talent for latency. It is this history, this aptitude that we will now track across the world" (p. 150).
The story begins with the impact Edgar Snow's romantic classic Red Star Over China: The Classic Account of the Birth of Chinese Communism had around the world, inspiring Maoist movements in Indonesia, Africa, Vietnam, Cambodia, the U.S., Norway, Germany, Peru, India, Nepal... with a chapter dedicated to each geographic center.
China, Lovell writes, was seen as the "patriarch of the global revolutionary family" (p. 140) and her fluid and knowledgeable account of its inception, emergence, and history in each of its victims is both lucid and well documented. The "infatuation" crossed many borders, but underlying almost every history emerge stories of horror and brutality (Africa, Peru, Nepal) despite the well-meaning of many of its early adherents. Many, as the "Maoist movement in Nepal became steeped in gun worship" (p. 404).
Most interesting for me was how "this passion for Mao was in many ways independent of China itself: hardly any of these radicals studied Chinese, or [visited] China" (p. 289); they succeeded through their generous loans, project financing, and the sheer bulk of propagandist literature churned out by the bales. When I was a student studying Chinese in a European country, we were constantly inundated with pro-Maoist magazines, flyers and literature--all free. A travel association arranged trips for us to the PRC to visit communes and the 'liberated countryside'. My colleagues went as poor students yet were given housing and language scholarships (we learned how to say 'dwarf bandits' and 'machine-gun nest' before 'Hello, how are you?), but if you were a Sihanouk or like the Zanzibar Nationalist Party Secretary General Abdulrahman Mohammed Babu, a foreign VIP with China sympathies, you were met on arrival by Mao or Zhao Enlai themselves, escorted in amongst thousands of flag-waving 'citizens', housed in luxury, feasted and feted and sent home with your pockets stuffed with money and promises. (Now I know why so many of our fellow 'exchange' students were Africans.)
Some readers have described this book as heavy reading; I suspect they weren't yet born when many of the events recounted by Lovell were happening, but for those interested in Chinese history post-1949, every page will call to mind a long-forgotten radio broadcast, or a quickly-glanced over newspaper item. Names will be dredged from the past and the pieces will slowly come together. If you thought Maoism died with Mao and the Gang of Four, you are dead wrong. "A Soviet briefing on the post-Mao Chinese government had it about right: 'the foam has gone down but the beer remains'" (p 429).
The story begins with the impact Edgar Snow's romantic classic Red Star Over China: The Classic Account of the Birth of Chinese Communism had around the world, inspiring Maoist movements in Indonesia, Africa, Vietnam, Cambodia, the U.S., Norway, Germany, Peru, India, Nepal... with a chapter dedicated to each geographic center.
China, Lovell writes, was seen as the "patriarch of the global revolutionary family" (p. 140) and her fluid and knowledgeable account of its inception, emergence, and history in each of its victims is both lucid and well documented. The "infatuation" crossed many borders, but underlying almost every history emerge stories of horror and brutality (Africa, Peru, Nepal) despite the well-meaning of many of its early adherents. Many, as the "Maoist movement in Nepal became steeped in gun worship" (p. 404).
Most interesting for me was how "this passion for Mao was in many ways independent of China itself: hardly any of these radicals studied Chinese, or [visited] China" (p. 289); they succeeded through their generous loans, project financing, and the sheer bulk of propagandist literature churned out by the bales. When I was a student studying Chinese in a European country, we were constantly inundated with pro-Maoist magazines, flyers and literature--all free. A travel association arranged trips for us to the PRC to visit communes and the 'liberated countryside'. My colleagues went as poor students yet were given housing and language scholarships (we learned how to say 'dwarf bandits' and 'machine-gun nest' before 'Hello, how are you?), but if you were a Sihanouk or like the Zanzibar Nationalist Party Secretary General Abdulrahman Mohammed Babu, a foreign VIP with China sympathies, you were met on arrival by Mao or Zhao Enlai themselves, escorted in amongst thousands of flag-waving 'citizens', housed in luxury, feasted and feted and sent home with your pockets stuffed with money and promises. (Now I know why so many of our fellow 'exchange' students were Africans.)
Some readers have described this book as heavy reading; I suspect they weren't yet born when many of the events recounted by Lovell were happening, but for those interested in Chinese history post-1949, every page will call to mind a long-forgotten radio broadcast, or a quickly-glanced over newspaper item. Names will be dredged from the past and the pieces will slowly come together. If you thought Maoism died with Mao and the Gang of Four, you are dead wrong. "A Soviet briefing on the post-Mao Chinese government had it about right: 'the foam has gone down but the beer remains'" (p 429).
March 7, 2020
Potential readers should understand what this book is not about: it is not an evaluation of the "merits" of Mao as a military strategist or statesman. Actually, the book isn't even about Mao.
It is in the first place a history of the worldwide impact of Maoist ideology, especially in the 1950s and 1960s. And this story is both fascinating and horrifying. Lovell leads you from Beijing to African states that had recently acquired their independence, to Vietnam, Peru, India, Nepal, Indonesia and even Western European countries.
The paradox is that this global influence almost didn't happen, and Lovell explains why. Most people know that after "The long march", the Chinese communists were more or less finished. So how did they bounce back? One factor that is pretty well known is the role played by the war against Japan. One factor that is less well known (at least to me) is the role played by the American journalist Edgar Snow, who was "smuggled" from Beijing to Mao's lair and was allowed to interview Mao in "depth". Snow's book "Red Star over China" became an international bestseller that propelled Mao to international fame at a time when his leadership was far from secured and was a major inspirational force for communist insurgents all over the world. Moreover, its translation into Chinese convinced numerous young Chinese to join the communist party, the description of which compared very favourably to the profoundly corrupt and cruel regime of Chiang Kai'check.
So why is this so important? Because it was all one big set-up. Snow wasn't a communist, so he wasn't suspect as a source. He had been "invited" by communist co-travellers in Beijing, who led very bourgeois lives and didn't really look like people who intended to install a murderous and repressive regime. When Snow was in Communist territory, all his movements were tightly controlled, to ensure he would only see what the party leadership wanted him to see. His accounts of his interviews with Mao were carefully checked, to ensure that life under communism would be represented as paradise on earth. Mao made sure to hide any authoritarian inclinations.
One can wonder why Snow played Mao's game. One possibility is that, as so many non-communist westerners, Snow really thought communism was basically social democracy on steroids. A more cynical explanation (proposed by Lovell) is that Snow knew that he had an incredible scoop and that he was prepared to embellish reality as the price for international fame. Surely, Snow continued to sing Mao's praise even when dozens of millions of people were starving to death during the "Big Leap Forward".
Unfortunately, this episode turned out to be rather representative for future interactions between Maoism and its privileged guests, who through a combination of pampering during their visits, and being completely sheltered from the reality of living in Maoist China, would quickly become enamored with the Great Helmsman.
The book also sheds a new light on the importance communist regimes attach to health care.
In the 1960s, while China was itself recovering from the Great Leap Forward, China invested massively in assistance to newly independent African countries. One of the key channels was medical aid: Maoists understood how doctors, through the sheer of people they were seeing could play a key role in the dissemination of Maoist propaganda.
However, the irrational attitudes to Maoism were not limited to the fanbase. The chapter on "brainwashing" is for instance completely baffling. It is a word that has become so common that we forget someone actually invented it. And there is a line here that leads almost directly to some secret programmes of the CIA and eventually to Guantanamo Bay.
The father of the terminology is Edward Hunter, a journalist without any academic training in psychology or psychiatry. The idea that Maoism had invented an innovative and particularly effective technique for indoctrinating people was quickly picked up during the Korean War (I suppose a key reason is that people in the West didn't understand that hundreds of thousands of 'volunteers' would just throw themselves in the line of fire of machine guns - little did they know that red armies all over the world have used their machine guns to motivate their soldiers to march to the enemy).
Anyway, the concept really scared governments and several research programs were set up to understand how brainwashing works and how to "unbrainwash" people. This was the time before ethical review committees. The story is so crazy that I link it here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project... .
Obviously, if this how democracies fight totalitarianism, you don't need totalitarianism. At the same time, other research programs showed that there was nothing path-breaking about Maoist indoctrination techniques: they weren't really different from techniques used by the Inquisition, really. But the damage was done. The CIA learned a lot from its study of Maoist techniques and would enthusiastically apply it itself, including in its fight against Al Qaeda...
Next to "brianwashing", the "domino theory" is another Cold War term that is now often derided as a chimaera that caused more than a decade of needless suffering in Vietnam. But Zhou Enlai explicitly justified the war in Vietnam as the starting point for "world revolution" and Mao saw road building in Laos as the stepping stone for road building towards Thailand. With hindsight, the biggest mistake both Americans and Communists made was to assume that Vietnamese Communists didn't have an agenda of their own. Similarly, African revolutionaries were happy to receive training and material help from Beijing, but didn't feel obliged to pursue Beijing's agenda once they were in power.
Two of the most horrifying stories in the book are of course the Killing Fields of Cambodia and the Shining Path in Peru.
In 1994, a rare surviving witness (as interpreter) of a discussion between Mao and Pol Pot revealed that Mao had confided that Pol Pot was implementing the policies Mao would have implemented in China if he hadn't been prevented by reactionaries. After the Vietnamese invaded Cambodia and toppled the Khmer Rouge, Pol Pot and his acolytes were judged in absentia as (you can't make this up) "a manifestation of the reactionary nature of both the Peking expansionaries and the ... genocidal criminals".
The story of the Shining Path also combines the horrible and the grotesque. When the Shining Path was merely a small sect of Mao-inspired ideologues in the 1970s, the military dictatorship had accumulated a lot of information about them. This information vanished in thin air when elected civilians took over government - exactly when the Shining Path had moved on to the next stage of the 'revolution': a series of gruesome murders intended to provoke a violent reaction from the state.
It's almost as if the Shining Path and the military regime has conspired to ensure that the reaction of the new democracy would be completely inept (which it was). (In the next stage, the Army moved to scorched earth tactics that, not surprisingly, increased the Path's membership)
The comical note is that the turning point came when the Peruvian government started investing in meticulous intelligence work instead of killing and burning. (It's pretty daft, but it took more than ten years of insurgency before Peruvian officers starting reading Mao, forgetting that knowing and understanding the ennemy is a basic principle of the art of war). Anyway, after a while, intelligence figured out that Guzmán was hiding in Lima, and started observing one specific house. Key elements that led to the conclusion that Guzmán hid there were: the specific medications (Guzmán had psoriasis) and the make of the cigarettes bought by the lady of the house. But, the decisive factor was.....the size of the underwear brought home. One does not always need big data.
In conclusion, this is a truly fascinating book. Moreover, it is extraordinarily lively and well written.
At the end of the day, I have to admit I still don't completely understand Maoism's appeal beyond despairing and uneducated peasants. Why are there so many smart and highly educated people who fell into it's traps? Lovell suggests that, often, the leaders were people who were the first in their family to receive a higher education, only to find out that the opportunities for them remained limited. This sounds plausible, but doesn't explain the fascination amongst the Western intelligentsia. I am not sure this mistery will ever be solved.
It is in the first place a history of the worldwide impact of Maoist ideology, especially in the 1950s and 1960s. And this story is both fascinating and horrifying. Lovell leads you from Beijing to African states that had recently acquired their independence, to Vietnam, Peru, India, Nepal, Indonesia and even Western European countries.
The paradox is that this global influence almost didn't happen, and Lovell explains why. Most people know that after "The long march", the Chinese communists were more or less finished. So how did they bounce back? One factor that is pretty well known is the role played by the war against Japan. One factor that is less well known (at least to me) is the role played by the American journalist Edgar Snow, who was "smuggled" from Beijing to Mao's lair and was allowed to interview Mao in "depth". Snow's book "Red Star over China" became an international bestseller that propelled Mao to international fame at a time when his leadership was far from secured and was a major inspirational force for communist insurgents all over the world. Moreover, its translation into Chinese convinced numerous young Chinese to join the communist party, the description of which compared very favourably to the profoundly corrupt and cruel regime of Chiang Kai'check.
So why is this so important? Because it was all one big set-up. Snow wasn't a communist, so he wasn't suspect as a source. He had been "invited" by communist co-travellers in Beijing, who led very bourgeois lives and didn't really look like people who intended to install a murderous and repressive regime. When Snow was in Communist territory, all his movements were tightly controlled, to ensure he would only see what the party leadership wanted him to see. His accounts of his interviews with Mao were carefully checked, to ensure that life under communism would be represented as paradise on earth. Mao made sure to hide any authoritarian inclinations.
One can wonder why Snow played Mao's game. One possibility is that, as so many non-communist westerners, Snow really thought communism was basically social democracy on steroids. A more cynical explanation (proposed by Lovell) is that Snow knew that he had an incredible scoop and that he was prepared to embellish reality as the price for international fame. Surely, Snow continued to sing Mao's praise even when dozens of millions of people were starving to death during the "Big Leap Forward".
Unfortunately, this episode turned out to be rather representative for future interactions between Maoism and its privileged guests, who through a combination of pampering during their visits, and being completely sheltered from the reality of living in Maoist China, would quickly become enamored with the Great Helmsman.
The book also sheds a new light on the importance communist regimes attach to health care.
In the 1960s, while China was itself recovering from the Great Leap Forward, China invested massively in assistance to newly independent African countries. One of the key channels was medical aid: Maoists understood how doctors, through the sheer of people they were seeing could play a key role in the dissemination of Maoist propaganda.
However, the irrational attitudes to Maoism were not limited to the fanbase. The chapter on "brainwashing" is for instance completely baffling. It is a word that has become so common that we forget someone actually invented it. And there is a line here that leads almost directly to some secret programmes of the CIA and eventually to Guantanamo Bay.
The father of the terminology is Edward Hunter, a journalist without any academic training in psychology or psychiatry. The idea that Maoism had invented an innovative and particularly effective technique for indoctrinating people was quickly picked up during the Korean War (I suppose a key reason is that people in the West didn't understand that hundreds of thousands of 'volunteers' would just throw themselves in the line of fire of machine guns - little did they know that red armies all over the world have used their machine guns to motivate their soldiers to march to the enemy).
Anyway, the concept really scared governments and several research programs were set up to understand how brainwashing works and how to "unbrainwash" people. This was the time before ethical review committees. The story is so crazy that I link it here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project... .
Obviously, if this how democracies fight totalitarianism, you don't need totalitarianism. At the same time, other research programs showed that there was nothing path-breaking about Maoist indoctrination techniques: they weren't really different from techniques used by the Inquisition, really. But the damage was done. The CIA learned a lot from its study of Maoist techniques and would enthusiastically apply it itself, including in its fight against Al Qaeda...
Next to "brianwashing", the "domino theory" is another Cold War term that is now often derided as a chimaera that caused more than a decade of needless suffering in Vietnam. But Zhou Enlai explicitly justified the war in Vietnam as the starting point for "world revolution" and Mao saw road building in Laos as the stepping stone for road building towards Thailand. With hindsight, the biggest mistake both Americans and Communists made was to assume that Vietnamese Communists didn't have an agenda of their own. Similarly, African revolutionaries were happy to receive training and material help from Beijing, but didn't feel obliged to pursue Beijing's agenda once they were in power.
Two of the most horrifying stories in the book are of course the Killing Fields of Cambodia and the Shining Path in Peru.
In 1994, a rare surviving witness (as interpreter) of a discussion between Mao and Pol Pot revealed that Mao had confided that Pol Pot was implementing the policies Mao would have implemented in China if he hadn't been prevented by reactionaries. After the Vietnamese invaded Cambodia and toppled the Khmer Rouge, Pol Pot and his acolytes were judged in absentia as (you can't make this up) "a manifestation of the reactionary nature of both the Peking expansionaries and the ... genocidal criminals".
The story of the Shining Path also combines the horrible and the grotesque. When the Shining Path was merely a small sect of Mao-inspired ideologues in the 1970s, the military dictatorship had accumulated a lot of information about them. This information vanished in thin air when elected civilians took over government - exactly when the Shining Path had moved on to the next stage of the 'revolution': a series of gruesome murders intended to provoke a violent reaction from the state.
It's almost as if the Shining Path and the military regime has conspired to ensure that the reaction of the new democracy would be completely inept (which it was). (In the next stage, the Army moved to scorched earth tactics that, not surprisingly, increased the Path's membership)
The comical note is that the turning point came when the Peruvian government started investing in meticulous intelligence work instead of killing and burning. (It's pretty daft, but it took more than ten years of insurgency before Peruvian officers starting reading Mao, forgetting that knowing and understanding the ennemy is a basic principle of the art of war). Anyway, after a while, intelligence figured out that Guzmán was hiding in Lima, and started observing one specific house. Key elements that led to the conclusion that Guzmán hid there were: the specific medications (Guzmán had psoriasis) and the make of the cigarettes bought by the lady of the house. But, the decisive factor was.....the size of the underwear brought home. One does not always need big data.
In conclusion, this is a truly fascinating book. Moreover, it is extraordinarily lively and well written.
At the end of the day, I have to admit I still don't completely understand Maoism's appeal beyond despairing and uneducated peasants. Why are there so many smart and highly educated people who fell into it's traps? Lovell suggests that, often, the leaders were people who were the first in their family to receive a higher education, only to find out that the opportunities for them remained limited. This sounds plausible, but doesn't explain the fascination amongst the Western intelligentsia. I am not sure this mistery will ever be solved.
April 17, 2022
"In China and beyond, the rural poor have suffered most at the hands of Mao's theories and practices." Err, they dismantled feudalism, conducted the most comprehensive land reform in history, ended famines, and made education and healthcare available for the first time, so in summary, you're talking nonsense.
Politically a stupid and reactionary book that fails to do the job at hand (which is a shame, because it was a good idea and worthy project). But enough interesting tidbits about Maoism, particularly in India, Nepal and Peru, that it warrants three stars.
Politically a stupid and reactionary book that fails to do the job at hand (which is a shame, because it was a good idea and worthy project). But enough interesting tidbits about Maoism, particularly in India, Nepal and Peru, that it warrants three stars.
January 21, 2020
This is a really interesting exploration of Maoism less as a philosophy and more as a historical phenomenon across the world. In the US, we're often taught to focus on the USSR as *the* Communist opposition, with China reduced to a secondary player, predominantly in Vietnam and Korea--so we pat ourselves on the back and say "the West won!" after 1989.
What makes this book so good is not just that Lovell shows that this is untrue, but that she does so in a nuanced way. None of the players are reduced to passive victimhood--all have made choices. Maoism had genuine appeal for people, whether or not it lived up to its promises. For itself, China has been an active exporter of ideology (and the power to back it) since before Mao took power. From his time in Yan'an, Mao used journalists to export a vision of himself that was what he wanted them to see: the champion of the peasantry, the man of the earth, of good humor, hard work, anti-imperialism, and equality. It worked. His beliefs--as structured for outsiders--inspired others to follow.
They had reason to. His anti-imperialism was appealing to those people just emerging from colonial rule as in Indochina, Indonesia, and Africa. His exhortations of the peasantry inspired those in deeply unequal societies in Peru and India. China worked to develop those ties--the Belt & Road Initiative is in the news now, but they were training ZANU rebels in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) in the 1970s and building projects in Zambia.
At the same time, though, Maoism often replicated problems in miniature: the elites, often dominated by men (despite claims to gender equality) dominated the upper ranks of revolutionary movements, talking about the masses as lesser. Naxalite leaders have profited from exploitation of natural resources, even as they criticize the Indian state for the same. Charismatic leaders like the Shining Path's Abimael Guzman led to terror and violence. At its extreme, Maoism led to the killing fields of Democratic Kampuchea and the closed personality cult of North Korea.
The book ends with a disquieting chapter: how Xi Jinping is now taking on the trappings (in a cut rate manner) of the Mao cult, looking to consolidate his power over China and, through economics, to expand his power abroad. Maoism hasn't died.
What makes this book so good is not just that Lovell shows that this is untrue, but that she does so in a nuanced way. None of the players are reduced to passive victimhood--all have made choices. Maoism had genuine appeal for people, whether or not it lived up to its promises. For itself, China has been an active exporter of ideology (and the power to back it) since before Mao took power. From his time in Yan'an, Mao used journalists to export a vision of himself that was what he wanted them to see: the champion of the peasantry, the man of the earth, of good humor, hard work, anti-imperialism, and equality. It worked. His beliefs--as structured for outsiders--inspired others to follow.
They had reason to. His anti-imperialism was appealing to those people just emerging from colonial rule as in Indochina, Indonesia, and Africa. His exhortations of the peasantry inspired those in deeply unequal societies in Peru and India. China worked to develop those ties--the Belt & Road Initiative is in the news now, but they were training ZANU rebels in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) in the 1970s and building projects in Zambia.
At the same time, though, Maoism often replicated problems in miniature: the elites, often dominated by men (despite claims to gender equality) dominated the upper ranks of revolutionary movements, talking about the masses as lesser. Naxalite leaders have profited from exploitation of natural resources, even as they criticize the Indian state for the same. Charismatic leaders like the Shining Path's Abimael Guzman led to terror and violence. At its extreme, Maoism led to the killing fields of Democratic Kampuchea and the closed personality cult of North Korea.
The book ends with a disquieting chapter: how Xi Jinping is now taking on the trappings (in a cut rate manner) of the Mao cult, looking to consolidate his power over China and, through economics, to expand his power abroad. Maoism hasn't died.
June 1, 2023
A very fascinating book. I have been studying Maoism for years now and yet this book still hit me with facts I was entirely unaware of. A good example being the depth of Maoist influence in Indonesia. That was my favourite section.
It continues to frustrate me how many people have never heard the name Mao Zedong before in their lives. The shockwaves of his impact are still felt nearly everywhere in the world today. Mao cost the lives of untold millions, and yet he served as the symbol of resistance against colonialism and imperialism. He was lionized as a saint but the man was anything but. In order to prevent deaths in our future, we must at least understand what drew so many people to a figure like him. Such cults of personality, even if they begin on the road of good intentions (or perhaps especially) must be studied.
I highly recommend this book.
It continues to frustrate me how many people have never heard the name Mao Zedong before in their lives. The shockwaves of his impact are still felt nearly everywhere in the world today. Mao cost the lives of untold millions, and yet he served as the symbol of resistance against colonialism and imperialism. He was lionized as a saint but the man was anything but. In order to prevent deaths in our future, we must at least understand what drew so many people to a figure like him. Such cults of personality, even if they begin on the road of good intentions (or perhaps especially) must be studied.
I highly recommend this book.
November 27, 2019
As I've been reading more books on capitalism and its all-too justified critics, I was struck by how most of them tended to entirely focus on the Soviet Union and entirely ignore China, in spite of its size and global importance. I was hoping this book would be the answer to that complaint of mine; it unfortunately wasn't, but it is at least a start.
I was trying to put a finger on what it is about this book that bugs me, and another reviewer on GR said something that struck me as right on the money: it's too much summary, too little synthesis. Two of the three stars this book got from me come from its comprehensive history of different Maoist-affiliated movements (some more tenuously connected than others) over the past seventy years. Don't feel like you know enough about the history of Malaysia, Indonesia, or Nepal? This book has you covered. Want to know if there's ever been armed resistance to the caste system in India? Here's your synopsis. Want to know how Zimbabwe got the backing to topple the racist Rhodesian government? Here's the story.
But that doesn't feel like enough, and at times her treatment of the subject matters feels poorly defended. She starts out with an outline of what she considers Maoism, but from her description of it you'd think it sprung straight from the brain of Mao full-formed like Athena out of Zeus, not gradually developing over the course of his life in response to real-life circumstances. It's pretty well established that his "continuous revolution" theory was Mao's attempt to reinsert himself into the seat of power after more pragmatic voices started to push him out in China. So does it count as essentially Maoist? And while she questions whether Nepali Maoists can be "real" Maoists because they chose to stop their war and try to get elected, somehow Xi Jingpei's cult of personality alone is enough to get him labeled "Mao-ish." What are the standards here? Does there have to be a single "Maoism" or can there be multiple "Maoisms" that developed in response to different situations? A couple of Indian reviews I found contested whether the Naxalites should even be considered Maoist or just their own brand of communist.
She also raises a lot of issues without every answering her own questions. She notices that in many places the Maoist leaders were bougie intellectuals rather than peasants; why did Maoism appeal to them? What did they see in it as a philosophy? The only answer she seems to want to give is that China basically tricked them into thinking it worked in their choreographed trips. Not only does this come close to the yellow-peril "brainwashing" she rightfully dismissed early in the book, she doesn't apply the same criticism to Chinese exposure to America after the opening of the country. They come to America and see how much better everything is here...somehow I doubt those trips included the Appalachians, Flint, or any given Indian reservation. It's just a very shallow take on what motivated these people.
But then again, when she decides to contrast "economic equality" and "economic freedom" as a dichotomy rather one being a necessity for the other, or to use literally one conversation with an urban taxi driver to prove that "equality of opportunity is more attractive than forcible equalizing of outcome"...well, obviously she a capitalist and doesn't understand the psychology of why leftism of any kind is appealing.
Likewise her pearl-clutching over the idea of political violence; admittedly she's British and I'm American and we have different histories, but after researching and writing a paper on John Brown this summer I'm rather inclined to say that, yes, sometimes political violence is absolutely worth it. Sometimes you've exhausted all your other resources and you have to take the risk. And in that situation, a philosophy that gives you concrete strategies to try to fight against an oppressive force can have great appeal, even if it doesn't give you an endgame.
And here we get to the last of her three stars, which is that the bits of analysis I feel this book really does give: that the reason many attempts at implementing post-Cultural Revolution era Maoism have become disasters is become "continuous revolution" along with "power comes from a gun" is a recipe for constant war. There must always be an enemy, always someone to fight. Thus you get purges, genocide, attacks on other rival leftists, and generally never any sense of stability. This is very much counter to Marx's ideal of a peaceful, post-class, harmonious society, and I honestly wish she'd maybe gone into that more, except that as that I mentioned she seems to have some obvious anti-Marxist bias in her writing. I also found her arguments that the Sino-Soviet split played a large part in the downfall of global communism quite compelling and worth considering when people want to think of it as a two-sided capitalism vs communism fight; there were, in fact, three sides (Orwell told us this, but did we listen?).
Hopefully, for all its flaws, this book may get the ball rolling on some actual broader analysis of Chinese communism and its global influence.
I was trying to put a finger on what it is about this book that bugs me, and another reviewer on GR said something that struck me as right on the money: it's too much summary, too little synthesis. Two of the three stars this book got from me come from its comprehensive history of different Maoist-affiliated movements (some more tenuously connected than others) over the past seventy years. Don't feel like you know enough about the history of Malaysia, Indonesia, or Nepal? This book has you covered. Want to know if there's ever been armed resistance to the caste system in India? Here's your synopsis. Want to know how Zimbabwe got the backing to topple the racist Rhodesian government? Here's the story.
But that doesn't feel like enough, and at times her treatment of the subject matters feels poorly defended. She starts out with an outline of what she considers Maoism, but from her description of it you'd think it sprung straight from the brain of Mao full-formed like Athena out of Zeus, not gradually developing over the course of his life in response to real-life circumstances. It's pretty well established that his "continuous revolution" theory was Mao's attempt to reinsert himself into the seat of power after more pragmatic voices started to push him out in China. So does it count as essentially Maoist? And while she questions whether Nepali Maoists can be "real" Maoists because they chose to stop their war and try to get elected, somehow Xi Jingpei's cult of personality alone is enough to get him labeled "Mao-ish." What are the standards here? Does there have to be a single "Maoism" or can there be multiple "Maoisms" that developed in response to different situations? A couple of Indian reviews I found contested whether the Naxalites should even be considered Maoist or just their own brand of communist.
She also raises a lot of issues without every answering her own questions. She notices that in many places the Maoist leaders were bougie intellectuals rather than peasants; why did Maoism appeal to them? What did they see in it as a philosophy? The only answer she seems to want to give is that China basically tricked them into thinking it worked in their choreographed trips. Not only does this come close to the yellow-peril "brainwashing" she rightfully dismissed early in the book, she doesn't apply the same criticism to Chinese exposure to America after the opening of the country. They come to America and see how much better everything is here...somehow I doubt those trips included the Appalachians, Flint, or any given Indian reservation. It's just a very shallow take on what motivated these people.
But then again, when she decides to contrast "economic equality" and "economic freedom" as a dichotomy rather one being a necessity for the other, or to use literally one conversation with an urban taxi driver to prove that "equality of opportunity is more attractive than forcible equalizing of outcome"...well, obviously she a capitalist and doesn't understand the psychology of why leftism of any kind is appealing.
Likewise her pearl-clutching over the idea of political violence; admittedly she's British and I'm American and we have different histories, but after researching and writing a paper on John Brown this summer I'm rather inclined to say that, yes, sometimes political violence is absolutely worth it. Sometimes you've exhausted all your other resources and you have to take the risk. And in that situation, a philosophy that gives you concrete strategies to try to fight against an oppressive force can have great appeal, even if it doesn't give you an endgame.
And here we get to the last of her three stars, which is that the bits of analysis I feel this book really does give: that the reason many attempts at implementing post-Cultural Revolution era Maoism have become disasters is become "continuous revolution" along with "power comes from a gun" is a recipe for constant war. There must always be an enemy, always someone to fight. Thus you get purges, genocide, attacks on other rival leftists, and generally never any sense of stability. This is very much counter to Marx's ideal of a peaceful, post-class, harmonious society, and I honestly wish she'd maybe gone into that more, except that as that I mentioned she seems to have some obvious anti-Marxist bias in her writing. I also found her arguments that the Sino-Soviet split played a large part in the downfall of global communism quite compelling and worth considering when people want to think of it as a two-sided capitalism vs communism fight; there were, in fact, three sides (Orwell told us this, but did we listen?).
Hopefully, for all its flaws, this book may get the ball rolling on some actual broader analysis of Chinese communism and its global influence.
January 24, 2020
Hitler, Stalin and Mao were at one time popular, yet all with dedication caused the deaths of millions of their own people. Even today each has admirers in Germany, Russia and China where you would think they would be despised. As generations have arrived that did not know the horrors of the times of their elders, thoughts of national greatness can eclipse the monumentally disastrous events gone by.
To try to understand the popularity of Maoism, or "Maoist Thought" as the author says the Chinese prefer, this is an invaluable book. Rising to power at a time when colonialism was on the way out and peoples around the globe were looking for freedom from it, Mao was an inspiration. He said things in simple language that the downtrodden longed to hear and he offered for proof of his words his success in defeating the forces of Chiang Kai Shek, who was driven to retreat to Taiwan despite the aid of the US, a supporter of capitalist and colonial overlords worldwide. The US notoriously upheld the French re-colonization of Vietnam in which even the hated and defeated Japanese troops of WW2 were employed to help.
Simply put, all eyes were on China, a prostrate country of millions upon millions of people now freed both of monarchy and warlordism and attempting to start from scratch with a system that promised power to the people. To boost the cause, as Mao fought Chiang with inferior forces, he made very good use of a Western journalist, Edgar Snow, who visited Mao in his stronghold and wrote a fawning book, Red Star Over China that galvanized admiration for Mao worldwide.
And this desire to follow the Chinese example was strongly supported by Mao's efforts to supply and support revolutionary movements around the world, even to the extent of impoverishing the Chinese people in favor of foreign aid. Though the American idea of falling dominoes in southeast Asia was overblown, China was indeed out to establish a dominant position as the beacon and leader of communism.
Julia Lovell moves sequentially through the world outside China detailing local histories and personalities that took up the Maoist banner and without exception placed ideology over people. Change had to come and if innumerable individuals had to suffer or perish, the price was well worth paying.
This reader was eager to discover the details of what happened in Indonesia, Vietnam and Cambodia, Africa and Peru. I have visited Lima and seen the now abandoned machine gun emplacements around the military facilities that were built to hold off the followers of the Shining Path movement by a government that was on the back foot and dealing as much terror as it opposed until the leader of the movement, Abimael Guzman, was captured.
This book is a necessary and very readable guide into the complicated chaos of the mid 20th century which convulsed China and the so-called third world and from which the United States was far removed yet intimately involved as a supporter of the status quo, no matter how heavy handed, cruel and unjust to people. The leftist movement in the US in the 1960's is not overlooked.
Even today in China, Xi Jinping as leader is promoting Mao veneration while going full speed for the capitalist development that Mao despised. Time has a way of whitewashing horror. It is wise that Jews say never again about the holocaust, yet in Israel current practice regarding the native Palestinians betrays that thought. Any and all can fall into a glorification of power and forget the many now anonymous people who cannot speak from the grave. This is why learning about the horrors of the past, in which this book is a valuable source, should not be shunned.
To try to understand the popularity of Maoism, or "Maoist Thought" as the author says the Chinese prefer, this is an invaluable book. Rising to power at a time when colonialism was on the way out and peoples around the globe were looking for freedom from it, Mao was an inspiration. He said things in simple language that the downtrodden longed to hear and he offered for proof of his words his success in defeating the forces of Chiang Kai Shek, who was driven to retreat to Taiwan despite the aid of the US, a supporter of capitalist and colonial overlords worldwide. The US notoriously upheld the French re-colonization of Vietnam in which even the hated and defeated Japanese troops of WW2 were employed to help.
Simply put, all eyes were on China, a prostrate country of millions upon millions of people now freed both of monarchy and warlordism and attempting to start from scratch with a system that promised power to the people. To boost the cause, as Mao fought Chiang with inferior forces, he made very good use of a Western journalist, Edgar Snow, who visited Mao in his stronghold and wrote a fawning book, Red Star Over China that galvanized admiration for Mao worldwide.
And this desire to follow the Chinese example was strongly supported by Mao's efforts to supply and support revolutionary movements around the world, even to the extent of impoverishing the Chinese people in favor of foreign aid. Though the American idea of falling dominoes in southeast Asia was overblown, China was indeed out to establish a dominant position as the beacon and leader of communism.
Julia Lovell moves sequentially through the world outside China detailing local histories and personalities that took up the Maoist banner and without exception placed ideology over people. Change had to come and if innumerable individuals had to suffer or perish, the price was well worth paying.
This reader was eager to discover the details of what happened in Indonesia, Vietnam and Cambodia, Africa and Peru. I have visited Lima and seen the now abandoned machine gun emplacements around the military facilities that were built to hold off the followers of the Shining Path movement by a government that was on the back foot and dealing as much terror as it opposed until the leader of the movement, Abimael Guzman, was captured.
This book is a necessary and very readable guide into the complicated chaos of the mid 20th century which convulsed China and the so-called third world and from which the United States was far removed yet intimately involved as a supporter of the status quo, no matter how heavy handed, cruel and unjust to people. The leftist movement in the US in the 1960's is not overlooked.
Even today in China, Xi Jinping as leader is promoting Mao veneration while going full speed for the capitalist development that Mao despised. Time has a way of whitewashing horror. It is wise that Jews say never again about the holocaust, yet in Israel current practice regarding the native Palestinians betrays that thought. Any and all can fall into a glorification of power and forget the many now anonymous people who cannot speak from the grave. This is why learning about the horrors of the past, in which this book is a valuable source, should not be shunned.
December 24, 2019
I would have approached the topic differently. It talked about maoist movement in different country and then looked at Mao influence in nowadays China, which I think isn't even qualified to be called Maoism. Yes, it's a challenging task, but the author didn't manage to unify all the different aspects of Mao's influence. To call it Maoism, the author neither offered any definitive definition, nor came up with any thesis to explain the difference between Mao's theories/thoughts and the revolutions stemmed from it.
The author used the second chapter to question Edgar Snow's work, but didn't offer any concrete evidence to rebut any of his claims. What she said was that he had ulterior motives. That's the worst academic argument I have ever hurt.
She didn't explored any Mao's theories academically. She just cited all the well-known aphorisms from Mao. If you want to know what Mao's thoughts and theories are systematically, sorry, you won't find it here. For me if you don't treat this subjective seriously, then your Maoism analysis is flawed.
The book ended up being a history of Maoist movements in different countries. There are much better books about each movement I believe. I find author's writing very engaging, but very quite shallow. Citations are very much all over the place. She simply told the story using people's words, a lot of them, when she can.
The author used the second chapter to question Edgar Snow's work, but didn't offer any concrete evidence to rebut any of his claims. What she said was that he had ulterior motives. That's the worst academic argument I have ever hurt.
She didn't explored any Mao's theories academically. She just cited all the well-known aphorisms from Mao. If you want to know what Mao's thoughts and theories are systematically, sorry, you won't find it here. For me if you don't treat this subjective seriously, then your Maoism analysis is flawed.
The book ended up being a history of Maoist movements in different countries. There are much better books about each movement I believe. I find author's writing very engaging, but very quite shallow. Citations are very much all over the place. She simply told the story using people's words, a lot of them, when she can.
October 17, 2019
The book shines most in its discussion of Maoism outside of China. If anything, the reader is left with an appreciation for the failures of Maoism and the ways in which it differs from the thinking of Marx. For an understanding of the Chinese Revolution and something other than the academic Marxism=communism=Stalinism, read something else ("The Tragedy of the Chinese Revolution" by Harold Isaacs comes to mind). The phrase "Marxist-Leninist-Mao Zedong thought" does a disservice to the former two. And still, as has been said with Lenin and Trotsky, the figures themselves were often better than their followers. Just ask the Red Guard in the United States, I guess, because apparently the DSA is worth physically attacking?
November 15, 2019
Lots of people try to make a difference in their lives - or at least hope to make a difference. The exhortation to do so is a well established staple of the self-help literature. Social psychologists have made much of an individual’s need for achievement. And yet, it seems difficult to make a difference - or even to come to conclusions about what making a difference actually means. Most academics and intellectuals, even highly published ones, fade into obscurity quickly, if they ever really emerge from it. Celebrity is fleeting and public figures that are remembered past their immediate time are rare.
...and then there is Mao. While he died in 1976, there continue to be biographies of him written in multiple languages. Many are hagiographies. Some, like June Chang’s 2006 biography are about as critical as one could imagine a biography to be. To this day, unless something has changed recently, Mao’s picture remains on display in Tiananmen Square, even though the PRC has embraced a state controlled capitalism and has grown to be the second largest economy in the world; even though the PRC has given up the spread of worldwide revolution and embraced a state interest foreign policy rooted in China’s imperial past. It is really not an issue whether Mao made a difference, but rather what that difference was and remains. Going after this with another Mao biography seems a bit like a fool’s errand, given the existing field of competitors.
Julia Lovell, a British historian, has instead done a biography of Maoism. What is that? It’s the aggressive exporting of revolutionary ideology and the fomenting of revolutionary movements around the world motivated by the ideas and example of Mao. The story begins with Edgar Snow and “Red Star over China” in the 1940s and continues onto the Communist victory in 1949 and the growth of the PRC for nearly three decades afterwards. The principal chronology here is well known and frequently reported and Professor Lovell does a good job in discussing it. This includes not just the Korean War and the split with the USSR but also the various disasters associated with the PRC, including the Tombstone famine, the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution. The includes, of course, the history of the Indochina Wars and French and US involvement.
What is fascinating about the book are the details she provides regarding the different Maoist movements around the world that are less well publicized. The chapters that I found the most interesting in this regard were those on the Shining Path movement in Peru, and the Maoist movements in India and Nepal. There is also good material on the history with Cambodia and Pol Pot.
This is not a light read. The story is long and detailed, but Lovell provides a good picture of Maoist foreign policy. She is not a passive observer, either, and is harshly critical of Maoism and its spread. This is not a matter of ideological biases but more a stark recognition of the huge human costs of Maoism, borne both by the Chinese at home and lots of other interested and disinterested parties abroad. History has not proven kind to these movements and Lovell’s case is persuasive.
An intriguing aspect of the book is that of continuities or discontinuities between the Maoist era and subsequent developments after the death of Mao and the ascent to power of Deng. On the surface, it is hard to imagine a sharper discontinuity in national history and policies, but Professor Lovell notes continuities in Maoism in motivating the continued dominance of the Communist Party in China. Maoism is also relevant in understanding the rise of Xi Jinping as General Secretary and in the general maintenance of state control over what has been the most rapid industrial growth in recent history. This should give pause to anyone wishing to make facile judgments about free markets in world politics, but the case of China has been a head scratcher for a long time. Lovell’s book is a welcome addition to the literature that sheds some new light. It is well worth reading.
...and then there is Mao. While he died in 1976, there continue to be biographies of him written in multiple languages. Many are hagiographies. Some, like June Chang’s 2006 biography are about as critical as one could imagine a biography to be. To this day, unless something has changed recently, Mao’s picture remains on display in Tiananmen Square, even though the PRC has embraced a state controlled capitalism and has grown to be the second largest economy in the world; even though the PRC has given up the spread of worldwide revolution and embraced a state interest foreign policy rooted in China’s imperial past. It is really not an issue whether Mao made a difference, but rather what that difference was and remains. Going after this with another Mao biography seems a bit like a fool’s errand, given the existing field of competitors.
Julia Lovell, a British historian, has instead done a biography of Maoism. What is that? It’s the aggressive exporting of revolutionary ideology and the fomenting of revolutionary movements around the world motivated by the ideas and example of Mao. The story begins with Edgar Snow and “Red Star over China” in the 1940s and continues onto the Communist victory in 1949 and the growth of the PRC for nearly three decades afterwards. The principal chronology here is well known and frequently reported and Professor Lovell does a good job in discussing it. This includes not just the Korean War and the split with the USSR but also the various disasters associated with the PRC, including the Tombstone famine, the Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution. The includes, of course, the history of the Indochina Wars and French and US involvement.
What is fascinating about the book are the details she provides regarding the different Maoist movements around the world that are less well publicized. The chapters that I found the most interesting in this regard were those on the Shining Path movement in Peru, and the Maoist movements in India and Nepal. There is also good material on the history with Cambodia and Pol Pot.
This is not a light read. The story is long and detailed, but Lovell provides a good picture of Maoist foreign policy. She is not a passive observer, either, and is harshly critical of Maoism and its spread. This is not a matter of ideological biases but more a stark recognition of the huge human costs of Maoism, borne both by the Chinese at home and lots of other interested and disinterested parties abroad. History has not proven kind to these movements and Lovell’s case is persuasive.
An intriguing aspect of the book is that of continuities or discontinuities between the Maoist era and subsequent developments after the death of Mao and the ascent to power of Deng. On the surface, it is hard to imagine a sharper discontinuity in national history and policies, but Professor Lovell notes continuities in Maoism in motivating the continued dominance of the Communist Party in China. Maoism is also relevant in understanding the rise of Xi Jinping as General Secretary and in the general maintenance of state control over what has been the most rapid industrial growth in recent history. This should give pause to anyone wishing to make facile judgments about free markets in world politics, but the case of China has been a head scratcher for a long time. Lovell’s book is a welcome addition to the literature that sheds some new light. It is well worth reading.
April 20, 2021
Maoism: A Global History takes a simplistic view of what Maoism is/was. Sadly, that is not its biggest flaw. The book fails in separating Mao from Maoism, which leads to a highly erroneous final analysis even if one overlooks some incorrect historical connections.
Ms. Lovell wilfully omits any detailed descriptions of the fundamental tenets of Maoism and what separated its radical left orthodoxy from the other Marxist, communist, and socialist economic schools. If the author had discoursed Maoism's excessive emphasis on rural, agricultural, pre-industrial tendencies (as against the industrial-heavy bias of almost all European economic schools), she would have realized why today's China policies are anything but Maoistic economically.
Mao, the political figure, is completely distinct from Maoism. Maoism is an economic framework he sketched in the later stage of his life, say in the 1960s. Even though the sketch was sketchy, encompassed in a small red book, and open to various interpretations, the author should have contrasted it to other similar schools in a book solely on the topic. This would have helped her discuss why specific types of oppressed worldwide were drawn to it, viz. societies dominated by the primary rather than industrial sectors; rural, as against urban, communities; and less educated or illiterate classes. Marxism was more about industrial labor. Maoism focussed more heavily on the agricultural classes. In a way, Maoists were violently fighting against not only the feudal landlords but also the urban forces that were suppressing the role and importance of the pre-industrial workers and their work.
Let's forget about those who the author tries to brand as Maoists that weren't (Indonesian PKI was more anti-imperial communist than Maoists; Ho Chi Minh was also more nationalist and communist than a Maoist; the Khmers who closed hospital and factories were far more anti-modernist than any Maoist under Mao). The point is that the world over the people who called themselves Maoist like zealots - like the Shining Path or a handful of political parties in India or Nepal - were far fewer than what the author makes it out to be. China was a poor nation with too many problems of its own in those decades. Like other large nations of the era, it tried to influence events just outside its borders in the '50s and the '60s; however, outside the Korean war and a small number of other cases, Mao did not alter or shape the political course significantly anywhere in the world including India.
Maoism under Mao in China had other local hues in the form of the required worship of the Chairman, Chinese nationalism/expansionism, domestic propaganda methods, violence, etc. While some outside China revered Mao as a great intellectual, few leaders anywhere supported a control from Beijing or wanted to be Chinese vassals.
Suppose some within China are celebrating Mao as a great past leader for whatever political or appearance-related reasons. Yet, in almost every case, it has nothing to do with their belief in Maoism. The author makes the mistake of counting many propagandists, violent or power-hungry leaders of past or present that she dislikes as Maoists with every tiny statement they may have uttered praising him as testaments. Many who prefer Mao's political methods in violence or hero-worship or brainwashing - like so many examples one can think of in early twentieth-century Europe or later from the Middle East - are anything but Maoists despite similarities in their political methods, achievements, or ambitions. The same is true about almost every present ruler globally because Maoism is comprehensively anachronistic and outdated in the technology-fuelled, urban world of the present.
The book discusses many lesser-known historic events in detail. Readers will also appreciate the author's detailed research on oft-ignored communities of Eastern India and Nepal (and the Shining Path). A lot more needs to be read and written on Maoism. This book is unlikely to prove to be the final word.
Ms. Lovell wilfully omits any detailed descriptions of the fundamental tenets of Maoism and what separated its radical left orthodoxy from the other Marxist, communist, and socialist economic schools. If the author had discoursed Maoism's excessive emphasis on rural, agricultural, pre-industrial tendencies (as against the industrial-heavy bias of almost all European economic schools), she would have realized why today's China policies are anything but Maoistic economically.
Mao, the political figure, is completely distinct from Maoism. Maoism is an economic framework he sketched in the later stage of his life, say in the 1960s. Even though the sketch was sketchy, encompassed in a small red book, and open to various interpretations, the author should have contrasted it to other similar schools in a book solely on the topic. This would have helped her discuss why specific types of oppressed worldwide were drawn to it, viz. societies dominated by the primary rather than industrial sectors; rural, as against urban, communities; and less educated or illiterate classes. Marxism was more about industrial labor. Maoism focussed more heavily on the agricultural classes. In a way, Maoists were violently fighting against not only the feudal landlords but also the urban forces that were suppressing the role and importance of the pre-industrial workers and their work.
Let's forget about those who the author tries to brand as Maoists that weren't (Indonesian PKI was more anti-imperial communist than Maoists; Ho Chi Minh was also more nationalist and communist than a Maoist; the Khmers who closed hospital and factories were far more anti-modernist than any Maoist under Mao). The point is that the world over the people who called themselves Maoist like zealots - like the Shining Path or a handful of political parties in India or Nepal - were far fewer than what the author makes it out to be. China was a poor nation with too many problems of its own in those decades. Like other large nations of the era, it tried to influence events just outside its borders in the '50s and the '60s; however, outside the Korean war and a small number of other cases, Mao did not alter or shape the political course significantly anywhere in the world including India.
Maoism under Mao in China had other local hues in the form of the required worship of the Chairman, Chinese nationalism/expansionism, domestic propaganda methods, violence, etc. While some outside China revered Mao as a great intellectual, few leaders anywhere supported a control from Beijing or wanted to be Chinese vassals.
Suppose some within China are celebrating Mao as a great past leader for whatever political or appearance-related reasons. Yet, in almost every case, it has nothing to do with their belief in Maoism. The author makes the mistake of counting many propagandists, violent or power-hungry leaders of past or present that she dislikes as Maoists with every tiny statement they may have uttered praising him as testaments. Many who prefer Mao's political methods in violence or hero-worship or brainwashing - like so many examples one can think of in early twentieth-century Europe or later from the Middle East - are anything but Maoists despite similarities in their political methods, achievements, or ambitions. The same is true about almost every present ruler globally because Maoism is comprehensively anachronistic and outdated in the technology-fuelled, urban world of the present.
The book discusses many lesser-known historic events in detail. Readers will also appreciate the author's detailed research on oft-ignored communities of Eastern India and Nepal (and the Shining Path). A lot more needs to be read and written on Maoism. This book is unlikely to prove to be the final word.
August 20, 2020
Not quite an in-depth look at Maoism, this book nonetheless provides a brilliant history of how the ideas of a peasant from rural China managed to make such an impact across the world, let alone in China. It is also about the repercussions that are still being felt today.
Maoism is an ideology rooted in Marxism-Leninism, but with a more nationalistic touch. It's been an inspiration for revolutions around the world, the perfect mind-tool for citizens who feel cheated by their country. Most interesting is the power Mao's thoughts had on the Boomer generation and their 'soft' Cultural Revolution. All of this puts its mark on modern China and the West.
There are many parallels you can draw between what Maoism advocated and how Western leftists act today. Overall, fascinating political history.
Maoism is an ideology rooted in Marxism-Leninism, but with a more nationalistic touch. It's been an inspiration for revolutions around the world, the perfect mind-tool for citizens who feel cheated by their country. Most interesting is the power Mao's thoughts had on the Boomer generation and their 'soft' Cultural Revolution. All of this puts its mark on modern China and the West.
There are many parallels you can draw between what Maoism advocated and how Western leftists act today. Overall, fascinating political history.
September 13, 2019
What it says on the cover. Not sure what drew me to the book, other than seeing it was available at the library and that this is the type of book that would be best as a library borrow. At 600+ pages, the author takes us through what it says on the cover: a global history of Maoism through its birth, the role it played in history and shaping the political atmosphere today, the major players, etc.
It was dull. I'll admit that a large problem for me is that I have almost no knowledge of it and so I wonder if this was really the book to start. But I felt it was really difficult to get into and was surprised by the high ratings of it. I felt generally lost and that there's a large amount of knowledge that is assumed on the part of the reader.
It could be this is the type of book that is better utilized in the context with other readings, more for someone who really knows this stuff, is reading it as part of a requirement for a class or paper, etc.
So library borrow was best for me and would recommend unless you need it as a reference or for class.
It was dull. I'll admit that a large problem for me is that I have almost no knowledge of it and so I wonder if this was really the book to start. But I felt it was really difficult to get into and was surprised by the high ratings of it. I felt generally lost and that there's a large amount of knowledge that is assumed on the part of the reader.
It could be this is the type of book that is better utilized in the context with other readings, more for someone who really knows this stuff, is reading it as part of a requirement for a class or paper, etc.
So library borrow was best for me and would recommend unless you need it as a reference or for class.
September 2, 2020
trenchantly cosmetic treatment of maoism made up of factoids for jetsetting Oxbridge dilettantes to trot out in the comments section of a Guardian Longread or an opinion-editorial for the financial times. hardly a page goes by that we don't have a comparison of mao, maoist ideology or a follower of mao's doctrine to hitler, nazism or donald trump, and not in a manner which penetrates into the precise nature of either. lovell seems to do this in order to satiate the desire of the aforementioned dilettantes to regard today's PRC as populated by brainwashed drones who have had the temerity to attempt to punch above their weight on the international stage in the past and look set to do so again. avoid at all costs
July 8, 2019
Really interesting topic, I felt like I learned a lot about the global scope of Maoist thought, and some of the big differences it had with Soviet philosophy. That said the book covers A LOT, which can make it a little hard to follow.
August 24, 2021
Having read a couple of global histories of communism in recent years, Lovell's book is a very nice addition and expansion to the usual canon. It also shows well how 'Maoism' has always teetered between doctrinaire party politics and a more symbolic labeling to legitimate local politics (and violence). The narrative flows well and there is a nice balance between storytelling and analysis.
My 'beef' with the book is somewhat fringe, but also revealing. Lovell seems to wholeheartedly embrace the idea of 'political religion', often used in connection with socialism and communism (e.g. Slezkine's House of Government). While there are some functional similarities between religion and the veneration of political leaders and/or parties, the concept remains problematic. It is especially so when it is used the way Lovell uses it, that is, as shorthand for 'irrational' and 'crazy'. All the crazy things Maoists said and did must be explained by the fact that they were so entranced by the 'cult' of Mao 'worship'. What makes it worse is that this seems to apply especially to western Maoists. The analogy comes up a couple of times in the exposition of the history of the CCP, but really kicks off in the chapter on Euro and US Maoism. Of course some Maoists used the analogy themselves, but one cannot avoid the uncomfortable sense that it is 'religion' when it affects otherwise rational westerners especially.
This is minor glitch that probably most readers won't even notice. But I sorely wish people would at least try to justify the religion analogy if it needs to be used. Otherwise it obscures more than it explains.
My 'beef' with the book is somewhat fringe, but also revealing. Lovell seems to wholeheartedly embrace the idea of 'political religion', often used in connection with socialism and communism (e.g. Slezkine's House of Government). While there are some functional similarities between religion and the veneration of political leaders and/or parties, the concept remains problematic. It is especially so when it is used the way Lovell uses it, that is, as shorthand for 'irrational' and 'crazy'. All the crazy things Maoists said and did must be explained by the fact that they were so entranced by the 'cult' of Mao 'worship'. What makes it worse is that this seems to apply especially to western Maoists. The analogy comes up a couple of times in the exposition of the history of the CCP, but really kicks off in the chapter on Euro and US Maoism. Of course some Maoists used the analogy themselves, but one cannot avoid the uncomfortable sense that it is 'religion' when it affects otherwise rational westerners especially.
This is minor glitch that probably most readers won't even notice. But I sorely wish people would at least try to justify the religion analogy if it needs to be used. Otherwise it obscures more than it explains.
October 27, 2022
Finished reading this thick, lengthy introduction to maoism.
The author discussed Mao's philosophy and how it impacted all across the world; its accomplishments, inconsistencies, and ultimately brutality.
Starting in the 1930s in northwest China, it covered in detail Mao's legacy both inside and outside China (including in India, Nepal, Indonesia, Peru, Cambodia, and parts of Europe and Africa), which were all influenced by Mao's revolutionary ideas, and it came to a conclusion with Xi Xinping's ascent to power.
It's the first book I've read on Maoism, so I can't tell about the book's overall authenticity. It appeared to be written from a left-wing liberal standpoint, and tbh the author appeared to be making an effort to maintain neutrality with regard to the information.
A lil bit lengthy(624 pages🙄) but worth reading. Recommended 👍🏻
Personal Rating - 4/5
The author discussed Mao's philosophy and how it impacted all across the world; its accomplishments, inconsistencies, and ultimately brutality.
Starting in the 1930s in northwest China, it covered in detail Mao's legacy both inside and outside China (including in India, Nepal, Indonesia, Peru, Cambodia, and parts of Europe and Africa), which were all influenced by Mao's revolutionary ideas, and it came to a conclusion with Xi Xinping's ascent to power.
It's the first book I've read on Maoism, so I can't tell about the book's overall authenticity. It appeared to be written from a left-wing liberal standpoint, and tbh the author appeared to be making an effort to maintain neutrality with regard to the information.
A lil bit lengthy(624 pages🙄) but worth reading. Recommended 👍🏻
Personal Rating - 4/5
January 11, 2024
weird propaganda
I skimmed the last two chapters because I for whatever reason can’t dnf a book. But I jumped to the conclusion and was thoroughly unimpressed. She also makes really upsetting claims like:
“Leading Indonesian Communists were intoxicated by the militant rhetoric of Mao's revolution in the early 1960s.
It encouraged and inspired them to confront the Indonesian military; this decision in turn gave the army a pretext to trigger the horrors of 1965. Without Maoism, Indonesia's catastrophe in 1965 is hard to imagine”
Blaming Maoism for the (US supported) mass killings of Communists and suspected communists in Indonesia?….. really bad take
I skimmed the last two chapters because I for whatever reason can’t dnf a book. But I jumped to the conclusion and was thoroughly unimpressed. She also makes really upsetting claims like:
“Leading Indonesian Communists were intoxicated by the militant rhetoric of Mao's revolution in the early 1960s.
It encouraged and inspired them to confront the Indonesian military; this decision in turn gave the army a pretext to trigger the horrors of 1965. Without Maoism, Indonesia's catastrophe in 1965 is hard to imagine”
Blaming Maoism for the (US supported) mass killings of Communists and suspected communists in Indonesia?….. really bad take
June 29, 2021
Really great and insightful book about the global impacts of Maoism - most of which I had no idea had happened prior to reading this. Truly learned a lot, especially about the impact of Maoism in revolutions in Africa, Peru, the United States, as well as modern day India and Nepal. Highly recommend this for anyone who wants to learn about the extent of how far Maoist ideology and iconography has taken over the globe over the past century.
Plus points too for how accessibly it was written!
Plus points too for how accessibly it was written!
December 10, 2023
Studium bardzo dogłębne oraz operujące bardzo pokaźnym materiałem źródłowym. Autorka świetnie tłumaczy historię oraz postawy tego, co nazywamy „maoizmem” oraz wpływ tego nurtu na ruchy rewolucyjne na świecie. Jedyną wadą jest nierównomierny poziom - omawianie zbyt szerokich zagadnień (jak np Maoizm w całej Afryce czy całej Europie) obok zagadnień dość wąskich (omówienie wpływów Chin na jedno państwo.
December 18, 2023
A few chapters in, Mao is described as a sweaty man with a receding hairline, sitting in a humid cave picking lice out of his pubic hair. Everything up to this point is irrelevant. Although thorough and informative, this book is similar to Mao's reign of terror in that it was at times gruelling, convoluted, and caused suffering.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 169 reviews