Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40

Thread: Mao's motivations

  1. #16
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,464
    One thing we do know. There are no pictures of mass Chinese populations with swollen bellies dying of starvation.

  2. #17
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,437
    Technically there are. Probably about as many as of the Holodomor, or any of the various famines in India aided by the British colonial administration.

    There's barely any famines that were ever as exhaustively photo-documented and exploited in public media as the one people always think of when they hear the word "famine".

  3. #18
    Patron
    Join Date
    07 Jan 08
    Posts
    172
    So how did WAB reach the conclusion of a few million before?

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,371
    Whatever be the motivations, Mao was a genocidal maniac. Much like Stalin, Winston Churchill etcetera. Discussing about people like these waste precious bandwidth.

    CPC right now is the biggest genocidal monster (Tibetans, Uighurs), alongwith the NK regime, Pakistani terrorist regime, the Venezuelans and the Iranian regime. Wonder why the CPC has the best of relations with regimes that can be called terrorist regimes. Why?

    Oh, and I've been restricted from posting or liking posts on Quora for 3 times now. The Chinese and the Pakistanis get a free pass on Quora with their propaganda posts. Counter those and get banned. Fcuk Quora.

    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Technically there are. Probably about as many as of the Holodomor, or any of the various famines in India aided by the British colonial administration.

    There's barely any famines that were ever as exhaustively photo-documented and exploited in public media as the one people always think of when they hear the word "famine".
    The Nazis were pure evil, everybody describes them as such, which is correct. Why doesn't anybody say the same about Winston Churchill and the British Colonialists? Had it not been for Roosevelt, we'd still be colonial subjects now. Two sides of the same coin from the victors, one against Colonialism, one for.
    Last edited by Oracle; 09 Jun 19, at 18:31.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  5. #20
    Patron
    Join Date
    07 Jan 08
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    The Nazis were pure evil, everybody describes them as such, which is correct. Why doesn't anybody say the same about Winston Churchill and the British Colonialists? Had it not been for Roosevelt, we'd still be colonial subjects now. Two sides of the same coin from the victors, one against Colonialism, one for.
    That's because of Anglo-American propaganda. Kidding. It's not actual propaganda, but what I believe to be a societal undercurrent that incentivises popular narratives that feed people's biases.

    Same thing here.

    You have, reportedly, up to 600,000 Uighurs being locked up for pre-crimes in relation to Muslim extremism. It then gets spun into, millions of moderate Muslim Uighurs getting exterminated in concentration camps. Sure, the lesser of two evil is still evil, but that spin, repeated on other events, fosters anti-Chinese sentiment, as seen in Youtube's comment sections.

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,464
    Quote Originally Posted by hboGYT View Post
    So how did WAB reach the conclusion of a few million before?
    WAB did not reach that conclusion. What we did say that 10s of millions of deaths relied on "creative" statistics. Basically anyone not borned or died during this period was counted as famine death. You died by jumping off a bridge during a famine period. It's a famine death. Deciding not to have children. Famine death.

    What we do know that people who died directly at the hands of the CCP (bullet in the head, jail time deaths) only numbered in the few millions at most.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Whatever be the motivations, Mao was a genocidal maniac. Much like Stalin, Winston Churchill etcetera. Discussing about people like these waste precious bandwidth.
    You cannot confront evil if you're unwilling to look it straight in the face. Mao was an egotistic god wannabe. Stalin and Churchill were cold hearted but efficent bastards, I could run circles around Mao but I better start outthinking Stalin and Churchill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    CPC right now is the biggest genocidal monster (Tibetans, Uighurs), alongwith the NK regime, Pakistani terrorist regime, the Venezuelans and the Iranian regime. Wonder why the CPC has the best of relations with regimes that can be called terrorist regimes. Why?
    By the same token, it was the CCP who lifted 1 billion+ people from the Stone Age to the Space Age. That kind of progess could not be done without anything but an iron hand.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    The Nazis were pure evil, everybody describes them as such, which is correct. Why doesn't anybody say the same about Winston Churchill and the British Colonialists? Had it not been for Roosevelt, we'd still be colonial subjects now. Two sides of the same coin from the victors, one against Colonialism, one for.
    I hihgly doubt that. Without the BIA, the Brits had no hope of holding onto India and they bargined Indian Independence with the BIA in exchange for their co-operation during WWII.

    I'm assuming that you're talking about the Bengal Famine when referencing Churchill. There is no doubt the Brits were heavily responsible but it was a 1-2-3 punch that caused the famine. British incompetence at shipping food to the region, crop failure, and losing access to Burma rice when they lost Burma to the Japanese. You cannot blame crop failure and Burma on the Brits but you can blame them for not priotizing famine relief over the war effort.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 10 Jun 19, at 15:43.

  7. #22
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,922
    By the same token, it was the CCP who lifted 1 billion+ people from the Stone Age to the Space Age. That kind of progess could not be done without anything but an iron hand.
    this is a common line of thinking but it really should come with a lot of caveats.

    IE, without access to global capital markets-- access that came because Deng decided to make common cause with the Americans-- China's rate of growth would have been significantly slower, probably somewhere in the 5-8% growth range vs 10-12%.

    the iron hand was great for initial state centralization, which is absolutely necessary for a national market...but afterwards it's more of a dead weight.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,464
    Tianamen Square. The resulting sanctions collapsed the Chinese economy. Without Deng forcing slave labour wages onto the Chinese population, he could have never enticed the 1st the Japanese, then the Europeans with bargin basement prices. Officially, those sanctions were never lifted, they were just left to expire.

  9. #24
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,648
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Tianamen Square. The resulting sanctions collapsed the Chinese economy. Without Deng forcing slave labour wages onto the Chinese population, he could have never enticed the 1st the Japanese, then the Europeans with bargin basement prices. Officially, those sanctions were never lifted, they were just left to expire.
    Arms deals sanctions are still in force. West still won't sell arms to China as a result of Tianamen.

  10. #25
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,074
    The notion that international sanctions after Tiananmen crashed the Chinese economy is pure myth.

    Percent Change
    _ _ _ _ _Exports _ _ _ _ to USA _ _ _ % share
    1987 _ _ +25.8% _ _ _ _+15.1% _ _ _ 7.7%
    1988 _ _+20.8% _ _ _ _+12.2% _ _ _ _ 7.7%
    1989 _ _+11.0% _ _ _ _+29.9% _ _ _ _8.3%
    1990 _ _+18.6% _ _ _ _ +20.4% _ _ _ _8.5%
    1991 _ _+14.7% _ _ _ _ +16.6% _ _ _ _8.6%


    Very straight forward, on the available evidence.

    The actual cause was the use of very poor monetary and fiscal tools to beat down rampant inflation (27.9% YoY in December 1988). Foreign trade was not compromised, and exports the USA not only increased, but rose as a share of total imports … during a US recession.

    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Inflation
    Q-1 1988 _ _ 10.3%
    Q-2 1988 _ _ 14.2%
    Q-3 1988 _ _ 23.1%
    Q-4 1988 _ _ 27.3%
    Q-1 1989 _ _ 27.6%
    Q-2 1989 _ _ 24.8%
    Q-3 1989 _ _ 15.4%
    Q-4 1989 _ _ 7.5%
    Q-1 1990 _ _ 4.0%
    Q-2 1990 _ _ 2.3%
    Q-3 1990 _ _ 2.2%
    Q-4 1990 _ _ 3.7
    Q-1 1991 _ _ 1.9%
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  11. #26
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,464
    Doesn't change the fact that DXP got out of that fiasco with slave labour wages to offer bargin basement prices, ie the CCP's iron hand.

  12. #27
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,371
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    WAB did not reach that conclusion. What we did say that 10s of millions of deaths relied on "creative" statistics. Basically anyone not borned or died during this period was counted as famine death. You died by jumping off a bridge during a famine period. It's a famine death. Deciding not to have children. Famine death.

    What we do know that people who died directly at the hands of the CCP (bullet in the head, jail time deaths) only numbered in the few millions at most.
    Interesting point. Never thought this way. If someone dies by jumping of a bridge, or decide not to have kids, I think it is related to the main cause. The purge.

    You cannot confront evil if you're unwilling to look it straight in the face. Mao was an egotistic god wannabe. Stalin and Churchill were cold hearted but efficent bastards, I could run circles around Mao but I better start outthinking Stalin and Churchill.
    Yeah, I guess so.

    By the same token, it was the CCP who lifted 1 billion+ people from the Stone Age to the Space Age. That kind of progess could not be done without anything but an iron hand.
    Agree. Your numbers are slightly off, it's 750 million, and even then this is a miracle which I don't think any other country can emulate. Never doubted Chinese propensity to earn money. How they do it, is being questioned now.

    I hihgly doubt that. Without the BIA, the Brits had no hope of holding onto India and they bargined Indian Independence with the BIA in exchange for their co-operation during WWII.

    I'm assuming that you're talking about the Bengal Famine when referencing Churchill. There is no doubt the Brits were heavily responsible but it was a 1-2-3 punch that caused the famine. British incompetence at shipping food to the region, crop failure, and losing access to Burma rice when they lost Burma to the Japanese. You cannot blame crop failure and Burma on the Brits but you can blame them for not priotizing famine relief over the war effort.
    You said it yourself. So, where is the doubt? I mean what did I say to that effect. Britain transported food from Australia to the Mediterranean during WWII, when there was surplus food there. Those ships could have very well fed those dying Indians. The thing is, they didn't care for dying Indians. Indians were of a lower breed.

    My views are plain and simple. If person X is the PM/President/Leader of a country/province, then the well-being of that country is on his shoulders. You have to remember that Churchill gave racists statements during the Bengal famine. I hold Churchill responsible for millions of unnecessary deaths. As far as the British Colonialists go, they destroyed textile industry of India, Jallianwala Bagh massacre and so many other things. We're still breeding like rabbits today, but millions aren't dying from want of food. Britain ate our bread, while Indians starved. Before 1800s, India consisted of artisans, traders, warriors and merchants having a share of 27% in manufacturing exports of the world, which the British reduced to 2%. Communalism existed, but the British fired it up by dividing Indians over religious lines, drawing a line between sunnis and shias.

    Warm water port (Pakistan), Fulda gap - the Soviets never came. All crooks and money launderers from India find safe haven in UK. Pakistan gets special mention here, even though UK supported Indian position in the UN vis-a-vis Masood Azhar, the Brits seem to handhold their poodle so that those jihadis don't destruct themselves. WTF is their problem. They are 1000s of mile away. We suffer, they don't. The list of the many things the UK did wrong, and still is doing wrong, is long.

    Credit to the colonialists is the infrastructure they built, it still holds well to this day in some parts of India like mine, but those were built from Indian taxpayers money, Indian blood and sweat and over Indian dead bodies. Britain united the princely states that formed the 'Union of India' - well 'Hind' or 'Hindustan' (ancient terms that described India) were ruled by the Guptas, Mauryans and many others who owned parts of India that today would consist of 60% of the entire land mass of India. So that debate is absurd. Britain's legacy in India is exploitative, racist and savagery. Every place the British Colonialists set their foot on is on fire today. Look at the middle-east. Af-Pak border. They drew borders with a pen on a paper without giving a damn about ethnicity or religion. As I think it over and over, I think the Brits never really wanted peace in their former colonies. They wanted those to burn.

    The good thing was that even during those terrible times, there were Brits who didn't support their Government and wanted them to exit India. Good people have always existed along with the bad ones, but they were/are always outnumbered.

    Since we're talking about it, why is Churchill being hold in high regard by the British people? He didn't win the war. US and the Soviets won it for them.
    Last edited by Oracle; 14 Jun 19, at 04:15.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  13. #28
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,464
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Agree. Your numbers are slightly off, it's 750 million, and even then this is a miracle which I don't think any other country can emulate. Never doubted Chinese propensity to earn money. How they do it, is being questioned now.
    In 1989, it was 1.1 billion people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    You said it yourself. So, where is the doubt? I mean what did I say to that effect. Britain transported food from Australia to the Mediterranean during WWII, when there was surplus food there. Those ships could have very well fed those dying Indians. The thing is, they didn't care for dying Indians. Indians were of a lower breed.
    Reading wiki, I still got lost

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

    It seems a whole sleuth of factors were involved within India itself, including social engineering (which never works out right in all of history). It only got better when the BIA took control.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    I hold Churchill responsible for millions of unnecessary deaths.
    As I stated, Churchill was a cold hearted bastard on par with Stalin. I don't think he holds Indians in lower regard. He even worked with Ghandi to fast-track Indian Independence through the British Parliment. However, when it came to shipping Australian food to starving Indians or shipping Canadian VALANTINE tanks to Stalingrad. Stalingrad won out even though the Soviets did not need Canadian VALANTINES. The war effort first and foremost. Everything else second. Let's not forget that he lost ships sailing to Stalingrad. I'm sure those crews would have loved to ship food from Australia to India instead.

    His cold heartiness was not restricted to Indians. The RAF could have stopped a lot of bombing of British cities since the Brits had cracked the German codes. The RAF could have whole squadrons waiting for German bombers before they could cross the Channel. However, doing so would only alert the Germans that their codes had been cracked and would change them, losing this vital Allied advantage.

    I don't think he lost any sleep over this if for nothing else that he was an alcholic and drank himself to sleep everynight.

    Detest him if you wish but never under-estimate his cold-hearted brutality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Since we're talking about it, why is Churchill being hold in high regard by the British people? He didn't win the war. US and the Soviets won it for them.
    From England. If the UK did not hold out, there would not have been a D-Day nor any Lend-Lease ot the USSR. The Battle of the Atlantic was a Canadian, ie a British, victory.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 14 Jun 19, at 05:54.

  14. #29
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,648
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    The notion that international sanctions after Tiananmen crashed the Chinese economy is pure myth.
    Could have been soft sanctions. Symbolic. There was a lot of talk at the time, opposition party jumping up and down as usual but i doubt the US wanted to hobble the Chinese economy as that would go against getting them to open up. WTO etc etc.

    We see today how well that worked out ; )
    Last edited by Double Edge; 14 Jun 19, at 05:55.

  15. #30
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Since we're talking about it, why is Churchill being hold in high regard by the British people? He didn't win the war. US and the Soviets won it for them.
    British people threw him out of office soon after the war ended. This comes as a surprise given how he is regarded today.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 14 Jun 19, at 06:01.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •