60th Anniversary of the Liberation of China

Very nice article sums up very well the great changes that occurred in China on October 1, 1949. The author finds that almost every Chinese woman he meets his joyous about the Chinese Revolution. Why? It was the greatest movement for he liberation of women that has ever occurred in the history of the world.
On that day, for instance, Mao issued a decree forbidding forever the binding of feet, a practice that was rampant under Chiang’s Nationalist government. Arranged marriages were ended and women received 1/2 of their husband’s property.
As Mao put it, “China stood up.” Indeed.
Were the Revolution never to have taken place, surely Chinese women would still have bound feet, would get screwed (literally in marriage) and would suffer form arranged marriages. In the rural areas, education and health care would be rare to nonexistent, just as it is in India today.
Mao also tried to stop wife-beating, an ancient tradition in China. His methods were ingenius. Mao ordered women all across China to order the men in the villages to stop beating women. If they did not stop, there would be consequences.
Many men did not stop, so party cadres in the villages told Chinese women to gather up their farm implements and raid the houses of the beaters and beat them up with farm tools. So all across China, in 100’s of thousands of villages, women armed with hoes and shovels stormed into houses and beat up men who were beating their wives. Wife-beating quickly dropped to a low level, though unfortunately it still continues today.
The Chinese government is said to be capitalist, but that is not really true. The latest government educational decree sent teachers to all villages with over 200 residents.
In the 3rd World, capitalist countries don’t do things like that. The reigning neoliberal model says the less the state spends on education, the better, as it is regarded as a waste of society’s money that would be better spent by the public sector. Instead, private schools are encouraged.
The US “liberal”mass media cheers the closing of schools in the Third World and government issuance of nonpayable school fees. When the Sandinistas were thrown out of office in 1990, the entire US media stood up and cheered. Nearly all legislators of both US parties (the “liberal” Democrats nearly more than the Republicans) roared their approval for the defeat of the Sandinistas.
The ultra-reactionary Violeta Chamorro got down to business very quickly. One of the first things she did was to close health clinics all over Nicaragua. Next she issued a $30/year fee that parents had to pay for every student in the public schools. This was unpayable for huge numbers of parents, so swarms of students all over Nicaragua quickly dropped out of school. I assume that that’s still the case today.
It is for such things that the entire US media cheers. Floods of students being thrown out of schools all over the land because they can’t pay the bills. Countless health clinics closing all over the land, leaving poor 3rd Worlders with no medical treatment. Both parties, “liberal” Democrats and Republicans, roar their approval of such atrocities.
The World Bank and the IMF, both of which are controlled both by US imperialism and also by World Jewry, imposes similar conditions all through the 3rd World. In order to get a loan, government spending must be slashed to the bone, especially health and education spending. Subsidies to poor for anything, for food, transportation, utilities, anything, are ordered to be slashed or ended altogether.
Prices for food, utilities, transportation, you name it, rocket upward and taxes are raised on the poorest of the poor. At the same time, taxes on business and the rich are gutted or eliminated and poor country must be opened up to economic colonization by corporations from the rich nations, often US corporations.
Careful studies have shown that IMF/World Bank policies have resulted in declining education and health figures across the board. The best estimates show that these sanctions have killed millions over the past couple of decades, and possibly continue to kill millions every year. So US imperialism and World Jewry are probably deliberately killing millions every year in the 3rd World through structural adjustment alone.
So any government that massively increases education to its people in these days must be a socialist nation, since capitalist countries by their nature do not do such things.
In the US, on Wikipedia and among reactionaries everywhere, there’s a new line out: the Chinese Revolution failed. Next time someone tells you that, think again.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

20 thoughts on “60th Anniversary of the Liberation of China”

  1. Dear Robert
    No doubt the Chinese revolution brought many benefits to ordinary Chinese. Still, in 1979, 30 years after the revolution, who were better-off, the mainland Chinese or the South Koreans and the Taiwanese? For all his merits, Mao is responsible for three big mistakes: too much economic statism, too little political freedom and neglect of the population question.
    Regards. James

    1. A book by Time-Life books in 1962 clearly states that the Taiwanese miracle could not have taken place in China, because China had something like 700 million mouths to feed and Taiwan only had 20 million or so. They actually discussed whether the development that had occurred in Taiwan could have taken place in China.
      It is much better to compare China to India. Both are large nations with huge populations, and both were at about the same developmental level in 1949. In almost every way, China is better off.
      Without Mao, I’m pretty sure that China would be a complete mess today, something like a gigantic Somalia. At best, it would look like India.

  2. Now that all these gains in China are being revoked, we have glowing approval from the Western media – ” growing prosperity after the bad old days of communism “. I think there’s no longer universal healthcare; hundreds of millions of peasants leaving the land because they can no longer make a living – you know the rest. But, like India, a few elites in the cities have i-phones and designer clothes, so THEY’RE the Chinese – the starving billion are just some scruff that don’t matter. Welcome to the Pax Americana.

    1. Yes, they got rid of universal health care. I could not believe my eyes when I was the US “liberal” media cheering for this “reform.” Incredible! “Liberal” media organs like Time, Newsweek, the New York Times, could barely contain their glee over this “reform.”
      China has now instituted an insurance policy that pays for 85% of your medical costs, but it’s unfortunately unaffordable for most people. But it was a step in the right direction.
      One great thing that Mao was that he attempted to equalize development in the rural and urban areas. I think he was more popular in the rural than in the urban areas as a result.
      The rural poverty is pretty bad now, but a delegation of Nepalese Maoists recently went to China and they were amazed at how well the Chinese system was working in the rural areas, at least compared to Nepal. Rural China seems like paradise compared to rural Nepal. The Nepalese seemed to regard even present day China as a great model.

  3. Rob,
    It is much better to compare China to India.
    Rob, you’ve compared China to India multiple times but I don’t think it’s an apt comparison. (And India for years called themselves non-aligned socialists and bought their weapons from the Soviets…) In 1960 South Korea and Chad had the same GDP per capita. Now South Korea is considered a developed country and is a net creditor to the US whereas Chad is still… well Chad.

    1. It’s an excellent comparison in many ways. For one thing, they are right next to each other. If anything, India should come out on top since almost the entire place is arable. You just don’t like the comparison because India ends up looking so bad.
      I don’t know any Communists or even Leftists who think that that fake socialism in the early days of India was worth a flying fuck. If I am not mistaken, they were incapable of even doing the most measly land reform. Land reform to this day has never been really done in India. It keeps coming up all the time, but the big feudal landlords keep shooting it down. India really is still a semi-feudal society.

  4. Robert Lindasy like to hail jewish mass murderes. Here is what the jews have done – the big picture. But hey, it’s not over yet, the destruction of lran is on the way. The american people is not stupid, they are fucking retarded!!!
    “That’s really all the Jews know how to do – steal and destroy things.”
    http://judicial-inc.biz/JB.Campbell.htm

  5. It’s an excellent comparison in many ways. For one thing, they are right next to each other.
    The US and Mexico are right next to each also, their populations and history are more closely tied to each other than India and China, yet the outcome for each country is quite different.
    Chinese basically have outperformed wherever they go.. Canada, the US, Britain, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines.
    Granted so, for the most part, have many Indians but the bulk of them are from a minority of population that also outperforms in India.

    1. If they outperform everywhere they go, how is that they had the same developmental figures in 1949. It certainly should be possible to replicate the Chinese model in India. Malnutrition in China is 7%. Malnutrition in India is at least 50%. Almost every village in China has a school or a teacher. There are no schools for tens or hundreds of millions of Indians. Maternal mortality is 450/100,000 in India and 12/100,000 in China. Those Chinese figures should be easy for India to achieve with an adequate socio-economic system, there’s no particular skill involved. BTW, none of these figures is bettered by neoliberalism.
      The reason that the comparison is good is because the development levels were the same in 1949.

  6. If they outperform everywhere they go, how is that they had the same developmental figures in 1949.
    Warfare, rebellion, and revolution on an off for almost a century, colonization by rival western countries (and Japan) which split the country apart for almost a century. (The colonization of India was by only one country, there was some rebellion but nothing like the loss of life and infrastructure in China (20 million dead in WWII or the Taiping Rebellion around 25 million dead)
    Some have hypothesized that China’s GDP was greater than all of Europe from 500 to 1820.
    http://www.historyorb.com/asia/china_economy.shtml
    In this link the GDP of China in 1820 is estimated to be higher than the entire G8 (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, Canada and Russia)
    http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=108&subsecID=900003&contentID=253413

  7. Dear Robert
    When it comes to feeding people, what matters is not the total number of mouths but the ratio of mouths to fertile land. In both Taiwan and China, this ratio was very high. Still, there is a difference between a very populous country like China and a country like Taiwan.
    As a result of the los of fertile land due to industrialization, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan now import much of their food. China can’t really allow the same to happen because it is one thing to import food for countries with a combined population of 180 million and quite a different thing for a country of 1.3 billion to do so. Unless the Chinese leaders lost their minds, they should do everything in their power to preserve cropland. A good book about this topic is Lester Brown’s Who Will Feed China?
    As to population size, it doesn’t seem to be either an advantage or a disadvantage for economic growth. On the one hand, of the 12 countries in the world with more than 100 million people, only 2 are rich: the US and Japan. On the other hand, Mexico is richer than the much smaller Central American countries. Brazil is richer than the much smaller Paraguay, Bolivia and Peru. Germany and France are richer than Greece or Portugal. India is richer than Bangladesh.
    Still, comparing India and China makes sense because in 1949, they stood at about the same low level od development. In terms of economic security and life expectancy, the Chinese have done better. On the other hand, let’s not overlook that Indians have had more personal freedom.
    Regards. James

    1. Still, comparing India and China makes sense because in 1949, they stood at about the same low level od development.
      Then let’s look at other countries of that time that had similar economic development also. I speculate the a recovering Japan’s level of development post WWII in 1949 was not very high. How about the two Koreas at that time..?
      As you say, the important thing is how much arable land (and how fertile it is..) there is per person in a country.

  8. The fact that you’re defending the most murderous regime in the history of the world is disgusting. It’s like trying to argue against someone who sees Charles Manson as a hero.
    And foot binding was banned in the early twentieth century, decades before the Communists came to power. “Women’s rights” is the main reason that the modern world sucks. Women don’t want to be “liberated.” They have a psychological need to be dominated by the men in their lives. If this need isn’t met, they start to detest the males of their race and become so confused they encourage immigration to destroy the emasculated betas they have to put up with.

    1. I’ve started to believe that the “liberation” of women, at least in this country, has been to their detriment in some important ways.
      Maybe men benefit the most when women are seen as their “equals,” in need of no protection and independent in reproductive matters.

    2. It’s not true. In 1949, millions or even tens of millions of Chinese women still had bound feet. Women do want to be liberated. At least Chinese women do, at least in the sensible sense. As the author reports, everywhere he went in China, the women were the most ferocious and intransigent defenders of the Chinese Revolution of all. That says a lot right there.
      The problem is not women’s rights, which are elementary, but the transition from women’s rights to women’s rule, which is what we have in the West – the Matriarchy.
      They have a psychological need to be dominated by the men in their lives. If this need isn’t met, they start to detest the males of their race and become so confused they encourage immigration to destroy the emasculated betas they have to put up with.
      One would think that the women of Vietnam, Cuba, North Korea, China, Russia, Mongolia, Eastern Europe and the former USSR would all be detesting the pussified men in their lives and clamoring for mass immigration of real men to replace their own wussies. It’s not happening.
      Mass immigration is happening only in the West and not elsewhere and is related to Cultural Marxism in the West combined with the capitalist sector (which you curiously champion) and its endless demands for cheap labor. “The women” are not behind the desire for mass immigration at all. I don’t know where you get this idea.
      As far as Mao goes, it’s quite clear that he saved more lives and prolonged life more than any man who has ever lived. By that criteria, Mao is clearly the greatest humanitarian of all time. If we compare India to China (looking at life expectancy) there were 170 million excess deaths in India versus China since 1949. That’s including deaths under Mao. So this “Greatest Murderer of all Time” crap is just a bunch of bull.
      This is why Mao is so loved by the Chinese people, despite his faults, which were many. They know how many lives he saved, and how much he prolonged and bettered life.

    3. “If we compare India to China (looking at life expectancy) there were 170 million excess deaths in India versus China since 1949. ”
      Why are you comparing China and India instead of China before and after the revolution? India has an IQ of 20 less than China, of course it’s not going to ever do as well.
      Anyway, at mid-century life expectancy was going up everywhere. A country with China’s IQ was bound to become wealthy eventually. They have Western technology to thank for it, not the lunatic who starved millions.

    4. It’s not true.
      Mao set a world record for doubling life expectancy in a record time. Life expectancy in 1949 was 32 and in 1976 it was 65.
      “It was going to go up anyway” is a shitty argument. By 1956, USSR life expectancy was already 65. There is no reason why life expectancy should have been so low in 1949.
      “Western medicine” is a shitty argument. Stalin set a world record for doubling life expectancy in the shortest period of time. Mao then broke the record. If it’s so easy to do, why can’t the capitalists do it?
      There is no reason why collective IQ should have anything to do with keeping people alive and not killing them when they are young. It’s not that hard to do. Surely Indians are intelligent enough to do that.
      If we look at China before and after the Revolution then, Mao probably saved 350 million lives.
      Capitalist countries have a shitty record on health care and life expectancy. The only countries that do well on this have socialist systems.
      There was starvation in the Great Leap, it’s true, but even with that, he’s still the greatest humanitarian that ever lived. Truth is that Mao ended hunger in China. In 1949, in the countryside, life was on precipice between life and death at all times. If you got sick, you either beat it or you died. There was no health care. Every day in Shanghai in 1949, crews would go out and clean up the dead bodies of all the homeless that died the night before. That’s how bad things were. Baby girls were left on the hillsides to die. The peasants had no land and there were semi-feudal relations in the countryside with huge landlords hoarding all the land and the rest of people as landless peasants. The landlords all had private armies. They had huge power over the peasants and committed crimes against them all the time. They killed peasant men, they raped peasant women, they stole from peasants, beat them, and abused them all the time. The state did nothing about it because Chiang was controlled by the big landlords. This was in 1949, when the US was becoming an industrial power. China was a backwater with a life expectancy of 32 and near feudal conditions.
      This is why Mao is cheered as a hero all over China. He ended this shit once and for all.

  9. “Wife beating” is not a Chinese tradition. It’s a man tradition, yet abuse towards women in China has always been very rare compared to other (especially white, black and australoid) cultures.
    As for bound feet, the Nationalist government tried to ban the practice. They ended up executing anyone who started binding her feet after at set period of time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *