The subtitle is A Global History and the author is Julia Lovell
(2019).
The book strives to make two general points: (1) that Maoism had a
global impact and was not merely a Chinese phenomenon, especially in countries
at the center of the Cold War, and (2) that the Chinese actively tried to
export the ideology around the world, such as to India, Vietnam, Peru and
Africa.
The story of Maoism sounds familiar to other socialist tales. It is about “mass democracy”, preaching
equality of outcome not just opportunity, and the disparagement of capitalism,
imperialism, and the West. But Mao Zedong’s
version also emphasized that “political power comes out of the barrel of a gun”. His vision was of perpetual revolution, with
an ability to use simple language to invoke his ideas. And he ultimately prioritized radical revolution
over economic growth, which led to a splintering between China and the other great
communist power, the Soviet Union. From
that foundation, Mao and China handed out huge aid packages to countries that
were coming out of colonialism. Yet, what
seemingly was done with a view of spreading the gospel, ultimately became a
power play for Mao and China to spread its influence and power over greater swaths
of the planet. The Great Helmsman,
indeed.
So, in looking at the various iterations of Maoism that appeared globally,
what one finds is that it provided a reasonable strategy for battling incumbent
powers, but did not demonstrate a track record of success once power had been
attained. The emphasis on violence, and
seeking retribution against any semblance of opposition, led to brutalization of
many civilian populations that were supposed to be the greatest beneficiary of socialist edicts, encouraging a “process of degeneration”. The greatest apostles of Maoism often took
the propaganda at face value, failing to confirm for themselves whether China
was as great as advertised, or that life in the West was as oppressive as the CCP
claimed.
Two final things that I found interesting. First, where Maoism took hold, what you can
see clearly is the elevation to leadership of people who commonly used brutality
to get there and who could be deemed “political entrepreneurs”, where the
greatest priority was securing political power.
In looking at China now, the misery of the Mao period (encapsulated by
the mass starvation and deaths during the Great Leap Forward and Cultural
Revolution) is obscured by the growth that came after Mao’s death and subsequent
shift in priorities under the leadership of a more market-oriented premier in
Deng Xiaoping. With the rise of Xi
Jinping, though, and the return of a more authoritarian leadership again, we
see China’s economic growth beginning to stall out.
Second, the rift between China and the Soviet Union ultimately played
an important role in the final collapse of the USSR.
The competition that existed between the two global leaders of communism,
to gain influence around the globe, led to huge financial outlays that burdened
their domestic economies significantly.
When Mao died in 1976, China prudently stepped back from its efforts to fund
revolution globally. The Soviet Union
did not, and felt compelled to stay the course as the global leader, preventing
any possible détente with the U.S.
