Modern China Pt 3: The Great Leap Forward & Cultural Revolution w: Ken Hammond

In this episode of Guerrilla History, we get into part 3 of our 4 part miniseries on modern Chinese history featuring Ken Hammond (and guest host Breht O'Shea of Revolutionary Left Radio) with an amazing discussion of The Great Leap Forward and The Cultural Revolution!
With these final two episodes in the series, we enter the period where various ideological traditions diverge in their analysis of the events, but regardless of what ideological background you come from, we encourage you to listen to these and engage with the information, as we believe the information will help you deepen your own analysis regardless of your ideological position.
Ken Hammond is Professor of East Asian and Global History at New Mexico State University. He has been engaged in radical politics since his involvement in the anti-war movement at Kent State in 1968-70. Ken is also the author of the book China’s Revolution & the Quest for a Socialist Future.
1804books.com/...
guerrillahisto...
Help support the Guerrilla History by signing up to their patreon, where you also will get bonus content: / guerrillahistory

[@frankmerriwell8339]

''Cynicism and passivity are great tools that those in power use to keep others from challenging them.'' So true.

[@lukeee117]

very informative episode so far, half hour in. Thank you 🙏

[@Kintaro-qg5ze]

Interesting thats how poverty alleviation campaign came about. The young ppl going into villages to monitor the local officials' progress remind me of the red guards going into the countryside. The great leap forward and cultural revolution contribute greatly to the china superpower leading a multipolar order today.

[@nickmargaritis3263]

🎉

[@alexhubble]

Guys, very interesting. I recommend the cultural revolution stuff on 1dime too. Can I point out three contradictions? 1) Your interesting case that the Great Man theory is overplayed, I agree, but you'd carry more weight if you didn't so obviously think Mao was a Great Man. 2) If there isn't a group of people preserving their power, why are the opposition parties under such very tight discipline? In a one party state, power is constantly preserved. 3) Can you be a Vanguard Party and at the same time listen to where the masses want to go. You're the Vanguard, you lead. Any way, yes, very interesting. 👍

[@frankmerriwell8339]

1) Don't know where the idea came from. Mao was the leader of the party of course he is mentioned more than anyone else. And it's made clear in this episode that when they say Mao's idea they're often referring to a group of people not Mao alone. To reject Great Man theory doesn't mean to deny the important roles certain figures played in history. Marxists acknowledge the development of history can be accelerated or retarded by actions of certain figures while the direction of said development is fundamentally determined by the people.

[@frankmerriwell8339]

2) Again don't know where the info came from sounds like BBCNN narrative tbh. In EVERY state the power is preserved by a certain group of people. It's called sovereignty. And it's not the number of parties it's the class interests the parties represent. There can be a single party that serves the majority of citizens or multiple parties that all serve the oligarchs and corporations. I.e. PRC and US. It's either dictatorship of the proletarian or dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Parties are just tools.

[@frankmerriwell8339]

3) Yes you can. In the case of CPC the party leads at the same time accepts constant supervision from the people. People won't always tell the party what to do but will give feedbacks on policies. Officials have to constantly answer questions or they will lose seat. In this process the party and people are deeply connected. It's not an easy concept to grasp for people in the west where parties and the masses are usually seen as separate or independent entities.

[@frankmerriwell8339]

YT deleted my second comment lol. *Freedom of speech intensified*

[@alexhubble]

@@frankmerriwell8339 thanks for the replies! Regarding 1) If anyone is going to qualify as a 'Great Man', I would say Mao is up there. His revolutionary achievements and his charisma made him, if not in charge, then very hard to oppose. Very hard. Sometimes circumstances propel able people to that position. 3) OK, I, can see it can be done. Not easy and potential for misuse but do-able. I'd be intrigued to hear no. 2 if you can be bothered to reword it!

[@AudioPervert1]

1959 to1962 the mass famine could also be discussed. As it caused a significant drop in the rural population of China, leading a mass exodus, of Chinese towards the west, Australia, Indonesia etc. The revolution, like every revolution, necessitates sacrifice. They got it right?

[@lukeee117]

bout 22 minutes in

[@Chicano.Marxist]

First

[@marksinger3067]

Mao was a monster but you know that..

[@girthbloodstool339]

@@Eye_Exist yeah I dunno not seeing 45 million dead peasants today.

[@jopeco84]

Mao was a revolutionary and inevitably a controversial man