(Putting this is GD as I’m not sure whether this has a definitive answer. Please move to GQ if necessary.)
He was secure in power, idolized by the masses, surrounded by his friends and comrades from the early days of the struggle and had established Communism on a stable basis in China. So what on earth did he have to gain by turning the country upside-down, inciting the people to criticize and even murder their leaders, people who were among his oldest and dearest friends? I just don’t get it. These are the actions of someone trying to overthrow an established government not of the head of such a government.
So what was going on? Senility? Did Mao lose his marbles in his old age? Or was Mao, old and isolated, a mere puppet controlled by his wife and the other members of the Gang of Four? I remember that was certainly the picture painted by the surviving leaders when the Cultural Revolution had been quelled and Madam Mao and her buddies got the chop, but I always figured that was a fiction designed to deflect blame from Mao, who was still revered by the masses.
If you suspect your “oldest and dearest friends” may have plans to supplant you, putting them on the defensive by inciting murder and mayhem could be a sound strategy.
Two things, I think. First, it’s how he came to power and was able to take control of the CCP in the first place, so, why would he change? He did it by being a totally ruthless killer, purging the ranks of any decent and consolidating total power. Secondly, revenge on high ranking members who disagreed with his policies publically. The CR was a trap…it promised reforms but what it did is brought people out in the open so Mao could cut them down.
From this bio, Mao’s “Great Leap Forward” turned out to be a huge disaster that resulted in millions dying of starvation, so he was persona non grata for a few years. His old allies no longer supported him. He was able to make his comeback by capitalizing on national fears of capitalism. Starting the Cultural Revolution, he had all the intellectuals sent to re-education through hard manual labor, and none of his detractors wanted to be reassigned. He was ruthless enough in his desire for personal power to forego all ties of loyalty he had previously built.
The CCP was evolving in a more moderate direction (think Deng Xiaoping) and Mao was losing power. He used idealistic youth as his revolutionary hammer to reassert his authority.
In the book the Lucifer Principle, the author claims after the failures of the great leap forward that the people who ran China started treating Mao like a dumb figurehead rather than the leader of China. So Mao started the cultural revolution to take power back.
There is a book called Becoming Madame Mao, by Anchee Min, that tells the story of how the two came to power and what the internal politics were like in the Party. I don’t know how well researched the book was but, as I recall it, the Mao’s were in fear of being ousted, and so started the Cultural Revolution as a way to distract everyone in the country and to utilize the anger if the people as a mechanism to take out their political enemies by proclaiming then enemies of the people.
They probably don’t say that about Madame Mao, more leftist than he, who felt she had the right to follow her husband as supreme leader.
A vain, greed-filled, ultimately stupid woman who controlled her own propaganda, yet was the target of lies from her enemies for decades, she came to believe her own meant-for destiny, but was sheerly defeated by her despised rival.
I agree. Mao was still the ceremonial leader of China but his actual power was slipping away. He launched the Cultural Revolution as a means of getting rid of political rivals.
In Russia they still have a positive opinion of Stalin. I don’t get it. Mao and Stalin caused so much damage to their nations. Whatever good they caused could’ve been done by someone less incompetent and destructive.
The political and cultural leadership of China since 1976 has been entirely composed of people who were perecuted and relegated to political exile during the cultural revolution. So when they managed to wrest power back, the first thing they did was denounce Mao and everything the CR stood for and foster a whole genre of revisionist literature from amongst their fellow travellers.
The Cultural revolution still enjoys widespread support amongst people in the countryside and outside the cities who benefitted from the positive aspects. But of course their voices are largely supressed by the Chinese government wh now pushes a narrative that poor urban elites were the real victims, and of course the urban elits are the ones who eventually get book deals in English, so ignorant westerners who know nothing about the history of China conveniently buy into the Chinese government narrative.
My wild-assed guess is that Mao took a look at the Soviet Union- which post-Stalin was descending into a comfortable bureaucracy of apparatchiks- and decided partly for ideological reasons and partly as a projection of his own midlife crisis that a “perpetual revolution” was the only way to preserve the vitality and purity of the movement. What he wanted was actually paraphrased years earlier by George Orwell in 1984, when the character O’Brien said that the revolution would always have just happened a few years ago and would be eternally young.
ETA: and it didn’t hurt that Mao did this just as the first generation who hadn’t been adults before the Revolution were coming of age, and that the Party bureaucrats made handy scapegoats for the various failures China had suffered.
Well it goes back to St. Just’s declaration of Permanent Revolution, and Trotsky’s reworking of that according to Marx’s restatement in the 1840s ( which is easily unseen, so 19th century is Karl, only 50 years after St. Just bit the big one ).
