𝗠𝗔𝗢 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗟𝗧𝗩𝗥𝗔𝗟 𝗥𝗘𝗩𝗨𝗟𝗡: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗧𝗔𝗥𝗘𝗘𝗘𝗘 𝗗 𝗔 𝗦𝗗𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗦𝗙𝗨𝗦 𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗘𝗥 Most Western writing about the Cultural Revolution stops at "Mao was a monster". It's easy to say that and it doesn't explain anything. Ken Leong wrote an article that asks a better question. Why would the person who used the people to win the revolution, direct those people to the country he built himself? I mostly agree with his answer. Mao was outgunned and outnumbered, and he won by going around the force instead of hitting it head on, a bit like water around a rock. After 1949 he was the rock. When he feared that the party was becoming a new privileged elite, he returned to the method he trusted most, which was the mobilization of the people against the bureaucracy. In my opinion, it was at its root an attempt to shake up an old and corrupt system. The cost was real, however, and I don't brush it aside. It is also one of the most divisive issues in China, and I humbly write about it. But I don't think the story ended in 1976. Deng kept the horn and knocked down the chaos. Today, China deliberates within the system, reaches a consensus, and entrusts the engineers who check policies before they are implemented. The revolution didn't stop, it just became pragmatic. People in the West like to say that powerful people never learn. China did it. My full approach, inspired by Ken Leungs article: To be informed, not entertained.

𝗠𝗔𝗢 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗟𝗧𝗩𝗥𝗔𝗟 𝗥𝗘𝗩𝗨𝗟𝗡: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗧𝗔𝗥𝗘𝗘𝗘𝗘 𝗗 𝗔 𝗦𝗗𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗦𝗙𝗨𝗦 𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗘𝗥 Most Western writing about the Cultural Revolution stops at "Mao was a monster". It's easy to say that and it doesn't explain anything. Ken Leong wrote an article that asks a better question. Why would the person who used the people to win the revolution, direct those people to the country he built himself? I mostly agree with his answer. Mao was outgunned and outnumbered, and he won by going around the force instead of hitting it head on, a bit like water around a rock. After 1949 he was the rock. When he feared that the party was becoming a new privileged elite, he returned to the method he trusted most, which was the mobilization of the people against the bureaucracy. In my opinion, it was at its root an attempt to shake up an old and corrupt system. The cost was real, however, and I don't brush it aside. It is also one of the most divisive issues in China, and I humbly write about it. But I don't think the story ended in 1976. Deng kept the horn and knocked down the chaos. Today, China deliberates within the system, reaches a consensus, and entrusts the engineers who check policies before they are implemented. The revolution didn't stop, it just became pragmatic. People in the West like to say that powerful people never learn. China did it. My full approach, inspired by Ken Leungs article: To be informed, not entertained.