Was Mao incompetent?

kitchen tools also would agree

Do you have the letter? I'm curious.

Stalin had numerous engineers, technicians etc gulagged for not meeting ludicrous deadlines and quotas.

There's always some worse option, but that doesn't make the "better" one good.

kek

this

In battle and fighting both the guomindang and japanese, no. he was absolutely necessary in these contexts

he got dumbass chiang kai shek to stop letting the japanese literally rape china so there's that.

As a leader of a country. Well he was real good at throwing babby temper tantrums that scared the heck out of all the other leaders.

Nope, he was an amazing leader

for morale, maybe. tactically he was a dumb dumb

The letter was written by Peng Dehuai for the Lushan conference. Although Mao read the letter publically, I can't find any text for it.

He killed over 60 million people.

If his objective was to commit mass genocide, I'd say he was definitely competent.

Not when it came to guerrilla warfare.

...

People always forget that Mao is Stalin's most successful flunkie. He was appointed the leader of Chinese commies on the same criteria as every other one of his flunkies: loyalty and ruthlessness.

Can we be sure he was a good military leader tho? I mean, the Chinese Civil War dragged on for an awful long time.

Moa Zedonge KILLED 100 trillion BABIES with his BARE HANDS. How? $15 minimum wage

I wasn't aware there was a timeline on a successful civil war with ww2 thrown in the middle of it.

...

The Soviets managed to clear a country the size of a continent in only 4, so yeah.

Top shelf stuff lad.

He was human, yes.

Let's just say everyone would have been better off if he'd dropped dead in 1950.

That's the beauty of military tactics, user: they're universal.

Even if that were true, tactics are hardly the only or even deciding factor in war.

That must be why tactics don't change depending on environment, manpower, available firepower, logistic capabilities, or a host of other variables.

Much like Stalin and Kim his best talent was politics and controlling people, in terms of improvement of conditions yes he was shit.

It was 45 million you rose-fucking faggotqueer.

Oh okay then, that puts it below my allowed megadeath limit. I love Mao now.

Mao was a shit leader. A good general and I've heard even a good philosopher, but a shit statesman.

stealth game, son

He was a conquer not a ruler. Had he been around in an earlier time in Chinese history he'd probably be seen as a heroic figure world wide, but because he mildly expressed interest in workers rights, he can only be remembered for gorillions.

I'm fairly sure he's remembered for the gorillions because of the gorillions. If it wasn't for the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, he would be an anti-imperialist icon to this day.

He wasn't even a conqueror in the classical sense; he was an expert guerrilla fighter. If he'd been born earlier, he might have become a figure like Skanderbeg, not Alexander the Great.

Earlier military figures killed comparable amount of people for their time and place. Mao was terrible at governing and his plans were disasters, but at least part of the reason the west hates him is his intentions rather than the result.

I think that is about as much as you can expect for a Chinese ruler at that time. People also often forget things weren't good in China long before the world wars for a straight century before that they had constant famines, rebellions and imperialistic threats thrown at them.

Interestingly a lot of bourgeois and reactionary writers thought of him in this way in the 60s and 70s, I remember some European monarch (i can't remember which) said mao was his all time hero and the long march was one of the great achievements in human history.

The mao was hitler thing is actually pretty recent

socdems almost make it too easy

Eh, I doubt it. Even if Mao was an ideal statesman who didn't kill a shit ton of the workers he claimed to be fighting for, the US would still hate him. The West never opposed communist countries because of the amount of people they killed(after all, the US has been very friendly to a host of brutal dictators). It was all ideological, a fear of any threat to the status quo. Even if Mao was a good statesman, the US would do everything in their power to discredit him.

You tell me

China imposed strict isolationism on itself. As a result it fell tragically behind in military technological advancement and got wiped out in the Opium War.

His book on guerilla warfare is still considered to be the golden standard on it

If he was, he would have lost the civil war.

Chiang Kai-shek was superior to Mao in every way. If Chiang called himself a communist and Mao called himself a fascist, and they had the exact same record of leadership, you wouldn't believe anything that you just wrote. And, I'm not even saying Chiang was a good leader, but miles better than Mao.

He was lost until Japan invaded and decimated the country and they received tons of support from the allies.

...

Which one is that?

literally on guerilla warfare,

Yes.

Anyone have the meme where it says he killed them with his 15 dollar minimum wage.

Mao was GOAT until 1956 when he became instantly dogshit tier.
I legit think something happened in the mid to late 50s that made him actually insane, like an anurysm or something

His reign was basically like handing a country to kid who plays Civ V all day.

Easily one of the top 5 strategists of the 20th century

where are the proofs, Billy?

you people are ignorant and are proud of it
nevermind that 5-year plans were never fully fullfilled, especially in the time of industrialization
nevermind that quotas were constantly changing

also
so what deadline is not ludicrous?

you are talking as if those people should be immune to the law
technocracy much?

Good band

The we-must-all-eat-with-forks-like-in-the-west-and-wear-hats-like-in-the-west-to-grow-the-economy guy?