Maoism

Author(s):  
George W. Breslauer

Mao Zedong and his legacy may be given credit for effective innovation in conducting guerrilla warfare and mobilizing the peasantry to win a fifteen-year battle against the Guomindang and the Japanese. Stains on his legacy are the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.

1967 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 3-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Neuhauser

The recent events in China are surely drama of the highest order, but at times it has seemed that the actors themselves were not entirely sure who was writing the lines. In fact what we seem to be witnessing is a form of commedia dell'arte: improvisation within a certain tacitly understood framework. The cultural revolution appears to have taken new turns and to have broken into new channels precisely because the actors have been faced with new and unforeseen circumstances as it has run its course. No faction in the struggle has been able to impose its will on the Party or the country by fiat; new devices and stratagems have been brought into play in what has looked like desperate attempts to gain the upper hand. It has clearly been a battle of the utmost seriousness, but there appear to have been limitations on the resultant chaos. Economic disorganisation does not seem to have occurred on the scale of the later stages of the Great Leap Forward. Nor, despite the clashes, confusion and bitter infighting, have new centres of power, totally divorced from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) itself, arisen. The cultural revolution has been pre-eminently a struggle within the Party.


1973 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
pp. 511-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Shirk

After the Great Leap Forward the Chinese Ministry of Education designed new programmes for teaching and administration. These guidelines, the “1963 Temporary Work Regulations for Full-time Middle and Primary Schools,” which are translated below, were drafted during 1961 and 1962, promulgated in 1963 but only became generally available during the Cultural Revolution when, in 1967, they were reprinted and circulated for criticism, to serve as negative examples for those drawing up new educational reforms. These 1963 regulations were an attempt to structure a school environment in which the teaching and learning of academic subjects would flourish. They provide documentary evidence for the concentration on expertness and “quality” which characterized educational policy during the period between the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Moreover, the regulations illustrate how the policy-makers defined “quality” education; they describe the specific measures which the authorities felt were necessary to guarantee a school setting conducive to that goal; and they indicate what values the policy-makers were willing to trade-off in pursuit of educational “quality.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document