The average lifespan of the Chinese at the start of the revolution was 33 years of age, that's how horrible things were under the British, Americans and other western imperialists exploiting the country. It went up DURING the revolution, a time of civil war between the communists and the ROC combined with a literally genocidal fascist invasion by the Japanese.
Conditions were so bad that the communists still made people's lives better during those horrendous circumstances. By the time the new country was founded it had risen to 45 years, and by the time Mao died in 1976 it had risen to 62 years of age.
Were things just peachy during this time? No. Did they consistently improve the lives of the people? Yes. Were things significantly worse beforehand? 100%.
The maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry.
global lifespans around the world have gone up, this isnt a totally fair argument. as they say, high tides lift all boats. british colonialists are notoriously evil, i wont defend them. i will have to look into uour comment more, thanks for the info. but on zedong, he was a cutthroat dictator and is succeeded by another and another and (etc. etc.), we're still seeing genocides today with the ugyhurs for example in tibet and forceful annexations with hong kong, tibet, taiwan (soon?), large sea expanses, etc... china's economic success does not excuse ethnofascism
Can you tell me what the life expectancy is in capitalist Nigeria please? Which France is attempting to get to invade Niger to stop them from becoming free of colonialism.
Capitalism has yet to improve the lives of people. It functions to maintain itself and provide wealth extraction from the labour of the working class, in the global south it functions to export that wealth into the imperialist western nations which act as an empire bloc.
he was a cutthroat dictator
Nah man. You don't really know this, you've just heard it repeated by hundreds and hundreds of reddit comments over and over again without actually investigating it properly from proper sources instead of propaganda. You also probably come from a country that has a deeply anticommunist problem. Here in the UK viewing Mao as having done more good than harm is normal among the left. It is the right and particularly the far right nationalists that scream all this bullshit. Here I can even show you elected mp Diane Abbot defending Mao on national TV (surrounding by right wing psychos). Or then Shadow Chancellor of the Treasury John McDonald throwing Mao's little red book on the table in Parliament giving a speech in front of the labour party.
Mao played a pivotal role in freeing the country from colonialism, establishing new china, redistributing wealth and land and improving the lives of the people. Anyone that believes those lives were going to improve without revolution is crazy. Was he perfect? Fuck no he definitely made mistakes like killing the Sparrows which they quickly backtracked on. But was he good? Fuck yes. 70% good, 30% mistakes.
global rising tides lift all boats. plus if all of your weak and eldery stave to death and youre left with only the fitter people then yeah youll have highrr life expectancies. pretty fucjed up way to do it though
you have daily 100 apples and 150 people, you try to ration but enough weaker and older people die to where theres only 90 people for your 100 apples, everyone lives now. having tens of millions die to meet supply and demand isnt an accomplishment
Anti-Communists: "communists are all brainwashed to ignore evidence!"
Anti communists when faced with the evidence:
want me to pull up the mass starvation records under mao or are yiu going to claim thats fake too, youre no better than a holocaust denier. fuck off
The average lifespan of the Chinese at the start of the revolution was 33 years of age, that's how horrible things were under the British, Americans and other western imperialists exploiting the country. It went up DURING the revolution, a time of civil war between the communists and the ROC combined with a literally genocidal fascist invasion by the Japanese.
Conditions were so bad that the communists still made people's lives better during those horrendous circumstances. By the time the new country was founded it had risen to 45 years, and by the time Mao died in 1976 it had risen to 62 years of age.
Were things just peachy during this time? No. Did they consistently improve the lives of the people? Yes. Were things significantly worse beforehand? 100%.
The maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry.
global lifespans around the world have gone up, this isnt a totally fair argument. as they say, high tides lift all boats. british colonialists are notoriously evil, i wont defend them. i will have to look into uour comment more, thanks for the info. but on zedong, he was a cutthroat dictator and is succeeded by another and another and (etc. etc.), we're still seeing genocides today with the ugyhurs for example in tibet and forceful annexations with hong kong, tibet, taiwan (soon?), large sea expanses, etc... china's economic success does not excuse ethnofascism
Can you tell me what the life expectancy is in capitalist Nigeria please? Which France is attempting to get to invade Niger to stop them from becoming free of colonialism.
Capitalism has yet to improve the lives of people. It functions to maintain itself and provide wealth extraction from the labour of the working class, in the global south it functions to export that wealth into the imperialist western nations which act as an empire bloc.
Nah man. You don't really know this, you've just heard it repeated by hundreds and hundreds of reddit comments over and over again without actually investigating it properly from proper sources instead of propaganda. You also probably come from a country that has a deeply anticommunist problem. Here in the UK viewing Mao as having done more good than harm is normal among the left. It is the right and particularly the far right nationalists that scream all this bullshit. Here I can even show you elected mp Diane Abbot defending Mao on national TV (surrounding by right wing psychos). Or then Shadow Chancellor of the Treasury John McDonald throwing Mao's little red book on the table in Parliament giving a speech in front of the labour party.
Mao played a pivotal role in freeing the country from colonialism, establishing new china, redistributing wealth and land and improving the lives of the people. Anyone that believes those lives were going to improve without revolution is crazy. Was he perfect? Fuck no he definitely made mistakes like killing the Sparrows which they quickly backtracked on. But was he good? Fuck yes. 70% good, 30% mistakes.
Your comment is legitimately incoherent.
deleted by creator
youre making it soumd like tens of millions starving to death is a win
Quick questions, what was the life expectancy when Mao came to power? And what was it when he left?
global rising tides lift all boats. plus if all of your weak and eldery stave to death and youre left with only the fitter people then yeah youll have highrr life expectancies. pretty fucjed up way to do it though
You're literally trying to argue that people dying younger raises life expectancy, just give up man.
you have daily 100 apples and 150 people, you try to ration but enough weaker and older people die to where theres only 90 people for your 100 apples, everyone lives now. having tens of millions die to meet supply and demand isnt an accomplishment
I'm gathering you don't know what "life expectancy" means
Yes pull up your CIA statistics so I can wipe my ass with it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Mothers wipe your ass with the mothers of the dead kids you removed wanker
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Mothers
please contact the families of the dead yourself you heartless fuck
So you're not going to answer my question?
'Anti-Communists: "communists are all brainwashed to ignore evidence!"
Anti communists when faced with the evidence:'
whats the question?
Replied to the wrong comment, what I meant to say to you is
what