Consume Product

Maoism was already a really weird variant of marxism if you dig into it enough.

It effectively promoted class collaborationism (at least as far as the petty bourgeoisie, small business owners) and openly used at least one major concept that came directly from fascist italy. That was the concept of the "proletarian nation", it's a fairly esoteric concept but the gist of it is that rather than a struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat of one nation, the people of the "proletariat nation" should be united against the "plutocratic nations" (eg the US, UK, etc). Maoism took this concept in its entirety and ran with it. How an Italian fascist theory ended up with Chinese communists, however, I don't really know for sure.

The primary issue with Mao was his disastrous ability to create sustainable long term plans. He was an amazing general, actually. Without biases, he was one of the best generals in history I would say. One would think this would translate into being able to run a country well, but it did not. Mao continually failed to industrialize where other socialist countries succeeded in it. Though he did build the base that Deng was able to launch from, china was unable to see it come to fruition under mao because mao by and large did not know what he was doing. Moreover, he was constantly being lied to by party cadres about what was happening in china. On military matters, mao remained solid. He oversaw a Chinese victory in Korea (the US was unable to establish a presence anywhere near manchuria, so therefore a full Chinese victory) and he created china's nuclear program from scratch with slide rulers and abacuses, which probably successfully prevented a soviet and/or US invasion. Outside of that, he still didn't know what he was doing.

However, unlike with the bolsheviks, there does not seem to be much real malicious intent in regards to Mao (besides silencing criticism, but every chinese leader before him *ever* did this, so it's not remotely unique or noteworthy). He really seemed to care about china as a nation. He saw the early successes of the soviet union (and they did definitely have quite a few early successes. Biases aside) and thought that a revised version of this was the best system for china. Mao viewed the boxer rebellion as a *positive* event, for one thing. The boxer rebellion was incredibly reactionary, no communist in their right mind would support it. But Mao did. But he saw kinship with the boxers. He wanted to drive out the foreigners and establish an independent and strong china. That was tantamount. He was in the kuomintang first before the CCP, which is also telling. In a way, he did get everhthing he wanted, and I think mao would be fine with xi's china because the system was secondary to the goal for mao.

Also, another point, Deng wasn't the end all be all. He reintroduced capitalism but gave it away entirely to private foreign interests. Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao did pretty much the same thing. Xi Jinping put china's private businesses on the state's leash in a similar manner that fascist italy or Natsoc Germany did. So, today, china is neither communist nor is it capitalist. This has worked enormously to their advantage, and they've skyrocketed at a rate faster than they ever did with any predecessors. Not only that, but under Xi china has managed to clean up its pollution issue (remember the smog? It's pretty much gone now) and go from being the lead manufacturer of cheap goods to the lead manufacturer of advanced electronic and industrial equipment all within a matter of about 13 years.

Furthermore, I consider that Israel must be destroyed

so chinese ethnonationalism was allowed because china helped jews. german not so much