The Great Leap forward was one of the greatest tragedies in history. 20-30 million people died during the program, which was originally aimed at industrialization through communes (commune dining hall). The idea of the commune was almost utopian. Each commune contained about 5000 families. Once in the commune everything that used to be owned by the individual was now owned by the commune as a whole, including their work. The commune assured that all adults could work by providing school and a nursery for all of the children, and the elderly were moved into "houses of happiness" and provided healthcare. By 1958 700 million people had been placed into 26,578 communes, a feat only possible through skillful propaganda(a card celebrating the Great Leap Forward). However, by 1959 things began to go downhill. The communes were held to impossible standards, and complaining meant you were a bourgeoisie reactionary. The homemade steel and shoddily put together machines were fall apart when used, and caused injury. Also, because the peasants were working on their "back-yard productions" they didn't harvest the desperately needed food but party members would not tell Mao the real numbers in fear of being accused of being a bourgeoisie sympathizer, so the people suffered. Perhaps the real issue with the great Leap forward was that Chairman Mao was unapproachable. Could such a noble movement have been saved if the leader had actually known what was happening. In the respect it is Mao's fault for creating a government where he can't even get accurate statistics. Maybe he would have changed the course of The Great Leap Forward if he knew that instead of making and exceeding their quota the communes were slipping into a state of disrepair and famine.
Nice post. I love the propagandaistic phrases, e.g., "houses of happiness."
ReplyDeleteYou sound remarkably in favor of the the commune-istic vision. Most students I know think they're a terrible idea. Do you disagree? You call it a "noble movement."
It is difficult for me to say where I stand on this issue. If there was a way for the communes to work in a fair and prosperous way then they may not be a horrible idea. Unfortunately that isn't possible. Economically the communes were a failure and for them to work the people inside them would have to work at the mercy of others. History has shown us that when normal people, with little supervision, are given power over others they abuse it. I call it a noble movement because the idea of it is pleasant. Child care, education,and elderly care is taken care of, and in a world where not many peasants became anything other than peasants it would not impede too any people. However, as we saw, the end result was disastrous. Something as utopian looking as communes can never exist because we forget the human factor. We are stubborn, lazy,manipulative, and will do anything to improve our standing in life. Even if the communes had been able to produce enough grain and make competent steel the human factor would have torn them down.
ReplyDelete