Mao Zedong dies in 1957

Hendryk

Banned
1957 is a convenient time for Mao to die, as the worst excesses of his rule have yet to take place and his overall legacy can at that point be considered positive. It also ties in with the beginning of the Hundred Flowers campaign, which was actually a cynical ploy to crush dissent, but if Mao dies before launching the crackdown, the campaign will paradoxically be seen as his last achievement and none of his potential successors will dare condemn it. This may end up giving Chinese Communism a Gomulka-esque flavor, if not a Dubcek-esque, especially if Zhou Enlai manages to become Mao's successor (he was quite a shrewd politician, so he could probably have pulled it off).

Zhou, like many others in the CCP, wasn't particularly interested in Communism as an ideology, but rather saw it as the most convenient way to put China back together. One may see the reforms that in OTL were implemented by Deng Xiaoping (incidentally a former protégé of Zhou's) show up 20 years earlier.
 

ninebucks

Banned
Zhou, like many others in the CCP, wasn't particularly interested in Communism as an ideology, but rather saw it as the most convenient way to put China back together. One may see the reforms that in OTL were implemented by Deng Xiaoping (incidentally a former protégé of Zhou's) show up 20 years earlier.

So, an even wider Sino-Soviet split?

And Maoism was surprisingly exportable. What effect would be seen in a world with no Maoists in South Asia, Eastern Europe or South America?

If Zhou initiates some kind of Chinese glasnost, perhaps we could see reunion with the ROC by the present day?
 

Hendryk

Banned
So, an even wider Sino-Soviet split?
The Sino-Soviet split would have happened no matter what. China was too big to toe the Soviet line indefinitely. The split was couched in ideological terms but it was at heart a question of geopolitics. In OTL, Mao accused Khrushchev of being "revisionist"; in TTL, Zhou may accuse him of being "literalist" or whatever (in the sense of reading Marxist dogma too literally instead of adapting it to local circumstances--it's amazing how fitting the Christian vocabulary is to discuss Communist thought). Though, being a pragmatist at heart, Zhou may have waited a few more years, until, say, China had its own nuclear arsenal; in which case the split may have been ostensibly caused by Brezhnev repudiating the reforms implemented by Khrushchev.

And Maoism was surprisingly exportable. What effect would be seen in a world with no Maoists in South Asia, Eastern Europe or South America?
Maoism was a convenient name tag. They'd call themselves "Guevarists" instead, that's all. Though I notice that even now you have a movement in Nepal calling itself Maoist, which goes to show that, even with Maoism being dead and buried in China itself, it can live on elsewhere.

If Zhou initiates some kind of Chinese glasnost, perhaps we could see reunion with the ROC by the present day?
Perhaps. It isn't a foregone conclusion.
 
Incidentally, killing Mao early might prevent the Cuban Missile Crisis. According to one line of scholarship, part of Mao’s rationale for splitting with Moscow was that the Chinese example of a peasant-based Marxist revolution was more relevant to the decolonizing world than the Russian experience was. Naturally, Khrushchev didn’t see it that way, and was worried about China making inroads into the revolutions of the Third World indepentent of Moscow's guidance. When Cuba started sniffing around for Soviet aid, Khrushchev used it as an opportunity to show the world just how serious the Soviets were about supporting the downtrodden colonized peoples of the world.
 
You know, that would be very interesting. For one thing, that would mean that the First Five-Year Plan would run its course, but the Great Leap Forward would most likely not happen. Hendryk's points are all valid. If anything, there could be the possibility of "shuttle diplomacy" to get the Mainland and Taiwan united without any significant fighting.
 
You know, that would be very interesting. For one thing, that would mean that the First Five-Year Plan would run its course, but the Great Leap Forward would most likely not happen. Hendryk's points are all valid. If anything, there could be the possibility of "shuttle diplomacy" to get the Mainland and Taiwan united without any significant fighting.

In what year would you suggest for this to occur?
 
Last edited:
The situation presented is that Mao dies in 1957. Now in 1958, the First Five-Year Plan was winding down and thus the Great Leap Forward began. Between Mao's death and 1958, a Special Party Congress would probably be declared to see who would succeed Mao. Zhou Enlai gets picked, and then it goes from there. Thus, the Great Leap Forward (an idea conceived by Mao, BTW) would not have occured.
 
The situation presented is that Mao dies in 1957. Now in 1958, the First Five-Year Plan was winding down and thus the Great Leap Forward began. Between Mao's death and 1958, a Special Party Congress would probably be declared to see who would succeed Mao. Zhou Enlai gets picked, and then it goes from there. Thus, the Great Leap Forward (an idea conceived by Mao, BTW) would not have occured.

I got all of that, but how about answering my question?:confused:
 
Top