- If we must discuss the “merits and demerits” of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping. If Deng’s “demerit” is three points, then Mao’s is ten; if Mao’s “merit” is seven, then Deng’s is fourteen. And the successors are all consuming or increasing the “dividends” of the two.
- Comparing “merits” with “demerits” is obviously raising or belittling the other, which is not the correct way to compare. Good is compared with good, bad is compared with bad, which is fair competition on the same track.
- Mao’s greatest “merit” and “demerit” lies in his ability to ruthlessly change the lives of others, but he also lacks the ability to truly change himself. As the saying goes: heroes have no weaknesses. This is the root of the cycle of soil and the cornerstone of the survival of a certain party. To completely deny Mao is to completely deny oneself. This is an act of self-destruction.
- Deng also followed this foundation. The anti-revolutionary political incident in Tiananmen Square in 1976, when the “emperor” was still surnamed Mao. And Deng’s subsequent third ascent to power, his fourth retirement in 1989, and his final return to power in 1992. It was only then that such a political ecology of “Qin Emperor and Han Wu” was fundamentally ended.
- Deng’s greatest “merit” and “demerit” lies in this. He did not thoroughly carry out political system reform. He also laid the groundwork for such a historical cycle.
- For example, the disclosure of officials’ property, transparency of information, continuation of the system… And the new Maoist party (which is also a collective that has seized the greatest benefits from reform and opening up) resolutely refuses and no longer allows such controversial discussions. Of course, if the old Maoist party continues to exist, it will not be much different from North Korea today.
- As a result, a certain party that did not change its Maoist ways and continued to learn from Mao without pursuing true self-revolution gradually became Mao again, but in a relatively rich form. This gradually cultivated such a political confusion and social injustice.