Right, this is not an unbiased and objective look at the life of Mao. This is the necessary counterpoint so that there might one day be an unbiased and objective account of the life of Mao. This opened my eyes to just how ignorant I am about a lot of the history of that region and the role of Mao especially. The book opens with Chang positing that Mao killed more than 60 million of his own people, more than any other dictator during peace time. He deliberated starved his own people, taking the harvest they had worked for to pay for the development of nuclear weapons. This famine which lasted between '58 and '61 killed 38 million alone, peaking in 1960 at 22 million, a greater number to die of starvation in one year than any country in the world at any time in recorded human history. He not only got away with this, and much more besides, but was allowed to die an old man in his bed, still in power of a country which continues to honour him to this day, with his portrait hanging in Tiananmen Square. This is the reason it has been nearly impossible to write an unbiased history of Mao - he killed anyone who spoke out against him or had anything on him, he demanded no written records be taken of much of his orders, had complete and ultimate control over all records, documents and publications relating to himself and his personality cult, and had the better half of the 20th century to weed out anything not to his liking and indoctrinate a quarter of the world's population into accepting his word as gospel. Chang does first-hand investigative reporting, interviewing people from the time (most of whom are now well into their old age) who knew Mao or were present during the major events of his reign, dredging up released Soviet intelligence files and researching the archives of post-Mao China to put together a case against Mao, as not the saviour of the People's Republic, but the scourge of it. She does somewhat overegg her case, at one point even trying to suggest that Mao drove Stalin to have his fatal stroke, because he wouldn't quit craiking for the atom bomb. Nonetheless, this remains a well written, compassionately humane, and thoroughly investigated examination of one of the greatest personalities of the 20th century, a monster to some and a saviour to others.

Along with Hitler, Stalin and Saddam Hussein, Mao Tse Tung was one of the most evil men of the 20th century, as anyone with respect for human life will attest.
The auhtors illustrate how Mao's thirst for blood is what led him to choose the Communist Party, over the Nationalists because the Nationalists put limits on the brutality their forces allowed and only the Communists could provide him with a means to assuage his mania for murder and destruction.
From even before his participation in the civil war, he showed a great almost sexual love of murder-'it is wonderful, it is wonderful' he enthused in 1927, during one of the Communists destruction of an entire city and it's population during the Chinese Civil War.
A revolution needed blood he told the local population of Hunan that year, "It is necessary to bring about a reign of terror in every country"
The authors point out how the Communists under Mao during the Sino-Japanese War saw the Nationalists as the main enemy and not the Japanese, and refused a united front with the Nationalists against the Japanese, later when a front was set up Mao ensured it was sabotaged and worked to make sure that the Japanese advanced deep into China.
The authors effectively debunk the myth that the Communists were the main force in resisting Japanese aggression. Mao had hoped for a deal between Stalin and Japan similar to the 1939 deal between Stalin and Hitler-the Molotov-Von Ribbentrop pact.

During the civil war, and after Mao took control of the country in 1949, the main target of Mao's killing machine was the peasants. Mao saw the peasants as beneath contempt and worth no mercy.
He died production and success in industrialization to a high death rate of the rural masses.
All the granaries were shut down in rural areas and massive quantities of food allowed to rot rather than to feed the starving masses.
In his dream to dominate the world Mao created the greatest famine in world history that killed over 38 million people.

He saw reducing the peasants to starvation as a virtue, and refused to take any measures to improve their well being.
The authors cover the horrors of the Hundered Flowers Campaign, the Great Leap Forward and most horrific of all the Cultural Revolution. It is harrowing to read of tortures and murders of millions of entire families from the oldest to youngest were killed, babies still on milk torn grabbed and torn apart at the limbs or just thrown into wells. His fascination with spreading death can be captured in his words about the famine "A few children die in the kindergarten, a few old men die in the happiness court, if there is no death human beings can't exist".
Mao's aim of world domination lead to the Korean and Vietnam wars.
In 1975 a year before his death, Mao congratulated Pol Pot on his slave labour state. 'You have scored a splendid victory' he just one blow and no more classes'. What Mao meant is that everyone had become a slave.
Mao's 27 year rule brought death to more than 70 million Chinese-in peacetime.
It is mind blowing that so many on the Left did and still do worship him.
It is this same cult of worshipping murder and evil that leads Leftist radicals to laud Saddam Hussein, the Ahmadinejad regime in Iran , terror outfits like Hamas and Hezbollah, and the Taliban.

Merged review:

Along with Hitler, Stalin and Saddam Hussein, Mao Tse Tung was one of the most evil men of the 20th century, as anyone with respect for human life will attest.
The auhtors illustrate how Mao's thirst for blood is what led him to choose the Communist Party, over the Nationalists because the Nationalists put limits on the brutality their forces allowed and only the Communists could provide him with a means to assuage his mania for murder and destruction.
From even before his participation in the civil war, he showed a great almost sexual love of murder-'it is wonderful, it is wonderful' he enthused in 1927, during one of the Communists destruction of an entire city and it's population during the Chinese Civil War.
A revolution needed blood he told the local population of Hunan that year, "It is necessary to bring about a reign of terror in every country"
The authors point out how the Communists under Mao during the Sino-Japanese War saw the Nationalists as the main enemy and not the Japanese, and refused a united front with the Nationalists against the Japanese, later when a front was set up Mao ensured it was sabotaged and worked to make sure that the Japanese advanced deep into China.
The authors effectively debunk the myth that the Communists were the main force in resisting Japanese aggression. Mao had hoped for a deal between Stalin and Japan similar to the 1939 deal between Stalin and Hitler-the Molotov-Von Ribbentrop pact.

During the civil war, and after Mao took control of the country in 1949, the main target of Mao's killing machine was the peasants. Mao saw the peasants as beneath contempt and worth no mercy.
He died production and success in industrialization to a high death rate of the rural masses.
All the granaries were shut down in rural areas and massive quantities of food allowed to rot rather than to feed the starving masses.
In his dream to dominate the world Mao created the greatest famine in world history that killed over 38 million people.

He saw reducing the peasants to starvation as a virtue, and refused to take any measures to improve their well being.
The authors cover the horrors of the Hundered Flowers Campaign, the Great Leap Forward and most horrific of all the Cultural Revolution. It is harrowing to read of tortures and murders of millions of entire families from the oldest to youngest were killed, babies still on milk torn grabbed and torn apart at the limbs or just thrown into wells. His fascination with spreading death can be captured in his words about the famine "A few children die in the kindergarten, a few old men die in the happiness court, if there is no death human beings can't exist".
Mao's aim of world domination lead to the Korean and Vietnam wars.
In 1975 a year before his death, Mao congratulated Pol Pot on his slave labour state. 'You have scored a splendid victory' he just one blow and no more classes'. What Mao meant is that everyone had become a slave.
Mao's 27 year rule brought death to more than 70 million Chinese-in peacetime.
It is mind blowing that so many on the Left did and still do worship him.
It is this same cult of worshipping murder and evil that leads Leftist radicals to laud Saddam Hussein, the Ahmadinejad regime in Iran , terror outfits like Hamas and Hezbollah, and even the Taliban.

What an insanely evil dude

This isn't balanced biography. This is more like character assassination. It reminded me of the harsh biographical treatment Albert Goldman gave Elvis Presley some years ago. Whatever detail of Mao's life Chang writes about, the negative aspects are emphasized. The facts of his marriages are glued together with the ways he crippled them and damaged the wives. Writing about his children, the author underlines the ways he mistreated them. Every lash of the whip is here: not writing to his children or neglecting a wife during childbirth. All the family dirt is reported here, just as it's reported that he controlled and abused political allies and colleagues. Many he tortured and had killed when he no longer had use for them. The harsh lives of the Chinese people in general, even starvation, were sometimes caused by Mao's policies. It's estimated his years of government were responsible for 70 million deaths. Was he a monster? Sure, I suppose so, as much as Stalin and Hitler and Pol Pot and others. But he was also a man. He was a husband, a father, and a friend to someone. He loved someone, sometime. It's okay to picture a leader's policies and direction as monstrous, but I believe at some level he's still a human being. Just as Hannah Arendt saw and pointed out the banal in Adolph Eichmann, Chang should have been willing and able to show the same banality in Mao. But she fails to allow him that. In my mind it makes for unbalanced, incomplete biography. The life and events punctuating that life are here--the young communist, the Long March, the Civil War, the Korean War, Chairman, the Cultural Revolution. I was surprised to learn how important Soviet help was to the Chinese Communist Party during the 30s. And also at how instrumental Moscow's steps were in keeping the Japanese bogged down so that they wouldn't be able to attack north into the Soviet Union. I also thought the analysis of Sino/Soviet motivations in Korea in the 50s interesting, if chilling. Some of the story is well-told. But because I feel Chang's over-emphasis on the negative approaches expose and polemic rather than comprehensive, complete biography, I wonder if exaggerations aren't present in accounts of Mao's administration of the country as a whole. Mao isn't a fun read--it's relentlessly negative. It's biased and imperfect because of that and because it leaves out part of the man.

Here is a man with NO redeeming qualities. Like, stood by when his own sons died and then seduced their wives kinda bad (never mind 70 million murdered). Pretty much the nicest thing about him that I found was: he would have have his bodyguards break in his shoes for him because he didn't like new clothes. I know, it's weak.

Yet another sadistic, narcissistic, lying schmuck. I imagine that this is the book that Melania Trump reads Donald before bed so that he has sweet dreams.

I once owned a t-shirt that I bought while vacationing in China that had a picture of Mao that is identical to the one on the cover of this book. Had I known how narcissistic, evil, diabolical, cruel and ruthless this man really was, I would have torn the shirt to shreds. I thought Hitler was evil...Mao Ze Dong was responsible for at least 10 times the number of deaths that Hitler was. In the tradition of the cruel emperors of China's past, Mao set himself up to be a god who required unquestioning loyalty of his citizens ruling with an iron fist and killing millions, even those devoted to him, because of his raging insecurities. Even on his death bed he was scheming of ways he could avenge his enemies. It's shocking to think that this man is still revered and reverenced in China with his giant portrait looking out over Tian An Men square, and his corpse lying in state in his mausoleum. It will be interesting to see how this man fairs in the day of judgment. I would not want be him at that day.

There are a few issues of bias and sloppiness in places, and i think the ideal balance is

Chang's book along with

Was Mao Really a Monster?: The Academic Response to Chang and Halliday's Mao: The Unknown Story
by Gregor Benton and Chun Lin (Editors)

..............

basically there can be blindspots with both sides in dealing with motivations in places, or going off too much into moral issues, when you need to be a cold realist with knowing when some irrational things are in fact, rational from the chinese point of view, or within that political system and era, with all the power politics and threats to power and policy, and where sometimes powerful leaders are cruel or barbaric at times. Yet there is a coldness when you're dealing with clearly defined 'enemies' or 'national interests' which is something you have to acutely be aware of with foreign leaders or the past.

If you understand national interests, national security and internal security threats, and who the enemies are within any society, or the political structures in power, you usually can get more accurate analysis of leadrership.

And sometimes you need to understand the bambi psyche and the godzilla psyche of leadership, power and threats, and not wanting to get squashed.

Man, this was a 2 1/2 month project to slog through. That's not to say it isn't a good book, I just had a hard time in the first half when we just have example after example of Mao killing thousands of his own men because he's either scared of losing power, scared of Stalin, scared of Chiang Kai-Shek, or greedy for something or other. It actually gets sort of redundant.

The book really picks up in the second half when things get considerably more interesting with the Russians and when, little by litte, every single ally he ever had turns against him (and Mme. Mao) and eventually kick him around a bit like an old dog. Not nearly the punishment he deserves for eventually starving millions of his own people (because of exporting all their food to Russia in exchange for weapons technology), but somewhat satisfying.

I can see how some would take issue with the editorial license of the authors, as they do take things a bit too far and state (not speculate) what Mao was thinking at various times with various decisions. I don't think there's any need for that and it somewhat compromises the otherwise rigorously well-researched feeling you get when reading the book (and when looking at the list of interviews in the back, man).

Also, I agree with what someone else said that to understand Russia you should read this book. I think this book makes me want to do some more reading on Stalin.

I must admit that before reading this I didn't know much about Mao.

What I thought I knew was all wrong - he was an absolute monster, up there with Hitler and Stalin as bogeymen of the 20C.

Mao the Unknown Story is a real brick of a book, running to 750 pages. It chronicles the life of China's dictator in great detail. It sets out events in a meticulous fashion, and builds and reinforces the central theme that Mao was spiteful, incompetent and interested only in power.

Occasionally the book feels like a lecture but this is somewhat understandable considering the enormity of the message.

Well worth a read for anyone interested in 20C history.

How do I review a book like this? I don't know, because I have decidedly mixed feelings about Mao myself. Jung Chang wrote the amazing "Wild Swans" biography/autobiography, but her voice there falls far short of the voice here. I'll be honest. It's very, very biased. She presents the work as *factual* when it's not actually quite that factual. Much of her interpretation and statements are based off of things like, "a dear friend of Mao's said..." and yet, the friend is *not* named or referenced. Just that alone made me uneasy.

It was an interesting read, don't get me wrong. I felt it was worth the time I spent on it, but I can't say that Jung did the best she could have. Her biases and hatred for Mao was all-too clear and for any book that claims to be a 'true' story, that makes it wrong in my books. Obviously, others will disagree with me and I know many people who find it a brilliant piece of work. The amount of work Jung put into it is admirable, but I can't say that this didn't bother me.

Overall? I'd say read it and judge for yourself.

“Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun”
Quote of Mao Tse-tung

“Long Live Chairman Mao”

“Chairman Mao Tse-tung is the Saviour of the Chinese People”

During the 1960’s and ‘70’s Mao was a much revered world leader – particularly adored by the college crowd (I know I was one of them) who put Mao on a pedestal. He was placed among the great leaders of the 20th century like Gandhi. His stature in Western society was likely similar to that of Stalin who was also glorified during the 1930’s and 1940’s.

The authors of this book do much to disabuse us of this notion – in fact Mao is vilified on almost every page.

We come away with a portrait of a megalomaniac who did very little to help China. The man was conniving and devious. For instance he instituted a short period in 1957 called “Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom” where he invited the people to speak out. They did. And Mao took notes.

Page 419 (my book)
Mao ordered an editorial for People’s Daily to be broadcast that evening, saying that challenging the Party was forbidden. Once he pressed this button, the persecution machine started rolling... As a result at least 550,000-plus people were labelled as “Rightists”... To Mao, writers, artists and historians were superfluous.


Mao was obsessed with making China a world power, with himself at the helm. Being a superpower to Mao meant acquiring military hardware and first-most - the Atomic bomb. In order to attain this he traded much needed food to the U.S.S.R. for their expertise and knowledge of the bomb. This was called the “Great Leap Forward.”

Page 438
Close to 38 million people died of starvation and overwork in the Great Leap Forward and the famine, which lasted four years [starting in 1958]. ..Had this food not been exported (and instead been distributed according to humane criteria), very probably not a single person in China would have had to die of hunger.

So much for the myth of Mao helping the Chinese peasant.

Mao’s struggle to attain power in the 1920’s and 1930’s was also a product of help from Stalin’s Russia. Stalin wanted to spread the gospel of Marx and communism to the world; eventually Mao wanted to do the same.

There are many similarities between Mao and Stalin - in the way they made their underlings cringe before them (Chou En-lai was a prime example); both created a cult of personality with abundant images and placards; there was censorship and immobility in that travel within and without the country was prohibited.

But there were differences. Mao created many vast villas for himself across China, which were sealed off from the general population.

Page 333
Mao was the only millionaire created in Mao’s China.

Mao also used public violence. Denunciations were followed by public beatings and executions with the people being encouraged to participate. This instilled a “cult of terror” and fear – as in who is to be next. This started in the areas Mao’s army occupied in the 1920’s – and never stopped evolving.

During the long war with Japan Mao did little to attack the Japanese. He saw advantageously that Japan could do his work in defeating his arch-rival Chiang Kai-shek (leader of the Nationalist side). Also Mao allowed Nationalist forces to destroy rival communist groups. This allowed him to become the sole communist leader by the end of World War II. Mao’s primary goal was power for himself only.

The authors erroneously claim that after the conclusion of the war the U.S., under their emissary General George Marshall, could have prevented Mao’s communists from winning the Civil War against the Nationalists by providing more aid. Chiang Kai-shek Nationalists’ were extremely inept and corrupt, and the U.S. had already provided millions of dollars in aid to them that was largely wasted. In essence Mao was too smart, and thoroughly outplayed Chiang Kai-shek, much like he did with his rivals in the Communist Party.

This book gives us an alternate view of Mao than that provided by earlier historians – it lays waste to Red Star Over China by Edgar Snow which eulogized Mao. It chronologically gives us Mao’s acquisition to power from the 1920 ‘s to 1947; and then how he relentlessly wielded it after. It’s a sobering read of a 20th century tyrant.

Page 525 (the 1960’s)
Leisure disappeared. Instead, there were endless mind-numbing – but nerve-racking – meetings to read and reread Mao’s works and People’s Daily articles. People were herded into numerous violent denunciation rallies against “capitalist-roaders” and other appointed enemies. Public brutality became a part of daily life...Moreover, there were no ways to relax, as there were now virtually no books to read, or magazines, or films, or plays, opera; no light music on the radio. For entertainment there were only Mao Thought Propaganda Teams, who sang Mao’s quotations set to raucous music, and danced militantly waving the Little Red Book.







Mao by Warhol