Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Mao's China - Patreon early access! (Patreon)

Published:
2025-07-18 16:47:40
Edited:
2025-07-30 20:32:48
Imported:
2026-09
Tags:

Videos

  • 508089273.mp4

Downloads

Content

Dear Patrons,

I am very pleased to share the next instalment of our epic history of 20th century China - 'Mao's China'. In this episode, the Chinese Communist Party and Chairman Mao are in the driving seat, imposing sweeping changes across society and the economy. The results of the 'Great Leap Forward' are dramatic, to say the least.

Thank you to Ting-chieh Ou Yang for assistance with translations, and to Taylor Bradford for invaluable guidance on Mandarin pronunciation. Any errors that remain are entirely our own!

I hope you enjoy the video. Two more to come in this series, covering the Cultural Revolution, and Deng's economic reforms. But before that, we will see the first episode of WW2 (1931-1934), and ULTRA Part 2.

Thank you for your amazing support, and more updates soon!

Toby

Files

Comments

Leonardo Espino

Excellent documentary! The sino-soviet split has to be, for me, an interesting split because the two prominent communist nations that were suppose to match together in lockstep decided to just end their friendship… but also attack each other (well, china attacked the USSR first). But it wasn’t just solely tho the denunciation of Stalin and his cultural of personality that lead Mao to dislike Kruschev. It was that mixed with the Hungarian uprising and the fact that Mao wanted the bomb too and the soviets didn’t wanted to share that with the Chinese. Mao thought that kruschev was soft on the uprising (and hence was a reason for his downfall) but also felt that the USSR was holding china back for not giving them the bomb. Interesting stuff that honestly, this should be shown on todays clsssrooms not just for historian enthusiats! Anywho, GREAT VIDEO!

Eli Khanam

I recently read about Trofim Lysenko, a Soviet biologist and political player who got his pseudo-scientific ideas to become state policy in the Soviet Union and aligned countries, and scientists who denounced his work were imprisoned or executed. It contributed to the millions of deaths during the Great Leap Forward, leading to party leaders to eventually accept the harsh truth that it was far removed from reality and had to accept advice from scientists, who had to band together to get their respective governments to remove his influence.

Timothy Fisher

I think it would be better if you showed the invasion of Tibet happening in 1950 rather than 1951 since the PLA invaded and occupied Tibet in October of 1950. I also think you should have the Inchon landing on the Korean War map.

Stuart Carver

I mean it shows 1951 for Tibet being occupied and annexed which would be correct. The next line “after a short conflict” I think does infer the 1950 intervention. As for The Inchon landing….it could be cool to see, but the map’s only meant as a simplified overview of the war.

EpicHistoryTV

Thank you Timothy, we’ll have another look at both of these. I did think about Inchon in the final review today, but in such a short summary I’m not entirely sure we want to get into the operations.

EpicHistoryTV

I was reading about him this week too! In a review of a new book about the history of epigenetics.. most of which went over my head.

Kevin Xu

Splitting this into domestic and foreign policy comments. I’ll preface by saying that I am descendant from that one in five people on earth: Chinese peasants and petite bourgeois from Shandong Overall, the history telling is an interesting dynamic in terms of framing the focus on the abuse of the landowners as opposed to that of the farmers. It’s the opposite telling in the American dynamic: where there is little sympathy given to the southern landowners who used generational enslaved labor and where land redistribution was also debated as a remedy for the centuries of wealth inequality(40 acres and a mule). Not saying that this should be muted, I do appreciate the detail and numerical impact on both sides(1 million killed and 300 million peasants liberated), but just something for folks to think about: why in the Asian or Cuban case the narrative is focused on the suffering of the landowners, and not the liberation of the peasants when in America, Europe and Tsarist Russia it is flipped. In China the gradient is also there in the individual basis: some landowners like my maternal great grandfather family ran a silk plantation with a generous soul(something my mom says I inherited with my own charitable giving and activism 😅 )while a neighbor was a loan shark. One was able to divide the land among sons and tenants while the other was punished more. Many landowners were formally blacklisted instead of killed, which did pass to their children in an unfair discrimination that prevented the clean slate and equal starting ground for all for decades. On the flip side, the liberation of women is not as clear cut either. It is a fascinating dynamic of social uplifting and the stickiness of some social norms that even a socialist government struggles to upend to this day. On one hand, everyone can agree to do away with honorifics, bows, and formal seniority etiquette among peers 1-3 years apart from each other(hence the difference between PRC China and the norms in Japan and Korea). At the same time, gender norms were and still are hard to dislodge from Chinese society, especially in the countryside where villages are organized in patriarchal clans where wives do not see their families until a special day in the Lunar New Year holiday. My father’s own village is called Xu village, neighboring Chen Village, and so forth. As such, these are heavily dense villages in agrarian standards, and much of the labor has historically been done by hand and human labor rather than animals, even prior to the communists arrival. The key source of communist era inefficiency from my fathers view point is twofold: the tending of commune land was seen as low priority for the farmer families, and the rations that did not calculate the metabolic needs of growing or working peasants. The communists could not and did not wish to upend these villages, but as noted in the video the attempts were made to refocus the structure away from individual households based on family seniority and more on the communist bureaucracy. The bureaucracy also brought benefits, specifically in subsidized education with a massive investment in schools and medicine such as the barefoot doctors program. This focus on health, especially maternal health, actually leads to an increase of life expectancy throughout the post 49 years, even with the great famine. The primary education of the hundreds of millions of children like my father will be invaluable when Deng’s industrialization requires a massive amount of young, educated labor force to run factory machines and laboratories. This stubborn grassroots patriarchy also impacted the implementation of the socialist policies of free education and equality of genders. Many families prioritize the well being of a younger brother to an elder sister, to the point where donations for girls were redirected to boys by families(even pink backpacks or clothing), delaying an elder sisters education start date until their brother was ready to go to school, or in the 80s onwards, even forcing the elder sisters to work in various low level, high pay industries to support a younger brother’s tuition(a reason for the strict ban on prostitution in China).

Kevin Xu

In the international section, I think it’s fair to state how similar the peasant situation was in Tibet, Mongolia, Xinjiang, and Korea. Reverting back to simply covering them as external invasions ignores local support for radical change, as well as ignoring the later domestic discontent and uprisings against the military dictatorship of South Korea such as Jeju Island or Gwangju. I also wished that the discussion of Mao’s focus on Communist revolution abroad at this time also touched on the reach outs done worldwide, such as WEB Dubois’s visits to Mao during the 50s and Huey Newton’s visit to meet Zhou Enlai, both of which is sadly not covered enough on both sides of mainstream history in the US and China

Kevin Xu

Oh a final thought while you’re making the Deng video: my father’s recollection is that while these years were rough they were fair in comparison to the 80s-90s. When stories went around the Mao executed his friend for pilfering $200, the environment was not for officials to shakedown people for bribes and fees. Even when the terracotta soldiers and Chinese archeology was found in this era, no one thought of trying to sell these precious items for money(tbf there was also lots of superstition of these tomb items by the peasants who first discovered them) This was contrasted by my father’s generation becoming twenty something’s during Deng’s market liberalization, where officials accepted liquor and banquets and street level official requested cash bribes with abandon. Take it with a grain of salt of childhood nostalgia, but the noticeable increase in petty corruption is a key contributor to the nationwide protests of June 4th

EpicHistoryTV

Genuinely fascinating and enlightening to read, thank you Kevin. Your point about the focus in relation to liberation of peasants versus persecution of landowners is interesting. One thought is that, in the case of emancipation of serfs and slaves in Russia and America, it was not done with comparable repression of former landowners. (Almost the opposite, in the sense that they continued to have economic and social dominance). That is a contrast. But I think it is fair to say that in a video like this, we rush through seismic events without always stopping to unpack or analyse them! I’m a very strong believer that these videos need to be as concise as possible, in order to reach a wide audience. But it’s great to have comments like these adding nuance and reflection on our narratives.

Kevin Xu

Agreed in terms of the end result of the American civil war. There was hundreds of thousands of lives lost, the former landowners had more influence under the reconciliatory attitude of the Lincoln administration. And much of the liberation of black southerners did get stamped out after the Compromise of 1877. But if General Sherman and Thaddeus Steven were at the helm instead, the actions might’ve been much more enforced, potentially vindictive, and the narrative from confederate exiles in Brazil or Cuba might be what we see with mainland China or other exiles from socialist countrie

Samuel Pattinasarane

I’ve noticed that videos are never presented in full screen, is there a copyright issue or it it purely artistic choice?

Eric Hu

Again thank you for the incredible series. Chinese modern history is a tumultuous series of tragedies that few really know the scale of. Thank you for all the hard work. At 7:22, I believe Tibet was not part of China until 1950 when the PRC invaded. Edit: ah I see you guys explain it right after. I think maybe the map at 7:22 should be fixed to be consistent with the timeline then?

Eric Hu

Around 21:50 you mentioned Mao stepped back, the literature I read implied that Mao was forced to because of his disastrous policies during the GLF and lost power in the CCP which is what led to the Cultural Revolution and his return to full power after. However, I noticed you only mentioned that he stepped back and was not sidelined. Will this be mentioned in the next video or was it intentional and there's more evidence that he was in full control the entire time?

TankerBricks

Finally got around to watch this video 7 hours after it first dropped, a good video (as yourself and the team do!!!!) Never realized that Taiwan airdropped supplies over the mainland so that's a new thing I've learnt!

Lord John 🇵🇱💚

This highly anticipated fourth episode was truly fantastic! Very much looking forward to more. Thank You Toby & Team!!! Sincerest regards Lord John 💚

MitchyCool

Mao also kept exporting food for money even when it became clear that millions of his own people were dying because of his policies. He was an idiot who didn’t understand how ANYTHING worked, constantly refused to listen to experts who actually knew what they were talking about - and we haven’t even gotten to the Cultural Revolution yet!

Kevin Xu

There is the barefoot doctor program and the free education to the villagers which were successes This resulted in increased life expectancy even during the famine years See my comments below: there is more to Mao than just the mistakes, especially if you truly want to understand how China is the powerhouse it is today

MitchyCool

I can give you that he’s mostly responsible for that, and did do some things that were good, but I’m sorry dude when you hit a death count that reaches the tens of millions - that is a “straight-down-the-checklist fuck up” right there

Kevin Xu

I’d look into the critique of Frank Dikotter, there is a political bias there in trying the tell the highest number, even higher than the purposeful genocide the holocaust that historians have pointed out in his popular narrative. Nevertheless, it is a high number, but remember in the video series that Chinese people have faced numerous famines and natural disasters that caused not only death, but the mass emigration of Chinese people throughout the world during the 19th century, both internally and globally. People don’t emigrate in large numbers to make Manchuria and Malaysia majority Chinese areas because things back home are great The point is that the famine is not remembered as a black mark in Chinese history the way the Japanese invasion or the cultural revolution was due to the frequency of such things in the villager’s recent history.

EpicHistoryTV

Artistic -plus many of the videos are not high resolution, and would look blurry shown full screen.

EpicHistoryTV

Thanks Eric! We'll look into that earlier map. Regarding Mao's 'stepping back' - that was the phrasing signed off by our historical advisor. I guess the difference between stepping back / being sidelined would depend on whether it was voluntary, or compelled, but it does seem like it was a tactical, political retreat of Mao's own volition (before making a comeback in the next episode!) If anyone else has further or different info on this I'd be interested to hear it.

Vincent Gerochi

“Communism is a valid form of government” is a crazy statement that is still uttered today. People are nuts.

Diego Zancan Bonomo

Great video! When you mention early Soviet cooperation with China, I think it would be useful to compare it to the U.S. Marshall Plan to Europe. I have seen at least one estimate stating that Soviet aid was actually larger than U.S. aid. This comparison would be useful to give the viewer a sense of how important the USSR was to China right after the Revolution. I would also suggest in the Korean War part to mention that when the Chinese joined the fight, they not only pushed the UN and South Korean troops to the parallel, but tried to re-invade the South (a parallel mistake to MacArthur’s decision to invade the North). They were stopped halfway and pushed back to the parallel. This important offensive (and counteroffensive) is missing. Thank you.

Kevin Xu

Comparing a form of government through the lens of bad implementations? How is this different from the Tsars and Metternich pointing to Napoleon and Robespierre to declare all liberal democracies are invalid and their supporters are dangerous traitors deserving of secret police enforcement?

Kevin Xu

Was the aid number specifically after revolution or during the warlord and world war period as well? I would think that peeling away Outer Mongolia would be a sticky point of contention post 1949, as well as the potential incursions into xinjiang from USSR Kazakhstan, a reason for the Xinjiang Construction Corps to be kept around

Matt White

I love how the video switiches from traditional Chinese characters to simplified characters after mentioning the changes in history, very nice touch

Lea

So much great content here that there isn't enough time during a day for it all !

Vincent Gerochi

Because every implementation of Communism in the real world in history has proved to have been devastating to the general population. Give me an example of a communist system that you would gladly live in today. Now give me a democracy where you would gladly live in today. And don’t be disingenuous.

Thomas Wiltherford

This was great! I feel that it was a very nuanced and fair view of the early years of China. Not all successes, not all failures, but somewhere in between. Reality is often like that, so thank you for depicting that in your documentary.

Kevin Xu

Again, how is this argument different from what the kings said in 1820 or 1848 “ you can only name past references so therefore all republics are bad: Cromwell became a puritan tyrant, America is a squabbling mishmash of states and weak, and France lost control with anti Catholic riots and plundering imperial armies that only last 15 years*” *And with France, you’d also be ignoring that the short term longevity was because of military blockade and alliances to take it down hell, Cuba has now lasted longer than Napoleonic France and doing fine despite embargo, yet we’re surprised people still find innovative ideas in socialism, but see it as natural when 1820 Decembrists looked at the 1 decade old France republic for inspiration?

Vincent Gerochi

Yes, let’s congratulate Hitler for his indirect contributions to the advances of modern medicine, and overlook his role in the Holocaust. Great mentality.

Kevin Xu

Hitler very specifically used ethnic nationalism and biases to explicitly blame Jewish people for German problems and clearly had an end goal of getting rid of their communities by any means necessary If you can’t differentiate that from aid programs that went wrong, then we should question whether it’s better to be apathetic to the worlds problems. If USAID made things worst with their programs in Afghanistan, should that mean we should put them in the same category of Hitler and Milosevic?

Kevin Xu

Even today, within China and in Chinese specific circles these discussions are happening in earnest as their impacts are still effecting everyday lives. Whether it is how much control the state should have in regulating factories or the persistence of patriarchal traditions on society It’s not well discussed in the west because many circles outside China unfortunately see the discussion as a binary pedestal or damnation of the entire system. I wonder if much in the same vein that Europeans in 1820 would “discuss” liberal democracy and Republican-Napoleonic France as either an anti-Christ movement or a shining beacon