Compare and Contrast Lenin's and Mao's Interpretation of Marxist Ideas in Theory and Application - Essay Example

Compare and Contrast Lenins and Maos interpretation of Marxist ideas in theory and application Marxism, generally considered as the most important critical analysis of the development of capitalism, is based upon the ideas put forth by Karl Marx. Besides, the world renowned political leaders/political theoreticians like Vladimir Lenin (USSR/Russia) and Mao Zedong (the Republic of China) tried to reinterpret Marxism and superimpose the same in their social and cultural settings. But the basic characteristics of Marxism like blind following of materialistic elucidation of the historical facts and aimless attack on capitalism prove that Marxism cannot substitute democracy. Thesis statement: The compare and contrast study on Lenins and Maos interpretation of Marxist ideas in theory and application proves that their theoretic interpretation of the same related to the topics like forms of government, the relationship of the individual to the state, justice and morality were same, but the difference in application resulted in the failure of Marxism/Communism in USSR/Russia and led China towards Communist authoritarianism. Compare and contrast study: The comparison is based upon Lenins and Maos interpretation of Marxist ideas in theory, especially on the topic s like forms of government, the relationship of the individual to the state, justice and morality. Besides, the contrast study based on the application of Marxist theory by Lenin and Mao is related to the topics like forms of government, the relationship of the individual to the state, justice and morality. A. Comparison: Lenins and Maos interpretation of Marxist ideas in theory I. Forms of government One can see that Marxism-Leninism is the byproduct of Karl Marx’s influence, especially the influence of Marxism on Lenin. Paul DAmato made clear that “Marx not only exposed all the ills of society-many had done so before him-but he revealed how capitalism developed, how it went into crisis, and how it would meet its end” (10). So, Lenin considered that the theory of Marxism is applicable to the context of Russia. For instance, some of the core elements of Marxism, especially Marx’s ideas on the government, were made use by Lenin. To be specific, Lenin made use of Marxism to form an innovative governing system in Russia. At the same time, Lenin totally ignored communism and it eventually led to the origin of Marxism-Leninism. One can see that the form of government envisioned by Lenin was totally different from dictatorship. On the other side, Mao’s interpretation of the Marxist theory, especially his ideas on the form of government in China, was deeply influenced by his concepts like Peoples war and New Democracy. Besides, the theoretical aspects of Mao’s interpretation of Marxism were based upon the practical scope of the same in the Chinese context. Mao considered that revolution must be based upon the needs of the people. Moreover, Mao envisioned that a successful revolution will eventually lead the nation towards a strong governing body in the centre. So, one can see that Mao’s theoretical interpretation of Marxist ideas, especially on the form of government, is comparatively different from the same envisioned by Lenin. II. The relationship of the individual to the state Within the context of Marxism, class consciousness is the most important element of the relationship between individual and the state. If one is unaware of one’s status in the society, one will not be able to be an integral part of the state. To be specific, one’s realization one’s role in the national context is utmost important for a Marxist. Within this context, Lenin interpreted the Marxist ideas on the relationship of the individual to the state as a complex relationship. For instance, Lenin was aware of the fact that the amalgamation of Marxist ideology can help the people (say, Russians) to be free from the Russian Empire. Under the Russian Empire, the people were not allowed to have any active role in governance. So, Lenin adopted the core elements of Marxist ideology and amalgamated the same to the context of Russia. On the other side, Mao interpreted the Marxist theory in broader context because he was aware of the basic differences between the European and Asian societies. For instance, Mao’s concept of Peoples War unmasks the relationship of the individual to the state. To be specific, Mao considered individuals as tools to transform the society/ state. This transformation from authoritarianism to communism/socialism is deeply indebted to the revolutionary struggle initiated by the working class. So, one can see that Mao’s interpretation of Marxist theory, especially the relationship between individual and the state, aims to inculcate political transformation and the independence of the lower classes in the society. III. Justice Marx envisioned a society in which the working class acts the role of a transformational power which alters the capitalistic social background and provides social justice to all. Lenin was attracted by the concept of social justice and equal treatment for all in the society. Folke Dovring stated that “Lenin’s notions about class war related to his ideas on international class solidarity” (80). In addition, Lenin considered that capitalism and imperialism hinders the society from providing social justice to the working class. On the other side, Mao considered that a capitalistic government cannot provide social justice to the needy. Instead, the people must take initiative to transform the society from capitalism to communism. Within this context, one can see that social and economic justice plays an important role in the development of the society envisioned by Marx, Lenin, and Mao. IV. Morality Lenins interpretation of Marxist ideas in theory, especially in the case of morality, is based upon the unity among the working class people. This is important because Lenin totally rejected the moral and ethical codes imposed by the bourgeoisies upon the working class. One can see that effective implementation of ethical and moral codes lead a society towards rapid progress. But Lenin tried to reject those ethical and moral codes (say, formulated and implemented by capitalism) which hinder the development of individuals. Guenter Lewy made clear that “Communist morality, Lenin explained in an address to the Russian Young Communist League in October 1920, is the morality which serves the class struggle” (27). So, one can see that the ethical and moral codes envisioned by Lenin are based upon the collective responsibility of the people towards the state. On the other side, Mao interpreted Marxist morality as one’s responsibility towards one’s self or self reliance. To be specific, this type of morality is helpful for individual development because it aims to transform one’s character and behavior. Later, Mao’s interpretation of Marxist morality was totally rejected by the communist party in China. B. Contrast study: Lenins and Maos interpretation of Marxist ideas in application I. Forms of government From a different angle of view, Marx envisioned communism as the end result of Marxism. But Lenin was aware of the possible difficulties to attain communism in Russia. For instance, Russia was under the Tsar Empire for centuries. George Lichtheim stated that “Prior to 1917, the prospect of a revolution in Russia figured in Socialist thinking primarily as an event that would make Europe safe for democracy by removing that traditional bulwark of reaction, the Tsarist regime” (325). This eventually led the people of Russia to accept monarchy as a necessary evil. After revolution in Russia, Lenin allowed the Russian Provisional Government for a short interval to rule over Russia. At the same time, Lenin came to realize the fact that Russian Provisional Government cannot fulfill the needs and demands of the downtrodden classes in the society. The form of government envisioned by Lenin, under the direct control of the working class, was based upon Marxist ideology. So, Bolshevik Party was formed by Lenin which aimed to apply Marxist ideology in Russia. Eventually, this led to the formation of Soviet Union. On the other side, Mao did not imitate Lenin’s ideas on the formation of government. Instead, Mao ignited revolutionary spirit among the people of China. This eventually led to the large scale mobilization of working class people to cities and towns. Besides, Mao was not against guerrilla warfare, which was crucial in the Chinese context. So, one can see that Lenin adopted the Marxist form of government (under the direct control of the working class) in Russia, but Mao provided importance to the revolutionary spirit of the working class and applied Marxist theory in a different way. II. The relationship of the individual to the state From a different angle of view, Lenin provided ample importance to the relationship between individual and the state. In Russia, the most important aim put forth by Lenin was to overthrow the ultimate control of the bourgeoisies over the government (say, the Russian Provisional Government). Besides, Lenin was aware of the fact the government must represent the working class in Russia. But one can see that the incorrect application of the Marxist theory on the relationship of the individual to the state in Russia eventually led to communist dictatorship under Stalin. To be specific, Lenin’s views on relationship of the individual to the state were totally vested upon the rights of individuals toward the state. But, Stalin reinterpreted this as the duty towards the state. To be specific, Lenin considered relationship of the individual to the state as two way policy. On the other side, Mao provided ample importance to the power of the individuals which assimilates different classes in the society as a single unit under the central authority. This was utmost important in the Chinese context because it was difficult for Mao to create awareness about Marxism among the people. Still, Mao was aware of the fact that the spirit of nationalistic feeling can eventually lead the people to accept revolution as the best possible way to attain freedom. Frederick Betz opined that “Mao reasoned that society could be developed only through individual effort in mass contexts of conflict- mass struggle, struggle by the masses” (156). Mao believed that the party cadres must educate the people on their role in the formation of a new government in China. Besides, Mao amalgamated his personal philosophy with Marxism/Leninism and implemented the same in Chinese context. So, one can see that Lenin’s interpretation of Marxist theory in Russia, related to the relationship of the individual to the state, proved to be successful. But it eventually led to communist dictatorship or the control of communism over the people. On the other side, Mao reinterpreted the relationship of the individual to the state as an opportunity to provide political education to the people of China. III. Justice As pointed out earlier, Marx, Lenin, and Mao considered that a capitalistic society cannot provide justice to the working class. Instead, the working class must try to gain political supremacy and this can help them to gain social and economic justice. One can see that Lenin provided ample importance to social and economic justice. But Robert Service opined that “Wide gaps existed in Leninist theory about dictatorship, democracy, social justice and human rights” (391). During the initial stages of the communist rule in Russia, the people were able to enjoy social justice. But the overall control of the communist government over the society hindered the working class from gaining economic justice. On the other side, Maoism was more flexible than Marxism-Leninism. For instance, Maoism provided ample importance to political education. Maurice J. Meisner stated that “ Mao Zedong, of course, long had tended to think of class in terms of political consciousness and behavior rather than Marxian-defined social and economic criteria” (162). This helped the downtrodden classes in China to be conscious about their rights and duties. In the present condition, China rejected Maoism. Still, the influence of Maoism provided strong foundation to communism in China. IV. Morality One can see that the application of Marxist theory in the Russian context, especially Marxist morality, helped the people to know more about the importance of ethics and morality in a society. During the initial stages of communist rule in Russia, the people were ready to accept communist morality as an integral part of their duty towards the state. Gradually, the duties towards the state transformed from obedience to the state to the obedience towards the communist leaders. Besides, this led the people of Russia to face the problem of dictatorship under Stalin. On the other side, Mao provided ample importance to individual development through political education. Yingchi Chu opined that “While in Mao’s period morality was subsumed under ‘political ideology’, the CCP under Jiang’s leadership revived a modified notion of morality compatible with the demands of the market” (125). Also, Mao made use of Cultural Revolution to renovate the Chinese society. But this led to the rejection of Chinese culture and acceptance communist culture, without considering its negative effect in the society. So, one can see that Lenin’s application of Marxist/communist morality was based upon collective responsibility, but Mao’s ideas on the same were based upon individual development. Summing, one can see that Lenin tried to interpret Marxist ideas and implemented the same in Russian context in a direct way. This helped the people of Russia to be independent from Tsarist tyranny. But Lenin did not provide importance to the long-lasting influence of Marxism Russia. Besides, the common errors occurred during the application of Marxist ideas in the Russian scenario eventually led to communist dictatorship and the total collapse of the same in 1990s. On the other side, Mao’s interpretation of Marxist ideology was totally different because he identified the errors committed by Marxism-Leninism and applied Marxist ideas in the political, cultural and military contexts of China. Later, the Communist Party of China rejected Maoism, but the same is still an influential political ideology in Asia. So, one can see that the differences in application of Marxist ideas by Lenin and Mao resulted in the decline of communism in Russia and the development of communism in China. Works Cited Betz, Frederick. Societal Dynamics: Understanding Social Knowledge and Wisdom. New York: Springer, 2011. Print. Chu, Yingchi. Chinese Documentaries: From Dogma to Polyphony. Oxon: Routledge, 2007. Print. DAmato, Paul. The Meaning of Marxism. Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2009. Print. Dovring, Folke. Leninism: Political Economy As Pseudoscience. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 1996. Print. Lichtheim, George. Marxism: An Historical and Critical Study. London: Taylor & Francis, 1961. Print. Lewy, Guenter. The Cause That Failed: Communism in American Political Life. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Print. Meisner, Maurice J. Mao Zedong: A Political And Intellectual Portrait. Cambridge: Polity, 2007. Print. Service, Robert. Lenin: A Biography. USA: Harvard University Press, 2000. Print. Read More