The Great Leap Forward movement of China--留学生历史作业Essay代写范文

留学生历史作业Essay代写范文:“The Great Leap Forward movement of China”，这篇论文主要描述的是在第二次世界大战后，各国相继忙于经济的恢复花丛间，中国也是如此，想要让中国的经济建设步上轨道，首先就需要先清除国民党政府留下的经济通货膨胀的问题，在加上苏联对于中国的技术援助，在这种情况下也就引发了中国的“大跃进”运动的出现。

During the 1950s, in the case of accepting technical assistance from the Soviet Union, China's economic construction has achieved initial success, stopping the hyperinflation left by the KMT government to stabilize the market price and restore the national economy severely damaged by the war, while the war with Korean Peninsula (USA) and Vietnam (France) was no longer a threat, dominance of the Communist Party was strong. On the other hand, the economic development of the Soviet Union slowed down, Mao Zedong believed the Soviet economy not only failed to catch up and replace "the West" and it was being constantly backwards. Mao Zedong believed that China should use its own unique development model of economic development, striving for catching up with the United Kingdom within 10 years and surpassing the United States within 15 years in the yield of major industrial products. Thus, it set off an unprecedented "Great Leap Forward" campaign in China.

Objective

China's "Great Leap Forward" movement means the nationwide mass movement between 1958 and 1960 launched by the Chinese Communist Party with the objectives of rapid development of industry and rural people's communes, which was mobilized on the basis of the eighth Third Plenary of the CPC and constant criticism on opposition to rash advance of 1956. In May 1958, the Second Session of the Eighth Party Congress formally adopted the general principle of "going all out to strive for better and more economical construction of socialism". The starting point of general principle was to change China's economic and cultural backwardness as soon as possible.

Process

After proposed the policy of the Great Leap Forward, Chinese government launched the "Great Leap Forward" campaign. The movement pursued high speed development of production, in order to achieve high targets of industrial and agricultural production. It required doubling, the yield of the main products of industrial and agricultural production. For example, Chinese government put forward the slogan that the grain production must increase 80% in 1958 than in 1957; in 1959, it must increase 50% than in 1958. By the end of 1958, in order to meet the wishes of Mao Zedong to double the steel production, it called for universal steel. However, due to irregular technique, it only acquired a lot of scrap metal, resulting in tremendous waste. Steeling needs iron ore, coke, fuel and other materials. Due to lack of iron ore, all people in the country stopped farming to be engaged in mining, so that the food production reduced greatly. Due to lack of fuel, they chose deforestation, which made the forests bare, causing great damage to the environment. All people are incorporated into a commune, their ration was distributed universally, which was a manifestation of egalitarianism, this egalitarian greatly hurt the enthusiasm of farmers and was not conducive to improving the socialist agricultural productivity. "Great Leap Forward" movement pursued a large-scale construction, infrastructure investment expanded rapidly, during three years, the total capital investment was up to 100.6 billion yuan (RMB), which was almost twice of the total investment capital than during the period of the first five-year plan. Insisting on complete unrealistic, high targets inevitably led to the proliferation of boastfulness, the people’s living encountered serious difficulties. From November 1958 to July 1959, Mao Zedong and the CPC have been aware of their errors and made efforts to correct, they had taken a series of measures to depress agricultural and industrial production index in 1959. But in 1960, due to the need for political struggle, the Chinese government again proposed to maintain long-term Great Leap Forward, continuing to require industrial and agricultural production to achieve unrealistically high targets. In case of emergency needs for food throughout the country, it still constantly added investment in infrastructure, began infrastructure projects. From 1958 to 1961, "Great Leap Forward” policy has led to a large imbalance of proportion of the national economy and caused serious economic difficulties. In 1961, the CPC began to correct the "mistakes" in rural work, "Great Leap Forward "movement is stopped.(References, Daniel Houser, Barbara Sands and Erte Xiao, “Three parts natural, seven parts man-made: Bayesian analysis of China’s Great Leap Forward demographic disaster”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, February 2009, Pages 148-159

Result

Due to neglect of objective economic laws, China's economy did not in the rapid development but became worse. The Great Leap Forward Movement in three years since 1958 led to a large imbalance for proportion of national economy and caused serious economic difficulties, so there was a massive food crisis and famine, and tens of millions of people starved to death. China's Great Leap Forward Movement led to one-sided development of heavy industry and the sharp decline in light industrial production, and caused the income over expenditure in the finance. China's Great Leap Forward Movement eventually led to the unrest "Cultural Revolution."

Compare and contrast

Compare

The similarities between Great Leap Forward Movement of China and Khrushchev Reforms in 1950s are reflected in the following two aspects.

1. The manner is the same.

Similarly as the country with Communist system, the political system, political culture and leadership are very similar, thus the "movement" is carried out nationwide with the high pressure of the top leaders. The so-called "movement" is to ensure the target can be prioritized by virtue of a nationwide effort based on the particular target, and other things should make way for this particular target. Only the totalitarian state with socialist system can do this. In 1950s, Khrushchev launched a nationwide movement of corn planting and the Great Reclamation. During the Great Leap Forward Movement, China launched the movements almost covering all industries, such as movement of manure collection and movement of irrigation and water conservancy construction, movement of nationwide steelmaking, movement to form rural people's communes, nationwide movement of education that "everyone can write poetry and everyone can paint", movement against four pests.(References,  Terry Cannon, “Chinese famine: an intemperate attack”, Food Policy, June 1990, Pages www.liuxuelunwen.org/dxessay/ 257-258)

2. The mentality is the same.

The role of subjective will and subjective effort is above the objective economic laws, and is subject to the punishment of objective economic laws. Khrushchev and Mao Zedong have super capacity, bold vision and courage. Especially Mao Zedong utilized the "voluntarism" of revolutionary war to the national governance and economic construction. Marshal Lin Biao in China had a saying that "How bold person, and how much production" which can be the most vivid portrayal for subjective voluntarism. Their starting point is "what I want" rather than "what I can" objectively. Throughout the history of human civilization for thousands of years, failure in following the objective laws should eventually be punished, and the differences are time and manner of punishment. (References, Carl Riskin, “Seven questions about the Chinese famine of 1959–1961”, China Economic Review, Autumn 1998, Pages 111-124) The role of subjective will is only played in the objective limits.  When the Soviet Union launched a nationwide movement of corn planting, regardless of the specific conditions and contrary to the most important principle of local conditions for agricultural production, many areas not for corn planting were forced to engage in this movement through the use of political pressure. As a result, corn production was far from the desired high and stable yield. However, the nationwide grass fields were reduced to one third in ten years, resulting in the acute shortages of feed supply. (References, Tue G?rgens, Xin Meng and Rhema Vaithianatha, “Stunting and Selection Effects of Famine: A Case Study of the Great Chinese Famine”, Journal of Development Economics, January 2012, Pages 99-111) The consequence of China's Great Leap Forward Movement is more serious. The agricultural production decreased dramatically, in which reduction of grain production in consecutive years caused a nationwide food crisis, resulting in the food shortage for about 30 million people in one year, and many people starved to death. (References, Erhun Kula, “Politics, economics, agriculture and famines: The Chinese case”, Food Policy, February 1989, Pages 13-16)

Contrast

1. The standpoint is different.

As mentioned earlier, Khrushchev takes the theory of war (World War III) to be avoided and the "peaceful coexistence", "peaceful competition" and "peaceful transition" as a policy-making standpoint. Chairman Mao Zedong in China considers that the World War III is inevitable, and the competition between socialist camp and capitalist camp is sooner or later. Therefore, the Chinese leaders make the Great Leap Forward Movement from the perspective of preparing for the war, and hope to complete the preparation of industrialization and comprehensive work before war just like the Stalin industrialization in 1930s. Hence, the mentality of Chinese leaders is more anxious.

In addition, Chairman Mao Zedong has the absolute authority in China. With the strong political pressure and mass appeal of Mao Zedong, the breadth and depth of Great Leap Forward movement in China are more than the reform of Soviet Union, and almost all Chinese people are devoted in this movement.

2. The ideas and concepts are different.

The key difference between the two countries is that economic development ideas and policy direction between the leaders are almost exactly opposite. Khrushchev has a deep understanding of the drawbacks in the highly centralized Stalinist model for repression of human nature, so his overall reform ideas are "material incentives" and "expanded autonomy". Stalin model is highly recognized by Mao Zedong, even more concentrated than Soviet Union in Stalin era, neglecting more material needs of the masses, and Khrushchev's "material incentives" is critiqued as a "revisionist" and considered as the bourgeois restoration. Politically, Khrushchev opposes to the cult of personality, but emphasizes the principle of collective leadership; Mao Zedong's personality cult is more than that of Stalin. In comparison, the reform led by Khrushchev in Soviet Union is more market-oriented and in more compliance with modern political and economic law.

3. The communes are different.

Khrushchev proposed that management system of the Soviet Union's agriculture program was one of the extremely important reasons for the slow development of agricultural production, he believed that it should abandon unnecessarily detailed provisions of plans for agricultural development, his reform program allowed the collective farms and farm staff to determine the acreage of various crops and the number of livestock products by themselves according to their needs, and the National planning Commission was only responsible for the vision of agricultural development and coordination of the work. Reform of the agricultural planning system made the collective farms have more autonomy in production and management to mobilize the enthusiasm of agricultural production. Furthermore, Khrushchev abolished the system of obligatory sales developed by Stalin, which greatly promoted the development of agricultural production, so that the income of collective farmers increased significantly. China's commune management system was evident in the management characteristics of a planned economy, it issued annual production task indicators for each commune, all production of farmers was scheduled by the country and the products were purchased by it, goods that farmers needed were distributed by the government. All production processes were governed by the collective, rather than the farmers themselves. People's communes made the farmers overwork, it also reduced people's enthusiasm and labor productivity.

Conclusion

Great Leap Forward Movement of China and Khrushchev Reforms in 1950s finally failed. The two are different in standing points, ideas and concepts, as well as commune management systems. These differences led to that although the Soviet reforms did not achieved the intended purpose, it has played a limited positive effect on the Soviet Union's economic development. And China's reforms did not achieve the intended purpose, they undermined China's economic development, resulting in the tragedy that more than 2000 million people starved to death. The similarities rested with the manner and the mentality, which showed that the communist management system led to too concentrated leadership, which easily led to that policies formulated by the government went against the objective laws and the law of development of the market economy. The author believed that the management system of communism was one of the fundamental reasons causing the failure of the two reforms.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创留学生作业代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。

51due为留学生提供最好的服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多essay代写范文 提供美国作业代写以及essay辅导服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041哟。-xz