American Imperialism In China

Words: 1454
Pages: 6

Towards the end of the nineteenth century, European countries had imperialized Asia’s two most populous countries: China and India. By 1900, Imperialism had broken up China into many smaller states, with each hosting a wealth of foreign soldiers and merchants not subject to Chinese laws. In India, Britain ruled both culturally and logistically, forcing their Western ways upon the Indians. Angered by the imperialism and consequent oppression of their beloved countries, Mao Zedong and Ghandi sought revolutions to reject European Imperialism, though each approached the issue from a vastly different stance. Ghandi, who was influenced by Thoreau but was inherently an Indian thinker, based his rejection of European Imperialism upon a combination …show more content…
He borrows Lenin’s rejection of capitalism and applies it to the unique class structure present in China, taking the petty bourgeoisie and peasants to bolster the proletariat. Furious about the class discrepancies in capitalism, Lenin writes, “in other words: under capitalism we have a state in the proper sense of the word, that is, special machinery for the suppression of one class by another, and of the majority by the minority at that.” Meanwhile, in China, Mao takes Lenin’s and in turn, Marx’s work and applies it to a Chinese social structure: “In economically backward and semi-colonial China the landlord class and the comprador class are wholly appendages of the international bourgeoisie, depending upon imperialism for their survival and growth. These classes represent the most backward and most reactionary relations of production in China and hinder the development of her productive forces.” Mao hates the traditional Chinese hierarchical structure, as the views the landlord and comprador classes as stomping on the peasants, proletariat, and petty bourgeoisie, and he indicates that they are the root of the Imperialist problems in China, as they are assisting the foreign powers in trade. By tying the class oppressions in China together under one knot and relating them to Lenin’s interpretation of the bourgeoisie – …show more content…
Lenin, seeking a real democracy for the masses, states, “These restrictions, exceptions, exclusions, obstacles for the poor, seem slight… but in their sum total these restrictions exclude and squeeze out the poor from politics and from an active share in democracy.” Lenin finds disagreement with the slight roadblocks in place that deter the people from voting and handing “democratic” voting power to those with property. Thus, Lenin seeks an uprising of the majority to remove the bourgeoisie from power in the same “transition period” addressed prior: “Democracy for the vast majority of the people, and suppression by force, i.e., exclusion from democracy, of the exploiters and oppressors of the people – this is the modification of democracy during the transition from capitalism to Communism.” Unsurprisingly, Mao shows influence from Lenin by also targeting the same democratic points for the betterment of the masses: “We are the leaders and organizers of the revolutionary war as well as the leaders and organizers of the life of the masses. To organize the revolutionary war as well as to improve the life of the masses are our two major tasks…” Much like Lenin’s rejection of capitalist democracy, Mao seeks as his duty to remove the proletariat and the peasants, the majority, from underneath the oppression of