本文同时刊发于南华早报，英文版翻页可见

2013年12月26日，是中华人民共和国缔造者毛泽东主席诞辰120周年。在现代中国历史上，毛泽东的影响远远超过任何人。在中国崛起和中华民族复兴的历史性时刻，世界的目光聚焦于中国，毛泽东的遗产无疑是不容忽视的一笔。当然，要给毛泽东这样重要、复杂的人物盖棺定论，历史需要的时间无疑是漫长的，也许永远也不可能。然而，为了理解当代中国及其与世界的关系，一些根本性的曲解亟待纠正。

在西方，通行的看法是认为中华人民共和国的前三十年，在毛泽东的领导下最终陷入灭顶之灾。一党执政的中共政权为了自救，被迫摒弃了毛泽东的意识形态统治，改弦更辙走改革开放的道路。

但上述观点是错误的。很多人割裂中共64年的执政历史，声称这段历史可分为正反两个三十年，其中从1949年到1979年的前三十年，主要领导人是毛泽东；从1979年直到当下的后三十年，以邓小平的改革为起点。毋庸置疑，邓小平的改革纠正了前三十年的许多错误政策，取得了巨大成就。大约6.5亿人在一代人时间里摆脱贫困，中国也从贫穷的农业国一跃而为工业大国。

然而，如果没有前三十年奠定的基础，后三十年的成就是不可能的。前三十年中，毛泽东领导的中共发动全国之力，集中有限资源，完成了现代中国的工业和人力资源积累。仅列举几个数据，就可证明这一阶段的成绩。1949年，中国几乎没有工业基础；除极少数大城市外，全国的通电率微不足道；识字率低于20%；免疫接种率实际为零；人均寿命仅有41岁。

到1979年，邓小平领导改革开放前夕，中国已建立了基本的工业体系。在全国各地新建了约1万座水电站，全国通电率跃升到60%以上，一些最贫困的乡村也通了电（当今全国通电率已接近100%）。识字率跃升到惊人的66%，这意味着超过80%以上的年轻人受过教育——在贫困的发展中国家中，这一数字遥遥领先（当今全国识字率是92%）。接受预防免疫接种的人口多达数亿；婴儿免疫接种率接近100%；全国人均寿命提高到65岁（当今是74岁）。事实上，到1978年时，中国的人类发展指数（HDI）已接近富裕得多的发达国家（数据来自1990年的联合国开发计划署《人类发展报告》）。

在改革开放前夕，中国有数亿虽仍贫困但身体健康、且受过教育的劳动者，还有基本健全的工业体系。这是中国改革开放后迅速腾飞、成就经济奇迹的基础。而前三十年的巨大积累，都是在底子薄弱、遭受全面外部封锁的艰苦环境中完成的。当然，在这期间未能避免失误，甚至巨大的灾难，比如“大跃进”和“文化大革命”，但若以此就全盘否定前三十年，不免有以管窥天之失。

毛泽东最重要的政治遗产，是造就了中国的民族独立。毛泽东领导建立、巩固的中华人民共和国，结束了近代百年来的国内战乱和外国瓜分，中国人第一次能牢牢掌握国家命运。冷战结束后，由于政治上的独立，中国能以自主姿态融入全球化。许多发展中国家却无此幸运，不但未能获益，反而被全球化吞噬。当然不可否认，毛泽东时代出现的政策错误造成了巨大损失和危机，中国民众为此付出了惨痛代价。然而风雨之后，年轻的人民共和国生存下来了，并进入了全面茁壮成长期。毛泽东时代的积淀泽及后人，甚至未来几代人都将继续受益匪浅。

最后有一点需要特别阐明。毛泽东常被描绘为意识形态的狂热信徒，这其实并不符合事实。在西方世界甚至中国国内，有一种观点很普遍，即认为毛泽东沉迷于意识形态，他领导的前三十年是意识形态挂帅的；而邓小平则是改革者，他开启的后三十年是实事求是的。中国崛起的秘密，就在于政治权力从毛泽东交到邓小平。

毋庸置疑，毛泽东时代的中国在特定时期吃过意识形态狂热的苦果。然而必须承认的另一面事实是，毛泽东归根结底是一个务实的政治家。全世界都不应忘记，正是在毛泽东的领导下，中国早在上世纪50年代末，就开始抵制苏联的影响和霸权。须知当时的苏联不仅是如日中天的超级大国，意识形态上也堪称新生的中华人民共和国的“老大哥”，毛泽东与苏联分道扬镳的决策，至少在胆略上也是无比惊人的。但毛泽东的手笔远不止于此，在冷战最激烈的70年代，他跨越意识形态的天堑，与美国结成事实性的同盟，以遏制苏联的扩张。相应地，这一布局为中国面向西方世界的开放开辟了道路，成为邓小平时代经济改革最强劲的动力之一。

所有在历史上留下深刻烙印的人物都不是简单的，其遗产总是丰富复杂的。但是，人们往往拘泥于简单、武断的裁判。正如历史学家托马斯·卡莱尔所言：“世界历史，不过是伟大人物的传记。”因此，曲解伟大的历史人物就是曲解历史，并可能误导未来。毛泽东不仅深深影响了十几亿中国人的命运，也触动了世界历史的脉搏。对毛泽东主席的认识，需要的是谨慎、深思熟虑的研究，而不是简单化的道德便利主义。

李世默是上海的风险投资家和政治学学者，春秋综合研究院研究员、复旦大学中国发展模式研究中心研究员。

毛泽东在开国大典上

翻页请看英文版

 

THE FOUNDING FATHER

SHANGHAI -- Today, China celebrates the 120th birthdate of the founding father of the People’s Republic – Chairman Mao Zedong. No one looms larger in the narrative of modern China. As the nation continues its ascendency to reclaim its position as a great power, Mao’s legacy is central to its perception in the eyes of the world. The ultimate judgment rendered by history, if such a thing is possible for a man of his significance and complexity, remains far into the horizon. But to understand the state of contemporary China and its relations to the world, some fundamental misconceptions need to be addressed.

The standard narrative in the West is that the first 30 years of the People’s Republic under Mao’s leadership was an unmitigated disaster and the party-state was only able to save itself by repudiating his ideological rule and taking the country in an opposite direction.

But this is false. Many segregate the party’s 64-year leadership into two thirty-year periods: the first from 1949 to 1979, mostly under Mao, and the second from 1979 to the present, starting with Deng Xiaoping’s dramatic reforms.  No doubt Deng’s reforms corrected many previous policy mistakes and delivered enormous successes. Some 650 million people have been lifted out of poverty in one generation and the country went from a poor agrarian economy to one of the world’s preeminent industrial powerhouses.

But without the foundation built in the first 30 years the accomplishments of the second 30 years would not have been possible. In the former, the Chinese Communist Party under Mao’s helm used its centralized political authority to mobilize limited national resources and built the basic industrial and human infrastructures of a modern nation. A few statistics demonstrate the significance of that period. In 1949, industrial infrastructure was negligible. Electricity availability outside small urban areas was near zero. Literacy rate was below 20%. Immunization rate was virtually non-existent and average life expectancy 41 years old.

At the eve of Deng’s reforms in 1979, China had built the framework of basic industrial infrastructures, though still very limited. Extensive national and local grids with about 10,000 newly built hydroelectric dams increased electricity coverage to over 60% even in the poorest rural areas (it is now near 100%). Literacy rate reached an astonishing 66%, meaning well over 80% of youth – among the highest among poor developing nations (now 92%). Hundreds of millions of people were immunized, nearly 100% of children at the age of one, and average life expectancy reached 65 (now 74). In fact, by 1978, China’s human development index was already closing in on much richer developed nations (UNDP Human Development Report 1990).

A still poor but relatively educated and healthy population with basic infrastructure set the stage for the country’s miraculous takeoff. And all this was achieved with very little resource under an international embargo. Certainly, unmitigated disasters did occur, such as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, but to define the entire period as such would be grossly mistaken. 

Mao’s most significant political legacy was Chinese national independence. After a century of endless civil conflicts and dismemberments in the hands of foreign aggressors, the establishment and consolidation of the People’s Republic under Mao’s leadership at last firmly placed the destiny of the nation into the hands of the Chinese themselves. This ability enabled China to then engage the post Cold War globalization on its own terms. Many developing countries were not so fortunate and were swallowed by globalization instead of taking advantage of it. It should not be denied that the Chinese people paid a heavy price for this independence as Mao’s catastrophic blunders caused deep suffering and severe crises. But the People’s Republic survived. The post-Mao dividends have been significant and in all likelihood will continue for generations to come.

Last but not least, the characterization of Mao as an extreme ideologue is misplaced. The widely accepted narrative in the West, and inside China - to some extent, is that the first 30 years under Mao was ideological and the second 30 years launched by Deng is pragmatic. And this transition from an ideologue to a reformer put China on the road to success.

No doubt China came under destructive spells of ideological fervor at several points during Mao’s rule. But the fact is Mao was a pragmatist through and through. The world should not forget it was Mao who led China out of Soviet domination as early as in the late fifties.  To decisively walk away from a newborn nation’s ideological mentor who was at the zenith of its superpower era was daring, to say the least. But Mao didn’t stop there. At the height of the Cold War, he reached across the ideological divide and built a de facto alliance with the United States to counter the Soviets. This in turn paved the way for China’s engagement with the West, which was one of the strongest propellers of Deng’s economic reforms.

All men of great historical impact were complex and their legacies mixed. Yet we yearn for judgments that are simple and unequivocal. As Thomas Carlyle once said, “the history of the world is but biography of great men.” Then to misjudge them is to misjudge history and risk misguiding the future. Mao Zedong, whose life left indelible marks on the lives of more than a billion people and changed the trajectory of the world, is to be studied with care and thoughtfulness, not to be judged with moral expediency.

Eric X. Li is a venture capitalist and political scientist in Shanghai.