3 ms·
It's actually fairly safe to discuss, since it happened more than 60 years ago and the results were so obviously disastrous that the policy was scrapped in its
by yorwba 5y ago
It's actually fairly safe to discuss, since it happened more than 60 years ago and the results were so obviously disastrous that the policy was scrapped in its entirety. The Baidu Baike article https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E5%A4%A7%E8%B7%83%E8%BF%9B/228533 https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E5%A4%A7%E8%B7%83%E8%BF%9B/228... (which you can assume to be officially vetted) criticizes it as unrealistic, but takes care to stress that the party "quickly" (well... within two years) corrected their mistake.
Drawing parallels to contemporary politics would be a different matter.
- SiVal 5y agoWhen you can cause millions to slowly starve to death and still describe it as the quick rectification of unrealistic expectations, you see the power of "anti-misinformation" policies wielded by the politically powerful who dominate the media. And note that in this frank and open admission of temporarily unrealistic policies, the powerful don't discuss the techniques they use(d) to silence anyone guilty of being unforgivably "realistic".