JohnRawls wrote:Batshit insane is a relative term. Labeling leaders batshit insane is a simplistic when you are at odds at what they have done or you have never tried to understand why have they done it. Be it Hitlers holocaust or Obamas healthcare there is always an underlying explanation to it. Things are not done, because the person in charge is "Batshit insane''. Actions can't be labeled good or bad if you take an impartial perspective. There is only action and reaction (then again you can say i am removing morality which in itself makes Mao look better).
But that is the whole paradigm of the situation. You are approaching it from moralistic point of view(That the leader must be batshit insane to kill people/hurt people to achieve a goal) while i try to be more amoral/altruistic in respect to all leader(That the head of the country tries to achieve the maximum benefit/achieve the goal with the means he has). Some fail, some don't.
Why i do this, is because moralistic point of view can't explain the realities of politics/diplomacy in general. (For example, Bush invaded iraq with no pretext or with a faulty context, which means he shouldn't have, which is contrary to reality).
Even if you took morality out of the Mao equation you still have a man who:
"[Ordered] The masses of China were mobilized to eradicate the birds, and citizens took to banging pots and pans or beating drums to scare the birds from landing, forcing them to fly until they fell from the sky in exhaustion. Sparrow nests were torn down, eggs were broken, and nestlings were killed. Sparrows and other birds were shot down from the sky, resulting in the near-extinction of the birds in China. Non-material rewards and recognition were offered to schools, work units and government agencies in accordance with the volume of pests they had killed."
Which of course had an extremely negative environmental impact. Even if you remove morality from the equation, that's still terrible policy. Putting farmers to work in backyard steel mills is terrible policy. If these policies didn't kill millions of people, and stunt China's economy they'd be comedic.
Bush had a penchant for bad policy, albeit to a much less flamboyant effect than that of Chairman Mao. No WMD's were found, the government lied to the populace about the war, and the fallout from that war lead to the power vacuum in Iraq that partially allowed ISIS to breed. Morals aside, that's a pretty big gaff. Dubyah is off topic though.
"It don't matter. None of this matters."