Make your own free website on
Charlie's IB Essay Section Essays to help you
with your studies
 Boo!   Ha Ha ha!


     An examination of the Communist Revolution of China as an representation of Marxism and Maoism.

The Communist Revolution of China can not be clearly classified as a Marxist revolution. A revolution following the doctrine of Marxism would be set in an industrialized nation with a substantial proletariate population. The capitalists’ natural tendency to achieve greater profit would steadily decrease the wage until it was at the bare subsistence level, creating intolerable living conditions. This leads to the formation of more trade unions, as well as strengthening existing ones, giving some power back to the workers. The unions would eventually become strong enough to topple capitalism and create a new system. Communism would solve the problems associated with industrialization, without sacrificing the advantages for the masses. People would be willing to abolish private property because nine tenths of the population have no property to abolish. China was an undeveloped nation during its revolution. Industry was just beginning, the far majority of the population were still peasant farmers. The revolution was achieve through armed conflict against the existing government. The proletariat was too weak to overthrow capitalism. Instead of unions fighting for more power, it is one single army which forces the previous government to flee, leaving the nation in the hands of the revolutionaries. The end result is more or less the same, but the paths were very different. Marx’s outline of the revolution was drastically different than China’s revolution of Maoism.


The extent the Japanese invasion and World War II hinder Or facilitate the Communist Revolution of China.

The Japanese invasion and World War II dramatically changed the Communist revolution of China and the Nationalist revolution. Morale were hampered as entire cities and industries were either evacuated or destroyed. Spirits boosted after each victory whether large or small. Official policies were modified or abandoned. It strained resources for everyone, especially during harsh times like the great famine. Armies were strengthened, weakened, or destroyed. Japan brought the civil war to an international level, creating new opportunities. The attack which shocked China allowed the two Chinese parties to be viewed under a different light. Loyalties changed with public opinions. Political rivalry became viewed more as fratricide to the public, and decreasingly justifiable. The invasion tightened the boundaries of political warfare, and reduced open war between the Chinese Parties. Conditions forced governments to take drastic steps it would not otherwise consider. It allowed the country to view the fighting governments in a new light, shifting public opinion to favour the Chinese Communist Party.paths were very different. Marx’s outline of the revolution was drastically different than China’s revolution.


The Communist Revolution of China: A Marxist Revolution?

Communism and Marxism are interchangeable to many, a dangerous misconception. Communal societies have existed for thousands of years, while Marxism was only created during the mid-nineteenth century. Communism is the general communal sharing of property. Marxism is specific to industrial nations, involving the revolutionary overthrow of the pro-capitalist government from the roots by an ppressed proletarian class, leading to the emancipation of the proletariate from the bottom of the social hierarchy, the formation of a single class from the abolition of all classes, and the abolition of private property such that all property becomes public. Marxist theory predicts the proletariat will inevitably seize control of the means of production. Marxism is so specific that a nation could be under Communist rule without following the Marxist doctrine.




     Similarities between Euclidean Theorems and Syllogisms

An Euclidean theorem is similar to an syllogism in many aspects; they are usually interchangeable. They share the same fundament principle which is deriving a conclusion from a few assumptions. The details coincide so consistently that it can be said that Euclidean theorems are syllogisms.


Is there knowledge we should not seek? Or is all knowledge inherently a good thing, and can only persons be harmful?

Only people can be harmful, knowledge itself cannot help anyone nor harm anyone. If someone is harmed, that is the result of a person. It is his will and harmful intent to harm the victim, not the will of knowledge. Since knowledge is neither good nor harmful, and whether the results of the knowledge will be beneficial or harmful is independent of any categories knowledge may lie within, there is no reason to avoid certain categories of knowledge. Every type of knowledge equally has the potential to enhance daily life, and that potential should be allowed to be exploited even at the cost of releasing harmful potentials. All systems of knowledge should be researched and taught because it does not harm, only people harm. Knowledge has will of its own.


Does thought require language?

The relationship between thought and language is no different than water and a container. Language is best defined as a method of expression. Like a cup, it determines how the thought is presented. A tall blue glass and an elegant glass bunch bowl both holds the same punch, only in a different way.


How can we know, if at all, when we have discovered or created truth?

Although absolute truth can never be found, the probable truth can. Using the process of analyzing evidence supporting and contradicting the statement, we can determine if any statement is probably true, as well as the degree of probability. With this information, whether or not truth was created or discovered can be found.


I'm still converting 20 or so essays.
much more to come soon... some day

Click Here to Visit Our Sponsor