General Mao's Influence

Chairman Mao's reign, starting at the beginning of the Opium War, is looked upon by today's people as a sort of unreal and unbelievable world. Not because of the strong sense of communism nor the Maoist way of blaming the enemy for disasters, but the cult of personality that Chairman Mao had formed. His mere image was symbolic of China and the global communist movement as a whole. His being influenced every Chinese home, and was also required by law, i.e., every household required a painting of Chairman Mao. He led the working class in a century long struggle against imperialism, feudalism, and capitalism, which were considered evil after the Opium War. Even some today look at Mao as a god-like figure, as he led China to be a powerful and independent nation. During his reign, many works of politicized art were made and circulated through society having Mao as the center or main idea. These included posters, badges, and music. Many said things such as "Chairman Mao is the red sun in our hearts" and a "savior of the people." Mao also had much influence on youth, as they were taught to idolize and, almost worship Chairman Mao. Also, they did not know of the immense suffering and starvation that occurred during his Great Leap Forward. A book known as "The Little Red Book" was also required to be carried around by all citizens of China, as it was written by Chairman Mao. The books was required to be studied and the people were required to live by it and its teachings. Also, a Maoist uniform was worn by most males and females alike, as it was worn by Chairman Mao. However, Mao did not rule with an iron fist or a tyrannical dictatorship; he was actually liked by the common people, especially the working class/peasants. This may be due to the fact that he was trying to make the revolt against the higher classes. However, was all this Maoism and cult of personality a benefit for China? Did it take away individuality amongst the Chinese? Was it fair to the nobility?
I believe, that Mao's cult of personality was beneficial, but also detrimental at the same time. Yes, it did take away the
individuality and freedom of expression of the common Chinese citizen. Many musicians were not allowed to play on the radio unless it was something revolutionary against the nobility or had revolutionary undertones. People did not dress as if the had the freedom to choose. People were told to idolize Mao, and spoon-fed their personalities and opinions. However, this was also good, as it brought the Chinese people together. Having Mao as a leader and also having all the citizens be in unhealthy favor of him definitely increases the feelings of nationalism and that makes China stronger as a nation. Also, it was not like Mao's presence in society was hurting it financially. If anything, inspiring the working class would have made them work harder for their country. Also, towards individuality and preserving it, it seemed as though that if people had a choice, they would still choose Mao's standards of living, because many youth were brought up in Maoist traditions. However, I also believe that China would have not been as successful without Chairman Mao. China needed to be united, so they had to find a regime or ideology they would all believe in. Mao was able to bring in communism into Chinese society quite strongly and managed to save them and start the People's Republic China. This made them feel united, and only a united nation is one that can succeed in its future. This brings up the argument of which is better; a society where all fear the ruler? or a society where all love the ruler? From the events that occurred during Mao's reign, I believe that what Mao had done in Chinese society, be it consciously or unconsciously, was the right move for China.

Was Hindu-Muslim Unity Possible in India during the Independence Movement?

Hindus and Muslims are two religions that share antithetical beliefs and cultures, which they believed disabled them from living together. In some cases, their views were the complete opposite of each other, which was the root cause of the tension between them. Later on, after partition, it was the dispute over Kashmir which causes some tensions today. Muslims were monotheistic, and Hindus were poly theistic. Muslims had different beliefs of the creation of the universe than Hindus. Also, at the time, when people had begun to intermarry and the caste system seemed to slowly fade away, Hindus still were not all right with the idea of marrying with Muslims. Also, in Hindu society, there was a caste system, while in Islam, everyone was equal. Hindus did not want to mix that kind of society with their's. Diet was also different between them, as Hindus did not eat cow because of their beliefs, while Muslims ate all wholesome meats. Problems with the food industry could be anticipated in a society of both Hindus and Muslims. The last major dissension was the theory of the afterlife. Muslims believed that the soul would either go to heaven or hell, on the Day of Judgement. Hindus believed in the reincarnation of the soul until one achieves moksha. A table of differences between the two religions can be found here. During the Independence Movement, relations between Hindus and Muslims were extraordinarily hostile, especially during the times of Direct Action Day and the Partition itself. Seeing this, Gandhi still believed unity was possible.
I feel that, at that time, Hindu and Muslim unity was an unavailing hope. The Muslims' beliefs intermixed with the Hindus' beliefs would not be possible, as their contradictions would not be able to coexist without some sort of tension or dispute. Also, the period of time did not aid the cause, as during that time, there were many more religious devouts that made religion and customs triumph over all, but in today's society, people can look past that and make compromises. However, I'm sure that alliances politically can be formed today, excluding the controversies over Kashmir, but a religious unity of two religions that contradict each other at almost every major religious aspect is simply absurd.