It has been argued that there are essentially two Mao Zedongs. The first Mao was the Communist Party leader prior to 1955-1956 who formulated and implemented policies based on pragmatic experimentation, trial and error, and patient persuasion in accordance with the dictates of "practice" and the "mass line." After 1956, it is asserted that a new Mao, more rigid and dogmatic, impatient and impulsive, and intolerant of criticism and debate emerged. At issue herein is a reconciliation of these two images of Mao. Such a reconciliation emerges from the recognition of the fact that many of the theories and practices of the Chinese revolution as developed by Mao diverged from strict Leninist orthodoxy (Schram, 291). Mao changed over time from a revolutionary leader who was intent on obtaining power to a leader insisting upon permanent revolution in order to retain power. It is this transformation that will be identified as creating what amounts to two different Mao Zedongs, each responsive to changing circumstances.
In the period prior to 1955-1956, Mao Zedong (1, 1) emphasized the relationship between knowledge and practice or knowing and doing. Mao believed that Marxists such as himself held that man's social practice alone is the criterion of the truth of his knowledge of the external world. In other words, in Mao's (1, 2) own words, "what actually happens is that man's knowledge is verified only when he achieves the anticipated results in the process of social practice (material production, class struggle, or scientific experiment)." To that end, the Maoist plan in the early years of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) domination was to employ a variety of experiments such as the creation of the agricultural commune or earlier land reform to determine what policies and procedures would work best for China.
This attitude is related to the Maoist construction of the "mass line." Mao (2, 1) held that "the masses have boundle...