Socialism

Abolishing the NEP in the USSR and moving onto more planned economy ended up being beneficial. However, in the case of China, the NEP-inspired socialist market economy is the reason China is where they are today. New contradictions have arisen, which is of course a gamble, but with that came highly developed productive forces and tight interconnection with the global economy. This has allowed the PRC to reach where the USSR could not, and the developed productive forces are forming the basis of the newly emerging, more planned economy.

There are many contradictions in your post, Comrade.

How could the USSR have achieved what China did—with the aid of Western assistance—if such Western aid was a priori ruled out, given that, in U.S. state strategy, the USSR was designated as Enemy No. 1?

And once again, you are pushing your central thesis: that China succeeded because it rectified the mistakes made by the USSR...

Don't you find that we are just going around in circles?

As for Mao, China was horribly underdeveloped. Many of his mistakes were in dealing with such an environment, knowledge of agronomics was low and industrialization was non-existent.

You probably meant to say that industrialization was a complete failure and morphed into the "Cultural Revolution." It seems to me that it was a gesture of desperation.

As for Mao, China was horribly underdeveloped.

Should I laugh or cry, comrade?... ))))

Key Milestones in Soviet-Chinese Nuclear Cooperation (1950–1958): Research Reactor and Cyclotron: On September 27, 1958, at the Institute of Atomic Energy in Beijing—with the assistance of the USSR—China's first experimental heavy-water reactor and cyclotron were commissioned.

Do you believe that agronomy is more complex?

The Russians trained 10,000 Chinese specialists in nuclear energy. It was thanks to the USSR that China acquired nuclear weapons.

Mao really should have asked the Russians; the Soviets are quite nimble when it comes to catching sparrows.... )))

Under Mao, a solid socialist base was laid out, which managed to created the basis for the modern economy.

I fully agree with you on this point—except regarding the economic aspect: Mao laid the foundations of a rock-solid party system that remains standing to this day. He also unified China.

As for his aspirations for China's development, however, his actions strike me as chaotic—almost as if he had conceived of something grandiose but didn't know where to begin.

At heart, he was a revolutionary, not a statesman. There were a great many such figures in the USSR during the 1930s—people who simply could not adapt to peacetime life.