I've been reading about the sino-soviet split and I still can't quite wrap my head around it. I'm going over it but it still confuses me.
Did they seriously split over things like the application of transitioning into communism? Centralization? Whether Agricultural peasants were the proletariat?
It all seems somewhat petty, especially as they were 2 separate states that needed to progress in their unique ways. Khrushchev even acknowledged this. Surely they saw how bad an idea this was at the time?
>>2561794
most likely they split because moscow wanted to tell bejing what to do, and bejing didnt want to become another satelite
>>2561794
Ideology is just an excuse
Mao didn't want to become governor of another soviet republic
>>2561794
>Whether Agricultural peasants were the proletariat?
soviets were literal autists, remember how they chose to remain away from the first civil war because the historical marxist grid describes capitalism as a transitionary step towards socialism. Lenin was literally telling himself "yo let this capitalism stir up a little for some month and then we come into play, can't rush things you know". Peasantry was even considered useless and too stupid to take part in class struggle even though they were the most oppressed demographic.
>>2561816
>>2561822
Not OP, but it goes back even further than that. The U.S.S.R. did try to run the communist revolt in China, and Soviet advisors kept telling Mao to go for large cities and spread propaganda there, because those were obviously the power centers, when Mao had a different strategic idea as to how to do this, and the first cracks were already developing in the late 20s.
You also had the fact that the USSR was officially recognizing Chiang's government and send (admittedly modest) amounts of aid to it while at the same time trying to run Mao's revolution making him wonder whose side they were really on.
>>2561830
Chinese-Soviet Border was one of the longest in the world. If they weren't allies then they were each other's biggest security threats.