Infant and child mortality figures are good measures of how well a society provides for its survival needs. In Third World countries children starve to death or die from simple diseases.

When Mao arrived as the leader of China in 1949, China was behind India in infant mortality and life expectancy. It was a basket case country. All that changed very quickly.

Chinese infant mortality in 1970 under Mao Zedong as reported by the World Bank was 69 per 1,000 live births. The figure of 90 for 1965 was thus radically bettered in the midst of the Cultural Revolution, contrary to anti-communist propaganda.

In addition, the figure of 90 in 1965 was better than the average for other countries called "low-income" by the World Bank. Indeed, it was better than the average for "middle-income" countries according to the World Bank's World Development Report of 1990.

In 1970, the same situation was true. 69 was better than the 139 low-income average and the 82 average for middle-income countries; even though China was a low-income country by World Bank definitions.

In fact, in 1970, China's infant mortality was lower under Mao than the low-income average in the world in 1997--82! That is to say even a generation of technological progress after Mao, the capitalist Third World still is not as well off as China was under Mao, who died in 1976.

When it comes to the mortality rate of children under five years of age per 1000, the story is the same. China's 120 figure in 1970 was better than the 214 of the low-income countries and 130 of the middle-income countries. In 1997, the World Bank says that the low-income countries only just caught up to where Mao's China was in 1970. The figure for the low-income countries in 1997 finally reached down to 118.

What do these figures mean? The difference between 120 and 214 in 1970 means that more than 1.78 times more children died in the capitalist Third World than in China--millions each year dying needlessly.

See the World Bank statistical report for yourself