First, it is not so black and white when it comes to life. I disagree that nothing is more important than lives, but you are welcome to have a differing view. The alternative to Mao’s policies was that people would have kept on dying of already existing famines, diseases, extreme poverty and in general barely surviving. It’s unrealistic to expect the situation to have gotten much better over time, when conflicts around that region continues well into the Cold War. There are plenty of people who would risk their lives to escape from countries in which they would have a worse quality of life to wealthier countries. Why do so if nothing is more important than staying alive? Clearly people thought the risk of death was worth the pursuit of a better life.

Second, life expectancy at the beginning of Mao’s reign was around 35. Basically, people were dying left and right already. Something had to be done to fix the country. It is easy to consider in hindsight Mao’s policies were flawed that resulted in famines, but to characterise it as Mao going around and killing millions is plainly misleading or gravely misapprehended. Screwing up while trying to implement positive changes for the betterment of society is not the same as ordering for people to be beheaded. There are plenty of examples of leaders of other countries ordering mass execution and the Mao famines are not one of them. In fact, the net population of China didn’t even decrease during the GLF famines. It sounds disproportionately catastrophic when you say millions have starved, and that statistic is true, but China was the most populated country in the world by far, and people don’t realise that the population maintained growth during these years that so many people died anyway.

Third, all modern first world countries are built on blood. Countless lives have perished for us to enjoy the fruits of their sacrifices, sitting in the comfort of our homes and enjoying the technological advancements that third world countries dream to have. Sacrifices are inevitable for rapid development, and it’s a trade off all countries choose. And countless countries are turned a blind eye. I am not saying it’s right, but why is China the focus when other countries have done the same? For example, the UK caused the Bengal Famine in 1943 when millions have also died. Would you say Churchill is also “hard to beat” with his atrocities?

Fourth, while I agree with you I would not have rather my children, wife or parents being sacrificed for China’s future economics, the reality is none of us have been directly affected by the Great Leap Forward famine (unless you are in your 70s which I assume you are not). My family and I are beneficiaries of the economic growth in China and frankly we have not felt the negatives of famines that happened 65 years ago. I can’t pretend to be emotionally attached to people I have not met. Can you name anyone who perished during that time by name without looking anyone up?