> I analysed Rummell's methodology. He's totally unreliable, uses right wing
> sources that exaggerate things that are bad enough already, doesn't
> evaluate them carefully, ignores conrary views, in short, is a ideologue.
<snip>
> I can't believe his figures for China are any better.
In this email he explicitly bases them all on Jung Chang and Jon Halliday's book _Mao: The Unknown Story._ And the impression I get from this review (by Andrew Nathan, a very middle of the Ivy League China scholar) is that the facts in that book are very loosely sourced.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v27/n22/nath01_.html
Michael