From 1956-57 Mao and the CCP elite engaged in a series of liberalisation policies: working conditions of intellectuals were improved (including monthly wage), criticisms of the Party were encouraged and Mao seemed to avert himself from the Stalinist economic and political model. 

This sprang from Khrushchev’s secret speech in which Stalinist methods were denounced and the soviet economic model was acknowledged as only one possible method to socialism which may be more harmful than beneficial in different countries. Unfulfilled Promises of destalinisation led swiftly to the Hungarian Revolution, after which Mao announced it occurred due to failings of Hungarian leadership. Premier Zhou recommended easing restrictions on the intellectual class to stop a burgeoning Hungarian style revolt.

However Mao had been preparing for rapid industrialisation in the first five year plan which saw a huge increase in intellectual cooperation in China- he remarked in 1957 that “the intellectuals are now in support of socialism”.

Did Mao recognise that economic aggrandisement necessitated the support of the skilled and cultured intellectual class, or did he prepare the Hundred Flowers as a continuation of his previous goal- extermination of the intellectual class- disguised as a policy of liberalisation, to draw out dissidents?

If the latter was the case, why did Mao not operate so extensively as to eliminate all enemies who spoke out, a measure which would have precluded the need for the Cultural Revolution?

Mao himself admits the policy was a deceptive tool “to lure the snakes out of their lairs”, however his personal doctor who helped him recover from stress when criticisms became overwhelming during the 
 campaign, believes the policy was an arrogant one from which Mao thought he could avoid criticism while appearing liberal to incorporate the aid of intellectuals into the new Chinese economic model.

This seems to be a unique event in history- of which the intentions are still heavily debated today, what do you think is the case?

I'm not sure that it was necessarily a unique phenomenon. Even in the context of 20th century totalitarian regimes, and only a couple of decades before Mao's Hundred Flowers Campaign, there had been a 'liberalisation' (or at least an easing-up of oppression) in Stalin's Soviet Union between 1933-4. This was a couple of years prior to the onset of the Great Terror of 1936-8. Whether it had been co-incidental or intentional is unclear. Further back in history, during the Abbasid dynasty of Baghdad, the 9th century caliph Mamun had at first promoted free-thinking and science before then initiating a strict religious inquisition which punished many of those who had benefited from his former patronage. I'm sure that there are also several other examples. 

Returing to Mao, then this month marks the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China. The 'Chinese Soviet Republic' had been declared in 1931 but this was more of an ambition rather than any reality as the Communists only controlled disparate pockets of territory at that time unlike the Nationalists who controlled the bulk of the country. By 1949, however, as Communist forces entered Peking, the tables were reversed and it were the Communists who controlled the bulk of the country while the Nationalists were reduced to a few pockets of territory and some offshore islands. Having lasted for 75 years means that Communist China has now exceeded the longevity of Soviet Russia which lasted for 74 years.