Great Leap Forwards.

Actually the bureaucratic-political-economic tensions were because of Mao using communism as a field to obtain his own pleasures and ego high, isn't it? At that time Mao took economy at his hands too and made the communes so that the people would trust him, without thinking that people would go and pick up for ex: more rice than normal...

In case you are interested in knowing the truth, here are some flaws in your statement:

First, by that time, the people already trust him, because CPC distributed the farmland to all the peasants. Imagine if you are given free land and plow on your own field, how to make you trust me more? Perhaps I could provide free irrigation or fertilizer, but definitely not to ask you to return the land back to public/communes. CPC chose to do the latter as they believe it is a good way to achieve higher efficiency. During this movement, they actually "consumed" the people's trust. Unfortunately, Great Forward Leap is a failure. We can do some serious research on how it fails, just like we studied the failure of Robert Owen's New Harmony. We may or may not reach an answer, but the entire communism movement, even up to today, is still a social experiment, and will inevitably fail here or there at some steps.

Second, Mao needed not seeking any personal pleasant or being ego at that point. After 1955, Mao step down from daily routine works and handed the economic/administration work to his colleagues. It was the period that CPC started preparing Mao's successor. Communism is an ideal for Mao and most of his colleagues, not a job like modern politicians we see on TV. He doesn't use it as a tool to collect the alleged fames. For example, later in an important CPC general assembly --- "7000 people assembly" at 1962, Mao conveyed a self-criticism and claimed a big portion of responsibility of the domestic famine.

After all, to assume he was ego and selfish is pretty amateur as a history researcher. We can always simply conclude history is caused by madness. It works perfect except it is not true and won't help you to predict the future, which is a main reason we study history. If you back track Mao from 1921 or even earlier, and review all the challenges he had to deal through out decades, you wouldn't accept a simplified assumption. Because the basic logic is always there: if Mao were stupid and crazy, and his colleagues are stupid and crazy, why could they fought and succeeded in those extremely tough situations? Are all their enemies including Chiang Kai-shek in China revolution war, Japanese intruders in WWII and US in Korean war and Vietnam war just morons?