/edu/ - Education

Yeah I think the idea is to do things in stages. Like, controlled capitalism with socialist backing so it outcompetes regular capitalism.

Their plans for when they push the full socialism is just before the profit rate is projected to fall to 0
ie. they're going to squeeze every last remaining bit of dynamism and progression out of capitalism remaining and savour those sweet sweet capitalist tears they juice out until capitalism becomes impossible

Next question?

>>12716
*big red full socialism button

>>12716
>>12715
So what's stopping them from just devolving into a fascist state. As I said even though, they seem to have the economic plans figured out, their sociopolitical stances is borderline fascistic. To even stand a chance, they will inevitably have to take imperialistic steps to match the West's raw power. At that point, what's even there to stop them from just continuing what's happening now? As for now, the only real thing that could shift the paradigm they could do without doing what I said above is solving the energy crisis, as doing that basically unlocks near utopian levels of resources to reach communism.

>>12718
>So what's stopping them from just devolving into a fascist state.
Not much. The chance that it might not tho is worth keeping an eye on tho.

>>12718
The approx 2050 to 2070 time limit on capitalism as long as they can keep the peace and prevent the arsonists and the war machine's destruction of fixed capital to which would boost the rate of profit at least temporarily and maybe kick the can down the road?

I thought the commonly accepted analysis was that there were clearly different factions of the CPC some which are genuinely socialist and others being neoliberal ghouls and everything in between, its kinda like there overton window is set where the furthest right you can go is european socdem with Xi being a stalin type centrist who suppresses both the right and left of the party

at least thats the impression ive always gotten

>>12721
Oh comrade Xi purged those corrupt right wing lunatics recently
Things are looking good

>>12714
>Is China an actual communist [socialist] state?
No, as you already identified. They abandoned this road in the 70s. Their current line is in direct continuation with this reactionary policy of integration with capitalist imperialism domestically, internationally in trade policy and ideologically.
>they're pretty much a nationalist state heavily relying on state capitalism for funding right now?
Yes and their social relations correspond to the ruling class being the bureaucrat-monopoly capitalist and national capitalist class exerting total control over the Party and governmental apparatus, with repression of everything that deviates.
>At this point, they're more likely to turn into the next globalist world power if they do manage to outlast the US.
A development that has already happened. They are an increasingly growing imperialist superpower in the domestic economies of countries on several other continents.
Remember that it is always more beneficial to analyze the history and present-day trajectory of the state in question to figure out the answer to questions like these. Thus you can safely ignore the (empty) promises of figureheads peddling propaganda as well as the phantasmed lemmings falling victim to such superficial theatrics (like """Stalin""" flag ITT).
>>12721
Xi also purged Bo Xilai, the actual Stalin/Mao "center" equivalent in this rhetorical scenario. This leaves Xi's clique squarely on the right-wing, as any parallel material analysis of the political economy of China and/or its recent history would also help to confirm.
In addition it's worth mentioning that the CPC isn't like the CPSU was; the former is head of a supposed people's republic and the latter was the head of a socialist republic. The distinction has its root in the different conditions their revolutionary periods went through before forming a superstructure. This has consequences for what class composition they are/were composed of, as well as the ideological diversity therein represented. While it is true that Xi has purged some outright neoliberals amid corruption scandals, but if we're speaking in the CPSU terms of there being a "left, center, and right" inside the Party, then these would clearly be far-right elements which the CPC continues to allow to house their internal ideological arena (a result them letting all stratas of the bourgeoisie rub elbows with them inside the Party). So yes, they do occasionally purge a few couple of capitalists after they've become centers of public social outrage by a perturbed populace. This results in reducing their overall representative percentage within the CPC by about 0.x%.
>Inb4 multipolarity
The new historical epoch we've entered into as a result of the objective conditions of the capitalist world-system is indeed multipolar. US-led western imperialism is met with another imperialist pole, Russo-Chinese-led eastern imperialism. The Chinese proletariat were usurped, the Russian as well. Bureaucrat and national capitalists lead both superpowers and the internationalism they engage in consists of bolstering comprador national capitalists of the global south that want to get in on their new BRI and capital export flows. This is clear.
The revolutionary science have taught us that the vanguard of the proletariat will have to seize upon the moment where inter-imperialist conflict among these poles manage to emiserate, sabotage and disrupt the workers, resources and logistics internationally to the point where the leadership of revolutionary communist parties ready for the task no longer goes on deaf ears. The likelihood of this starting is usually in the countries of the global periphery and then triggers a ripple effect which potentially reaches the class consciousness of the working classes of the imperial core. What the working classes of both the periphery(,semi-periphery) and core have in common is their regional opposition: capital, the bourgeoisie. They will have to overthrow governments subservient to US-led western imperialism as well as Xiist / United Russia -led eastern imperialism to be successful, and if current trends continue, it would be wise to do it in the immediate aftermath between an escalating war between the US and China. People's wars are already ongoing in India and southeast Asia. Africa and Latin America too have much potential for revolutionary success in this regard.
>>12718
In summation? Not much. Some would even argue, with Marxist-Leninist sources of argument, that they're already there. I know some people on here in all other instances except China likes to reference the definition of R. Palme Dutt (Fascism and Social Revolution), Stalin's broadened definition of fascism which also includes social democracy ("the moderate wing of fascism") and the inclusion of blatant anti-communism as being good indicators of fascism. So, we've got a bureaucratic monopoly-capitalist dictatorship that falsifies its communist history (Great Leap Forward, GPCR, "reform" / counterrevolutionary period) and Marxism in its education and media (revises it to peddle gradualist social democracy), is in a Stockholm's syndrome relationship with US-led western imperialism (of which their working class continues to be overexploited by and domestic firms owned by), and brutally represses all revolutionary proletarian movements (Jasic Incident). What do you think, is it closer to fascism, free market liberalism or socialism?

>>12724
damn that sucks Bo Xilai sounds p chill

Mr. Mao expert whats the deal with the gang of four?

heres what ive learnt so far
>Wang Hongwen was basically some young prole dude who rose through the party ranks ,started the shanghai commune and was Mao's chosen successor
>Read a cool zhang chunqiao pamphlet where he just talks shit and analyzes how to repress the boug after the revolution

however I am having trouble finding good english sources on any of this that isnt just insane anticommunist hysteria and this is basically the extent of my knowledge but

Not really and any expectation that it might is just wishful thinking
Reminder that the only reason the US and China are currently opposed is because Americans are retarded and don't know how to keep allies, otherwise they've both been on essentially the same side since Nixon. They have been the biggest advocates and the biggest winners of the US-led unipolar world order.

>>12724
While I agree with everything here, I don't think you can absolve Mao of blame for the course China took after him. It's not that far a leap from the New Democracy to China today, if anything it's just that the fourth star on the Chinese flag earned its place.

>>12736
>not that far a leap
pun not intended

>>12714
ask mao, not the retards ITT

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-5/mswv5_30.htm

The present-day capitalist economy in China is a capitalist economy which for the most part is under the control of the People's Government and which is linked with the state-owned socialist economy in various forms and supervised by the workers. It is not an ordinary but a particular kind of capitalist economy, namely, a state-capitalist economy of a new type. It exists not chiefly to make profits for the capitalists but to meet the needs of the people and the state. True, a share of the profits produced by the workers goes to the capitalists, but that is only a small part, about one quarter, of the total. The remaining three quarters are produced for the workers (in the form of the welfare fund), for the state (in the form of income tax) and for expanding productive capacity (a small part of which produces profits for the capitalists). Therefore, this state-capitalist economy of a new type takes on a socialist character to a very great extent and benefits the workers and the state.

>>12738
I'm adding this to my list of shit to throw at Maoists next to the one where he admits he never read Capital and his entire meeting with Nixon, but I hope you understand that if you genuinely agree with any of that then you are braindead beyond belief
This is besides the fact that China in 1953 is vastly different from China today and claiming that their economy is currently "supervised by workers" is such an advanced level of delusion that it would probably get you admitted into an asylum

>>12740
my point is mao, deng and xi are under no delusion that china is currently a socialist ecomony. What it is though, is a capitalist ecomony in controlled by workers councils of which are ideologically marxist.

>>12742
why cant we just say at least some factions of the party are basically running a weird transitional dirigsme and we'll just have to wait and see if it works?

>>12743
I think its fair to wait and see, I think its important to understand that ANY country in the west would be better if they where in there position, where marxists occupied the highest levels of government and marx was a openly taught subject in school.

>>12744
yeah I think the big lesson of AES is despite some major flaws and problems socialism at its worst is basically the same thing as capitalism at its best:

state capitalism with strong social democratic reforms

>>12745
mmm
Socialism at it's worst is a failed experiment and a lesson.

>>12746
correct, because governing countries are not cake recipes, you do it and test it if you want to achieve something.

Most current leaders of the PRC will be dead by 2050 so that's when they plan to finally liberalize fully, stretching it out until then

>>12738
>The present-day capitalist economy in China is a capitalist economy
…
>which for the most part is under the control of the People's Government and which is linked with the state-owned socialist economy in various forms
A link that was strengthened and became dominant thorough the efforts of the left in the CPC around Mao, reaching socialism with the GPCR (which was a revolution not only in the superstructure but also the base)
>and supervised by the workers
The "People's Government" today no longer has representative parity between the classes, but is instead dominated by stratas of the bourgeoisie.
>>12742
Your point (of view) obscures the fact that Deng and Xi are part of a reactionary movement that actively disestablished and represses the socialist state-economy and organs of worker-power in the interests of imperialist capital.
>What [contemporary China] is though, is a capitalist ecomony in controlled by workers councils
I would love to see the reasoning behind this statement. Please demonstrate how you got to this particular conclusion.
>>12744
No country in the west will look like China because they are the active parties responsible for the liberalization of China through sheer force you idealist buffoon person.
>>12740
>his entire meeting with Nixon
History and material reality are not "owns". How could you possibly convince yourself into thinking Maoists aren't aware of the Nixon visit? It would seem very implausible, no? Maoism is formed as a critique of the revisionist turn in China and Mao Zedong Thought (keeping what worked and dispensing with what didn't), developing the revolutionary science of socialism forward. But to be clear: the Nixon visit happened as the right-wing backlash against the GPCR was gaining, it was its first major sign of the breaking of the back of the proletariat in China. Wait a minute, how so? Well Mao Zedong was neither a monarch, nor responsible for the foreign policy of the PRC at the time. You know who was? Deng Xiaoping. Interesting, right? Now, in hindsight (which Maoism is) both of these setbacks having developed in the first place were part of the pitfalls with Mao's tactics (i.e. he wasn't able to effectively rid the bourgeois influence within the state effectively). Having realized the tide was turning, he would spend the last of his years voting against and voicing opposition, while beginning to let go. The following years coincide with the rightists literally overthrowing, imprisoning and murdering all supporters of the socialist economy and the GPCR line and proletariat. Mao was visibly dying simultaneously before the change was finalized in 1976. This is the full context of the penetration of international capital into the soil of China, celebrated by "SWCC" defenders today.
>the one where he admits he never read Capital
Urban legend disprovable by multiple angles but my favorite are the physical data like his annotated volumes of Capital found to be in his possession. Not a good look peddling anti-communist myths as a byproduct of your obnoxious ignorance, right?

>>12748
>We are strictly guided by scientific calculations. And calculations show that in 20 years we will build mainly a communist society.
- 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev, 1961

I hate to say it I liked Bo Xilai but he was a theorylet best case Kruschev gotta love his enthusiasm but he was a theorylet which led the soviet union down a failed road

>>12742
>my point is mao, deng and xi are under no delusion that china is currently a socialist ecomony.
True
>What it is though, is a capitalist ecomony in controlled by workers councils of which are ideologically marxist.
Absolutely not my brother in christ, did you land in here from Mars? I've heard many things but the idea that China is a council republic is a first lmao
>>12743
It's that "transitional" part that is doubtful when nothing indicates that they are going to radically change course by 2050 or 2078, if you actually read what they goals are by then. Once again, the best SWCC defenders can resort to is wishful thinking
>>12749
I'm sorry friend but his meeting with Nixon still remains one of the most embarrassing things to ever happen in the 20th Century and the transcript is fucking hilarious, but keep doing good work shitting on Deng beetles though
>physical data like his annotated volumes of Capital found to be in his possession.
That's interesting, source?
>Not a good look peddling anti-communist myths as a byproduct of your obnoxious ignorance, right?
I don't think there's any anti-communist out there who wants people to think Mao was not a Marxist when the whole point is to conflate the latter with the 200 morbillion dead lmao

>>12745
>state capitalism with strong social democratic reforms
Rare moment of self awareness for China and AES defenders. Problem is China's welfare policies are barely better than the West, they don't even have universal healthcare.
Also, if strong social democratic reforms is what you truly desire, vooting for your local socdem party is probably your best bet rather than continuing to pretend you are a communist

>>12753
Why did Iraq have to be destroyed?

>>12754
After CIA helped him get in power and kill gommies, he no longer had any purpose after 1991 and it was time to cut loose ends

>>12756
Sure but why did it have to be destroyed so comprehensively?

>>12757
haliburton reconstruction contracts

>>12753
no youre right king everything should be owned by porky but go off i guess

>>12759
yeah exactly what i said well done

>>12753
counterpoint: socdem parties dont ever get shit done

I'll take overtly violent socdems where some of the members do genuinely want to do a socialism other neoliberalism that shit not even a competition

>>12763
They get as much shit done as China in that regard
Once again, if the height of your radicalism is just a wish for mild socdem reforms you might as well be honest about it