Does capitalist development necessarily lead to socialism? Anonymous 07-05-23 15:32:29 No. 14720 [Last 50 Posts]
Nearly every successful socialist revolution has happened in an underdeveloped nation in the global periphery, usually very early in that place's capitalist development. While these revolutionary projects have proved incredibly successful at raising living standards and quality of life and modernizing their nations, most successful socialist projects have a habit of reverting through revisionism into some level of capitalist development. Those who remain committed to more Marxist-Leninist economic practices often become incredibly isolationist due to imperialist pressure.
Anonymous 07-05-23 15:42:43 No. 14724
>>14723 Chyna plans to
The rest of us are probably fucked because of liberals
Anonymous 07-05-23 16:14:14 No. 14726
>>14725 How?
They have public plans published on this
moderately prosperous society in all respects by 2030 socialism by 2050 something in 2070
The CPC has a good track record on achieving their plans
like eliminating extreme poverty or greening the Gobi desert so why would these plans be different
Anonymous 07-05-23 16:35:36 No. 14736
>>14729 At the very least I'm optimistic that the American empire could very easily collapse in flames in the not-too distant future. All of the signs of decay are there.
All it would take to seal America's fate would be to do something really dumb, like trying to occupy Mexico like Afghanistan or something (very stupid idea because the land border makes going home impossible and the terrain would breed insurgents, but conventionally invading the capitol and border towns would be so easy and tempting if they couldn't manage to pull off a coup of a leftist president who didn't let them have oil/lithium or if a Trump/Bush figure needed an outlet for drug/immigration anxiety).
Of course actually living through that collapse would probably suck for decades for everyone.
Anonymous 07-05-23 16:47:59 No. 14744
>>14736 I do fear the years of danger that are already upon us as US grasp disintegrates, the process has been under way under some time actually.
Eastern Europe, Finland Taiwan, Japan and Korea are also kinda worrying places to live for the next few years to a decade. Totally burger cucked and next to America's stated enemies. Iraq and other Iran's neighbors too, Saudis maybe too, but I have hope that middle east is going to be better off now. Of course if nukes start to fly, then all bets are off. Ukrainian nation of course is dying for the empire's right to persist already, but probably only hastening it's collapse as I see it. I hope adults on both sides (whatever remain in the west) will manage the disassembly as graciously as possible. In decade or two we will be on clear multipolar waters again.
Anonymous 07-05-23 16:49:05 No. 14745
>>14740 A while ago
I'm going to turn this around on you
Capitalism is defined by crisis every ten years or so
If the Chinese continue to have no crisis then by definition it is not capitalism
Anonymous 07-05-23 16:52:41 No. 14747
>>14746 No AES went through a stage of Capitalist development and require element of it in order to develop their productive capabilities. It is only really through highly advanced productive forces that Socialism and then Communism can be realised as it is only through this that the commodity form can become redundant.
You must remember that all AES are young nations generally born from intense struggle and economic backwardness. The PRC has only existed for 75 years which is around the average human lifespan.
Anonymous 07-05-23 17:00:12 No. 14751
>>14748 Idk how long it will take for China to achieve Communism, I'm not the PRC. I don't even know if they will pull it off. But their logic does make sense and has done them well so far.
A completely planned economic in a not fully developed nation would be bad, it would be inefficient. Socialism isn't just when planned economy.
Anonymous 07-05-23 17:08:32 No. 14753
>>14742 >The special economic zone Zones. Plural.
> to learn good practices from capitalists and adopt in building socialism Come fucking on.
Anonymous 07-05-23 17:13:46 No. 14760
>>14756 How is that working out for them compared to China?
>>14754 Really? Show me one example
Anonymous 07-05-23 17:19:24 No. 14765
>>14762 >The PRC doesn't have "market anarchy" do you understand what it even means ffs?
>Capitalism employs elements of central planning Yes for profits, not for needs. Exactly as Chinese are doing it. Dengoids argument about "extreme poverty reduction" is a clear show of this.
>Baby level understanding of political economy and socialism. Said fucking mongoloid that doesn't understand what market anarchy is.
Anonymous 07-05-23 17:32:12 No. 14769
>>14767 Yes I think so. This is part of the reason why the U.S and its client states are freaking out so much about China in Africa. The PRC offers a better deal and rn isn't interventionist. If the Belt and Road is successful it will likely be the death-blow for Western imperialism, so expect Western interventions in states that adopt it.
Idk if the PRC would ever transition to actively aiding revolution as that is against their current anti-interventionist public stance. But who knows what the future holds.
The REAL big deal about the shift towards China is it weakens the West's ability to use sanctions. If things go well, it will completely remove it, and sanctions are really THE way the Western empire keep countries under the heel.
Anonymous 07-05-23 17:42:59 No. 14779
>>14776 Deng beetles have gall to call other people delusional while believing in "press communism button in 2050".
>>14777 Because it's an easy way out of argument. Paint yourself a victim. They do it all the time, i remember in china thread, before those splits, when the board was more populated, you couldn't even call China capitalist without dozens of bengoids calling you sinophobe.
Anonymous 07-05-23 17:50:42 No. 14783
>>14782 If it's true it's true
also
>Truth lol I should make a tally every time a w*sterner uses the exact language of a shepherd without a flock but it'd just be constant.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Anonymous 07-05-23 17:53:29 No. 14784
>>14720 >Nearly every successful socialist revolution has happened in an underdeveloped nation in the global periphery, usually very early in that place's capitalist development. Weakest links
Every bourgeois revolution happened on the back of ordinary people who fought for equality and well-being of all. Liberalism was socdemery of it's age. Is it really surprising that porkies of the weakest links will have no choice but to support socialist revolutions with the idea to force through capitalism through corruption, coups and such?
Continued economic development REQUIRES socialism because capitalism cannot provide enough human capital to support higher and higher levels of economic development.
Anonymous 09-05-23 01:00:16 No. 14805
>>14748 >PRC literally manufactures post of the worlds stuff how much for productive forces are needed sire ? enough to sustain itself from imperialist overthrow
depends if we can build enough to eclipse the capitalists without them killing everyone
Anonymous 09-05-23 01:02:01 No. 14806
>>14761 yeah socialism is not a checklist, that is the opposite of dialectical thinking
socialism is not a state of affairs which is to be established
socialism is not ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself
socialism is the movement to abolish the present state of things
Anonymous 09-05-23 08:07:22 No. 14808
>>14733 If China's development isn't stalled, it's literally impossible for them to keep up this level of progress by still maintaining capitalist. At some point the private sector becomes too much of a burden on the economy and has to be phased out. It doesn't matter what Xi says, he needs to calm foreign investors, an unfortunate pragmatism. You are not going to get cybernetic fully automated capitalism.
It's not dirigisme because unlike France under DeGaul they are a dictatorship of the proletariat and peasants.
Form =/= substance
Anonymous 09-05-23 08:15:25 No. 14809
>>14808 (me)
Also I find it an odd notion that a party elite can just "press the communism button", that's essentially a Trotskyite/Blanquist concept. Socialism has to involve large masses of people like it was in the early USSR or Cuba today.
It's also pretty arrogant to allege that top party leaders of the biggest Communist Party don't know what socialism is. It's not like the Western left amounts to failure after failure.
Anonymous 09-05-23 08:58:33 No. 14811
>>14810 1. The superstructure does in fact matter
2. It's not just the CPC it's how the entire state is organized
3. Dirigisme is not an ideology it's a way to conduct economic affairs. A state can use dirigisme and still has a specific class character. The USSR dirigisme in the NEP and clearly was a socialist republic. Cuba today pretty much uses dirigisme.
Anonymous 09-05-23 10:47:14 No. 14817
>>14720 > Stuff promising "socialism by 2050" because development will necessarily lead to communism seems about as likely as liberal states promising net zero carbon emissions by 2050 or whatever. In light of recent developments the deadline seems pretty arbitrary given the CPC had to know the Cold War would happen in-between. Not saying it wasn't considered , of course, but it's such a huge conflict that it strikes me as disingenuous to predicate anything on winning.
On the other hand it seems "undiplomatic" to frame the development of Chinese capital as accelerating the contradictions of global liberalism until it brought China, and the other big players, into conflict with the USA.
Anonymous 09-05-23 11:00:14 No. 14818
>>14817 It's closer to catastrophic climate change by 2050
Remember the rate of profit is falling and it'll be hitting zero around then
Socialism or barbarism have fun kids I'll probably be dead by then
Anonymous 10-05-23 09:33:57 No. 14828
>>14825 As Comrade Deng said I am a Communist and therefore an optimist
Why fall for bourgeois cynicism comrades? You aren't Haute Bougeois anyway it'll never work for you the way it works for them
Anonymous 12-05-23 13:03:26 No. 14840
>>14839 Socialism is when people are nice and don't look after their own profit but engage in "mutual aid"
This is what I get from liberals so I think it's the generally agreed upon definition
幸灾乐祸 12-05-23 16:43:34 No. 14843
>>14745 >Capitalism is defined by crisis every ten years or so >If the Chinese continue to have no crisis then by definition it is not capitalism China never had much trouble since Deng's liberalization because they make big bucks from international trade, their trade balance has (almost) always been positive so far.
But Chinese growth is also predicated on a large amount of debt (see Evergrande) that is expected to be reimbursed, and unlike the US, they don't control the world's reserve currency, on the contrary the renminbi is soft-pegged to the USD for devaluation purposes, in order for the US domestic market to absorb a lot of the glut of Chinese manufactured goods circulating on the world market.
In short, the Chinese have been unironically developing the productive forces using supply-side economics, but a different kind than Reagan, focused on gaining the upper hand in manufacturing.
It was the whole philosophy behind Deng's catchphrase, more or less "让一部分人先富起来", which was incorrectly translated as "To get rich is glorious", but more accurately means "Let some people get rich first" — if you want the real speech, take a quick look at
http://keywords.china.org.cn/2021-01/11/content_77102316.html .
They did a great job at this, but the problem is that now, worldwide recession is happening — and crises have long-lasting effects, remember 2008, it's the main historical reason why you feel so miserable all day!
What I expect is the following:
>1) Western consumers absorbing the glut won't be able to afford as many Chinese goods as before, due to economic depression. Imagine you are a Chinese factory supervisor, you see a ton of products rotting in stock, you don't have enough facilities to store anymore, and stopping the production is more expensive than letting the machines run. What would you do? Imagine this at the scale of China.
This is called an over-production crisis, and it's a real possibility.
This means some Chinese companies are looking forward to delocalize their production to nearby countries like Vietnam, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, etc.
In turn for Chinese workers, the direct advantage they gain from GDP growth will recess, just like it did in the West before, and a more important part of GDP will be fueled by high-tech companies (and certainly financial capital as well).
Urban workers who aren't highly qualified will most likely be left out of the rat race, and be reduced to sell their labor power to
Uber Eats 美团 in order to deliever food to PMCs and single parents in exchange for a substandard wage, just like in the West right now.
The working class might, as a side effect, eventually rediscover its rich socialist history in the process.
Oh wait, it's already happening right now, that's why 躺平 and 摆烂 became memes in the Sinosphere around the same time the /r/antiwork admin was being interviewed on FOX News, and young Maoists who get a tad bit rebellious get thrown in jail. I don't feel like explaining why it's not a good omen, you jerk off enough on the end of the petrodollar and the Russo-Ukrainian war already, you already know what I'm talking about.
I'll just quote a bit from Wikipedia, in case a Washington D.C. bureaucrat reads this:
<In a speech delivered in March 2009 entitled Reform the International Monetary System, Zhou Xiaochuan, the Governor of the People's Bank of China called Keynes's bancor approach "farsighted" and proposed the adoption of International Monetary Fund (IMF) special drawing rights (SDRs) as a global reserve currency as a response to the financial crisis of 2007–2010. U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner expressed interest in the idea of greater use of SDRs as a reserve. <However, he was criticized severely for this in the United States, and the dollar lost 5 cents against the euro in exchange markets following his statements. He and President Barack Obama shortly afterwards backtracked Geithner's comments. [Source is Adam Tooze's 2018 book "Crashed"] I recommend reading the introduction of
Trade Wars Are Class Wars by Pettis and Klein (2020) if you can find a copy of it, it analyzes the current trade war between the US and China, taking cues from Hobson's theory of imperialism and Keynes.
I'm excited for the future of China, not because it will collapse in 3 weeks, not because a glorious socialist future is forecasted for 2050, but because
it will experience the same current problems of the West as it's basically a developed country now, and this will foster more international working class solidarity when ecological problems will pile upon us exponentially and we'll have truly no other choice than socialism or barbarism. It's a good time to get immersed into Chinese culture.
Unique IPs: 41