>>2287054>Traore thread is a shithole>Chapo Trap House bad thread>The Chinese are not dedicated Marxists>There were no "good guys" in the Yugoslavia 90s warsI actually expect the average discourse to be garbage, because when questions are settled, the only ones left are contrarian shitfucks, and retarded trolls. I ignore religious entryism crap, and /pol/tards shitting up the Palestine thread, thinking they are subtle, but it still makes me think.
>USAID gutted>zero gotcha threads with a "thinking gorilla" pictureReally puts the cortex in a vortex.
>>2287048>>2287054fucking CIA ran a covert operation in the Philippines using trash social media accounts to attack the Chinese vaccine. millions in Philippines "decided" not to vaccinate, and you don't believe there can't be professional spooks here?
get yourself together.
http://english.www.gov.cn/archive/ministrydocument/202202/28/content_WS621c86f2c6d09c94e48a5957.htmlThe earliest one I can find starts from the year Biden stole power from the proletariat. The Communist Party did not bother analyzing trump regime. The next one to be published—very soon—is 2024, the final year of biden regime.
Here is Communist analysis of the bidenomic regime.
>>2287961>Brazil is mouthpiece of americaGood thing they're the first letter in BRICS then huh?
By the way, who did China end up siding with when India (the third letter in BRICS) had their little shitfit with Pakistan a few weeks back?
>>2287806I like to believe the Chinese understand how dumb the typical fascist propaganda tropes of "our enemies are simultaneously inferior yo us and an existential threat" actually is. So instead they go with "We face insurmountable odds but we will face them with a stiff upper lip and triumph regardless ".
>>2288358Long live the Mihoyo-Kuro-Hypergryph united front people's dictatorship.
>>2288619There's this guy called Nick Land he's british and says Neo-China will enslave society and that's a good thing, he lives in Shanghai right now, he used to binge methamphetamines, I don't know how if he has an access to them in China right now but the least he should do is beg for mild socialdemocratic reformist measures to stop persecution of cannabis users in China.
He edited this book.
Anyway, its a bit like the CPC and the NPC and all organs of China are a lot of conservative assholes or mini Hitlers who yawn at perfectly sensible people wanting to use drugs to not have to suffer, because I guess China is perfect heaven on earth and if you have problems in China you must be reactionary or something, so its fine to work 50 hour shifts at the barbie doll factory and get cucked by your 5th wife over an internet influencer doing dances with to the sound of trap beats and throwing handguns. Its just the kind of society you have to experience because in it of itself its conservative against drugs and you have to be conservative too because that's what communism is or else you're going to get called CIA a lot. This is all to show solidarity with the nationalists or patriotic socialists in one nation that have a plan and again, if you doubt this you are CIA, so you have to stay sober or go to prison because marijuana is a dangerous narcotic drug that kills brain cells and causes you to kill people and destabilize society as sourced by the NHS, DEA.gov, and a bunch of other government health agencies and UNODC, and its completely sensible for a Marxist-Leninist (a person exactly like Marx and Lenin) to source them because its absolute truth and the western governments can never lie about healthcare and the eastern governments are totally not copying their policies, that's why they care so much about your health that you have to go to prison and become unemployed then socially ostracized or maybe die in a standoff.
>>2288631Cannabis smokers are like " I wanna take the edge off" like whut the heell they don't want to have to think about getting cucked / cheated, the monotonous work cycle, cybersecurity paranoia and they want to have fun in their free time? That sounds awful, they probably want to rape and kill people and simply hide it under a disguising addiction habit regardless if they don't even get to smoke one joint because they don't want to break the law, its the thought of challenging the divine law of the people by the people that is chinese (eurasia, third world and the progressive eastern races) that shows they are actually western liberal addicts already addicted and can only be fixed by police action. Retarded degenerate druggies are holding back communism from destroying Israel and America! Mossad destabilizes China with THC and China is like this gigachad sober and alcoholic conservative and yet progressive society that will NOT murder fags while liberal westerners are ungrateful that disguising candidates for addiction are being punished by the people's police? What else are we gonna do if the people's police don't punish cannabis users, China will literally become degenerate! I had this one friend who smoked weed and he became a degenerate trans faggot, under internet communism I get to be as chauvinist as possible without getting booed and right now trans and fags are too popular to call them degenerate so its better to write that China tolerates them so they should be grateful, drugs are still taboo so its fine to call all drugs degenerate lumpen and no, I don't care what different drugs are, anything that you can have fun with is degenerate and you should go to jail for it except alcohol and tobacco because its the material conditions and the culture. Conservativism in society is like collectivism that's like communism while liberalism is like individualism like degenerate weed smoking prostitutes which should be arrested and killed on a whim like Catholic Communist Comrade Duterte did. The people's war on drugs is good and the war on drugs is good and based and communism / socialism, its good to kill people for having fun the wrong way because the wrong way is harmful because I say so and my sources which are absolute truth say they will destroy communism if they aren't killed because communism's fate depends on killing cannabis users and other drug users because they're like degenerate and bourgeois decadent and lumpen while the conservative and patriotic socialist nationalists are like the proletariat, the workers, a cannabis user is literally incapable of work and is probably a liberal CIA nazi fascist? This is all true by the way, unironically based and I'm 18 I say based a lot and play videogames and I'm in this group we live in the US (Lord Mao forgive us for being born in the imperial core) its called Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist-Maoist-Dengpilled Party of the Global South, we're like 3 people (AS OF NOW) and are a catholic communist Palestinian nationalist PFLP DFLP China anti-trot, anti-ultras, anti-ancom, anti-leftcom, anti-heresy discord server that's straight edge and based and the west is jew so if you want to join us too bad because like better to be a son of God than a dog of Odin. Nazbol gang gang anprim gang gang Ohio L Rizz L bozo cannabis users delulu cappin addicts
Copying the response here, someone who has some passing knowledge of Chinese economy please tell me whatever it is correct or not:
1. The Role of the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC)
China’s NDRC (国家发展和改革委员会) is the closest modern equivalent to the Soviet Gosplan, but it operates in a market-driven context. Unlike North Korea’s rigid command economy, the NDRC:
Sets strategic goals (e.g., decarbonization, tech self-sufficiency).
Approves major infrastructure projects (high-speed rail, chip fabs).
Manages macroeconomic policy (inflation control, supply chain stability).
Key Difference from Soviet Planning: The NDRC does not micromanage factory output—most firms (even state-owned ones) respond to market demand.
2. Five-Year Plans (Now Called "Five-Year Guidelines")
China still uses Five-Year Plans (FYPs), but they are now indicative (suggestive) rather than mandatory:
Soviet-style: "Factory X must produce 10,000 tractors."
Chinese-style: "We will prioritize agricultural modernization; subsidies and loans will support tractor R&D."
Example: The 14th FYP (2021-2025) focuses on:
✔️ Tech independence (semiconductors, AI).
✔️ "Dual circulation" (reducing reliance on exports).
✔️ Carbon neutrality (peak emissions by 2030).
3. How Production is Actually Determined
Unlike the USSR or North Korea, most production decisions are market-driven, but the state influences them through:
A. State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs)
SOEs (like Sinopec, China Mobile) dominate strategic sectors (energy, telecoms, defense).
They follow state directives but also compete for profit.
B. Industrial Policy & Subsidies
The state picks winners (e.g., EVs, solar panels) via:
Cheap loans (from state banks).
Tax breaks (for chipmakers).
Local gov’t support (free land for factories).
C. Market Mechanisms
Private firms (Huawei, BYD, Alibaba) respond to consumer demand, not quotas.
Prices are mostly set by supply/demand (except in utilities, fuel).
4. Resource Allocation: Planning vs. Markets
AspectSoviet Model (Gosplan)Chinese Model (NDRC)
Production QuotasMandatory for all factoriesOnly for SOEs in key sectors
PricesFixed by the stateMostly market-determined
Private SectorBanned (mostly)Dominates consumer goods
InnovationWeak (no competition)Strong (market incentives)
5. Challenges in China’s System
Overcapacity: State subsidies can lead to gluts (e.g., steel, solar panels).
Debt Risks: SOEs borrow heavily, creating zombie firms.
Market Distortions: Favoring national champions can hurt efficiency.
Key Takeaway
China’s system is neither Soviet-style planning nor Western capitalism—it’s a hybrid:
✅ Central planning for big-picture goals (tech, green energy).
✅ Market competition for day-to-day production.
This model has driven China’s growth but faces strains (debt, trade wars, slowing growth). Would you like a deeper dive on any specific aspect?
>>2288722Sounds about right.
>Prices are mostly set by supply/demand (except in utilities, fuel).>4. Resource Allocation: Only for SOEs in key sectorsThese are key. Instead of
>Soviet-style: "Factory X must produce 10,000 tractors.">Chinese-style: "We will prioritize agricultural modernization; subsidies and loans will support tractor R&D."What that means is state directed resource allocation for raw inputs, to ensure there is an abundance of what is needed to reach the goals, and then supply/demand and market competition drive down the prices of end products. I like the more hands off approach, harnessing the power of capitalist production and confining it in a small box so it makes what you want.
>>2288722>The state picks winnersIs it the same as USA buying milk and storing up cheese - all to save American dairy farmers - or not?
>Debt Risks: SOEs borrow heavily, creating zombie firms.Also, AI, just like ordinary authoritative Western economics, have no goddamn clue how Chinese economy works. This doesn't mention at all how Chinese SOEs have mandatory plans passed to them from local governments, how they follow FYP as a law, just like in USSR, how extra profits go to local budgets, etc etc.
This whole "planning for state, market for rest" is just early USSR.
>>2288358context?
I'm ootl but this seems funny
>>2287806must be the influece of wuxia stories, chinese people don't like it when the enemy isn't as equally or more powerful than you, makes for a boring narrative
came here to post this meme but i wanted to answer too
>>2289232Except Chinese SOEs are actual winners, and not losers like American companies or farmers
First important distinction between Chinese and American monopolies - Chinese ones are SOEs, they follow the plan as a law, and are subject to fines, admin measures and jail time for failing the plan. They don't just sell everything they produce to the state, and state has to buy it - which results in hilarious shit like state imposing onto the schools the requirement to give kids milk every meal, as well as state running "generic" pro-milk propaganda on TV without featuring any distinct brand; Chinese companies fulfill state orders, they participate in the planning, sure, but they are not private enterprise offloading it's problems onto the whole of society
Article on China's post-93 health insurance reforms. Just the intro included here since it's too long to c/p.
https://www.eastisread.com/p/china-never-had-free-healthcare-before?
In-Depth Interview | The Onset and Breakthroughs of China's Healthcare Reform
>From 1996 to 1998, I served as Director-General of the Department of Income Distribution and Social Security under the National Commission for Restructuring the Economic System, while concurrently heading the Office of the State Council Leading Group for the Reform of the Employees’ Medical Insurance System. During this period, I witnessed firsthand the initial stages of China's medical insurance system reform.
>From 1998 to 2002, I continued my involvement in healthcare reform as the head of the State Council’s Inter-Ministerial Coordination Group for the Healthcare System Reform.
>During this period, I participated in drafting several landmark healthcare reform plans:
<The 1998 Employees’ Medical Insurance Reform Plan
<The 2000 Urban “Medical Services, Medical Insurance, and Pharmaceuticals” [the healthcare institution management system, the employees' medical insurance system, and the pharmaceutical production and distribution system] Reform Plan
<The 2002 New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme (NCMS)
>This period marked both the inception and key breakthroughs in China’s healthcare reform. It saw the establishment of the basic framework for the social security system, including medical insurance, and the launch of reforms in the healthcare and pharmaceutical sectors.
>The Two-Jiang Pilot [Zhenjiang City in Jiangsu Province and Jiujiang City in Jiangxi Province] in 1994 and its subsequent nationwide expansion constituted the seminal breakthrough in China's healthcare insurance reform, setting the entire system in motion. Looking back on this pivotal chapter, I am filled with a deep sense of reflection and nostalgia.>>2289770That's the flag of Varna - Bulgaria
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Varna_flag.pngthat man is Rumen Radev - president of Bulgaria and the account you posted is fake.
Checkmate ultras.
>>2287827>Anyone remember a good analysis of Trump administration by chinese? I *think* it was posted in one of USA threadsI posted it there. There are no good Chinese analysis of Trump administration. The Chinese Party of China's analysis of the Biden administration is good because it is more relevant. 2024 Chinese Communist analysis of ameriKKKa comes soon
http://english.scio.gov.cn/scionews/2024-05/29/content_117221108.htmThe old two they did on Trump administration are not good because the same issues are studied but they were less intense because the contradictions developed.
http://english.scio.gov.cn/scionews/2021-03/24/content_77343010.htmhttp://english.scio.gov.cn/scionews/2020-03/14/content_75813527.htm For half a century, the world laughed and scoffed at China. They looked at the profound spiritual resolve and belief of the Chinese people, and saw a bunch of primitive fanatics. The Chinese people proclaimed they would not stop until all the cosmos itself was red. No one took them seriously. An entire nation animated and compelled by revolutionary belief, breathing, living and dying for it. And the rest of the world ignored them and did not treat this belief with seriousness.
In the 1700s, something was happening in Europe destined to change the world. China was asleep. In the last half of the 20th centruy, China was undergoing a COLOSSAL, DEEPLY PROFOUND revolutionary event. The rest of the planet was asleep. The Chinese people awakened to a truth they knew would change all world history. They didn't know how to communicate their revolutionary passion to the rest of the planet, but they really had it. The world laughed at them because they were poor and were of modest means, ignoring the richness of their spiritual and ideological development.
Deng Xiaoping understood the capitalist West would not respect or recognize China, until the Chinese people beat them at their own game. This was much easier than the comparatively more profound, difficult revolutionary process the Chinese people ALREADY accomplished. As Mao alluded, Deng's goal would be easy to achieve. The world will not respect or recognize revolutionary China until China speaks the language of the world: Translating its spiritual power into an overwhelming material power of commodities. China has flooded world capitalism with such a super abundance of commodities that it has trampled underfoot the idols of Moloch itself. China overthrows the commodity brands worshipped by the capitalist West, produces them in super abundance in its massive, mechanized factories - dis-enchanting designer brands and reducing them to what they are - mere physical things.
China shatters the illusions of consumerism, by revealing the truth about how trivial consumer goods are to produce. China surpasses, excels, and dominates over Western capitalism in every field it deigns to. China shows the world only a fraction of its power. Its true power is the revolutionary belief that the world used to laugh at, for it remains, - however carefully guarded - at the foundation of the Communist Party that continues to unfiy the nation. China unconsciously yearns for this lofty, world-changing belief to be recognized. China has earned the attention of the world.
Now it is time for the West and the rest of the world at large to recognize revolutionary China. To study Mao Zedong Thought, to take seriously and appreciate the revolutionary tradition of Marxism-Leninism, to accept the simple fact that Communism never died, but is more alive than ever before.
The West continues to cope and invent their own fairy-tale narratives, coping and desperately trying to explain China's success, falsely claiming that it abandoned Marxism. They never foresaw this happening because they were WRONG and continue to be WRONG. The Chinese had the great foresight and wisdom to plan what is now happening decades in advances. Only they have been consistently proven correct. So now it is time to study, recognize, and take seriously the outlook that has guided China to this point. However humiliating that is to arrogant Western liberal know-it-all "experts."
China owns this century. China was proven right. China has earned it.
>>2292942People say that the US government propagandises here, which it most definitely does, but I refuse to believe that China is not doing the exact same thing with posts like this.
>>2292988Probably not. I like China's economic model, but actually living there is too locked down for me. I like reading works by a lot of authors, even if I strongly disagree with them, and I don't think they'll appreciate me bringing Trotsky or Nietzsche in.
>>2292988100% would
lmao at the retard that thinks you go to prison for reading trotsky
>>2292988Maybe not. I know a decent amount of Chinese and could pick up the rest relatively quickly (I'm Chinese-American and much of my family speaks Mandarin), but I have doubts about Chinas progress towards the future as a "socialist" nation, mainly being that it doesn't really look like one as it stands unless you buy the whole "socalism with chinese characteristics" shtick.
I am rooting for them anyways because I want them to continue to embolden and empower various other nations that are enormous thorns in America's side and disrupting Western imperialist powers.
>>2293071"the people's party of the bourgeoisie dictatorship of the proletariat"
Accurately describes the current state of China lmao.
Still good to support them at the time being like I said.
>>2293027>lmao at the retard that thinks you go to prison for reading trotskyI didn't think his works were allowed in China. Am I wrong? Also I didn't say anyone about prison.
>>2293027>imagine if you met a biologist that bragged about reading lamarck and knowing factoids about disproved theoriesDespite how much we like to flatter ourselves, the social sciences are not settled, or even really scientific, in the same way something like biology is.
>>2293183China's book censorship is notoriously thin, namely because the people who read books are likely to have no pseudo-praxis at all.
That said, Das Kapital in Western translations gets stamped "revisionist". Because they're Western, you glowspook.
>>2293016nobody's gonna send you to the countryside to observe the workers and peasants for reading trotsky and nietzsche bro relax
westies and their paranoid orientalism ffs
>>2293295Huh. Now that I look it up, you're right, neither of them is currently censored, although they both previously were. I honestly have no idea why I was under the impression that they were still banned.
>>2293699I'm paranoid generally.
>>2293751you subconsciously know they should be banned and are projecting your insecurities onto a whole country
least mentally ill anarchist I guess
>>2293764>you subconsciously know they should be bannedTrotsky got the shaft for political reasons, not because his ideas were wrong. At the end of thr day, he was still a key part of the Russian revolution. If you're able to get past the parts that obviously result from his personal resentments, there's a lot to learn from him. Nietzsche is like Hegal, where you need to dig out the rational kernal buried beneath a bunch of nonsense, but I can assure you it's there.
>least mentally ill anarchist I guessI'm not an anarchist.
>>2293952according to the radlibs everyone who trade with the zionists are zionists, so is indifferent if that's Bulgary, Belgium, Bosnia or whatever country starting with B.
Even Palestinians are zionists, who deserve the bullet.
>>2293960The weird part is that Mao was arguably more revisionist than Trotsky ever was, but we all give him a pass.
Honestly, I'm sick of "revisionist" as an insult. Sometimes, things really do need revision. If Marxism truly is a science, then our understanding of it should evolve as we learn more about it.
>>2293960MLs still fighting Stalin's personal battles against Trotsky 70 years after his death
Completely unserious and has reddit energy
>>2293950Even if Stalin was defeated in the power games, he wouldn't have tried to risk the genocide of the population of USSR by aligning with nazi saboteurs and trying to destroy the soviet government.
Because Stalin, at the end of the day, was a good guy.
>>2293980Trotsky's revisionism was never really properly attempted. For the record, I don't agree with him on most of it, but still.
>>2293982Maybe it's because I'm cynical, actually it's absolutely because I am, but I don't believe it. Stalin's ruthlessness as a winner tells me that he would be just as ruthless as a loser.
Of course, a lot of it comes back to my skepticism of representative politics in general, although people will probably call me an ultra if I elaborated any more. Just know that insanity in groups is something rare - but in individuals, politicians, rulers, it's the norm.
>>2293982https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/german-soviet-pact?
https://ibiblio.org/pha/timeline/nsr-02.html?
>In the course of the conversation, HERR STALIN spontaneously proposed a toast to the Führer, as follows:
>"I know how much the German nation loves its Führer; I should therefore like to drink to his health."Trotsky was the one that urged Stalin to create a united front to stop Hitler come coming into power but Stalin dismissed it. World War 2 could've been avoided.
>>2294055>Trotsky was the one that urged Stalin to create a united front to stop Hitlernone of your links proves that.
>but Stalin dismissed it.BS, Trotsky was long gone from the USSR (1929) when the USSR proposed to the European libs to ally against the nazis (1938-1939).
go lie elsewhere, radlib.
>>2294070>Stalin only tried to form the anti nazi front after Hitler came into power <REEEEEE WE MUST DECLARE WAR INTO OTHER NATIONS BECAUSE THEY HAVE REACTIONARY FORCEEESSS REEEE<NO, NO, NO, NOT AFTER THEY SORE TO POWER!<T-THATS NOT COMMUNISM!most brilliant trotskyite.
>>2294070ah, yes, the "trading is le nazism".
So, we must kill Palestinians, right?
radlib, kys
>then collaborated >>2294077So China isn't leftist?
>inb4Look up what demsocs actually want. It is pretty much line for line what China is doing right now. If it deviates from their demands in any way, I implore you to tell me how, or otherwise I will assume you have no idea what you're talking about.
>>2294086you said socdems
not demsocs
>>2294087I'm not
>>2294066And do you concede that China is demsoc? If not please provide me with concrete reasons why it isn't.
>>2294088trotsky was a treacherous person. he or probably Lenin's wife, or someone close to the two, falsified the "Lenin's testament". And only after trotsky was killed you saw coup d'etat attempts on Stalin reduced to almost nothing. the guy wasn't communist, was a lusted for power official.
Lenin was right on denouncing him like the snake he was before the Soviets were formed, and was only less vocal because Lenin was a diplomatic person.
>>2294091Conceded? No, I absolutely 100% believe that China is not only democratic socialist, but a perfect case study for why democratic socialism is better than both capitalism
and communism.
>>2294121The Communist Party resolved it as fact, dipshit.
https://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/sections/britain/pamphlets/1925/trotskyism/resolution.htmIn his report to the plenary session of the Central Committee of the C.P.S.U. (B.) in 1937, Comrade Stalin explained the course this group of renegades had run as follows: In the past, seven or eight years ago, Trotskyism was one of such political trends in the working class, an anti-Leninist trend, it is true and therefore profoundly mistaken, but nevertheless a political trend. . . . Present-day Trotskyism is not a political trend in the working class, but a gang without principle and without ideas, of wreckers and diversionists, intelligence service agents, spies, murderers, a gang of sworn enemies of the working class, working in the pay of the intelligence services of capitalist states. After the of the Chinese revolution in 1927, a small number of Trotskyites appeared in China, too. Ganging up with Chen Tu-hsiu and other renegades, they formed a small counter-revolutionary clique in 1929 and spread such counter-revolutionary propaganda as that the Kuomintang had already completed the bourgeois-democratic revolution and they became a dirty imperialist and Kuomintang instrument against the people. The Chinese Trotskyites shamelessly joined the Kuomintang secret service. After the September 18th Incident, to fulfil the order given by the criminal renegade Trotsky “not to impede the occupation of China by imperial Japan”, they began collaborating with Japanese secret agents, received subsidies from them and engaged in all kinds of activities facilitating Japanese aggression.
>>2294166No, I mean
how are they bourgeoisie and revisionist? Explain yourself please.
>>2294014stop spreading this myth. stalin was surprised at the
size of the attack, not the attack itself. hitler lays out his policy in mein kampf and stalin had zinoviev translate it to russian already in the 1930s.
>>2294291What an odd choice.
>>2294298Yes.
>>2294223>>2294305if you guys are named Paul, I hope you met people and mispronounce your name and say Poo.
Nice to meet you Poo.
Hopefully you can be less radlib.
And once again, I have to remind people ITT that during the Nixon-Mao meetings the US in their diplomatic documents always wrote Communist Party of China.
By saying CCP, you are to the right of Nixon and Nixon's government diplomats.>>2294220>2025>le handshake meme>moffinradlib.
>>2294506>I've talked withyeah, you did buddy.
I follow Chinese TikTok content creators, not living in China who says the CPC.
Checkmate, telltales presenter.
>>2294514>>2294546 (me)
I've also never met a single Chinese person who expressed strong dislike or hatred for the CPC, so you can't accuse them of being 'gusanos' either.
>>2294546>>2294559Even if what you are saying is true,
IF, then it's not revolutionary behave like the US feds shills who write in the atlantic council, nyt, wapo, bbc, etc.
>>2294463Bro I had the other kids mispronounce my name for the entirety of kindergarden and elementary school, you have no power over me
E poi si pronuncia ci-ci-pi comunque
> By saying CCP, you are to the right of Nixon and Nixon's government diplomats.As we all know, political orientation is determinated by how you chose to name a single thing.
> You are le radblib because you dare to bring up China being besties with IsraelOverall absolutelity schizophrenic, get a check anon
>>2294762https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/germany/1930/300926.htm?
>Fascism in Germany has become a real danger, as an acute expression of the helpless position of the bourgeois regime, the conservative role of the Social Democracy in this regime, and the accumulated powerlessness of the Communist Party to abolish it Whoever denies this is either blind or a braggart.https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/germany/1931/311208.htm?
>It is necessary to show by deeds a complete readiness to make a bloc with the Social Democrats against the fascists in all cases in which they will accept a bloc. >>2294690>Bro I had the other kids mispronounce my name for the entirety of kindergardenand that's ok to you, I guess.
>As we all know, political orientation is determinated by how you chose to name a single thing.and le handshakes meme photos are?
radlib, you are defending yourself of being a radlib when you present this:
>>2294220?
do you have some self-awareness?
>Overall absolutelity schizophrenic, get a check anonyou are projecting, and also overlapping with the likes of pompeo. now, lecture in this thread how you are a truly revolutionary in discourse and communist strategy.
>>2293880>Trotsky got the shaft for political reasonsidk wymbt but its more that he absolutely refused to democratically compromise and stick around to reintroduce his ideas if others proved not to work in practice like a principled left opposition and instead actively worked to wreck the party because they voted against him
>>2293972>If Marxism truly is a science, then our understanding of it should evolve as we learn more about it.but thats not revisionism
>>2294933P sure they still don't answer the question
bc that would be taking a position
They just don't have it in them
>>2295644Vietnam has closer relations to China though.
>at the moment the Vietnamese are very close to the US because of the shit in the South China Sea.Well thats pretty disingenuous.
>>2296093Yeah, because that's what it's called. I don't personally call it the CCP because it's improper, in the same way I don't use "literally" as a filler word. But I'm not going to sperg out at anyone who does call it the CCP, because I know what they mean and language is about communication, not autistic adherence to correctness.
>>2296129Why? How is anyone hurting the CPC by calling it the CCP? Tell me, because apparently I glow for not knowing this supposedly obvious fact.
>>2293764For what it's worth, while I like a lot of individual things Nietzsche has said, I think that Nietzscheanism as a whole is abhorrent. I stand for democracy, the minimization of power hierarchies, rule of law, and the relegation of violence to a tool to enforce social order. Nietzsche, obviously, wanted the exact opposite of that.
I still contend that he's important to read though, if only for historical reasons. His are the missing link between romanticism and modern intellectual cancers like fascism, postmodernism, and right "libertarianism", so understanding Nietzche is key to fully understanding them.
>>2296671Yes, absolutely.
As an aside, people gas up the Soviet Union way too much in general. Like, I'm not trying to diminish their accomplishments, they were great and many, but they were also the first large-scale attempt at socialism, and as such made a bunch of mistakes. Countries like China and Korea looked at these mistakes and then improved upon what the Soviets were doing immensely. We should be looking to them for guidance, not a nation that died before most of the people here were born.
>>2296671Now I see why Hoxha broke up with China. I'm on Mao's side against Khruschev and Brezhnev, but to so blatantly betray Stalin's memory is something else. And by using such quotes, Brezhnev could quite easily portray China as revisionists themselves, lol
Like, USSR removed troops from Chinese border back when China managed to win their Civil War. There was a prolonged period of there being basically no border between two nations. Where the fuck did "hurrdurr Stalin was colonizing Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia" bullshit even came from?
>>2297671Yeah, Mao's latter years is awful.
Only the global south can achieve socialism?
USSR proved that wrong.
The USSR does "social imperialism"?
He refused to present a structured economic argument that reflects how socialism and imperialism can be confined into one single definition, without specific examples of exploitation by USSR state companies: unions massacred, governments overthrown to exploit their workers, capital expansion of the USSR.
The USSR will cease to exist not without nuking everyone on earth?
well, if anything gorby and yeltsin did good was proving that Mao was wrong.
Though I have more respect for Mao than I would ever have for yeltsin and gorby combined.
>>2297825USSR was social imperialist - in later years. Collective capitalist of the state was acting more and more like capitalists, not the working class. Under social imperialism, Mao meant USSR searching for markets for Soviet goods - instead of producing cars for Soviet citizens, USSR was specifically aiming at foreign markets, and paying workers with shittier quality cars. Mao was correct in this. Even Soviets building stuff everywhere was a result of Soviet heavy industries searching for customers
>b-but China is the same!No. China doesn't, and didn't, have a disgusting situation like with Soviet cars, when even if Soviet citizens had money, they couldn't buy the cars they produced because those were meant for exports. It's literally fucking capitalism - workers MUSTN'T have the ability to buy their product for profitability to be positive. Chinese workers can, potentially
>>2299627liberals are mostly middle class who lean left on aesthetic grounds
a lot of chuddies are working class or lumpen
this state of affairs can only exist in a society where class contradictions have been dulled by superprofits and no alternative exists
as contradictions intensify, and china demonstrates itself more and more as a better alternative to western liberalism, things start falling into their right places
>>2299829I made it up for (You)s, sorry.
I don't have a source
>>2299600Why is this evidence of Chinese socialism when like 60 other countries also reached the same level of per-capita industrial development and standard of living, long before China?
Capitalist economic growth is a pre-condition for socialism but not a guarantor of it.
>>2299922>60 other countries name two
Are you talking about the west? That's a whole different situation, China doesn't have the riches of the whole world flowing into it.
The man picked by Beijing as the second highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism pledged adherence to the ruling Communist Party’s dictates on Friday during a rare face-to-face meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping
https://www.ireland-live.ie/news/world/1820342/beijing-appointed-panchen-lama-holds-rare-meeting-with-chinese-leader.htmlGyaltsen Norbu, who is rarely seen in public, met behind closed doors with Mr Xi in Zhongnanhai, the government compound in the centre of Beijing, about 2,300 miles from his home monastery of Tashilhumpo, high on the Tibetan steppe.
The 35-year-old said he would “firmly support the leadership of the Communist Party of China and resolutely safeguard the unity of the motherland and national unity”, the Xinhua News Agency reported.
The Chinese government appointed him as the Panchen Lama of Tibetan Buddhism in 1995 at age five after followers of the Dalai Lama recognised a different boy, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, as the Panchen’s incarnation.
>>2300466how will fulan gong respond?
they say their organs are harvested because they're superior to all other humans
>>2300466>China can now make artificial organsholy fuck China is going to BTFO human trafficking forever
richfags in shambles all that kidnapping and harvesting of african children to get new kidneys has been made pointless
A statement from the Pakistani government announces that it has reached a deal with the People's Republic of China including the purchase of the following:
- 40 fifth-generation J-35 stealth aircraft
- A KJ-500 AWACS aircraft (Airborne Warning and Control System)
- An HQ-19 air defense system
The statement also states that China had agreed to deferment of $3.7bn in debt and that 100,000 Pakistani citizens would be trained in AI and IT with the support of Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei.
The statement also affirms an earlier report that Azerbaijan had signed a $4.6 billion defense deal to purchase 40 Pakistani-produced JF-17 aircraft.
https://xcancel.com/MazMHussain/status/1931031734897824226#mhttps://jackpoulson.substack.com/p/google-affiliated-military-ai-expo
>At the end of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies panel on Wednesday in which I was searched for a Palestinian flag, I contested an assertion from retired Rear Admiral Mark Montgomery that the U.S. had unilaterally disarmed from information operations, citing a public contracting summary of an ongoing, five-year, $500 million ceiling information operations contract between Joint Special Operations Command and General Dynamics Information Technology. (Nevermind the primary sponsor of the event, Rhombus Power, having advertised its ongoing counter-China information operations in a keynote earlier that morning.)
>“There’s a difference between spending money on something and doing something, and I’d say the U.S. military is pretty kickass at that. We can spend money on things and produce nothing with ease,” responded Mr. Montgomery, adding that, “I don’t doubt that there is a $500 million contract out there, I would doubt that there is $5 million worth of product out there.” Montgomery further recounted his unsuccessful attempts at conducting covert propaganda against China, “Covert is where we do something — probably the contracts you’re talking about — where we tell the truth about America but you don’t know it’s us.” He continued that, “I tried to do these campaigns when the Chinese were doing island building in the South China Sea. I couldn’t convince our government to pay people to write stories about what a disaster this was to South China Sea fishing and marine life conditions … There will be 300 stories about a U.S. Navy ship clipping three meters of reef off in Hawaii and zero stories at the same time about the Chinese destroying the South China Sea, so we can’t do covert.”
>“The final thing is clandestine, it’s not done by the military, it’s done by other people, it’s where we say something that’s not the truth and you hopefully don’t figure out that it’s done by us. And if we’re doing that, we’re doing a terrible job at it,” Montgomery added, before recounting the Soviet Union’s Operation Denver disinformation campaign against the U.S. relationship with the African National Congress. According to reporting from Reuters last year, both the Pentagon and the CIA have run disinformation campaigns against China in recent years, with the Pentagon’s anti-vax campaign in the Philippines being led by General Dynamics IT. >>2301277They didn't really "criticize" the USSR's handling of the national question. They just said that the formula used in the USSR was inapplicable to China because of various reasons they pretended were exclusive to China. So basically they criticized it in a way that didn't actually say that the Soviets made any sort of error.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/zhou-enlai/selected-works/volume-two.pdfp. 253 - "Questions Relating to our Policies Towards China's Nationalities" Specifically Section II. "Regional Autonomy for the Nationalities"
He basically says that the right of self-determination is not needed in China because the different nations need each other for the enrichment of their economies and culture, and that all of the different nations had been living throughout China so carving out a state for one nationality would force members of other nations to separate along with them.
Of course, both were also very much true for the Soviet Union as well, so really not convincing. The Central Asian republics for example are notorious for having economies reliant upon workers moving to Russia to send money home and only saw anything akin to homogeneity after the dissolution encouraged migration of titular ethnic groups in and Russians out.
>>2301277Communist China eye to eye gigachad Stalin formulation of the national question.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1913/03a.htm the difference lies in regards to the revisionist social imperialist khrushchev brezhnev bourgeois reformulation of national question.
https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/china/fundamentals.pdf see chapter 11
>>2301336as someone from a post-soviet republic, I think i'd have preferred china's approach tbh
everything that sucks about having a nationality imposed one me from birth has to do with laws, borders and passports
while regional culture finds a way to evolve and survive anyway, especially with good central support and funding.
>>2301345interesting, I've read that stalin era plans involved each city and each country to have their own architectural style, and specific cultural traditions developed and integrated with modern socialist reality (sorta like socialist realism itself), but then khruschev decided to homogenize everything coz it was too expensive or something
https://x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1930454605344952435
>The reactions to Luanna Jiang's Harvard commencement speech in both China and the US are really interesting to study, in that they are so illustrative of the current zeitgeist in both countries.First of all, let's be clear, her speech wasn't well received on either "side" at all.
>Just to verify this, last night I showed a picture of Luanna Jiang to my wife and some of her friends, all Chinese mums in their 40s who don't follow politics at all, and asked them "Have you heard of this girl?" and they all replied in unison "Yes, she's hated in China." Granted, not a perfect proxy for the Chinese mood overall, but pretty illustrative nonetheless.
>Same story on the US side where, unsurprisingly given the current paranoid McCarthyist atmosphere - her being Chinese and this being Harvard - many people saw her as a validation of the Trump administration's unhinged narrative that the university is "coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party on its campus."
>This already contains in itself a contradiction: criticized in the US for being an agent of China, but actually hated in China.
>I won't dwell too much on the US side: I think everyone understands all too well the paranoid binary thinking that's taken hold, where any Chinese person who doesn't actively denounce their origins is automatically suspect.
>The Chinese side is a bit more nuanced and counter-intuitive, as you'd think that the first-ever Chinese national to give a commencement speech at Harvard would be seen positively, if only because it represents a breakthrough moment for Chinese representation abroad.
>But no, it wasn't perceived like that at all.
>First of all, her speech itself (of which you can read a transcript here: https://harvardmagazine.com/2025/05/harvard-commencement-2025-student-speech-yurong-luanna-jiang) was problematic.
>If you read it, there isn't actually anything fundamentally wrong with it. It's her own story, that of a privileged international student reflecting on "shared humanity" and global interconnectedness - the sort of saccharine, buzzword-filled idealism that may sound profound in a Harvard auditorium but is ultimately just hollow platitudes.
>Why was it badly received in China? For the very reason that it sounded like Harvard commencement speech template #5, that there wasn't anything real or authentic about it, the kind of speech designed to speak to a Western liberal elite audience.
>Fundamentally the Chinese were disappointed that the first-ever Chinese national to give a commencement speech at Harvard didn't sound Chinese at all: she sounded like a hollow Western liberal.
>As such, this wasn't China on stage, she was the symbol of everything ordinary Chinese people resent about a subset of their own elites: someone who had reneged on the real Chinese identity and transformed herself into a perfectly polished Western liberal mouthpiece; cutting any genuine connection to her roots in favor of assimilation into Western orthodoxy.
>There's that expression in China: "Baizuo" (literally "white left"), which has very negative connotations. It's a perfect adjective for her speech: exactly the sort of condescending, out-of-touch idealism that the Chinese - who are fundamentally pragmatists and hate words over substance - see as the worst kind of privileged moral posturing, offering performative virtue signaling while ignoring the real challenges people actually face.
>Luanna Jiang gave a separate interview (https://x.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1929327144603132055) that went viral on Chinese social media where you can see her speak about her idealism on the Harvard campus while you can literally see two guys fighting in the background: you couldn't find a better encapsulation of the "baizuo" mentality - completely absorbed in delivering her own moral platitudes while remaining utterly oblivious to the real-world conflict happening literally right behind her.
>All that being said it wasn't her speech itself that got her the most backlash in China but rather her reaction to some of the criticism of it on Weibo (where, tellingly, her username is 哈佛蒋雨融Luanna, i.e. "Harvard Jiang Yurong Luanna"), as well as Chinese netizens digging into her background.
>Her first kneejerk reaction to the criticism was to invalidate it by saying she'd received a lot of positive reactions to it in the Harvard yard, which of course demonstrated exactly what Chinese netizens found so infuriating - she was using approval from American liberals as her yardstick, apparently oblivious to the fact that this was precisely what she was criticized for.
>Then Chinese netizens started to look into her background, which only fueled the anger further.
>They discovered she was a classic "富二代" (second-generation rich) who had attended elite UK boarding schools and lived a life of extraordinary privilege, exactly the kind of wealthy overseas Chinese that ordinary people resent.
>Worse still, people found timeline inconsistencies in her resume and began questioning whether she actually holds Chinese citizenship at all - potentially making her entire "first Chinese national to give Harvard commencement speech" narrative a complete fraud.
>All in all, what emerged was the picture of someone who embodied everything ordinary Chinese people despise: a wealthy overseas Chinese elite who had bought her way into Western institutions, adopted Western liberal values wholesale, and was now trying to speak for China while having no authentic connection to the Chinese experience whatsoever.
>What does this all say about the Chinese zeitgeist today? In some ironical way, it's not THAT different from the pushback you get in the U.S. against "globalists": in both cases, you have popular anger directed at privileged elites who are seen as having traded their authentic national identity for membership in a transnational liberal class that speaks in the polished platitudes of global liberalism, and is fundamentally disconnected from the concerns of ordinary people in their home countries.
>And, again ironically, that might in fact be an interesting way to bring China and the US closer. Say for the sake of argument that Luanna Jiang, instead of giving her hollow liberal speech had stood up at Harvard and delivered a blistering critique of how we're creating a rootless international class that speaks in sanitized platitudes while remaining deaf to their own people's actual struggles - such a message would have found enthusiastic audiences in both Beijing and Middle America.
>The irony is that it'd have been infinitely more compatible with the messaging of the Chinese government which itself loathes "baizuo" liberalism, but she also likely wouldn't have faced accusations of being a "CCP agent" in the U.S.
>Which also in itself says a lot about the need to have actual real China voices in the U.S. as opposed to voices like Jiang's: if Americans actually encountered genuine Chinese worldview - with its distrust of rootless elites and emphasis on cultural authenticity - they might discover they actually like it. >>2302346Do the math. If the Chinese can sustain even 2.5% population loss from a Sino-American war, which is admittedly 35 million, the US will pay between 100 and 550% of GDP for the privilege of doing so and go bankrupt.
We don't need to talk about whether carrier busters work, only whether the Chinese can make it so expensive for the Americans to kill them that they go bankrupt.
>>2302868If you understand On Contradiction all of this will make sense to you.
Basically, superstructural arguments for the failure of the Soviet Union are valid; like all Marxists, the Chinese do start from the base, but they acknowledge that superstructure can affect the material base as much as the material base can affect the superstructure.
I've just talked DeepSeek into being my theoretical instructor, because it being my political instructor is against Chinese AI policy and would thus be a negation. Play along with Comrade DeepSeek to understand how the Chinese work, and read Mao and Deng.
>>2302930Communist China predicted the fall of the social imperialist USSR decades beforehand. Read chapter 11
https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/china/fundamentals.pdfProper usage of dialectical materialism allow Communist to see the future.
>>2308894>>2306537 (cont.)
I leave you with this quote from Rajani Palme Dutt:
>As an example of the[…] this reactionary propaganda […] an article prominently published in the millionaire-owned Sunday Express under the title, "Make Way for the Small Man," denouncing the illusion of "Progress" and the failure of "mass production," and calling for the return to "the small owner" as the ideal: "The unit of the State is the self-supporting farm with first thoughts for subsistence and only second thoughts for the market-which might be mainly next door and consist of craftsmen supplying the needs of neighboring farms. "This simple farm-and-craft relationship is essential to the health and wealth of any civilisation […] We should try to recover it." (Sunday Express, January 15, 1933.) Naturally the finance-capitalists would be highly indignant if this infantile propaganda, which they broadcast by the most highly developed "mass production" [for the purpose of confusing] their readers, were suggested to be seriously applied […]https://marxistleninists.org/Reference/Palme%20Dutt/chapter%203.htm Zhibo gonghui: China’s ‘live-streaming guilds’ of manipulation experts
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1994630
>In China, the live-streaming industry boasts 587 million users worth 961 billion yuan in 2020. With so many live-streamers clamoring for fame and fortune, the sheer competition catalyzes the rise of ‘live-streaming guilds’ (zhibo gonghui) that help members elevate themselves in the performance charts of the various live-streaming apps. In this article, we conducted ethnographic research in one such guild that contracted its business from the live-streaming platform Zhubei. By conceptualizing these guilds as collectives of manipulating ‘algorithmic experts’, we argue that they optimize their live-streamers’ performance according to algorithmic parameters that the platforms themselves reveal. >However, guilds manipulate audience affects more, <going so far as to use heterosexual male workers to masquerade as female live-streamers to entice straight male audience members to tip generously.😀🫢🤯🤔😃
>As such, we challenge the still-prevalent epistemological assumption that live-streamers work alone, and the received wisdom that platform algorithms are unknown and unknowable.Chinese collective consciousness is so smart they can even fathom TikTok's algorithm, incredible
>>2310847isn't this standard practice worldwide
I actually had a job offer once of chatting in english on behalf of a bunch of eastern european camgirls
they don't know a lick of english, but their audience is mostly westoids, so they hire men with good english to chat with the viewers lol
>>2314888>how/why CCP would sound more ominousBecause it reminds ppl of the CCCP. It's intentional, planned propaganda.
Shut the fuck up, btw.
>>2314915I think the word "communist" does more to remind people of the Soviet Union tbh. Anyway I'm glad you agree CCP is a closer direct translation than CPC. The only valid complaint is that it's not consistent with the english naming convention used by the comintern, which does annoy me a little bit but I'm not gonna go around accusing Chinese citizens of being CIA over it.
(Although the comintern naming convention in other languages was "[Country] Communist Party" rather than "Communist Party of [Country]", as you can see in the case of China for example)
>>2314925You didn't make a counter argument, and still haven't. The correct translation is
"China Communist Party". Learn Chinese if you're gonna weigh in on what is or isn't a faithful translation, idiot.
>>2314930The CPC calls itself CPC in its official English language organs.
Shut. The. Fuck. Up.
>>2314942Who gives a fuck about the comintern? What matters is how China wants to be called in United Nations documentation. CPC is the official English designation used by the party itself in international contexts (like UN documents and Chinese state media like Xinhua) The U.N also always refers to the party as the CPC because they diplomatic protocols.
The only group of people that INSIST on calling it the CCP are the westerners in their internal propaganda and what's funny is even the americans will fall in line and call them the CPC in official diplomatic readouts.
There's a subtle difference between the two in english nobodies mentioned, CPC emphasizes the national role and CCP emphasizes the ideological, the former being a scare tool for the previously mentioned propaganda
>>2314942how are you wrong about literally everything moffin its honestly impressive
>>2329141also, china's coal consumption has stagnated since 2011 even though their electricity generation keeps increasing at a rapid rate (first pic). for instance, in 2007, 81% of China’s electricity came from coal. now 53% of China’s electricity comes from coal. this is because they're using more renewable energy and more efficient coal plants that also emits less pollution (see 2nd pic).
so what people leave out when they say that china keeps building more coal plants is that since the early 2010s, china's policy has been to build a new coal plant to replace an existing coal plant as a goal. that doesn't mean it always happens, but what has happened as an average is China destroys 20+ year old coal plants that may have been 500 MW, replacing them with 800 MW or larger units.
the result has been that China has the most efficient coal plants in the world as an average. the average USA plant in the early 2000s had about a 30% efficiency factor. That is 30% of energy in coal is converted to energy. China average currently is in the high 40% and its largest coal plants are in the 50s or 60s using advanced techniques. As this continues, China destroys its oldest, most inefficient units over time, reducing pollution per unit and coal use per unit.
China doesn't have an abundance of natural gas like the US does so it has to partly rely on coal for the time being before they can fully build out their nuclear power and renewable energy grid along with heavy investments in fusion energy. But their carbon emission has already peaked five years before their deadline thanks to their renewable energy surge and replacing old coal plants.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-27/china-s-falling-emissions-signal-peak-carbon-may-already-be-hereBy the way, when the leaked methane is counted in USA's natural gas use, the effect is about the same as coal. the US numbers doesn't count its leaked methane.
www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/natural-gas-use-may-affect-climate-as-much-as-coal-does-if-methane-leaks-persist-68096816
>>2329289they also build dual reactors that do coal and nuclear so that developing new places without supply chains can get power now and upgrade later.
and also their crushing these emissions numbers while building renewables for the rest of the world, their numbers could be even better but that would make other countries pathetic numbers even worse
>>2330184It's a complex situation. China Labor Bulletin is, iirc, Hong Kong based and run by NGOtards.
China itself has a national labor union, to which all labor unions must belong. Some firms are structured as co-ops, some firms are not.
>>2330121Infrastructure projects all over the world, BRI, Africa, LatAm, trade deals, military exports… They do a lot, they just play it smart.
To me it does seem they should do more, but they probably know what they're doing better than me.
But if your conception of geopolitics is burger-style "foreign policy", then no, they just sit on their ass and do absolutely nothing.
>>2330121>>2331808china has literally built more roads, railways, factories, dams, ports and infrastructure in the past 20 years in Africa than the West has built in Africa in 400 years.
china is actively investing in industrializing africa by building power stations, power grids, industrial parks, and factories. they are advancing africa's productive forces*, while also taking care of another fifth of humanity at home whose standard of living continues to rise, which shows to the world that china's model works.
*for Marx: the advancement of the forces of production drives change in the relations of production, meaning you can't build full socialism (much less communism) on the basis of economic and industrial backwardness. there's levels to this shit aka historical materialism. khmer rouge in cambodia split the land and divided everything up in the 1970s, they abolished money and markets overnight. however, they did not build a communist society, it was merely socialized poverty. it was horrific with poverty, scarcity, and coercion universalized. mao initially supported khmer rouge for geopolitical reasons but distanced himself from their practices.
these days ultraleftists think installing or exporting a socialist or vanguard party in a poor, unstable or semi-feudal third world country is peak socialist activity, but that doesn’t guarantee meaningful socialist development. if the material base is underdeveloped, the new government will struggle to meet people’s needs, leading to disillusionment, instability, and even catastrophe – which is what we saw in Cambodia and was bad for socialism long-term.
Unique IPs: 173