>>2371242 (pic)
>It's me, Xi>I'm logged in>Ready to upload data<Hits ENTER key on the keyboard<Cut to stereotypical "haxor" lines in green running on his computer screen>I'm in<Starts profusely typing on the keyboard, his typing speed is astronomical<Objective completedHave a nice day
>>2371672>Meanwhile, in FACT-landThere has been more than thousand strikes in China this year,
as encouraged by the proletarian state apparatus of Chin@. Chin@ repressed its internal bourgeoisie and kept on overcoming the US economy.
u live in, and report from a parallel dimension, my friend! >>2371789 (samefag)
>>2371672 (samefag)
….. imagine being a paid CIA glowie shill and within two subsequent posts claiming that
>CHHONAH has strikesbut also
>ChÉÉNAh does not allow strikesLike, (k)N-EE-GAHW, make up your mind
>>2371812>>>>no sourcesNiguh, "we" in the "West" are struggling due to inflation, which means that out real wages allow us access less and less to food and rent and shit, while the Chinese are experiencing deflation, meaning their real wages are automatically worth more, and their p-bourg cry about muh prices and having to offer more for less cash.
It's literally picrel, you utter faggot, you scum, you pestilence, you sociopath!
>>2371822>inflation, which means that out real wages * our
Sry
>>2371841>Did party tell them to?Yes, anon, under totalitarian dictatorships (tm) everything that the people do are ordered by the party.
You are obviously not a libshit, btw, and your understanding of historic processes is great!
>>2371266China is literally the future, lmao
Would have never guessed that I'd be saying this in the 90's
>The upward trend of strike activity has only continued. As a result of the tariffs and factory closures, from April until the writing of this article in June, China has been the scene of escalating proletarian dissent and independent collective action organized outside the states domineering regime union structure. On April 24, hundreds of workers of Guangxin Sports Goods in Dao county went on strike after the company’s factory was shut down without paying employees their compensation or their social security benefits. Workers struck in the Shangda Electronics’ factory that manufactures circuit boards, after not being paid wages since the start of the year and social security benefits for nearly two years. On April 28, a large-scale workers’ protest broke out in Wuzhen, eastern China, over wages that have been reportedly unpaid since January where over a thousand went to the town hall to protest and a dozen were arrested. Workers at Yunda Express in Chengdu, Dongguan and Dao County went on strike and took to the streets against factory closures. Workers’ protests also took place in the autonomous region of Inner Mongolia, against the non-payment of wages. In the southwestern province of Sichuan, a textile factory was set on fire over unpaid wages, preceding the fire, affected workers had staged vigils, filed wage claims and protest sit=ins, decrying the absence of legal recourse, but state enforcement remained absent until the extreme act of arson forced their plight into the public eye, generating a viral response across Chinese social media. Online platforms quickly dubbed the arsonist “Brother 800”, with thousands of posts expressing sympathy, calling his act a desperate "lesson for exploitative bosses", and condemning delayed wage enforcement, though authorities later labeled the “800 yuan” narrative a rumor.
>The Chinese capitalist class, unable to resolve the crisis, has so far responded with state violence. Protesters are beaten, arrested, and disappeared. Amid the mounting repression, Hong Kong based Chinese Labor Bulletin which has for years reported on the developing Chinese labor movement mysteriously shut down operations starting on June 12 that it “can no longer maintain operations”, closing its website and social media.
>The All-China Federation of Trade Unions has echoed Chinese Communist Party leadership by emphasizing the need for “harmonious labor relations”, wage negotiation mechanisms, and workplace stability, particularly as it marked its 100th anniversary in April. While it has formally ignored directly commenting on the strikes in official comments, along with top CCP officials it has warned of “mounting employment pressures” and stressed that “jobs are the foundation of social stability”in recent public statements. Recently, ACFTU has also promoted state-guided collective bargaining reforms in provinces like Guangdong, feigned as democratization measures, while simultaneously working to defuse strikes or mass worker mobilizations.
>The rising proletarian activity is not a collection of isolated incidents, but the initial pangs of the working masses spontaneous return to class struggle, albeit not yet led by its party with its program of action, not yet organized within class unions, but already appearing again onto the historical scene with barricades, fists, and fire spreading throughout the world at the onset of the looming economic cataclysm of capital and it’s future inter-imperialist war. The American bourgeoisie watches with concern and calculation. Trump claimed to have struck a “quick deal” with China to “save them from what I thought was going to be a very bad situation”. The harsh tariffs were not partially revoked out of generosity, but because adequate concessions were made to shore up U.S. financial dominance while simultaneously balancing the reality that behind all of the U.S. maneuvers to destabilize the CCP it is tempered by the risk of inadvertently breathing life into a renewed class militancy within the Chinese working class who toil within the world’s preeminent industrial power house.
>>2372095No, J-20 are for air force exclusively. You're thinking of J-35 which are also 5th gen fighters but smaller. They'll be adopted in the navy as carrierborne 5th gen complement to J-15 while the land and export based variant, the J-35A will be adopted for the air force.
The newest electromagnetic catapult American carrier, the Ford class (only 1 so far), hilariously enough can't deploy the 5th gen F-35C fighters.
Only 6 out of 10 of older steam catapult Nimitz class carriers can launch them. Shanghai shipyard is constructing second conventionally powered sister carrier to Type 003 while Dalian is constructing the first ever nuclear powered carrier - the Type 004. Yes 2 supercarriers under construction. And seeing how fast Chinese shipbuilding is, it's safe to say that at least one of them will be completed before America finishes the second Ford.
USN has 11 nuclear carriers. Oldest Nimitz is retiring next year. China has 3 conventionally powered carriers with 2 of them being Soviet style ski jump carriers and 1 with electromagnetic catapult. Granted their smaller amphibious assault (heli carrier), Type 076, has a single electromagnetic catapult meaning it can potentially launch 5th gen fighters too but it'll probably be a drone carrier instead. Meaning that even though only half of American fleet can launch 5th gen fighters, Americans still have quantitative and qualitative edge over Chinese carriers. But still this isn't really a fair comparison. China operationalized carriers for the first time a decade ago - Americans had carriers since WW2. Also Americans need (or at least needed* before the modern hypersonic carrier killer upset) carriers to power project across the world in order to support their 800 international military bases and global empire shenanigans. The Chinese don't even need half of that for national/regional defense - they're building it for prestige and BRI sea lane securing.
In 20 or so years, if this shipbuilding trend continues on both sides, China will catch up both in numbers and in quality since most of the 1980s Nimitz will be retired while Fords won't be constructed as fast.
>>2372173If you use them for power projection imperialism against tiny countries like Yemen, then yes. You'd be right.
But using them to counter American imperialism, even in a way where it's just a war by industrial attrition and not a direct engagement, then it's based.
Also it's nice to inspire the next generation to be feel safe and be patriotic AND to dab on the Japanese/American marines in Asia with freedom of navigation patrols.
If you want accurate tracking of Chinese carrier strike group patrols and exact number of J-15 sorties, then just follow the Japanese news and tweets. They can't shut the fuck up about them in a weird mix of seething, admiration and fearmongering type of way. Both Taiwanese and Japanese TV shit stirrers had to admit they were impressed that they never detected a single mishap by the Chinese during their various exercises in the region, despite the common narrative that Chinese military equipment is faulty.
Look at the reporter comparing Chinese carriers to Imperial Japanese carriers lol. Like dick measuring. It's interesting how the best Chinese military parade montages on Youtube are made by a Japanese guy
https://www.youtube.com/@HakushinChannel/videos with even the Chinese writing in the comments how this guy is "more Red than our own media directors". No to be orientalist or racist or anything but Japanese culture is pretty unique in a way how they begrudgingly respect strength. They kneel to America now because they've been soundly defeated but they shared this type of feeling for Chinese Tang dynasty too. The best way to defang Japan is simply to intimidate them.
>>2372467brics is about providing funding for projects so countries don't have to be dependent on western dominated financial instiutions like the world bank and IMF that are ran by neoliberal gangsters. it also partly focuses on trading in their own currency. and brics doesn't have a budget because they established theor own bank with equity participation called the new development bank. speaking of brazil, here's an old list of some the projects that have been funded as a result. also brics just expanded to 20 countries - 10 members and 10 partners - after adding Vietnam in june 2025.
BRICS+ now makes up 44% of world GDP (PPP) and 56% of the global population.
>>2371912>China Labor Bulletinlmao literal radio free asia shit
worthless
https://thefloutist.substack.com/p/chongqing-global-and-invisible“Chongqing, global and invisible.”
<The West's 'wall of ognorance.'
<Guy Mettan, the prominent Swiss journalist, returns to The Floutist’s pages with this very fine piece on Chongqing, written after a recent visit. We like it for its exploration of China’s aspirations as these are manifest in advanced technologies and their applications. In this it is a reminder of how, obsessed as we are with China as a malevolent, globally ambitious menace, we are blinded to the nation as it is. More than this, Guy gives us a close-in view of a phenomenon that is evident to one or another degree across East Asia. This is the rediscovery among Asians of their Asianness—a salutary self-centeredness in the best meaning of this term. To modernize, at long last, no longer means to Westernize: This is a turn in consciousness of world-historical significance, in our view. Guy Mettan shows us what it looks like. >>2372473>@31:48 You know, I feel like two and a half, three years ago, people were very, very optimistic about the rise of multipolarity and BRICS potential to challenge Western hegemony, especially seeing China's rise as a superpower, as an economic superpower. But that was before the genocide in Gaza. And what the genocide has shown is that the US empire is maybe not quite as close to collapsing as others as some may have liked may have hoped for and BRICS countries aren't really able to restrain the USIsrael alliance or come to the defense of its members. So I mean we're almost 2 years in into the Gaza genocide. it doesn't really seem to be slowing down and the devastation is just unimaginable. So I mean how do you evaluate multipolarity now like given all that and given the optimism surrounding it just a few years ago how has the balance of the balance of forces have they really changed?
>Well, I mean this is a very tough question because we're in the middle of major changes in world affairs. The first thing is in 2009 when the BRICS was formed as a body, it was effectively a trade body. These were large countries in the global south that understood that the markets in the United States and Europe after the big credit crisis in the North Atlantic states you remember the housing crisis in 2007 and 8. After that these countries felt look we need to trade with each other more. We can't rely on US and European markets for our goods and services. So the initial BRICS was basically a commercial trade venture. And there was some pushing and proddding at the edges on politics.
>For instance, permanent seats at the United Nations and so on. But even here there was a lot of disagreements. I mean China was not sure and continues to be not sure about India getting a permanent seat at the security council. There is no permanent Latin American seat, there is no permanent African seat. these issues were on the table but nobody really was putting them forward banging away you know why isn't there an African country with a permanent seat at this have you heard anybody no it's not a big issue over the course of the last decade particularly as matters have got more and more uneasy the United States really going crazy the pivot to China I mean what pivot to China that was in 2011 11 2 years after the BRICS was formed. You know what was the United States? What did they want to do? You know, you want to blow things up.
>The BRICS got a little more active at that time. You know, there was a little more concern about militarism. There was concern about, for instance, the bombing of Gaza in 2014. BRICS felt the need to make a statement about that and so on. And you began to see the BRICS position itself as a block of peace and development as against the western block of war and austerity. There was this slight disagreement between the BRICS and the global north on these issues. But it wasn't some major break because even when the BRICS created a new development bank the so-called BRICS bank when they tried to develop an alternative to the IMF the international monetary fund it was called a contingency reserve arrangement didn't really take off but all of these instrents were not so different than the western instrents they were not completely detached from western financial systems it's when the west started to sanction everybody everybody, you know, particularly Russia and and even China and, you know, when Trump first went after China with the trade war, these countries began to understand the world differently. Like, you know, if we're going to get attacked by the West, if we're going to get thrown out of the international financial system by the West, we've got to build our own stuff. So, they started actually to accelerate some of these processes.
>The term multipolarity comes from American political science which likes these binaries between unipolarity and multipolarity. I don't think these are useful I don't think there really ever was a unipolar system. I think the United States attempted to become unipolar but even then you know there were always so-called rogue states that were not obeying the great master there was always Cuba and there was Venezuela and these countries that said we don't agree with system, you know, we're not going to accept it.
>So these terms from US political science shouldn't be taken uncritically and just used. I don't think the BRICS wants to establish a multipolar order. <What they want is a more balanced international order. They want a multilateral system, you know, where the United Nations is the core body and and you multilaterally deal with problems and so on. Not that there's a US pole and a Chinese pole and a nobody wants that. That's that's the worst way to think about world affairs. You know, the Chinese certainly don't want to create a Chinese pole. You know, they want to be part of a multilateral system, a multilateral international system, United Nations charter at the center center of it.
>So these terms I don't know where they actually came into popular discourse but but they are kind of nerdy US political science terms which I completely don't use and I think they are they are really not relevant to the actual developments taking place in the world. So I think there are great changes happening. There is an attempt by these countries to push for a more multilateral system but they have their contradictions between each other.
>You know things are not so easy. Many of them don't get along. They have very different political systems. China is led by a communist party. India has been since 2014 led by a right-wing political party. Russia is led by a patriotic block but it's not a left-wing block. These countries are all different. Brazil oscillated between the center left and the far right. I mean what are we talking about? Yeah they don't have the same political viewpoints. Very difficult for them to just come together and be like hey listen let's create a pole. It's not going to happen like that. >>2372632These are literal wundewaffles. The US knows they cannot out-manufacture the Chinese so they're building highly specialised
garbage jets and defences to keep up.
Because that worked so well for the Nazis.
>>2372654Sorry, but bruh,
>EKRANOPLANI had to google this, Wiki this, and even afterwards I have no idea what an EKRANOPLAN is or supposed to be. Could you please knowledge me up on EKRANOPLANs?
Thx baby
>>2372857>drone carrier airship whenJiu Tian. Also referred to as "Drone mothership" is a High-Altitude Long-Endurance (HALE) drone capable of carrying and deploying both Geran/Shahed type kamikaze drones and normal quadcopters. Basically an infantry eraser.
In flight testing since May of this year, awaiting for mass production and adoption. Maybe even export since it was at Zhuhai.
>>2372756They're already reviving it for ferrying and tourism. AS700 had conducted regional test flights few months ago and some have already been delivered to some operators.
>>2372376Anyone who says China doesn't have freedom of speech needs to explain to me how a sentient meth rock has citizenship.
> Later, he moved to China and re-emerged as a figure on the political rightThanks China!
>>2373769we did it reddit
we collapsed china
>>2373771Because China
isn't imperialistChina is known to infiltrate Taiwanese social media and support both the left Labor Party and the right KMT which both want Chinese unification. Taiwanese army officers also have a tendency to give China top secret information.
>>2374107Chang Gang
Chang Gang
>>2374558that is the most beautiful container ship design I have ever seen
when is it being built
>>2374560It's not a container ship, it's a car carrier. Unlike RoRo ships, car carriers are exclusively for cars. BYD ordered a fleet of 8 ships because they're about to conquer the world and kill all legacy automakers. They're brand new. That one is being delivered this year.
If you're a Ford or a VW employee you'd rather see enemy nation's destroyers than these ships because Chinese EV companies will unironically do more damage to western economies than an outright war with Russia or whatever.
>>2374573Yeah they're just delaying the inevitable. America will get stuck in the past while the rest of the world will be riding/flying Chinese automated solar powered wunderwagons. But Ford and friends will not use that time to improve because they can just lobby the revolving door puppets into letting them abuse the slave proles with their shit cars. Forever.
>>2374577Americans imposed 100% tariff on Chinese cars, and Chinese companies don't even bother with American market. However in the past, before this whole schizophrenia started, you could technically drive Chinese EVs by importing them. But now you can't even do that anymore. They are taken off the streets due to good ol' "National Security Risks" because of course if even the Chinese coffee machines, TikTok and port cranes are spying on you then you can bet your ass Chinese cars do too. According to White House boomers that is.
>>2374584Btw the car that Ford CEO is talking about and that picture in Doug's webm is Xiaomi SU7. The very FIRST car Xiaomi, a mobile phone company (they make other home appliances but whatever) made. Their first attempt. It sold out in minutes and they later made track versions which broke records at Nürburgring.
Look at this picture. Only two cars are faster than it and they're Le Mans prototypes that are more formulas than cars. This thing is literally just a slightly upgraded base Xiaomi family coupe model but with a spoiler and body work lol. It costs THIRTY THOUSAND BUCKS ($30,000) and it absolutely OBLITERATED cars that cost millions of dollars (I am NOT kidding, Rimac Nevera lap time is considerably slower despite costing 2,200,000 fucking dollars lmao).
And this is their FIRST car. And one is made every hour in a lights out dark factory with minimal human input. They weren't even trying to dab on the legacy automakers yet they murdered them. To make things funnier, if you were to look at the picture again, the 4th place belongs to Lotus Evija - that's also a Chinese EV made in China since Lotus belongs to Geely.
If you want to piss off your normie friends then THIS is the topic to do it. Car brands are pillars of pride of the western industries and consoomer culture. And they're all about to get mercilessly massacred by nerds from Chinese telephone companies. Out of fucking nowhere.
>Then in 1966 came the “cultural revolution”, which lasted a whole decade, a real disaster for China. During that period many veteran cadres suffered persecution, including me. I was labelled the "No. 2 Capitalist Roader" after Liu Shaoqi. Liu was called "commander-in-chief of the bourgeois headquarters" and I "deputy commander-in-chief". Many strange things happened in those days. For instance, people were told that they should be content with poverty and backwardness and that it was better to be poor under socialism and communism than to be rich under capitalism. That was the sort of rubbish peddled by the Gang of Four. There is no such thing as socialism and communism with poverty. The ideal of Marxists is to realize communism. According to Marx, communist society is a society in which the principle of from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs is applied. What is the principle of to each according to his needs? How can we apply this principle without highly developed productive forces and vast material wealth? According to Marxism, communist society is a society in which there is overwhelming material abundance. Socialism is the first stage of communism; it means expanding the productive forces, and it represents a long historical period. Only if we constantly expand the productive forces can we finally achieve communism. The Gang of Four's absurd theory of socialism and communism led only to poverty and stagnation. […] Certain individuals, pretending to support the reform and the open policy, call for wholesale Westernization of China in an attempt to lead the country towards capitalism. These people don't really support our policies; they are only trying vainly to change the nature of our society. If China were totally Westernized and went capitalist, it would be absolutely impossible for us to modernize. The problem we have to solve is how to enable our one billion people to cast off poverty and become prosperous. If we adopted the capitalist system in China, probably a small number of people would be enriched, while the overwhelming majority would remain in a permanent state of poverty. If that happened, there would be a revolution in China. China's modernization can be achieved only through socialism, not capitalism. There have been people who have tried to introduce capitalism into China, and they have always failed.
<Deng Xiaoping, We shall draw on historical experience and guard against wrong tendencies, April 30, 1987
>Taken together, these accounts tell a pretty compelling and straightforward story: a worker state led by a vanguard party has placed the productive forces developed by capitalism under human control once again, for the benefit of the many rather than the few, and so definitively begun the complex and difficult transition away from capitalism and into communism that we call socialism. Capitalists, sheltered and insular in their dealings with fellow human beings, don’t understand that they are not sympathetic characters, so they shamelessly self-victimize in the press in the hopes of winning sympathy from the masses, in a futile effort to rally the necessary fervor for military intervention. The situation looks grim for the forces of reaction… And then the Western Left bursts onto the scene with a litany of harsh recriminations, determined to build up China into a villain worthy of war: “China has billionaires.” “China still has inequality.” “China still has wage labor.” “There’s no free speech there.” “Suicide nets.” “Free Tibet.” “Xinjiang is East Turkestan.” “Liberate Hong Kong.” “Neither Washington Nor Beijing.” Their indulgence in atrocity propaganda is unparalleled, and they’ll often outdo original sources and even the most vicious reactionaries in their preening paraphrases of Chinese horror.
<Roderic Day, China Has Billionaires, 5th of April, 2021
>If private property, money, abstract value production, class society, and the state, are abolished prematurely, when the oppressive logic and power of capital still controls the entire world, China would become vulnerable to both external imperialist violence and internal reactionary sabotage (no doubt under the banner of “democracy”). The Communist Party would be immediately compromised by foreign backed elements; the country might be torn apart once again by civil war, and once again subjected to imperialist domination. The Chinese revolution, what so many millions fought, worked tirelessly, and sacrificed their lives for, will have been for nothing. Marxism is anything but rigid and dogmatic, and has always been about adapting to the ever changing objective conditions of each era, using what ever is available toward revolutionary goals. The opinion of those baizuo who think that China should have chosen the disastrous course of action described above, or at least remained underdeveloped, poor, and weak, in order to satisfy their fundamentalist interpretation of Marxism, should not be indulged. These myopic and short-sighted “left com”, “ultra-left”, or modern “Maoist” types love to denounce modern China as a betrayal of socialism, without considering that it is the failure of the Western left to do successful revolutions in their countries which made it necessary for existing socialist states to adapt to the global conditions of entrenched neo-liberal capitalism. Those who think that 1.4 billion people, who for 200 years suffered so immensely under vicious colonial rule and brutal capitalist domination, will so quickly forget what their true enemy is, don’t know much about capitalism, colonialism, or people.
<He Zhao, The Long Game and Its Contradictions, 27th October, 2018
>So, to build socialism it is necessary to develop the productive forces. Poverty is not socialism. To uphold socialism, a socialism that is to be superior to capitalism, it is imperative first and foremost to eliminate poverty. True, we are building socialism, but that doesn’t mean that what we have achieved so far is up to the socialist standard. Not until the middle of the next century, when we have reached the level of the moderately developed countries, shall we be able to say that we have really built socialism and to declare convincingly that it is superior to capitalism. We are advancing towards that goal.
<Deng Xiaoping, To Uphold Socialism We Must Eliminate Poverty, 26th April, 1987
>“I am convinced that more and more people will come to believe in Marxism, because it is a science. Using historical materialism, it has uncovered the laws governing the development of human society. Feudal society replaced slave society, capitalism supplanted feudalism, and, after a long time, socialism will necessarily supersede capitalism. This is an irreversible general trend of historical development, but the road has many twists and turns. Over the several centuries that it took for capitalism to replace feudalism, how many times were monarchies restored! So, in a sense, temporary restorations are usual and can hardly be avoided. Some countries have suffered major setbacks, and socialism appears to have been weakened. But the people have been tempered by the setbacks and have drawn lessons from them, and that will make socialism develop in a healthier direction. So don't panic, don't think that Marxism has disappeared, that it's not useful any more and that it has been defeated. Nothing of the sort!”
<Deng Xiaoping, Excerpts From Talks Given In Wuchang, Shenzhen, Zhuhai And Shanghai, 1992
>I think China is a socialist country, and Vietnam is a socialist nation as well. And they insist that they have introduced all the necessary reforms in order to motivate national development and to continue seeking the objectives of socialism. There are no fully pure regimes or systems. In Cuba, for instance, we have many forms of private property. We have hundreds of thousands of farm owners. In some cases they own up to 110 acres (some 150 hectares). In Europe they would be considered large landholders. Practically all Cubans own their own home and, what is more, we welcome foreign investment. But that does not mean that Cuba has stopped being socialist.
<Fidel Castro, Interview with La Stampa reporter Jas Gawronski, published 2nd of January, 1994
>"The modern factories that defeated the Germans in World War II had their origin in the many technical agreements signed with foreign firms […] By March 1930 the [USSR] had signed 104 contracts. Of the 104, 81 were with American or German companies […] Over 400 American engineers made the architectural drawings for the Magnitogorosk plant, the largest project in the First Five-Year Plan. […] In May 1930, McKee waws hired to supervise the construction as well. By 1931, 250 American engineers were working on the project […] McKee brought in engineers from General Electric to work on the huge electrical installation. New open-hearth furnaces were designed by the Freyn Company […] the American Morgan Engineering Company […] and the German Demag A-G.”
<Walter Dunn Jr., The Soviet Economy and the Red Army 1930-1945, 1995
>In speaking of the capitalists who strive only for profit, only to get rich, I do not want to say that these are the most worthless people, capable of nothing else. Many of them undoubtedly possess great organizing talent, which I do not dream of denying. We Soviet people learn a great deal from the capitalists.
<Stalin, Marxism Versus Liberalism, An Interview With H.G. Wells, 1934
>Get down to business, all of you! You will have capitalists beside you, including foreign capitalists, concessionaires and leaseholders. They will squeeze profits out of you amounting to hundreds per cent; they will enrich themselves, operating alongside of you. Let them. Meanwhile you will learn from them the business of running the economy, and only when you do that will you be able to build up a communist republic. Since we must necessarily learn quickly, any slackness in this respect is a serious crime. And we must undergo this training, this severe, stern and sometimes even cruel training, because we have no other way out.
<Lenin, The New Economic Policy, 1921
>The mainland will maintain the socialist system and not turn off onto the wrong road, the road to capitalism. One of the features distinguishing socialism from capitalism is that socialism means common prosperity, not polarization of income. The wealth created belongs first to the state and second to the people; it is therefore impossible for a new bourgeoisie to emerge. The amount that goes to the state will be spent for the benefit of the people, a small portion being used to strengthen national defence and the rest to develop the economy, education and science and to raise the people’s living standards and cultural level.
Since the downfall of the Gang of Four an ideological trend has appeared that we call bourgeois liberalization. Its proponents worship the “democracy” and “freedom” of the Western capitalist countries and reject socialism. This cannot be allowed. China must modernize; it must absolutely not liberalize or take the capitalist road, as countries of the West have done. Those proponents of bourgeois liberalization who have violated state law must be dealt with severely.
<Deng Xiaoping, Bourgeois Liberalization Means Taking The Capitalist Road, 1985
>China is not a free market economy. We tried. We let them into the World Trade Organization. We sent businesses over there. We made trade deals. They are a controlled top-down economy. You will never compete and win against them, unless you take back the means of production.
<Hillary Clinton, interview with Chatham House [now deleted from Youtube] (2021)
>China has found a way to use capitalism against us, and what I mean by that is the ability to attract investment into entities that are deeply linked to the state.
<Marco Rubio, interview with Face the Nation on Jan. 29, 2023
>Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke? No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity.
<Friedrich Engels, Principles of Communism, 1847
>Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.
<Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875
>Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
<John Fitzgerald Kennedy, on the first anniversary of the Alliance for Progress, 13 March 1962
>Every demand of the simplest bourgeois financial reform, of the most ordinary liberalism, of the most formal republicanism, of the most shallow democracy, is simultaneously castigated as an "attempt on society" and stigmatized as "socialism". And finally the high priests of "religion and order" themselves are driven with kicks from their Pythian tripods, hauled out of their beds in the darkness of night, put in prison vans, thrown into dungeons or sent into exile; their temple is razed to the ground, their mouths are sealed, their pens broken, their law torn to pieces in the name of religion, of property, of the family, of order.
<Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1852)
>The Japanese elite knew their country to be one among many confronted by the dangers of conquest or subjection which they had faced in the course of a long history […] what is perhaps more important, the Japanese elite possessed a state apparatus and a social structure capable of controlling the movement of an entire society. To transform a country from above without risking either passive resistance, disintegration, or revolution is extremely difficult. The Japanese rulers were in the historically exceptional position of being able to mobilise a traditional mechanism of social obedience for the purposes of a sudden, radical, but controlled 'westernisation' […] the 'Meiji Restoration' […] a drastic 'revolution from above' […] The parallelism between Japan and Prussia has often been made. In both countries capitalism was formally installed not by bourgeois revolution [against feudal lords] but from above, by an old [feudal] bureaucratic-aristocratic order which recognised that its survival could not otherwise be assured.
<Eric Hobsbawm, Age of Capital (1848-1875), Chapter 8
>>2374632mobile
automobile
what next?
>>2375668>become a citizenIIRC, it's hard for foreigners to become citizens of China
>and get executed for accelerationist socialist revolutionary activities.And if you try to overthrow the CPC, you'll deserve it for being a CIA proxy.
>>2374836>disproving criticismWell first, I wouldn't call anyone a leftcom, they are a historical oddity.
That's one thing. They are the ones insisting not only they are part of the communist club but going so far as to gatekeep their club from reality itself.
The other idea, I'd just start asking yourself questions and not just of everyone else. I think that's what it amounts to, really.
Like what is it I would need to modify my beliefs (falsifiability) ? Is there anything anyone can do (realistically) to "be communist" that isn't sitting around dreaming of a better world.
And so on.
>>2374795I'll save that for repostin
>>2375701There's no need for revolution on land because there's no peasantry anymore. Industrial society has consumed all of them already.
Private ownership is eeeeeh. The only place where it's dangerous is middle sized companies. Basically, the issue gets solved either by going bankrupt or by becoming large enough to qualify for direct party oversight
Chinese education and healthcare are top notch. Their problems are twisted by our westoid perception of the problem where we have to engage in corruption to get our basic needs met, and so we root for corruption, and in China, they have solved their problems, and now stamp out corruption
>>2374795>Their indulgence in atrocity propaganda is unparalleled, and they’ll often outdo original sources and even the most vicious reactionaries in their preening paraphrases of Chinese horrorThis phenomenon is more than a little odd.
That's why I see more potential or usefulness (not to speak of moral righteousness) in the avg arab or muslim (either/or) than the avg [trot] (replace with ultragauche or whatever super special tendency as needed).
I might be wrong now but I don't think so.
If you can't see something that is staring you in the face this much, I would be very skeptical of your dependability.
Do I have a fellow feeling with anyone that professes to be communist (etc.)? No (not anymore).
It's kinda like this: “Before [practice], mountains are mountains and waters are waters; After [starting out], mountains are no longer mountains and waters are no longer waters; after enlightenment [i.e enough practice], mountains are once again mountains and waters once again waters.”
>>2375701I don't get it. Is that a genuine question or rhetorical?
Why is the starting point of your inquiry "how can I feel optimistic". That's all wrong, as I hope doesn't need much explaining. One needs (to endeavor) to look at things as they are. Seeking truth from facts.
As for China, strictly speaking I am agnostic. We will all have to "cross the river by feeling the stones". All things have problems / contradictions and there is nothing in this world that is otherwise.
Then there is the whole issue of what optimism even means in this context and what this whole thing has to do with your life, your immediate existence.
>>2376209>>2376199Isn't it
interesting that he once spent over 100 posts dancing around this topic and refused to say that he supported Palestinian resistance and now he's the bestest friend of Palestine now that he can use this as a talking point.
>>2376430>XHS should be a big argument for why China isn't socialist…Yes because the Internet totally corresponds to real life.
>>2376571Most people didn't want capitalism, they wanted Western lifestyle, but thought socialism would continue. They were very naive about the intentions of counter-revolutionaries. Ironically after counter-revolution some of them were brainwashed into believing that all the corruption and plunder were due to insufficient transition or their own culture being backward. Which is how you got this current cuck mentality among middle class in ex-soc countries.
>>2376617>a lot of people from socialist or formerly socialist countries are basically boomers>Now that they have a bit of power they just want to privatize everything.Most boomers don't have any kind of power whatsoever. Most boomers didn't become oligarchs or compradors. Most boomers were at the other end of the stick and they oppose privatization because they are used to what socialism provided. Which is one reason why even after 35 years the ruling class hasn't been able to completely destroy all remnants of socialist era and some things in ex-soc countries are still a lot better than in the West.
People who became oligarchs or compradors were in fact people who already had some form of power during counter-revolution, they were opportunists from the party bureaucracy or economic management, or had ties with them. They didn't just pull themselves up by their bootstraps. It was a counter-revolution from above by opportunists who wanted to make a quick buck by either plundering the country for themselves or selling it off to foreign capital because they were in position to do so and they took advantage of the crises at the time.
>>2376732 (me)
The ultimate reason for counter-revolutions was serious lack of party discipline. All the mismanagement in the decades before was salvageable, as proven by China where party discipline remained strong.
>>2376779well the jiang zemin and hu jintao eras also happened in the 1990s and 2000s, when america had its triumphant Unipolar Liberal End-Of-History party. it's hard not to see the party next door and feel a little envy during those eras. however, that's not the situation today. after the party there's a hangover (2007 crash) and now the world watches the US with morbid curiosity. china's model has proven highly successful with it making rapid advances in tech, infrastracture, living standards, global influence, etc. its party sees this, and even the US and EU is taking notes from china, beginning to hark back to industrial policies. however, the contradictions of neoliberalism is becoming too great in the west and stifling progress. on the other hand, China has an ML system that retains the capacity for long term planning, institutional discipline and coordinated strategy. it's the US that is looking chaotic and reactive while china is strategic and focused.
>>2376943>it's hard not to see the party next door and feel a little envy during those eras. however, that's not the situation today.One thing I've read from various writers who grew up in Eastern Europe during socialism and Soviet-era "dissidents" too is that the West became a fascination because it wasn't easily accessible. That's the paradox of it. The more those governments tried to keep Western influence out, the more people were attracted to it. The higher the wall, the more you wanted to look over it.
It's hard to generalize about a country as large as China, but I suppose some generalizations are necessary to talk about this stuff. And my sense is that they have a less black/white view about the West (even this concept of the "collective West" that you hear in Russia
to this day isn't how they do things) and do try to copy the U.S. in many ways if they think it works or can help them. I screenshotted an image in one video awhile ago and had to save it because it showed this paradox so well, students dutifully looking at Xi Jinping books in their college bookstore with American-style varsity jackets for sale in the background.
I think another factor might be cultural. I'm not sure there's a way to mention this without sounding like a reactionary, but there's just… I dunno… a Chinese kind of… "civilizational" or cultural confidence? At worst it can veer into a superiority complex about Chinese being better than other people. But the healthy side is like a deep-rooted pride that leads to calm sense that "we've got this" and "trust the plan." Eric Hobsbawm noted something similar in "Age of Extremes" while contrasting that with Russia where he wrote that everybody there knew they were backwards. Chinese are not like that. It's like, *we're* backwards? Bruh, we invented paper.
The Islamic countries have also struggled with this. They have a corrupt, wealthy elite who live Western lifestyles and want to get in on that, and then you have these Islamic revivalist movements and their militant expressions like Al Qaeda and ISIS who want to oust the corrupted rulers and restore the Khalifah. But they reject most "Western" things including scientific rationalism (more importantly) so it becomes like a clash of civilizations and mirroring primitive anti-foreigner movements in Chinese history like the Boxers.
>China has an ML system that retains the capacity for long term planning, institutional discipline and coordinated strategy. it's the US that is looking chaotic and reactive while china is strategic and focused.I mentioned scientific rationalism and I think it's that. And all of those things too. I wouldn't overstate it though, I think they can be chaotic and reactive as well, and I reckon that in reality a lot of their plans are cobbled together or some crisis happens and they're like "oh shit, oh fuck" but ultimately something comes together. There might be something about the CPC forming in a long guerrilla war that encourages a culture of improvisation and getting practical results, fast and cheap. A guerrilla has to be quick on his feet and come up with plans on the fly otherwise he's a dead guerrilla.
>>2377428>My God. It really is that the Communists were too naive and trusting wasn't it?Well there was one dissident writer I was listening to in an interview who had become disillusioned with the West (because he had a hard time getting published and selling to a market; America didn't need any more dissident Russian writers) also say the KGB was naive. If the KGB only knew how these dissidents would actually be treated by the West, they would've thrown them out a lot sooner!
>>2376199Because it's the first time I hear of Vietnam in relation to Israel, meanwhile China was brought up as one of the great supporters of palestinian liberation some months ago because they made a strongly worded letter about it.
>>2377034>>2376209Since when did the CIA bring up the truth?
Even the chinese goverment agrees with me that they're besties with Israel
> China-Israel ties bloom spectacularlyhttps://english.www.gov.cn/news/internationalexchanges/202203/07/content_WS6225601ec6d09c94e48a6238.htmlOverall: cope and sethee
>>2379428I know… I don't even believe in reincarnation… it's pvre opium. i just wanna get high on ideas… to forget… that I'm…. a
fucking burger. ACK.
The obsession of the baizuo to see China destroyed it's baffling.
See picrel. people dreaming of a population collapse in China, as in 5 years China will be gone (lmao, that's Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia) and of course, Arnaud Bertrand had to answer:
>I don't think Americans realize how this "demography screws China" narrative is yet another self-soothing fiction they tell themselves in a long tradition of American wishful thinking about China's inevitable downfall.
<Just look at basic math: there are today over 9.5 million births a year in China (9.56m in 2022, 9.02m in 2023, 9.54m in 2024). That's the equivalent of the entire population of LA, Chicago, Houston and San Francisco - combined - born each year in China.
>This is compared to about 3.5 million births a year in the US, a ratio of 2.8. Which means that, already for the rest of the 21st century, you can see that any American fantasy about "waiting out" China's demographic collapse is complete nonsense: it's already baked in.
>Today's 9.5 million babies will enter the workforce in 25 years and will be going into retirement at the very end of the century. And, given the trends, they will be far better educated and productive than the average employee in China's workforce today, many of whom didn't even go to high school.
>Sure, there will be a high dependency ratio (many retired folks per working age folks) but this is also often misunderstood: we assume that retirees are entirely dependent on their working age descendants when it's not quiteI don't think Americans realize how this "demography screws China" narrative is yet another self-soothing fiction they tell themselves in a long tradition of American wishful thinking about China's inevitable downfall.
>Just look at basic math: there are today over 9.5 million births a year in China (9.56m in 2022, 9.02m in 2023, 9.54m in 2024). That's the equivalent of the entire population of LA, Chicago, Houston and San Francisco - combined - born each year in China.
>This is compared to about 3.5 million births a year in the US, a ratio of 2.8. Which means that, already for the rest of the 21st century, you can see that any American fantasy about "waiting out" China's demographic collapse is complete nonsense: it's already baked in.
>Today's 9.5 million babies will enter the workforce in 25 years and will be going into retirement at the very end of the century. And, given the trends, they will be far better educated and productive than the average employee in China's workforce today, many of whom didn't even go to high school.
>Sure, there will be a high dependency ratio (many retired folks per working age folks) but this is also often misunderstood: we assume that retirees are entirely dependent on their working age descendants when it's not quite the case in China. Actually often the contrary is true: in Chinese culture, grandparents almost systematically live with their kids and grandkids and provide crucial unpaid labor - childcare, household management, and family business support - that actually enables more working-age adults to participate in the formal economy rather than being a "burden" on it. Also, they're typically net contributors to household wealth through property assets and savings.
>So even for this, this is again a case of projecting our own fragmented, nuclear family model onto a society with fundamentally different intergenerational relationships and economic arrangements. the case in China. Actually often the contrary is true: in Chinese culture, grandparents almost systematically live with their kids and grandkids and provide crucial unpaid labor - childcare, household management, and family business support - that actually enables more working-age adults to participate in the formal economy rather than being a "burden" on it. Also, they're typically net contributors to household wealth through property assets and savings.
>So even for this, this is again a case of projecting our own fragmented, nuclear family model onto a society with fundamentally different intergenerational relationships and economic arrangements.
Westerners in resume: "Any day now, China will collapse 😭😭😭😭😭"
>>2379985china already has a bulge in the alpha pipeline that is a bigger generation than zoomers. and by 2050 the number of retirees per 100 will still be less than what japan has in the current year.
if you look at china's degree of urbanization, it was 29% in 2000 and 66% in 2023. comparatively in the US it's 82% and in japan it's 91%, so china's urban population still has a ways to go. urban workers are also 4 times more productive than rural workers to the economy.
china could have run into some problems like japan in the 1990s however Japan started growing old when AI wasn't a thing.
the most brvtal trvthnvke is that everything aligned perfectly for China. Its demographic dividend (large young population) swept up the manufacturing on the planet in the 90s-2000s. it's now beginning to reap the intellectual dividend from millenials and zoomers who are much more educated than their parents, who have better access to nutrition and healthcare, who are now driving the innovation for BYD, DJI, Huawei, Deepseek, Unitree, etc, companies guided in industrial policty and strategic long term planning by the CPC.
the more advance industrialization and intellectual dividend of today will facilitate their fourth industrial revolution of automation as their blue collar force is retiring over the next decades. the 2030s and 2040s is when they will begin to reap the benefit of the AI/automation dividend. goldman sachs predicts up that to 50% of jobs could be fully automated by 2045, driven by generative AI and robotics.
the ML state structure also gives China a unique position to transition peacefully and strategically towards the realization of a mature socialism (2049) and toward the material foundation necessary for realizing communism. common prosperity will achieved!
meanwhile, mass unemployment in the USA will likely be far more destabilizing, contested, and even violent as the bourgeoise like peter thiel, elon musk, mark zuckerberg, jeff bezo fortify their compounds, militarize the police, desperately trying to maintain the decaying neoliberal order and then sick their robots on us, in the midst of intensifying culture wars in the population.
>>2380236Unitree.
Btw, Boston Dyamics has been sold three times, fired lots of staff, abandoned hydraulic actuation and now uses Chinese motors/actuators to try to catch up. They have been around too long without big products in the market (1992). Boston's Dynamic's humanoid robots are neat demos in controlled environments but never leave the lab. Their battery life is around 65 seconds while Unitree's battery life is 2 hours. They are far away from commercialization. Hyundai is trying to sell them.
Meanwhile, China's Unitree G1 and H1 robots are in full mass production ready to buy. They host robotic runnng marathons open to the public. There are also other companies like EngineAI.
>>2380295Watch their be an arms build up in multiple countries friendly to China and America and Europe will be helpless to stop it.
Chinas ability to manufacture weapons, brand new weapons, is almost infinite. Americas own armouries are filled with antiquated cold war gear and have been recently giving Taiwan rotten, poorly shipped spare military gear. It's over.
>>2380322we haven't reached the stage china can just give nuclear warheads to a country like Khrushchev did in '62
America may no longer have the capacity to stop China doing what it wants in the seas, not can it win an open war with them, but they always can threaten with their nooooks.
>>2381349Yeah, every western journalist/rag accusation is an admission. Like the whole housing bubble FUD. China popped it, let speculators burn and moved on.
This is why nobody talks about Evergrande anymore. They're ashamed at how efficiently China managed and redirected the investors after years of doomhoping from the west. It's why the retarded "overcapacity" term was birthed.
>>2381826Shitty video. South Korea and Japan are US vassals, while China is constantly demonized and provoked by the West.
The West simply does not allow much of an opening for Chinese culture to enter the West. You have too seek it yourself and there's a lot of very cool stuff to discover.
>>2381898SK and JP are in the US sphere of influence but as we have seen recently the US needs them more than they need the US
I feel something will snap in the next 5 years where SK librools and Japanese
fascist conservatives bend the knee less and less to the US on supplying more and more tech and ships to the US for extortionate prices.
>>2381884I hope you're joking. Cpop is much less regulated than Kpop and with much worse trafficking scandals.
>>2381898Yeah that's part of my post. But it's true that the government of China, unlike the Korean government, doesn't invest into their soft power.
A father’s heist for hope against medical bills ends in prison—and tragedy<Desperate father stole to fund his son's leukaemia treatment, but a four-year sentence meant he missed the child’s final breathhttps://www.pekingnology.com/p/a-fathers-heist-for-hope-against?
>Yu Haibo, born to farming parents in China’s northeastern province of Jilin, left school at 13, became a father at 19, and, by 28, stopped being one. When nine-year-old Jiayue died of leukaemia, Yu was serving his four-year sentence for stealing rural electricity transformers, an act that raised a mere 30,000 yuan [4,186.7 U.S. dollars] for hospital bills but was judged “sabotage of power facilities”. In June 2023, prison officials granted him a temporary release so he could sit at his son’s bedside; the boy died a month later.
>China Central Television, the state broadcaster, aired Yu’s story, including that final visit, in October 2024. The broadcast unleashed a wave of sympathy across social media, where users questioned why desperation seemed to be on trial.
>The following report was published on June 15 on the WeChat blog of Jiupai News, a popular digital news platform affiliated with the Yangtze River Daily, a state-run newspaper based in Wuhan. >>2382149very conflicting views here, chinese media and social media can critique and feel sympathy for these people but the fact it happened in general is tragic
I hope China restores free healthcare soon.
>>2382765>thing:/
>thing, in japanchina:0
>>2381412that Africa stat
YNs from Africa about to blitz old musty Evropean ass haha
>>2380162Good that they're actually automating shit no-one wants to do (janny, farming, people over 80)
>zomg solar panel cleanerThose are cool, but it's not new or a China exclusive. You can buy one right now if you have the money.
>>2383373The transformation to socialism was already complete by 1956 as resolved by Communist Party.
https://www.marxists.org/subject/china/documents/cpc/8th_congress.htmThe exploiting class, as a class, was eliminated by 1981 as resolved by the Communist Party.
https://www.marxists.org/subject/china/documents/cpc/history/01.htm>>2378059Wrong. The Communist party resolved exactly what I stated. You are but anti-Communist dumbass bitch idiot.
>>2383941Worth a watch but I wish they would go into more details instead of so much filler shots. Well, most of them are nice to get the vibe I guess.
What I ultimately got from this doc is that there's still a lot to be done in some rural areas but the progress is clearly happening and the party's organizing down to the grassroots level is far beyond anything I've seen in any other country. There's way too little "propaganda" about this side of CPC so this doc is great in that sense.
>>2381826>When China stops being shy about its modern culture and starts funding its soft powerIf you play Genshin Impact, you're already seeing Chinese soft power.
>>2380285>There is no party, in America at least. Either you help build it or bougeois revolution will follow.Bougeois revolutions are actually progressive and the bougeois lost their progressive quality as a class back in the 19th Century. What's already happening instead is pure barbarism.
>>2383474Looks like they could be squashed flat by any tank made in the last 70+ years.
>>2383387>China is a Communist State>Communist StateThis is how I know you haven't read Marx at all. Take your consensus crack shit somewhere else. Go back to your tard pit in USAPol.
>>2384580Because one of the few industrial sectors that is growing massively is the tech sector, like Nvidia.
Chips and GPUs are Americas monopoly, that's why Taiwan is so important.
>>2385405Marx in "Fragment on Machines"
<"As soon as labour in the direct form has ceased to be the great well-spring of wealth, labour time ceases and must cease to be its measure, and hence exchange value must cease to be the measure of use value."essentially, he's saying when human labor is no longer the main source of wealth, then labor-time can no longer serve as the measure of value. as a result, exchange value can no longer be the basis for measuring use value. in simpler terms, the economic system built on valuing things according to labor input begins to fall apart… capital itself is destroyed. currently, human labor is still the main source of wealth, but as this shift to intelligent automated machines becoming the main productive forces where less and less human labor is needed, this will cause a rupture to the relations of production by galvanizing a social revolution.
>“At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production… From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution.” (Preface to the German Ideology)china’s marxist-leninist state structure, built on the foundations of the original revolution, gives china a unique position to transition peacefully and strategically to a mature socialism and the horizon of communism. on the other hand, advanced western states, like the US, will likely find themselves in a path that would be far more destabilized, contested, or even violent where the bourgeoisie remains in control of both the state, the means of production and the ideological apparatus.
https://archive.is/lhJTD
>When firms raise prices, “gouging” their customers, many governments complain. Some cannot resist intervening. But in today’s China, the opposite is happening. In May the state reprimanded carmakers not for raising prices, but for cutting them. “There are no winners in this price war,” it said, blithely ignoring the happy customers who can now buy a zippy electric car for less than $8,000.
>In wars, the methods are sometimes as shocking as the results. Many Chinese manufacturers sell cars cheaply to dealers, who resell them as “used” vehicles, even though they have zero miles on the clock. The ploy, perverse as it sounds, lets carmakers split their market, offering pre-owned but undriven vehicles to price-sensitive customers, and identical, higher-priced vehicles to everyone else. “This disguised method of reducing prices disrupts the market order,” complains the People’s Daily, an official newspaper. Carmaking is not the only part of the economy suffering: factory-gate prices fell year on year in May in 25 out of 30 major industries. In eight, including coal-mining and steelmaking, the drop was even steeper than for cars. Across China’s vast industrial machine, average prices have now fallen for 32 months in a row (see chart).
>Manufacturing investment, especially in high-tech ventures, has been a bright spot for China’s struggling economy in recent years as it weathers a prolonged property crisis. But the rapid decline of industrial prices and profits has raised doubts about the sustainability of even this capital-expenditure boom. Industries such as electric cars, lithium-ion batteries and solar panels were supposed to be new engines of growth that would fill the yawning gap left by the property sector. Now they have also become engines of deflation.
>The government has a new word for the problem: “involution”. This has long referred to arms races between students or workers, for whom extra effort brings no extra reward, because it obliges everyone else to try harder, too. In the past year the same term (neijuan in Chinese) has been applied to cut-throat competition between firms. It appeared in a statement from the Politburo, which comprises the 24 most powerful people in China’s ruling Communist Party, in July 2024. In December it reappeared in the conclusions of the Central Economic Work Conference, which sets the tone for economic policy. “Rectifying ‘involutionary’ competition is something that everyone is very concerned about,” said a spokesperson for China’s planning agency in May.
>Which industries are most involutionary? According to Zhao Wei of Shenwan Hongyuan, a Chinese securities firm, the problem most severely afflicts electrical machinery, steelmaking and non-metallic mineral products, such as cement, ceramics and glass, where prices fell faster than the national average last year. These parts of the economy also suffer from unusual amounts of idle capacity. And, by his reckoning, another 15 industries, from cars to tobacco, show some involutionary tendencies, such as weak profit growth, rapid increases in debt, falling prices or low rates of capacity utilisation.
>Although the term “involution” is new, the problem is not. From 2012 to 2016 China suffered four and a half years of falling factory-gate prices. In response, Xi Jinping, China’s ruler, introduced a policy called “supply-side structural reform”. Its original aim was to raise prices and restore profitability, not by increasing demand, but by curbing supply. China had prepared two tables of food for only one table of guests, according to an unnamed source in the People’s Daily. However hard the guests ate, they could not finish it all.
>To clear the tables, China’s planning agency imposed production quotas and capacity cuts on oversupplied industries such as steel. It sought mergers and acquisitions to reduce competition. Coal mines were instructed to operate for only 276 days a year. Officials also strictly enforced standards for energy efficiency and pollution, forcing older, dirtier plants to shut. The policy is considered a success. Steel prices and profit margins increased. Across industry as a whole, factory-gate prices stopped falling in September 2016 and rose by more than 7% in early 2017.
>Is the government trying to repeat this trick? As well as rebuking carmakers for giving customers too good a deal, it has told the solar-panel industry to exercise “self-discipline”. At the end of last year, 33 panelmakers duly pledged to set a ceiling on production and a floor under prices. The government has also tried to prevent the “blind expansion” of steelmaking by insisting on the “three don’ts”: don’t produce anything without an order, don’t sell at a loss and don’t ship without sure payment. E-commerce platforms have been encouraged to reduce pressure on merchants. They have, for example, phased out refund policies that allowed customers to get their money back without returning the goods. Local governments have also been told not to go too far in their efforts to promote investment or shield local champions from competition. According to Thomas Gatley of Gavekal Dragonomics, a consultancy, listed firms on China’s mainland (which number over 6,300) reported receiving 195bn yuan ($27bn) in subsidies last year, some 13% less than the year before.
>These interventions are less bold than those of the 2010s. The campaign may be more tentative because many of its targets are different, says Robin Xing of Morgan Stanley, a bank. In 2015-17 the industries suffering from excess capacity were dominated by large state-owned enterprises. They were easy to boss about. And they were often the biggest winners from the eventual shake-out, emerging with a bigger share of a less crowded industry. The smaller enterprises squeezed out by production limits and pollution standards were often scrappy private firms, relying on cheaper, dirtier technologies.
>Many industries now suffering from involution are led by less biddable private firms. Electric cars and solar panels, for example, are dominated by sophisticated commercial enterprises, using cutting-edge technology. Some of the industries, indeed, represent the new engines of growth for which the original supply-side reform was meant to make room. “New driving forces are being strengthened,” said the anonymous sources interviewed by the People’s Daily in 2016. But “if the old does not go, the new will not come.”
>Moreover, some excess capacity is an inevitable result of Mr Xi’s desire to maintain China’s industrial might. He wants to preserve manufacturing’s share of China’s output whether or not anyone wants to buy it all. The problem is made worse by local governments scrambling to fulfil his wishes, thereby duplicating each other’s efforts. At a symposium of economists and business leaders held last year, Mr Xi was warned his call to cultivate “new productive forces” could result in involution, as each local government strived to ensure the cultivation happened on their patch.
<Demanding problems
>Some of China’s struggles with involution also reflect a persistent shortfall of demand in the economy. Consumer confidence is low; the household saving rate (more than 31% of disposable income) is high; and a smaller share of that saving is flowing into the property market. In the first five months of this year households spent less than half as much on new homes as they did in the same months of 2021.
>Mr Xi’s 2015 reforms owed a lot to other policies that lifted demand. These included an expensive effort to replace so-called shantytowns with modern flats. If the government could once again stabilise the property market, restore consumer confidence and lift spending, some of China’s overcapacity problems might disappear. Others would be easier to bear. Rising prices in booming industries could offset deflationary pressures elsewhere, and hiring in sunrise sectors could ease the pain of firings in industries that overextended themselves. “Without a strong demand-side anchor, even the best designed supply-side measures risk falling short of delivering reflation,” argues Mr Xing. Many Chinese industries have prepared two tables full of food. The government needs to invite more guests to the party. ■ >>2385576>I promise you it will devolve in to 100's of posts of the usual suspects saying 'china le bad THOUGH' and the other usual suspects biting the b8.That and a lot of people have this incredibly reactionary Neo-Luddite attitude towards technology. Imagine saying that forced labor on RFK Jr.'s "Wellness Camps" is better than agricultural robots because automation isn't Authentic or whatever.
>>2385674>Dude, it's a free game with in-built adverts.I've been playing Genshin for a while and haven't seen a single ad.
>In Genshin, you get at least one SSS character for free from playing the game every 1-2 patches.Genshin doesn't grade its characters like this, there's only 4-star characters and 5-star characters. The way Genshin's pity system works is that you're guaranteed 1 five-star character after 80 pulls; if you "lose" your 50:50 (Get a standard-banner character), you're guaranteed the banner character next time you get a five-star.
>>2385733well that chart actually overstates china's export as part of GDP since it uses gross exports instead of the domestic value added of the product. IMF uses gross exports as for this stat as well, but a country like germany or south korea is more closely aligned since it does less assemble. however, china is beginning to move up the value added chain especially since the past decade.
>Do you even adjust this metric for the fact that for those companies wages are getting paid in local currency, and profits are in dollars, therefore it's quite literally cannot be a part of country's GDP, since it's a part of USD worldwide circulation?you're mixing up financial flows (currency) with real economic output. GDP is measured in local currency, then possibly converted for comparison. whether profits are in USD doesn’t affect whether the goods were produced domestically. so the foreign exchange of earnings and spending is accounted for in the balance of payments, not GDP
>>2385765Goods produced for international market are necessarily higher % of GDP because, one would imagine, the reason why you sell overseas is because it's better profits. However, in reality, you have something like a separation of production, say, automobile factory produces half of it's cars overseas, gains dollars from that trade, and produces other half of it's cars for internal market, maybe a different model even, and pays wages for all workers from this sale. Half of it's production will be a high-value GDP, and other half will be low-value, because it's local currency. Do you get what I mean now?
>>2371242Guys where can I get all 4 volumes of
Xi Jinping governance of china
>>2386185rudd has read the original chinese and believes Xi is a real bona fide marxist and he thinks if the west ignores it, it is to its own peril. however rudd also talks about a nationalist dimension of xi's thought, but his use is shaped by western discouse where it springs from ethno-nationalism, isolationism/cultural supremacism, zeru-sum thinking, etc. xi's 'national rejuvenation', is more from a post-colonial context which shaped by china's century of humiliation, the trauma of western and japanese imperialism, etc. but xi also gives plenty of space for an internationalist praxis as well with belt and road initiative, brics, sco, global development initiative , global civilization initiative, focac, and so on
>>2386192there are some english versions that gets published from the journal
https://arkansasworker.com/dialectical-materialism-is-the-worldview-and-methodology-of-chinese-communists/ >>2386298NP, we're all always learning. :)
>>2386222In that discussion he says his book argues that Xi is a Marxist and a Leninist and that the party is going to head in a 'more leninist' direction. Not entirely sure what he means by that, i'll probably read it and find out. It's refreshing to hear a lib who actually bothered to attempt a serious understanding more generally.
>>2386294>>2386293>>2386291>>2386182Thank you but no need, I already bought physical copies of all of them, they will be arriving soon.
Will post pics.
>>2386295There's a size limit actually. Those PDFs are about 30MB so it's unlikely he'd be able to get all 4 in 1 post. I think the limit is 100MB at a time. You can post up tp 5 files but there's also a size limit.
>>2386298Don't feel bad it's unlikely you'd have been able to fit all four in one post due to the size limit
>>2385774What on earth are you on about?
>>2385840>GDP as a metric is basically profits in dollars in prices on American marketAh now I see. You are completely wrong about this. Stop trying to intuit what GDP means and just read an article about what it is.
>>2387817It's just a Twitter screenshot and you created a whole geopolitical theory about it
Bro
>>2387817>Lil bro is trying to make American ekranoplans with one of those scam startups investorbait companies…Let me guess, the only things his company has ever produced is CGI mockups.
>This is why American reindustrialization efforts will remain a pipe dream. Incompetent salesmen running the show.That and you can't just go full Speer and expect that you can round up welfare-state beneficiaries, throw them in some rotting factory and expect them to make the type delicate parts that aerospace technology uses today.
>>2383190>needlessly traumatizing your already demoralized population and strawberry soldiers Based. It'll just foster resentment for the DPP when they think about how they're all going to get Ukrainianized by puppets whose children live in the US lol.
Also, those tanks embarrassed themselves in Ukraine. I wonder if they'll be added to the Chinese tech tree in War Thunder like the CM-11 though. That'd be funny.
>>2387981>the forces that are in direct command of the DPP are Americans.It's not just Americans. The Taiwan independence movement is a very pro-Japanese movement. I've always suspected that a lot of dark money from Japan has flowed to Taiwan to promote independence.
>>2389245There's a couple of Chinese anons but they haven't posted here recently. There could've been more though. I wanted Leftypol to get on XHS back when TikTok refugees were fleeing there during the TikTok ban but some furfag (Probably a mod) shot it down because it was "too proprietary." Let's just stick to Elon Musk's Nazi bar instead! That's
totally not proprietary.
>>2389156Crouching Tiger was HK but House of Flying Dragons (superior) was Mainland?
Please confirm or deny. It's all china to me.
https://youtu.be/UNGL12Jm0NgProminent American think tank,
Council on Foreign Relations declares China in the lead in tech
>>2390895>>2390801Actually, both China and the US have roughly 120-130% of GDP debt. But the Chinese also have between 140% of GDP and 225% of GDP assets, while the US at best has around 30% of GDP assets. So China is net positives, with assets yielding more than debts.
The US will probably attempt to inflate its way out, which is also known as the end of the dollar.
Either way, the mighty US military can't afford to fight; Iran wasn't invaded because the US couldn't afford it, what happens if it engaged a country with an economy 21-45x the size?
Sure, K/D ratios might be unfavorable, but a prolonged, attritional war will lead to the collapse of the dollar.
https://policytensor.substack.com/p/the-problem-of-the-strategic-defender
>These historical patterns offer crucial insights when considering a future great power conflict involving China, especially given the overwhelming fact that the Chinese Communist Party is explicitly committed to reunification with Taiwan, peacefully if possible, forcibly if not. The United States is the incumbent power in Asia. It is perhaps the clearest instance of a strategic defender. China therefore enjoys all the advantages of the first mover and the US all the disadvantages of the strategic defender.
>If and when China decides to absorb Taiwan by force or kick the US out of Asia, we should expect China to exploit this initiative in several ways.
>We can anticipate that China will attempt to achieve its objectives through a meticulously planned ‘time-table war,’ where its full military and economic potential is unleashed at a predetermined moment of its choosing. The strategic goal will be to achieve a swift, overwhelming knockout blow at the very outset of hostilities, designed to present a fait accompli to the United States.
>The CCP’s long-term military modernization efforts are geared towards reaching a specific peak of preparedness for the Taiwan scenario. This allows them to choose precisely when to initiate conflict, timing their move to coincide with a perceived window of vulnerability for their adversaries – whether due to their own temporary qualitative or quantitative advantage in the arms race, or external distractions facing the incumbent powers. If Chinese decision-makers perceived that they had the upper hand in the arms race during a brief window, they would very much like to seize that window of opportunity.
>China’s authoritarian system is well-suited for waging ‘totalitarian war.’ China has perhaps the most formidable state capacity in the world. Executive level decision-making in China is hyper-competent, certainly relative to the West and especially the contemporary United States. When they set out to do something, they get it done. And the state reaches very deep into everyday life. As Tooze put it recently, ‘China takes social engineering literally!’ This enables China to direct its stupendous human capital, world-dominating industrial capacity, and rapidly rising technological prowess towards military-strategic goals with unparalleled efficiency and focus, allowing for rapid and comprehensive mobilization akin to the ‘super-agencies’ and ‘planomania’ seen in Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union. When China goes to war, we can be certain it’s be fully prepared.
>Just as Germany used the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and its alliance with Japan to mitigate a two-front problem and pin down Soviet divisions, China may employ opportunistic foreign policy maneuvers to isolate potential intervenors, deter third-party involvement, or divert US attention. If somehow Japan could be neutralized via intimidation or seduction, that would be a real coup for China. South Korea is almost already neutralized—there is no appetite in Seoul for intervening in a Taiwan scenario. These scenarios of losing fighting allies in Asia is what is worrying Bridge Colby these days.
>The ideal scenario for China would be to entrap the US in a capabilities-consuming major war far away from the Western Pacific. If the US got into a war with Iran, for instance, that would be a significant window of opportunity for China. When the US expended a THAAD battery defending Israeli cities in the 12 Day War, no doubt at least some toasted in Chinese military circles. We have previously argued that Iran will now give up its policy of self-reliance and seek a strategic alliance with China. The Chinese have a great interest in Iranian strength as part of this ‘strategy of distraction.’ The same is true even more so with respect to Russia. The worse Russo-American relations get, the better for China. The best case scenario for China is escalation in Ukraine and a protracted proxy war that consumes American strength.
>It is the thesis of this analyst that China’s exploitation of the first-mover advantage would involve a carefully orchestrated, rapid, and overwhelming assault, executed at a moment of its choosing to capitalize on its maximum military potential and strategic surprise. The enduring challenge for the strategic defender is to deny this ‘strategy of rapid decision.’ A strategic objective that will become increasingly difficult as the Chinese military buildup proceeds.
>The great question for US China policy is whether it is worth it. Is this a hill we want to die on? Should we not in fact secure a modus vivendi with China well before this nightmare scenario arrives? The Anglo-Saxon powers refused to accommodate Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union. Was it worth it? And those were smaller powers relative to the US. China is bigger and about to get much bigger still. >>2391903bohrium.com
t. knower
>>2392621Can I invest in this or nah. Doesn't seem like it
>>2392639>>2392652Ohh right, forgot about Wukong. While kinda not talked about, still a good soft power. And fucking Genshin/Gacha in general. Crazy soft power.
The only place China is lacking is film. There really isn't any Chinese films that have broken into outside markets.
Unique IPs: 198