/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2524679
Solution to what?

>>2524649
a peasent nationalist revolution.

>>2522744
>revisionist

why? he basically fullfilled the developement of productive forces and restraining of banking and land capital that is studied by classical political economy which marx culminated

>>2524722
Which is ironic because Deng administration was collective, there wasn’t at all any sense of One Man Rile which there very much was with Mao and today with Xi

>>2524718
>>2524722
>le great man theory
ok ok, by "him" i mean "the economic direction china took after dengism, for x and y material conditioners and a w number of other factors"

>>2524730
and by "for x and y conditioners…" i meant "because of x and…" (esl…)

>>2524740
It is, you being sarcastic isn’t changing that

>>2524742
Welcum back Lassale

>>2524740
>>2524748
the state CAN be AN historic (relative, contingent upon material, class, productive… conditions) agent for communism IF it is a dictatorship of the proletariat, just as the capitalist state is and has been AN agent, but not THE historical agent by any means… Otherwise, if it is the case that the state lacks any historical agency, why should we communism seek to control it as a mean for our goal? and why has it been effectively used to hinder our goals by our class enemies?

>>2524760
Holy shit

>>2523063
>Zhao Ziyang
yep thats bait

If you are a Sino-Marxist, there is no contradiction. As Mao said, Praxis is the Sole Criterion of Truth.

>>2523063
Like hideo kojima

>>2524763
holy shit what??? hahahaha

W-WHATEVER YOU DO, DON'T DISTURB MY ABILITY TO ACCUMULATE CAPITAL OFF OF CHINESE (GOOD) STOCKS! D:'

>>2524464
>they have the same essence
Just cut to the chase and say they have the same vibes or the same aura or whatever. If you can't actually say how they are the same in any concrete way, when in reality they are vastly different both historically and in terms of political economy, then you're just labelling them as identical based on nothing but your assertion that they are.



>russian imperialism
If imperialism is when a country is mean to it's smaller neighboring countries then sure


>Compelling argument
The argument was that in order to justify your own argument you have to conjure an imagined world that doesn't exist and say "see in my imagined world I'm right!". Calling you retarded and a faggot were obviously just insults, you obtuse fucking moron

>>2524778
elaborate mf

>>2524907
Nah

>What does China‘s success change about Marxist thought?

did the Scandinavian economic model change anything about marxist thought ?

China doesn’t exist, stop talking about it

>>2524933
Scandinavian social model is just serfs with benefits, economic elites held over 70% of national wealth, but income was evenly distributed.

China is the Lenin-Deng gamble, do you trust a vanguard party or not?

How do you reconcile being an unloved cunt?

>>2525149
Til nazi germany was not imperialist

>>2525169
nazi germany does fit the 5 criteria

>>2525149
>imperialism is a checklist you have to fill out and not a stage of global capitalism
someone post the autism box clip from haz

russia and china both proved marx wrong in the sense that marx thought that the most industrialized nations would have the most revolutionary potential rather than imperialistically exploited largely agrarian/peasant nations. Marxism is a science that adapts to new evidence, not a religious dogma immune to reasonable and rigorous criticism and change.

>>2565499
you need to actually read the book bro

Who cares? The libration of the working class will be done by the working class, first winning the battle for democracy, that is, establishing itself the ruling class of a nation. The PRC ain't gonna save you bro, it's up to us

>>2565498
No shit you simpleton. I‘m asking for how Deng‘s success changes Marxist thought.

>>2522744
>this revisionist
By accepting the fact that Marxism is a science and not a religious cult.

>>2565504
Marxism is a ideology, not a science

>>2525169
Are you going to tell me Nazi Germany did not have colonies? Do you understand the term lebensraum?

>>2565488
if you read the book you would know that the 5 criteria in the image are updated for the modern era. the checklist is a simplified explanation of the dynamics of capitalism under monopoly conditions.

>a stage of global capitalism
no its not a stage of global capitalism, its a stage of national development, because monopolies begin in and are defined by national conditions before becoming global. when we speak of imperialism as a stage of capitalist development, we are talking about the national economy of a given country, and not of capitalism as a global system which consists of many nations at different levels of development.

imperialism is global, yes, but that does not make the victims of imperialism imperialist themselves for being exploited. it does not even mean that willing comprador bourgios governments are themselves imperialist, because imperialism refers to the monopoly status of capital as a merger of industry with banking into finance capital, and as the image indicates "dominate world markets", "reserve" and "net goods exporter" because just as lenin did not consider the mere existence of finance capital as sufficient for imperialism, but the primary importance of finance capital as the engine of imperialist economy, and in modern times its not the mere existence of a national monopoly, but transnational monopolies that dominate world markets, because as lenin correctly pointed out monopoly is not simply regional control, but lack of market competition, and as we can see while russia has state monopolies in oil, which is a commodity good and not finance capital, it is also subject to market competition from the global cartel controlled by the US, who is in fact not subject to competition and we see this reflected in the pricing of russian oil being subject to western dictates and not the other way around.

to actually understand imperialism you first have to understand marx, and how market competition leads to consolidation, how technological innovation stagnates under monopoly, how the organic composition of capital lowers the rate of profit, and how as identified by lenin this dynamic necessitates extraterritorial expansion into underdeveloped markets to counteract that falling profit rate. and careful analysis shows this does not apply to russia generally, and definitely not in the case of their intervention in ukraine

I despise you social imperialist scum. The way you dress up Chinese imperialism as a positive 'industrialisation' is sickening. Imperialists and social imperialists deserve skinning.

>>2565714
Elaborate how china is imperialist?

>>2565715
Union of industrial and financial capital and export of said financial capital through loans (What evil defenders celebrate as the Belt and Road Initiative, as if it is any different from the wicked World Bank).

Example of Imperialism: Oil in South Sudan, where China owned the plurality of oil in the country since OVER A DECADE ago.

It's only revisionism if you refuse to read it.

>>2565717
And russia?

>>2565711
>updated
Modernizer

>>2565726
Dogmatist