/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2597449
Nah

>>2581493
>sovereignty
Idealism to the max

>>2581344
This quote is about Taylorism not re introducing markets in an already socialist state

>>2581348
>Lmao, read Marx and Engels
okay….

>To my mind, the so-called “socialist society” is not anything immutable. Like all other social formations, it should be conceived in a state of constant flux and change. Its crucial difference from the present order consists naturally in production organized on the basis of common ownership by the nation of all means of production. To begin this reorganization tomorrow, but performing it gradually, seems to me quite feasible. That our workers are capable of it is borne out by their many producer and consumer cooperatives which, whenever they're not deliberately ruined by the police, are equally well and far more honestly run than the bourgeois stock companies.

<Engels, Letter to Otto Von Boenigk In Breslau, August 21, 1890

>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

>Our theory is a theory of evolution, not a dogma to be learned by heart and to be repeated mechanically. The less it is drilled into the Americans from outside and the more they test it with their own experience […] the deeper will it pass into their flesh and blood. When we returned to Germany, in spring 1848, we joined the Democratic Party as the only possible means of getting the ear of the working class; we were the most advanced wing of that party, but still a wing of it. When Marx founded the International, he drew up the General Rules in such a way that all working-class socialists of that period could join it – Proudhonists, Pierre Lerouxists and even the more advanced section of the English Trades Unions; and it was only through this latitude that the International became what it was, the means of gradually dissolving and absorbing all these minor sects, […] Had we from 1864, to 1873 insisted on working together only with those who openly adopted our platform where should we be to-day? I think that all our practice has shown that it is possible to work along with the general movement of the working class at every one of its stages without giving up or hiding our own distinct position and even organisation […]

<Friedrich Engels, Letter to Florence Kelley Wischnewetsky, January 27, 1887

>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

>I have, which will surprise you not a little, been speculating—partly in American funds, but more especially in English stocks, which are springing up like mushrooms this year (in furtherance of every imaginable and unimaginable joint stock enterprise), are forced up to a quite unreasonable level and then, for the most part, collapse. In this way, I have made over £400 and, now that the complexity of the political situation affords greater scope, I shall begin all over again. It's a type of operation that makes small demands on one's time, and it's worth while running some risk in order to relieve the enemy of his money.

<Karl Marx, Letter to Lion Philips. 25 June 1864, preserved in Marx-Engels Collected Works, Vol. 41

>Within the co-operative society based on common ownership of the means of production, the producers do not exchange their products; just as little does the labor employed on the products appear here as the value of these products, as a material quality possessed by them, since now, in contrast to capitalist society, individual labor no longer exists in an indirect fashion but directly as a component part of total labor. The phrase "proceeds of labor", objectionable also today on account of its ambiguity, thus loses all meaning.
What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges. Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society – after the deductions have been made – exactly what he gives to it. What he has given to it is his individual quantum of labor. For example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another.

<Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875

>Labor is not the source of all wealth. Nature is just as much the source of use values (and it is surely of such that material wealth consists!) as labor, which itself is only the manifestation of a force of nature, human labor power. The above phrase is to be found in all children's primers and is correct insofar as it is implied that labor is performed with the appurtenant subjects and instruments. But a socialist program cannot allow such bourgeois phrases to pass over in silence the conditions that lone give them meaning. And insofar as man from the beginning behaves toward nature, the primary source of all instruments and subjects of labor, as an owner, treats her as belonging to him, his labor becomes the source of use values, therefore also of wealth. The bourgeois have very good grounds for falsely ascribing supernatural creative power to labor; since precisely from the fact that labor depends on nature it follows that the man who possesses no other property than his labor power must, in all conditions of society and culture, be the slave of other men who have made themselves the owners of the material conditions of labor. He can only work with their permission, hence live only with their permission.

<Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875

>Let us take, first of all, the words "proceeds of labor" in the sense of the product of labor; then the co-operative proceeds of labor are the total social product. From this must now be deducted: First, cover for replacement of the means of production used up. Second, additional portion for expansion of production. Third, reserve or insurance funds to provide against accidents, dislocations caused by natural calamities, etc. These deductions from the "undiminished" proceeds of labor are an economic necessity, and their magnitude is to be determined according to available means and forces, and partly by computation of probabilities, but they are in no way calculable by equity. There remains the other part of the total product, intended to serve as means of consumption. Before this is divided among the individuals, there has to be deducted again, from it: First, the general costs of administration not belonging to production. This part will, from the outset, be very considerably restricted in comparison with present-day society, and it diminishes in proportion as the new society develops. Second, that which is intended for the common satisfaction of needs, such as schools, health services, etc. From the outset, this part grows considerably in comparison with present-day society, and it grows in proportion as the new society develops. Third, funds for those unable to work, etc., in short, for what is included under so-called official poor relief today.

<Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875

>“No social order is ever destroyed before all the productive forces for which it is sufficient have been developed, and new superior relations of production never replace older ones before the material conditions for their existence have matured within the framework of the old society."

<Karl Marx, from the preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859)

Hello xibros
I see many libtubers bring up china's demographics as a big problem
What do you think? Will the declining population be a huge problem

>>2580376
Does owning stocks mean that i am a capitalist

>>2616940
not unless you can live off the dividensd, otherwise its just a glorified savings account

>>2616883
>Hello xibros
>I see many libtubers bring up china's demographics as a big problem
>What do you think? Will the declining population be a huge problem
no because every other place other than africa and central asia is declining as well so its a wash

>>2580376
People in China usually work for bosses who own the means of production and who sell what the workers produce for profit. Markets don't just cover a few steps of the production process, there isn't just a market for consumer goods, but also for the means of production and raw materials ("allowing the market to play the decisive role in allocating resources" - Xi Jinping, Governance of China). The split between work for immediate consumption and building up means of production is not set in a plan, but by market processes. The government has some rough ideas about how the split should look like and nudges the market decisions with taxes and subsidies. I guess it isn't real capitalism from the perspective of an "anarcho-capitalist", but that form of capitalism does not and cannot exist anywhere.

"To further balance the relationship between the government and the market we need to decide which of the two is to play the decisive role in allocating resources. To boost the economy we must enhance the efficiency of the allocation of resources, especially that of scarce resources, so that we can use fewer resources to make more products and gain more benefits. Both theory and practice have proved that the allocation of resources by the market is the most effective means to this end. It is a general rule of the market economy that the market decides the allocation of resources, and a market economy in essence is one in which the market determines resource allocation. We have to follow this rule when we improve the socialist market economy. We should work harder to address the problems of market imperfection, too much government interference and lack of oversight. Positioning the market as playing a “decisive role” in resource allocation is conducive to establishing the correct notion of the government-market relationship…" - Xi Jinping, The Governance of China. I think any Marxist should be able to recognize this outlook for what it is.

>>2616880
>To my mind, the so-called “socialist society” is not anything immutable. Like all other social formations, it should be conceived in a state of constant flux and change. Its crucial difference from the present order consists naturally in production organized on the basis of common ownership by the nation of all of production. To begin this reorganization tomorrow, but performing it gradually, seems to me quite feasible.
<Engels, Letter to Otto Von Boenigk In Breslau, August 21, 1890
How about gradually moving, but in the opposite direction?
"Over the past two decades or so we have advanced economic and other reforms centering on the goal of establishing a socialist market economy, and realized a great historic transition from a highly centralized planned economy to a robust socialist market economy…" - Xi Jinping, Governance of China. Countless times there is the mantra about the market having the "decisive role" (a right-wing shift from "basic role"). I haven't read TGoC part 2 yet and heard it's better, but that's some bleak shit. I did read the rest of that letter by Engels and it ends with Engels expecting quick collectivizing of big industry after gaining political power.

*Glancing over the rest of the quotes*
What does Critique of the Gotha Programme have to do with China? You believe a capitalist speculating on the Chinese stock market gets a return in proportion to his labor hours? Have you actually read those texts or this is just some copypasta?

>>2617792
Truthnuke

>>2617604
Thanks anon

>>2617821
Already his first sentence was false, fyi.

>>2618034
Got stats?

>>2618277
Like 60% of China's economy is state owned.

>>2617792
>People in China usually work for bosses who own the means of production and who sell what the workers produce for profit.
Wrong. Proletarians in China work for themselves. The proletarian managers who oversee vast socialized means of production and circulation on behalf of Communist society work for the proletarians.
>Markets don't just cover a few steps of the production process, there isn't just a market for consumer goods, but also for the means of production and raw materials
The Communist market is perfect, unlike capitalist market.
>The split between work for immediate consumption and building up means of production is not set in a plan, but by market processes.
Wrong. The plan is created by the Communist Party. Capitalist market forces cannot exist in Communist China.
>The government has some rough ideas about how the split should look like and nudges the market decisions with taxes and subsidies. I guess it isn't real capitalism from the perspective of an "anarcho-capitalist", but that form of capitalism does not and cannot exist anywhere.
100% wrong. The Communist market is not a form of capitalism. The Communist market is planned.
>I think any Marxist should be able to recognize this outlook for what it is.
Xi Jinping Thought is scientific socialist outlook of modern Communist society.
>How about gradually moving, but in the opposite direction?
Communist China moves forward in great strides thanks to the Communist market. Communism without markets is not Communism.

love the communist stock exchange, keep it up fellas

>>2618300
Still a far cry from communist Ukraine

>>2618449
it's another "anti-dengist" projects his brain farts on the evil "dengists" thread

>>2618455
The economy of Communist China is fully planned in accordance with the primary material laws of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, ensuring that production is systematically expanded and perfected to meet the ever-growing needs of the people, free from the exploitative contradictions of capitalism.

As a result of the replacement of China's old bourgeois production-relations by socialist production-relations, the economic laws of capitalism, expressing relations based on the exploitation of man by man, cease to operate. The law of surplus-value, the basic economic law of modern capitalism, disappears from the' scene. The general law of capitalist accumulation, the law of competition and anarchy of production, together with other laws, also disappear. The categories which express capitalist relations cease to exist: capital, surplus-value, capitalist profit price of production, wage-labour, the value of labour-power, etc.

With the birth and development of China's new socialist relations of production, new economic laws make their appearance and begin to operate: the basic economic law of socialism, the law of planned (proportional) development of the national economy, the law of steady increase in the productivity of labour, the law of distribution according to work, the law of socialist accumulation, etc. The basic economic law of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics determines all the main aspects and main processes of development of the socialist mode of production, the purpose of socialist production and the means to achieve this purpose. The essential features and requirements of the basic economic law of socialism are the securing of the maximum satisfaction of the constantly rising material and cultural requirements of the whole of society, through the continuous expansion and perfecting of production on the basis of higher techniques. In socialist economy the growth of requirements (the purchasing power) of the masses is the motive force of socialist production and drives it forward. The continuous growth of socialist production is the material foundation for the steady growth of consumption by the people and the growth of new requirements. The priority development of the production of means of production is the essential condition for the continuous growth of socialist production. Socialism with Chinese Characteristics ensures the steady development of advanced techniques, essential to the continuous growth of perfecting the socialist production and the ever fuller satisfaction of the growing needs of the working people.

That socialist direct social products still possess varying degrees of commodity characteristics is determined by the level of productivity in the socialist period and by the two forms of socialist public ownership system and other material economic conditions. Since socialist products still possess varying degrees of commodity characteristics, categories related to commodities, such as use value and exchange value, concrete and abstract labor, money, price, and so forth, will certainly exist. To negate the commodity aspects of socialist direct social products and to attempt to abolish commodity production prematurely is obviously erroneous. Ch’en Po-ta, a renegade and Trotskyite, clamored for the abolition of commodity production and exchange during the period of the rapid development of China’s rural people’s commune movement in a vain attempt to lead revolution and construction astray. Chairman Mao saw through this conspiracy in time and engaged him in a resolute struggle. In the resolutions of the Sixth Plenum of the Eighth Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party personally convened and chaired by Chairman Mao, this was pointed out: “This way of thinking which attempts to prematurely abolish commodity production and exchange, prematurely negate the constructive role of commodities, value, money, and price is detrimental to developing socialist construction and is therefore incorrect.” (4) Socialist commodity production must not only be retained, but must also be developed to consolidate the economic link between China’s industry and agriculture and between urban and rural areas in order to promote the development of socialist construction.

>>2618449
>>2618486
(you)

>>2618455
Don't reply to him. He's either being payed to do this, mentally ill, or both.

>>2618300
Yeah that's what Wikipedia says:
<State-owned enterprises accounted for over 60% of China's market capitalization in 2019
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprises_of_China
(and this is their source: https://insight.factset.com/investing-in-chinese-state-owned-enterprises
"By FinChina’s definition, more than 60% of the CSI300 index (the Chinese large-cap index) by weight are SOEs.")
Anyway, this is not telling you size as fraction of jobs.

The Wikipedia article goes on (in the same paragraph) to say that SOEs
<employ between 5% and 16% of the workforce.

So I don't see how this debunks post >>2617792 saying this:
<People in China usually work for bosses who own the means of production and who sell what the workers produce for profit.

>>2617792
>What does Critique of the Gotha Programme have to do with China?
because the vulgar marxists are lassalleans who see deductions from the wage in the chinese economy as the same as capitalist exploitation when really it's just socialism in practice.

>>2617792
>To further balance the relationship between the government and the market we need to decide which of the two is to play the decisive role in allocating resources. To boost the economy we must enhance the efficiency of the allocation of resources, especially that of scarce resources, so that we can use fewer resources to make more products and gain more benefits. Both theory and practice have proved that the allocation of resources by the market is the most effective means to this end. It is a general rule of the market economy that the market decides the allocation of resources, and a market economy in essence is one in which the market determines resource allocation. We have to follow this rule when we improve the socialist market economy. We should work harder to address the problems of market imperfection, too much government interference and lack of oversight. Positioning the market as playing a “decisive role” in resource allocation is conducive to establishing the correct notion of the government-market relationship…
Holy cow, that's one hell of a quote…

>>2617792
>I think any Marxist should be able to recognize this outlook for what it is.
What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges. Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society – after the deductions have been made – exactly what he gives to it.

>>2618750
What do you mean by this?

>>2618753
Those are Marx's words from Gothakritik. State Capital exists after proletarian revolution. So does reform. So does class. Marxists have always admitted this. Marx says that the proletariat, once it has won political supremacy, wrests "by degrees" (i.e. gradually) all "capital" from the bourgeoisie. And they do this initially only at a national scale rather than an international one, hence why they confiscate the property of "rebels and emigres" who inevitably flee to remaining capitalist countries. Marx says the proletariat after it has won power should force people to work "equal liability of all to work" and should establish a "national bank" with "state capital." Are you seeing where I am going with this? Engels says the proletarian revolution will not be able to abolish private property overnight, but will probably do so gradually. Lenin says State Capitalism is a prerequisite for socialism several times, and only blockheads don't understand that.

Marx, Engels, Lenin, they all were "dengists!"

The SOE thing has always been goofy to me. Would you consider your local public utility to be run by the proletariat? Is the post office some sort of coop?

>>2618769
it's about class dictatorship
SOE under capitalism = bourgeois state owned enterprise

SOE under socialism = proletarian state owned enterprise

inb4
>proletarian state?! how dare you!

read Lenin

>>2618768
>To boost the economy we must enhance the efficiency of the allocation of resources, especially that of scarce resources, so that we can use fewer resources to make more products and gain more benefits. Both theory and practice have proved that the allocation of resources by the market is the most effective means to this end. It is a general rule of the market economy that the market decides the allocation of resources, and a market economy in essence is one in which the market determines resource allocation. We have to follow this rule when we improve the socialist market economy. We should work harder to address the problems of market imperfection, too much government interference and lack of oversight.
Does not sound like a gradual transition away from markets, but instead an embrace of them as a permanent solution.

>>2618770
What makes a state proletarian anyway? It seems very abstract to me.

>>2618776
You seem very abstract for me.

>>2618770
How is a Chinese SOE run differently from government owned entities all over the world?

>>2618794
>How is a Chinese SOE run differently from government owned entities all over the world?
because it's run by a government with a Communist party in power.

>>2618734
Still, you defy Deng Xiaoping Theory. You are wrong because the entirety of China's economy is Communist. Independent proletarian enterprises are just as Communist as SOE. The Communist Party does not need to micromanage every social product. Despite your confusion, that post has already been utterly debunked. >>2618449
>>2618749
This quote is 100 percent wrong because they implicate that the perfect Communist market system is itself a problem, as if the Communist Party directly distributing every single social product would be less "imperfect." Such defiance of the Communist market is Trotskyite nonsense as Mao explained >>2618486
>>2618773
You never say single reason why the Communist market system is so bad, despite the fact it eradicated poverty. To all of reasonable mind who adhere to Communism, you seem to think Commumism is marketless poverty. Communism without markets is poverty. Please explicate why you think the Communist market system is so bad when you have been given so many corrections.
>>2618769
Correct. The ultra obsession over SOE originates from their failurr to grasp the necessity and Communist nature of private proletarian enterprise. Private proletarian enterprise is no less Communist than SOE.
>>2618794
>>2618850
You ask the wrong question. You ask "How are China's SOE Communist?"
You should ask, "Why is China Communist?"

China is Communist not because of SOE, but because the socialist transformation of private ownership of the means of production has been completed, the system of exploitation of man by man abolished, and a socialist system established. The exploiting class, as a class, has been eliminated.

China also is the central producer to the products of capitalist countries and businesses.

>>2618948
>>2618953
It's amazing how you're able to say so little in so many words. Despite what you seem to think, angrily asserting the same thing repeatedly does not a convincing argument make. You need to actually justify your positions if you want anyone to take you seriously.

>>2618850
Thoughts on Belarus?

>>2618955
You are lobophobia is typical for proponent of bourgeois ideoglogy. We use Shanghai Textbook to correct these anti-Communists that are the most vocal against Communism. Your Confucian demand to convince and not correct these agents of revisionism, when perfection of the Communist product exchange system is so evidenced, is futile. Study Shanghai Textbook chapters 15, 19, and 21 and report back with your answers to the review problems.

>>2618773
>Does not sound like a gradual transition away from markets, but instead an embrace of them as a permanent solution.
Where are you getting the permanence. It says especially that of scarce resources. They are saying that the more scarce something is the more they should rely on the market to allocate it. Thats just correct. As things become more abundant the market becomes less important. Its good to use the market to distribute scarce resources as long as the state puts up minimal guardrails to ensure they are incentived towards increasing production

right after that quote

>Our market economy is socialist, of course. We need to give leverage to the superiority of our socialist system, and let the Party and government perform their positive functions. The market plays a decisive role in allocating resources, but is not the sole actor in this regard

>To develop the socialist market economy, leverage should be given to both the market and the government, with differentiated functions. The Decision put forth clear requirements for improving the functions of the government, emphasizing that scientific macro control and effective governance are the intrinsic requirements for giving more leverage to the advantages of the socialist market economy. The Decision also makes plans for improving macro control, correctly performing government functions in all areas, and improving the organization of government. It stresses that the main responsibility and role of the government is to maintain the stability of the macro economy, strengthen and improve public services, ensure fair competition, strengthen market oversight, maintain market order, promote sustainable development and common prosperity, and intervene in situations where market failure occurs

>Second, adhering to and improving the basic economic system. The basic economic system with public ownership playing a leading role and all forms of ownership growing side by side is an important pillar of the socialist system with Chinese characteristics.

>Second, adhering to and improving the basic economic system. The basic economic system with public ownership playing a leading role and all forms of ownership growing side by side is an important pillar of the socialisSince the introduction of the reform and opening-up policy in 1978 the structure of ownership has undergone gradual adjustment, with the weights of the public and non-public sectors changing in their contribution to the economy and employment. The economy and society have grown more vigorous during this process. In such conditions, how to better recognize the leading role of public ownership and stick to this position and how to further explore the effective forms for materializing the basic economic system have become major topics for us.

>It is emphasized in the Decision that we must unswervingly consolidate and develop the public economy, persist in the leading role of public ownership, give full play to the leading role of the state-owned economy, and incessantly increase its vitality, leveraging power and impact.

>Adhering to and furthering the relevant deliberations made since the Party’s 15th National Congress, the Decision proposes to vigorously develop the mixed- ownership economy. It stresses that such an economy, with cross-shareholding by and integration of state-owned capital, collective capital and non-public capital, is important to materialize the basic economic system of China. It will help to improve the functions of state-owned capital, maintain and increase its value and raise its competitiveness. It is an effective channel and inevitable choice for us to adhere to the leading role of public ownership and improve the vitality, leveraging power and impact of the state-owned economy in the new conditions.

>The Decision states that China will improve the state assets management system, strengthen state assets oversight with capital management at the core, and reform the authorized operation mechanism for state capital. State-owned capital investment operations must serve the strategic goals of the state, invest more in key industries and areas that are vital to national security and are the lifeblood of the economy, focus on offering public services, develop important and future-oriented strategic industries, protect the ecological environment, support scientific and technological progress, and guarantee national security. The government will transfer part of the state-owned capital to social security funds. We will increase the proportion of state-owned capital gains that are turned over to the public finance, to be used to ensure and improve the people’s livelihood.t system with Chinese characteristics.

>>2618958
Basic ass european country

>>2619248
nah they're post-soviet and have the only soviet era leader left. they also haven't abandoned social democracy yet, and their social democracy was never based in NATO imperialism. they're a non-NATO member.

There is no reason to convince dengits they are wrong. It will be more pleasurable to watch them looking the inevitable rot of China completely clueless of what happens.

>>2620588
you will die of natural causes first at this rate

>>2620120
>no cow content
6/10.