/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2613865
I'd trust you but I saw a lot of Indian users with the socialist flag so I won't

>>2613865
>the flaws of China's "Do nothing, win" strategy
You moron even started a shitty thread. Incredible.

All was answered in /PRC/: >>2613887

westoids have no shame, whatsoever

An under discussed topic of the BRI is how it dollarizes the economies of the developing countries. And China's over production deciminates the local industries leaving an open all you can eat buffet for American finance capital to harvest from third world countries (and now Europe).
The problem is looking at the world as only two competing giants instead of which regions these two can form power centers in and I dont think China is going to have much influence against America's 7 headed hydra like financial system.

>>2613888
Is a common strategy for some of the worst posters on the site, they loose an argument (in spectacular fashion often) And so go to make an OP reiterating the argument and/or seething about loosing the argument.

>>2613865
Chatgpt thread

>>2613886
Damnit. Those bloody raiders stealing MY flag! >:(

>>2613903
I wasn't even in that thread.

>>2613911
I typed this myself, thank you very much. Nobody has addressed my criticisms that China is just letting the US surround it with basically no resistance, ignoring the real danger of a future blackade.
Also, AI wouldn't tell you to kys, motherfucker!

>>2614065
>Nobody has addressed my criticisms
Meanwhile, in reality:
>>2613888

Kys, undereducated willing shill of NAFO

>>2614070
Literally hasn't addressed anything. Just calling me "undereducated" without elaboration, isn't helpful.

>NAFO
I'm not one of the raiders, dipshit!

Shit, why was my name removed?>>2614115

>im worried that china might-
<NAFO NAFO NAFO WESTOID WESTOID SHIIL SHIIL SHILL SHILL

This place sucks and we should leave the trolls to eat each other

China is eternal and undying.

>>2613865
>China's complete neglegt of this danger may be its downfall. For all their greatness, they cannot last against a neval blockade, land siege and hybrid warfare, the US has been preparing for.

I dislike china but this is moronic, china gets like 40% of its oil domestically now and for the rest they can just build a pipeline from Russia. The time for blockading china from oil is sliping away

>>2614285
>I dislike china but this is moronic
I dislike you but you are an anti-communist, manifest, tbh.

>>2614172
Okay but "China does a million things" doesn't actually address anything. What specific things is China doing to avoid the scenario in the OP?

why do tankies worship china

>>2614350
Why do anarchists worship repeated failure?

>>2614355
Exactly, this we like successful revolutionaries like freidrich ebert instead of faildaughters like luxemburg here

>>2613865
China will collapse from global climate mismanagement and lack of sufficient revolutionary development. America may utilize proxies and mercs extensively to counter Chinese influence, but there is a high chance the country falls apart before it can see its plots to fruition.

>>2615243
I would not seriously factoring in current or future arable land developments in that manner. The release of land from Arctic conditions will be a chaotic and catastrophic affair that will take a minimum of a century to deal with. The released land would consist of a great deal of rocks, swamps, gravel/sand filled soil, and melted ice (water). The communities, infrastructure, and local ecosystems will of course be devastated by all of this. And let's not forget the extreme changes in weather and temperature that will occur, along with potential increases in pollution from devastated areas of civilization across the planet.

I would seriously bet on civilizations that invests heavily in sealed, indoor, climate controlled agriculture would be the breadbaskets of the world while everyone else, for the most part, is getting mad max levels of nutrition (if even that).

>>2614327
>>2614355
Materially, China is fascist. The class antagonism between bourgeois and proletariat still exists, they've just added another layer of control on top of it. Instead of a proletariat being opressed by the ruling bourgeois, they have a proletariat oppressed by the bourgeois who are oppressed by the CPC. They have not meaningfully solved the problem of capitalism, but instead obfuscated it.

>inb4 the CPC says it's communist
Anyone can say anything. Do you believe goth kids when they tell you they're werewolves? You have a brain and five perfectly good senses, what's it going to take for you to actually use them?
>inb4 the CPC is ideologically committed to communism
Even if they do think they're "ideologically commited" to communism, that doesn't mean shit. People are driven by their own material self-interest first and foremost. The CPC's party leadership has no material incentive to improve things for the Chinese people. At most, it might absorb its bourgeois into itself, achieving state capitalism. But even then, despite what some people seem to think, state capitalism on its own does not mean that the state has any incentive to wither away. On the contrary, in China's situation, the state would have all the incentive in the world to strengthen itself in such a situation.
>inb4 the CPC represents the proletariat
It doesn't. It represents itself. Representative democracy has already proved to not actually be very representative, and the CPC is structured in such a way that the people with the most sway over the direction the party takes are the people already entrenched in it, meaning the bureaucracy has very little incentive to be receptive to the needs of anyone but its own leadership.
>inb4 China's prosperous right now
So? That has absolutely zero bearing on whether or not they're on the path to communism.
>inb4 they're better than the US
This is the only argument I can even slightly abide, but even then, it's the same retarded logic that democrats use to try to get leftists to vote for them.

I'm getting sick of this site. I've seen the same stupid fucking nonsense posted over and over again, and the more theory I actually study, the more I realize just how stupid and nonsensical it is.

>>2615571
Frankly speaking if you leftcomm and reject ML every ML state is fascist.

End of the day, if you acknowledge the CPC as a vanguard party, China is socialist, if you do not, it's fascist. Simple as that.

>>2615230
If Luxemburg survived the SPD and German communists won the civil war, you would hate them.

>>2615598
I'm probably closer to ML than leftcom in the traditional sense. But vangardism is a bad idea. You're not going to have a party acting in interests of the workers for any extended length of time when the people in charge are not themselves workers.

>>2615571
>Red fash idiocy
GTFO, anarshit! Nobody asked for your braindead libel.

Why is noboby addressing my concerns in the OP??? Always derailing with irrelevant shit. kys

>>2615571
>Materially, China is fascist.
No.
>The class antagonism between bourgeois and proletariat still exists, they've just added another layer of control on top of it

Let's ask Lenin whether class struggle continues to exist after the revolution:

<Socialism means the abolition of classes. The dictatorship of the proletariat has done all it could to abolish classes. But classes cannot be abolished at one stroke. And classes still remain and will remain in the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The dictatorship will become unnecessary when classes disappear. Without the dictatorship of the proletariat they will not disappear. Classes have remained, but in the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat every class has undergone a change, and the relations between the classes have also changed. The class struggle does not disappear under the dictatorship of the proletariat; it merely assumes different forms.

Lenin, Economics And Politics In The Era Of The Dictatorship Of The Proletariat, 30 October, 1919

>>2613890
>le debt-trap hoax but with a leftist spin
"dollarize" doesn't mean anything. if you develop, you are going to have a foreign currency deficit at the beginning because you are importing the machines and the infrastructure -the capital- to develop. this is not the same as a neoliberal government destroying the local currency through a carry trade scheme, which is what people usually mean when they speak negatively of dollarization in the third world

>China's over production
it is only overproduction in the marxist sense if it can't find buyers at a profitable price, which is clearly not the case or you wouldn't be making the next point:

>deciminates the local industries
countries aren't forced to join the bri, if a country has a strategy to develop a sector through protectionism they can still join the bri and complement that strategy with new infrastructure. or maybe their strategy doesn't involve protectionism, or maybe the local bourgeoisie is so backwards and petty not petite, half the illiterates in this site call the petite-bourgeoisie "petty-bourgeoisie" they don't have a strategy at all so it doesn't matter

>>2615607
>But vangardism is a bad idea.
Historically whats the alternative?

>>2615781
China is not a dotp since the CCP who dictates things is composed of all classes, notably with billionaire capitalist members having more access to and leverage on the state apparatus than random wage workers.

In the USSR the NEPmen were stripped from their right to vote, let alone be in the party.

>>2615571
>Materially, China is fascist
Your argument would have been stronger (but still incorrect) if you had said "formally" instead of "materially".

>>2615571
>The CPC's party leadership has no material incentive to improve things for the Chinese people.
I bet you believe that China is not democratic at all and is ruled top down. Recommend you actually study why China is socialist

>least consider the flaws of China's "Do nothing, win" strategy, and how it may paradoxically still lead to its undoing.
🚫Wrong. Communist China does not "do nothing." Thanks to Communist China, Communism is now dominant mode of production.
>Amerikkkan reliance on proxies and mercs is the key to maintain the Empire. If they can make China's neighbours fight them in their stead, they they can win, and have East Asia plundered, like they have plundered Eastern Europe since the 90s, to give capitalism another 50 years.
🫸Wrong. Communist China can never be defeated. Communist China has greatest defenses. Third-world europe is nothing like China. Third-world europe was correct in seceding from social fascist imperialist revisionist empire. Social imperialism fell to its own peculiar contradictions.
>China has failed to counter this problem completely, letting country after country on their borders fall into US hands in recent years. Once friendly countries turned into enemies. China's rebranded 'socialism in one country' strategy isn't enough to resist US aggression. The US doen't need to do much to blockade Chinese shipping, and block all imports from entering the mainland. Going from "random" drone boats sent from US vallal states, to airstrikes and piracy conducted by US forces themselves, which they have been training for through the recent attacks on Russian and Venezuelan ships. China can't retaliate against this adequately, due to their lack of bases or proxies of their own around Amerikkkan territory.
🇨🇳Wrong. You speak of blockading the world scientific hub and factory. Global economic collapse would be bad for everyone, but certainly the imperialist. Communist China has many powerful friends. Vietnam. Russia. Communist Korea. You fail to grasp that surrounding comprador states have deep bonds with Communist China. You speak of "lack of bases." Communist China has helped build ports and other infrastructure in over 100 nation.
>China's complete neglegt of this danger may be its downfall. For all their greatness, they cannot last against a neval blockade, land siege and hybrid warfare, the US has been preparing for.
✋️Wrong. Communist China has strongest navy, strongest army. Communist China have total food and energy security. If imperialist attack, Communist China arm all freedom loving people against imperialist.
>This is why solidarity is so important. Supporting comrades in other countries isn't about kindness. It ensures you will not be attacked by brothers turned against you. Meanwhile, the global bourgeoisie has shown extreme amounts of solidarity amongst themselves, to great effectiveness. They are very unified, especially compared to the 1910s, unlike us.
🛑You are 100% wrong. You do nothing but slander Communist China. You liken Communist China to third-world Europe. You show solidarity with bourgeoisie by attacking Communist China. Solidarity with China means grasping Chinese strategy and defending China from slander. You are demoralization agent. All your ultimatums are western propaganda.

>>2616003
it is democratic, and so are many other bourgeois nations, it wouldn't matter that it is anymore so than it's like another bourgeois nation, even states like the UAE and turkmenistan hold parliamentary elections, they aren't "ruled from the top down", yet are still ostensibly bourgeois nations ruled in contradiction to proletarian rule, this goes too for china and any other AES nation you like

>>2616005
based

>>2616023
Wrong. 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. 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.

>>2616005
This bombastic response made me smile even though I disagree with some points. Very based post unironically. Leftypol should have this more.

>You show solidarity with bourgeoisie by attacking Communist China
Stop calling me a demoraliser 😭

>>2616007
>>2616004
>>2616031
>Wrestling
Actual schizo

>>2615898
Historically, communism as a movement is extraordinarily young. Marxism-Leninism and anarcho-communism are the only forms of socialism that have even been in the position to be tested in any meaningful way. To act as if we know the proper way to achieve communism based on the relative success of the former compared to the latter alone betrays an an extremely limited understanding of history.

But on my end, I propose a hybrid between vanguardism and direct democracy via sortition. Whenever the vangard wants to make a decision, it needs to run it by a handful of randomly selected workers and get their consent first. This way, you preserve the expediency of top-down leadership while also gaining more direct input from the workers and greater checks on power.

Note that I've thought about this in the context of war communism. My proposition should be workable, even if you're fighting off attempts at destruction by a stronger bourgeoisie state.

>>2616003
>I bet you believe that China is not democratic at all and is ruled top down.
I'll admit I am a bit rusty, but going off of what I remember from when I was studying China's political system in greater depth, they were similar to the Soviet Union; a very hierarchical, illiberal form of republicanism. If the idea of someone voting for someone else somewhere along the line makes something "democratic" then China does technically count, but in practice, the influence that the workers have on the state is so heavily abstracted that the country is in practice ruled by party leadership, not the other way around.

>>2616051
You're extremely new. He makes some variation of this post like three times a day.

>>2616143
Fuck off, anarshit! I've been here since the 8chan days. Stop derailing, and leave! >:(

>>2616238
I'm not an anarchist, and have already said as much.
>I've been here since the 8chan days.
I somehow doubt that.

>>2616286
It's not the anarchist flag. It's the libertarian socialism flag, which covers a much broader range of beliefs.

>>2616299
No. If I were somehow the magical king of the universe, we would be much harder on pedophiles, not less. The fact that you need to resort to unhinged accusations because you're unable to refute my actual point is frankly pathetic.

More to the point, I don't particularly care about specific policies. I care about achieving proletarian rule, and in terms of political economy, that means thinking about underlying systems, their viability, and their results; not the legality of anal sex or whatever other retarded nonsense people care about.

The only way to actually achieve proletarian control is, big shocker, a system where the proletariat is in control, not bureaucrats, elected or otherwise. To this end, we need

1. Proletarian law: laws must be passed via direct democracy. The specific form of direct democracy doesn't particularly matter, so long as the whole proletariat in a given area is eligible to vote, although I personally advocate for sortition. There should still be a vangard to draft the laws, so as to prevent political disorder and give the proletariat direction, especially early on when they're warding off reactionary forces. But they must not go forward with decisions until they gain the approval of the workers.

2. Proletarian politicians: elected officials must be held to strict age and term limits. This is to ensure that, after they've spent a sufficient amount of time leading the party, they go back to being ordinary workers, and thus will make decisions that benefit workers while in office.

3. Proletarian monopoly on violence: instead of having a dedicated police force or military, there must instead be a citizens militia, consisting of ordinary proles serving part-time, eliminating the use of violence as a tool imposed on the proletariat from the outside.

4. Proletarian economics: at the very least, the commanding heights of the economy must be nationalized and run by elected officials from the proletariat, elected by the proletariat.

5. Proletarian privilege: the bourgeois and lumpen, in so far as they're allowed to exist, must be considered second class citizens, lacking the ability to participate in politics. A dictatorship of the proletariat must be dictated by the proletariat.

How these features are implemented depends on the specific material conditions they're being implemented in, but they are the only surefire way to enact proletarian rule in the long term, as opposed to a state that is merely proletariat friendly in the short term.

By the way, I do critically support China. They've managed to achieve a high standard of living without exploiting other nations, I enjoy much of their cultural output, and overall they're the world power to get the most right. But they also have many of the same structural problems as the Soviet Union, and a few bad chairmen could torpedo the whole thing.

>>2616143
>>2616143
>>2616143
>If the idea of someone voting for someone else somewhere along the line makes something "democratic" then China does technically count, but in practice, the influence that the workers have on the state is so heavily abstracted that the country is in practice ruled by party leadership, not the other way around.
100% wrong. You think democracy is voting. This is incorrect. Democracy is control over means of production. Only proletarian democracy under dictatorship of proletariat can eliminate poverty, such as in Communist China. In Communist China, worker control is material, not abstract. In Communist China, workers do not "influence" State. In Communist China, workers ARE State. In Communist China, socialist rule of law and socialist moral value and proletarian wellbeing permeate all society

>the country is in practice ruled by party leadership, not the other way around.
You have stumbled upon the definition of Communist dictatorship of proletariat and mistaken it for valid criticism. Praise be that China IS ruled by Communist Party!

>>2616423
>100% wrong. You think democracy is voting. This is incorrect. Democracy is control over means of production.
Bickering over literal semantics is the last refuge of the man whom has no argument.

Whatever terminology you want to use, the point remains: if we are to achieve a state that is controlled by people who perform labor, then politics must be driven, as much as possible, by people who perform labor. A full-time politician is not someone who performs labor. As such, in a state where the political sway of people who don't perform labor is to be minimized, the presence of full-time politicians is to be minimized. Insofar as full-time politicians are required for practical reasons, they must be culled from the group of people that perform labor, and given as much personal, egoistic reason as possible to work in favor of the people that do perform labor.

This is not a set of perspective policy proposals. It's a series of inferences based around the premise that people do what they perceive to be in their material best interests, a premise that virtually all commited materialists agree with, including Marx.

>Only proletarian democracy under dictatorship of proletariat can eliminate poverty
Why? What is your basis for this? Do you actually have any arguments for this, or are you just going to keep running in circles?

>In Communist China, worker control is material, not abstract
Meaningless gibberish.

>In Communist China, workers do not "influence" State. In Communist China, workers ARE State.
So tell me, oh wise one, what kind of productive labor has Xi Jinping performed in the last year? How about the last five years? The last ten?

>socialist moral value
Marx is spinning in his grave.

>You have stumbled upon the definition of Communist dictatorship of proletariat
Please refer to my first paragraph.

>Praise be that China IS ruled by Communist Party!
Good fucking grief.

>>2613865
>the global bourgeoisie has shown extreme amounts of solidarity amongst themselves, to great effectiveness

Lolno. Right this moment, USA is competing with Russia for the glorious title of a gas station with nukes, India chooses China over the West (even if wrecker behaviour remains), and Europe is trying to screw US dreams of petrodollar revenues over by trying to colonize Russia. I see no goddamn unity, everyone is at each others' throats, and China is exploiting this easily

>>2616470
> politics must be driven, as much as possible, by people who perform labor.
You are wrong, for such is the case in Communist China. By rejecting "democracy = control over MOP," you reject materialist basis of politics.
>Meaningless gibberish.
You are the one who said meaningless gibberish. You are the one said, "worker control in Communist China is abstract." You blow but wind.
>A full-time politician is not someone who performs labor.
Wrong. Ironic that you now use semantic to say all who work full-time for Communist Party does not work. You are fascist of anarcho-syndicalist deviation who denies Communist Party and therefore reject dictatorship of proletariat. Full-time Party member is full-time proletarian who contributes immense mental labor which is in fact multiplied simple labor. Without Communist Party, there is no dictatorship of proletariat.
>Why? What is your basis for this? Do you actually have any arguments for this, or are you just going to keep running in circles?
>So tell me, oh wise one, what kind of productive labor has Xi Jinping performed in the last year? How about the last five years? The last ten?
Xi Jinping provides greatest services to all workers of world as evidenced by fact that Communist China eliminated poverty.
>Marx is spinning in his grave.
You reject socialist morality; therefore, you embrace bourgeois morality.
Praise be to China's Communist Party!

>>2616762
>Full-time Party member is full-time proletarian who contributes immense mental labor
So the PMC comprises the proletariat? That's news to me!

>Xi Jinping provides greatest services to all workers of world as evidenced by fact that Communist China eliminated poverty.
Okay, but what form of productive labor has he done in the past century? What product has he produced, procured, or preserved using his labor, which is to say, by actually physically doing something, not by directing someone else.

Cope thread

>>2617351

<muh labor is when coal miner

fucking retard. just because america is a dictatorship of the bourgeois wherein the positions of power are captured by the capitalist class, doesn't mean literally every managerial position and task is 'PMC'. do you not think that communism requires specialists in organization and management? do you really think communism is when mcdonalds employee is president? what 'productive labor' did Lenin, or Stalin, or Trotsky perform beyond their administrative and managerial functions? were they secretly fucking farmers between leading revolutionary armies?

>>2617360
>do you not think that communism requires specialists in organization and management?
Of course it does. But these specialists should also have first hand knowledge of what they're organizing and managing, and a personal stake in how it's organized and managed.

>do you really think communism is when mcdonalds employee is president?
Yes.

>what 'productive labor' did Lenin, or Stalin, or Trotsky perform beyond their administrative and managerial functions? were they secretly fucking farmers between leading revolutionary armies?
Note how th Soviet Union ultimately failed to achieve the long-term goal of achieving a classless, stateless society, and is no longer in existence. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, there's something to be learned here?

>Sounds crazy, I know, but I think Xi-fans should at least consider the flaws of China's "Do nothing, win" strategy,
But they aren't doing nothing. China is pouring resources into infrastructure development, setting up to transition to the next stage of socialism, and ensuring the PLA is modern and ready.

>>2617404
>and ensuring the PLA is modern and ready.
For what?