I think China is socialist and every developing state should take up its policy.
>but china is le capitalist!
Okay, we can have Chinese capitalism then, it's clearly better than what we have now.
Am I missing something? Why don't we just replicate China's policy? I don't care if it's a Chinese or American cat as long as I feel worthy of living.
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
for sure let me know when China puts a dollar in my pocket
Economically, China is democratic socialist, an arrangement that retards the contradictions within capitalism, rather than eliminating them. It is, if anything, vastly more reactionary than unfetted capital, because it aims to keep it perpetually in a lower stage. Politically, China is illiberal, but the absence of liberalism is not the presence of socialism; if it were, ᴉuᴉlossnW would too be considered a socialist.
>>2818200The NEP was a highly restricted temporary measure to get the Soviet Union from emerging capitalism to higher-stage capitalism, so that they could then step in and move to socialism.
The CPC and its sycophants insist that China is "just building up the productive forces", but, as the successful transition from the NEP into a planned economy most clearly shows, China has had these productive forces for a long time now. There really is no excuse.
>>2818187Of course it is, its textbook bourgeois socialism. I am eagerly awaiting an IRON sex robot.
>>2818369>The NEP was a highly restricted temporary measure to get the Soviet Union from emerging capitalism to higher-stage capitalism, so that they could then step in and move to socialism.it's easy to declare that the NEP ended in 1928 after Stalin rose to power, but in practice the USSR continued accepting foreign capital investment all through the 1930s. The USSR was doing "Dengism" the whole time.
<"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
<Certain comrades affirm that the Party acted wrongly in preserving commodity production after it had assumed power and nationalized the means of production in our country. They consider that the Party should have banished commodity production there and then. In this connection they cite Engels, who says: "With the seizing of the means of production by society, production of commodities is done away with, and, simultaneously, the mastery of the product over the producer". These comrades are profoundly mistaken. Let us examine Engels' formula. Engels' formula cannot be considered fully clear and precise, because it does not indicate whether it is referring to the seizure by society of all or only part of the means of production, that is, whether all or only part of the means of production are converted into public property. Hence, this formula of Engels' may be understood either way. Elsewhere in Anti-Duhring Engels speaks of mastering "all the means of production," of taking possession of "all means of production." Hence, in this formula Engels has in mind the nationalization not of part, but of all the means of production, that is, the conversion into public property of the means of production not only of industry, but also of agriculture. It follows from this that Engels has in mind countries where capitalism and the concentration of production have advanced far enough both in industry and in agriculture to permit the expropriation of all the means of production in the country and their conversion into public property. Engels, consequently, considers that in such countries, parallel with the socialization of all the means of production, commodity production should be put an end to. And that, of course, is correct. There was only one such country at the close of the last century, when Anti-Duhring was published - Britain. There the development of capitalism and the concentration of production both in industry and in agriculture had reached such a point that it would have been possible, in the event of the assumption of power by the proletariat, to convert all the country's means of production into public property and to put an end to commodity production.- Stalin, Economic Problems of the USSR, 1951
>>2818401What about the 1940s? And regardless, China has developed the productive forces more than enough to have a fully planned economy.
It's always the same shit:
>You either fulfill the prophecy and become communism
>Or you either win (actually, survive) against the bourgeoise world, whose demiurge used to be Britain but now is USA, and retort to some form of social democracy
You can't have both at the same time.
Communism is not about having capitalism be better than what we have now. It is about moving past capitalism entirely. Fuck you collaborationist pigs. I wish Lin Biao had survived and stuck every single roader on a bamboo spike.
>>2818438So you want maoist commodity production instead of dengist commodity production
>>2818449Socialist commodity production is possible. That is just lower stage socialism. Commodities are not the exploitative part of capitalism, they can be around in socialism for a while until use value is all that remains. It is exploitation that is the imminent evil.
I don’t think China is socialist (yet) but so far they’ve succeeded, it’s up to the class struggle in the party itself to push either forward or backward
>>2818452So whats your problem with dengist socialist commodity production?
>>2818506Bailing the US out from recession in 2008
>>2818508Socialist market economics, just like how Stalin bailed out the allies during WWII and Israel
I don't really see how China could be socialist when it is founded upon a strict separation of classes between rural and urban workers. The hukou system is antithetical to the abolition of the distinction between town and country called for by Marx. That Mao did not immediately overturn this feudal caste system, but instead employed it to punish his enemies, speaks to a streak of rancid opportunism which infects his thought. And whatever merits his revolution did have, they were destroyed by Deng.
>>2818509Those were very clearly long term strategic mistakes, ones forced on him for the short term survival of the republic, but mistakes nonetheless
>>2818511Yeah well excuse China's mistaking now
>>2818510Ah, but I do agree that China is overall in a better place than the United States and has greater potential for socialist reform. I don't necessarily think a second violent revolution is required in China, where as socialism will only come to the US through mass death and destruction.
>>2818512My real resentment with them lies in them arming the enemies of Maoists in Nepal and the Philippines, I get non intervention, but what happened in those places crossed that line very clearly.
>>2818514Lmao if you think the CPC would allow trotskyist entryism
>>2818515Maybe they were CIA
>>2818517I could maybe believe that about Shining Path, but NPA and the Maoists under Pranchanda before his surrender? Fuck no, you’re crazy
>>2818520The nepalese ones defended liberal multi party democracy over the class party, so they were color revolutionaries
the filipino ones were probably pushing drugs to the filipino proles poisoning them, so China funded the socialist Duterte to save the filipino workers
>>2818187>Okay, we can have Chinese capitalism thenIf you just want this then just vote for your country's succdem party and stop GLARPing as a communist
>>2818526it wont be the same because theirs has chinese characteristics and chinese people are smarter, tidier, and more clean than european barbaric scum
>>2818527chinese characteristics have better aesthetics than the rest of the socialdemocratic world
>>2818524You’re missing context for Nepal and lying about the Philippines. In Nepal when it was clear Prachanda was winning the war, Nepali Congress called up Hu Jintao and Manmohan Singh and had them threaten to invade Nepal lest Prachanda agree to multiparty democracy. Duterte, far from being a socialist, is a landlord who kept the Hacienda system afloat and used the “drug war” to kick peasants off their land and force them into debt slavery or death in the bush. The CPP, despite claiming MLM, predate the Shining Path by 20 years.
>>2818526Pic 1: Social democracy in the rest of the world
Pic 2: Social democracy in China
>>2818529Nepal and Philippines both looked like turds, it is obvious that their fake "communists" did not develop the nation, China made the right choice
>>2818531Its because China is almost fully atheist
>>2818532And now Nepal and the Philippines are both in the hands of outright US puppets, great strategy. Almost as good as training UNITA and Yoweri Museveni
>>2818534Its part of the greater strategy of Xi, since China is winning
>>2818534If filipinos and nepalese like communism so much, why don't they move to China where it actually works? China is like the home of the proletairat.
>>2818535Or they have good domestic politics and bad international politics, these don’t have to be mutually exclusive. The stuff I’m bitching about predates Xi anyway.
>>2818536Prachanda for governor of Tibet!
>>2818537If international politics are so bad, why is China the number #1 strongest most developed richest global power that everyone is reliant on?
>>2818539This is exactly what I meant, yes
>>2818539Hey ultra, real movement that abolishes the present state of things, i.e. before iphone 5 there was iphone 4 and for China before cashless society there was a cash society
>>2818540Because of its internal development strategy, not its borderline reactionary international politics
>>2818544Whats internal and international for China though? The whole world belongs to China almost
>>2818545>extensive welfare state>china no?It is a welfare state though, they literally wipe people's asses after shitting. China takes care of its people.
>independent workers unionWhat the fuck do you want independence for? Autonomist nonsense.
>GDP China and Israel are business partners so this doesn't matter.
Conclusion: China and Israel are both fine social democracies, but China is better.
>>2818549China is better because 1. it is not religious 2. it has better aesthetics 3. it is bigger 4. it has better things and more things 5. more innovation
compare this fucking filthy shitty slum called jerusalem that looks like it was made out of clay to the skyscrapers in china
>>2818550also China is currently not being bombed to shit so yes China wins
Israel should look at China's example and instead of getting into 10000 wars at once it should make trade partners out of its enemies instead
>>2818404>What about the 1940s? That was WW2 so economic cooperation with the Germans ended but economic cooperation with the Americans and British continued.
>China has developed the productive forces more than enough to have a fully planned economy.You think in absolute and not relative. Absolutely China is much more developed in terms of productive forces, but relatively it is still locked in a geopolitical struggle with the most powerful empire on earth which has thousands more nuclear weapons than it, and which has 800 offshore bases and a navy all over the world. It is the power of China relative to the capitalist world which determines its ability to go "full communist" without being invaded and destroyed. Only once China has the upper hand against the whole capitalist world (which it plans on having this by 2050) can it begin to export socialist revolution the same way the CIA currently exports bourgeois counter-revolution.
>>2818545of course israel has higher GDP when it lives off of endless gibs from the burger reich
>>2818187Indeed bro, China will become fully socialist in two more weeks
>>2818580The pure socialists' ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.
How is the Chinese proletariat involved in politics?
>>2818835
Commodity production has been abolished in China already. Deflation happens because no one is buying treats because their citizens are all satisfied. You are looking at an advanced communist economy but because you're dumb you don't understand how to contextualize it. Low spending is portrayed as a bad thing in bourgeois propaganda but if you think about it you will realize that's because the average Chinese citizen doesn't need to buy anything and feels no need to engage in mindless consumption.
>>2818851
>Chinese have typ doe (tiny yellow peckers)
And yet they obviously get more sex, because their population is the largest in the world
btw Chinese simps are fascists as proven by this post
>>2818527 so racebaitibg is a valid response
>>2819331>lasallean bernsteinite What does a figure of the second internationale who got killed in a duel before he could even have a political career and an economist have to do with this? Can you explain with resorting to buzzwords?
>>2819332Can you spare me your concern-trolling routine and stop pretending you don't know what I'm talking about?
>>2819334Concern trolling? Bro, you are spamming words and categories you have no understanding of, lol
>>2818506My problem is not Dengist commodity production it is Dengist labour exploitation, dengist lack of class struggle and existence of an imperialist capitalist class that is not being liquidated, Dengist neoliberalism and Dengist imperialism.
>>2819337Thank you for admitting you are a loser who read to little and talks to much
>>2818369China doesn't believe in socialism in one country, which is why they need to build up the productive forces to confront the west
Unique IPs: 19