>Gigabazed EditionA thread for the harmonious discussion related to the saviour of socialism, the uplifter of nations, the king of cooperation, the soviet of SOVL, the enjoyer of empathy, the ally of Africa, the demigod of development, the bureaucracy for banter, the prince of ping pong, the lobotomizer of labour aristocracy, the protector against proxy wars, the sponsor of sophisticated sciences and culture, the guarantor of gommunism, the Proletarian Dictatorship of Chynah™.
Original threads:
https://archive.ph/S2XYAhttps://archive.ph/Ytckvleftypol.org archives:
https://archive.is/https://leftypol.org/leftypol/res/30501.htmlbunekrchan.xyz archives:
https://archive.is/https://bunkerchan.xyz/leftypol/res/8925.htmlhttps://archive.is/yrBUNhttps://archive.is/pCecrprevious thread
>>2786133 The worst excess of the cultural revolution was when they bullied Soong Ching Ling for not dissolving the KMT revolutionary committee, she really didn’t deserve it.
It’s up to anyone calling China capitalist or shitting on their worker co ops to come up with a positive alternative, not just post the Marx quote about the real movement.
>>2832456>worker co opsTo 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.
- Friedrich Engels, Letter to Otto Von Boenigk In Breslau, August 21, 1890
https://thequantuminsider.com/2026/06/05/chinese-scientists-demonstrate-quantum-random-access-memory-architecture-aimed-at-solving-data-bottleneck/Chinese Scientists Demonstrate Quantum Random Access Memory Architecture Aimed at Solving Data BottleneckInsider Brief
Researchers at Zhejiang University experimentally demonstrated a quantum random access memory (QRAM) architecture on a superconducting quantum processor, a step toward improving how quantum computers access classical data.
The team implemented four-bit and eight-bit QRAM systems using a bucket-brigade architecture, achieving query fidelities of up to about 81% and 60%, respectively, according to a study published in Nature Physics.
The demonstration remains at the proof-of-concept stage, with significant challenges in scaling, accuracy, error correction and hardware development before QRAM could support applications such as drug discovery, fraud detection or quantum-enhanced AI.
https://pandaily.com/china-achieves-mass-production-breakthrough-with-360tb-glass-jun2026China Achieves Mass Production Breakthrough with 360TB Glass Hard Drives Researchers at Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST) have achieved small-scale mass production of glass-based hard drives, a breakthrough that could transform enterprise cold data storage. Each glass disc can store a staggering 360 terabytes of data across 400 stacked layers, using laser "carving" technology that writes data into the internal structure of the glass medium.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3351241/china-unveils-worlds-first-coal-fuel-cell-can-produce-electricity-zero-emissionChina unveils world’s first coal fuel cell that can produce electricity with zero emissionNew technology developed by Chinese scientists achieves higher energy efficiency than burning while eliminating carbon dioxide emissions
Good morning, fellow China-enjoyers!
It seems we start this thread with leftcom spam this time.
>>2832469The way you deal with any leftcom is to ask them to deal with a positive alternative, they can’t, at least anarchists argue for different structural models, you can’t get shit out of a leftcom except the Marx quote about “the real movement”
who is xi jinping successor?
>>2833329If you dont work you dont eat. You want them to be lazing about at home contributing nothing to society like westerners?
>>2833733Prolecattle ought to accept the guidance of the party and start a small business if they don't want to be poor. Socialism is not free treats y'all. It is about treats purchased for wages and keeping the GDP growth high. If you don't attend to national wellbeing by contributing your work to a business, you are harming the construction of socialism.
>>2833329how do i know this isn't hong kong or taiwan
>>2833329It's only solveable by unionizing and sharing the work equitably.
>>2833854>>2833329I mean, I judge by taxi/uber/whatever you call it drivers in my area, in Russia. Everyone is backstabbing everyone else to get the customer, they have a phone that distributes calls to drivers, but every driver gives thier customers their own phone, so that they don't share customers with other drivers.
>>2833854>It's only solveable by unionizing and sharing the work equitably.rideshare apps in the USA were specifically created to destroy old entrenched taxi unions, and the expansion into food delivery apps has a similar effect on delivery drivers, even though they were never unionized in the first place, they at least worked at the same pizza place and could have theoretically unionized. the phone undoes the socialization of labor. the factory created a common ground where proletarians associated with each other, but the phone turns the proletarians into individuals competing with one another. Atomized. Alienated. Unable to speak with other workers directly except 1 at a time perhaps.
>>2833857>Atomized. Alienated. Unable to speak with other workers directly except 1 at a time perhaps.Ai speak
>>2833858I used to want to write novels so I just write in a faggy dramatic way. Now I definitely don't want to do it anymore because I'll get accused of being Chat GPT even when I write my own shit.
Also did you have an issue with what I actually said or just the fact that I inserted a couple of 1 word sentences in there?
>>2833868It was a joke. I know what parcellation is. Or is it syntax parallelism? Oh who cares
>>2833739You are being sarcastic but this is how China keeps beating thr shit out of yankees. They know socialism isn't just gibs like western losers think but hard work
>>2833876it's both. china works really fucking hard but also receives a better social safety net.
>>2833329I love capitalism but red
>>2832463obsolete bc dna data storage doesnt even need to be kept cold. should work in a decade or so
>>2833329the single two things that are most aesthetically cyberpunk/William Gibson coded in the modern day are e-bike delivery drivers and those disposable cherry banana mango ice vapes that middle schoolers smoke
>>2833329nice propaganda Mr. Langley but the PRC is aware of these problems and working to expand labor rights for gig economy workers:
https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3351571/china-outlines-new-labour-protection-plan-nations-200-million-gig-workers<The 12-point plan – issued by the State Council, China’s cabinet, and the Communist Party’s powerful Central Committee – pledges stronger labour protections for “new employment groups”, or gig workers, across a number of areas.<The document calls for timely and fair wage payments, a stronger social security system, enhanced labour protections during extreme weather, and greater transparency in how platforms’ algorithms allocate orders, price fees and set time limits, among other measures. >>2834495I can't find the source CCP document on the English internet but here's an article with more details + other article sources:
https://www.metaintro.com/blog/china-gig-worker-rules-200-million-platform-workers-2026>According to coverage from Bloomberg, Semafor and The Star, the rules require platforms to:<Pay at least the local minimum wage for hours worked<Enforce maximum working hours, after which the app must stop sending orders to a worker<Use standardized written contracts with platform workers<Disclose how algorithms set pay, dispatch tasks and impose penalties<Move toward broader social insurance coverage, including pensions and work-injury benefits<Hit a 2027 target for standardizing labor practices across the platform economy >>2834509>>2834495Sure, they are fixing their mistakes, but why didn't they anticipate it all and prevented mistakes from ever happening in the first place? CCP is not communist at all!
>>2833884>I love capitalism but redAufhebung is better translated as sublate than abolish. And what does sublate mean?
Sublate means to negate or eliminate something while preserving it as a partial element in a synthesis. That is what the Chinese have done with Capital. To negate it while preserving it as a partial element within their national economy. The birdcage.
I can appreciate chinas economic policy, as centrally planned as it is, it works like a charm to bring the greatest increase in standard of living in world history. What I’m not as big a fan of are the genocides and colonialism. Free Tibet!
>>2834626>Aufhebung is better translated as sublate than abolish.Maybe for Hegelians with their incomprehensible idealist gobbledygook, but Marx is pretty clear that he means abolish.
>>2834625damn you right I guess China is all mustache-twirling villains who are merely pretending to be communists just like every mainstream western media outlet has been saying for decades… it's over Xisters
>>2834637Necessary communism in question is accumulation of capital for the purposes of common good and development of productive forces. It was menshevik position that they needed a capitalist class to rule and call the shots in order to reach socialism, which was deeply retarded
>>2834631>>2834637'Aufhebung' is explicitly used in magical contexts though. 'Aufheben' literally literally means to lift, or to lift up, often used in common expression like to lift a curse or to lift a spell.
>>2834650I love how all the other points are ignored and it focuses on those points marx thought were already outdated during his time.
>>2834626Except China is as dependent on capital as everyone else and its entire economy is dependent on the fact that everyone buys Chinese treats. Whatever the birdcage is, it's not for capitalism, it may be for the CPC
>china thread
>no discussion on recent nk visit
what did I expect honestly?
>>2834637I'm not criticizing China's method of socialist construction, I'm saying that Marx argued that communism was the "abolition" of private property, anarchy of production, generalized commodity production, etc. He meant that these things are to be (eventually) done away with entirely, not kept around in some vaguely defined "sublated" form. This is obvious if you actually look at the more detailed descriptions of what they mean than go beyond a single word. Marx and Engels speak regularly of centralizing all instruments of production in the hands of the state, an economy where there is no competition between individual producers, etc.
>>2834654>but so do AES states if you look at the international situation so it always rang hollow to meThis is why communism also seeks to abolish nation states and create a world socialist republic.
>>2834711>I'm not criticizing China's method of socialist constructionYou should.
>I'm saying that Marx argued that communism was the "abolition" of private property, anarchy of production, generalized commodity production, etc.Especially since you understand not only the above, but also
>Marx and Engels speak regularly of centralizing all instruments of production in the hands of the state, an economy where there is no competition between individual producers, etc. A the above was true until the Dengite counterrevolution.
>communism also seeks to abolish nation states and create a world socialist republic.Let's remind ourselves how comradely China aids
>the Africans? <monopolizes Congolese natural resources like mines for chinese capitalist national gain, Congolese proletariat hyperexploited >The Koreans? <Lobbies and sanctions the DPRK in order to hinder its nuclear deterrence strategy, with the USA. Today pretends it never happened instead of publishing a self-criticism. >The Nepalese neighbors? <Supports the monarchy and big bourgeoisie for stable ROI, does jack shit when sycophant rightist MLs control Nepalese government for years; not even trying the mere nominal, superficial semblance of a success story of Chinese "socialist internationalism". Lets Nepal collapse into NED-sponsored lumpen-bourgeois chaos instead. Oh well! Nothing about the struggle for our successful victory over the bourgeoisie hinges on the Chinese. When we succeed it will act as a flashpoint for the chinese workers to correct course and liquidate their reactionary classes as well, starting with the primary antagonists - their national bourgeoisie, bureaucrat monopoly-capitalists in the CPC and the middle and subsequently petty bourgeoisie. Xi's beloved SEZ's will have stopped because of
our actions. Taiwan will have become toothless because of
our actions.
Stop fucking around.
>>2834659>marx thought were already outdated during his time.expand on this
>>2834766>we will liquidate billions yeah it's a larp unless you get your hands on nukes, and then it's a tragedy and a step backwards
>>2834644>It was menshevik position that they needed a capitalist class to rule and call the shots in order to reach socialismnot a menshevik sympathizer but this sounds like an oversimplification of what their position actually was with regards to Russia
>>2834711>Marx and Engels speak regularly of centralizing all instruments of production in the hands of the state, an economy where there is no competition between individual producers, etc. To simplify, an economy which forbids commodity production and exchange.
>>2834784You indeed LARP as your conception of communist praxis boils down to
- buy chinese commodities
- dress up
- tip astroturfed "communist streamers" virtually
- fall in line for harmonious coexistence with your chief comrade at your workplace (your boss who only makes millions, not billions)
Get tarred and feathered
>>2834766>When we succeedYou know what? I'm too old for this larping shit, you'll never going to do nothing ever, uyghur.
>>2834800Now execute your cope-cycle, eternal eurocom boomer-brain invertebrate:
>>2834797 >>2834797random accusations making up shit i never said
>>2834797> buy chinese commoditiesonly if I need them. I think my microwave might be chinese
> dress upas what?
> tip astroturfed "communist streamers" virtually why would i ever give my wages to larpers and grifters?
> fall in line for harmonious coexistence with your chief comrade at your workplace (your boss who only makes millions, not billionssas opposed to what? unionize? quit and find another job? sure. larp as a militant when nobody else around me is willing to do that ? suicidal at the present.
>Get tarred and featheredby your words? go harrass an actual porky forum. there's crypto chuds everywhere but you pick this site for some reason.
>>2834803Not the same person, retard. You will never kill nor expropriate anything or anybody. Grow up.
>>2834797How many killed and crippled by the Red Guards would have been needed? How many killed by crossfire between PLA and Red Guards with zero growth or technological innovation would have been an acceptable price to pay for ideological purity?
>>2834844Excuse me while I bind the feet of my harem and court eunuchs in the name of Mao
>>2834860Take that up with the Marcyites and LaRouchite's running Yankee "Leninism" into capitulationist loop #934875436.
PSL, CPI, ACP - all Trotskyist.
Read Bordiga >>2834870If Bordiga’s critiques were worth anything he would have been the head of state in Italy, he’s every bit the loser Trotsky is. What makes Lenin and Mao worth reading and engaging with is the fact they won.
>>2834879>they wonDo workers own the means of production in China?
>>2835020He won more than Bordiga, Bordiga never even picked up a gun and went into battle
How much do productive forces have to develop until we can get qualitative changes in China?
When will we see the end of private property, the stock market, commodity production, etc.
I'd be a lot more trusting of China's intentions if there were some concrete promises of this. I keep hearing that 2050 a next stage of socialism will be reached but I don't see anything concrete by the government about this beyond more development of productive forces.
https://dn720006.ca.archive.org/0/items/on-the-three-stages-in-the-development-of-socialism/On%20the%20Three%20Stages%20in%20the%20Development%20of%20Socialism.pdfIs there any equivalent to this that is supported by the state?
>>2835145according to people here,it's when they produce more and are at least militarily on par with the entirety of NATO combined
>>2835145>I don't see anything concrete by the government about this beyond more development of productive forces.maybe because you dont really look. They have shifted from full growth strategy to "high quality growth" (meaning trying to climb value chain, and being a lot more careful of long term sustainability, work condition and environment), and as the state direct much of the investment, this is a big change. At the same time, they're focusing on increasing social services availability and quality, especially in healthcare and education
>>2835530They're probably well past that point. Russia alone is outproducing all of NATO in some areas, and Chinese industrial capacity is far greater.
>>2835648None of those are qualitative changes that couldn´t fit right into a liberal democracy. Sustainible techology or welfare programs aren´t socialism.
When will they abolish private property? If they don´t have a concrete answer to this why should I trust their commitment to communism?
>>2835664What good does abolishing private property do for China? Why should they care about communism more than their prosperity and wellbeing?
>>2835650Why are they bogged down if they are overproducing so much?
>>2835708Because drones have changed the paradigm and made any kind of large scale operations impossible for both sides. Similar to machine guns and artillery in WW1.
>>2833329>>2834495The gig economy is inherently anti-human. China takes an L if it doesn't destroy the gig economy. People should get used to deliveries taking time. Plebs are too spoiled.
>inb4 what about an emergency purchase?In such cases, get delivery drones. But I can guarantee you that such situations are very rare. Get used to slower deliveries plebs, it's good for you.
>>2835729so he was an adventurist
no wonder italian communists lost
Is anyone else studying Chinese? I've been going to Chinese classes for one year already and I'll start the B1/HSK3 on September
>>2835823de-desertification is so cool tbh
>>2835823>The Great Green Wall, officially known as the Three-North Shelter Forest Program (simplified Chinese: 三北防护林; traditional Chinese: 三北防護林; pinyin: Sānběi Fánghùlín), is a series of human-planted windbreaking forest strips (shelterbelts) in China, designed to hold back the expansion of the Gobi Desert[1] and provide timber to the local population.[2] The program started in 1978 and is planned to complete around 2050Why does every project seem to end around 2050 bros? Could it really be that "moderately prosperous by 2035" and "socialism by 2050" aren't mere slogans? What do the local ultras think?
>>2835853Agreed, it's amazing.
Communists make the desert bloom but based and real, not fake and gay settler cringe.
>>2835866To compare, Stalin's great transformation of nature was cancelled, only select shelterbelts were planted in around Kazakhstan, and as a result, today, both south Siberian/Uralic Russia and Kazakhstan and other -stans have dry winds and water shortages
>>2836926Lenin and Stalin. Trotsky was a saboteur who uttered "neither peace nor war, but the army must be disbanded" nonsense in official talks, giving Germans an excuse (alongside opposition trying to murder a German ambassador) to continue the war.
>>2836926Lenin.
you know what most of Trotsky's political career on 'Russian' soil was defined by? Being Lenin's opp.
>>2836946Trotsky as a leader of Russian military was a compromise by Lenin to let opposition have a say while castrating them by Lenin having a direct almost dictatorial power over the military. It was like a more general policy of forming committees of half+1 belonging to Leninist side and the other half to opposition, with chairman being Leninist and "vice-chairman" being of opposition.
All roads lead back to the ICP.
>>2836967>half are missing or disappeared or ???Are you seriously going to claim that Kollontai went missing?
China never left the oriental mode of production and that’s a good thing because it’s superior to capitalism, socialism, and feudalism
The Soviet Union under Stalin contributed on the partition of Palestine thus contributing to the rise of the abomination known as Israel. Stalin was a fucking traitor to the working class.
>>2836971https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1927/11/06.htmNow, after the victory of the dictatorship of the proletariat, when everybody has seen for himself to what Marxism leads and what its victory may signify, Social-Democracy is no longer able to flaunt the banner of Marxism, can no longer coquet with the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat without creating a certain danger for capitalism. Having long ago broken with the spirit of Marxism, it has found itself compelled to discard also the banner of Marxism; it has openly and unambiguously taken a stand against the offspring of Marxism, against the October Revolution, against the first dictatorship of the proletariat in the world.
Now it has had to dissociate itself from Marxism, and has actually done so; for under present conditions one cannot call oneself a Marxist unless one openly and devotedly supports the first proletarian dictatorship in the world, unless one wages a revolutionary struggle against one's own bourgeoisie, unless one creates the conditions for the victory of the dictatorship of the proletariat in one's own country.
A chasm has opened between Social-Democracy and Marxism. Henceforth, the only bearer and bulwark of Marxism is Leninism, communism.
But matters did not end there. The October Revolution went further than drawing a demarcation line between Social Democracy and Marxism; it relegated Social-Democracy to the camp of the direct defenders of capitalism against the first proletarian dictatorship in the world. When Messieurs the Adlers and Bauers, the Welses and Levis, the Longuets and Blums abuse the "Soviet regime" and extol parliamentary "democracy," these gentlemen mean that they are fighting and will continue to fight for the restoration of the capitalist order in the U.S.S.R., for the preservation of capitalist slavery in the "civilised" states.
Present-day Social-Democratism is an ideological support of capitalism. Lenin was a thousand times right when he said that the present-day Social-Democratic politicians are "real agents of the bourgeoisie in the working-class movement, the labour lieutenants of the capitalist class," that in the "civil war between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie" they would inevitably range themselves "on the side of the 'Versaillese' against the 'Communards.'" 2
It is impossible to put an end to capitalism without putting an end to Social-Democratism in the labour movement. That is why the era of dying capitalism is also the era of dying Social-Democratism in the labour movement.
The great significance of the October Revolution consists, among other things, in the fact that it marks the inevitable victory of Leninism over Social-Democratism in the world labour movement.
The era of the domination of the Second International and of Social-Democratism in the labour movement has ended.
The era of the domination of Leninism and of the Third International has begun.
>>2837595https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/dec/x01.htmThis is about modern leftists, who prefer garden over jungle:
>Social-chauvinism is a consummated opportunism. That is beyond doubt. The alliance with the bourgeoisie used to be ideological and secret. It is now public and unseemly. Social-chauvinism draws its strength from nowhere else but this alliance with the bourgeoisie and the General Staffs. It is a falsehood for anybody (including Kautsky) to say that the "masses" of proletarians have turned towards chauvinism; nowhere have the masses been asked (with the exception, perhaps, of Italy, where a discussion went on for nine months prior to the declaration of war, and where the masses also were against the Bissolati party). The masses were dumbfounded, panic-stricken, disunited, and crushed by the state of martial law. The free vote was a privilege of the leaders alone—and they voted for the bourgeoisie and against the proletariat! It is ridiculous and monstrous to consider opportunism an inner-party phenomenon! All Marxists in Germany, France, and other countries have always stated and insisted that opportunism is a manifestation of the bourgeoisie's influence over the proletariat; that it is a bourgeois labour policy, an alliance between an insignificant section of near-proletarian elements and the bourgeoisie. Having for decades to mature in conditions of "peaceful" capitalism, opportunism was so mature by 1914-15 that it proved an open ally of the bourgeoisie. Unity with opportunism means unity between the proletariat and its national bourgeoisie, i.e., submission to the latter, a split in the international revolutionary working class.<that it is a bourgeois labour policy, an alliance between an insignificant section of near-proletarian elements and the bourgeoisie.<Having for decades to mature in conditions of "peaceful" capitalism
>In its issue of April 1915, Preussische Jahrbücher, a conservative German journal, published an article by a Social-Democrat, a member of the Social-Democratic Party, who concealed his identity behind the pseudonym of Monitor. This opportunist blurted out the truth regarding the substance of the policy pursued by the entire world bourgeoisie towards the working-class movement of the twentieth century. The latter can neither be brushed aside nor suppressed by brute force, he says. It must be demoralised from within, by buying its top section. It was exactly in this manner that the Anglo-French bourgeoisie has been acting for decades, by buying up the trade-union leaders, the Millerands, the Briands and Co. It is in this manner that the German bourgeoisie is now acting. The Social-Democratic Party's behaviour, Monitor says to (and in essence in the name of) the bourgeoisie, is "irreproachable" in the present war (i.e., it is irreproachably serving the bourgeoisie against the proletariat). The process of the transformation" of the Social-Democratic Party into a national liberal-labour party is proceeding excellently. It would, however, be dangerous to the bourgeoisie, Monitor adds, if the party were to turn to the right; "it must retain the character of a workers' party with socialist ideals. On the day it gives that up, a new party will arise to take up the rejected programme, giving it a still more radical formu lation" (Preussische Jahrbücher, 1915, No. 4, pp. 50-51).<It would, however, be dangerous to the bourgeoisie, Monitor adds, if the party were to turn to the right; "it must retain the character of a workers' party with socialist ideals. On the day it gives that up, a new party will arise to take up the rejected programme, giving it a still more radical formu lationhttps://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1924/foundations-leninism/introduction.htm
>It is usual to point to the exceptionally militant and exceptionally revolutionary character of Leninism. This is quite correct. But this specific feature of Leninism is due to two causes: firstly, to the fact that Leninism emerged from the proletarian revolution, the imprint of which it cannot but bear; secondly, to the fact that it grew and became strong in clashes with the opportunism of the Second International, the fight against which was and remains an essential preliminary condition for a successful fight against capitalism. It must not be forgotten that between Marx and Engels, on the one hand, and Lenin, on the other, there lies a whole period of undivided domination of the opportunism of the Second International, and the ruthless struggle against this opportunism could not but constitute one of the most important tasks of Leninism.<the fact that it grew and became strong in clashes with the opportunism of the Second International, the fight against which was and remains an essential preliminary condition for a successful fight against capitalism >>2837627>The first contradiction is the contradiction between labour and capital. Imperialism is the omnipotence of the monopolist trusts and syndicates, of the banks and the financial oligarchy, in the industrial countries. In the fight against this omnipotence, the customary methods of the working class-trade unions and cooperatives, parliamentary parties and the parliamentary struggle-have proved to be totally inadequate. Either place yourself at the mercy of capital, eke out a wretched existence as of old and sink lower and lower, or adopt a new weapon–this is the alternative imperialism puts before the vast masses of the proletariat. Imperialism brings the working class to revolution.<working class-trade unions and cooperatives, parliamentary parties and the parliamentary struggle-have proved to be totally inadequate
>The third contradiction is the contradiction between the handful of ruling, "civilised" nations and the hundreds of millions of the colonial and dependent peoples of the world. Imperialism is the most barefaced exploitation and the most inhumane oppression of hundreds of millions of people inhabiting vast colonies and dependent countries. The purpose of this exploitation and of this oppression is to squeeze out super-profits. But in exploiting these countries imperialism is compelled to build these railways, factories and mills, industrial and commercial centers. The appearance of a class of proletarians, the emergence of a native intelligentsia, the awakening of national consciousness, the growth of the liberation movement–such are the inevitable results of this "policy." The growth of the revolutionary movement in all colonies and dependent countries without exception clearly testifies to this fact. This circumstance is of importance for the proletariat inasmuch as it saps radically the position of capitalism by converting the colonies and dependent countries from reserves of imperialism into reserves of the proletarian revolution.<The appearance of a class of proletarians, the emergence of a native intelligentsia, the awakening of national consciousness, the growth of the liberation movement–such are the inevitable results of this "policy." The growth of the revolutionary movement in all colonies and dependent countries without exception clearly testifies to this fact.So, in short, Stalin was a Third Worldist, like Mao and modern China. Funny that
Check this out. Prices decrease due to an increased competition, this means what? That's right, a bad scary word: involution! As opposed to monopolization of the market in the West, where it's self-evidently a healthy and natural thing, and since this doesn't happen in China, this means China is doing something very, very wrong and unnatural!
https://www.prcleader.org/post/china-s-economic-involution-state-and-business-strategies
>China’s economic involution, characterized by cutthroat, race-to-the-bottom competition, is a symptom rooted in its political and fiscal structure. During the recent economic downturn, the central government, local governments, and businesses entered a self-reinforcing cycle. The central growth targets and debt-reduction pressures pushed local governments to expand investment in state-favored industries, creating low-profit competition and oversupply. The declining revenues further reduced demand, but businesses must expand production to survive. An examination of real estate and electric vehicles suggests that these sectors share similar dynamics: excessive capacity, slow turnover, declining prices, and high financial leverage. But they also differ in terms of dominant players, market expansion success, and the role of local governments. The central government’s recent anti-involution campaign has encountered difficulties because, while it cracks down on over-investment and excessive competition, it simultaneously pursues GDP targets and industrial growth. Instead, the central government should realign its policy goals with local actors. >>2836967this is such a lazy pic and leftypol debunked it like in 2016
>>2837968I wouldn't consider myself an expert on the Chinese economy but isn't oversupply and falling prices in low profit industries a recipe for a crisis unless they press the communism button?
>>2837983Almost all the old bolsheviks died by 1940
>>2837991It's crisis only for capitalists. For socialists, it just means everything gets cheaper. That's how you in the West can still afford your daily goods, because if there was no China, modern capitalist crisis would have happened back in 00s, and by 26, you would have been a generation deep in the crisis, with WW3 on the doorsteps
>>2837991>>2838026I'm not making sense, sorry.
Okay. Socialists think this way because their mode of production makes it so company earnings are workers' wages. Since production = consumption, it autobalances into low profit margins meaning no decrease to workers' wages, meaning workers just consume more goods with stagnant wages - at worst. At normal or best scenario, wages are actually growing due to increased production and increased sales.
Under capitalism, this doesn't happen. Instead, you have talks about preserving profits by establishing cartels and monopolies and a bewildered gaze at the suggestion that monopolism is bad and counterproductive to increasing country's wealth.
And since capitalism - or, rather, imperialism - is in crisis, there's war on the horizon. if crisis was permanent from 00s without China's socialist production of goods, instead of rapid collapse of today, we would be on the verge of WW3 already as imperialists would be trying to redraw markets and borders. Instead, we only getting to this point because a socialist economy supplying the world with cheap goods is offsetting capitalism's ills
>>2838020Because they were old
<*badum tss*No, seriously, half of Stalin's kills died of old age.
Hey so if China is allegedly Actually Existing Socialism why is it doing what it can to keep the global economy afloat and allow America and Israel to wage war on Iran with impunity?
china is a right wing society. ive been all over asia, china and japan are the most petite bourgeoise, and racist (toward black even, and more poor asian countries) societies. ive literally been to every asian nation other than NK and can confirm it. china was like if capitalism was done without the ills of multiculturalism and individualism but its definitely a right wing society and government lmao
>>2838158Btw these two nations dont even like their own people who get too dark they bleach their skin and see the darkie asians as poor field workers. japan and china are the most petite-bourgeiose asian societies, maybe throw korea in the mix too, but even south korea is less racist and more aware of things going on. I could see south korea uniting under a socialist republic before i could see half of the chinese population suddenly dropping their bourgeiose values. i spent a lot of time in asia my dudes, and chinese people are very very nice and cool but their values and politics are anything but left. south koreans are more pro marxist than chinese, its the 2020s. china is basically just asias new america
>>2838146Why should China strive towards making anybody's life hell? China's improving quality of life of Chinese citizens, everything else is secondary.
Like, look at world's opinion on USA starting a war in the Middle East, resulting in great troubles for the world economy. It's so bad that people in the West are sympathizing with Iran, even, despite all the propaganda. Why should China take over the mantle of USA in creating troubles for the world, when benefits lie in the exact opposite - in helping everyone?
>>2837968>Another potentially problematic practice, associated with using low prices to increase sales volume, is to tacitly and systematically turn new cars into zero-mileage second-hand cars (零公里二手车), which has occurred in both domestic and export markets. The practice reduced a company’s existing stock, thereby easing overcapacity pressure, and at the same time artificially increasing sales volume by pricing cars at a used-car level without blatantly violating price regulations. Many car producers used such a strategy to create a false image of a hot-selling product. It also lowered the costs of after-sales service for customers (since used cars do not require such service), and, importantly, utilized state subsidies targeted at second-hand cars. Just as with informal IOU notes, regulators began to curb such practices in late 2025, but whether there will be real changes remains to be seen.[42]Wow, how horrible, new cars are being priced as used cars.
>However, such strategies have recently incurred increasing costs, showing warning signs. Smaller players may go out of business, especially when governments can no longer bail out firms. Levdeo, an EV company, received a loan of more than 1 billion yuan in 2018 from a local SOE owned by the Changle government in Shandong province to expand its business. But after the central government issued policies against such behavior, the Changle government decided in 2023 to cut off its finances. Levdeo’s owner fought back by exposing Changle’s party secretary, who forced the company to report a fake figure of 7 billion yuan in EV output, rather than the real figure of 2.5 billion yuan, to show an increased political achievement.[44] But Levdeo’s substantial sales decline and financing problems still forced it into bankruptcy. Similar stories occurred with Neta Auto, which adopted a low-price, negative-profit strategy to enter the market but ran out of financing from local government-backed state-investment firms across multiple localities (e.g., Tongxiang, Ningbo, Nanning) and entered into bankruptcy, with 26 billion yuan in debt and large unpaid service obligations to its suppliers.[45] In addition to Neta, Niutron, Weltmeister, HiPhi, Jidu, and Qoros recently went bankrupt as well. Large players like BYD may not face the same challenges, as their sales markets continue to expand domestically and internationally. However, the high-leverage finance model, which relies heavily on IOUs, rests entirely on the assumption that market sales must continuously expand.Wow, Chinese have a policy of letting private retards to fall? How dare they? Also, notice the implicit bias of "if they report corruption, the truth must be an even more horrible than reported", so that if there was one party official fake reporting it must mean that the real problem is much worse, lol
>Local governments, homeowners, and the majority of surviving businesses all have an interest in avoiding prices from further plunging.[52] That is why local governments have set a floor for pricing through direct supervision to avoid further race-to-the-bottom competition. And whenever price violations occur, local authorities intervene to stop them.[53] The state has also removed purchasing barriers and encouraged house purchasing to stimulate demand. As a consequence of deleveraging, the state is allowing over-leveraged firms to go through bankruptcy and restructuring (such as the recent case of Vanke), while keeping a watchful eye on prices. The fact that SOEs now increasingly dominate the sector also means the state can more easily use them as tools to control prices.Yeah, dude, it's not because it's SOEs now dominating the real estate that prices were allowed to be free, it's because all the petite bourgeois elements were crying and conspiring! Honestly, it's quite amazing how they manage to read direct quotes of Chinese government and then assume there to be a double meaning somewhere between the lines.
>In June 2025, the State Council issued a rule requiring small and medium enterprises to receive payments on time, directly challenging the widespread practice of IOUs in the EV sector. The auto industry association also issued a regulation in 2023 stating that a firm should not use irregular prices to disrupt fair market competition. But over time, these measures were not taken seriously as competition intensified.[54] Wow, let's see what will happen in 2027. I'm sure that the state will buckle under the pressure and bail out indebted companies or something, instead of putting in jail all the people violating regulations. Oh, and all of that is definitely to stop deflation and not to stop retards from imploding the market with unsustainable prices ala Tesla, AI companies, or those car ride apps or other attempts at monopolizing the market at low prices and then hiking up prices later when there is no competition anymore. How dare China be proactive in this and sink the wannabe monopolists?! It's involution! It's devaluation! reeee
etc etc and so and so forth *sniff*
Sometimes I want to take the dengpill just to get the copium you guys get
>>2837635>So, in short, Stalin was a Third Worldist, like Mao and modern China. Funny thatM3W post-dates Stalin and Mao. While all Marxism-Leninism advocates Anti-Imperialism and the struggle of oppressed nations, M3W goes a step further.
See
>>>/leftypol/2767836 written by a Haitian comrade, which distinguishes between ML-MZT, MLM, and M3W:
>In the 90s M3W is formed as less of a political force and more of… an art project, in North America. Their activity consists of media engagement, primarily online. Their "theoretical elaboration" (that the proletariat in any imperialist nation is structurally incapable of revolution) deviate from MLM and MZT theory and practice, while retaining the militant verbiage and symbolism. They don't last more than a decade in terms of noticeable output, are still technically existing today as "MIM (Prisons)" which also still just posts stuff online, which can be described as "bizarro US exceptionalism". China is going to be America, the capitalist state if it isn't already, so don't get your hopes up. China is imperialist after all.
How do Dengists justify China's support for Israel?
>>2838646>China is going to be Americathis is undialectical, unmaterialist, metaphysical, idealist, cyclical pseudhistory. it implies that nothing ever transforms or erodes. Even if China becomes the global capitalist hegemon, it will not govern exactly as the united states did. it will do some things very differently, just like the USA did some things very differently from the British empire. You erase the possibility of gradual transformation. I can understand being cynical and doubting the sincerity of Socialism With Chinese Characteristics, but what I don't understand is pretending that China is simply USA 2 when USA wasn't even British Empire 2.
>>2838977>>2838986China became one of Israel's largest trading partners. Bilateral trade expanded rapidly during the 2000s and 2010s, providing Israeli companies access to the world's second-largest economy and a major export market
https://www.cfr.org/articles/whats-behind-israels-growing-ties-chinaChinese firms invested heavily in Israeli technology, research, venture capital, and start-ups. China's interest was particularly focused on Israel's strengths in cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, semiconductors, agriculture, and medical technology.Chinese state-owned companies participated in major Israeli infrastructure projects, including ports, railways, tunnels, and transportation systems
From the 1980s through the early 2000s, China was a major customer for Israeli military technology. Israel transferred expertise, avionics, electronics, UAV technology, and other defence-related systems to China. Although this primarily benefited China militarily, it also generated substantial revenue for Israel's defence industry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Israel_relationsDespite increasingly pro-Palestinian rhetoric from Beijing after the Gaza war began, China has continued trade, investment, and diplomatic relations with Israel rather than imposing sanctions or severing ties
https://kinacentrum.se/en/publications/principles-and-pragmatism-chinas-evolving-approach-to-israel-and-palestine/https://www.inss.org.il/publication/china-taiwan-israel/ >>2839038holy shit this is crazy. you're right. Death to china! USA must save the world from evil zionist china
>>2838470That's maotism. Under Maoism, I meant Mao Zedong Thought
>>2839038Instead of blaming China, you should be pressuring your own government.
>>2839409but that requires effort and risk, i would much rather be mad at who the state department tells me to be mad at, but leftishly
>>2839408uygha you are fucking illiterate.
has anyone here actually ever been to CHINA?
>>2839553I already live in America, China’s siamese twin without which neither would exist
>>28358662049 will be the 100th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China. 2050 is just a nice round number.
>>2839553>has anyone here actually ever been to CHINA?There used to be a few Chinese anons here but I haven't seen them in well over a year.
How many industries are nationalized in China?
>>2840960China tends towards domination of sectors of economy by SOEs, not direct state control of entire sectors.
>>2840997That's not socialism
>>2841002Read Stalin. Or do you imply that Stalinist USSR was also not real socialism?
>>2841021Stalin’s USSR wasn’t socialism either, and that’s a good thing, socialism is bourgeois nonsense, it’s Hitler’s ideology
I don't read totalitarian opportunistic bureaucratic non-marxist non-leninist theory. All power to the soviets
>>2841029>All power to the soviets<says a TrotTrotsky defended Provisional Government and porkies in 1917, by the way. Trotsky's - and others, like Kamenev, Nogin, etc, instead of DIRECT SOVIET RULE supported PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED BY THE SOVIETS and opposed Lenin on demanding full power transferred to the Soviets.
>>2841037>>2841029This fact makes Trotsky the opportunist bureacrat, and also non-marxist and non-leninist.
>>2841044“… Comrade Trotsky, did not get on the practical center, which was called upon to lead the uprising. How can this be reconciled with the current notion about comrade Trotsky’s special role? … Yet there is nothing strange about it, for comrade Trotsky, who was a relative newcomer in our party in the period of October, did not, and could not have played any special role either in the party or in the October uprising … All talk about a special role of comrade Trotsky is a legend, spread by obliging ‘party’ gossip-mongers …” (Pravda, No.269, November 26, 1924.)
>>2841044Is this even a real quote?
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1918/11/06.htm
>A. Transcriber's Note Here the Moscow editors have omitted the concluding part of this paragraph in the original article, where Stalin mentions the Trotsky role in the revolution. The last complete English translation of this article was published 1936 by Lawrence and Wishart in the book The October Revolution, from which we cite the rest of the paragraph (op. cit p 30):
>"All practical work in connection with the organization of the uprising was done under the immediate direction of Comrade Trotsky, the president of the Petrograd Soviet. It can be stated with certainty that the Party is indebted primarily and principally to Comrade Trotsky for the rapid going over of the garrison to the side of the Soviet and the efficient manner in which the work of the Military-Revolutionary Committee was organized. The principal assistants of Comrade Trotsky were Comrades Antonov and Podvoisky."
>Trotsky mentions this omission in his The Stalin School of Falsification published 1937 (se the section "4. Letter to the Bureau of Party History (Part I)").
>The old Stalinist Molotov comments the matter in his conversations with Felix Chuev, published in english translation 1993 under the title Molotov Remembers: Inside Kremlin Politics. There we read (page 166):
>"The talk switched to Trotsky, and about Stalin's assessment of his acitivity in the article 'The October Revolution'. It turned out that a whole paragraph had been omitted from Stalin's collected works — Molotov brought his own volume, in which he had written in the margin what had appearrd in Stalin's original version — how Trotsky managed to win over the Petrograd garrison." So, there are two sources for this: Trotsky and Trotsky, because Chuev didn't do any real interviews with Molotov, Chuev printed his own fantasies in the West comparable to that ancient forgery "Khruschev remembers", and even named the same way "Molotov remembers". Are we surely sure that Trotsky didn't just insert a passage into Stalin's speech, and that Lawrence and Wishart didn't just insert Trotsky's fantasies into Stalin's mouth?
>>2841088>>2841077From Russian wiki on Order 1 of Petrograd Soviet:
>According to the memoirs of the Mensheviks D. O. Zaslavsky and V. A. Kantorovich, while the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Soviet was occupied with the question of power in connection with the upcoming negotiations with the Provisional Committee of the State Duma on the creation of a Provisional Government, a stormy meeting of the soldiers' section was taking place in the adjacent room, chaired by N. D. Sokolov. Sokolov also headed the commission for editing the proposed measures and drafting the order — however, as Zaslavsky and Kantorovich wrote, “… there was essentially no leadership at all. The proclamation was given the outward appearance of an order. It was composed by several people based on the instructions of the meeting, where unknown soldiers came to the rostrum, made proposals, each more radical than the last, and left amid stormy applause. It would be a mistake to look for an individual author of this work, which became historically known under the name of 'Order No. 1.' It was composed by the faceless soldier masses.”From English wiki:
>Its immediate impact, however, was very clear. Within 48 hours of its proclamation, the Executive Committee attempted to issue “Order Number Two” in an unsuccessful attempt “to annul the first order, limiting its application to the Petrograd military district”.[11] According to Leon Trotsky, it was “in vain” and “Order Number 1 was indestructible”. Very revolutionary of the Petrograd Soviet: direct demands of the masses of soldiers and workers was overruled in 48 hours. Unsuccessfully, but attempt was made.
>>2841239Same as Nazi Germany accusing USSR of a Great Purge using Troikas - aka
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Court_(Germany) Germans even have troikas today!
>A Strafbefehl (penal order) is a written German court order used to resolve minor criminal offenses without a public trial. It acts as a formal conviction, typically resulting in a fine, and becomes legally binding if not contested quickly
>Procedure: Issued by a judge at the request of the public prosecutor's office (without a court hearing).>Penalties: Most commonly consists of a fine calculated in daily rates (30 to 90 Tagessätze), but can also include a suspended prison sentence up to one year. >>2839184Because it's not an argument
>>2839409We do. We've banned trade from the Occupied Territories.
>>2842115What's the interesting info to slop ratio?
>>2842119I think the content in the first half is mostly interesting with a layer of slop framing (easy to ignore), but then it goes downhill to slopville fast. Don't watch if you're allergic to hearing "see see pee" instead of "see pee see". I enjoyed the part comparing Chongqing and Guandong.
>>2842172
DPRK explained is pretty good. Korean Friendship Association UK has a youtube channel.
Lenin's New Economic Policy (NEP) and Deng Xiaoping's Reform and Opening Up (ROU) were both attempts by communist-party-led governments to use market mechanisms to strengthen socialist states. However, they differed significantly in scale, duration, goals, and outcomes.
The NEP was introduced in 1921 after the Russian Civil War and allowed peasants and small businesses to engage in limited private trade while the state kept control of major industries. Deng's reforms began in 1978 after the Cultural Revolution and also reduced economic controls, but they went much further by encouraging private enterprise, foreign investment, and participation in global markets. Both policies reflected a pragmatic belief that some market activity could help achieve socialist goals, but Lenin saw the NEP as a temporary measure to restore economic stability, whereas Deng's reforms became a long-term transformation of China's economy. The NEP helped the Soviet economy recover but was ended by Stalin in the late 1920s, while Deng's reforms continued and contributed to decades of rapid economic growth in China. In short, both policies used markets to revive socialist economies, but Deng's program was broader, more enduring, and far more integrated with the global economy.
However, just because Stalin ended the NEP, does not mean he ended foreign direct investment in the Soviet economy. Consider:
<"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
Formally, Joseph Stalin ended the NEP by abolishing private agriculture, collectivizing the countryside, and imposing centralized planning through the Five-Year Plans. In that sense, the NEP clearly ended. The limited domestic market economy that Lenin had permitted was largely dismantled.
Stalin's industrialization drive was not based on complete economic isolation or pure autarky. During the late 1920s and early 1930s, the Soviet Union purchased foreign technology, hired Western engineers, licensed industrial processes, and contracted with American and German firms to build factories and infrastructure. The massive industrial complexes that became the foundation of Soviet heavy industry were often designed or assisted by foreign experts. In that respect, Stalin's policies retained a form of Leninist pragmatism. Ideologically, the Soviet government condemned capitalism, but practically, it was willing to use capitalist expertise and technology when it served Soviet development. Ironically, what followed the NEP was in one waty closer to the ROU than what came before: Lenin's NEP allowed market activity within the Soviet economy, but Stalin's industrialization, even though it eliminated domestic market mechanisms, it still continued to draw on foreign capitalist resources from outside the Soviet economy. Foreign direct investment: An opening up.
Regarding the perennial bugbear of "commodity production" Stalin said:
<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
Also:
<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
So it may be more accurate to say that Stalin ended the NEP's economic structure but preserved a certain pragmatic willingness to use capitalist tools for socialist ends. In that limited sense, one can argue that the NEP survived "in spirit," though not in its actual institutions or policies. Many historians would also note that this pragmatic borrowing from the capitalist world resembles one of the features later associated with Deng Xiaoping's reforms.
China remains socialist because the state retains control over the commanding heights of the economy and because political power remains in the hands of the Communist Party. In this view, markets are tools, not the defining feature. The CPSU meanwhile, dissolved itself and caved to a neoliberal counter revolution. Critics say the CPC may as well have dissolved because they have betrayed socialism. They point to billionaires, stock markets, and trade with Israel. What are your thoughts?
China is not socialist
>No internationalism, they not are helping Cuba in any way
>Workers are not involved directly into politics
>The state is not withering away
>Worker do not own the means of production
>China is engaging imperialism in Latin-America and Africa
>>2842598>Lenin's New Economic Policy (NEP) and Deng Xiaoping's Reform and Opening Up (ROU) were both attempts by communist-party-led governments to use market mechanisms to strengthen socialist states. Wrong framing.
NEP was a return to NON-WAR ECONOMY, partly because Bolsheviks couldn't jump straight into socialism from the war economy's footing.
ROU started under Mao and expanded on by Deng. In essense, Chinese called their war communism socialism, and they also had to get back from war economy towards peaceful development, even if it had market mechanisms.
What really matters is the class character. Ruling classes tend towards their preffered economic systems, but evidently enough there is no hard division between state owned or market economies.
Also, NEP was an economic failure, while ROU was an economic success. The real point of contention is that Stalin's economy was
>Ideologically, the Soviet government condemned capitalism, but practically, it was willing to use capitalist expertise and technology when it served Soviet development.Give who wrote this some hard spanking. Imagine claiming that scientific progress belongs to capitalism, lol
>In that respect, Stalin's policies retained a form of Leninist pragmatism.Why are you calling normal economic functioning "pragmatism"?
>Stalin's industrialization, even though it eliminated domestic market mechanismsSays who? Soviet economy continued to work on market prices. Market prices didn't behave like market prices because of the amount of coordination between market players, sure, but that's not something that doesn't happen under capitalism either.
china sounds nice to live in as a foreigner but the highly restrictive drug policies are a deal breaker
>>2842601Why do they need socialism? What is socialism good for? Socialism didn’t lift 800 million of them out of poverty
>>2842845>Socialism didn’t lift 800 million of them out of povertyincorrect
<[…] 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. - Deng Xiaoping, We shall draw on historical experience and guard against wrong tendencies, April 30, 1987
I'm all for the rehabilitation of neets but…
>This is an ad from one of those “troubled teen” institutions in China. They keep resurfacing because parents keep paying for them, but the business model is almost always the same: abuse children, call it “discipline,” and market it as salvation.
>These places don’t reform kids. They break them. And again and again, they only get shut down after enough children are injured, traumatized, or dead.https://news.sina.cn/sa/2011-03-23/detail-ikftpnny4655843.d.html?vt=4https://www.rmzxw.com.cn/c/2019-02-24/2291375.shtmlhttps://www.cernet.edu.cn/edu/zong_he/zong_he_news/200908/t20090804_396158.shtmlhttps://nitter.poast.org/SteamedBunBunX/status/2066764312048177658#mA socialist country such as the PRC should be capable of directly addressing the socio-economic conditions that result in the type of households, the type of parents, that result in young people like this.
>>2843079Hard to find those things because all interested parties are secretive. PArents - to avoid being shamed that their kids are "special", those who run it - because it's abuse that goes against the law, and kids can't say anything.
Why isn't China helping Cuba?
>>2844522You already know.
>>2832419Kid probably had it coming.
>>2842570>overproduction crisisjust plan the economy with computers lol
>>2844895Fuck computers, just use the data from everyone’s phone and have it automatically be incorporated into the five year plan with constant real time updates on what to produce and how much.
>>2844522you mean like fast tracking Cuba's energy independence to make the oil blockade less of an issue? yeah, that'd be real cool if they did that…
>>2843013 >>2844915smartphones are pocket sized computers anon, but yes that sounds smart.
>>2844927The revolution is lost motherfuckers
>>2846466The Cuban revolution is lost. Did China send oil?
>>2846809so banning ai was the good timeline?
>>2846819The USSR would've sent nukes before letting Cuba fall. Why China didn't do anything of significance? Simple is not socialist. They couldn't care less if the proletariat suffers defeat anywhefe.
>>2847082Is china also supposed to wipe your ass and tuck you into bed ?
>>2847133Yeah motherfucker, where the fuck is the international solidarity that socialist countries are supposed to have? Fuck China and fuck their capitalism. I can't wait for their crisis of overproduction to hit them hard. People should wake up to the fact that China is just another US on the making
>>2847156I love social democracy
>>284721620 million Soviet citizens died liberating the world from Nazism, a few tens of millions more is paltry in the grand scheme of things
>b-but muh innocent AmericaroonisWestoids aren’t people
>>2847217>20 million Soviet citizens died liberating the world from Nazism, a few tens of millions more is paltry in the grand scheme of thingsWell, there wouldn't be much left of the USSR after the Americans destroyed every single city there and the rest of the world (Especially the Third World) would face apocalyptic famine from nuclear winter but at least they died for the Glory of Socialism. 9_9
>>2847217that was a defensive war,no way the USSR would've invaded first lmao
>>2847216I meant sending nukes to Cuba to deter the US not launching them.
>>2847753That opens the door to the US sending nukes to be stationed in Taiwan, makes no sense strategically.
>>2847261This is also a defensive war
>>2847821until burgers launch operation burgerossa china has no need to go HAM
>>2847755How would you proceed on that scenario?
>>2847753>I meant sending nukes to Cuba to deter the US not launching them.I have an honest question. Have you read a book? You just described the Cuban Missile Crisis, which is the closest the world came to nuclear war.
>>2847883>How would you proceed on that scenario?Give military aid to Cuba and in the event of invasion, support a insurgency against the US occupation forces. There's a ladder of escalation and nukes are the dead last rung. At the end of the day, Cuba is a salient. There's no way the USSR or China was/is going to risk a nuclear apocalypse for a hard-to-defend salient after the Cuban Missile Crisis.
>>2847878>until burgers launch operation burgerossa china has no need to go HAMOperation Burgerossa ends with the USN's vaunted supercarriers dying to hypersonic missiles. Iran beat the USA in the Persian Gulf with far simpler Shahed drones and China's industrial capacity is orders of magnitude larger than Iran's.
>>2848181 I don't read books. What should I read?
BEIJING – The first and second volumes of selected works of Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, on Party building have been published and are available for distribution in China.
The two volumes compile 102 pieces of the most important and fundamental works by Xi on Party building from November 2012 to February 2026, which come in forms such asreports, speeches, articles and instructions.
The publication of the works will provide authoritative materials for Party members, officials, and the public to study and implement Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, especially Xi Jinping Thought on Party Building.
It is of great significance for the entire Party to apply Xi Jinping Thought on Party Building to plan and advance the Party's development and exercise full and rigorous Party self-governance with higher standards and more concrete actions.
Compiled by the Institute of Party History and Literature of the CPC Central Committee, the books were published by the Central Party Literature Press.
>>2847217>Westoids aren’t peopleyou're supposed to nullify this type of thinking, not simply invert its usual vector
https://x.com/BrianJBerletic/status/2069652977078677679🇺🇸🇨🇳NEW ARTICLE: US Prepares Terrorist Army to Expand its Dirty War on China
<(NOTE: Because X continues censoring links previously banned by Twitter in cooperation with the US State Department including NEO, I am providing the entire article below).
>The US media has invested in recent years in rehabilitating Uyghur Chinese extremists now based in Syria, depicting them as “freedom fighters” whose ultimate goal is to “liberate” (carve off) territory in western China, and are preparing to fight China across Eurasia - adding to an already ongoing dirty war the US has been waging against China over the 20th and 21st centuries.
>A Familiar Pattern
>From the Cold War to present day, the United States has actively created and used the world’s worst terrorist organizations to advance US geopolitical objectives worldwide. This includes the creation and use of Al Qaeda (through local chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood) in the 1970s and 1980s in Syria and their export to Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Union until their withdrawal in 1989. It also includes the use of these same terrorists to divide and disrupt unified resistance to invading US forces in Iraq from 2003 onward, and the eventual region-wide US reordering of the Arab World spanning Libya and Egypt in North Africa to Yemen and Syria in the MIddle East beginning under the likewise US-engineered “Arab Spring” in 2011. From North Africa to Central Asia, the US has admittedly utilized terrorist organizations listed by the US State Department itself as such, to both target nations the US military cannot attack directly and to serve as a pretext for US invasions and occupations in nations the US seeks to attack more directly. Other episodes in which this US strategy has been employed include against both Russia in its southern Caucasus region and even as far as China in East Asia. While both Russia and China appear to have successfully neutralized this malicious method of proxy warfare utilized by Washington within their respective borders, the US continues not only arming and building up terrorist forces for future conflicts, but is also shaping public perception to depict such use of US-sponsored terrorism as somehow supporting “freedom fighters” against “authoritarian” governments.
> US Media Reintroducing Uyghur Terrorists as “Freedom Fighters”
>A troubling sign that the US continues seeking to use extremists specifically tailored for attacking China and its investments and projects across Eurasia, is a May 2026 National Public Radio (NPR) article titled, “The foreign fighters who helped topple Assad — and why China worries about them.” The article - only the latest of many spanning recent years - portrays the largest segment of foreign fighters involved in the US-backed overthrow of Syria in 2024 - Uyghur extremists from China’s western region of Xinjiang - as simply fleeing persecution in China and incidentally ending up aligned with and fighting alongside Al Qaeda. The article mentions the previously US State Department-designated foreign terrorist organization (until June 2025) Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) Uyghur fighters were recruited into as an Al Qaeda affiliate which ultimately overran Syrian forces in 2024, toppling the Syrian government. HTS’ figurehead Abu Mohammad al-Jolani (now referred to as Ahmed al-Sharaa) has even been designated as Syria’s defacto president by the US and its proxies and has even been invited to the White House by current US President Donald Trump despite previously having a 10 million USD reward on his head by the US government itself.
>The moral flexibility of the US regarding Al Qaeda based on whether the US is trying to justify direct military intervention in Syria before the government’s collapse or cement a terrorist-led proxy regime afterwards is the central hallmark of the decades-spanning use by Washington of terrorist organizations to target, undermine, topple, then politically capture targeted nations. It is no coincidence that the US not only recruited thousands of Uyghur extremists to fight alongside HTS in its proxy war against the Syrian government, but now seeks to redeploy this battle-hardened, experienced force of extremists across Eurasia as part of its ongoing dirty war against China. The NPR article, in regards to thousands of battle-hardened Uyghur extremists, stated: They say they now hope to preserve their culture and perhaps one day raise an army powerful enough to seize control of Xinjiang, or East Turkestan as the Uyghurs call it, the region that the Uyghurs consider their homeland and that the Chinese Communist Party took control of in 1949. Of course, Xinjiang had been part of China for centuries and only briefly during the 20th century found itself adrift as part of the US-European imposed “century of humiliation” China experienced before its rise in the last 20th and now 21st century - history Washington finds an inconvenience regarding narratives it is building ahead of justifying the next wave of terrorism being prepared across Eurasia and against China itself.
>Radicalizing and Ravaging China’s Xinjiang and Beyond
>Today, NPR pretends the circumstances surrounding violence in China’s Xinjiang region involving radicalized Uyghurs is ambiguous, claiming it began with student protests demanding the investigation into clashes between Uyghur and Han factory workers.
>The article only barely touches on the violent nature of Uyghur extremism in Xinjiang (which radiated far beyond the region in subsequent years). In reality, the Western media has admitted in past years to a concerted campaign of targeted radicalization of China’s Uyghur population in its western Xinjiang region. The LA Times in a 2016 article titled, “In China, rise of Salafism fosters suspicion and division among Muslims,” indicates the radicalization of Uyghurs not only created tensions with the Chinese government and non-Uyghur ethnic groups in Xinjiang, but also among Uyghur Muslims themselves.
>The article describes the process as originating from Washington’s close Persian Gulf ally, Saudi Arabia, claiming: “Saudi preachers and organizations began traveling to China. Some of them bore gifts: training programs for clerics, Korans for distribution, funding for new "Islamic institutes" and mosques. "This exposure to Saudi discourses actually caused a momentary implosion within the Salafi community in the 1980s," said Mohammed Al-Sudairi, a doctoral student at the University of Hong Kong who spent years researching Salafi Muslims in China. "The new generation, which was much more engaged and influenced by Saudi Arabia, began to contest the knowledge of the older generation. You had a lot of excommunication within the [Muslim] community, people were saying to each other that they were not real Muslims."”
>In other words, despite Washington accusing Beijing of “genocide” in Xinjiang, parathetically meaning “cultural genocide” of what Washington claims is Uyghur culture, it was the US through its Saudi proxies erasing indigenous Uyghur culture and overwriting it with imported, politically-driven Salafist extremism that demonstrably exploded into armed, widespread violence targeting China’s stability. While this violence is deliberately omitted from Western narratives today regarding Xinjiang - specifically to amplify the illusion Beijing’s subsequent security measures were arbitrary and unwarranted - at the height of the violence between 2009-2015, the Western media eagerly reported on spiraling violence Beijing seemed unable to control.
>The BBC in a 2014 article titled, “Why is there tension between China and the Uighurs?,” documented a long list of extremist-driven terrorism both across Xinjiang and wider China. The article noted: “…things really escalated in 2009, with large-scale ethnic rioting in the regional capital, Urumqi. Some 200 people were killed in the unrest, most of them Han Chinese, according to officials. Security was increased and many Uighurs detained as suspects. But violence rumbled on as right groups increasingly pointed to tight control by Beijing. In June 2012, six Uighurs reportedly tried to hijack a plane from Hotan to Urumqi before they were overpowered by passengers and crew. There was bloodshed in April 2013 and in June that year, 27 people died in Shanshan county after police opened fire on what state media described as a mob armed with knives attacking local government buildings.”
>The article then briefly attempted to suggest the details of the attacks were difficult to verify in an attempt to deny Beijing justification for increased security to deal with the violence - however - most of the attacks described in the BBC article had been captured on security cameras, documenting the undeniable brutality of the radicalized violence. The article continued: “At least 31 people were killed and more than 90 suffered injuries in May 2014 when two cars crashed through an Urumqi market and explosives were tossed into the crowd. China called it a "violent terrorist incident". It followed a bomb and knife attack at Urumqi's south railway station in April, which killed three and injured 79 others. In July, authorities said [attacks were carried out on] government offices in Yarkant, leaving 96 dead. The imam of China's largest mosque, Jume Tahir, was stabbed to death days later. In September about 50 died in blasts in Luntai county outside police stations, a market and a shop. Details of both incidents are unclear and activists have contested some accounts of incidents in state media. Some violence has also spilled out of Xinjiang. A March stabbing spree in Kunming in Yunnan province that killed 29 people was blamed on Xinjiang separatists, as was an October 2013 incident where a car ploughed into a crowd and burst into flames in Beijing's Tiananmen Square.”
>The extensive but by no means exhaustive list the BBC published of violence carried out by radicalized Uyghurs left a path of death and destruction from Xinjiang to Beijing - with attacks just as likely to kill fellow Uyghurs as they were other ethnic groups and government employees. The violence eventually radiated beyond China itself with a bomb blast in 2015 targeting central Bangkok, the capital of Thailand, following the Thai government’s refusal of US government demands that Uyghur terror suspects be allowed to travel onward to Turkey to join US-backed terrorist forces fighting in neighboring Syria instead of being sent back to China to face justice. Chinese security and development policies successfully managed to bring the cycle of radicalization and violence to an end, rehabilitating and deprograming extremists before providing them job training and allowing them to return to society. China also invested heavily in economic development across Xinjiang to drain the pools of poverty and unemployment that had primed the local population for radicalization in the first place. However, this did not happen before thousands of Uyghur extremists were transplanted by the US from western China to West Asia where they were armed, trained, and battle-hardened in the US-backed overthrow of Syria spanning 2011-2024, where they now await redeployment against both China itself and Chinese-backed investments, infrastructure projects, and diplomatic missions across Eurasia.
>Resurrecting and Rebranding Washington’s Anti-China Terror Front
>Just as the US has done with other terrorist organizations, including HTS in Syria and the notorious Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) of Iran, Uyghur terrorist organization, the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), previously listed by the US State Department as foreign terrorist organizations have been “delisted” as of 2020. The DW in their article, “US removes China-condemened group from terror list,” claims, “China regularly points to the East Turkestan Islamic Movement to justify its crackdown in Muslim majority Xinjiang. The US removed it from the terror list, saying there's "no credible evidence" that it still exists.” The article further explains that, “"ETIM was removed from the list because, for more than a decade, there has been no credible evidence that ETIM continues to exist," a State Department spokesperson said, news agency AFP reported.” Yet, just 2 years earlier - well within “more than a decade,” US Central Command itself admitted to strikes on ETIM terrorists in Afghanistan which shares a short section of border with neighboring China - exposing the US State Department’s justification for delisting ETIM as a blatant lie. Just as was the case with HTS and MEK, the Chinese Uyghur terrorist organization ETIM was delisted not because it no longer exists or is no longer engaged in terrorism, but because the US seeks to legitimize that terrorism and more openly aid and abet it. The US is already waging a dirty war against China across Eurasia including backing Baluch terrorists in southwest Pakistan and armed militants in the Southeast Asian country of Myanmar - both of whom are striking at Chinese-backed infrastructure projects, attacking Chinese investments, and in Pakistan, killing Chinese engineers along with an attempt to kill the Chinese ambassador to Pakistan in 2021. Uyghur extremists transplanted by the US to topple Syria in West Asia are now openly being prepared by Washington to work their way back east toward China to augment this already ongoing dirty war the US is waging against China, its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), investments, citizens, and diplomatic missions, as well as China’s friends and partners everywhere in between. Part of these preparations include the US media itself reinventing previously US-designated terrorists into “freedom fighters” in the hopes of not only building public and political support for Washington’s armed proxies, but to depict China’s inevitable attempts to defend itself against this latest hostility aimed at it, as “authoritarianism” and even “aggression.” Only time will tell if China’s rise and attempts to build up the multipolar world can outpace Washington's attempts to undermine China and tear the multipolar world down. In the meantime, Washington has readied yet another piece to place upon this global chess board - one that threatens nations across Eurasia and demands Eurasia-wide security cooperation with China to defend against.
<Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer. stumbled upon this, apparently china has its own chuds
Im going to go ahead and say this is a cia psyop.
on the other hand maybe 4chan pol poisoned china naturally
https://gnet-research.org/2026/04/29/han-ethnonationalism-in-china-from-historical-nostalgia-to-transnational-extremism-influences/
>Figure 3: Image shared by a Han ethnonationalist in a WeChat group chat depicting an ancient Han warrior piercing a figure in Mao-era attire. Behind them stand Red Guards with banners and armoured warriors bearing the Black Dragon Flag, a modern invention appropriating historical motifs. The violent imagery expresses hostility towards the Maoist China that opposed “Han chauvinism” and to contemporary leftist critics of Han ethnonationalism, both online and off.>>2853101>apparently china has its own chudswoah…………… deep…………….
>>2851832idgaf about short high production value videos from glowie westoids claiming to know things about china
>>2853101Get get cracked down on every so often. I think a few years ago the state brought in some laws forcing tech companies to deal with them more effectively.
>>2853101I mean with a flag that sexy I might be a chi-chud too
>>2853101>apparently china has its own chudsYeah don't go to a town in China and ask about Vietnam
Is the "Tank Man" picture actually banned in PRC? If so, what is the point?
>>2853208Who are they harshest against? Koreans, Vietnamese, Filipinos, Thai, people from Myanmar?
>>2853407Chinese. Nationalists are always the harshest against their own people, both practically (via scamming them) and ideologically (via claiming that they are cucks who don't fight for their race, or some variation of this)
>>2853101>Im going to go ahead and say this is a cia psyop.>on the other hand maybe 4chan pol poisoned china naturallyI'd say both are true considering that /pol/ itself is a psyop. Remember when Jeffrey Epstein met with Moot and /pol/ got launched the very next day?
>>2853193>Get get cracked down on every so often. I think a few years ago the state brought in some laws forcing tech companies to deal with them more effectively.Unfortunately, Nazis tend to be very good at hiding themselves online when the heat gets to them.
>>2853194>I mean with a flag that sexy I might be a chi-chud tooIt looks stupid. It looks like something from Mortal Kombat.
>>2853407>Who are they harshest against?Probably ethnic minorities in China. IIRC, Han chauvinist rightoids hate the government because they feel that it privileges minorities over the Han majority.
>>2854342see this to me shows that chinese people are just gusano realists
>>2853219>Is the "Tank Man" picture actually banned in PRC?yes
>If so, what is the point?Because this has become a so-called "liberal" political dog whistle. However, I personally believe that a massive crowd of the petty bourgeoisie occupying a country's square—which serves as a national symbol—should indeed be cleared out, though it should have been done with batons and shields rather than Type 81 rifles and infantry fighting vehicles.
"Wang Jian (王建) from China Society of Macroeconomic Research, who proposed the Great External Circulation strategy back in 1987 that was officially adopted by the central government, talked about this in an interview in the early 2000s:
中国是享受到美元霸权的好处最大的国家……美国巨大的贸易逆差，是对中国产品的巨大需求， 拉动了我们经济的增长……我们现在要担心的是，美元贬值引起国际金融大动荡，美元失去国际的货币的霸主地位，没有能力继续用经常项下的逆差来拉动亚洲，特别是对于中国的经济增长的影响，这才是最可怕的事。”
China is the greatest beneficiary of the dollar hegemony… the huge trade deficit of the US also represented a huge demand for Chinese products, and spurred our economic growth… What we have to worry about now, is the global financial instability caused by the depreciation of the US dollar. If the dollar loses its global currency hegemonic status, it will no longer have the capacity to sustain its deficit to drive Asia’s growth, and this will especially affect China’s economic growth. This would be the most terrible thing to happen.
In September 2020, months after China proposed the Dual Circulation Strategy (export balanced by domestic consumption), Wang Jian reasserted the importance of dollar hegemony in an interview:
中国是最依靠美元体系的国家，因为人民币没有国际化，而欧元、日元、韩元等都是国际化货币。过去，中国一直享受着美元霸权的好处，人民币不是国际化货币，但是中国的生意可以做到世界最大，因为中国用美元结算。如果美元体系崩溃，即美元作为储备货币和结算货币的比例发生断崖式下降，比如从60%下降到30%，受到伤害最大的一定是中国。 所以在 “十四五”期间，一旦美元出问题，会对中国产生非常大的影响。
China is the country that relies the most on the dollar system, because the RMB is not internationalized, whereas the Euro, the Japanese yen, the Korean won, are all internationalized currencies. In the past, China has continuously enjoyed the benefit of the dollar hegemony - the RMB is not an internationalized currency, yet Chinese businesses can expand to become the world’s largest, because transactions in China are settled in US dollars. If the dollar system collapses, then the proportion of the US dollar as a reserve currency and settlement currency will fall steeply. For instance, if it drops from 60% to 30%, the country that is hurt the most must be China. Hence, if the dollar system encounters trouble during the 14th FYP period (2021-2025), it will cause great impact to China’s production.
Source is from Jia Genliang’s Modern Monetary Theory in China (2023)
Once you understand this, you will understand that China cannot and will not give up the dollar system, especially its hegemonic status. The status quo greatly benefited the Chinese economy and there is no reason to give up even when the US itself is threatening to end the arrangement, because China still has plenty of cards to play (e.g. rare earth export). The US will find itself unable to decouple from China.
This is also why when the US confiscation of Russia’s $300 billion foreign reserve at the start of the Russia-Ukraine war, and the Fed rate hike that caused dollar liquidity crisis in many Global South countries and spurred strong interest in many to leave the dollar regime, China has been the one that was and still is the most reluctant to abandon the US dollar. If China doesn’t want to, then nobody else can do anything about it. The Biden administration correctly gambled that China would not threaten the dollar hegemony during the rate hike in 2022."
>>2853219it's not a picture, it's a vid, and he doesn't get run over. the only reason jeff widener won a pulitzer prize for his "picture" is because it distracted from the video and westoids spent 3 decades fantasizing that the guy got ran over. once the internet made it obvious he didn't, libs started crying it was AI
>>2856865>Wang Jian (王建) from China Society of Macroeconomic Research, who proposed the Great External Circulation strategy back in 1987 that was officially adopted by the central governmentProofs? I don't think that anybody outside of China's Plan has any influence on economic policies.
>>2856865>Jia Genliang’s Modern Monetary Theory in ChinaSo, opinion discarded. MMT is a stillborn failure
>>2857008MMT works only if you have currency hegemony like the USA does. which is funny because the USA never used MMT to its full potential for anyone except the military industrial complex… and now the entire imperial hegemony is crashing down from its own hubris
>>2856901It's telling how weak their case is against China that they still bring up events from almost 40 years ago.
>>2856623>However, I personally believe that a massive crowd of the petty bourgeoisie occupying a country's square—which serves as a national symbol—should indeed be cleared out, though it should have been done with batons and shields rather than Type 81 rifles and infantry fighting vehicles.They actually tried that and were literally burned alive by the counter-revolutionary insurrectionists.
>>2857014It doesn't work even for hegemony, just look at them turning into a gas station with a navy
>>2832510The alternative is Communism
>>2857435Where? Point to it on a map
Someday you’re gonna wake up and realize communism IS THE BOURGEOIS IDEOLOGY
>>2858123China is more democratic than le West, fyi
>>2857045You're right, I forgot about that
>>2858138Yes china is more liberal than the west, they also have a big industrial proletariat with much more revolutionary potential, I think when the global economical system collapses and the bourgeois scramble on chauvinism and retardedly fail at the taiwan invasion to get bogged down in a long destructive war we will see socialism there
>>2858138>China is more democratic than le WestThat's why the left must oppose it.
>>2858138Yes - the demos (citizenry) is constituted by property ownership, such as in the Athenian democracy. Private home ownership is greater in China than in the US, so more citizens are enfranchised into political power. Sismondi revived the term "proletarii" (e.g. "the fourth estate") in the 19th century from the Roman term, which denoted propertyless persons, which was evidently accelerated under capitalist conditions. The state of propertylessness was equivalent with slavery de facto, as Cicero writes regarding wage work, which is based in dependence. The real science of slavery was forwarded by capitalists at the turn of industrial revolution, such as Arthur Young, who said "the lower classes must be kept poor, or they will never be industrious". Here, deprivation from wealth is prerequisite for service. Home ownership in Britain in 1871 was 20% - a feudal state of affairs. So, property in the demos is the prerequisite characteristic of the rule of the people (e.g. democracy is not a style of "voting", but political representation; rulership).
>>2858296Thanks china for saving liberalism. You have ressurected the beaten down liberals across the west. we're saved.
>>2858348Owning a house is nice but how does it help solve the dependence on wage labor? Unless you can rent part of it out I guess but I don't think most do that (not sure).
>>2858357Back in Roman times, most [citizens] had farmland so would barter with other households or eat from their own land, so people who worked for wages were free but propertyless, on account of their deprivation. As we may read in a 1929 textbook on the USSR, around 50 million people worked on farms and lived off of their own product, meaning that they worked for themselves and not other people (forced extractions only appeared before 1921 and after 1928). Now, not everyone can or should be in agriculture, but the ideal is clear; working for oneself is different from depending on others. Marx describes this as the intermediary period of peasant property holding in England, between 1400-1500, which was broken up by capitalist relations (e.g. primitive accumulation). So, the ideal is to have a natural surplus of animals and plants from yourself, your family and friends (kin), with an oikos (household) and acres.
Some Free Tibet schizo set himself on fire in front of the UN building a few days ago. Most Muslim countries didn't get onboard with the "Uighur Genocide", so I guess its time to bring back the classics. I just wonder when we'll see the Real Communists start to shill Free Tibet.
>>2858187If you can believe that China can invade China, then I guess you can also believe China is more liberal than all the G7 countries.
>>2858296>democratic is le bad depends on the class character
>>2858370>agriculture is our wisest pursuitwho did his agriculture for him i wonder
>>2858561>If you can believe that China can invade China, No they'll fail like Russia in Ukraine but chinese proles are less cucked so they'll rise up
>>2858370Okay you're talking about independent farmers and the yeoman ideal. I don't think modern Chinese home owners support themselves with farming so how does owning a home "enfranchise them into political power"?
>>2858702>No they'll fail like Russia in UkraineThe only thing that has saved the Ukraine from defeat is its massive size and direct land connection to NATO. And its not like the Ukraine's doing all that well when it has to literally abduct men into vans and force them into the army.
>chinese proles are less cucked so they'll rise upThe CPC has ~90% approval rating, so your CIA "revolution" will fail hard.
>>2858732To be fair, he was talking about Taiwan, not Xinjiang. But least the Ukraine is a widely-recognized county, whereas nobody officially considers Taiwan to be a country. Not even the Republic of China considers Taiwan to be a country.
>>2858953queue leftcoms seething about "chiggers" for not abolishing the commodity form as ITT:
>>>/leftypol/2853401 >>2859028our "leftcoms" are literally just western chauvinists
Unique IPs: 123