[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
leftypol archives


File: 1651748202889.jpg (259.48 KB, 1148x1600, Mao-Zedong.jpg)

 No.953900[View All]

The Cultural Revolution was literally a civil war between the left-wing and the right-wing. The right-wing won. Today we see the effects.
>"but wasn't the KMT the right-wing"
Both the Communist Party and the KMT were "big tent" in terms of both class and ideology. The founder of the KMT was literally praised by Lenin. It wasn't until Kai-shek that the KMT took a, let's say, "fascistic" turn thus the collapse of its "big tent". In conclusion while yes the KMT had a "fascistic" turn, the Communist Party still had right-wingers in its ranks. So it wasn't the defeat of the KMT which signaled the victory of Socialism, the actual Revolution was the Cultural Revolution. And it was a disaster. Mao died, much of the left-wing was purged, untold horrors such as cannibalism were inflicted for revenge… Truly the blackest of reactions. Soon after Deng would rise which leads us to the China of today.

So again, why are we still pretending China is Socialist?
550 posts and 55 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.

 No.968434

Do the Chinese themselves even claim to be socialist, economically speaking?
iirc the timeline is
>2020: achieve a "moderately prosperous country"
>2035 achieve "socialist modernization"
>2049 become "fully developed, rich, and powerful nation"

 No.968436

>>968434
how about you go speak to Chinese people if you want your questions answered westoid?

 No.968437

China's mode of production is capitalism but the CPC is extremely good

 No.968444

>>968436
What anon is talking about should be available from CPC statements and notices. Asking the average Chinese person about government plans in the future is like asking the average American what the federal reserve is doing, they don’t know and they don’t care. Nor would they have some secret hidden knowledge that only Chinese could know.

 No.968455

>>968444
> Asking the average Chinese person about government plans in the future is like asking the average American what the federal reserve is doing
No it isn't
>they don’t know and they don’t care
Proof?
>Nor would they have some secret hidden knowledge that only Chinese could know.
average liberal universalist mindset, "those dumb Chinese don't know whats good for them, their country should just listen to us internet leftists instead who definitely know better for them"

 No.968458

Hoxhaists tend to be cringe on China and AES. It just comes across as dogmatism. Deng wasn’t the only prominent CPC member who supported the reforms. From what I have read of Deng's own words and seen of Deng's own actions, (and for that matter Xi as well) he comes across as a principled Marxist (and ofc there's always more for me to learn/read but you know).
#QUESTION TO THE WESTOIDS:
If deng wasn't a marxist, why did he join the CPC before it was ever remotely relevant, and fight in the Civil War for them when it would have been a thousand times easier just to join the KMT? And also if Deng was a “capitalist roader” or KMT spy, why did he not try to coup Mao when he practically controlled the army?

China isn't even imperialist, just look at how much China is impacted by unequal exchange. Minqi Li wrote an article for Monthly Review about it: https://monthlyreview.org/2021/07/01/china-imperialism-or-semi-periphery/

 No.968472

>>968458
>AES
Advanced Encryption Standard?

 No.968488

>>968455
Not at all what I said. I’m not calling Chinese people “dumb”, I’m just saying the majority of them (like in every other fucking country) aren’t experts on their governments policy.

 No.968501

>>968472
actually existing socialism

 No.968562

>>968458
> if Deng was a “capitalist roader”
Reminder to everyone that..
1) Mao never ever called Deng a 'capitalist roader'.
2) 'capitalist roader' doesnt mean someone who wants or is trying to bring back Capitalism, but rather means someone who supports Soviet Economic Planning methods (which Mao thought had become like Fascism) I.e. Liu Shaoqi & Peng Dehuai.

>‘Presently Soviet Union is in the hands of the dictatorship of the Big bourgeois class, German fascist kind of dictatorship, Hitler kind of dictatorship and other such bourgeois class dictatorship, They are worse than De Gaulle'.

-Mao Zedong, 1964.
(Some Interjections At A Briefing The State Planning Commission Leading Group)
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-9/mswv9_18.htm

 No.968574

Planned economies are superior yet they haven't worked out. Curious.

 No.968578

>>968574
not enough cybernetics

 No.968580

>>968578
Then why hasn't any Socialist state tried it yet?
And how do you account for every small fluctuation in supply and demand, or when resources go missing, turn out to be defective, etc.?

 No.968585

>>968562 (Me)
>>968458
also an extra point I want to make is that what gets called 'Dengism' (The Four Modernizations) was actually Zhou Enlai's policy.

>At the latest stages of the Cultural Revolution, in 1975, Zhou Enlai pushed for the "Four Modernizations" in order to undo the damage caused by the Mao's policies. in one of his last public acts, Zhou Enlai made another pitch for the Four Modernizations at the 4th National People's Congress.One core tenet was the rejection of the previously long-held concept known as the "iron rice bowl".

 No.968586

>>968419
>communism is the real movement to preserve the present state of things

 No.968589

>>968586
I laughed but that's just it, In just a few decades look at how much China has grown, and not just by useless capitalists metric but healthy ones like the fall in poverty, growth of the middle class, the urbanization, industrialization and Proletarianization of a huge population of peasants, the list goes on

 No.968590

>>968580
>Then why hasn't any Socialist state tried it yet?
computers were mastered too late
>account for every small fluctuation in supply and demand
pseudomarkets. read cockshott

 No.968638

>>954045
>What would China look like today if the Gang of Four held control?
It would have been overthrown around 1989 (if not sooner) in the wave of the Color revolutions that hit the Socialist world. The Gang of Four had no Economic program and saw Building Productive forces as 'Bourgeois Economism'. While the Chinese economy grew during Mao's leadership in the last year of the cultural revolution where the Gang of Four was in charge the Chinese economy contracted and got smaller by 1%. After being overthrown China would have either become a 'Liberal Democracy' or turned into a second Warring States period.

> Better to be poor under Socialism and Communism than to be rich under Capitalism.

- Gang of Four's famous slogan during the cutural revolution

Deng Xiaoping becoming the leader post mao's death was the best person who could lead China at the time.
(other than maybe Chen Yun)

 No.968732

>>968173

also im right to point out most of the countries in this list are actually socialist (lao, china, cuba, vietnam) or are an ex-ussr satalite state; really just accenting my point here.

 No.968921

>>968586
Sublate.
If communism preserved the present state of things then china is sure doing a poor job at preserving them seeing as how much they grew, progressed and developed their economy for the people, over the past few decades. You stupid fucking westoid

 No.968924

Reminder the main reason why liberal policies were reintroduced to China was because of the Sino-Soviet split that saw the PRC's industrialization grind to a halt

 No.968929

>>968455
Have you spoken to a Chinese person anon, or any person for that matter
Regular people don't care that much about politics

 No.968930

>>968434
I mean Xi himself said they have no plans of abandoning the market and returning to a planned economy, so my bet is they'll keep doing their dirigisme thing indefinitely
The way the party documents use the word "socialism" just makes it seem like Nordic socialism type SocDem shit, if even that

 No.968933

>>968419
>socialism is just organising the economy for social ends
I will literally strangle you
>real movement
the real movement to do what? I seem to recall something about the present state of things, but I'm not sure

 No.969142

>>968933
>the real movement to do what? what is marxist theory?
>I will literally strangle you because I don't understand theory

 No.969774

>>968921
Capitalist development =/= socialism
>>969142
You have literally never read theory, and you probably haven't even read the Manifesto. You're just parroting le funny ultra meme without understanding its context in the Manifesto.

 No.970005

>>968589
yes but this does not mean china is socialist as seen in these statistics from sk

https://www.ide.go.jp/library/English/Publish/Periodicals/De/pdf/03_02_05.pdf

new middle class, old middle class, upper middle class grew a decent amount during the park era. Additionally working class also grew.(pg 204) Not only that the second industry aka industry also grew from 9 percent to 29 percent at the end of the park era. and as you can see from the data in pg 208 most of the new middle class and old middle classs fathers were farmers, which suggests social mobility(tho this is from 1990)

besides that child mortality decreased from 10.66 to 3.66 during the park era.

and if we look at these charts livelihood absolutely improved in sk does that mean sk was socialist, no

i can also bring taiwan and japan statistics too if ya want




https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$ui$chart$endBeforeForecast=1979;;&[email protected]=kor;;;;&group$data$;;&frame$value=1960&extrapolate:101;;;;;&chart-type=mountain&url=v1

click the slider below to readjust the year and click options time to adjust the years avaliable. and thus if you check you will notice the poverty rate went down a decent amount

 No.970007

>>970005
>click the slider below to readjust the year and click options time to adjust the years avaliable. and thus if you check you will notice the poverty rate went down a decent amount

the poverty rate for south korea i mean

 No.970016

>>969142
>he doesn't understand sarcasm, let alone theory
Ok anon I think I see the problem now

 No.971159

>>970005
>i can also bring taiwan and japan statistics too if ya want
Japan borrowed a lot from the Soviet Union in its postwar economic miracle which Worst Korea and Chinese Taipei regimes then borrowed from japan

 No.971290

>>971159
source because ive heard this claim and im kinda interested about this

after all it seems manchuko did copy some things from the soviet union but i havent read sources proving that connection

 No.971308

>>968253
I dont find the smiling face of mao gazing down on modern chinas retainment of the revolution cringe anon.

 No.971320

>>963593
Still no proof from this guy, the lies goids tell themselves

 No.971321

>>971320
the cia supported mao tho

 No.971324

>>971321
the CIA supported everyone, even Castro got donations from the CIA.

It means nothing, have you ever heard of the phrase 'hedging your bets'?

Its the richest empire in the world, they could afford to fund both sides; it makes perfect sense as well, remain on the good side of the winner; geopolitics 101.

 No.971325

>>971324
so the cia is everything anon

 No.971326

>>971325
no but in the case of mao getting money from the CIA, id point to castro also getting money from the CIA during the revolution.

They took there money and turned around and then used it to kill landlords, pretty based anon ngl.

 No.971328

>>971326
(wait did mao actually get money from the cia lol)

 No.971330

>>971328


preface: there are better sources for this and im just stoned and being lazy right now

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-10-19-mn-6235-story.html

for castro


and in regards to the CIA and Mao; at first glance it would be absurd to suggest there is a connection but funnyily enough the founders of the CIA actually did indirectly aid Mao in his revolution through there indirect support of him during the Tibetan revolution.


Ya see the CIA, or what would later become the CIA (the US army where the agency sending in 'spies' into Tibet) had people in there reporting, and the reports (of course) where pro-mao and anti-tibet, as spy reports typically are factual and unshrouded by as much political bias it gave a pretty factual account of the situation in Tibet, mainly that of one country liberating another from feudal serfdom.

Which ended in the US gov sending some aid and money to Tibet to indirectly support Maos cause.

Some shitlibs will argue that in both cases it 'proves' that both are backed by the CIA but its a retarded arguement.

 No.971332

>>971330
huh now this is fascinating i need to read more about it

 No.971333

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_Tibetan_program

im being a shitlib and using wikipedia but its a general overview

 No.971336

>>971333

k thanks i shall read this

 No.971339

>>971336
my wiki source is just to show that no, actually the CIA did not support China.

They threw some empty support at the Dali Lama to show face, but not enough to actually do anything. (kind of like Ukraine right now, haha)

Prior to the 1950s though we had British spies in there (for no reason anon, I assure you)

Saying this;


>Robert W. Ford, one of the few Westerners to have been appointed by the Government of Tibet at the time of de facto independent Tibet, spent five years in Tibet, from 1945 to 1950, before his arrest by the invading Chinese army. In his book Wind Between the Worlds: Captured in Tibet, he writes


">All over Tibet I had seen men who had been deprived of an arm or a leg for theft (…) Penal amputations were done without antiseptics or sterile dressings"

 No.983517

>>968585
And Zhou Enlai was the one guy who was on Mao's side throughout the GPCR, neither being a denounced rightist nor an ultra-leftist engaging in unnecessary violence.

 No.984301

Why can leftypol never seem to get past the Black Book of Communism tier perspective of China under Mao?
People keep fucking claiming he did shit while he was fucking dead. They attribute Deng's foreign policy blunders to him CONSTANTLY. It is fucking ridiculous.

 No.984354

>>984301
path dependency
Mao was the origin of the sino-soviet split (in the sovietboo perspective, I don't care either way)

 No.984439

>>984354
>Mao was the origin of the sino-soviet split [therefore Mao and Deng same]
This is reductio ad absurdum. They had completely different lines. Albania was Mao's international ally against soviet revisionism. Mao helped Vietnam during the US invasion. Deng funded mujahedeen and Pol Pot.
It is stupid shit.

 No.984559

>>984439
no it's not

 No.984809

>>984301
>Why can leftypol never
stopped reading

 No.985192

>>969774
whats that thing about proletarianizing peasants? what does it mean that division of labor is a socialization of production?


Unique IPs: 20

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]