[ 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[Last 50 Posts]

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?

 No.953903

Socialism is anti imperialist. Anti imperialist is anti Zionist. So no. China is Zionist .

 No.953904

>>953900
it's just retarded "MLs" who barely read any theory trying to fill the USSR-shaped hole in their heart

 No.953905

mao was a retarded idealist centrist uygha like Stalin tbh

 No.953906

>>953904
I mean that describes me well but I just cope and seethe by playing map painting sims

 No.953908

>Why are we still pretending China is Socialist?
Because they aren't the US. That's it. There's no other reason.

 No.953913

>>953905
Mao was part of the left he was part of the gang of 4 (which should be called gang of 5)

What makes Stalin a centrist didn't he also follow the anti revisionist line?

 No.953916

>>953900
I think philosophically Mao's biggest mistake he made was the interpretation of the "contradiction" in Marxism. In theory, history has been pushed forward by all the struggles between contradictions. There are small struggles and there are big struggles. The small struggles push the change of quantity. The big struggles formed by those small struggles lead to the change of quality. Then society proceeds into the next stage and the circle would repeat itself in a similar form.

I don't think there will be any disagreement about that (unless you are willing to point out). But Mao took the literal interpretation by believing that having a great level of struggles over the contradictions in a short amount of time, then society would evolve much faster. While it's true that in theory the struggles will push society forward, if they are too frequent and intense, then whole society won't be able to sustain itself. In other words, the social order would not even exist but just anarchists taking over everything. There would be no achievement but just destruction and disruption.

Of course, Mao wasn't as naive as I describe because he did try to limit the scale of the Cultural Revolution, but the situation soon lost control and many opportunists who were supposed to be the target purposely escalated and broadened it into a total conflict. If we apply the chemical sense here, when the chemical reaction of molecules is so intense, frequent and unstable it's gonna trigger a massive explosion. Similarly, in physics, you can find the same phenomenon in the particle world. Since Marxism absorbed a lot of theories from natural science, it's not odd for me to borrow science to explain the nature of the Cultural Revolution.

For Deng, he may have been correct in bringing in changes, but changed too much of the system and caused big structural problems that had to be solved by later generations of leaders (corruption, growing inequality, and the detrimental effects of the influence of capital on government). Cause at the base of it, the Cultural Revolution had tremendous grassroots support and the peasants did get more benefit than disaster from it in the countryside, opposite of the cities. Or perhaps if Deng corrected the mistakes of the Cultural Revolution but didn't open the window fully to let in all the serious problems that accompanied his reforms, then that would've been better.

 No.953919

Who's "we"?

 No.953920


 No.953922

>>953913
Mao and stalin both failed to export the class struggle to their utmost ability and both engaged in national chauvinism at times.

 No.953923

>>953916
if you fail to push forward the class war and to develop socialism then you will find your project is degenerating and falls to counter revolutionary opportunism.

 No.953924

File: 1651751015879.jpg (25.52 KB, 434x538, FB_IMG_1651601709383.jpg)

China isn't socialist but there are genuine socialists in the CPC who could one day seize power. Of course that would require us to not be living in the darkest timeline and I'm pretty sure we are.

 No.953926

>>953900
Big tent is also Bolsheviks when taking power.

Deng was center, just like Lenin and Stalin and Mao. Khruschev was left-wing.

 No.953927

>>953922
Mao exported revolution he had a policy of promoting anti revisionist socialism no matter what. For example when working with the US to stop soviet revisionists from nuking China he was still supporting communists against the US.

It is true that Stalin had a conservative position on exporting revolution if you think this was wrong it can be viewed as a mistake but Stalin was not intentionally being a reactionary he followed a ML anti revisionist line.

 No.953929

>>953926
Lol no
Deng and Khrushchev were rightists

Lenin Stalin and Mao were or leftists


Left = correct line and construction of socialism

right = restoration of capitalism

 No.953930

>>953920
These faggots rhetorically pulled a "well we will just beat the capitalists by being better capitalists, actually" And then they lick America's ass for decades anyways because the international capitalist system is a cartel with it's own established interests. Even if I was a nationalist retard I wouldn't call jeff bezos moving to Shanghai a victory for "China". Even if your ideology is "America bad" China is in century of humiliation mode simpering to NATO compared to when they had a communist line and were steamrolling the KMT in the 50s and putting the Americans into full retreat. Instead the leaders chose to sell their country into the imperial periphery again.

 No.953931

>>953929
I meant to say construction of communism

 No.953932

>>953929
Stalin and Mao were both tailists that represented bureacratic right deviations holding back the full prosecution of the revolution by the proletariat. That being said this is still false since it's muh great man theory, it was the class character of the Chinese and Soviet vanguard that was the problem.

 No.953933

>>953927
>For example when working with the US to stop soviet revisionists from nuking China he was still supporting communists against the US.

meanwhile, in reality:

Chairman Mao: I like rightists. People say you are rightists, that the Republican Party is to the right, that Prime Minister Heath is also to the right.

President Nixon: And General DeGaulle.

Chairman Mao: DeGaulle is a different question. They also say the Christian Democratic Party of West Germany is also to the right. I am comparatively happy when these people on the right come into power.

 No.953934

>>953931
development of socialism towards construction of communism would also work

 No.953936

>>953900
Whether it is, or is not, is secondary to the fact that China is advancing capitalism and disturbing the workings of imperialism. China is the single most important anti-imperialist, hands down, by following what they call "socialism with chinese characteristics". They can call it whatever they want. It is a positive development for the world.

 No.953937

>>953933
Stay in chat a min I will link you to something on Maoist Chinas foreign policy

 No.953938

>>953933
kek did he actually say this?

 No.953939


 No.953940

>>953936
>Whether it is, or is not, is secondary
>China is disturbing the workings of imperialism
>China is the single most important anti-imperialist >They can call it whatever they want
>It is a positive development for the world

 No.953941

>>953939
Okay tbf I wanna see more proofs but I am giddy at seeing this if true

 No.953943

>>953927
Mao funded the muhadjidiheen and the contras against communists just because they were working with the Soviet Union

 No.953947

>>953937
I couldn't find what I was looking for.

I had an entire document explaining CPC foreign policy under Mao it had a twitter thread too.

 No.953949

>>953947
cool, would be nice to see anyways, thanks for looking

 No.953951

>>953938
>>953939
>>953941
>>953943
>>953947
>>953949

Hey everyone ignore bs lies on Maos foreign policy.

I have just found said document detailing Mao's foreign policy etc.

https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/ncm-5/cpc-policy.pdf

 No.953956

>>953900
Cannibalism?

 No.953957

>>953920
NFT bros and Dengoids are two sides to the same jewish coin

 No.953958

>>953943
This is utter fucking bollocks, this was dengoids you absolute coping bitch

 No.953959

>>953913
I legit think the reason it's not called the gang of five is because of whitewashing to not "taint" the image of Mao as the founding father of modern China. IIRC the Cultural Revolution up until fairly recently was an extremely taboo topic in China that was taught in schools as basically "oh there were these rowdy radicals trying to destabilize our country but we took care of it" which I'm pretty sure counts as whitewashing.
>>953924
That's assuming they don't get purged if they get too "rowdy".

 No.953961

what a profoundly retarded thread, the only thing that keeps me from slavish devotion to china is that they refuse to turn america into an irradiated wasteland

 No.953962

>>953957
>>953958
Please respond to my reply to you in leftybritpol

 No.953965

>>953958
Okay right I got years wrong but there definitely was support for anti-communists while mao was chairman like with cambodia, and Algeria and obviously the US

 No.953966

>>953965
Also the Soviets did this during the Stalin admin as well. It's all national chauvinism realpolitik shit

 No.953967

>>953956
Guangxi Massacre.

 No.953968

ultroid thread ultroid thread

 No.953969

File: 1651753478012.png (148.62 KB, 300x230, ClipboardImage.png)

>>953920
The People's NFTs
>>953924
The People's Yemeni massacres
>>953940
The People's Zionist "Anti-Imperialism"

 No.953970

>>953965
mao died in 1976, by the later years he wasn't really in control, Democratic Kampuchea arose in 1975, Algeria i'd have to get back to you, but I'm not denying Mao made some dogshit decisions later on.

The vast bulk and most agregious support of anti communists happened post Mao however, the mujihadeen, contras, UNITA, support for Marcos, Duterte, Saudi Arabia, etc etc

 No.953971

>>953962
meaning to bruh haven't given the thing a read yet

 No.953973

>>953971
Take your time, thanks

 No.953974

>>953970
Yeah fair and nuanced. I think the leader cult shit is complete cancer and obviously idealist delusion but I also engage in it sometimes myself and Mao says some pretty hilarious shit, same with Stalin. Anyways the main point I wanted to impress is that the PRC engaged in national chauvinism that contributed to the downfall of socialism

 No.953975

>>953961
Do you know how to read?

 No.953976

>>953968
not an argument

 No.953977

>>953961
is this satire? lol

 No.953980

>>953969
>look at this image, who knows where, of 20 chinese grannies holding a sign IN ENGLISH, this is unrefutable proof that China is enamoured with Israel

 No.953981

>>953980
The Chinese state does support Israel

 No.953991

File: 1651754808111.jpg (115.85 KB, 1311x650, jerusalem march.jpg)

>>953969
>>953980
This picture was taken in downtown Jerusalem in Israel.
>this is unrefutable proof that China is enamoured with Israel
Sarcastic remarks aside. It was just a diplomacy thing, all countries do things like that unless they have hostile relations.

 No.953993

>>953900
>So it wasn't the defeat of the KMT which signaled the victory of Socialism
Yes it was

 No.953996


 No.953997

>>953991
Doesn't change the fact that China has a longstanding military, economic and technological allegiance with Israel

 No.954000


 No.954001

>>953997
Israel and Vietnam have a closer military relationship.

 No.954003

>>954001
Oh wow the famous Dengoid tactic "b-b-but what about X country????????????????"

 No.954005

>>954001
Okay. 1) I doubt it 2) Doesn't change Chinas own relationship even if it was true.

China and Israel's military relationship includes: both supporting the Mujihadeen (which is where their relationship began) Both supporting the Contras (which happened simultaeneously) both supporting the regime in the Phillipines, Saudi Arabia, etc.

China and Israel also trade weapons, and China is currently building Israel's biggest port, along with numerous other infrastructure projects.

 No.954008

File: 1651755358331.png (352.85 KB, 550x427, ClipboardImage.png)


 No.954009

>>953920
Dengoids here will defend this shit

 No.954010

File: 1651755441188.jpg (90.84 KB, 800x533, vietnamese-soldiers.jpg)

>>954005
>>954005
Vietnam is one of the top export markets for Israel guns which is a closer military relationship than anything China has worked up with Israel. As for the charge of "whataboutism," I'm just expressing frustration at an obvious double standard which mainly comes from the fact that the U.S. wants to woo Vietnam against China so it's not criticized.

 No.954011

>>954010
>but muh vietnam
yes they are also a capitalist shithole state
>which mainly comes from the fact that the U.S. wants to woo Vietnam against China so it's not criticized.
No deng beetles are more influenced by American propaganda about China

 No.954012

>>954003
that is their whole fucking ideology. tribalism and idealism

 No.954017

>>954011
>yes they are also a capitalist shithole state
Did you just decide that two seconds ago

 No.954018

>>954010
>the U.S. wants to woo Vietnam against China
Pretty sure China has done a great job of doing that themselves

 No.954019

>>954018
The Vietnamese are smart not to get hooked into any alliance.

 No.954020

>>953993
You don't know what you're talking about. Conveniently you ignored almost everything in the OP.

 No.954021

>>954020
Sorry I didn't read it

 No.954022

>>954010
>which is a closer military relationship than anything China has worked up with Israel
I think actually engaging in joint military exercises a la the mujahedeen is a deeper tie than selling guns, although on the subject, this article is hilarious

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-arms-drones-and-spy-tech-israeli-weapons-aid-vietnam-s-cruel-surveillance-stat-1.9179736

 No.954026

Just more proof that "anti-Dengists" are obsessed religious retards.

 No.954028

>>954022
Funny thing, Vietnam arrested an arms broker a few days ago.

>Millions of dollars worth of arms trade between Israel and Vietnam has been put at risk after an arrest warrant was issued for a key Vietnamese broker.


>Vietnam’s Investigative Police Agency of the Ministry of Public Security announced its decision to prosecute and arrest Nguyen Thi Thanh Nhan, the predominant businesswoman, alongside seven others last Friday.


>Nhan has been key in promoting and broking arms deals between Vietnam and Israel, the value of which has exceeded over $1 billion in the last ten years.


>The businesswoman was formally charged with "violations of regulations on bidding" in relation to a hospital, according to Vietnamese media.


>However, Israeli media Haaretz reported that “the real reason for her arrest was involvement in military deals," quoting an unnamed source.


>The source "stressed" that one reason for the arrest was "power struggles" between Vietnam’s prime minister, the Communist party secretary-general, the public security minister and the president, the newspaper said.

https://english.alaraby.co.uk/news/vietnamese-broker-israeli-arms-deal-faces-arrest-warrant

 No.954037

>>954028
Would be dope if they ended ties and purged the porky arms dealer. Doubt it will happen but who knows.

Also on the subject of Israel in general, it is pretty hilarious that despite America continually presenting their asshole to Israel, Israel continues to sell weapons to places like Vietnam and China.

The burger, eternally cucked in every way.

 No.954045

What would China look like today if the Gang of Four held control?

 No.954046

>>954022
>silence the populace
How would this work when Vietnam has the Fatherland Front, a kind of constitutionally protected civil organization, which literally exists to keep the Party in check?

 No.954051

>>954046
Well, that is why the whole article is hilarious, Israeli's calling out human rights abuses and disappearing/torturing people etc.

There is nobody on earth with less self awareness than a Zionist. Bar none. Even the burgers are less blatant than this.

 No.954053

>>954045
Egalitarian poverty and underdevelopment, which is to say Westoids would love it because they love far away places with poverty they can fetishize and pretend to care about. I'm not even sure such a China would be politically feasible, because it would lack wide support from the population, unlike Xi's system.

 No.954058

>>954053
>socialism causes poverty and underdevelopment
>you can either have le trickle down or le everybody is poor
>le commies just don't know how le tough life under socialism was, those spoilt le babies
>they only pretend to le care about le poor
>socialism has never had le support of the le population
>only capitalism can have le support
Thanks Mr Friedman, very cool!

 No.954059

>>954053
uyghur that is the modern china, all you are doing and all you ever do is projection. I am not a sectarian uygha but dengists aren't leftists. They aren't even human.

 No.954061

>>954058
it is
>socialism bad but also I am a socialist
aka unpaid ciauyghur/mssuyghur post yalta world order shit

 No.954065

>>954058
>>socialism causes poverty and underdevelopment
Embargoes and restriction of technological exchange, etc. do cause underdevelopment, you drooling retard.

>the rest of your projection and head cannon

boring

>>954059
boring zealot

 No.954076

>>954065
literally every socialist experiment has had embargoes and restrictions of technological exchange, the result has not been underdevelopment, but development in the face of a mountain of hostility.

What are saying? You have to be a cuck or they might fuck your wife? Meanwhile, you're still a cuck and they are still fucking your wife

 No.954082

>>954076
>the result has not been underdevelopment
Compared to the West? It absolutely was the case. You could compare textile, steel, etc. factories in 1991 Russia to those owned by the US and can not but come to this conclusion. And let's not start with the state of electronics, and other late 20th century conveniences.

>You have to be a cuck or they might fuck your wife?

<when anti-Dengism brings out the /pol/tard in you

 No.954102

>>954008
>the People's Zionism
shit take
China upholds the Palestinian right to a state.

 No.954103

how was Mao leftist? he literally discarded class struggle in his own words

 No.954107

>>954102
>two state solution
Absolutely disgusting

 No.954113

>>954107
Zionists oppose the idea that Palestinians can have their own state where they are politically enfranchised. Since China upholds Palestinian statehood, they cannot be Zionists.

 No.954124

>>954082
>hur dur imperialists did better than periphery countries
Wow well done. Ignoring of course the fact that the imperialists started with and maintained massive advantages.

How about we compare like for like,Cuba, for Haiti, for example. Nicaragua, to El Salvador. Bolivia, to chile, the ussr and somewhere like Brazil I suppose, outcomes
>poltard
Weak cope

>>954102
>>954113
China pays lip service to Palestinian support and get maintains economic, military and technological ties with Israel as mentioned above, long term ones in key geostrategic areas like Afghanistan and Latin America.

 No.954130

>>954124
>imperialists started with and maintained massive advantages
And embargoes are part and parcel of maintaining said advantages, something China outwitted to the growing chagrin of imperialists.

You literally have no case. Take the L.

 No.954136

>>954130
It’s not outwitting if you just join them, you literally have no case, take the L

 No.954139

If only all socialist countries could have sided with the CIA in every conflict involving socialists in the last 30 years, then perhaps there would not be a trade embargo on cuba. P sad

 No.954140

>>954103
What? Everything I've read suggests Mao advanced the class struggle, considering it paramount. The rightists were the ones who rejected or downplayed the class struggle in the interest of Capital.

 No.954143

>>953904
glowing

 No.954144

>>954124
>China pays lip service to Palestinian support
Yes and Zionist are mad about it.
China doesn't have enough long distance military projection to enforce statehood of Palestinians anyway.
If Palestine gets help it will have to be from a country much closer like Iran or something.

 No.954150

Reminder that it's always, always, always anglo "leftists" who are most pissed off by China.

 No.954159

>>954150
cultural libtards

 No.954163

>>954150
Prove you aren't an anglo
Post maw

 No.954167

because Chine has a unitarian party that calls itself communist and that's all it takes

 No.954208

>>954076
lol yup

 No.954211

>>954150
The most pissed off people about the Chinese bourgeois state that I have met are Chinese communist dissidents

 No.954215

>>954102
No they don't you dumb faggot hahaha
they send weapons and aid to israel in return for influence and the opportunity to invest. They are actively aiding the genocide of Palestinians. Actions speak louder than words.

 No.954217

>>954143
Both the American and the Chinese glowies win out from people believing that China is communist.

 No.954219

>>953900
Agreed we should support CIA in its crusade against China.

 No.954223

>>954219
The CIA calls China communist and wants the American proletariat AND the Chinese proletariat to believe the current system there is socialist.

 No.954233

>>954219
CIA, known ultras

 No.954235

>>954140
He didn't advance it, he completely abandoned it
>The rightists were the ones who rejected or downplayed the class struggle in the interest of Capital.
←—–

 No.954236

>>954233
The CIA actually did fund right deviationists

 No.954241

The Dengists/Tankies/Revisionists who believe the Capitalist, Imperialist, and Fascist State of Dengist China is “Socialist”, “Anti-Imperialist”, and “Marxist-Leninist” are brainwashed by Crypto-Fascist Marcyite Campism, 😂🤮! They are in desperate need of some Marxist-Leninist-Maoist praxis to get them on the Shining Path to Communism!

 No.954242

>>954236
Like the current Chinese government

 No.954243

>>954235
I agree that mao was a right deviation but I would need to see some further proof of that transcript

 No.954244

>>954242
yup including int baizoudogistan

 No.954306

>>954102
supporting the israeli state as it is equals zionism
china not only supports it with words but also economically and militarily
<long live the idf, the people's army, in their struggle against palestinian imperialism!
<long live zionist china in its struggle for selling weapons to saudi arabia to kill imperialist yemenis and selling weapons to israel to kill imperialist palestinians!
<long live zionist communist party of china in its struggle to support sanctions against iran for israel's sake!

 No.954417

>>954235
Nice idealism. He completely abandoned it because… He said things? Good thing I judge revolutionaries by their actions, not words.

 No.954418

Because it is Socialist.

What we should stop pretending about is the idea that it matters. The paradigm of the new Cold War which defines geopolitical and domestic civil struggle is not between communism and capitalism, but between “Authoritarians” and “Democrats”, which has no ideological content.

 No.954428

>>954223
The CIA does not. The CIA calls China “authoritarian.” The present CIA is indifferent to socialism or capitalism, and only cares about geopolitical machinations. It discourages media workers and propagandists from drawing attention to state ideology and economic modes in lieu of comprehending and relating to political entities as pro/anti China. China is only ever called communist by the US agencies in the context of applying old, anti-Chinese laws which are still in effect and written during the twilight of the Cold War.

 No.954433

>>954428
It’s actually much more common for the CIA to call China capitalist, imperialist, and neo-colonialist.

 No.954435

>>954144
Yeh I’m sure they are mad about the capture of geopolitical objectives and their big shiny new port largest one they’ve got in lands they ethnically cleansed.

>>954150
Reminder that’s it’s always people who say Anglo who don’t have a fucking clue about shit

 No.954439

>>954428
>the CIA is indifferent to socialism or capitalism
Dengoids literally disgust me. The things they will say to defend China.

The CIA was literally purposefully invented to oppose socialism and that is all it has ever done.

If you believe otherwise you are either a knowing liar propagandising for them or simply without the facts, a noob to socialism, and should sit down shut up and listen

 No.954442

>>953900
Hopium. The answer is always hopium.

 No.954444

>>954150
t. calls them "jungle trots"

 No.954446

>>954435
China didn’t create Palestine, you did. Blame yourself, not the far off Asian country with the policy of non-intervention.

 No.954448

>>954439
It’s absolutely un-equivocally true that the CIA and the US a foreign policy and intelligence apparatus as whole has ceased to characterize its enemies as socialist and begin to characterize them as authoritarian.

 No.954451

>>954446
Yes me I personally created Israel lmao.

Non intervention is not when you build their biggest port, trade weapons and other tech, and enter into military alliances with them alongside the CIA. Unless you are telling me

1) those things didn’t happen or 2) those things don’t count as intervention

Kek. The Palestinian liberation movement states that virtually all Israeli goods are complicit in the oppression of Palestinians, yes that does in fact apply to ports and weapons tech lmao

 No.954452

>>954448
Oh i see well if the CIA labels something as something it definitely changes what they fundamentally do and have done since their inception.

>um China actually says it supports Palestine so… it does despite all actual material action

>um… the CIA actually says it fights authoritarianism so… it does despite all the actual material action

The state of this lot Jesus

 No.954454

The quality of dengoids on this board actually used to be okay but it’s plummeted the further down the hole they’ve gone

 No.954460

>>954113
2-state solution is purposefully meaningless and implicitly supports israel

 No.954461

>>954448
The CIA will actively supports socialist and communist states where it supports it goal of containing China. It has pushed for agnosticism in regards to state ideology, and a reorientation to understanding good and bad based on friend/enemy distinctions. It is pro-Vietnamese Communism because it’s anti-China, and pro-SDF because it’s anti Syrian, pro-Maoist in SEA, pro-Baloch in Pakistan, and notably, pro-anarchist/leftcom in the US, in regards to organizations that have alarmingly narrow focus on Mainalnd China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.

 No.954463

>>954451
Yes, trade is non-intervention. The CIA is working hard to expel China from Israel, don’t worry. Palestine is your atrocity. Not ours.

 No.954471

>>954461
>the CIA is pro Maoism in SEA
Lmao. No it isn’t.
>pro Vietnamese
Again, no, it’s not
>pro SDF
Because it got kicked out of Turkey. At the time Russian was also pro SDF and so was Assad. By the way the CIA has also worked with assad, and assad is not a socialist. Absolutely dog shit take.
>pro anarchist/ leftcom
If you mean putting saboteurs at the anti globalisation protests etc, that is explicitly anti communist in all means, if you think they differentiate you’re a dumbass.

 No.954472

>>954463
>ingnores the part about actual military alliances
>ignored that Palestinians explicitly ask for a boycott of all Israeli goods
>pretends trade is non political, as a communist

>some shit about who I am not the actual information contained in post I.e idpol


Deng cucks, staying cucked since.. idk whenever Bernie cucked and Corbyn cucked is about as long as they’ve been a “communist”

 No.954473

>>954471
From here on out, pay attention to the number of times US propaganda organs such as the NYT, Washington Post and WSJ, and government officials and diplomats mention “authoritarian and democracy” over “socialism and capitalism”. The former will outnumber the later 100:1, conservatively.

 No.954475

>>954473
Oh the lib papers call stuff authoritarian omg that it literally hard smoking gun evidence that the CIA supports Maoists in south east Asia and Vietnamese communism

You defo haven’t just fan ficced that out your opinion haver poop chute in an enormous coping flail

 No.954479

>>954463
>Not ours.
Who's "we" uygha

 No.954480

>>954435
>Reminder that’s it’s always people who say Anglo who don’t have a fucking clue about shit
t. anglo, naturally

 No.954481

>>954479
He’s pretending he’s Chinese but he’s an American pansexual other kin

 No.954484

>>954463
fuck you zionist

 No.954485

>>954480
If you use the word Anglo you are not anti idpol

 No.954489

>>954417
True, actions speak louder than words. And Mao was a capitalist roader in actions, too, like the meeting in the pic when he joined the side of Nixon and the USA.

 No.954502

>>954417
Can you explain what the Bloc of Four Classes was except class collaborationism?

 No.954507

>>954502
uh it actulaly was uuh the contradictoin uuuhhhhhhhhhh

 No.954518

>>954502
"Big tent" politics. That doesn't make Mao right-wing. The whole point of "big tent" politics was to mobilize as many as possible against the Japanese forces and later KMT. The Bolsheviks did the same thing for the overthrow of the Tsar. Curious, what is your tendency? Wrecker-ism?

 No.954553

>>954518
Anon, the Bloc of Four Classes and New Democracy was after the Revolution and war, and it's explicit class collaborationism. What exactly do you think the Chinese flag symbolizes?
>The largest star symbolizes the Communist Party of China's leadership and the surrounding four smaller stars symbolizing the Bloc of Four Classes, i.e. proletarians, peasants, the petty bourgeoisie (small business owners) and the national bourgeoisie.
Mao, Deng, there's no difference.

 No.954572

>>954553
The point of the Cultural Revolution was to abolish the "big tent".

 No.954576

>>954572
Did it work

 No.954581

>>954576
do you?

 No.954602

>>953900
productive forces + materialist dialectics + art of war

 No.954603

>>954553
>The largest star symbolizes the Communist Party of China's leadership and the surrounding four smaller stars symbolizing the Bloc of Four Classes, i.e. proletarians, peasants, the petty bourgeoisie (small business owners) and the national bourgeoisie.
Is that actually true or retconned? How tf did they get away with that shit?

 No.954609

>>954602
Capitalist reforms spat in the face of all that and wrecked the economy, just like in the USSR. They were done just to make some party bureaucrats rich at the expense of the proletariat and socialism

 No.954611

>>954603
>How tf did they get away with that shit?
By having right-wingers in the Party. Read the OP.

 No.954726

>>954685
Laughably untrue.

 No.954746

>>954685
still blows my mind that mao was an anarchist at first

 No.954752

>>954746
He was a librarian too when he was an anarchist right? Just shows that anyone can rise to power if circumstances were right

 No.954756

>>954685
Stfu dengoid. The cultural revolution was one of the most based things to ever happen in leftism.

 No.954796

>>954746
You make it sound as it was a significant chunk of his early political life. It was more like a second of his politically active life in the greater span of things.

 No.954802

>>954796
all i said was mao was an anarchist at first which is a fact

 No.954835

>>954746
>>954802
It is common for many Marxists, especially today, to have gone through an anarchist phase. It's because anarchism is more accessible to the uninitiated but radically oriented, both in it being a synthesis of socialism and liberalism as well as it being theoretically less dense than Marxism, which takes years of reading, scientific study and practice to get a grip of.
Most Marxist on this site seem to have had an anarchist phase when political development threads come up.

 No.954847

>>954835
Also add that today that heavy layer of anti-communist propaganda still lingering on from the cold war can be bypassed via anarchism.

 No.954872

>>954835
>Marxism, which takes years of reading, scientific study and practice to get a grip of
so most people on leftypol arent marxists?

 No.954888


 No.954952

>>954835
I went from vulgar anti-imperialist (more like anti-America and anti-Israel) /pol/tard straight to Marx (although I have read a bit of Kropotkin, Bakunin, Proudhon, Stirner). Do I get snowflake points? Understanding dialectics and the point of communism took years though. Before that I was like "capitalism is immoral and dialectics don't matter". Now I know better. A lot of times talking to socialists online I am disappointed by their moralizing, lack of understanding dialectics or the relevance thereof and just not getting the point is to progress past capitalism, to harness the benefits capitalism has brought, without the restrictions. To self-crit a bit although my power level grows there is still a lot I don't understand. Such as why is the war in Ukraine happening, why has the West decided to destroy its economies? None of the offered explanations are satisfactory to me. It seems like an unprecedented event, where an inter-dependent world in terms of trade is suddenly teared apart over what? How does this advance the interests of the ruling classes of either side? It is a mystery to me.

 No.954971

>>954952
instead of dialectics it sounds more like you studied dianetics anon

 No.954975

>>954971
Elaborate

 No.954978

>>954975
>although my power level grows there is still a lot I don't understand

 No.954982

>>954978
Yes? Must I explain the power level meme on an imageboard of all places?

 No.954987

>>954982
it's a joke anon
do you have autism

 No.954992

>>954987
In any discussion surrounding dialectics the chances of participants being autistic is high, anon.

 No.955077

>>953916
Imo Hua Guofeng would have been better if he was able to heal the Sino-Soviet split.

 No.955136

>china socialist
>no universal healthcare

 No.955141

>>953919
Thread

 No.955160

File: 1651799671659.png (17.59 KB, 594x389, FSCHWhQUcAIHH-u.png)

Mao to Nixon, "I would've voted for you. I like Rightists."

 No.955180

>>954602
Literal Orientalist Qanon, 😂🤣🤮!

 No.955186

>>955160
I’ll admit that Mao made two critical mistakes, meeting Nixon/Kissinger and not reeducating Deng in the full Dunce Cap routine, because if he didn’t make these two mistakes, China would still be Socialist.

 No.955215

>>955180
kek true.
Trust. The. Plan.

 No.955217

>>955160
reminds me that Khrushchev once said that if he were British, he would vote Tory

 No.955457

>>954603
I would suggest you educate yourself on the new democracy.
The purpose of the Chinese revolution, like the great October revolution, was to speed up class antagonism in china by establishing a society containing both capitalist and socialist relations, just like the Russian federative Soviet republic did for years… It was explicitly class collaborationist. The great proletarian cultural revolution was the , you know, *proletarian* revolution attempting to overthrow the burgs entirely. It failed.

 No.955580

>>954059
Based.

 No.955582

>>954082
<Couldn't refute the point but just attack the idea's similarity with other things

Dengoids confirmed cucks

 No.955589

>>954102
>>954113

<Two state

Literally worthless.
Anyone not explicitly supporting the Axis of Resistance in Palestine is supporting Israel.
Everything is just games being played on Palestinians skin.

>>954150
<Idpol in 2022
Stop it.

>>954461
<Cia is currently pro-Maoism in SEA
No sources?

>>954144
<China's Gdp EIGHTY TIMES higher than Iran's one

Yeah there's no way it all they could help Palestine in their struggle.

 No.955618

File: 1651826588827.png (42.42 KB, 500x502, ClipboardImage.png)


 No.955623

>>955589
>anglo is idpol
lol

 No.955630

>>955589
>The CIA will actively supports socialist and communist states where it supports it goal of containing China.
God I wish that were true.
>quoting that one buzz term from the least retarded centrist nazi
Kill yourself pseud
>It has pushed for agnosticism in regards to state ideology
Western imperialists are the only reason that the middle east is still theocratic instead of communist and Western intelligence agencies have been implicated in literrally every single islamic terrorist plot in the west.
Are you just larping as a mentally retarded liberal or something?

 No.955631

>>955623
Define idpol you pants on head motherfucker

 No.955634

File: 1651827305591-0.png (1.54 MB, 1500x1024, mao and nixon.png)

File: 1651827305591-1.jpg (424.7 KB, 1200x840, mao and kissinger.jpg)

>China isn't socialist anymore because it's foreign policy is bad
People say this like Mao had a great foreign policy.

 No.955635

File: 1651827336142.png (8.31 KB, 300x300, ClipboardImage.png)

China isn't radical enough. That's why I'm voting Labour!

 No.955638

>>955634
>x also bad so China socialist and Chinese state good
there you go again
Yes mao era CPC was right deviationist wrecker shit as well

 No.955639

>>955618
You spend literally every day of your life trying to defend the cpc from criticism and calling China socialist. You're not getting paid mofo

 No.955640

File: 1651827917986.png (64.76 KB, 720x1280, ClipboardImage.png)

>>955639
>Triggered baizuo.

 No.955662

>>955623
<Essentialism is not idpol
Least retarded dengoid

 No.955663

>>955635
Labour is about as radical as China rn lmao

 No.955664

>>954150
Remove the anglo and the anarcho-trotskyite-liberals will disappear.

 No.955666

>>955663
Corbyn is unironically a thousand times better than Xi

 No.955668

File: 1651830647928.gif (1.92 MB, 480x270, well there it is.gif)


 No.955672

File: 1651831105226-0.png (274 KB, 645x905, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1651831105226-1.png (470.25 KB, 634x491, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1651831105226-2.png (636.28 KB, 634x520, ClipboardImage.png)


 No.955679

>>954952
>How does this advance the interests of the ruling classes of either side? It is a mystery to me.
They could just be irrational and insane and incapable of planning anything.

 No.955681

>>955672
Nothing to see here, just two wholesome socdems looking at eachother

 No.955683

>>955681
All two attendees of the anti-imperialist social democrat conference

 No.955687

File: 1651833243976.jpg (21.78 KB, 680x447, nowlookatthisbait.jpg)


 No.955703

>>954150
Literally true. I'm not even really interested in pursuing this line of argument, but it's chiling just how true it is.

Let's take a look at all the recognisable namefags/flagfags and those whose nationality can be deduced from their flag

>>953924 anglo
>>953957 anglo
>>955180 anglo
>>955687 anglo

>>955635 I'm not 100% sure about this one, but if it's Anglo SocDem, then yes

>>955141 This anon seems to be the only recognisable non-anglo ITT, but I still have doubts because many Western lefties like larping as Allende (not that there is anything wrong with that).

IMO it'd be funny if we got in contact with a member of some Trotskyite party in New Zealand (I haven't checked but I'm pretty sure they have at least one) who hates China and convinced him/her to start posting on our board to make sure that the circle is closed all the five horsemen of the apocalypse are here.

 No.955710

>>953916
with the advantage of being able to look back at history, it seems like the mistake all communist leaders made at some time or another was to move too fast along a path which they thought was right, without treating people as people first and foremost and experimenting and taking it slow. I dont know if this is an indictment since who knows what could have been the outcome of too much caution and not enough timeliness. But for us here in the 21st century, we ought to be 100% for a scientific approach to all matters, rather than dogmatism. One good thing about Deng (even though he is very equally guilty of this idealism, or just treachery) is that he showed that a communist party can embrace privatization and markets, if it seems to be the way to success. They can't be an ultimate goal since they hold within them unavoidable pitfalls, we know this because of Marx, but it gives us space to, e.g., not force collectivization, or force a certain use of farmland, etc. No matter what, we start from where we stand now, and move rationally.

thanks anon for this post, its always good to learn some more about mao

>>953923
This points to an important problem for understanding the role of a socialist party. On the one hand, it is a tool of the working people against the bourgeois establishment, on the other hand in cases where revolution wins the party has come into control of the state, and the state acts best when it doesn't try to appease or push some ideological line.

This is a problem we see in socialist countries, where the party becomes basically synonymous with the state, and is no longer fighting for the people, instead it becomes bloated with all kinds of factions in order to run the government (since it takes lots of bureaucrats), and inevitably some liberal takes control. Though i just realized i'm only thinking of russia and china, so idk if this holds…. what did vietnam and laos do? I'm not going to count cuba because for the longest time castro was the leader. They seem to be doing ok tho.

Anyways, do you think that this means there can't be a one party solution, or that the party should be more strict, or something else? I think it's good to have a one-party (basically no-party) state and to allow democracy within it, because it's the people's after all, but the socialist party of the country then should split and be actively engaged again in a grassroots way, apart from any government activity.

 No.955924

>>955703
China is definitely not socialist or trying to move toward it.
Also yall dont have my countries flag

 No.955930

>>955929

I'm a kiwi

 No.955954

>>953900
>Shitty revisionists are shitty but are not a useful counterweight to the current neoliberal world order and don’t have a greater capacity for unfucking themselves
What is to be done

 No.956047

>>955703
>King Lear is an anglo
King Lear is many things, including a glowie, but he's not an anglo lmao

 No.956052

>>956047
of course he is
you aren't that unabashedly obnoxious and insane without being one
>>955930
of course you are

 No.956053

>>956047
Isn't he American or is the fact he voted for Joe Biden a meme

 No.956061

>>956052
>you aren't that unabashedly obnoxious and insane without being one
you are

 No.956065

>>956047
Isn't King Lear American and an admitted Biden voter?

 No.956211

>>956204
See >>955954

 No.956214

>>956211
communism is when you produce and trade communist commodities rather than capitalist commodities
it's dialectical yuo see

 No.956216

>>956214
>Muh commodities
<You will abolish commodity production overnight

 No.956220

China is more progressive (in a historical sense) than most countries are right now, I also dont think its socialism and believe the by 2050 talk when I see it, but many Anti-China socialists lack that nuance too.
What I found almost Chinas biggest lack is internationalism

 No.956223

>>956220
Eh, I still consider them socialist, but revisionists who gave up revolutionary politics and class struggle. Still, they have the potential to at least unfuck themselves

 No.956226

>>956216
no, that's ultraleft nonsense
real communism means building productive forces until the sun explodes

 No.956228

>>956223
for sure, and they look to be best prepared for the big troubles that will propably define this decade

 No.956230

>>956214
Nobody except MLkiddies think China is communist. It's not. It's primarily a capitalist mode of production managed by a communist state.

 No.956231

>>956226
real communism is giving weapons to israel and saudi arabia

 No.956249


 No.956684

>>956230
>It's primarily a capitalist mode of production managed by a communist state.

but that is communist, just not communism

 No.956699

>>956230
That is communism.

 No.956700

>>956231
How else do you get the Saudis and Israelis to cooperate with you instead of the US? How do you defeat the US empire without breaking the petro-dollar?
If you wanna defeat the US, what other options do you have?

 No.956709

>>956230
It's managed by a dicatorship of the bourgeois that is pretending to be communist for reasons beneficial to capital in China and internationally.

 No.956716

>>956709
Source?

 No.956723

>956716
give me a source or no

 No.957059

>>956700
Iran is keeping the Empire busy in the Middle East with 1,2% of China's Gdp.
Sometime you have to simply face the Empire and kill the beast.

 No.957073

File: 1651909632104.png (429.17 KB, 399x614, wowstartarguinganytime.png)

>>955703
>ur an anglo

 No.957075

>>956223
>they have the potential to at least unfuck themselves
This.

 No.957080

>>953900
China is revisionist. Even still, it is better for the CCP to be in power with all its flaws than for China to allow itself to be pulled back into Western sphere of influence. I think we should closely watch Xi Xinping as he is much less revisionist than some of his predecessors.

 No.957085

>>953900
>be anglo
<how come you guys think in a non-anglo way?
<makes me furious!!!

 No.957102

>>955703
Anglo Anglo Anglo.
You are all anglos
None of you are free from the box

 No.957134

>>957080
>I think we should closely watch Xi Xinping as he is much less revisionist than some of his predecessors.
How so? Also what control does Xi Jinping have over the affairs of China?

 No.957137

>>956220
>What I found almost Chinas biggest lack is internationalism
Lol they are the opposite. They have been national chauvinists since day one and lost any pragmatic aiding of foreign communists or anti-imperialist forces since the 70s

 No.957156

>>957085
you're literally an anglo until proven otherwise

 No.957161

>>956709
Basically Chinese people believe they are socialists but fortunately White leftoids are here to tell them they are merely pretending.

 No.957173

Frankiy the anarchist/leftcom demand that we draw a firm distinction between ending poverty, developing a country etc. and Socialism, and that these good things are not actually part of the socialist project, should be rejected with extreme prejudice.

And (while on the subject) doing things like dedicating entire issues of your magazine to literal CIA agents should also result in exclusion. But that’s just me.

 No.957180

>>957161
>socialism is when you believe you are socialist and call yourselves socialist
These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves

 No.957183

>>957173
>>>/mensheviks/

 No.957184

>>957173
>socialism is when good things happen
Long live Socialism with Prussian Characteristics and Bismarck Thought

 No.957187

The angloid is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a liberal, parasite, imperialist, bourgeois, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him an anglo and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”

 No.957189

>>957187
>t. anglo

 No.957214

>>957184
Socialism is the development of productive forces. Socialism is the elimination of poverty.

 No.957215

>>957180
On the contrary, you are the ones that have changed the definition of socialism to avoid giving that label, for some reason, to the most successful socialist project in world history.

 No.957217

>>957214
Literal neoliberal LMFAO
The real movement? Wuzzat? shut the fuck up ultra

 No.957218

>>957184
Anglos implicitly believe that socialism is a western project, and that it cannot have Chinese characteristics. For an asian country to be socialist, it must copy the practices of the west. The more of its own original ideas it incorporates, the less socialist, and the more oriental and despotic it is.

 No.957221

>>957215
And what "original" definition of socialism are you using? Ferdinand Lassalle? lmao

 No.957223

>>957217
Neoliberalism is when you end extreme poverty for 500 million people. What’s odd though, I haven’t figured it out yet, but for some reason, only China was able to do this despite every other country also being neoliberal. Best not to think about, though. Socialism is the cult of poverty.

 No.957227

>>957218
Dirigisme originated in the West actually

 No.957230

If you ain’t poor as shit…. You ain’t a socialist! We don’t give a crap about that “development” crap here son. That ain’t real socialism unless you are eating meet twice a year—Max!

 No.957232

File: 1651918787515.png (370.98 KB, 1400x988, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957223
Indistinguishable from neoliberals shoving this graph in your face and saying capitalism good lmao

 No.957233

>>957227
Dumb bitch China invented the administrative state and implement every form of it before your civilization learned you could shit in a hike.

 No.957235

>>957230
>socialism is when development
Park Chung-Hee was my favorite socialist. You're just an anglo that doesn't like Socialism with Korean Characteristics

 No.957238

>>957233
So you're not even denying SWCC is Dirigisme lmao
You will never be Chinese
You will always be American

 No.957239

>>957218
dengists are the orientalists (usually westerners) Chinese communists don't say retarded orientalist shit about China or argue to abandon the class struggle
>>957227
frogs?

 No.957241

>>957232
That graph is a wonderful example because when you compare it to the same graph ex-China, you see the ex-China version is a flat line. Every positive trend in poverty and development that neoliberals claimed was a global trend was in fact a near-exclusively Chinese trend.

 No.957242

>>957233
go back to your fbi.gov cult ezra

 No.957243

>>957238
No, I’m just pointing out the idea that you invented government was laughable.

 No.957245

File: 1651919018845.png (104.82 KB, 768x512, ClipboardImage.png)


 No.957246

>>957241
lol no and the reason line go up is because the standard for poverty keeps going down

 No.957248

>>957243
And who fuckin said that LMFAO
Fine, have it your way, China invented Dirigisme and class collaboration. Is that what you want?

 No.957249

>>957245
had that one ready huh? lmao

 No.957252

>>957249
there's this thing called google

 No.957253

>>957248
dengism is mental illness as is all right wing thought

 No.957256

>>957239
Ah yes, Chinese are actually Westerners and when they have a civilization and a system of social ethics and governance philosophy that predates the 20th century they are self-orientaliziing. Good point.

Oh why don’t they know? Socialism is when you are FUCKING POOOOOOOOR AS SHIIIT. It has nothing to do with developing social or productive forces.

 No.957257

>>957252
it usually takes me a while to find decent sources on google. I saved some decent bookmarks at least but they were all kind of obscure like uni websites and shit

 No.957260

>>957248
You said that randomly that, bizarrely, socialism with Chinese characteristics was invented in the West. No it wasn’t you moron lol

 No.957261

>>957256
shut the fuck up western idealist bugman

 No.957264

File: 1651919310422.png (193.27 KB, 640x479, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957256
>productive forces

 No.957265

>>957245
Notice how one line goes straight down and the other doesn’t?

 No.957268

>>957265
But it does go down though That means it's alleviating poverty and thus it's socialism, right?

 No.957269

>>957264
SOCIALISM

IS

POVERTY.

Repeat after me: Socialism is poverty.

 No.957270

File: 1651919515056.png (915.69 KB, 640x853, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957269
>socialism is when you're rich

 No.957272

>>957264
we should compile a list of phrases used by the dengist gpt bot

1.productive forces
2.some confucian shit
3.socialism with chinese characteristics
4.xi
5.china is anti imperialist
6.ultra
7.china is socialist
8.Whether it is, or is not, is secondary to the fact
9.I didn't say that
etc.

 No.957273

>>957268
No, if it was socialism, the line would go up as we’ve established. Socialism is not when you stop being hungry, it’s not when you do science or art. It’s when you are poor.

 No.957274


 No.957275

>>957270
We are all socialists, here, which is why we all understand that not having enough food is the best way to live. Do not confuse “growing food” with socialism.

 No.957276

>>957273
>>>/r/sanders4president

 No.957277

>>957273
No, socialism is when you alleviate poverty and have taxes retarded ultra. Over here we support AES like China, Vietnam, France, USA, Saudi Arabia

 No.957280

>>957272
I'm not convinced the dengoid posters on this board aren't already gpt-2 bots tbh

 No.957281

>>957277
I can’t help but notice China isn’t a poor agricultural economy and the people there seem like they eat the recommended, or perhaps even MORE than recommended, serving of protein a day. Why are we still pretending this country is socialist?(Ban evading idpol spammer)(User is a known right wing astroturfer upon further inspection)

 No.957283

>>957281
>Why are we still pretending this country is socialist?
The government does stuff and they are cool and based Orientals, unlike the decadent West, so they perfectly fit the definition of socialism as dictated by Lassalle Thought. You just hate them because they don't fit your "pure" conception of socialism from ultras like Marx and Lenin.

 No.957287

The dude that made the claim that “the CIA supports Maoism in Southeast Asia and also Vietnamese communism” really just made that claim, reasserted it when challenged, did not post any proof then left thread.

I’m telling you bros dengoidism thought is literally fan fiction 50 shades of grey style

 No.957291

>>954553
If class collaboration is whenever classes have their contradictions mediated through through the party, then all sucessful revolutions in all of history have been class-collaborationist, and we have no reason to suspect anything other than class collaboration will work.

Yeah, don't just regurgitate slogans. Actual class collaborationism is mediating class conflict with the intention of perpetuating it.

 No.957294

>>957291
What would you call the Bloc of Four Social Classes

 No.957296

>>957294
What would you call the soviet worker-peasant alliance?

 No.957297

>>957296
I don't see the worker-peasant including the national bourgeoisie, do you?

 No.957298

>>957291
Based and National Syndicalist pilled

 No.957299

>>957298
>>957297
The national bourgeoisie is a revolutionary class, same as the peasantry, same as the proletariat.

 No.957306

>>957299
Yes, and the Chinese Revolution was a bourgeois revolution led by the peasantry (proto-petty boug) against the feudal and colonial elements of China, therefore them allying with the international bourgeoisie against the Soviets and them becoming the new big capitalist superpower is nothing surprising and perfectly consistent
Glad we are on the same page

 No.957313

File: 1651921935559-0.png (908.92 KB, 736x725, 1644186124469.png)

ITT
>it seems like /our/ success has been a source of controversy
What is the communist party doing?
What is your government doing?
Has your country seen a significant reduction of poverty in the past 30 years?
Has your country seen a significant reduction of food insecurity and calorie deficiency?
Is your country's infrastructure not only not crumbling, but getting way better every single year?
When was the last time your country finished a line of the bullet train system? It does have a bullet train system, right?

 No.957318

>>957306
Nah it's a socialist revolution, the sino-soviet split was not just the fault of the coloured people, the white people also did some national chauvenism which lead to the split.

Curious how you only blame the people that don't look like you 白左

 No.957319

>>957313
Why would I be jealous of a capitalist state when I already live in one though

 No.957321

>>957313
Nooooo anon capitalism constantly does this and is totally able to do so and so therefore I don't have to suspend the lens where I can blame 3rd world people for the failure of 1st world revolutionaries to achieve anything of note 😭😭

 No.957322

>>957318
Explain to me how it was necessary for China to ally with fucking Nixon and the USA at every turn just because Khrushchev is a retard, I'll wait lmao
>Nah it's a socialist revolution
No proof, no right to speak
I already elaborated why it most definitely isn't

 No.957324

>>957321
>can't argue
>hides behind idpol
You will never be Chinese

 No.957327

>>957322
>Explain to me how it was necessary for China to ally with fucking Nixon

The USSR routinely followed a chauveniat line against it's fraternal socialist nations. PRC adjusted to this reality. If you had to defend yourself against the USSR, allowing with the US was the obvious choice.

Now was the sino-soviet split a mistake? Sure. Was it the fault of Mao and PRC alone?
Not even close.

 No.957328

>>957313
I'm not jealous of delusional midwit burger autists that pretend China is socialist and we should abandon the class struggle and sell off communism entirely. Completely oblivious to the fact that Chinese capital doesn't give a fuck about proles and doesn't need to allow lube for proles outside of China in it's new imperial periphery in America and shit when they become the new capitalist superpower. You are not only a traitor to communism, not only wasting your life spending all your time spamming here, not only delusional and incapable of overcoming your stupidity, but you are also a fucking cuck

 No.957333

>>957328
>>957328
>Completely oblivious to the fact that Chinese capital doesn't give a fuck about proles and doesn't need to allow lube for proles outside of China in it's new imperial periphery in America and shit when they become the new capitalist superpower

Agreed, but "chinese capital" isn't in charge of PRC. The CPC is.

 No.957334

>>957319
>all countries that have a primarily capitalist mode of production are exactly the same
Your country has been on the decline in key components of welfare and infrastructure for the past 30 years.
Unlike China which has been the direct opposite.

You are suffering from nothing more than imperial anxiety. Massive amounts of cope and denial are typical symptoms.

 No.957336

>>957333
Chinese capital is in charge of the CPC and this gaslighting from "fellow communists" should be met with beatings and bullets

 No.957337

>>957327
>the ussr did something naughty so China doing that times 10 is justified

 No.957338

>>957334
Uh no anon, A = A
This is how dialectics work.
It doesn't matter who's in charge of a process. It's just capitalism. I will be a manager in the new trot adventurist cambodia superstate

 No.957339

>>957321
Yes it does. It is Keynsian shit done at the behest of certain segments of the bourgeoisie that directly benefit from it.

 No.957340

>>957334
So you do admit China has a capitalist mode of production lmao
Was Japan before 1991 socialist? Was South Korea during Park Chung-hee socialist? Is Singapore socialist? Honest questions
>imperial anxiety
I live in a eastern yuro shithole country you retard, meanwhile your burgershart ass corn syrup smell permeates through the screen. No amount of settler guilt will make you chinese anon

 No.957341

>>957337
>>957336
Source?
How are the bourgeoisie in charge of the CPC. How did the PRC act "10 times" worse than the USSR prior to and during the split?

 No.957342

>>957328
I'm not a burger, retard. My country has extreme corruption, violence, death, and poverty. We can only wish we had agovernment like China's. We've been poor for decades and shit doesn't get better for my country. You're a privileged scum that preaches "purity" from an ivory tower. Kill yourself :)

 No.957343

>>957339
However I should add: Keynes saving capitalism was much less bad for communism than China's actions which is capitalist vampirism of the former socialist system

 No.957344

>>957342
where do you live?

 No.957345

>>957339
>>957339
>Yes it does. It is Keynsian shit
When did Keynesianism happen? What made it possible and later what made it successful?

 No.957346

>>957341
>How did the PRC act "10 times" worse than the USSR prior to and during the split?
Oh well Khrushchev is a chauvinist fuckhead, guess I'll pull out of Vietnam and let Americans slaughter them and support the Mujahideen now

 No.957349

>>957340
>So you do admit China has a capitalist mode of production lmao
Sure.
That doesn't make PRC capitalist.

 No.957350

>>957346
Sure if the USSR is a dangerous chauveniat nation on your borders, that makes geopolitical sense

 No.957351

>>957349
>capitalism isn't when you have capitalism
L M A O

 No.957352

>>957350
Who's more chauvinist in your opinion, the USSR or the USA?

 No.957353

>>957346
And also cooperate with the CIA and save capitalism from a defeat by socialism, however revisionist. China put America on life support and nursed it back the health to get it strong enough to defeat communism

 No.957356

>>957349
>>So you do admit China has a capitalist mode of production lmao
>Sure.
>That doesn't make PRC capitalist.
Have you ever read a single piece of marxist theory?
The mode of production determines the class character os the state *facepalm*

 No.957357

>>957352
The more I argue with dengoids here the more I realize just how far this capitalist rot in the prc dates back

 No.957359

>>957344
Mexico.
>>957351
>>957340
>muh categorical analysis of politics
<BEHOLD! A COMMUNIST COUNTRY! JAPAN BEFORE THE 1990s
No Diogenes, wrong room. Plato's academy is three boards down.

 No.957360

File: 1651923330089.png (29.22 KB, 671x173, whattf.png)

>>957349
Capped and saved
I fucking hate this site lmao

 No.957361

File: 1651923432589.png (1.37 MB, 1280x720, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957359
Diogenes owned Plato though

 No.957362

>>957360
desktopbro pls take more cringe pics and we'll save them for a dengist cringe thread

 No.957363

>>957359
>Mexico
Post proofs

 No.957369

File: 1651923918424.mp4 (19.35 MB, 1920x1080, 1651313922512.mp4)

>>957356
>>957360
Arrogant and ignorant. Name a more iconic duo.
>>957361
Yeah, Diogenes was based. But we're not engaging in Platonic categories here.
>>957363
No thanks.

 No.957370

>>957340
>I live in a eastern yuro shithole country you retard, meanwhile your burgershart ass corn syrup smell permeates through the screen. No amount of settler guilt will make you chinese anon

 No.957371

>>957369
I knew you were a burger motherfucker

 No.957375

>>957351
>>957356
Not that anon but I think he meant China as a socialist project. Like Vietnam or Venezuela, they don't have socialist economies but they have some sort of socialist political project in power.

 No.957380

>>957351
Base and Superstrucuter dont corralate 1 to 1

 No.957386

>>957356
Problem:
You didn't say PRC ONLY has a capitalist mode of production. You said capitalism exists within PRC.
This is a Motte and Bailey. You're using an uncontroversial statement to prove a controversial one.

 No.957388

>>957351
feudalism had capitalism. That didn't make feudalism capitalism. That's not how it works. Your ridicule demonstrates arrogant ignorance

 No.957389

>>957386
No you just said something retarded that displayed your ignorance and lack of understanding of marxism

 No.957390

>>957352
The USA ofc.
But who posed a more immediate threat to PRC at the time?

 No.957392

File: 1651925512973.png (830.02 KB, 975x1200, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957388
>>957386
Jesus fucking Christ

 No.957393

>>957390
If I had to guess at the time, it would be the country hell-bent on lynching every communist on Earth. You're telling me the USSR was more of a threat than this?

 No.957394

>>957389
litterally no u.
If your claim is that if capitalism exists within a system then that system is capitalist, then you need to read more Marx, because that would make all systems since the dawn of civilization capitalism

 No.957395

>>957380
the dichotomy inbetween the mode of production and the state isn't the dichotomy inbetween the base and the "supertoocuter"

 No.957397

>>957390
America had fucking nukes pointed at China and was actively embargoing.and destablizing them and had just killed 10s of millions of them and their brothers.

 No.957398

>>957393
By the late 60's in the Khrushzhev era it was totally up in the air whether the tanks that was going to roll over you were Russian or American.
I'm not saying it was a wise decision, but I'm saying that blaming PRC alone shows an obvious bias and one that's probably based on perceived racial characteristics.

 No.957400

>>957395
mode of production and ruling class dont corralate 1 to 1

 No.957401

>>957397
USSR had nukes pointed at China.

 No.957403

>>957401
Yeah after China threatened to invade them. You rewlly think the USSR would use the nukes? Of course not. They were brothers, they were just having a dementia moment due to capitalist roaders

 No.957404

>>957400
Yes they do

 No.957405

>>957394
It's not that capitalism "exists within a system", it's that capitalism is unquestionably the dominant mode of production in China you dense motherfucker
Capitalism and socialism aren't defined in terms of percentages or whatever the fuck you're spouting, but in terms of class relations. China has markets, private ownership, wage-labour, commodity production, capital accumulation etc, so unless you are a socdem lib that thinks socialism is when Norway and welfare, China is capitalist without a single doubt. Why do you keep embarassing yourself?

 No.957406

>>957404
then why were capitalist revolutions neccesarry

 No.957407

>>957405
you didnt describe class relations but the economic mode thats a difference

 No.957408

>>957398
The USSR never threatened China in the same way America did, even while China was actively aggravating them. That is historical revsionism

 No.957409

>>957403
The USSR had done politics that had alienated most of the communist Bloc.
Romania, Albania, DDR, Hungary, Yugoslavia: these were all nations that were alienated by USSR chauvinism and played out the west and the east against each other.
It is lamentable that this happened, but let's not pretend that USSR policies did not play a large factor in this state of affairs.

 No.957410

>>957408
>The USSR never threatened China in the same way America did, even while China was actively aggravating them. That is historical revsionism
Source? How many American troops were stationed on the Chinese border?

 No.957411

>>957406
wdym? the ruling class and mode of production were both challenged by an underclass that waged evenetually successful revolutions, like with the socialist ones

 No.957415

>>957409
No I agree with that, I also think what China did is even worse like titoist betrayal on steroids

 No.957417

>>957405
>China has markets, private ownership, wage-labour, commodity production, capital accumulation etc,

It also has a DotP, which means that while a capitalist mode of production exists alongside other modes of production within the PRC, the PRC is still a social project even if capitalism exists within the PRC

 No.957418

>>957398
>that blaming PRC alone shows an obvious bias and one that's probably based on perceived racial characteristics.
Literally what the fuck are you even going on about now lmfao
You're a million times more orientalist and racist than anyone in this thread if you think non-whites can't do any wrong on account on being non-white. Allying with the biggest imperialists, racists, butcherers of communists on the planet and fighting against commies with them at every turn is absolutely a fucking horrendous thing, which, you are right, was a logical decision for China: not because they are threatened by the chauvinism of the USSR, but because they are a class collaborationist bourgeois country that acted in its logical self interest.

 No.957419

>>957417
no it has a dotb

 No.957420

>>957415
Okay it may have been an overcorrection, but it think it's wrong-headed to then assume that this meant that the Chinese revoltion was peasant capitalist from the start.

 No.957421

>>957411
capitalist mode of production existed dominantly before the capitalist class had the state power

 No.957422

>>957418
yup. never mind all the anti-revisionist non white countries

 No.957423

>>957419
source?

 No.957424

>>957417
>It also has a DotP
It does fucking not lmfao, unless you think DotP is when you just call yourself one and not when the proletariat is in control.

 No.957426

>>957424
How would the proletariat be in control of the DotP in a way that it isn't now? Should every single prole be in the standing committee? What kind of political control do you think is lacking?

 No.957427


 No.957429

>>957424
what does Dotp stand for

 No.957430

>>957420
it wasn't a correction at all, it was twisting the knife. If they weren't national chauvinist they would have supported independence among socialist nations instead of collaborating with the capitalist end boss to shatter socialism and doing their own controlling and exploiting other communist nations like Vietnam and Cambodia and Algeria etc.

 No.957431

>>957418
no I'm saying you're blaming only one side in a comflict where both is guilty.
Suspiciously, you blame only the non-whites

 No.957432

>>957430
>If they weren't national chauvinist they would have supported independence among socialist nations

They did that, Romania and Albania are examples of that.

 No.957436

>>957427

Sure there are billionaires in China.
Are they in control of the CPC or does the CPC often crack down on their interests?

 No.957439

>>957431
I think the Sino-Soviet split was two retards fighting eachother, but I didn't see Khrushchev openly allying with the imperialist in response
Why can't you accept that China showed its class character when it rubbed elbows with their pals Nixon and Kissinger? Why are you finding excuses for engaging in imperialist slaughter?

 No.957440

>>957426
For a dotp there would need to be bloody revolution that deposes the bourgeoisie and instates proeltarian rule reapropriating capital to be immediatedely reorganized, and socialized along a planned economic socialist line of development, while defending against counter-revolution and supporting communist revolutionaries as much as possible to avoid encirclement and degeneration. If the proletariat actually rose up and did these things they would win and we would have a shot at world socialism. China with a socialist economy would instantly be the most powerful country in the world even geopolitically. They have the most industry and the most capable armed forces on the planet and have enough international assets that they could seriously improve the position of socialists world wide and find some friends.

 No.957442


 No.957443

File: 1651927061163.png (425.49 KB, 1073x780, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957436
If the proletariat is in control in China, what are they keeping billionaires over their necks for?
Also can you just drop that flag already lmfao, not that I have any respect for Gonzalofags but this is somehow even more embarassing

 No.957444

>>957442
Like in America lol

 No.957445

>>957439
>but I didn't see Khrushchev openly allying with the imperialist in response
He wouldn't have to, the USSR constituted it's own superpower and geopolitical pole.
They didn't have to cooperate with and fund bourgs except for the times that they did, funding the KMT and also during ww2.

 No.957448

File: 1651927141438.png (280.27 KB, 520x528, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957432
Yeah, I remember when China supported this fine non-chauvinist fellow against the USSR
I sure wonder what this gentleman's opinion is on WW2 Nazi collaborator dictator Ion Antonescu

 No.957449

>>957440
that has never happened and there's no indication that will ever happen. All successful revolutions thus far have consisted of multiple classes mediating their interests through the party.

What you're talking about sounds very nice. But that's the thing with utopianism, it all sounds very nice.

 No.957450

>>957445
>He wouldn't have to, the USSR constituted it's own superpower and geopolitical pole.
>it's pole vs pole not communism vs capitalism
>So just ally with the anticommunist one that would annhilate you in a second for capital gains instead of the communist one acting retarded due ro opportunists that you could like just assasinate
>oh and then make your own pole and bully other socialist countrys even more than the ussr ever did

 No.957452

>>957449
>dotp is utopianism
>thinking socialism can be achieved through reforms is not

 No.957454

>>957449
I despise you for being such a fucking kautskyist tumour

 No.957455

>>957443
because the national bourgeoisie as a revolutionary class are necessary to keep for the meanwhile to survive in an age of capitalist unipolarity and the contradictions of capitalist siege, that's why.

 No.957456

>>957452
>things that literally already happened and could have been done better are utopian now
>sorry sweaty but we all need to tighten our belts and do a bit of austerity or the economy is gonna die :(

 No.957457

>>957450
The USSR made that reality bu acting like a geopolitical pole. The PRC responded to that, perhaps with an overcorrection.

 No.957461

>>957440
this is the anglo box 📦 that treats socialism as a list of traits and not a vector of development and power.

 No.957462

>>957455
The world was definitely not unipolar when Mao wrote the New Democracy, though they sure helped make it so when they fought to destroy the USSR at every turn with their pals in Washington
Did the Bolsheviks ally with their national bourgeoisie? Hm…

 No.957463

>>957461
Bitch you're in the anglo pit if you think a country you admitted is capitalist is socialist lmao

 No.957465

>>957457
Why didn't they just kill the revisionists in the USSR and stay loyal to communism themselves? Why didn't they just liquidate their own bourgeoisie after the revolution and actually build socialism? It's because they weren't fucking communists

 No.957466

File: 1651927618977.png (2.63 MB, 1600x1235, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957455
>the national bourgeoisie as a revolutionary class are necessary to keep for the meanwhile to survive
So true

 No.957467

>>957461
>orientalism
>anglo calling me an anglo
you could not get more baiznglou than this

 No.957468

>>957455
uyghuyghuruyghuruyghuyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghurniguyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghurgeruyghurniuyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghurggeruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghureruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghureruyghurniuyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghurggeruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghurniguyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghurgeruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghuruyghur

 No.957469

>>957445
>They didn't have to cooperate with and fund bourgs except for the times that they did, funding the KMT and also during ww2.
And according to you when Stalin did these things was it evil khruschevite imperialism or based socialist class collaboration with progressive national elements?

 No.957471

I hate these fake communists even more than capitalists that don't pretend to be otherwise. If the gestapo ever has us two in a room I am narcing on you even if it means I'm the first to get the bullet

 No.957473

>>957462
>Did the Bolsheviks ally with their national bourgeoisie? Hm…
They did! And when they chose absolute violence over mediation and phasing out, that lead to their eventual absolute collapse. PRC took a route which was sustainable.

 No.957474

>>957463
quote me admitting it is capitalist

 No.957475

>>957473
>PRC took a route which was sustainable
Yeah, capitalism

 No.957478

>>957473
>They did!
when?
>And when they chose absolute violence over mediation and phasing out, that lead to their eventual absolute collapse.
No after detente they and the socialist position internationally slid downhill while America and anticommunists continued to peacefully pile wasps into their asshole

 No.957479

>>957465
>Why didn't they just kill the revisionists in the USSR and stay loyal to communism themselves?

What would that have looked liked.


>Why didn't they just liquidate their own bourgeoisie after the revolution and actually build socialism? It's because they weren't fucking communists


All projects that went down that route have collapsed or are extremely isolated today. It is an unscientific route that doesn't work.

 No.957481

>>957474
>>957349
>inb4 socialism is not a mode of production but when the government does stuff, therefore China doing stuff → China is socialist

 No.957483

>>957479
>What would that have looked liked.
Getting them bumped off or removed somehow. America managed to do it to the USSR's hardliners so should have been even easier for China to do
>All projects that went down that route have collapsed or are extremely isolated today
Yeah after they restored the bourgeois again. It's the opposite of what you are saying

 No.957484

>>957466
fascism is the support for actual class collaboration, that is to say the support for perpetuating the contradiction of classes indefinitely by trying to render that relation nom-antagonistic.
It is also entirety dependent upon imperialism to survive.

 No.957485

File: 1651928174205.png (1.21 MB, 1200x1200, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957479
>What would that have looked liked.
Not as bad as this

 No.957487

>>957478
If that is capitalism, then capitalism is the only road that has proven to work, I'm sorry.

 No.957489

File: 1651928250785.png (442.5 KB, 600x315, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957487
MAOIST-THATCHERITE STRIKES AGAIN

 No.957490

>>957481
the gov't having political power to directly contradict and subvert capitalism is socialism

 No.957491

>>957484
>fascism is the support for actual class collaboration, that is to say the support for perpetuating the contradiction of classes indefinitely by trying to render that relation nom-antagonistic.
That is what China is doing
>It is also entirety dependent upon imperialism to survive.
Not necessarily, see Spain. However the Chinese system will eventually be dependent on imperialism. Also post your reasoning and sources and stuff etc tbh

 No.957492

>>957487
Just call yourself a capitalist then and no one will take offense to what you are saying

 No.957493

>>957478
>when?
February revolution? NEP? The bourgeois elements that existed throughout the history of the USSR?

 No.957495

>>953900
>So again, why are we still pretending China is Socialist?
China sekarang dipimpin sama sebuah partai komunis, jadi banyak ornag ynag ngira kalau China itu sosialis sebenarnya enggak

 No.957496

>>957490
yeah just like it is an ancient germanic tradition and they might have chosen to call themselves the liberal national party

 No.957497

>>957490
HE ADMITTED IT
WE DID IT

 No.957499

>>957491
>That is what China is doing
Source?
>Spain
Spain still had colonies and at the very least participated in western imperialism.

 No.957505

>>957235
Lee Kuan Yew was my favorite socialist. You're just a dumb anglo that doesn't like Socialism with Singaporean characteristics.

 No.957506

>>957492
>>957496
I refuse to. Socialism is a scientific process. Whichever path can establish power away from Capital, Imperialists and the bourgeoise in that order, that ia socialism

 No.957508

>>957499
>Source?
My brother in Christ, what exactly do you think Socialism by 2050 entails? Hint: there's no eradication of the bourgeoisie mentioned anywhere, and there's no end to wage labour in sight. Almost as if the state exists to mediate the class struggle, not abolish it, curious

 No.957509

>>957506
>Whichever path can establish power away from Capital, Imperialists and the bourgeoise in that order, that ia socialism
So China isn't socialist given that it is on the side of all three of those things

 No.957510

>>957493
>February revolution?
which event is this?
NEP?
Only lasted a short period of time and because the planning committes were made up of like illiterate peasants and labourers with little education or access to technology and not a preplanned computer automated cybernetically planned economy like we could implement instantly in a present day revolution.
>The bourgeois elements that existed throughout the history of the USSR?
Which bourgeois elementa and are they the bourgeoisie?

 No.957512

>>957506
>Socialism is a scientific process. Whichever path can establish power away from Capital, Imperialists and the bourgeoise in that order, that ia socialism
Which is what you are rejecting in favour of abandoning the class struggle and eating sweet dengist brain worm lies.

 No.957514

It's ogre. China cancelled. Baizuos won.

 No.957515

>>957506
You will never be a communist
You will never be Chinese
You will always be a burgershart
You will always be a corporatism apologist
You will always be an orientalist

 No.957517

File: 1651928999923.jpg (151.49 KB, 1908x1146, creepy clown beaten.jpg)

>>957514
>memes are reality

 No.957518

>>957508
>My brother in Christ, what exactly do you think Socialism by 2050 entails? Hint: there's no eradication of the bourgeoisie mentioned anywhere,

I agree the notion of socialism by 2050 is kinda ludicruos and overly optimistic and I think they should withdraw that statement. That said, even if it takes longer, the fact that the CPC has the political power to wrest away property and direcrly contradict the logic of capital is crucial.
While they currently may not walk entirely the right path, the fact that they CAN do that is crucial.

 No.957519

>>957518
how do you know the cpc has the power to wrest away property and direcrly contradict the logic of capital and why didn't they do this?

 No.957520

>>957512
Noone is abandoning the class struggle, it just isn't the primary contradiction facing society right now, let alone China.

 No.957521

>>957518
>While they currently may not walk entirely the right path, the fact that they CAN do that is crucial.
If they can, why aren't they doing it?

 No.957522

>>957520
>Noone is abandoning the class struggle, it just isn't the primary contradiction facing society right now, let alone China.

 No.957524

>>957519
They do this all the time. Jack Ma got sidelined. PRC is one of the few countries where capital is not concentrating and the GINI is falling. It's just going slower than you'd like.

 No.957525

>>957523
>>957522
I didn't say that.(yes you did)

 No.957527

>>957523
Not between civilizations no

 No.957528

>>957524
uyghur will you please do a suicide pact with me?
I will legit give you my pinky finger if you never call you or China communist ever again

 No.957529

>>957518
>While they currently may not walk entirely the right path, the fact that they CAN do that is crucial.
You do realise this is true of any sovereign state, your bar for what comprises 'socialism' is so low that literally any monopoly on violence, any control over the state of exception qualifies, if all socialism is, is the mere existence of state power.

 No.957530

>>957318
>>957321
This dude is just a falseflagging troll. Stop feeding him, he's a midwit baiting.

 No.957532

>>957522
>Noone is abandoning the class struggle
>… BUT

 No.957533

>>957466
Musolini type corporatism, means corporate structures taking over and becoming the state.

The Chinese system has very powerful state structures that follows the Marxist Leninist model in a lot of ways. More Power is delegated to the provincial level than is usual for ML-state. There are no corporations in existence that could take on this juggernaut. Just the CPC alone has 90 million members. Corporatism is structurally incapable of scaling up that much. Musolini's itally sucked pretty bad, that was probably already to large.

You have to be aware of the past, but if you try to explain the present in terms of the past alone, your reasoning will fail you. Present day China is very different from Italy circa 1922-1945.

 No.957536

File: 1651929601620.jpg (55.57 KB, 1024x723, 1649863830399.jpg)

>>957532
Why do I still click on this thread
autism is pain uygha

 No.957539

>>957533
>Musolini type corporatism, means corporate structures taking over and becoming the state.
Wrong. It is the state forming corporate structures comprising the bourgoise and the state-approved labour representatives while rendering all other labour organising illegal in order to tamp down class struggle and ensure the smooth and harmonious profit making of finance capital. ie. very much what china does

 No.957541

>>957529
>You do realise this is true of any sovereign state

I am not realizing that because that is not true. It is unrealizationable.

 No.957542

>It is the state forming corporate structures comprising the bourgoise and the state-approved labour representatives while rendering all other labour organising illegal in order to tamp down class struggle and ensure the smooth and harmonious profit making of finance capital.

Socialist projects should just allow any old union to do whatever they want now regardless of the actual needs of the socialist economy overall?
No socialist project allowed super autonomous unions, that would have been a very bad idea.

 No.957543

>>957533
Yeah sure, still class collaborationism
Literally every material the CPC has put out mentions "common prosperity", "getting rich together" , "national rejuvenation" etc. The state in China acts as a mediator between classes keeping both the bourgeoisie in check and also the proles from getting too rowdy, in favor of a national project to become an efficient global superpower. They're much more gentle than the West, and much better at their job, but this does not make it socialism, it's just class collaborationism plain and simple. What better comparison for it is there than corporatism?

 No.957545

>>957542
This would be true… in an actual socialist country
>inb4 China not allowing proles to organize against their bourg is proof China is socialist

 No.957546

>>957543
>Yeah sure, still class collaborationism

If that is class collaboration, then every single successful revolution in history has done it to some degree and as far as we can tell it is unavoidable.

 No.957547

>>957545
<inb4 China not allowing proles to organize against their bourg is proof China is socialist

Nah dw I wouldn't do that

 No.957548

File: 1651930506494.png (489.95 KB, 620x400, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957546
So true. I love great authentic revolutions like in China, America, England etc.

 No.957549

>>957548
Those were all successful revolutions yes.
Maybe less so for the English they did have a bit of a thermidor, but overall it crippled the feudal order immensely.

 No.957552

>lifting people out of poverty
Steven Pinkerton tier arguments
Capitalism lifts people out of poverty, congratulations for concluding capitalism is progressive as Marx did. Where your lack of understanding theory shows is thinking lifting people out of poverty is socialism. Capitalism already does that. Marx himself agreed with the assertion of Lassalle that wages in "the long run" will necessarily sustain the lives of workers. The point of socialism (as envisioned by Marx & Engels) is to SURPASS capitalism, or in German aufheben (which was translated in anglospeak into "abolish" which fails to convey the immanent dialectic implications of the word). Let's use poverty as an example. Though it is true capitalism lifts people out of poverty, what is EQUALLY true is that it keeps them in poverty through the mechanism of the reserve army of labor. In this case SURPASSING capitalism would mean employing EVERYONE; in doing so poverty automatically vanishes. This is dialectical materialism.

Western Dengoids are sheltered college kids who never experienced or studied the growths of their countries, they take it for granted. Then they see the growth of China and think this is "socialism" because look they're lifting people out of poverty while my country isn't! Except your country has already lifted people out of poverty, and the ones remaining in poverty are due to the reverse army of labor mechanism.

Fight me Dengoids.

 No.957554

>>957542
When socialist projects create monopolistic state trade unions they use them as tools to educate workers, they don't use them to negotiate corporatist compromises with capital. At least when western european countries did tripartism the unions weren't sockpuppets for the state.

 No.957559

>>957554
>When socialist projects create monopolistic state trade unions they use them as tools to educate workers, they don't use them to negotiate corporatist compromises with capital.

Plenty of smashies would say that this is exactly what the monopolistics state trade union does between the workers and the state. there is always some mediation. It's kinda inevitable.

 No.957564

>>957559
The difference being when the only two actors are the workers and the state there's an argument to be made that the state must be a proletarian state and that this mediation is soviet democracy. Corporatism is not mediation between state and workers but the state mediating between (neutered) workers and capital. You're trying to act like mediation is the issue when the issue is quite clearly the bourgeoise. Corporatism is not a part of 'socialist projects' unless you include western social democracy as socialist projects. China which is economically corporatist unlike other examples of 'AES' is at best a socialist project in the tradition of social democracy (though stripped of most liberal democratic elements).

 No.957566

>>957564
>You're trying to act like mediation is the issue when the issue is quite clearly the bourgeoise.

Why? A contradiction between the state and the people exists, just like a contradiction exists between the workers and the bourgeois. Both of these are contradictions that can and must be mediated, the contradiction between the state and the people by way of the party and the mass line, and the contradiction between the workers and the bourgeoisie through the Party and the Mass-line within the New Democracy.

 No.957570

>China which is economically corporatist unlike other examples of 'AES' is at best a socialist project in the tradition of social democracy

I'll take it!

 No.957580

File: 1651932899448.png (257.6 KB, 474x377, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957570
>Dengoid finally admits to being Succdem social fascist
Finally…

 No.957583

>>957580
Lenin was Succdem

 No.957589

>>957566
Contradictions are not to be mediated but struggled through to the obliteration of both. Class struggle means the proletariat and the bourgeoisie fighting for supremacy, the victory of the proletariat which comprises its own self-abolition together with capital, or the common ruin of the contending classes are inevitable.The perpetuation of the bourgeoise and proletariat is by definition the continued triumph of the bourgeoisie, mediation of the conflict is simply one of the bourgeoise's methods of class struggle, of their self-perpetuation.

>>957570
Long live the People's Dirgisme, we must uphold the DotP of Gaullist France and Scandinavian tripartist mass line!

 No.957591

>>957580
Name one successful non-'social fascist' Marxist nation or project in history.

 No.957594

>>957591
You heard of this dude called Lenin?

 No.957598

>>957589
>Contradictions are not to be mediated but struggled through to the obliteration of both.

I agree, but the struggle will be long and must be relatively peaceful. It is not feasible to immediately abolish through absolute force the batuibak bourgeoisie, much like it is not feasible to abolish the state immediately through absolute force.

If your project is based upon the immediate and absolute abolition of both with absolutely no mediation, then your project has historically not been proven viable.

>>957594

Lenin was a SocDem and engaged in class-collaborationism.

 No.957602

>>957598
>Lenin was a SocDem and engaged in class-collaborationism.
Did you hit your head or is this some whole new cope?

 No.957608

>>957539
>ensure the smooth and harmonious profit making of finance capital.
if thats the case one has to wonder why they often crack down on it when they think they stop being a positive force for the economy, fucking porkies in the process. So no, very much not what china does.

 No.957609

>>957608
>when they think they stop being a positive force for the economy,
Why'd you just answer your own question

 No.957611

>>957609
that would mean positive for economy == positive for finance capital, which is fucking retarded assumption

 No.957613

>>957580
the ghost of autistic adherance to logic can rest in peace now. goodnight computer bros

 No.957615

>>957602
>Did you hit your head or is this some whole new cope?

He literally was a SocDem, and he collaborated with bourgeois parties routinely and even had some tolerance for national bourgeois forces within the RFSR to some limited degree. Much less than Deng and Xi of course, but still, he did that.

 No.957621

>>957609
>>957611
>The economy = the bourgeoisie
Careful there

 No.957622

>>957615
>He literally was a SocDem, and he collaborated with bourgeois parties routinely and even had some tolerance for national bourgeois forces within the RFSR to some limited degree
Pre 1917 and back when social democrat meant communist? lololoooloolloolookl

 No.957624

>>957622
>Pre 1917 and back when social democrat meant communist?
It still does in China, evidently. No other path has proven viable.

 No.957626

>>957624
why do you repeat counter revolutionary talking points for free as a proletarian?

 No.957628

>>957626
>why do you repeat counter revolutionary talking points for free as a proletarian?

Following the path of scientific socialism is in fact the revolutionary thing to do. It is utopianism that's a dead end for socialism.

 No.957648

File: 1651935077758.png (14.42 KB, 978x122, Screenshot_4.png)

>>957628
My guy you have no clue what the fuck scientific socialism is, you literally outed yourself as a Thatcherist for all to see lmfao
Close this site, open up your favorite theory folder or website and start reading, otherwise just put on the Succdem flag and stop calling yourself a communist and we're good

 No.957650

>>957626
Because Dengists are anti-communists with left wing debatebro characteristics

 No.957651

>>957608
>individual capitalists are punished when they step out of line and threaten corporatist harmony and profits with their individual corruption and decadence
Wow a self-disciplined ruling class, amazing, clearly this is socialism and not capitalist corporatism.

 No.957655

>>957628
then why are you a u(dys)topian?
>>957648
yup
although lenin would say something like "no go right ahead and go into the mud, and anyone else who wants to go with you into the mud as we march forwards hand in hand towards revolution can go right ahead too and those calling from the mud and telling us how great it is are welcome to because those that go into mud are right where they belong but do not cling onto us and try and drag us back to you while we continue on our journey"

 No.957657

>>957651
what is socialism?
a dictatorship of and over capital

 No.957658

Dengoids after finding out about Socialism with Italian Characteristics (they made the trains run on time and fought anglos, which is socialism)

 No.957660

File: 1651935767266.mp4 (157.11 KB, 640x640, 1647733748291.mp4)

>>957657
>socialism is the dictatorship of capital and over capital
im losing my mind

 No.957661

File: 1651935798410.png (839.35 KB, 844x767, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957657
>the real movement to abolish the present state of things? Never heard of it

 No.957662

>>957648
>you literally outed yourself as a Thatcherist for all to see lmfao

No I didn't. I didn't say capitalism is all that is viable. I said *if this thing* is capitalism, then capitalism is all that is viable.
History demonstrates this to be true. I don't care that it aesthetically resembles an argument Thatcher made.
That has absolutely no bearing on the truth or untruth of the argument.
What matter are which paths have proven themselves viable. Thus far, as far as we can tell, the way China constructs socialism is the only way to viably do so, so if that is capitalism, then capitalism is the only proven road to socialism.

>>957655
>then why are you a u(dys)topian?

I'm not. The PRC is slowly gaining primacy in the world. They're winning.
Yes, I am saying that the road to socialism is difficult and takes time and none of us will live to see it.

 No.957664

>>957543
China is a proletarian state, that forces the bourgeoisie to collaborate at gun point. They sometimes exile, jail or execute capitalists if they try to privatize political power. It's also true that capitalists receive many privileges, but it's not like in the west where the capitalist class stands above the law or is the one that makes the rules. There is no way a bunch of billionaires can tell the politburo and the central committee what to do.

The Chinese state executive looked away when "rowdy" workers lynched a capitalist who was popularizing the idea that one generation of workers had to be sacrificed for progress. The capitalists have to go along with the plans of the communist party, and they can't interfere with social outcomes, or else they risk proletarian wrath. Bourgeois dictatorships, don't have that safety, If capitalists go off the rails shit hits the fan and societies go up in flames.

>What better comparison for it is there than corporatism?

There is no comparison between China and corporatism, this is entirely a bad faith argument. You have to be smoking really strong idealism to look at fascist Italy and go "yup that's like China"

I don't like market economies because it causes so much inequality, overproduction crisis, uneven development and much more. I would like it if China went full cybernetic socialism tomorrow. However you can't argue with their results. The CPC has been extremely successful in modernizing the country despite of all the compromises they made. Corporatists like other variants of fascism haven't managed to do anything else than ruining the countries they get a hold off.

What is even the point of arguing that China is fascist, are you trying to rehabilitate fascism as something that can work ? Or what is the agenda ?

 No.957665

>>957662
>I didn't say capitalism is all that is viable
>I said *if this thing* is capitalism, then capitalism is all that is viable.
And this thing is capitalism, so you just said there is no alternative to capitalism you little Reaganite you. What you "think" you're supporting has no bearing on it

 No.957667

>>957664
The central committee and the politburo are a bunch of billionaires you absolute dolt

 No.957668

>>957664
>The CPC has been extremely successful in modernizing the country despite of all the compromises they made
Why, anon, you've finally cracked it. Modernizing their country and achieving "common prosperity" is their goal, not socialism.

 No.957669

>>957667
No their not.

 No.957671

>>957665
>And this thing is capitalism, so you just said there is no alternative to capitalism you little Reaganite you.

"Reagan would have said this" is not an argument.
If you want to dispel the notion that there is an alternative to the route that the PRC has taken, then you need to demonstrate that.
You need to prove that there are other viable ways to do it, because if there isn't, then this is the path they must take.

 No.957672

>>957660
dw I was joking lol but dengists really do be getting into fascist territory

 No.957673

>>957658
so true spaghetti sis

 No.957674

>>957664
>However you can't argue with their results. The CPC has been extremely successful in modernizing the country despite of all the compromises they made. Corporatists like other variants of fascism haven't managed to do anything else than ruining the countries they get a hold off.
The bourgeoisie of every developed country have successfully modernised their country, this does not socialism make, nor does it justify support as some great progressive force. Corporatism wasn't just practised by italy btw, look to scandinavia, france, post-war germany or singapore for other modernising corporatisms that aren't socialism and never will be.

 No.957675

>>957672
>wah fashemshem
Prove socialism can be constructed any other way

 No.957676

>The bourgeoisie of every developed country have successfully modernised their country

How did they do it in Europe? Did imperialism have something to do with that maybe?

How did China do it? Why wasn't India able to do the same thing?

 No.957677

>>957662
>m not. The PRC is slowly gaining primacy in the world. They're winning.
Yeah and they are capitalist anticommunists
You think we have to enteust the fate of communism to them instead of preparing for when they are the primary contradiction?

 No.957679

>>957675
>Prove socialism can be constructed any other way than fascism

 No.957680

>>957676
>How did they do it in Europe? Did imperialism have something to do with that maybe?
No.

 No.957681

>>957677
>Yeah and they are capitalist anticommunists
And you should be thankful, they're the only viable political force than in any way can stop absolute technocapitalist disintegration neocene takeoff.
They are humanity's last best hope. You can call them capitalist all you want, without them humanity is lost.

>>957679
<Prove socialism can be constructed any other way than fascism
Do it. Show another way.

 No.957682

>>957675
China hasn't been any more successful at constructing socialism than the soviets or anyone else in history so i don't see why you're acting like they're getting any more points on their method of choice.

All ways of constructing socialism so far are on pretty equal footing since none has been successful. If anything those that haven't been tested at all yet are more legitimate than those that have.

Saying 'you can't argue with results' when the results aren't socialism doesn't make a good argument for why its the best or only way to construct socialism.

 No.957688

>>957681
>Do it. Show another way.
Indeed I will feed a free (you) directly into your web browser

 No.957689

>>957671
Anon, if you are this adamant that only the things which currently exist must necessarily exist, then you've completely dropped the revolutionary cause and haven't even realized it. The October Revolution & USSR was a completely unthinkable event with no historical precursor, and yet if Lenin went "Sorry bros there's no alternative, Paris failed so we gotta do reformism and shit" or supported the Provisional Government like his fellow comrades Stalin and Trotsky, it never would have happened. Why keep calling yourself Communist if you insist on maintaining the present state of things, contrary to everything Marx and Lenin and the dudes you supposedly followed believed?
also
>Prove socialism can be constructed any other way
We've already more than proved China is not constructing socialism, which you have admitted to be true, so how exactly is it an argument that they survived so they must be the only way forward? China survived unmolested by the Cold War because from the very beginning they were a bourgeois class-collaborationist state, as they still are.

 No.957692

>>957682
The greatest improvements in quality of life, industrial capacity, and local purchasing power came from mass collectivizations and planned construction of industry

 No.957694

>>957682
>China hasn't been any more successful at constructing socialism than the soviets or anyone else in history so i don't see why you're acting like they're getting any more points on their method of choice.

Yes, still existing is further than most other socialist projects have come. That absolutely nets a lot of points.

>All ways of constructing socialism so far are on pretty equal footing since none has been successful.


And none will ever be. Socialism is a process not a destination. You're thinking in rigrid checkboxes now. Dialects demand that this kind of thinking is left behind.

Lemme put it to do in another way:
what would you argument against literal utopians or anarchists be, if it is true that all socialist branches have exactly the same evidence?
How could you argue against Saint-Simon for example?

 No.957695

>>957689
>Anon, if you are this adamant that only the things which currently exist must necessarily exist, then you've completely dropped the revolutionary cause and haven't even realized it. The October Revolution & USSR was a completely unthinkable event with no historical precursor, and yet if Lenin went "Sorry bros there's no alternative, Paris failed so we gotta do reformism and shit" or supported the Provisional Government like his fellow comrades Stalin and Trotsky, it never would have happened. Why keep calling yourself Communist if you insist on maintaining the present state of things, contrary to everything Marx and Lenin and the dudes you supposedly followed believed?
Thank you anon, needed to be said.

 No.957696

>>957668
>Modernizing their country and achieving "common prosperity" is their goal, not socialism.
Assuming their goal is socialism, they would still need a modern and prosperous country to do it.

I'm sure that their will come a time when the Chinese socialists will have to struggle against the capitalists to keep their modern prosperity. Because eventually the Chinese capitalists will go bad and become neoliberal ghouls that suck the life out of society like in the west. But the socialists in China are in a better position than the capitalists, they are a lot more entrenched. Chances are that the capitalists will fail to destabilize China, and they will never be able to impose shock doctrine. And when they attack the proletarian class character of the Chinese state they will loose.

 No.957698

>>957692
also all these measures dropped during capitalist reforms but it's plastered over by the bourgeois narrative

 No.957700

>>957689
It was Stalin and Kamenev who voiced support the provisional government, Trotsky had already been calling for a second revolution which is why he and Lenin immediately came together as soon as Lenin returned to russia to push the april theses through the party.

 No.957702

>>957696
> But the socialists in China are in a better position than the capitalists, they are a lot more entrenched.
Not true, it's literally a dictatorship by and for capitalists

 No.957703

>if you are this adamant that only the things which currently exist must necessarily exist

I'm not. I'm saying that if you critique that is, then you must also suggest an alternative and present some historical evidence as to why the path you're suggesting is viable. I'm not even saying your ideal project has to be around, I'm saying that you must argue how the previous centuries indicate that your route is viable.


Luckily as you've mentioned we've had a few revolutions already, and so we have data to glean from.

Surely you would agree that the projects that lead to absolute collapse are not projects that are wisely emulated, right?

 No.957711

>>957700
I am a turd that is very slowy sliding down the stalanoid pipeline into the purifying septic tank of trotskyism from the prolapsed anus of a sucdem with marxist sympathies

 No.957712

>>957570
this

Western social democracies and SWCC did have similar levels state control, but there is a big difference that makes the former not socialist and the latter socialist: imperialism and anti-imperialism. Welfare states were built on the exploitation of the third world, using the proceeds of imperialism to create class peace in the imperial core. Most of the world being in poverty while only a few European/Anglo-Saxon/East-Asian countries are prosperous and relatively equal is just as socialist as an ancient Greek democracy is democratic where a large part of people living in the polity don't have voting rights nor any other rights.

Meanwhile China was an underdeveloped country with a communist leadership and strong state control which decided to partly integrate itself into the world (capitalist) economy to acquire the necessary technology and utilise the progressive aspects of capitalism (i.e. industrial capital, which is being abandoned by the imperial core anyway). The reasons why the socialist system in China (CP rule, control of the commanding heights, preservation and state guidance of pre-industrial small propretiors) isn't destroyed by the considerable capitalist elements in the economy are the same reasons why welfare states disappeared so quickly without a major political crisis:
1. Both systems were instuted by states which on the basis of their class character very much wanted the compromise to not evolve into anything further than a compromise. In the case of welfare states not only the bourgeois nature of the political system played a crucial role, but also the military-intelligence state apparatus which was driving the Cold War and had serious concerns about socdem parties or anyone else stepping out of the line.
2. States of bourgeois or proletarian class character were able to utilise the declassing effects of imperialism to maintain their rule. Western capitalists knew that they need a social compromise to preserve social stability and win the Cold War, while Chinese capitalists understand that without the guidance of the Communist Party and strong state control of the economy they couldn't have become successful capitalists in the first place. On the surface, the state only has to remain committed to imperialism/anti-imperialism to preserve its class character and it doesn't have engage in class struggle directly (take a look at what is happening in China: https://redsails.org/this-is-a-great-struggle/

 No.957715

>>957702
China is not a bourgeois dictatorship.

 No.957724

>>957712
>this
the guy you are agreeing with admitted China is capitalist and fascist and he doesn't believe socialism is possible

>Meanwhile China was an underdeveloped country with a communist leadership and strong state control which decided to partly integrate itself into the world (capitalist) economy to acquire the necessary technology and utilise the progressive aspects of capitalism (i.e. industrial capital, which is being abandoned by the imperial core anyway).

no
Opportunists in China sold the (not very developed) socialist system for money in their personal bank accounts (see deng's family showing up in leaks of offshore bank account scandals like the paradise papers right alongside david cameron and black water)
China was then not immediately raped by imperialism like everwhere else because it was an early sale (betrayal) while the USSR was still alive and there wasn't that much industry to export to the imperial core.
>>957715
Yes it is

 No.957725

>>957724
>wasn't immediately raped
however it did suffer the effects of capitalist restoration and foreign investment did not make up for this loss

 No.957726

>>957694
>Yes, still existing is further than most other socialist projects have come. That absolutely nets a lot of points.
The Soviet Union existed till 1991, were they a legitimate and successful way to build socialism in 1990? How about 1980? 1950? 40? Obviously not, we're stuck in the present, that doesn't mean we must evaluate everything forever with no perspective on history or the future. British capitalism might as well be socialism by virtue of its persistent existance for several centuries now.

>what would you argument against literal utopians or anarchists be, if it is true that all socialist branches have exactly the same evidence?

>How could you argue against Saint-Simon for example?
The same way i argue against 'dengism', by being a materialist who understands that there are classes with distinct interests in conflict with one another and you can't just handwave them away by having a powerful technocratic state with the right ideas mediate social harmony. You're the saint-simonian here my friend.

 No.957727

>>957724
>the guy you are agreeing with admitted China is capitalist and fascist and he doesn't believe socialism is possible
Source?

 No.957731

>>957726
>The Soviet Union existed till 1991, were they a legitimate and successful way to build socialism in 1990? How about 1980? 1950? 40? Obviously not, we're stuck in the present, that doesn't mean we must evaluate everything forever with no perspective on history or the future.

Yes and living in the present, we are able to analyze the past, meaning that yes as long as the USSR existed, there was a strong case to make that it was in fact viable, until it collapsed and even stronger evidence appeared to indicate that this path was not viable.
Had this been the 50's I'd never have rushed to say that the USSR was doomed to failure, even if that was the eventual result. Me saying that would have been conjecture and I would be speaking out of turn, presenting my opinion as knowledge.

>British capitalism might as well be socialism by virtue of its persistent existance for several centuries now.


Well, the British empire collapsed largely, so it wasn't. If you mean Thatcherism, then yes, that proved itself a viable path to perpetuate capitalism. It was a viable path. Social liberalism by the 70's no longer was. History indicates this.

>by being a materialist who understands that there are classes with distinct interests in conflict with one another and you can't just handwave them away by having a powerful technocratic state with the right ideas mediate social harmony. You're the saint-simonian here my friend.


Okay so if we have this idea very much in our head and understand this very very hard, then some kind of alternative to the path that has historically been taken will appear.
The harder we think about this fact, the less we have to make a practical way of making a viable political system.

Your word don't mean much.

 No.957734

>>957726
Also, not a dengist, I think Deng was a right-communist that overcorrected too far.

 No.957738

Look up closed-loop workplaces. Worker are kept inside their factories in adjacent dormitories and only allowed to leave once a week. Recently they have been rioting in Apple manufactories because of even harsher pandemic restrictions

 No.957739

>>957738
What do you think about Gulags?

 No.957744

>>957731
>Had this been the 50's I'd never have rushed to say that the USSR was doomed to failure, even if that was the eventual result.
Some did and they were right to, their analysis has been proven to have been entirely correct.

Your perspective is not a historical materialist one, you view history, socialism, the real movement, entirely as a bystander. Paths are simply taken, causes, motive forces notwithstanding, there is no active component. History isn't over, new forms have and will continue to arise, your insistance on the immutability of the present way of things is the most non-dialectical thing imaginable.

>>957739
Christ, do you have any shame?
Gulags were prisons, whatever you think of the ethical character of prison labour, they were not places you shipped off ordinary proletarians.

 No.957745

File: 1651939294695.png (389.66 KB, 750x392, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957739
They're good places for people like you

 No.957756

>>957734
And you're not a Maoist either. You're just a clown.

 No.957856

>>957744
>Gulags were prisons, whatever you think of the ethical character of prison labour, they were not places you shipped off ordinary proletarians.

Often they were. Building socialism is not pretty, never have been.

>Some did and they were right to, their analysis has been proven to have been entirely correct.


They BECAME correct in many cases. Anarchists predicted that the USSR would fall. Is anarchism correct now.
Sure, speculation and trying to calculate the future is warranted. It is even necessary to predict the correct line. If the correct line is not determined, it will lead to fall. However, the correct line must be determined through a process of rigorous historical analysis, and not be dogmatic. We must predict the future through the lens of reality as it happened.
Therefore, our suggestions must be deeply rooted in historical argumentation and demonstration.
If your proposed path has none of that, it would be unwise to take suggestions from you.

 No.957949

>>957490
Socialism is actually liberal democracy with soc-dem style independent labor unions. Every country needs soc-dem style indy labor unions. If they don't have them then it doesn't matter how many children they feed. They will NEVER be socialists.

 No.957966

>>957724
>Yes it is
No it isn't.

 No.957968

File: 1651951298778.png (174.34 KB, 640x614, ClipboardImage.png)

>>957966
yes it is times infinity (I win)

 No.957976

>>957756
It is a good thing the MSS keeps the Maoists on a leash.

 No.957980

>>957976
Your day will come, bureaucrat.

 No.957982

File: 1651952388513.jpg (207.2 KB, 1242x1394, chadmaoist.jpg)

>Your day will come, bureaucrat.

 No.957984

Here’s the deal
Reality isn’t real
Definitions aren’t real
Words aren’t real
Just say something is socialist and it both is and isn’t

 No.957992

>>957980
>>957982
During the cultural revolution there was a manager of a rural factory who raped several women workers. He was arrested but then brought back a week later because the factory could not run without his expertise.

 No.958026

>>957992
Nice factoid, psychopath.

 No.958027

>>957712
park chung hee and chiang kai shek thought is clearly communist

 No.958035

>>957992
they needed expertise in raping women ?
what were they making in that factory ?

 No.958037

>>958035
Babies.

 No.958039


>>957664
I mean its not like a certain state cap dictator from south korea did the same thing lol

 No.958066

File: 1651956038550.png (67.81 KB, 200x252, ClipboardImage.png)

Im confused why dengists say china is socialist when if we examine their evidence:
-china intervenes a lot in their market economy(which is what other east asian state cap nations did)
-china has a rural modernization program(which is what south korea did in the samuel undong)
-china has a bunch of state control of banks and capital etc(which is what sk taiwan and japan did)
-china does not follow the liberal democratic pattern(yeah and park chung hee era sk and chiang kai shek era taiwan were liberal democracies)
-china control capitaly because reasons(simmilar reasons you "could" use to argue that cpital was controlled in sk taiwan and japan)
-china has a decent amount of state owned industries(yeah its not like in taiwan, the gov also had a decent amount of soes too)
-china isnt imperialist(yeah and chiang kai shek taiwan was really imperialist)

 No.958399

>>958027
>>958066
The main difference between the Asian Tigers and China is, again, the question of who is in power. Why is it that no one else was able to adopt the East Asian developmentalist model outside of East Asia? South Korea and Taiwan were able to prosper because they were allowed to by the US. These two countries were and still are capitalist regimes under the influence of the biggest imperial power in history, the United States. They only used the state interventionism to kickstart their industry and avoid a pro-communist revolt. Industrial policy was discarded later in favour of neoliberalism. Both countries are struggling with severe social problems and neither of them were able to reach a level where they could start exporting capital to stave off capitalism's contradictions. South Korean workers suffer a notoriously high workload and many Taiwanese are only finding suitable job opportunities in the Mainland, in spite of Taiwan being vastly richer than most other Chinese provinces.

Meanwhile the reason behind China's rise wasn't a political concession. They recieved Western investment because Western capital needed to offload its own contradictions, and China was a perfect candidate for that because of its large, skilled and disciplined workforce and the infrastucture built before the reform. China was able to utilise this to its own ends by maintaining strong state control through which they could reappriopriate foreign industrial strength into their own domestic economy. The general aim of this was very clearly underlined by the CPC: the preservation of the socialist system in times of retreat. The PRC is showing no signs of moving towards a sudden liberalization like in South Korea or Taiwan. State control, especially in the political sense is only being strengthened.

 No.958408

>>958399
very very good post

 No.963593

>>957287
still no proof from this guy

 No.968146

File: 1652480010130.png (34.75 KB, 1200x800, ClipboardImage.png)

https://gowans.blog/2022/05/12/why-china-is-not-socialist/
>Colonial politics and imperialism are not healthy, curable deviations of capitalism…they are the inevitable consequence of the very foundations of capitalism. Competition among individual entrepreneurs either to become ruined, or to ruin others; competition between individual countries places before each of them the alternative of their remaining behind, running the risk of [falling behind], or ruining and conquering other countries, thus elbowing their way to a place among the great powers. – V.I. Lenin, “Imperialism and Socialism in Italy”
Xi discovers that capitalism, not politics, is in command.

 No.968147

File: 1652480065003.png (464.71 KB, 918x506, ClipboardImage.png)


 No.968165

deng this

xi that


how about 90% of people in China own a house you idiot westoids

ultras cope and seething at the impurity of the CPC while the workers retain assets and construct socialism, relative to the west getting dick raped by 10 billionares and asking for more cum

 No.968172

>>968170
>no doubt
lol

 No.968173

File: 1652481177768.png (74.07 KB, 473x668, ClipboardImage.png)

>>968165
HOLY SHIT new list of AES just dropped

 No.968175

>>968170
>socialism is when you build productive forces so that you can produce even more commodities

 No.968179

>>968173


consider china has billions of people and that 89% number should be considered one of the greatest achievements of humanity.

 No.968181

>>968179
Sorry but Romania is currently more socialist, the numbers don't lie

 No.968184

>>968181

romania is fudging the numbers by only having 96.1 functioning houses in the entire country

 No.968185

>>968179
consider that India has billions of people, ridiculous amounts of corruption, and doesn't pretend to be socialist, yet still is only a little ways behind (only 3% less.)

 No.968186

>>968185

india has the second largest communist party in the entire world, these things are connected

 No.968189

also il concede that high ownership of housing doesnt = communism, I just think its typically a decent indication of if work is actually paying off for workers within society or not, socialist/AES countries tend to do better for this.

 No.968192

>>968189
Wow so house ownership doesnt mean socialism now? What's next, government doing stuff isn't communism? Sounds like ultra shit

 No.968248

>>968192
Wait until he hears about USA's glorious socialism of state-owned enterprises and economic planning!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprises_of_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_planning#United_States

 No.968253

>>968165
>>968170

Cringe.

 No.968264

>>958399
This is what mfs need to understand. China needs capitalist countries and corps to invest so that its industry can modernize. Socialism in one country is near impossible, so by controlling a capitalist system they can ensure a smooth transition to a more planned economy, whatever form it may take.

 No.968300

File: 1652487451760.png (285.77 KB, 1000x1000, ClipboardImage.png)

>>968248
>>968248
research and development funding is comparable to china economic planning meanwhile barebone us state enterprises are comparable to chinas soes

 No.968307

>>968192
socialism=
gov planning
house ownership
workers control of the gov
state nationalization of most of the economy
collectivism
workers democracy
suppresion of capitalism and capitalist classes
one class over another

meanwhile in china:
no workers control
controlled by burecrats
all classes exist
mixed market econonmy
no worker suppression of the borg or petit borg
not even any welfare
economic planning that is simmilar to japan and sk back during the cold war

hmmm

 No.968310

>>968307
>nooo just economically isolate yourself so leftists on the internet can say you’re cool!
Look at the stats anon, Chinese people are better of now than ever before.

 No.968312

>>968310
i do not deny anon that china is doing well and is an example of a good economy. after all i prefer fucking fredich list style economies over the liberal anglo one

but what i dont believe is china being socialist. if anything china is a really weird strange regime that follows the economic tradition of german style capitalism with a marxist leninist governing structure. aka the point is i dont view china in its current form as socialist, maybe this will change, but right now its in a weird dirigste, communist combination that can go any direction tbh

 No.968380

>>968312
>socialism is when some tradition of all the dead generations is implemented today and weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living

 No.968388

>>968380
anon a gov thats based on a marxist leninist gov structure is clearly something borrowed from socialism. does this make china socialist? no it just means it kept elements of socialism, but keeping elements of socialism does not nescessarily equal socialism. as seen in my post where i typed china isnt socialist

 No.968408

>>968388
>nooo true socialism is X Y and Z precondition ackchually!!! some guy says somewhere!!!!

 No.968416

>>968408
>socialism is a mixed market economy that has a lot of private industry, where bourgesie corporations are rampant, where all classes exist together in class collaboration, where the ccp is filled with burecrats and etc

anon this is not even precondition, this is literally nowhere socialist except for the political governing structure and philosphy. But as seen in the kmt you can fucking coopt the marxist leninist structure while remaining capitalist.

like jesus christ man, i would have respected more the answer that china is merely temporarily doing capitalism and then it will go to socialist. I would have understood that

but saying china is socialist in this current stage, like lol

 No.968419

>>968416
socialism is just organising the economy for social ends. china is already socialist. communism is a real movement, not a set of conditions that will be achieved, not a state of affairs to be established.

 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: 110

[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 ]