I've been on this site long enough to get a superficial understanding of Marxist politics, but I've officially passed the Dunning-Krueger peak, where I've realized how superficial that knowledge is. So in an attempt to deepen my understanding of the subject, I have a few questions.
People say that gradual reforms won't work, with the cited reason being that, so long as the bourgeois element is allowed to exist in any significant capacity, it will burrow its way into government and reassert control. But doesn't China disprove that? Their entire plan is to gradually reform their market economy into "full" socialism.
On that note, from what I understand, "capitalism has inherent contradictions that will lead to its downfall" is really just a fancy way of saying that the relationship between the bourgeois and proletariat is an antagonistic one, and eventually the proletariat will get fed up with it and assert control. But is this actually a given? I could easily see a scenario where technology allows the bourgeois to assert permanent control, using robots to replace the proletariat and surveillance and weapons to quell any opposition. I could also see the opposite happening, where capitalism keeps rewinding itself to earlier states indefinitely, creating a situation where life is "good enough" that people don't feel the need to rebel.
Dialectics in general confuse me. Every time I think I have a grasp on them, I'll have someone else loudly proclaim that I'm wrong. If I ask for correction, the explanation provided is so long-winded and convoluted that I end up with more questions than answers. Can someone please give me a basic, working definition of what dialectics are in the context of Marxism? They seem so fundamental to Marxist analysis, and without understanding them, I don't feel like I can actually properly understand any of what I'm looking at.
Finally, I frequently hear people say that we're going to be entering a China lead multipolar world order. That sounds like like a (logical) contradiction to me. Doesn't the term "multipolar" imply multiple leaders?
Note that I don't ask these questions with any ideology in mind. I find much of what I read here incredibly confusing, and my ignorance has been punished enough that I figured it's high-time I do something about it.
>inb4 read a bookI plan to do that as well. I just thought I'd come to you guys so I have a startin
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.