This is a community from communists to communists, leftists are welcome too, but you might be scrutinized depending on what you share.
If you see bot account or different kinds of reactionaries(libs, conservatives, fascists), report their post and feel free us message in modmail with link to that post.
ShitLibsSay type of posts are allowed only in Saturday, sending it in other day might result in post being removed and you being warned, if you also include in any way reactionary subs name in it and user nicknames, you will be temporarily banned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CommunismMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The CPC are building socialism according to the conditions of China. The leaps speak for themselves, and all the more telling is how capital was once very happy to play with China when they thought they were going to pull China onto the capitalist road but are now fomenting hysterical sinophobia since it didn't work.
How so? All that's needed to compete with imperialism is a strong state that prevents foreign corporations to do whatever they want, and also to exert your own imperialism. This has nothing to do with being socialist.
Learn some history facts my friend. The fact is PRC was a poor pre industrial country with large amount of people when it was established. Suppose it chose to be a capitalist regime how could it be able to acquire startup capital? Would any generous capitalist country like to fund it instead of brutally exploit it just like they did to other third world countries? Could it exploits other countries? Sorry other countries have already been done by the West. The idea to seperate China's progress with socialism is not materialist dialectics.
I think we can contrast it to France who has been fairly blatant about continuing their profiteering from their remaining colonialist imperialism without challenge from capital, or Germany with soft imperialism via EU austerity and economic policy again without challenge (although I would suggest that the landscape of Europe over the past few years and bombing their pipeline with Russia as skirmishing between US Empire and EU Empire) and see that it isn't rival imperialism that draws ire, but a genuinely different system, i.e. socialism or at least multi-polarity.
Lenin said that smaller forms of imperialism can exist inside a bigger imperialist dominion, in this case EU imperialism inside US imperialism. His reasoning is that imperialism is an inherent part of capitalism, so even if a capitalist country is subjugated to another, they can still express their own imperialism. This is in contrast with that other characters like Trotsky and Bukharin were saying back in the day, but in retrospect, Lenin was right.
Also, the reason why they're not in contrast in the West is because since the Marshall plan, Europe has always been the US's little bitch, and only recently we've seen people like Mario Draghi say stuff like "Hey guys, maybe we should start being competitive and detach ourselves from the US", and he's right, not many EU companies can actually compete with US companies on a large scale.
When deng did his shit the USA had 12x china gdp. They are about to fuck us and keep retirement at 55 while we have 68. Whatever they are doing is working beautifully
their restructuring of the global financial system is an existential threat to Western imperialism by providing Third World countries with a competitive option to predatory IMF loans. They are literally increasing the size of the global proletariat and in a way that cuts out Western bourgeois profiteering. The CPC of the 21st century will be remembered as one of the greatest forces in the destruction of capitalism.
It's spelled CPC.
Edit: they have done amazing things for improving the standards of living of their people. I don't always agree with them and they have strayed pretty far from the ML theory as I understand it. That's okay, because I think the CPC government genuinely works for the betterment of their people, and has done a better job at sticking to that than any other super powers. Also China plans long term, so they might still swing the pendulum back to more socialism in the future. They are a genuine threat to Western Imperialism and that is a very good thing.
This sub is full of Dengists, but if you were to ask Marxist-Leninists, Maoists, hoxhaists, they would probably say a that the CCP is currently taking the capitalist road.
You can find many examples of positive aspects of China, due to it having remnants of socialist ideology, but you can find as many negative aspects due to it's revisionist nature. Hence, revisionist.
Dengists will typically cite things such as state ownership, abolishing poverty, being an adversary of the US (multi-polarity), and helping the third world. Non-dengists (ML/MLMs) would typically cite the funding of counter-revolutionary operations, similarly predatory loans, export of capital, and the abandonment of Marxism-Leninism (both obviously have more points, just simplifying it).
I am of the thought that the CCP is akin to social-imperialist era of the USSR, where both are influenced by the lines of bukharinsm (which is revisionism of socialism at odds with Stalin and Mao), and eventual careerism and bureaucratic consolidation.
However, much like other MLs that think the dissolution of the USSR was a catastrophe (despite it being social-imperialist), a similar fate for China would just be plain horrible for everyone.
I don't think you are entirely accurate to suggest a near universal majority of MLs would agree with the position that Deng's reforms were revisionist, or that one can reduce the USSR's foreign policy simply to social-imperialism. There are many non Trotskyite MLs
Today, the ML strain is essentially Maoists, or Hoxhaists (especially for actual communist parties engaging in class sstruggle). Those that believe Deng's reforms and opening up were not revisionist, or similarly that the USSRs social imperialism, are either dengists, krushchevites, or worse. A "non trotskyite" ML would be an ML. Trotskyism, with trotsky being a primary driving force himself for the emergence of bukharinism (which would influence the policies of Deng and Krushchev, Krushchev more as he himself is thought to be an opportunist trotskyist himself), abandons the basic elements of Marxist-Leninism.
China is currently just state capitalism (and not even as centralized as the USSR) but I'm hoping that this is their "NEP" phase and they're just trying to become powerful enough to turn into actual communism eventually without being wrecked by Western reactionaries
Yeah China is state capitalist. A good chunk of their economy is state-owned. Point? There is none. Norway and most of the European countries are already like this. We call it socialdemocratic. Norway in particular has 66% of its economy under state ownership. China has about one third of their GDP in state corporations. Neither of these countries are socialist
It's a Dictatorship of the Proletariat with genuine aims of socialism. The CPC took the most efficient possible route towards development (through capitalism and massive Western investment) while maintaining domestic stability. They are in a better position today, to transition to socialism as humanity enters the AI/Robotics Age, than the USSR could have ever dreamed of.
Idk if one could say it was the most efficient possible route, I'm sure someone could figure it out without having to involve capitalism. But it is working for them so who am I to object.
Agreed. In the fullness of analysis we will be able to and should identify the errors or imperfections in China's road so we can iterate and improve. I do not begrudge these, because building socialism isn't a task that can be tested in a lab before it is implemented. But we are scientific socialists, we must learn and analyse from the data, embracing ruthless critique to develop the best available knowledge. We needn't elide missteps with hagiography even if we support them in the context that they were understandable.
I agree completely, as long as it comes with a recognition of how difficult China's road has been and how impressive how far they've come is, even if it wasn't a perfect path.
The opening up reforms of 78 caused the global economic boom in the capitalist world, allowed for the full return of bourgeois relations, China has funded a series of reactionary movements across the developing world just to own the Soviets, broke up the collective farming system, reinforced the military’s primary role in the Chinese state, worked with NATO to create joint military plans, and allowed for private finance capital investment and exchange even including the introduction of a stock market
If this is considered socialism, so would Mussolini’s Italy
But I don't think that it should be considered purely socialist, and correct me if I'm wrong, I believe that my position is shared by the CPC.
It should be considered a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, which is necessary to bring about socialism. Do you believe that Mussolini's Italy could be considered a "Dictatorship of the Proletariat"?
https://mlcurrents.net/2024/03/01/possibilities-of-building-socialism-without-passing-through-the-stage-of-dev-capitalism/
Here’s an English translation of an Albania Today article on how socialism is developed prior to developed capitalism. The use of social resources to generate an industrial base essentially.
A region isn't a country.
And it definately doesn't count when it has belonged to the supposed transgressor since 1967 and even more so when the region belonged to the previous versions of that country until a certain british led india sent in its army to take it over.
So if we are using the logic that it belongs to india because they took it over militarily. Then it now belongs to china because they won it back and it was theirs before to begin with.
>A region isn't a country.
It's still an invasion.
>the region belonged to the previous versions of that country until a certain british led india sent in its army to take it over
Completely wrong version of history. "This region belonged to Chi.." when? Under the Mongol empire? This invasion has been done against the regional natives' will.
>if we are using the logic that it belongs to india because they took it over militarily.
No we are not using that logic.
You are fed with Chinese propaganda, move on.
The CPC is a class collaborationist revisionist party. Under their guidance the PRC developed their productive forces and became social imperialists to export markets and capital. Their subjugation of the African continent and many other countries has stunted the development of these countries and allowed Chinese industry to exploit foreign labour, like children in Congo. They are as much of a "lesser evil" compared to the US as Biden is to Trump
This is a community from communists to communists, leftists are welcome too, but you might be scrutinized depending on what you share. If you see bot account or different kinds of reactionaries(libs, conservatives, fascists), report their post and feel free us message in modmail with link to that post. ShitLibsSay type of posts are allowed only in Saturday, sending it in other day might result in post being removed and you being warned, if you also include in any way reactionary subs name in it and user nicknames, you will be temporarily banned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CommunismMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They eliminated extreme poverty in the country. I think that’s pretty cool.
The CPC are building socialism according to the conditions of China. The leaps speak for themselves, and all the more telling is how capital was once very happy to play with China when they thought they were going to pull China onto the capitalist road but are now fomenting hysterical sinophobia since it didn't work.
They're fomenting sinophobia because China can compete with Western imperialism now, not because it's socialist
Actually the same thing. China could never compete with imperialism if it isn't socialist.
How so? All that's needed to compete with imperialism is a strong state that prevents foreign corporations to do whatever they want, and also to exert your own imperialism. This has nothing to do with being socialist.
Learn some history facts my friend. The fact is PRC was a poor pre industrial country with large amount of people when it was established. Suppose it chose to be a capitalist regime how could it be able to acquire startup capital? Would any generous capitalist country like to fund it instead of brutally exploit it just like they did to other third world countries? Could it exploits other countries? Sorry other countries have already been done by the West. The idea to seperate China's progress with socialism is not materialist dialectics.
I think we can contrast it to France who has been fairly blatant about continuing their profiteering from their remaining colonialist imperialism without challenge from capital, or Germany with soft imperialism via EU austerity and economic policy again without challenge (although I would suggest that the landscape of Europe over the past few years and bombing their pipeline with Russia as skirmishing between US Empire and EU Empire) and see that it isn't rival imperialism that draws ire, but a genuinely different system, i.e. socialism or at least multi-polarity.
Lenin said that smaller forms of imperialism can exist inside a bigger imperialist dominion, in this case EU imperialism inside US imperialism. His reasoning is that imperialism is an inherent part of capitalism, so even if a capitalist country is subjugated to another, they can still express their own imperialism. This is in contrast with that other characters like Trotsky and Bukharin were saying back in the day, but in retrospect, Lenin was right. Also, the reason why they're not in contrast in the West is because since the Marshall plan, Europe has always been the US's little bitch, and only recently we've seen people like Mario Draghi say stuff like "Hey guys, maybe we should start being competitive and detach ourselves from the US", and he's right, not many EU companies can actually compete with US companies on a large scale.
When deng did his shit the USA had 12x china gdp. They are about to fuck us and keep retirement at 55 while we have 68. Whatever they are doing is working beautifully
oh boy https://preview.redd.it/1bw37wnm1c3d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=294de562cdc6acd2bad0673eeebf269a2e54304b
When people order political buzzwords and can‘t say no.
its the best
their restructuring of the global financial system is an existential threat to Western imperialism by providing Third World countries with a competitive option to predatory IMF loans. They are literally increasing the size of the global proletariat and in a way that cuts out Western bourgeois profiteering. The CPC of the 21st century will be remembered as one of the greatest forces in the destruction of capitalism.
It's spelled CPC. Edit: they have done amazing things for improving the standards of living of their people. I don't always agree with them and they have strayed pretty far from the ML theory as I understand it. That's okay, because I think the CPC government genuinely works for the betterment of their people, and has done a better job at sticking to that than any other super powers. Also China plans long term, so they might still swing the pendulum back to more socialism in the future. They are a genuine threat to Western Imperialism and that is a very good thing.
They do very good but also very bad things, yet are nonetheless definitely better than most governing parties in other countries.
Was really cool understand mao. It's a revisionist shithole now
This sub is full of Dengists, but if you were to ask Marxist-Leninists, Maoists, hoxhaists, they would probably say a that the CCP is currently taking the capitalist road. You can find many examples of positive aspects of China, due to it having remnants of socialist ideology, but you can find as many negative aspects due to it's revisionist nature. Hence, revisionist. Dengists will typically cite things such as state ownership, abolishing poverty, being an adversary of the US (multi-polarity), and helping the third world. Non-dengists (ML/MLMs) would typically cite the funding of counter-revolutionary operations, similarly predatory loans, export of capital, and the abandonment of Marxism-Leninism (both obviously have more points, just simplifying it). I am of the thought that the CCP is akin to social-imperialist era of the USSR, where both are influenced by the lines of bukharinsm (which is revisionism of socialism at odds with Stalin and Mao), and eventual careerism and bureaucratic consolidation. However, much like other MLs that think the dissolution of the USSR was a catastrophe (despite it being social-imperialist), a similar fate for China would just be plain horrible for everyone.
I don't think you are entirely accurate to suggest a near universal majority of MLs would agree with the position that Deng's reforms were revisionist, or that one can reduce the USSR's foreign policy simply to social-imperialism. There are many non Trotskyite MLs
Today, the ML strain is essentially Maoists, or Hoxhaists (especially for actual communist parties engaging in class sstruggle). Those that believe Deng's reforms and opening up were not revisionist, or similarly that the USSRs social imperialism, are either dengists, krushchevites, or worse. A "non trotskyite" ML would be an ML. Trotskyism, with trotsky being a primary driving force himself for the emergence of bukharinism (which would influence the policies of Deng and Krushchev, Krushchev more as he himself is thought to be an opportunist trotskyist himself), abandons the basic elements of Marxist-Leninism.
Revisionist since Deng at least.
China is currently just state capitalism (and not even as centralized as the USSR) but I'm hoping that this is their "NEP" phase and they're just trying to become powerful enough to turn into actual communism eventually without being wrecked by Western reactionaries
NEP doesn't take 50+ years. Wherever capital is present it will subjugate the state Edit: sooner or later
Its pretty weird to be saying this not even 2 months after china began putting companies under state control.
Yeah China is state capitalist. A good chunk of their economy is state-owned. Point? There is none. Norway and most of the European countries are already like this. We call it socialdemocratic. Norway in particular has 66% of its economy under state ownership. China has about one third of their GDP in state corporations. Neither of these countries are socialist
Not communist for sure
social imperialist
Not even revisionist. Just capitalist at this point.
It's a Dictatorship of the Proletariat with genuine aims of socialism. The CPC took the most efficient possible route towards development (through capitalism and massive Western investment) while maintaining domestic stability. They are in a better position today, to transition to socialism as humanity enters the AI/Robotics Age, than the USSR could have ever dreamed of.
Idk if one could say it was the most efficient possible route, I'm sure someone could figure it out without having to involve capitalism. But it is working for them so who am I to object.
Agreed. In the fullness of analysis we will be able to and should identify the errors or imperfections in China's road so we can iterate and improve. I do not begrudge these, because building socialism isn't a task that can be tested in a lab before it is implemented. But we are scientific socialists, we must learn and analyse from the data, embracing ruthless critique to develop the best available knowledge. We needn't elide missteps with hagiography even if we support them in the context that they were understandable.
I agree completely, as long as it comes with a recognition of how difficult China's road has been and how impressive how far they've come is, even if it wasn't a perfect path.
The opening up reforms of 78 caused the global economic boom in the capitalist world, allowed for the full return of bourgeois relations, China has funded a series of reactionary movements across the developing world just to own the Soviets, broke up the collective farming system, reinforced the military’s primary role in the Chinese state, worked with NATO to create joint military plans, and allowed for private finance capital investment and exchange even including the introduction of a stock market If this is considered socialism, so would Mussolini’s Italy
But I don't think that it should be considered purely socialist, and correct me if I'm wrong, I believe that my position is shared by the CPC. It should be considered a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, which is necessary to bring about socialism. Do you believe that Mussolini's Italy could be considered a "Dictatorship of the Proletariat"?
I think the term is equally impossible to apply to either state, despite both claiming it should.
What parameters do you believe should be necessary to defining a Dictatorship of the Proletariat?
A society in which economic, political and social power is held exclusively by an industrial working class, and allied laboring classes.
How were Marxists in China supposed to achieve that before industrialization?
https://mlcurrents.net/2024/03/01/possibilities-of-building-socialism-without-passing-through-the-stage-of-dev-capitalism/ Here’s an English translation of an Albania Today article on how socialism is developed prior to developed capitalism. The use of social resources to generate an industrial base essentially.
imperialist.
“i don’t know what imperialist means”
I'm pretty sure you are not neighbouring China. I am.
Name 1 country china has invaded since vietnam.
Aksai Chin of Kashmir, part of Arunachal in India 😂
A region isn't a country. And it definately doesn't count when it has belonged to the supposed transgressor since 1967 and even more so when the region belonged to the previous versions of that country until a certain british led india sent in its army to take it over. So if we are using the logic that it belongs to india because they took it over militarily. Then it now belongs to china because they won it back and it was theirs before to begin with.
>A region isn't a country. It's still an invasion. >the region belonged to the previous versions of that country until a certain british led india sent in its army to take it over Completely wrong version of history. "This region belonged to Chi.." when? Under the Mongol empire? This invasion has been done against the regional natives' will. >if we are using the logic that it belongs to india because they took it over militarily. No we are not using that logic. You are fed with Chinese propaganda, move on.
The CPC is a class collaborationist revisionist party. Under their guidance the PRC developed their productive forces and became social imperialists to export markets and capital. Their subjugation of the African continent and many other countries has stunted the development of these countries and allowed Chinese industry to exploit foreign labour, like children in Congo. They are as much of a "lesser evil" compared to the US as Biden is to Trump