To reduce clutter and low-quality threads about China I'm going to start anchoring threads and redirecting to here instead. If the subject is important enough to warrant a separate thread (let's say, a thread discussing maoism) then feel free to do so.
Post last edited at
There still is the liberal/socdem party in Taiwan that opposes the KMT and advocates more independence.
unironic oriental scientologist cult sucked off by western liberals
rational wiki has a whole list
Russia was a shithole up until the 90's. Gorbachev thought the supermarkets in America were dressed up to be so full of food. Find someone who lived through the communist bullshit and ask them how the food lines were, how empty the stores were. Get first hand knowledge and then think critically about how Socialism works.
Oh, and fuck commie China. Look at the four pests campaign and see what happens when someone is given total power with zero knowledge.
Everything that China has was stolen from another or given to them. There is no discovery or creativity left in the Chinese soul.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
Poor peasants owning centrally heated apartments, having electricity, radios, television sets, seeing toilets and bath tubs for the first time in their lives. Those evil commies.
Actually swerdy throwing out a sizeable portion of what's produced because it's gone out of date is GOOD ACHERLALLY
I hope the PRC shuts reddit down.
That wasn't Gorby that was Yeltsin you dolts...
>Russia was a shithole up until the 90's
Yeah when everyone started dying.
> Gorbachev [sic] thought the supermarkets in America were dressed up to be so full of food.
I mean they basically are? A great deal of that food is thrown out everyday.
Yeah, and it makes the story all the more suspect. Yeltsin obviously sold out the whole economy with glee, and his daughter is very wealthy and if not a billionaire herself at least married into billions. I don't doubt he said some dumb shit in a grocery store, but the notion that he was shocked by what he saw is ridiculous. It's not like Boris Yeltsin had literally never seen, heard of or read about the living conditions of western capitalists nations. He could watch a fucking movie and see a grocery store. He was obviously playing up his astonishment with a random Texas grocery store to ingratiate himself with an American audience.
CAPITALIST RESTORATION CAUSES TENS OF MILLIONS OF EXCESS DEATHS YOU FUCKING PIG
Modern day Russia has gone seventy ranks down in per capita calorie consumption compared to soviet times.
How can you honestly look at the ISIS tier garbage that happened and say the cultural revolution was a good thing? This is why nobody takes maotists seriously.
ChINa iS StilL sOciALisT
Pic related is getting harder and harder.
>Find someone who lived through the communist bullshit
why do libs always say this?
In high school I was an exchange student in a former soviet country and the consensus in my guest family was that it was better. Dad liked being able to go around eastern europe and travel the river don with his army buddies for free. Grandma was a teacher and hates what has become of education. I could go on.
In any event this meme of
>hurr talk to someone from the commie countries… t-they'll set you straight
is such garbage
It was a shithole after 90 fam. Gnp reached 80s status only after 2010. Tens of millions died due to drugs, alchoholism. Crime went out of proportion.
If u had money saved to buy a new car in beginning of 89, that money was worth 2 loafs of bred at the end of the year.
There was a total deterioration of the health system. If you had to go to hospital you had to bring your own syringes, drugs and other medical supplies and equipment. Also you had to pay the doctors in cash because noone was receiving any salaries.
School teachers stopped receiving salaries and parents had to bring cash to schools to pay them for their work.
All public infrastructure went to shit because there was noone maintaining it. The country was worse of than after the civil war in 1924.
Slow your roll there. I've talked to the people personally that lived through it and the consensus was that Communism was the worst thing that has ever happened in their respective country. And this was of last week, not when you were a kid. So yeah, it is a valid argument.(no, it isn't.)
yeah and so have i, and they all have positive views. so do the majority of Russians, Czechs, Hungarians, etc. according to various referendums and polls. the Soviet Union alone had a population of nearly 300 million people, a few gusano types or people who were barely teens during the Gorbachev era aren't enough for me to believe that everyone single person who lived during socialism hated it, especially considering the positive view that most of those hold of it.
also worth mentioning that anyone can make up a story to support their view point. you can say "yes i have talked to many people who say gommunism was the worst thing ever" (funny how in all these anecdotes you anti-communists never provide any information like how old they were when socialism fell in their country, it's always just "this person i totally know said communism killed his whole family and he could never buy *insert x good and/or service* trust me) just as much as i could say "my dad grew up in the USSR and he said literally everything about it was perfect". it doesn't make it true, so unless you can provide some statistical evidence that shows most people have a negative view of socialism in their respective countries you're really not proving anything.
lol I buy bottles of wine with Stalin's face on it from an old Armenian dude who definitely lived through.
Lol, clearly you've never ever met a person from Russia, Ukraine, Belarus etc. Now stop lying.
>gdp per capita
isle of man global superpower 2020
>meanwhile in the real world
HIGH QUALITY POSTING
Guys, what is going on in Xinjiang and Urumqi?
Is it all real or it is just speculation?
Thanks for your attention and for the answers in advance
t.very concerned Muslim
ITS THE MOST ANTI IMPERIALIST FORCE ON EARTH. LIKE CURRENT USA DEFENCE MINISTER SAID "REMEMBER, CHINA, CHINA AND CHINA". THE PORKY FEARS THE DENGIST.
It's text-book US agitprop with no concrete evidence beside testimonies from US founded NGOs.
Fuck muslims though
Do people actually think China is socialist? From my perspective they've realized that state capitalism is the most effective form of capitalism and merely hide behind the politically "communist" state in order to keep the proletariat in check. Am I wrong in this?
I'm not baiting by the way, legitimately curious
Nah, that's right
Comparing China's situation to NEP is plain retarded. NEP permitted foreign investment and market competition between worker-owned enterprises, but private employment was strictly limited and industry wasn't privatized. Meaning that a real bourgeoisie class did not form and when they started rolling it back, the only opposition could come from rural kulaks and small store owners. Meanwhile China has literal billionaires. Even if the CPC decided to construct socialism tomorrow, they'd have to do it through bloody class war (and I doubt there is political will for it). China fucked up, there's no other way about it. It's been 40 years.
-some anons work I stole
Chinese billionates are in the CPC. They simply give away their billions when said
China is imperialist, it’s Germany to America’s UK in 1914.
>implying mad, "Asian work ethic (sucking up), based family fascism", confusionists, are revolutionary in any way
Lao Tzu could have been amazing, if he wasn't spooky as shit, and you should google him.
People calling Chinese investment in Africa neo-colonialism are doing a lot of heavy lifting towards erasing the actual genocidal horror of colonialism.
I read a research paper the other day that was the source of a recently propagandized statistic about how Chinese have positive feelings towards the new social credit *system* (not score), and I was disturbed the massive category error the author had made where they insisted to put Sesame Credit and social credit under the same name.
For those who don't know, Sesame Credit is an opt-in rewards program managed by Alibaba that has no legal basis and cannot punish you in any way, it is simply design to encourage you to use Alibaba services for discounts. It's a shoppers rewards card.
The social credit system is a "system" for transparently and effectively enforcing laws that already exist. So in one famous example, fare evasion on a train can get you banned from riding trains for a certain number of days. You do not lose points on a score, nor do you get punished in other ways. You just get put on the train blacklist. That IS social credit, it is not AI-driven invasive social control, or a technologic panopticon. It's enforcing the rules, which exist for good reasons, and it no wonder Chinese think it's a good idea.
The reason this is problematic is becuase there is no effort by most people tasked with informing USians about China that cares what the social credit system is, instead they come with this one two setup: There is a black mirror-esque score in China, and most Chinese support it. It's incredibly fertile ground for racist theories about the oriental mind to flourish.
This meeting was pretty forcefully denied by Beijing btw.
Netflix just released some over-the-top anti-China propaganda with a bunch of falsehoods about various not-banned things being banned, and pictures of xi drenched in a blood red filter while random scary words float across the screen. A Jon Oliver special is coming soon I expect. The topic is going to be either Social Credit or Xinjiang, I'll put money on it.
have you guys ever read the joy luck club?
Lmao kill yourself
No. I will rather send hem to de-relegionize camp
Are you suggesting that China isn’t extracting profits from its investments in Africa?
I think it’s naive to expect that social credit will simply just be used for mundane shit like train fare. Think about the concept from a Marxist perspective.
>The social credit system is a "system" for transparently and effectively enforcing laws
In other words it’s a tool of law and order, but the proper class analysis begs the question: Whose law? Whose order? China is a bourgeois state, and as such this is bourgeois law and bourgeois order. If you think this won’t be used to undermine organized labour in China, crack down on strikes, on anti-revisionists, and on worker’s movements of all types.
Well I think you hit the nail on the head. It is naive to think that "law" will be used just for train fare. The few people who actually know what social credit is often promote dystopian visions of it because they think all Chinese law is illegitimate, and hate the idea of the enforcement of law becoming more effective. This recent yellow panic has been triggered partly because Chinese regulations in all sectors; in health, labor, food safety, corruption, data privacy and yes, censorship, have started to be seriously enforced. But it's not a score.
that would be imperialism, not colonialism m8.
>How can you honestly look at the ISIS tier garbage that happened and say the cultural revolution was a good thing?
There is nothing wrong with destroying reactionary and bourgeois culture. Reactionary ideology will linger even with changes material conditions. Only vulgar materialists think otherwise. From Mao and Pol Pot to Hoxha, they have all realized the necessity of waging ideological war against remnants of the past.
I would say they are quantitative differences, as according to the Chinese government
>China's private sector has made an important contribution to economic growth, head of the country's industry and commerce federation said Tuesday.
>The sector now contributes more than 60 percent of China's GDP growth and brings in over half of China's fiscal revenue
>The private economy is also playing a stronger role in China's job creation and innovation drive by providing over 80 percent of jobs and contributing more than 70 percent of technological innovation and new products in the country, according to Gao.
>He said that last year, more than 90 percent of new jobs were created by private businesses.
>At the end of 2017, there were 65.79 million individually-owned businesses and 27.26 million private enterprises in China, which employed some 340 million people.
Although I just got an email looking for a skype interview for a job there, so idk. If I go there I'll post back in this thread, although of course anecdotal evidence is secondary
People who criticize China solely for it's market economy are ofc totally braindead and ignorant of Marxism. EVERY worker's state will have to undergo a DoTP period where it is forced to interact on the world market, before all it's trade partners too become communist. It is hard to overstate how much the leftcoms & Trots have totally ruined the Western left with this line of thinking for the past 100 years.
With that said, there's no way the CPC didn't have the intention to enrich themselves with the reforms under Deng. They didn't even have to go down the NEP route, they could have just made serious political reforms to ensure millionaires had no way to have seats in government or influence it at all. But there was no political will to keep the party's proletarian character, clearly.
? he hates them
he supports cybersyn / cybernetic socialism
you couldn't be further off. he despises workerism and thinks all labour must be automated asap. also he believes borders should be abolished. he's even more of an internationalist than you, mr. fourth international flag-bearing trotskyite
1989 tiananmen square massacre
someone praising chinese state capitalism for its superior efficiency is now "utopianism"?
The red guards actually harassed Muslims a lot during CR, and there's even official apology
>there's even official apology
That's what happen when you halfass your only job. Let's hope this time no apology will be needed once they are liberated from their feudal superstitions.
Can we do Maoist memes thread again?
We need this again
Or as we Dengist call it;
The Culling of Liberals
US "China Watchers" are completely zoinked out now. Many of them just imagining war crimes against China, no context, just threatening to kill millions of Chinese people and warning them they should get ready to be killed. Let me grab an example.
This guy has been advocating for war with China somewhat low-key over Taiwan for years now. A typical sort of white supremacist asia expert who waxes over his gross racism with psudo-scholastic pontificating about oriental despotism. Has just dropped the facade now. Talking about Germany after WWII and the need to bomb China back to the stone age, and this.
Ahem, I mean WWI. This guys bad, though he's not the worst, which is kind of shocking.
What– no. Greer is dismayingly influential among China hawks. These are think tank guys, journalists on the China beat and China "watchers". Elite opinion and media editorial policy is crafted based on the reports they write to each other. What some random senator or bureaucrat official thinks they know about China is delivered to them by these guys. It does NOT matter how popular an opinion is. They are the "elite". The US public did not, and will not in the foreseeable future, vote on (much less be aware of) the development of US foreign policy.
this guy has some cataclysmic interpretations of things
I don't know what you don't get. It's not the number of likes on those specific tweets, its that the content of them was the original product of the guy. If 0 or 1000 people like it it wouldn't change what I'm drawing attention to, which is what the us China Watching community believes and curates their presentation of China towards convincing others it is right.
Is there anything worse than nerds on Twitter who take things too seriously? Smh
Yes. American retards that bring up said twitter shit.
Twitter just gives you insight into the careers of think tankers— everything they eventually package into a report is hashed out on Twitter first. I take CSIS and AtlanticCouncil et.al. seriously because I have to. The “elite consensus” on China had been overwhelmed by Hawks in the last two year because of Trump, and the hawks are just advocating for full scale war now.
Daily reminder to learn Mandarin so you can defect when WW3 comes
Is Naomi Wu a prototype for the female socialist with chinese characteristics?
Because I didn't get to choose my genes.
Could be of interest, though quite liberalism
Will Taiwan or China achieve communism first?
Saw some Falun Gong shills on Dam Square today. The billboards they had set up were more anti-CCP propaganda than the bullshit front of meditation and spirituality. In that regard it's surprisingly honest, showing what's behind the mask.
Bourgeois freedom stinks, it means these fascists are able to openly preach their poison. We even have a scientology church right infront of the country's largest college. Atleast our southern neighbours banned scientology for being a cult.
Interesting thing is the Epoch Times is a Falun Gong paper, which has some inexplicable connection to Trump. Also China Uncensored on YouTube is them to iirc. They get a ton of funding from Taiwan.
>Implying Taiwan isn't a part of China
Strange how no Dengists will respond to my Chinese source saying how the majority of GDP growth and nearly all new jobs are in the private sector. I'm interested to hear someone explain how this is building socialism when for decades the trend has been towards more privatization, not less. It seems to me like China is not in an extended NEP but stuck in glasnost or something. It's hard to say the government is still a Leninist organization when the standing committee of the people's assembly looks like pic related. Not to mention the apparent lack of criteria for belonging to the CPC itself. For people that think they are capitalist but a dictatorship of the proletariat, how do you explain the coexistence of the CPC with openly bourgeois parties, along with the allowance of someone like Jack Ma in the party? I really don't understand Ismail on this point
Yeah I quickly stumbled upon the Epoch Times and China Uncensored while looking for information on Falun Gong. Just like shills such as Charlie Kirk get big bucks for spreading domestic anti-socialist propaganda, there's a whole network of shady think tanks and societies (a typical article about China or North Korea will mention these aplenty) in Asia that spread imperialist propaganda, you can probably get a better living that way than most workers in SK or Taiwan.
>China has a small KMT party in the People's Assembly
So much for communist repression.
Anyways it seems that unironic dengism has died down but there's still an agreement that we need a more realistic assessment of China than "it's literally Mordor guise muh 100 million no freedom tiananmen"
>Russia was a shithole up until the 90's.
THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF REVISIONISM
Despookify yourself you idealist cuck
Yes, China has been carrying out several liberalizations but it's not comparable to what Gorbachev did, let alone to the shitshow that Russia became from Yeltsin's rule onwards. They never dogmatically accepted the neoliberal recipes the US and the World Bank tried to shove up their throats. China still maintains a largely state-controlled economy no matter how much external pressure is being put on the country. Of course this isn't socialism, but it is pretty fucking far from a laissez-faire economy too. And for all their failures, the liberalizations did succeed in making China the world's second economy in a tremendously short span of time and pulling millions of Chinese out of poverty - although there's no denying a large-scale purge of the bourgeoisie will be needed if the government ever decides the time is ripe to move on to actual socialism.
Also I don't think the existence of bourgeois parties forms a problem. At least not in a fairly strong country that can defend itself against imperialism. Fair point about rich capitalists in the CPC though.
>"muh food lines" even though there was no food scarcity or major shortage in the later decades of the USSR
>someone who lived through the communist bullshit
do we really need to post the stats of the nostalgia for communism in Eastern Europe once again?
>up until the 90's
this has to be bait, read a book or at least a fucking article
So, since no one ITT has answered this satisfyingly. What's with all the "Muslims in concentration camps" articles? Is there a good reason to believe that these are either true or false (apart from the probability that they're porky propaganda)? When did these articles start? Any reliable sources on this?
Let me just bring it to the point. The whole thing started with the
>China Has Detained Up to 1 Million Uighur Muslims UN report says
hoax published by Bloomberg last year. Bloomberg is often reporting lies and missinformation about China that often get quoted by other U.S papers as legitimate reports without any investigation and it was this Bloomberg report that quickly spread trough the entire U.S. controlled media and beyond starting the whole campaign, slowly adding little lies on top with every iteration of citing each other. Before that there was only noise compared to this. It could so easily spread because they claimed the authority of a UN report to back their story.
The thing is that UN report never existed. Yet you can still hear people cite it all over the world. There was no such UN report. Months later Bloomberg silently corrected some of the false parts to "UN experts said" and added alot of "mays". The entire story is based on what "Gay McDougall" said in an open panel of the UN comittee called CERD when she was speaking on her own behalf and just asking a lot of loaded questions. She didnt talk on behalf of the UN. Nothing she said is part of any official UN report or investigation. She cited a 3rd party report published by the "Network of Chinese Human Rights Defenders" (henceforth NCHRD)
Who is Gay McDougall? Gay McDougall is the official representant of the U.S.A. for CERD.
Whats NCHRD? NCHRD is an almost 100% U.S. government fundend "non-government"-organisation based in Washington DC. NCHRD is not a network. It doesnt network. Besides its blog republishing bad stories about China under their "humanitarian" name, its a shady business. Before the Bloomberg, their site was hardly telling what they where even doing and only left a googlemail address for contact. There where only 2 people including the apparent manager known, two people with a nearly 7 digit anual budget. Its clearly just a proxy to whitewash propaganda from questionable sources into "human rights activism". Their entire report is just a compilation of 3rd party reports. On a sidenote that report never even spoke about millions of interned Muslims but refered to reports claiming possibly "up to a million Muslims could be discriminated" in China. Bloomberg invented the "detained up to 1 Million". A few of the citations are from U.S. mainstream media including Bloomberg and NCHRD (you are reading right, they are quoting themself) Nearly all citations come from "Radio Free Asia" (henceforth RFA) or 4th parties citing RFA.
What is RFA? RFA is a news agency founded by the U.S. government. It's also funded by the U.S. government. Was at least, they have done their job and now comes the usual cutting of connections) RFA headquarters are based again in Washington DC. RFA is operated by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (henceforth BBG)
Whats the BBG? The BBG is a US federal agency under the supervision of the State Department. Their own job description is literally to spread propaganda to aid the U.S. regimes policies.
1) Camps and heightened security definitely exist, however the 1 gorillion is a clear fabrication for the reasons you wrote. A few thousand is justified given the actual history of terrorism in the region.
2) I don't think it was Bloomberg specifically, more like a combo from all the major MSM outlets at once. Bloomberg was 100% responsible for that fake chip hoax (Chinese gov was allegedly planting undetectable chips in servers used widely by Amazon, Apple, etc). News story was never backed up by any major intelligence agency and strongly denied by Apple and the like.
Besides that, this is mostly correct.
I have said in this thread that I don't think it's neoliberal tier, I just don't see much of a difference between the Chinese Dream/ Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and social democracy. (Ironically, every socdem complains about evil totalitarian China, when in reality that's probably the best case scenario for their ideology - incredible sustained growth for decades, massive poverty reduction and rise in living standards, etc.) Like I said, it seems like they are stuck in glasnost - they stopped just short of Yeltsin-tier whereas the Soviet Union continued to full blown liberalization. Also I disagree with
>if the government ever decides the time is ripe to move on to actual socialism
This seems like idealism, putting the superstructure above the base. Which is something I see around often, is people thinking the CPC can just flip a switch and "activate" socialism.
In 2014 China economy specialist Nicholas Lardy concluded that the private sector now produces at least two-thirds of China’s GDP.
>The central finding of this study is that the economic reform process that began in the late 1970s has transformed China from a state-dominated economy into a predominantly market economy in which private firms have become the major source of economic growth, the sole source of job creation, and the major contributor to China’s still growing role as a global trader.
>pic related from the book
Also from that book:
>China’s government revenue relative to GDP is identical to that of Mexico, 2 percentage points below that of Malaysia, and 5 percentage points below that of South Africa.28 Thus, there is little evidence in the fiscal data of the overwhelming power of China’s bureaucracy.
>The case that the Chinese state is one of the world’s most powerful in terms of the ownership of the means of production is closer to the mark than the claims with respect to employment and income. But this study has already presented evidence that the state’s power in this domain is shrinking. This is reflected in the declining share of industrial output produced by state and collective firms, from 100 percent of output in 1978 to about one-quarter in 2012. State and collective firms controlled all of the country’s productive capital in the industrial sector as reform was getting under way, and one can infer from the production data that its share of productive assets has dropped precipitously since. Second, the investment data examined in chapter 3 show that state firms’ share of investment in industry has been declining since 1980, while that of private firms has been rising. By 2011, private firms’ investment was almost three times that of state firms in absolute terms
Last post ITT unless someone wants to continue arguing this shit. Exactly how China hasn't had political liberalization is nothing short of a miracle, I'd be interested if anyone has a good materialist explanation of that
>Exactly how China hasn't had political liberalization is nothing short of a miracle, I'd be interested if anyone has a good materialist explanation of that
bruh, you actually believe the neoliberal meme that capitalist restoration in socialist countries makes them more democratic? that's not materialist at all
Why would political liberalisation be at all in the interest of the chinese bourgeoise? It already finds ample expression of its class interest through the CCP.
Sorry, backreading this thread for the first time in a while and I just wanted to say that I think that something a lot of people overlook with the "Yellow Panic" as you term it is exactly that over the past 10+ years China actually has started implementing regulations from the Central Party Apparatus down to the Provincial & Local levels and something people miss is how salty this makes not only Foreign Capital Invesment from the West but also that from surrounding Asian Territories & even Domestically. It's exactly because these things are potentially threatening the cushy postion of Imperialism in China that even those that aren't neccessarily allied with western Imperialist powers & blocs are at least, privately, pleased with the propaganda efforts of this Red Scare that is being created by the US over unease about their status as the Hegemonic world power.
Not that it would actually be more democratic for workers, bur porky generally prefers liberal democracy
I think that it has a lot to do with the CPC having the benefit of hindsight in establishing a modern capitalist state. They've learned the lessons of the 19th century, mainly that you have to keep workers satisfied, or else they will begin to develop a political consciousness and make demands not only for improved conditions and wages, but the right to freely organize, and for greater democracy. Despite the Dickens tier horrors that exist in China, they have made great gains in the standards of living, which has suppressed the desire for political liberalization.
For people who think "at least the CCP is a communist party that adheres to ML", here is a funny chart from an interesting study about the social composition of the CCP and people's opinions of it in China.
>2) I don't think it was Bloomberg specifically, more like a combo from all the major MSM outlets at once.
Bloomberg published the first major article explicitely claiming the "1 Million in internment camps" hoax and the other major MSM channels all copied Bloombergs newly fabricated wording not even MC Dougal herself used, because unlike media she has to be cautious what she accuses people of without evidence, as even the propaganda report initially explicitely only compared the situation in cities with heightened security methaphorically to camps but didnt actually claim a gazillion would be inside camps.
Its highly unlikely they all came up with the same lie right after Bloomberg at the same time independently.
This is the so called UN report they are now refering to as UN expert opinions because even the UN officially denied the claims of it being a UN report or even a UN body.
Sure it doesnt really matter since they are all colluding but its good to remember where the roots of this "evil" are.
>They get a ton of funding from Taiwan.
Taiwan is just as much a proxy in this as is that Falun Gong cult.
Its rooted 100% in Washington, everone else is just pawns in their game.
The "America Uncensored" channel they created after backlash of their blatant racism getting called out is hillarious. The flattery of the Trump regime couldnt be any more blatant.
>China bad to the US!
>Trumps policies good!
no critique about America at all and barely any views.
Bloomberg hates China. I don't know what's up with them. They hate them more than any other western, except RFA I guess. Their straight reporting is always a hack-job and the put a bunch of outright racist cranks on their opinion page.
>Taiwan is just as much a proxy in this as is that Falun Gong cult.
Kinda, but the Taiwanese government does indeed fund anti-Chinese scholarship and media and it has for decades. One interesting thing I learned recently was that Taiwan's government furnished scholarships actually prohibited recipients from ever traveling to mainland China. So we got Taiwanese educated China experts who had never been to the country.
Chinese government scholarships have no such restrictions btw
If the USA's war with China went hot, would the Chinese be able to use any possible connections with American Corporations into submission?
The Nazis appealed to American Corporations and Industrialists which brought production to a stand-still for a short while. You don't hear of it for some reason. Americans don't realize that all Corporations care about is profit so you can "convince" them to fuck shit up.
Probably not. And a real war between them would have no winners.
Something interesting happening the last few days. A number of major US, Canadian, Oz newspapers coordinating quite openly against a Chinese company, Huawei, whose main crime seems to be being Chinese. Aggressively policing other outlets against a “PR offensive.” This seems bizarre that this is just accepted as normal behavior.
So is China socialist or nah?
The CPC is a rerun of the same bullshit that European social-democratic parties were like a century ago. Radical in principle, bourgeois in practice. Career politicians LARPing as proletarians, basically.
China is still lightyears ahead of the rest of the world though. It is the only country on the planet where it's possible to imagine popular discontent taking a communist form at the moment. Socialism and Mao's legacy still hold weight there. In my humble opinion, China is effectively mankind's last hope.
“Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Soviet Communist Party collapse? An important reason was that their ideals and beliefs had been shaken. In the end, ‘the ruler’s flag over the city tower’ changed overnight. It’s a profound lesson for us! To dismiss the history of the Soviet Union and the Soviet Communist Party, to dismiss Lenin and Stalin, and to dismiss everything else is to engage in historic nihilism, and it confuses our thoughts and undermines the Party’s organizations on all levels.”
“Why must we stand firm on the Party’s leadership over the military?” Xi continued, “because that’s the lesson from the collapse of the Soviet Union. In the Soviet Union where the military was depoliticized, separated from the Party and nationalized, the party was disarmed. A few people tried to save the Soviet Union; they seized Gorbachev, but within days it was turned around again, because they didn’t have the instruments to exert power. Yeltsin gave a speech standing on a tank, but the military made no response, keeping so-called ‘neutrality.’ Finally, Gorbachev announced the disbandment of the Soviet Communist Party in a blithe statement. A big Party was gone just like that. Proportionally, the Soviet Communist Party had more members than we do, but nobody was man enough to stand up and resist.”
China tends to be Dengist and a neoliberal dictatorship with protections. Dengist China has been funneling money from Wall Street and European banks for 40+ years along with business people. In part due to slave labour, if Mao was as upright as he was meant to be he would never permit that to happen to his people.
> China is effectively mankind's last hope
I feel sorry for you if you believe a neo dynastic imperial nation (and a long running history of having vassal nations and destroying cultures is anything like you said.
Isn't that a white nationalist jewish conspiracy website?
Isn't that a right-wing Australian think-tank?
Maybe, maybe not
But are they wrong though?
I mean… as a pretty well read person in Chinese thinking, communist or otherwise… that's a total fabrication. Chinese people don't believe in a "Chinese race," but have subdivisions of things like Chinese nationality, Han ethnicity, and subdivided various minorities or vassal states. They don't object to religion as a competitor to their country, they believe, unlike Stalinists, in controlling religions and no one in China who is a party member is atheist. Only consumerist, tuhao people are atheist. Only poor farmers educated in Mao's reign are "atheist," but they are still leftover folk religious people and they don't think about "god" like Western theology does. They were formerly illiterate Confucianists, not Judeo-Christian. So yeah, rense's shit is manufactured without obvious knowledge of Chinese history and culture.
As for the other source… China is not a country that can engage in war like others can. Furthermore, I think China is the subversive element— the United States is not good at beating China in these games. They have tried many times and failed. Tiananmen for one, did not bring some social upheaval. Nor did the more recent student protests in Hong Kong. Indeed, China doesn't fight literal wars: they fight trade and culture wars, and they are doing a good job. They don't need imperial conquests to get their way as such. Thus, the source is just reactionary capitalist hoo ra about nothing.
The mass migrations of the Chinese into Canada USA and Australia are not nothing and seem to accord with the sources. The Chinese themselves seem more than content to continue to undermine those countries as some kind of retribution for the century of humiliation. You may justify the attempt towards the USA for being a blantant imperialist but its concerning to rationalise the subversion of Canada and Australia who had embraced Chinese the most and tends to be awefully insidious and treacherous. The rense source as well as aspis for better or worse converge on the events which have been unfolding in recent years. Dismissing those sources as "outsiders" when they have reasonably and considerably confirmed the climate in the South China Sea and the Chinese version of Lebensraum would be oblivious at best and suspicious at worst.
China had subjugated Vietnam for 1000 years, made Korea and vassal state and had destroyed pre-Kanji era Japan. More recently, had created an implicit caste system in Malaysia leading the Malay riots. Singapore was returned to Malaysia but the Chinese made sure it was away from Malaysia. There was also the Soviet and Chinese boarder dispute instigated by China among many other imperialist designs.
When the so-called CCP denies those actions meanwhile mobilising them with urgency like the bygone Dynasties have its just deflection and obfuscation. Its communist and socialism might suffer too by the actions of China.
Wow, what a vile, misanthropic little rat you are. I was quite critical of the CPC in my post, but clearly that wasn't enough for you, as I don't believe that Chinese people are an inherently aggressive race of brutes hellbent on annihilating culture or whatever the fuck you're going on about.
>I feel sorry for you if you believe a neo dynastic imperial nation (and a long running history of having vassal nations and destroying cultures is anything like you said.
You don't feel sorry for me, you're just angry because I said Chinese workers have revolutionary potential, which clashes with your national chauvinist/xenophobic anticommunist worldview. Don't even try to deny your open racism. Why else would you use China's imperialistic and self-interested policy as proof of it's lack of revolutionary potential when literally ever fucking major bourgeois power does the same?
Communism is impossible without China, they are too important a player on the world market to be excluded from a post-capitalist system. Cry about it some more, retard.
Good excerpt, I haven’t read much of Xi’s speeches / writings but I was pleasantly surprised by this. The military is an all-important force for the construction of socialism and must be closely integrated with the people, state and party. This is why under socialism I am in favor of conscription.
Is this the power of /leftypol/‘s Marxist analysis in the current year?
>The mass migrations of the Chinese into Canada USA and Australia are not nothing and seem to accord with the sources. The Chinese themselves seem more than content to continue to undermine those countries as some kind of retribution for the century of humiliation.
Not how it works. People, such as the upper classes of Hong Kong, Beijing, Taiwan migrated (especially starting in the 1990s) to first world destinations like San Francisco, Los Angeles, Vancouver, Seattle, Sydney, Melbourne and so on for better economic opportunities and living standards. Go talk to a Chinese immigrant and ask them what they think about your "retribution for the century of humiliation" theory and they'll have no idea what you're talking about.
>Chinese version of Lebensraum
One-child policy (1979-2016), full reproductive rights (contraceptives, abortions) for women and a strong political and cultural emphasis on parents educating and nurturing their only child instead of just popping out a bunch of uneducated kids doesn't seem in line with your theory of "Lebensraum" and all its implications.
>China had subjugated Vietnam for 1000 years
China or the "Chinese" people is a modern concept. You clearly don't know much of the history of the dynasties, khanates and other political states that ruled parts of the region now known as China.
I didnt mean to give you any shock treatment. Ignoring factual history and current affairs for the sake of ideology, especially by socialists and communists, would be negligent. With your eruption towards the fact of imperialist and geopolitical designs of China you do seem like the proverbial boomer who would lick the feet of the Chinese unironically while betraying the generations local people. Complain to the jannies all you want and call for a ban if you like but remember this: if communism and socialism until recently has been at an all time low it would reach another low once it becomes apologetic towards China considering both historical and current events. More people would flock to /pol/ than they did after Gamergate as normies have been affected and would be affected by the said "soft power" of the Han Chinese.
Posts like yours can make it frustrating when talking to others about socialism and communism who are outside the respective boards and, guaranteed, being apologetic to country that tries for Lebensraum would further entrench people away from socialism and communism.
>Not how it works. People, such as the upper classes of Hong Kong, Beijing, Taiwan migrated (especially starting in the 1990s)
You literally skipped two decades and redacted people from China starting to migrate too en mass with visa programs and then with 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧investor🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 visas along with those
> "retribution for the century of humiliation" theory and they'll have no idea what you're talking about.
They know, try as they might to hide it they know. Not to mention the implications of "owning" and belligeance towards Canada and Australia and that at the smallest slight there would be sanctions
>doesn't seem in line with your theory of "Lebensraum" and all its implications
One question: does the one child policy apply outside of China? The correct answer and despite of mental gymnastics is an emphatic no. Furthermore despite the one child policy they have saturated Western Canada and the West Coast of the USA. I suppose the imperical statistics are reactionary and misanthropic.
>China or the "Chinese" people is a modern concept. You clearly don't know much of the history of the dynasties, khanates and other political states that ruled parts of the region now known as China.
They have subscribed to being Han Chinese and identify as such and act in accordance with their cultural narrative encompassing to the chargrin of the China Apologists the neo-dynastic imperialism
So far I have provided source which have not been merited on their factual basis rather than ideological which China, to put it ideologically, considers itself non-Chinese as the proletariat and themselves the bourgeoisie specifically being their rightful place through soft power. Africans were expecting jobs but those expected jobs were given to the Chinese flying from China, pretty much scabs forming a caste system like they did in Malaysia which cased the riots there. Swap the name China for Britain and you might find yourself starting to think differently.
>the Chinese are migrating to undermine the West
>China instigated the Sino-Soviet split
>China subjugated Korea and Vietnam
Except the CPC helped in both the Korean and Vietnam wars? And the SS split was about 50-50 responsibility, maybe even moreso the USSR's fault? And what evidence do you have of that pol-tier conspiracy theory? There is legitimate criticism of the CPC but this is absolute bs.
Read The Governance of China if you want to understand Xi Jinping thought in its entirety. It's not very impressive, mostly platitudes and dogmatic adherence to the reform and opening up.
Thanks for the book recommendation, comrade.
>They know, try as they might to hide it they know.
Not an argument.
>Not to mention the implications of "owning" and belligeance towards Canada and Australia
Are you Canadian? Why are you blaming all Chinese people for the fault of a few billionaire/multi-millionaire real estate speculators who took advantage of your government's policy of having no regulations on real estate?
>Furthermore despite the one child policy they have saturated Western Canada and the West Coast of the USA.
What's your point? Do you feel antagonized by all those Chinese people?
>neo dynastic imperial nation
gtfo American shill
>and a long running history of having vassal nations and destroying cultures is anything like you said
it's not like the country was an empire and then became socialist at some point
>I mean yes they're fascists but why would that make them unreliable?
can you please post a link to the full source?
You may as well quote Trumps Twitter account for reference of the utterly baseless and fabricated propaganda bullshit maskerading as flat earth tier conspiracy theory bullshit you are dumping here.
No in fact even that would be more sensible.
>In another case, a hundred workers were required to stay late after work to observe a disciplined employee read out loud a message of self-criticism she had been required to compose.
oh no no no
>Contrast this to China where the Communist Party not only continues to control the commanding heights of the economy, but has actually expanded this control in recent years. All while livings standards continue to soar, and income inequality (both regional and between rural and urban regions) continues to decrease,
Why wouldn't this apply to the US after FDR?
>words words words
It's just text comrade, rense publishes almost everything that's submitted, sometimes it's on point, sometimes it's garbage why the strong emotion?
Trumps on the spectrum so if anything he's more credible, than say Clinton
Oy, libertarded faggots! I 'ave a question fer ya. What the fook is outhoritharean about China and CPC rule? Because CNN said so?
Seriously faggots, tell me.
can't legally fap to bjork.
Absoluttely dank, I've recently started to fucking love the shit out of Mao, fuck the landlords, fuck kapital, fuck revisionism, never stop revolutionizing
I don't see what's really that "Capitlaistic" about this
Self-Crit has been a popular part of Maoist / Chinese Socialism for a long while long before Deng Xiaopings Market reforms
>NeoLiberal dictatorship with protectionist policies
>Neo-Imperial Elective Monarchy
This is why some shouldn't be allowed to use the internet
>according to sources familiar with the matter
>Huffington Post editor
>Rockefeller Foundation fellow
It's been 4 days and noone has been able do describe what is authoritarian about CPC rule?
Blimey, all you Jackaroo ockers fucking suck and will go to gulag.
>China’s 93 billionaires’ lawmakers have an accumulated wealth of US$504 billion while the 50 richest members of the US Congress have a combined wealth of “only” US$2 billion!
Only one post in this thread called China authoritarian
>Contrast this to China where the Communist Party not only continues to control the commanding heights of the economy, but has actually expanded this control in recent years.
>South China Morning Post recently published a highly interesting report about the wealth of China’s lawmakers.  The paper is known as a serious source and it certainly knows what it’s talking about
>South China Morning Post
wait hold on a moment
>thats the first line of the article too
>be lead into this room
>you hear the door behind you shut
>the bag covering your head gets taken off
>this is what you see
So you are saying it is an outright lie?
Call him a filthy revisionist and say he is not better than Tony Blair.
Just buy a new refrigerator anon, you can get old ones cheap.
love unruhe in there
this picture is pretty insidious tbh
Ni hao yo mayo gee gee
Dengoids will defend this.
real gommieism has never been tried
w-what's in that black purse
actually existing communism?
this picture looks like a scene from a political thriller movie
Xi never looks intimidating though.
he looks spooky here
>trying to get sanctions lifted
>same as a failed NEP where party members party member are bought by billionaires and cooperate with the U.S on trade
Why is ISIS there? The only communists supporting them are one Italian Maoist party and some Trotskyists.
>diplomacy is counter revolutionary
tfw Stalin should be purged because he talked to FDR
Anti imperialism alone isn't worth stanning
it's used constantly in in articles about the government by SCMP
i know this is kinda old news but for those who defend China what do you make of the Jasic Incident along with all the disappearances?
>tfw Stalin should be purged because he talked to FDR
No handshakes allowed.
>want to bring back a class of parasitic """"scholars""""
gulag and >>2801187
The claim that the SCMP is a reputable and reliable paper, is as silly as calling Trump a cultured gentleman and chevalier.
SCMP is part of Washingtons propaganda web and responsible for most of the high profile fakenews about China. Its a proxy they keep citing as "Chinese media", even if the author is a U.S. educated white American who lives in Washington or one of these dual citizenship Hong Konger educated and tied via residence permits to the U.S. Its the go to source for fakenews about China for the whole clout of FOX, Bloomberg, CNN and all the other culprits. Its openly shows bias for Trump, the U.S., the "West" and is most blatantly anti-China and anti-CCP and just as often as its producing fakenews, just echoes U.S. made only so that U.S. media can cite their own fakenews as "according to Chinese sources". They turn every shitty Twitter shitpost into a frontpage article and 5 minutes later its all over Washingtons propaganda web.
The recent acquisition by a real Chinese company has not changed anything about the way the paper reports. I suspect they are just making the best out of the fact the paper keeps getting massive traffic due all the major Western media coorporations citing it no matter how wrong and low quality the articles are and shutting it down would just make the U.S. establish another proxy. So at least they can take the profits.
As for the article about billionair lawmakers in China itself. You don't need to get past the headline
>China's Billionaire Lawmakers
That is already bullshit. They cite the Hurun report (more on that one later). According to that these 93 billionaires are "Politically Affiliated Billionaires in China".
The first layer of spin. Those are not all "lawmakers". SCMP quickly rushes over that refering to it as "delegates to the legislative and political advisory".
The second layer of spin. It's the majority of these 93 billionaires that are not "lawmakers" but "political advisors". Only 37 of the 93 are actually NPC delegates, which is a legislative body. The weight of billionaires is on the "political advisory" part, just like in the U.S. where Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett have a combined net worth as large as the next 10 Chinese counterparts combined.
Third layer of spin is that the NPC has nearly 3000 delegates as compared to 455 members of the U.S. congress. The whole group of "delegates to the legislative and political advisory" is 5000 against 455. They are comparing a much larger mass of people in first place. Out of these only 170 are part of the NPCSC. These are congressmen that could be considered actual lawmakers compareable to an US Congress man. I cant be arsed to check which one of the 37 NPC delegates are billionaires according the Hurun report, but the statistical odds are lower than 1 to 17.
The fourth layer of spin is that in the West people the standard is to go into politics, then make corrupt policies for certain coorporations and after that they become directors and advisors of those coorporations and start the careers making them billionaires. In China its the biggest enterpreneurs, best scientists, greatest schollars and so are pushed into consutling roles as result of their accomplishments. Its all apples and oranges.
This report labels Jack Ma, Pony Ma and Zong Qinghou as billionaire lawmakers. Its just bullshit.
And finally comes the sources.
The Chinese numbers come from the Hurun report. Those are at best dubious estimates by Rupert Hoogewerf. The Hurun report provides no sources for their list.
Pony Ma Huateng was estimated at nearly 50 Billion alone. There are no public records of his wealth. Most of that is an estimate of the value of the private company he partly owns.
The issue is Rupert Hoogewerf has an agenda to shill capitalism in China and China as capitalist. Hes glorifying capitalists hording wealth. He promotes wealth hording as a competitive race. He openly undermines Deng Xiaopings reforms and attribute Chinas wellbeing alone to capitalism- The reports are nowadays extended to cover other countries but only as an afterthought. Its still aimed at China and was founded as capitalist propaganda for China. He and those suckered into this competition have a clear motive of inflating their numbers.
The U.S. numbers come from the Roll Call report which admits itself is not a comprehensive statement about the net wealth and provides an insight only. These must be understood as minimum and only public reported parts of their net values. In the U.S. they dont have to report certain personal assets like residencies. They have just ranges they have to report their wealth either. A congressman with a $ 500 Million villa and $ 5 Billion other assets may end up with the exact same public reported net wealth as a congressman with a $ 50 Million villa and $ 50 Million other assets.
The SCMP objectively does not and can not even know what its talking about. Neither can the subliminal key message that Chinese legislature is even more "capitalist" than the U.S. legislature be taken serious. thespooks.net took the bait here exactly like it was intended.
>I cant be arsed to check which one of the 37 NPC delegates are billionaires according the Hurun report, but the statistical odds are lower than 1 to 17.
That should have been: I cant be arsed to check which one of the 37 NPC billionaires according the Hurun report are NPCSC members, but the statistical odds are lower than 1 to 17.
>Liu Zhongjing, arguably, is the forefather of the Chinese intellectual dark web, and currently its most notorious stalwart.
>A piece on Liu must necessarily begin with an argument as to why he merits serious treatment…
Weeeelll? Where's the argument? There is this:
>in 2009, he completed a translation of Flying Serpents and Dragons: The Story of Mankind’s Reptilian Past by R.A. Boulay, a dead-serious explication of the theory that an alien race, the Anunnaki, visited ancient Sumeria…
Then there is some more about him making incompetent translations of books that were stupid to begin with.
>Liu Zhongjing’s philosophy — Auntology — borrows heavily from the work of Oswald Spengler
Is Otto Neurath available in Chinese? He did a long and thorough review of Spengler, and Spengler didn't come out of that looking good.
Would it be safe to read and search for Cockshott when I move to China?
No. They said they would ban him if he keeps having lectures and gives out books.
Also why hasn't the BadMouse debate not been discussed here as yet, you absolute faggots.
pic related is what republicans and alex jones actually believe will happen
Well I am on the side of Ian of course, but I find that these debates don'T allow for a debate really, two parties state their stances and after each one did it and exchanged one or two arguments the subjects changes, this results in both parties coming out without their mind being changed at all.
Even though I found it really annoying how the Maoist always brought up his opportunistic line of the Soviet Union almost every argument he brought up started with "muh soviet union state capitalism". He cant really escape his ultra leftism
I've read the wikipedia page and well it didn't sound good, of course. Iam way to unknowledable on the topic to make any claims but I think we should approach it not too dogmatic from both sides. I often see Anti Swcc communist jump to conclousions screaming "muh capitalism china bad" and pro Swcc "CPC good cant make mistakes".
It may be very well be that the CPC is making mistakes here, but we shouldn't forget that reactionary workers movments, corrupted by counterrevolutionaires have existed in every socialist country, the best example would be the Solidarność
How do you guys counter the China pollutes more so people who talk about Climate change should be angry at them?
1. They pollute more because the west has outsourced its polluting industry to China.
2. Out of all countries, they are putting the most resources and effort into mitigating pollution and climate change.
>They pollute more because the west has outsourced its polluting industry to China.
What a wonderfully way to say China caused deindustrialization and caused western workers to become unemployed.
right on bro, fucking chinese insectoid commies caused that, not capitalism.
Am I right or am I right?
Good reply for the first one point, but how to you reply to conservatives bringing up how China continues to build coal mines to this day?
China didn't cause it you dumbass. Capitalists who realized they could make a bigger profit by making shit in China is what caused deindustrialization.
They pollute less than Europe or USA per capita. They pollute even less by consumption per capita. IE, much of the pollution is for things that will be exported. Also, pollution from the massive US military doesn't figure into US pollution figures.
>coal production up 5.2%
>energy production by coal up 6%
>doesnt mention higher energy production does not equal higher pollution or coal consumption due to more efficient and cleaner new coal plants replacing old ones
>doesnt mention the relative amount of coal used in Chinas total energy mix
>doesnt mention energy production by all sources was up 8.1% i.e. coal is down
<this development goes directly against the nation’s promise to decrease the amount of coal used in their total energy mix
<crushing blow to any optimism
>finally mentions China is building new more efficient coal plants at end of article
>doesnt mention they are also causing much less pollution
<this is also bad because it will increase the energy output by coal even more!
This may sound stuck up but sometimes I wish I where another blind sheep. How can you read that and not see this bullshit? How do these papers get away with this?
I'm glad the PRC supports Brenton Tarrant's killing of 51 invaders.
Yanis Varoufakis: Don't Worry So Much About China
So did anyone watch the "is china socialist?" debate badmau5 hosted between the "On Mass"-podcast MLM guy (Mubarik) and Ian Goodrum? I haven't watched it yet. I fear it might be too cringey for me.
I've watched it look here for my opinion: >>2849398
It was actually pretty good and civilized.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing.
hahaha cultural revolution when?
oh god fuck off, its the same as taking side for the
CIA controlled Solidarność
>"Western pigs and muslims are killing each other, the situation is excellent."
t. Xi "The Jin" Ping
>a member of a Marxist circle which combined struggle for workers’ rights with ecological concerns and a Chinese version of #MeToo
Ah the good old "Marxist" with Anglo American characteristics claimed but conventiently there is no evidence for anything story
What about Huayou Cobalt?
Alright so I listened to it. I kinda like Mubarik but his anti-revisionist MLM shtick is autistic as hell. Ian made some good points and came off as a very likeable and sensible guy. I'm not a dengoid (I used to spend way too much energy debating that lenin hat retard on here) but I think the pro-China side "won" pretty clearly in this debate.
Proles of the Round Table episode 23: Western Media is a F*** (w/ Ian Goodrum)
Someone recommend me some good (marxist) pro-China podcast episodes, youtube videos, etc. Preferably something I can listen to while doing other stuff but articles welcome too I guess.
Thanks. Those "Proles of the Round Table" twats are completely insufferable though. It's like they discovered r/fullcommunism yesterday and decided to start a podcast. The one with Ian Goodrum as the guest was pretty decent but literally only because of Ian.
does anyone know, where I can get such a suit?
Chinese Socialism: A Streaming Talk With Ian Goodrum (Liberation News)
Is there a chance for China to dislodge Greece and Italy from american/european hegemony?
What's the difference between "Western imperialism" and "Chinese investment", in Africa?
China does it
1. without military intervention
2. allowing for re-negotiation (Varoufakis talked about how easy it was to re-negotiate a deal with China, something an american or german company would never have done)
3. for mutual benefit and not just one-sided resource extraction
You're a pretty fucking weird ancom. Not complaining though.
>without military intervention
>for mutual benefit and not just one-sided resource extraction
Except that to pay for Chinese “Investments” have to pay in debt, which they often can’t pay. Which results in China owning their infrastructure. This is littearly what the IMF does. Load up poor countries with debt they can’t pay, than when they can’t pay the debt take all their infrastructure. The only difference is with the IMF the infrastructure is privatized while with China Chinese state owned companies get the infrastructure.
China is socialist. The west is not.
>China is socialist
Imagine thinking you can just flip the Gommunism switch when uncommited billionare party members exist
Okay now I know it looks bad… that China has the highest volume of trade in the world, the biggest labor pool in the world, has plenty of high-tech cities, high-speed trains, basically its own internet, and that it has billionaires in its parliament, and they're mirroring Western imperialism, and they have wealth inequality worse than the US, and their economy is flat-out profit-centered… but dude, I swear, they're actually socialist. It's three-dimensional Go, they're going to betray capitalism and install communism any decade now…
t. First worlder
No amount of "not true socialism" bullshit will save you from the wheel of history.
I-I- swear, they'll somehow break free of being controlled by Jack Ma!!1!
No but they are because it's called the "Communist" Party of China.
Also their economy is state-owned.
>No but they are because it's called the "Communist" Party of China.
Nation SOCIALIST German Workers party tier and I hope this is an AstroTurf attempt
>Also their economy is state-owned
Communism is when the government does things!
No no but listen.
They sent weapons to America's enemies.
Also the party is affiliated with the "International Meeting of Communist and Workers Parties". Now if they weren't communist why would they join that group?
China is socialist. If they weren't then why do they have a plan for it by 2050?
America also enshrined life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but you can keep drinking paint if you want to retain your Dengist retardation.
>citing dictionary definitions
It took me a while to realize but Dengists and Sinophiles are annoying and naive but Sinophobes are annoying and naive too but they swallow and spread the most vile and fake imperialist propaganda so I defend China when necessary.
>Trot pushing imperialist narratives
Like pottery. If you could take a look at that wikipedia article, this is the very first overseas base of the Chinese navy. A first for what is normal for the US. And this isn't fucking military intervention?
As for investment, seriously reconsider the truism that it's the same as western imperialism. Infrastructure developments during colonialism were for the sole purpose of extraction, which is why so many African railways went unused after independence. And independence in a lot of countries was dubious, you still got western-backed coups, a collaborating comprador bourgeoisie left from colonial times willing to sell out their country once again, descendants of european settlers with disproportiate ownership of land etc. etc.
When an African country deals with China, they're doing so on a more sovereign and equal basis than when dealing with former colonial superpowers. A lot of infrastructure falls under Chinese ownership (more commonly, long term lease) but the investment actually has positive effects on developing Africa's productive forces. They are rapidly developing after decades of stagnation. For this alone China deserves credit.
>No but they are because it's called the "Communist" Party of China.
Which means nothing
>Also their economy is state-owned.
Half of it is, the other half is privatized. A similar ration to France. Is France socialist, no?
>They sent weapons to America's enemies.
This isn’t socialism. Most of America’s geopolitical enimies aren’t socialists.
>Also the party is affiliated with the "International Meeting of Communist and Workers Parties". Now if they weren't communist why would they join that group?
Because of Historical reasons.
>China is socialist. If they weren't then why do they have a plan for it by 2050?
>China is socialist
>China will be socialist by 2050
>Trot pushing imperialist narratives
In what way does the US War Machine use what I have cited as anti-Chinease propaganda.
>but the investment actually has positive effects on developing Africa's productive forces.
This is the same argument Europe used when colonizing Africa
>but Sinophobes are annoying and naive too but they swallow and spread the most vile and fake imperialist propaganda so I defend China when necessary.
I’m not a Sinophobe for wanting Chinese Workers to not be exploited by capital.
肯特州立大学枪击事件 Kent State Shooting
美國愛國者法案 USA PATRIOT Act
Current PRC is pretty much Not Socialist, barley even socialist, more even more oppresive capitalism. Maos china was kinder to the worker
well the definition fits for the socialist sector of the Chinese economy, wich is the main economic secotr of the China wich makes the country socialist :)
well China being the lead in steel production doesnt mean that their productive forces over all are more developed than the US?
They are still recognised as a developing nation, wich still catches up in parts like health care, rural life, poverty etc
I can link you some articles on it in like a few days, if you want
>well the definition fits for the socialist sector of the Chinese economy
Same with France, is France socialist?
>doesnt mean that their productive forces over all are more developed than the US?
So you have to literally be the global hegemony to implement socialism? Give me a break.
>They are still recognised as a developing nation, wich still catches up in parts like health care, rural life, poverty etc
So was Russia in 1928
How do China's bootlickers defend state violence, lack of free speech and lack of democracy?
>wich still catches up in parts like health care, rural life, poverty etc
you fix that problem with socialism, capitalism causes them
How is China more "socialist" than the Nordic countries? Is being tortured by the state more Marxist or something?
>Same with France, is France socialist?
what? can you elaborate?
>So you have to literally be the global hegemony to implement socialism? Give me a break.
The productive Forces aren'T defined by leading in the world market, it is the combined development of the means of production and the knowledge and expertise of the workers
Those are uneven developed in China, it lacks behind in some areas. I'll link you something
>So was Russia in 1928
Sure, and Lenin said that these things cant be resolved without building the material basis for it through the NEP
>"Strictly speaking, there is 'only' one thing we have left to do and that is to make our people so 'enlightened' that they understand all the advantages of everybody participating in the work of the cooperatives…In this respect, NEP is an advance, because it is adjustable to the level of the most ordinary peasant and does not demand anything higher of him. But it will take a whole historical epoch to get the entire population into the work of the co-operatives through NEP. At best, we can achieve this in one or two decades…Without universal literacy, without a proper degree of efficiency, without training the population sufficiently to acquire the habit of book-reading, and without the material basis for this…we shall not achieve our object…the system of civilized co-operators is the system of socialism." - (On Cooperation, VI Lenin)
>The precent of government spending/ownership as part of GDP for China and France is similar
Well Government ownership of the economy doesnt neccecarily constitute socialism
>China is leading the world or second to Burgerland in pretty much every industry
It still lacks behind in medicin, agriculture, poverty rates, wages etc
It still is a developing country
>Capitalism creates uneven development. If your gonna wait for Capitalism to make Xijang as developed as Hong Kong you’ll be waiting for millennia
China plans their economy according to those problems to boost the areas that lack behind
>When Lenin did the NEP he called it capitalism, no one in the USSR called the NEP socialism. They all knew it was a temporary stage of capitalism. If what China is doing right now is similar to the NEP that makes China capitalist. Also 1928 is the first year of the five year plans, when the NEP was abolished and the USSR became socialist.
Well he called it state-capitalism, capitalism under a socialist DoTP.
China uses the same elements but with a dominant socialist sector of the economy, wich constitutes the country as a socialist one
As long as capitalism exists elsewhere repression of internal dissidents will be required in order to prevent imperialist sabotage and subversion.
> Well Government ownership of the economy doesnt neccecarily constitute socialism
That's his point.
> It still lacks behind in medicin, agriculture, poverty rates, wages etc
> It still is a developing country
That's because they desire those things. The resources to develop ARE there. It's capitalism that's keeping them down, and they're choosing to have it.
That's absolutely ridiculous. You can't force the people to adopt socialism, they must do it themselves through revolution. China had a revolution, that was betrayed and now it enforces the capitalist status quo upon its population using state violence.
>Except that to pay for Chinese “Investments” have to pay in debt
Except that thats just oversimplified U.S. propaganda tier bullshit.
There are large Chinese grants that absolutely do not need to be paid back.
There are different types of investments that vary from most favourable credits for the creditors to planned losses for the Chinese lenders. Many Chinese credits are exactly the opposite of the proclaimed debt traps. China is often lending money to faciliate growth without any exploitation i.e. zero or near zero interest credits because it benefits China more if the economy is growing in independent foreign countries trading then with tham than throwing more money at business in China that struggle to grow further in the current economic system.
>debt they can’t pay,
In most cases they can or could if somone would actually invest in them and not just try to debtrap them like the IMF that is behind the screeching about Chinas mutual investments that quit the other way around in general result in countries being able to grow from the investment.
> which they often can’t pay
This is a simply wrong U.S. propaganda lie and hypbolic and false narrative repeating the ever same few cases that are many times in fact not fully or not even mainly Chinese investment projects and definitely not something common.
>Which results in China owning their infrastructure.
or not and they are just compensated in a way that does not equal ownership at all but is sold as such in hyperbolic and dishonest U.S. propaganda.
Or in the Chinese business lending the money is going bankrupt
Or in China extending the debts resulting in them being able to pay it back after all
Or in China kjust slashing the debts
Go shill your onesided White House propaganda page narratives elsewhere.
>Well Government ownership of the economy doesnt neccecarily constitute socialism
No, but your using the word socialism as “government ownership of the economy” when you argue China is socialist because it has state owned companies.
>It still lacks behind in medicin, agriculture, poverty rates, wages etc
>It still is a developing country
Yes, but China is also has the highest industrial output in the world. It has enough productive forces to move beyond markets and develop soly using five year plans and develop faster using just five year plans than by using the current system. The reason China doesn’t do this isn’t because they can’t, but because the CCP is run by billionaires who don’t want to do this.
>No, but your using the word socialism as “government ownership of the economy” when you argue China is socialist because it has state owned companies.
>you argue China is socialist because it has state owned companies.
>Yes, but China is also has the highest industrial output in the world. It has enough productive forces to move beyond markets and develop soly using five year plans and develop faster using just five year plans than by using the current system. The reason China doesn’t do this isn’t because they can’t, but because the CCP is run by billionaires who don’t want to do this.
Well their high industrial output doesn'T say anything about the state of their overall Productive Forces though. Yes, they are quite developed in some areas but they need to develop in others.
They are still a developing country
>fastest growing economy on the planet within the last decades
>fastest rise in living standards on the planet
<the policy of the CPC is keeping them down
The main topic at the last party congress was to overcome the unequal development between cities and the countryside. It's their main agenda point now and remember that Chinese companies are either state-owned or must obey state orders. So let's see what happens.
>Capitalism won’t, and will never develop the interior of China, because Capital only develops the “most efficient” “most competitive” areas. Look at Burgerland, the most developed country in the world, a handful of it’s cities account for most of it’s GDP. If the CCP thinks’ capitalism will be different in China they are deluding themselves.
Correct, that is why the CPCh uses socialist planning to target those problem areas
This. If eliminating poverty, raising living standards and growing the economy is the goal, clearly whatever the Chinese are doing seems to be working. Mao was based but China was poor as shit during his time. Would China have developed at the same rate if they preserved Mao era economic policy? Maybe, but probably not.
lol thanks for proving my point about your retarded U.S. propaganda
the amount of idpol and socdem fellation over there is depressing. not mentioning literally half the post are about pewdiepie since the shooting, as if thats where we should look for an explaination
I started looking at breadtube when an university profesor studying media bias toward Venezuela did an ama, which was great, but 80% is shitty liberal content
>probably about to die
you do you fucking dengoid
>their high industrial output doesn'T say anything about the state of their overall Productive Forces
just fucking kys faggot how can you be this fucking dishonest
you're irredeemable, i rly want to believe china still has some worker state characteristics, but all evidence show it wrong. use some fucking arguments ffs, instead of those blatantly dishonest excuses. answer to marxists that point out massive contradiction between the displayed goal and the interests of the fucking billionaires with huge power in the party. dont pretend its a developing country if you want to be taken serioudly you retard.
>you do you fucking dengoid
Can you point me to, where I argue in that manner?
My point is, that China is a socialist workers state, since China hold a DotP and a socialist economic sector that is the main sector of the Chinese ecnomy.
That sector is socialist, because it operates in a socialist Manner, with workers congresses that are being appointed by workers and the ACTU. It is structured as any other workers democracy in all of socialists states history.
>just fucking kys faggot how can you be this fucking dishonest
>you're irredeemable, i rly want to believe china still has some worker state characteristics, but all evidence show it wrong.
>use some fucking arguments ffs, instead of those blatantly dishonest excuses
I did, and listet sources you can read to educate yourself see here >>2856811
>Policy or practice based on the political or economic theory of socialism
Even the definition you cited supports China being socialist
Their strong nationalism and focus to ethnicity makes me feel a tad too nervous
China is socialist and there's nothing you seething western imperialist liberal porkies can do about it
*arrests Marxist students*
A few brainlet questions:
How bad is poverty in China compared to India, and how many people work in sweatshops? How does the government justify the oppression of the uyghurs and the fact that taiwan/japan/south-korea is way more developed and poverty-free despite being capitalist and starting from being the same war torn shithole? How many chinese will have the living standards of the average japanese in the end of this century?
>How bad is poverty in China compared to India,
not remotely comparable, see pic
>and how many people work in sweatshops
It's mixed. You would need a more specific question to get real data.
>How does the government justify the oppression of the uyghurs
It doesn't exist. The CIA and Saudi Arabia do not have a right to brainwash Chinese citizens into joining the Turkistan Islamic Party terrorist group.
>the fact that taiwan/japan/south-korea is way more developed and poverty-free despite being capitalist and starting from being the same war torn shithole
Just because sweatshop workers (which are like a tenth of the population) aren't in extreme poverty doesn't mean that they aren't suffering.
Uyghurs just want to practice their religion and be distributed the fruits of the resources in xinjiang, which all go to han chinese.
taiwan is better than china in every single way except maybe tourism factors like heritage sites or food, and they are capitalist and had the same economic conditions as the mainland after the wars.
/pol/ falseflagger or gullible liberal, what's it gonna be?
capitalist restoration really did a number on them huh
Muh ciarxist students.
As I am genuine it would have to be the latter case. Don't you see their incredibly strict immigration laws as symbolic of nationalism?
>>fastest growing economy on the planet within the last decades
More like the history of humankind.
>>fastest rise in living standards on the planet
More like the history of humankind.
This is the age which many internet right wings want us to forget form what ever was happened after Xinhai Revolution.
What do you want? Total open border so that the CIA and Western NGOs and think tank can move freely everywhere in China?
Alright /prc/, make me a dengist. What are some books or articles I could read? I'm really skeptical towards China but I'm willing to learn if your sources aren't biased.
Is China Socialist? The Debate - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryaBIjSlteU
Chinese Socialism: A Streaming Talk With Ian Goodrum (Guest talk) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfmjGgWh0AA
I listened to these and thought they were pretty informative. I'm more interested in the question "does China have a marxist/socialist-oriented government?" than "is China in it's current state a socialist society?", so I try to absorb any information that would help me assess the former question and ignore any dumb arguments (for or against) regarding the latter.
>Don't you see their incredibly strict immigration laws as symbolic of nationalism?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCOAbkTs_a4 I wonder if she was arrested for visiting /leftypol/
Based Comrade Xi.
>What trade war? Even more Chinese products coming to US
>China Ghost cities are now alive and filled with 300 million people -What is going on?
>The Truth About 50 Million Empty Homes in China
What kind of black ops 5 reveal is this?
What the fuck is this channel?
Whats that news site from the communist party? Or newspaper? I forgot the name, but didn't bookmark the site …
After watching a few all I can say is that it feels like if David Dees tried making videos
is this a crptic teaser for some video game?
Looking at the other things on that channel it seems like either an elaborate massive shitpost or the makings of someone who might be mentally ill
So I took some time to look into his channel and it's a bunch of Boomer Qanon stuff interlaced with this website blaming doctors/the Canadian tax services of all things for some shit. I also ended up googling this strange ass videos (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfz3CaGLniY) location and I found that it looks like some schizo stole a dead boy's grave marker around the same time.
Food for thought
So what happened with corporations in China giving out faulty vaccines exactly?
Why the fuck doesn't Xi just cut his losses and let Hong Kong secede? I get that there's potential for a recession and also for war but China is strong enough now it really could whether both things particularly if it had Russia and Indiacon it's side which it most certainly would
With the EU slowly going to shit the only traditional ally hong Kong woild have in a potential war is the USA and maybe Japan and I highly doubt either of those countries could handle a proxy war with China for very long and probably wouldn't want to even try. Hong Kong would fucking implode eventually from the eventual neoliberal hellscape it would become and with enough suffering might even want reunification after a few years
Creating the perfect prole.
Better yet, demographically replace HKers with peasants from Guang Dong, Heilongjiang or anywhere in China. It can be done in a generation or less, especially with their 1.2 tfr (which is likely even lower amongst your average neo-lib anglo-worshipper HKers) and age pyramid.
Question to those believing PRC is socialist: how can China be socialist if it has a stock market and advertisements? I get that literally, by definition, a country can still be socialist yet have crappy labor laws, poor pensions, shoddy infrastructure, billionaires – but stock markets and advertisements are just about themselves, by definition, capitalist – no? Surplus value goes into the capitalist system in these ways – there seems to be no weaseling out of this in the way of "But they use the money for social means" or whatever.
"My gift to industry is the genetically engineered worker, or Genejack. Specially designed for labor, the Genejack's muscles and nerves are ideal for his task, and the cerebral cortex has been atrophied so that he can desire nothing except to perform his duties. Tyranny, you say? How can you tyrannize someone who cannot feel pain?"
It has a capitalist market economy controlled by an ideologically communist government controlled by the proletariat. They're developing the productive forces of society and plan to build a new socialist society by 2050.
Can you develop on the "proletariat control" thing like >>2792758 said?
What the fuck is your problem? Deng already wrestled HK from the West, why would they give it up again?
Why do you think the PRC isn't merely opportunist like Mathieu Kérékou and Said Barre were, calling themselves "communist" just to pacify a real internal communist movement? Who's to say they aren't doing it to prevent another Tienanmen Square?
Deng basically compromised on Hong Kong to keep the west out of the mainland for as long as possibke. Now it's causing major problems for them and if it refuses to be annexed for the cause of defeating America and building socialism should be crushed
Is it really causing major problems though? Hong Cucks are just being uppity even though China is just continuing HK's integration with the rest of the mainland as planned.
It isn't right at this moment but it's already being used by the west to stoke even more aggression against the mainland and if Hong Kong hardliners themselves form into a unified political mass it could really turn into a clusterfuck down the line. Xi can't just invade and forcefully annex them cuz it would be atrocious pr (see the Hungarian revolution or Putin's invasion of crimea) so his only real options are to encourage and allow them to secede or what >>2870774
You have to nip things like this in the bud and trying to let Hong Kong become a country now would be so chaotic it would negate itself as a potential threat. It's kind of the same thing as the consensus among leftists about Trump which is that it's better to go through this hard-right period with an pad like Trump at the helm because if he wasn't and Hillary gave us a 3rd Obama term an actual intelligent and cunning fascist would show up later
Amazon will close its domestic e-commerce marketplace business in China, effective from July 18. The company will keep running other business sections in China, including Amazon Web Services, Kindle e-books, and cross-border operations.
The exit marked an end of the company’s 15 years of journey into the China market for their rigid localization in business strategy and management.
“We are notifying sellers we will no longer operate a marketplace on Amazon.cn (the Chinese-language site) and we will no longer be providing seller services on Amazon.cn effective July 18,” the company said in a statement as Financial Times reported.
Amazon has faced stiff competition from Chinese e-commerce giants Alibaba and JD.com. It’s also been less visible in terms of marketing, and its differentiating factors have diminished.
Interesting thing is I read somewhere* that Huawei is to a large degree controlled by the people working there, with internal elections and stuff.
>Amazon Quits China Market
Scientific proof that Jeff Bezos has zero long-term thinking skills and is just a dipshit who got lucky.
*90 % sure it was either junge Welt online or Unsere Zeit, can't find such an article so maybe it was just a reader's comment
Lol retarded. China will import oil from Iran and stop exporting rare earth materials to the West. They don't need to give a shit about bad pr lmao.
So why doesn't Xi just smash the,border and grab them already? Why all the back and forth?
>why doesn't Xi just smash the, border and grab
"smash and grab" is imperialism, it doesn't work, we have millennia of evidence where great powers did that and then disappeared, and the reason is simple, a "smash and grab" is one time economic boost, while "back and forth" is continuous.
>it's imperialism to take back a piece of your own country from the west with very little net economic damage to either region
oh never mind then
Because they don't wanna destroy their country and economy in a pointless war with Burgers over a fucking island.
> China will import oil from Iran
us would shut down the straight of hormuz
Killing the dollar softly: China lobbies ASEAN on yuan use to expand economic influence
Drumpf lost Pakistan. China backed Pakistan during the recent conflict they had. Even if they shut down the straits with the US navy which wont happen Iran will pipeline through Pakistan into China which will happen regardless in the near future
A lot of Iran's oilfields and infrastructure is on the Western side of the Strait of Hormuz, and the south-Eastern parts of Iran borders Pakistan's unstable tribal areas of Baluchistan (i.e., greater risk of attack by insurgents). Re-routing the oil-infrastructure east of the strait is of course possible, but it's very expensive and not done in an instant either.
Also it's not like the US navy can't sink or seize ships off the coasts of Oman or Pakistan and block the strait itself at the same time, lol.
The only way to secure Iranian oil supplies to China is through the land route planned in the Belt and Road Initiative, through Central Asia (or Pakistan, i forget) and into Xinjiang province, which is why China is so hyped about the project. The Belt and Road will massively undermine US leverage over China.
imagine unironically shilling the cultural revolution in AD 2019
all fun and games until you get beaten to death in the street because your classmate thinks you look like a counter-revolutionary nerd
Serious question: I possess a Huawei, does this in any way make it harder for the American and European governments to spy on me than with a Samsung/Iphone/…? Even if the Chinese spy on me, I much prefer that to being watched by the CIA.
Regional safety and stable trade relations are China's foremost priorities right now, a large military confrontation is the last thing they want. Which is also why the US/Japan/Philippines screeching about "Chinese imperialism" and comparing the country to Nazi Germany is completely idiotic.
If you want to understand Chinese regional politics and US/China relations, DEFINITELY read this book
>Yes, China has been carrying out several liberalizations
No it hasn't. The expectation in the Hu-Wen era was that they'd de-gear the SOE sector, or even fully privatize some of them. They haven't. They've completely gone back on that.
God /leftypol/ are so fucking dumb about East Asian communist movements.
>especially with their 1.2 tfr
Shenzhen's TFR is even lower m8. All of the Eastern seaboard cities have incredibly low fertility rates.
Care to say some things about it? or know where to find a copy? can't find on libgen.
>gorillion year old temple
capitalism is only .001 gorillion years old
So China is economically capitalist but has maintained communist ideology independent of the economic base for decades?
First, Android is backdoored to hell and back, you need to get rid of that first.
Second, all phones probably get bugged in-house before being sold on the market or allowed through customs so you probably would need to personally smuggle one directly from the manufactur and prevent cust*ms from touching it to keep CIA niggers out of your phone.
>First, Android is backdoored to hell and back, you need to get rid of that first.
I don't think my phone has Android. Or do all huawei phones? am tech illiterate
>Second, all phones probably get bugged in-house before being sold on the market or allowed through customs so you probably would need to personally smuggle one directly from the manufactur and prevent cust*ms from touching it to keep CIA niggers out of your phone.
I did buy it in South Africa though, no idea how bugged it's likely to be.
Basically it's a very well-researched book about the subject that tackles it from a left-wing perspective, clearly more sympathetic to China than to America but without losing objectivity. It discusses China's economic model and American attempts to restrain the economic/political expansion of China, debunking the whole narrative of China being some kind of imperialist power that wants to subvert the world. It then goes on to discuss the political position and recent history of many Asian countries (Japan, NK/SK, Philippines, Taiwan, India,..) in great detail - honestly might be a bit too much detail in some sections, but it's all very interesting and insightful nonetheless.
>or know where to find a copy? can't find on libgen.
Yeah sadly I think you may have to buy it or loan it from a library. I got it as a present myself; would consider scanning it but i have it in translation
Polluted water, gutter oil, poisonous milk powder, poisonous running track, putian hospital, haze, children being stolen and robbed, society becoming indifferent and even values being distorted, all these make them feel uncomfortable, suffocated and afraid.
Many of them have good ideas, but they don't have much of a say in society.They are sober, cynical people, but most of the time their words are drowned out by official mainstream views and secular western fishing views.They watched the gourd-eating masses confused and misled by fake masters, pseudonyms and experts, who wanted to rebut were soon overwhelmed by the so-called fan economy.They look at the populist kidnapping and blind patriotism of the grassroots people, just want to stand up and complain twice, but immediately they are called grassroots people, and then have to worry about their Japanese cars and phones being smashed.They have become a "clean, pretentious" race, often mocked and used as well as ridiculed for corrupt officials and fifty points.Even the janitors of their villages or parking lots dare to provoke them. They are helpless, without any dignity or legal guarantee.In society, cheaters run wild, but they adhere to the moral bottom line and sense of justice;There is no place to protect our rights.We want the rule of law, dignity, security and voice, but we are always afraid of harmony and loud voices.
>I don't think my phone has Android.
Unless you have an iphone, you have Android. It's an OS from Google like windows is from Microsoft. just think about it, a private, for-profit megacorporation that has monopolies, completely controls "your" device and knows 99% of people are tech illiterate. How do you think they will treat you?
Why do I get the feeling that it would look exactly like the light in the suitcase from Pulp Fiction?
Why China is US’ number one adversary
[…] If you revisit Davidson’s choice of wording above, he referred to China as the “principal threat to US interests” which doesn’t necessarily correspond to an actual military threat. A threat to US “interests” almost always relates to an economic interest. The threat only becomes a military one when the US decides that it needs to counter said country with the US military, relying on brute strength only to deter nations from adopting stances which weaken its economy.
This week, representatives from 150 nations including global leaders of around 40 countries are gathering in Beijing for President Xi’s second Belt and Road forum, including all the leaders of the 10 countries that form ASEAN. To date, China has signed 173 cooperation documents on its Silk Road Project with a whopping 125 countries and 29 international organizations.
China has thus far invested over $90 billion in these countries between 2013 and 2018, with average annual growth currently sitting at 5.2 percent. Likewise, $40 billion was invested back into China from these Belt and Road nations, with total trade between the two components reaching as much as $6 trillion.
Last month, Italy became the first G7 country to sign up to the initiative, with other EU members indicating that they will follow suit. For example, Austria and Portugal are notable European nations set to take part in the upcoming forum. Britain, Switzerland, France, Spain, and Australia are also rumored to be intrigued enough to sign Belt and Road inspired agreements with China without formally endorsing the project.
When Beijing said every country is welcome to sign up, it means literally almost everyone. This has created a monumental headache not only for Washington, but the wider EU in general.
Just this week, Spain’s foreign minister and former president of the European Parliament Josep Borrell Fontelles said that China’s current trade and infrastructure proposals reflect a new state of being that China has become a world power.
“[The belt and road] is proof that China is no longer considering itself a net receiver and starts considering itself a contributor to the world, and this is something Spain welcomes,” Borrell told the South China Morning Post (SCMP).
[…] Reportedly, the joint statement is the next step toward the creation of an EU-China Comprehensive Investment Agreement by 2020 which is aimed at improving market access and eliminating practices that discriminate against foreign investors.
[…] Whether the US can realistically take China on militarily remains to be seen, but it certainly does seem that the “America first” doctrine of the Trump administration (if it is indeed putting “America first”) is leaving a global void which China is more than happily filling itself. And despite all criticism thrown at China for its practices, there does appear to be a vital difference in the way that China goes about filling the void left by the United States. Where the US relies on threats, blunt force, CIA-led coups and the like to achieve its aims, China thus far largely prefers a more diplomatic and cooperative approach based on business and trade.
In my estimation, the more the EU jumps on board with China’s initiative, the less influence will ultimately remain in Washington’s hands. In that instance, the US may resort to all-out war, and the preparations for this showdown are being carried out right before our eyes.
It keeps amazing me how RT tends to be so spot-on and genuinely leftist in their analysis
They allow the real opposition to surface spearheaded by leftist journos when it comes to the West or geopolitics, but they severely limit the same when it comes Russia.
RT's European line is anti-EU and pro nu-right movements. Their US line is more social democratic and anti-imperialist.
Once I had a discussion with a comrade from my party and he made a pretty good point, how cultural revolution should be done right: Our city has a cathedral as landmark and he said, instead of destroying it, we should just turn it into a natatorium.
The PRC is:
I'll field this. China's stock market isn't really a big source of capital formation. Most firms have a capital structure that leans heavily on debt from state owned banks.
Can someone explain how the economic system of China works? How free is their market? What about the SEZs?
Did you just discover that pasta so you're spamming it everywhere?
"populist" right is a term manufactured by bourgeois media to legitimize and enable the nu-right and acclimatize people to increasing reaction.
>A claimed deliberate spying "backdoor" in Huawei routers used in the core of Vodafone Italy's 3G network was, in fact, a Telnet-based remote debug interface.
>The Bloomberg financial newswire reported this morning that Vodafone had found "vulnerabilities going back years with equipment supplied by Shenzhen-based Huawei for the carrier’s Italian business".
>"Europe's biggest phone company identified hidden backdoors in the software that could have given Huawei unauthorized access to the carrier's fixed-line network in Italy," wailed the newswire.
>Unfortunately for Bloomberg, Vodafone had a far less alarming explanation for the deliberate secret "backdoor" – a run-of-the-mill LAN-facing diagnostic service, albeit a hardcoded undocumented one
>"The 'backdoor' that Bloomberg refers to is Telnet, which is a protocol that is commonly used by many vendors in the industry for performing diagnostic functions. It would not have been accessible from the internet," said the telco in a statement to The Register, adding: "Bloomberg is incorrect in saying that this 'could have given Huawei unauthorized access to the carrier's fixed-line network in Italy'.
wow, totally didn't see that one coming
hey, is there some non capitalist source on Tienanmen square ? Was it half as bad as it sounds or is ti usual insane propaganda ?
>will someone please give me a source that I agree with saying a country with a red flag brutally stomping out a worker and student uprising is OK.
It doesn't exist, China eliminated it from history so they don't talk about it.
What is socialism and what is Marxism? We were not quite clear about this in the past. Marxism attaches utmost importance to developing the productive forces. We have said that socialism is the primary stage of communism and that at the advanced stage the principle of from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs will be applied. This calls for highly developed productive forces and an overwhelming abundance of material wealth. Therefore, the fundamental task for the socialist stage is to develop the productive forces. The superiority of the socialist system is demonstrated, in the final analysis, by faster and greater development of those forces than under the capitalist system. As they develop, the people's material and cultural life will constantly improve. One of our shortcomings after the founding of the People's Republic was that we didn't pay enough attention to developing the productive forces. Socialism means eliminating poverty. Poverty is not socialism, still less communism.
— Deng Xiaoping, speech discussing Marxist theory at a Central Committee plenum, 30 June 1984
>Shilling for Capitalism with a red painting
How about no?
The Wandering Earth was pretty good. Hope Chinese cinema keeps stepping its game up cause I've had it with Hollywood trash.
Has anyone made a subscribtion of Qiushi? I've read some articles from the website and it seems pretty interesting.
What the fuck! Yugo was facist too?
Sure as hell wasn't socialist what with all that production for exchange
>socialist is the primary stage of communism
Socialism is roughly from each according to their ability, to each according to their work. Alternatively, we could say production for use-value instead of exchange, since Marx said the commodity (the contradiction between use value and exchange value materialized as an object) is the foundation of capitalist relations. Does this describe China in any way? Or is Deng just trying to construct a theoretical veneer to hide his counterrevolutionary tendency behind?
>Marxism attaches utmost importance to developing the productive forces
<not class struggle
<thinking class struggle and developing the productive forces are somehow in contradiction
Redpill me on the social credit system.
Exaggerated by western media. Here in Germany, our "social credit system" is called Schufa.
And let me add to that that Schufa has zero transparency, charges people if they want to know their score, and is not controlled by any public institution.
China ‘has no interest’ in joining US-Russia nuclear deal – FM
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has said his country isn’t interested in negotiating a nuclear arms control treaty with the US and Russia.
Wang was in Russia’s Sochi for talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Monday, a day before US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is set to do the same.
US President Donald Trump is withdrawing from a landmark nuclear treaty with Russia and has said he wants a new agreement that includes China as well.
Wang told reporters that China “has no interest” in being part of such a treaty, AP reported. He added that China keeps its arsenal of nuclear weapons at “the minimal level to ensure the defense policies.”
What if the third world war is between a socialist US and whatever China becomes?
does anybody still have that gif of anime deng xiaoping
Does anybody have an ebook of One China Many Paths?
>U.S.S.A. vs. Chinese Characteristics
That is so spectacularly ironic that I have no doubt that it will happen.
You mean the US implements some mild social democracy and all chauvinist leftoids will say it's socialism and support a war against China.
Now this is something that might happen actually.
it's second international opportunism all over again
I am not kidding by the way - wealth disparity usually decreases during wartime cause keeping it at the same level would literally starve a large part of the population. Socdems are easily bribed and would probably support the war effort because of this.
>China is a socialist country, and a developing country as well. China belongs to the Third World. Consistently following Chairman Mao’s teachings, the Chinese Government and people firmly support all oppressed peoples and oppressed nations in their struggle to win or defend national independence, develop the national economy and oppose colonialism, imperialism and hegemonism. This is our bounden internationalist duty. China is not a superpower, nor will she ever seek to be one. What is a superpower? A superpower is an imperialist country which everywhere subjects other countries to its aggression, interference, control, subversion or plunder and strives for world hegemony. If capitalism is restored in a big socialist country, it will inevitably become a superpower. The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, which has been carried out in China in recent years, and the campaign of criticizing Lin Piao and Confucius now under way throughout China, are both aimed at preventing capitalist restoration and ensuring that socialist China will never change her colour and will always stand by the oppressed peoples and oppressed nations. If one day China should change her colour and turn into a superpower, if she too should play the tyrant in the world, and everywhere subject others to her bullying, aggression and exploitation, the people of the world should identify her as social-imperialism, expose it, oppose it and work together with the Chinese people to overthrow it.
File: 36e245b776f931c⋯.jpg (Spoiler Image, 97.83 KB, 453x543, 151:181, 36e245b776f931ccbfdc8dd022….jpg)
Once China has constructed a Dyson sphere, it'll be ready to move to the next stage of socialism
Ok nbew to /prc/ can I get a quick run down
Is this just about modern day china or maoism too?
There should be more Mao discussion this thread
Missiles, planes, ships. The US also has a bunch of military bases in its colonies around China.
>but bureaucrats really do share a different relation to the MoP than workers/farmers, even if they're vital to the operation of the state.
if the bureaucrats in china really did want to rule as a ruling class, there is nothing stopping them from dissolving the socialist system like the bureaucrats in the ussr did. the fact that china survived the 90s and is still going strong proves that if nothing else, the party's goal remains building socialism
The burocrats privitized half of the economy, and privatization grows every years. Calling yourself “socialist” doesn’t make you socialist.
Guam and Wake Island are still pretty far from China. The only way the US goes to war with China is if the China is at war with Taiwan or India and the US joins the anti-China side.
No, the UN did not report China has 'massive internment camps' for Uighur muslims
Media outlets from Reuters to The Intercept falsely claimed the UN had condemned China for holding a million Uighurs in camps. The claim is based on unsourced allegations by two independent commission members, US-funded outfits and a shadowy opposition group.
And the U.S. is just as likely to side against India in support of Pakistan. The U.S. is playing The Man With No Name in the India-Pakistan rivalry.
>Sage Northcutt: I think ONE Championship is amazing and everyone is amazing in Asia
<i'd like to take this opportunity to remind you that everything is not at all amazing in asia. china is executing people over their religion, selling the organs of these people they execute, censor the internet, have implemented a "social score" for citizens which encourages you to stay in line and not fight against this incredibly totalitarian regime, since people with low scores might not get jobs, mortgages or ability to buy plane tickets, and the president recently removed the limit on his term, meaning he can rule forever. It's already VERY BAD in China, and the way it is set up, will only get worse for the hundreds of millions of poor people who literally have no way out. Sorry to "debbie down" good ol clean Sage's comments, but what's happening in China sounds like it should be out of the 1950's but its 2019 and no one's doing anything about it.
Can't even avoid this shit when I just wanna turn off my brain and read some MMA discussion.
inb4 that what you get for going on reddit and yes i agree
Article on Falung Gong, their multi-million dollars Shen Yun spectacle, their many names lobby groups, and the Mecca/Saint Peter they are building in Deerpark.
On a side note, does organ harvesting really happen, and is it a good thing?
Jack Ma needs to be worked literally to death
>On a side note, does organ harvesting really happen, and is it a good thing?
It does happen, but it's fairly rare compared to other black market trades since most lumpenbourgs aren't willing to deal with the extreme risk involved. Though if any country were to ever have a real life Max Payne 3 plot it'd def be China.
I was thinking more specifically about Falung Gong practitioners being kidnap by the municipal polices, because of their renown good health due yo their Falung Dafa lifestyle.
>we're being persecuted because of our good health
Imagine actually believing this. Part of the reason Falun Gong is supressed is because they don't go the doctor and don't vaccinate. They're the Chinese equivalent of anti-vaxxers and are rightly supressed for being a threat to public health.
Future Huawei phones will be free from Google-Bloatware! Another reason to buy Huawei
Can any of you Dengoids tell me how the healthcare reform is going? Will there be free healthcare by 2020?
China's other nuclear option in trade war with US – Rare earth materials
Beijing has yet another economic weapon to use against Washington in the escalating trade row – a possible embargo on vital rare earth metals needed to make everything from high-tech devices to fighter jets.
A routine visit by President Xi Jinping to a Chinese rare earths facility earlier this week came amid rising tensions between the two countries and shortly after the US turned up the heat on Chinese tech giant Huawei. Despite the lack of any official announcement from Beijing, the visit has triggered fears that China is ready to use the materials, specifically a ban on their export, as an advantage against the US.
Rare earth materials are indeed one more way China can retaliate, independent political analyst, Alessandro Bruno, told RT.
“It could put heavy restrictions on the rare earth metals that are necessary to make all kinds of electronic equipment, especially phones. This is a significant threat because the West does not have its own supply,” he explained.
The minerals are unsurprisingly not included on the US list of $200 billion worth of Chinese goods facing higher import tariffs. Shortly after Chinese and other media reported that Beijing is considering an embargo, shares of rare earth miners skyrocketed.
On Tuesday, the rare-earth sector jumped by 8.5 percent, according to Global Times. China Rare Earth Holdings Ltd enjoyed the biggest gains in the industry as its shares soared 108 percent.
Started to read Deng. Check out this quote here:
" We will make an objective assessment of Chairman Mao’s contributions and his mistakes. We will reaffirm that his contributions are primary and his mistakes secondary. We will adopt a realistic approach towards the mistakes he made late in life. We will continue to adhere to Mao Zedong Thought, which represents the correct part of Chairman Mao’s life. Not only did Mao Zedong Thought lead us to victory in the revolution in the past; it is — and will continue to be — a treasured possession of the Chinese Communist Party and of our country. That is why we will forever keep Chairman Mao’s portrait on Tiananmen Gate as a symbol of our country, and we will always remember him as a founder of our Party and state. Moreover, we will adhere to Mao Zedong Thought. We will not do to Chairman Mao what Khrushchov did to Stalin."
Unironically tempted to get a Huawei just because of the fuss the US government is making about it. Am I thinking on the level of a "doing stupid shit to trigger the libs" reactionary?
Under normal circumstances I would agree however huawei is on the frontlines of combat vs US economic imperialism during period of protracted people's war. If on long march during luding bridge crossing red army sentries suddenly declare "I have already fired at capitalist reactionary forces for 8 hours so I'm going to stop now" said sentries would rightful consigned to firing squad asap. Huawei workers realize every line of code written is another stake driven into the coffin of capitalism. Thus exceptions must be made to defend socialism, defend marxist ideology, defend leninist ideology, defend china, defend chinese working class prosperity, defend communist party, and defend chinese advancement in productive forces.
Based and Dengpilled.
you are a human and harnessing such psychological mechanisms to make you feel good are just fine provided you maintain perspective. Making use of spontaneous self brainwashing and psycho-manipulation is perfectly acceptable, and even to be encouraged, if you have the mental discipline to retain objective grounding while doing so. Irrational fanaticism can be powerful and optimally you could turn such thinking on and off at will.
So are the reports of China's terrible working conditions all just Western propaganda?
Because otherwise I can't see how you could view the PRC as socialist.
Let us project two countries' healthcare system, shall we?
(richest country on Earth, lol)
>Obungo: make it partially free
>20k Americans die every year, lol
(Third world country, lol)
<Makes every year more accessible its healthcare system
MAKES ME THUNK
>Unironically tempted to get a Huawei
only if it's hackable/rootable (ie. you can install LineageOS on it). planned obsolescence via locked-down operating systems/firmware is a thing.
>Buying commodities from one company over another because you think the company that makes it is more “ethical” or whatever is liberal-tier retardation.
conscious/political consumerism does tend to be ineffective, it's like telling people to shop at a local store instead of ordering online at amazon
you purchasing a huawei isn't going to make a dent in the trade war.
>Huawei workers realize every line of code written is another stake driven into the coffin of capitalism.
not sure what huawei being forced to write their own android fork and app store to compete with google android and google play has to do with "driving a stake into the coffin of capitalism"
U.S. Banks are terrified by chinese payment apps
>A routine visit… has triggered fears that China is ready to use the materials.
Indeed. There is actually no sign from China that it plans to do this, but for some reason the US commentariat has gone into overdriving insisting that the will. As far as I can tell, only this visit and hot air from Global Times has provided any basis from the Chinese side. Basically, it is bullshit. Why are US commentators trying to create this threat out of nothing? I think it has to do with reinforcing US hawkishness. Somehow China has to be threatening the US.
I don't hear many voices of reason. It seems the most vocal China experts do not actually have any sources in China, and many or most even have a poor grasp of the language. The China that they sold to the US is just something they made up.
If you are wondering why US groups all started to say 1-3 million it's because the state department said 1 million, and the pentagon said 3 million, and the refused to reconcile these numbers when asked or clarify which one is the US official estimate. So 1-3.
No it won't. If the US changes significantly it will be from a massive stimulus program that makes the Military Industrial Complex the explicit foundation of the US economy and academy. It's not something we would recognize as socialism.
/Ourgirl/ Liu Xin destroys Fox news whore Trish Regan on american TV
>host starts with: we will do our very best to not to speak over each other
>host continuously speaks over the guest
lol fox is so butthurt, they have deleted the video
Universal Healthcare by 2020
Tuition Free education by 2025
Communism by 2050
Based and redpiled!
ffmpeg -y -i input.mp4 -c:v libx264 -b:v 60k -vf scale=-1:240 -pass 1 -an -f mp4 NUL && ^
ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -c:v libx264 -b:v 60k -vf scale=-1:240 -pass 2 -c:a aac -b:a 64k output.mp4
>BEIJING (Reuters) - A rare government takeover of a little-known Chinese bank has revived concerns about the true health of hundreds of small lenders in the country as a slowing economy and souring loans test their capital buffers and drain their reserves.
>Regulators seized Baoshang Bank last week, citing serious credit risks. The sudden takeover of the Inner Mongolia-based lender has fanned worries about other banks with substantial borrowings.
Does someone here is knowledgeable on the Chinese banking system?
Is this bad news for China?
China is not a communists economy, thus not communist. Made the 180 pivot in 1988 to Fascism. So let's get it right we should use Chinazis for a nickname official Fascist Republic of China or FRC.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
Forced visit to labor camp for you.
Really thought, this is such a brainlet take. China is a mixed economy who's oriented towards socialism. People have some weird idea that China exists without any relations to other nations. At the time of reform China's economy was shit while their neighbors's economies were booming. Was China supposed to stay a backwards place that couldn't frequently feed itself? They never abandoned socialism to the extent Russia has and Xi said in a recent talk that they shouldn't forget their country's goal is to have a fully nationalized economy. They don't have much in common with facist
A nice discussion to be honest.
>China is a mixed economy who's oriented towards socialism.
A country either is socialist or is not. Their is nothing left-wing about “mixed economies” capitalism can’t function without state intervention in the economy. State intervention in the economy is not inherently left-wing. The government doing stuff is not inherently left-wing or socialist. Socialism is the abolition of wage labor, private property, and production for exchange. Both private and state owned companies in China engage in this, therefore China is not socialist.
Folks, this is why Trotskyites were purged.
>A country either is socialist or is not. Their is nothing left-wing about “mixed economies” capitalism can’t function without state intervention in the economy. State intervention in the economy is not inherently left-wing. The government doing stuff is not inherently left-wing or socialist.
Conversely, the existence of a market (and even the existence of a bourgeoisie) does not automatically make a country capitalist. This is why the NEP, though it did temporarily create a market and a bourgeoisie, did not magically turn the USSR capitalist.
>Socialism is the abolition of wage labor, private property, and production for exchange.
No, that's the end-stage of communism. China, like the USSR was, is a socialist DoTP: a state run by the proletarian class. You cannot abolish wages, property or production for exchange immediately. If you try, your revolution will be crushed in the cradle.
Please read Lenin. For fuck's sake, PLEASE read Lenin.
>This is why the NEP, though it did temporarily create a market and a bourgeoisie, did not magically turn the USSR capitalist.
The NEP wasn’t socialism. No one claimed it was. Both Lenin and Stalin admitted it was capitalism. The USSR was not socialist until 1928 when the five year plans started.
>No, that's the end-stage of communism.
No Communism is the abolishment of money, and “from each according to his need, to each according to his ability.”
>China, like the USSR was, is a socialist DoTP: a state run by the proletarian class.
So then what separates a socialist economy from a social democratic one that isn’t self-identification?
My specific point about the NEP was that it's the same thing as what China has right now, i.e. a socialist-oriented state, with a capitalist or quasi-capitalist economy. The point being that China is making strides towards renationalization, and to simply say "China is not socialist" is a severe oversimplification.
Secondly: a DoTP, in developing its economy, may or may not have the current capabilities to get rid of wages, property or production for exchange. The way in which these things are abolished is over time, and gradually, while paying attention to the economic needs of the country at the same time. China needed to restore the market in order to make economic progress, but their state is still firmly proletarian and intent on bringing China down the socialist road when it is ready.
>So then what separates a socialist economy from a social democratic one that isn’t self-identification?
"Social democracy" nowadays means, socially progressive policies implemented by a bourgeois state in a capitalist economy. You need to pay attention to the class character of the state.
The state isn’t socialist or capitalist, the economy is.
>My specific point about the NEP was that it's the same thing as what China has right now,
The NEP lasted five years. Deng’s reforms have lasted forty.
>China is making strides towards renationalization
No they aren’t. Xi is still privatizing the economy, albeit at a slower rate than his predecessor.
>Secondly: a DoTP, in developing its economy, may or may not have the current capabilities to get rid of wages, property or production for exchange.
China is a fucking superpower they could abolish private property in a split second and no one could do anything about it.
>China needed to restore the market in order to make economic progress
They had lot’s of growth under Mao.
>but their state is still firmly proletarian
Only by self-identification. They are plenty of billionaires in their parliament.
>"Social democracy" nowadays means, socially progressive policies implemented by a bourgeois state in a capitalist economy.
>Social democracy, nown, a form of capitalism in which parts of the economy are nationalized, and their are strong labor regulations. Private property is still maintained.
This definition fits China perfectly.
>mfw you lose points from cheating in vidya
china, you're alright
>The NEP lasted five years. Deng’s reforms have lasted forty.
And they have developed the country rapidly. I don't see why they should return to central planning when it has been shown to be ineffiecent with also turning foreign investment away
>No they aren’t. Xi is still privatizing the economy, albeit at a slower rate than his predecessor.
State enterprises play a large role in China and are one of the largest in the world. Here's what the book "The Third Revolution: Xi Jinping and the New Chinese State" says about them
"Other in-stances of mixed ownership suggest a similar reliance on state actors.
The Chinese energy conglomerate Sinopec sold 30 percent of its distri-
bution unit in 2014, but only 10 percent went to private investors while
other SOEs and financial institutions captured the rest."
"In 2017, the NDRC, which holds responsibility for managing mixed-ownership
experiments, concluded a much-heralded deal for a subsidiary of China Unicom, one
of China’s state-owned telecommunications companies in which pri-
vate companies Tencent, Alibaba, Baidu, and JD all took stakes in the
company. Yet a deep dive into the deal by Gavekal analyst Xie Yanmei
revealed that effective state ownership will still be 58 percent. Moreover,
the stakes taken by the technology firms appear to be overwhelmingly
individual—by the firms’ founders or senior managers—so as not to
risk their companies’ funds. Xie concludes that mixed ownership is not
designed to use privatization to accomplish efficiency and profitability
gains but instead “provides a way for the state to direct private capital
to serve national development and political priorities.”
The benefits for private companies to invest—outside of generating
political goodwill from the government—are thus not likely to be
immediately apparent to many potential investors. As a Mercator
Institute report notes, the effort is designed to expand opportunities
for private capital in the state sector, while at the same time ensuring
that private investors retain only a minority stake. Wanda Group
Chairman Wang Jianlin, whose portfolio includes a number of foreign
acquisitions such as AMC Theatres, Legendary Entertainment, and
Sunseeker International, raises this same point directly: “If I’m going
to ‘mix,’ the private company definitely needs to have a controlling
share, or at least I want relative control . . . . If the SOE has the con-
trolling share, isn’t that the same as me helping out the SOE by giving
it money? Wouldn’t that be crazy of me to do? I can’t do that kind of
p 113 -114
>China is a fucking superpower they could abolish private property in a split second and no one could do anything about it.
Well, this is untrue. It would pretty much mean a collectivization in a country that depends on foreign trade. Which is bad.
>They had lot’s of growth under Mao.
Not really. Mao was a brilliant stategist but I wouldn't say that about his economics. See picture.
>Only by self-identification. They are plenty of billionaires in their parliament.
Using this article as a source (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/02/chinas-parliament-has-about-100-billionaires-according-to-data-from-the-hurun-report.html) It would mean that around 100 of 3000 of people in the parlament are billionaires. which would put them at around 3%. What is high but I wouldn't say a bourgeoise state. This article by NYT (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/business/china-parliament-billionaires.html), which is a peak bourgeoise source, states that " About 20 percent of the nearly 3,000 delegates to Parliament are businesspeople, according to government news media." Which while large, isn't the majority.
I don't know where to stand about China. I just know it's sure is better than whatever Russia did.
>muh social credit
This is not how it works. "Social credit" is a thing only in set industries and is not used to measure random public individuals.
You know thats just uttter bullshit
>State enterprises play a large role in China
This is also true in France. This doesn’t make France socialist.
>Here's what the book "The Third Revolution: Xi Jinping and the New Chinese State" says about them
Walking the walk is different from talking the talk. Self-identfication doesn’t make a country socialist.
>The state isn’t socialist or capitalist, the economy is.
Your whole premise fails on the following Leninist dictum: economic power differs from economic power. As under NEP the economy was majority private owned (strategic sectors being state controlled), rather similar goes to contemporary China. By your logic, we could argue that EVEN THO the Bolsheviks were in power (Troysky included) under the period of the NEP, it was "objectively capitalist", while in fact political power (as Lenin correctly observed) is the primary determining factor, something you "naturally" disregard in toto.
*political power differs from economic power
sry, mobile postan
It doesn’t matter what political party is in power. If private property and wage labor exists it’s still capitalism. Also yes the USSR was capitalist during the NEP. It was not until the five year plans that they become socialist. Also the CCP has billionaires in their parliament so their status as a vanguard party is dubious.
>If private property and wage labor exists it’s still capitalism.
This definition literally would make USSR capitalist in its socialist period. I'm going to write a longer response later but the idea that different modes of production can't co-exist is dubious. Which obe is dominant in China I'm not sure of. I would say the capitalist one. I'm going to write a longer response later since I don't have time now.
I should write posts when drunk.
I'm wearing this metal pin on my backpack to show my solidarity with China and the CPC. Some retards get actually triggered by it…
btw I live in Germany
>solidarity with chinese kulaks
t. ultraleft utopianist
These pins really are beautiful.
t burger suc dem who thinks socialism is when the government does stuff
+ 5 points for your social credit account
what if people didn't really "get triggered" by you wearing that specific pin, but they are disgusted by the fact that you try to express yourself through pins on your backpack?
If that's the case, those people should also become angry, when they see someone wearing a christian cross around their neck or someone, who is wearing a band t-shirt.
I'm not chinese and I don't have chinese citizenship. But I'm proud of my patriotism towards china and I don't care, what classcucks here in Germany think about it.
Fuck those german classcucks, they got nothing on our proletarian comrades such as the Huawei board of directors
>I'm not chinese and I don't have chinese citizenship. But I'm proud of my patriotism towards china
You are what the right thinks the left is. People who believe that other nations are superior to their own. You are a transnationalist.
>I'm not chinese but I'm proud of my patriotism towards china
You are a stupid ass larper, that's what you are.
Thank you for showing international solidarity. Let us all learn from anon and work together to help realize the Chinese dream and achieve win-win cooperation between all nations.
Looks pretty good if I have to be honest. Where can I get my social credit comrade Xi?
You gotta give it to Fox, they host more dissenting voices than MSNBC or CNN.
But /ourgirl/? She immediately conceded to intellectual property having to be protected and agreed that you can "steal" it.
You can't fucking steal bio-chemical reactions in your brain. You can steal a horse or a casket of apples, but you can't steal ideas. This is even consensus amongst bourgeois legal scholars.
You must consider, this was aired on Fox news and the audience is the ordinary burger. From a tactical perspective, it makes sense that Liu Xin toned down her answers.
When Taiwan stop being rebellious, or drift away from the Mainland coastline due to tectonic activity, or get the same fate as Atlantis never to be seen again.
I don't see what's wrong about China's approach to Taiwan, which is after all Chinese. Taiwan's history since 1949 has consisted in being used by the US to militarily pressure the mainland (and, until the 70s, to prevent the PRC from being in the United Nations.)
>Let’s turn Taiwan into a radlib dream state
This is stupid. Taiwan and the Mainland need to be unified under the Chinese branch of the International Committee of the Fourth International.
When will KMT autism about the mainland end? It's been 60 years.
lmao fuckin good luck with that.
>hmm sounds like you have an advantage
So how true is the "China forces muslim women to obey yellow cock" narative? I've heard they are forced to get maried to Chinese men.
KMT wants reunification. The DPP wants independence. The PRC passed a law that if Tiwan declares it’s self Independent than the PRC will invade them. Still doesn’t explain why the ROC claims land that belongs to Japan and India.
>China still doing state atheism
wtf I’m a Dengist now
What the fuck was Chiang Kai-shek's problem? He used to be a Soviet ally.
>Still doesn’t explain why the ROC claims land that belongs to Japan and India.
It's not that strange if you think about it. ROC consider itself the legitimate rulers of China, so they take seriously China's territorial disputes with its neighbours. It's like Russian white emigrees hating the Bolsheviks in power, but you still wouldn't expect them to agree to encroachment on Russian territory from other countries if they're actually sincere about their nationalist principles. Nationalists gonna nationalism, I guess.
I wish I'd receive a state issued muslim gf.
>tfw Xi has not brought socialism with chinese characteristics to your country yet
HHe duped them. Stalin should have called him out and solely and fully supported the CPC tbh
According to the little box on the right side, 1989 Tiananmen Square was partially caused by economic reforms
I'm confused, were they protesting communism or the liberalization of China's economy?
But Tiwan is controlled by the DPP. Who are pro-Independce. This isn’t like the White Army. This would be like if the white army held on to control of Ukraine, held elections, lost said elections to Ukrainian Nationalists. And then the Ukrainian nationalist Government claimed to be the rightful controllers of Russia.
Some were Neomaoists, some were Liberals. The protestors had no central leadership or ideological leaning who weren’t Dengists joining in the protests.
They are currently controlled by the DPP, who haven't made much progress towards their goal of independence (probably because they're already de-facto independent and would risk Chinese paratroopers in their backyard and possibly WW3 if pushing for formal independence), but the KMT has made headway in the last local elections IIRC, and the DPP could end up losing to the KMT in the next general election, though both parties have experienced a loss in popularity.
Maybe the ROC would renounce their claims if DPP managed to hold on to power and accomplish formal independence (making most of their claims illegitimate if based on Chinese sovereignty), but this is pure speculation.
I realize that this doesn't really answer your question, but I'm not really sure why countries in general hold onto unrealistic territorial claims in the first place. The explanation could be as simple as that without any good incentive in place to renounce such claims, there is little reason for any politician to even touch the subject. It's like an old bike on the bottom of a river that nobody cares enough about to retrieve, so it just stays there. If any anon has a less shitty analysis on the subject, I'd like to be educated.
Still while the DPP’s goal of formal independence is unrealistic, it would be more realistic if they renounced their claims on Mongolia, Russia, Vietnam, and India.
Students wanted liberalization and workers wanted return to communism, thus the two were in conflict. The students got to leave the square peacefully while workers outside the square were killed, showing which side was closer to the government's position.
I don't really see how. Declaring independence will lead to a Chinese invasion regardless of ROC's weird claims. The PRC's military power is what makes ROC's independece unlikely, not that ROC has claims that mirrors the PRC's.
Interesting, never heard of that before. Source?
>The students, unlike the workers, were intimately involved in the factional fights going on within the CCP. Students largely took the side of the more radical market reformer, Zhao Ziyang, who headed the party at the time. Zhao wanted to push the reforms through more quickly. On the other hand, the students largely reviled Li Peng, the head of state, well before he became the figurehead of martial law in late May. A moderate reformer, Li was seen as an old style bureaucrat who stood in the way of a rapid and efficient transition to a rational market economy. Workers did not really take part in this factional fight. They’d gained little by participating in factional fights before, specifically during the Cultural Revolution and the Democracy Wall movement of the late 1970s and early 1980s. The workers’ federation warned that “Deng Xiaoping used the April 5th movement [of 1976] to become leader of the Party, but after that he exposed himself as a tyrant.”[viii] Party members returned the favor in kind, with the All-China Federation of Trade Unions publicly backing the students but ignoring the workers who participated and their fledgling organization.[ix] Party elders, however, shifted away from supporting General Secretary Zhao’s policy of concessions to the students as May developed. At a contentious May 17th meeting of the Standing Committee of the Politburo held at Deng Xiaoping’s residence, Deng and Li Peng criticized Zhao’s approach, claiming he was splitting the party. Deng pushed for the declaration of martial law, which was formally announced on May 20th. In the early morning of May 19th, Zhao went to the square to warn students to leave, saying they should not sacrifice themselves for a movement that was over. Then Zhao left the square, having lost his position within the party, and was soon put under house arrest for the rest of his life. The late May announcement of martial law sharpened the politics of participants, with the workers’ federation announcing that “‘the servants of the people’ [the party] swallow all the surplus value produced by the people’s blood and sweat,” and that “there are only two classes: the rulers and the ruled.”[x] The majority of students, conversely, still held out for support from Zhao’s faction even after martial law was declared. A potential alliance between students and workers never materialized under the pressure of the rapidly changing political context.
>Students initially told workers not to strike so the movement’s focus would remain on themselves and their power within it could be retained. After martial law had been declared on May 20th, however, students finally saw the importance of worker participation, though again only in a supporting role, and they finally asked workers to undertake a general strike. By that point, however, participation in the protests had dropped dramatically, and it was too late for workers to fully mobilize their forces. Nonetheless, workers were still able to pull large numbers to resist the implementation of martial law. In fact, workers continued to put more people into the streets even as student numbers dwindled. But by this point, the party had marshaled up to 250,000 soldiers in the outskirts of the city. Workers and other urban residents were initially able to stop the entry of soldiers into the city from the night of June 2nd into the 3rd, blocking roads and surrounding troops in vehicles. This led to only a small amount of violence, with urbanites often feeding the tired soldiers caught up in the crowds for several hours before they gave up and pulled out of the city center. This only encouraged more resistance the following night.
>From the night of June 3rd into the 4th, however, the army moved more resolutely towards the square to put an end to the protests. That night it was mainly workers and unemployed youth who attempted to slow the approach of the army in the streets leading up to the square, and many of them paid for it with their lives, with hundreds of civilian deaths (among whom very few were students). Along Chang’anjie—the main east-west avenue bisecting the city at Tiananmen—workers and other Beijing residents built blockades with buses, often setting them afire. Molotov cocktails and rocks were thrown as soldiers approached. The intersection around Muxidi on Chang’anjie to the west of the square was particularly hard hit, with pitched battles between workers and soldiers. Many deaths were concentrated there. As the first soldiers in armored personal carriers (APC) arrived on the square, some students and residents continued to resist, and an APC was set on fire. Several civilians were killed on the edges of the square. Once the main body of the army reached the square they stopped, and by the early morning they were negotiating with the remaining student occupiers, allowing them to leave the square and walk back to their campuses—though not without several being beaten by soldiers first. The protests in the capital were over, but the repression continued. Workers were hit the hardest in terms of prison sentences and executions in the days and weeks that followed, with student participants getting more lenient sentences.
Lel students were not allowed to leave peacefully and were killed. The government's problem was that they were using tanks to try to put down urban protests which had thrown the entire city into revolt, and many others throughout China (which were handled much better). If they had riot police, the death toll would have been in the single digits. They were not making concerted efforts to shoot workers and spare students.
Tianamen only means anything to Chinese people. Everyone else plays fast with the truth to convince you of some lie.
That is KMT’s position IIRC. DPP is almost isolationist in that respect.
can someone tell me what is written on these red flags?
also whats the real story behind the tianamen square protests, i heard they were against neoliberalism and corruption
DPP is pro-Independence but Taiwan is not is the simple answer. People struggle with this idea but the Taiwanese population is not uniformly in favor of independence. It's a conservative society and the majority supports the status quo, hard-greens and hard-blues match each other in equal numbers and the subject of Independence is a losing issue from both sides. That said, the DPP has lost all credibility and is quickly actually becoming the anti-CCP party, they've taken very overt measures to silence pro-Chinese voices and will probably panic before the next election.
Holy fuck check out this Twitter thread from one of NYT top China beat people:
This is fucking insane. She flew Air China and they put this much resources into it and made this much noise about it. They are targeting this woman like she's a sleeper agent because she is ethnically Chinese. It's deeply fucking unsettling. Many people assume the NYT is some kind of anti-racist paper because that's how conservatives cast it, but that couldn't be the truth, and if the US elite is targeting ethinic Chinese to this degree we are in the beginning of a dark era. The US government is already doing it via usually unscrutinized institutions like the NIH and threatening to withhold federal funds from academies. This is not going to go away. It will become worse, more monstrous, and unstoppable.
NYT pressing any area of conflict to stir division in opposition isn't a surprise. Also there's nothing racist about this you hick.
People are being racially-profiled because they are ethnically Chinese everywhere. What the fuck do you call that you stupid fuck? Don't Sage it again you racist little shit. Take a hard look in the mirror and explain why do you think racially profilling Chinese-Americans isn't racist.
Yellow peril and red scare are powerful drugs.
So who will win the next election? Hopefully these guys. I know their sucdems but their the only group in Tiwan’s parliament who aren’t right-wing.
>so leave this sort of argument for the kids at school
I mean the PRC has no reason whatsoever to give up its claims to Taiwan. The PRC is China. Taiwan is Chinese territory. It's like saying the PRC should have ended its "autism" over Hong Kong and Macao.
As an aside, I just scanned this English-language account of Tiananmen from a Chinese author: https://archive.org/details/BeijingTurmoil
So the world's getting gook-pilled. What's next, deep state Qing sleeper cells?
>NIH officials have said they are not engaging in racial profiling.
There are a not-insignificant number of Chinese in Hong Kong who want "independence" (or even a reversion to British rule) due entirely to their opposition to the PRC's political system. That doesn't mean they aren't Chinese.
>That doesn't mean they aren't Chinese.
Nations don’t come from nature, they are social constructed, As such the only way of knowing hat nation someone is is self-identification. If someone claims to be Han they are Han. If someone claims to be not Han, they are not Han.
>I believe it so its true
Identity is an idea.
Correct, which is why identity politics is inherently anti-marxist. A nation is a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture.
Leaving aside that you misunderstand how nations work, the fact is that if (for example) the government of South Vietnam at any point was like "actually we aren't Vietnamese, we now declare ourselves the Republic of Annam, a separate country for a separate nation, ergo any talk of 'reunifying Vietnam' is just Tonkin chauvinism," North Vietnam would be justifiably upset, especially given that South Vietnam existed only thanks to US military support and so the practical result would be perpetuation of the division of Vietnam.
That's roughly how Chinese on the mainland see the idea of Taiwan as a separate country and nation completely distinct from the rest of China.
>Is the PRC a direct successor state to the Qing Dynasty?
The Qing dynasty ruled over Chinese territory, so I don't see your point. If the British monarchy were abolished, would that suddenly destroy the existence of the English territory and nation because the House of Windsor is German?
The Bolsheviks welcomed the demise of the Russian Empire, but that didn't mean a Russian nation and Russian territory didn't exist, just that they didn't encompass the entirety of the Russian Empire.
It isn't like the PRC claims every inch of land ever controlled or claimed by the Qing dynasty (as noted earlier in this thread, the Kuomintang claimed more land for China than the CPC does, which is why Taiwan's government to this day has problems establishing normal diplomatic relations with Outer Mongolia, which it constitutionally recognizes as a Chinese province.)
>How would you answer to charges of petty bullying
What petty bullying? The PRC has reaffirmed time and again that Taiwan is a part of China in response to efforts by the US and the government on Taiwan to build up Taiwan's separate military and the notion that Taiwan has nothing to do with the rest of China.
>And I want you to quote me the part of 毛主席語錄 which postulates barring Taiwan from the WHO as a necessity for achieving world revolution?
The PRC, both under Mao and after he died, sought to remove the "Republic of China" from all international organizations. It's why Taiwan was kicked from the United Nations when the PRC was admitted.
>and the Three Worlds Theory?
What does a geopolitical theory devised by Mao in the 1970s have to do with the question of whether Taiwan is Chinese or not?
Your doubts about the CPC and PRC are not helpful to building international solidarity between Marxists of all nations. We must support not just the PRC, but Cuba, DPRK and even non socialist states like Venezuela as well. At the same time we need to recognize that our ability to support for far away countries is limited. The core of the capitalist system is in the united states and eliminating that core is essential to human survival. There's no sense in wasting time arguing over whether the PRC is a good socialist state or not. It is part of the international capitalist system but it is not the head, just a limb. We don't seek to cut off a limb of capitalism and leave it crippled, we seek to destroy the source. Work to build socialism where you live, work to build an alternative international trade structure outside of the capitalist network. That is what needs to be done.
So what are the theories of current Marxists from where you are at? Share them here so all can learn.
>The core of the capitalist system is in the united states and eliminating that core is essential to human survival. There's no sense in wasting time arguing over whether the PRC is a good socialist state or not. It is part of the international capitalist system but it is not the head, just a limb. We don't seek to cut off a limb of capitalism and leave it crippled, we seek to destroy the source.
The PRC will be the core and they day that they will be the core is very near. The US is dying, their economy is stagnate and their diplomatic and military control of the world is going down. Day by day US Industry contracts and Chinese Industry grows. The truth is that the US is unable to hold up the capitalist order in the long term. This responsibility will soon shift to the PRC.
Well it's much easier to launch a land invasion of the PRC than the US. The PRC is not protected by water on both sides and has huge flat terrain near it's economic andp ower centers suitable for maneuver warfare. They also only have 250 nuclear warheads. A joint EUSSR and USSR invasion could easily install communism in the PRC. On the other hand any military action against the US will be extremely difficult. You need a superior navy which takes about 50 years to just build up and you need to deal with the over 1000 nuclear warheads coming your way. The US is immune to foreign invasion which makes them such a dangerous and difficult opponent to bring down.
So in summary: Build communism in Europe, in Russia, and in India.
Taiwanese """independence""" is USA subservience
>U.S. imperialism invaded China's territory of Taiwan and has occupied it for the past nine years. A short while ago it sent its armed forces to invade and occupy Lebanon. The United States has set up hundreds of military bases in many countries all over the world. China's territory of Taiwan, Lebanon and all military bases of the United States on foreign soil are so many nooses round the neck of U.S. imperialism. The nooses have been fashioned by the Americans themselves and by nobody else, and it is they themselves who have put these nooses round their own necks, handing the ends of the ropes to the Chinese people, the peoples of the Arab countries and all the peoples of the world who love peace and oppose aggression. The longer the U.S. aggressors remain in those places, the tighter the nooses round their necks will become.
- Chairman Mao
I go through an effort post too don't brush it aside or you'll not reap the full value of my labor. Also don't get so angry we're all on the same team here. China may be the largest economy (by some measures) but it is not leading capitalism. The RMB is not the world reserve currency, a good chunk of the US's power comes from having the reserve currency. China still needs to sell real things to get the currency it needs to buy means of production from Germany, Japan,or US. It can't just export paper with Chairman Mao's face and turn that into lithography equipment. It is a participant in the US lead system. You also underestimate the strength left in the west (mostly US). They are unmatched militarily and will continue to be so for some time. Even if they decline as much as you optimistically predict they can still damage the world significantly if their leaders decide that war is preferable to losing power. We also need to consider the US reactionary energy sector and it's threat to our survival. China at the very least is investing the product of the Chinese proletariat into non fossil fuel energy infrastructure. My surplus value goes into stock buybacks, weapons research, and stupid internet start ups.
what's wrong with chuangcn
define "more democratic"
You misunderstood me. I do not invest my surplus into stocks or weapons for the US military. The corporate profits that come from my labor and the taxes I pay go into those things. I'm lucky enough to only spend 30% of my income on rent, many of my coworkers are spending 50% or more. You appear to be living somewhere where these is still social democracy. I hope we can have social democracy in the US by 2030.
Anyways, i'm not asking you to shill for the PRC, I'm asking you to treat it as a second tier threat on the same level as Germany, Japan, India, or Russia. And I'm asking you to not disparage the DPRK, Cuba, Vietnam IRL.
As for stock advice I don't have any except hope you're born to a rich family.
Taiwan can get their independence when every citizen carries a portrait of Lenin and Stalin around.
Explain decentralization. Why is it good?
Ok that's a good theory. I'm not well read in this topic but how has centralization vs. decentralization worked out in other diverse states? We can look at Yugoslavia, USSR, Ottomans T*rks.
Also why does centralization lead to civil wars in China (and possibly Yugoslavia)?
The US might not be invaded, but their economic power is falling apart. They no longer are the titan of Industry they once are. They are dependent on foreign imports and their economy is stagnate. China doesn’t need to invade America to take’s it’s place as the center of capital.
China will not be as savior for America. Socialism in America will have to be built by us. China is a treat to the currently capitalist United State, hence all of the noise being raised over it. China could potentially be a nice pool of technology that a socialist america can work with or steal from in the future depending on how relations between the two countries play out. I certainly don't consider China a fascist state, state capitalism does not make fascism. The anti-China sentiment comes from a combination of yellow peril and a fading sense of superiority in the west. I have no doubt that if India were the red rising power there would be just as much suspicion towards the Indians.
As for social democracy, I think it is the easiest path forward for attacking the capitalist system. It's worth defending if it exists and building up if it does not yet exist. It also has the convenient side effect of making life for working people better.
I’d like to add, the US didn’t need to invade the USSR to destroy’ it’s geopolitical power, and while the US probably won’t balkanize to the extend the USSR did, the same thing applies. The destruction of economic and geopolitical powers doesn’t require invasion.
So your worry is that a recovering socialist US will not have the power to deal with the new capitalist order lead by the PRC. Not every country wants to join with China and there are alliances that can be made. Putin is losing legitimacy and maybe the KPRF will uncuck itself, the higher ranks of the KPRF are worried about genuine communists in their ranks. Socialist movements existing in Europe as well. We can even sell worst korea down the river and cozy up to the DPRK for a convenient staging ground at China's doorstep.
I find Chinese culture to be uninteresting. 5000 years and they didn't even create anything close to liberalism let alone Marxism. Are there any materialist Chinese philosophers that have influenced popular sentiment or state policy?
Oh shit he got banned I was hoping to get a response to me dunking on chinese culture.
Without the deep flaws in liberalism there would be no Marxism. Without materialism we would not have improved the human condition so much in the past 300 years. Of course, science and technology born from materialism is also the cause of the upcoming climate crisis. There's no going back to the good old subsistence farming days, so forward it is.
I'm aware of the 4 great novels, they're good. The poetry is good too. But all that culture did nothing to help China during the century of humiliation. Sun Yat Sen was western educated, practiced Christianity, and espoused Gerogism. He initiated China's recovery. The CPC following Marxism-Leninism completed the recovery. Western culture and western concepts built modern China (and it's more developed neighbors as well).
I don't know much about the culture of taiwan but I can't imagine it being much better than any typical cosmopolitan liberal culture. I deal with enough of that shit every day. But I bet there nuances in their culture I don't know of. Tell me, what is the culture of the working class there? What about their kulaks and their agricultural laborers?
I still don't get why you like Chinese culture so much. Tea, music, literature, everyone has it (or coffee). I've read contemporary books from both Mainland and Taiwan, both had good parts but overall both were had rage inducing parts and ultimately I didn't like them. So why China, why not Russian culture or Iranian culture? And why the love of child laborers picking tea over say laborers building a house? If it's just your personal preference than so be it. However I think you are too heavily basing your identity around this culture which doesn't even seem to be your own considering you've never been to Taiwan. Your fear is that the big bad Chinese are going to destroy your beloved culture which to me sounds like right wing nerds crying about SJWs taking away their video games.
Stop treating the negative news from China as commonplace and typical. They're not becoming Nazi Germany. I've talked with Chinese coworkers, they don't buy the racial superiority bullshit. They know the intensity of work in China is terrible, they don't want it for themselves or anyone else. That's why there is organization against this in China. The government of the PRC isn't all powerful and the Chinese proletariat aren't powerless nor are they mindless drones. I've also talked with Taiwanese coworkers, they're typical people just like the ones from mainland. All workers under capitalism hoping to make a living. Changing China is up to them, changing Europe is up to you I suppose. And I assure you here in America we are struggling against capitalism as well. We even read books.
So are you supporting DIEM and comrade Varofakis?
> Japan achieved racial equality by taking Singapore
Erm excuse me what the fuck?
They made this, but yeah ancient China like all ancient “civilizations” were trash
I mean Singapore's entire system of government is basically based in Confucianism. So there's that.
Shut the fuck up angmoh. Imagine falling for the asian values meme.
Oh cultural values is such a fucking bullshit thing not gonna lie, but the bigman Lee Kuan Yew wanks about it so it at-least had some influence.
water buffalo stirner though
>wanks about it so it at-least had some influence.
Kaki kong kaki song nia.
I don't see how the government is particularly Confucian aside from its emphasis on education and technocracy, but that can also be from British concept of meritocracy and aristocracy. Nor do they want to portray themselves, least they be seen as Chinese chauvinism from Malaysia and Indonesia, something that they love to browbeat Workers Party politicians.
Whatever legacy he has left behind, it is more of him being Harry Lee the Cambridge lawyer than LKY. Read Liberalism Disvowed.
Porky has spent all this time telling us that markets are the greatest thing ever and that we need to stop trying to attack markets.
However now that Dengists are beating porky at his own game, they're getting pissed. Why?
When Porky competes against Porky, one Porky loses.
Help us build the productive forces on >>>/marxism/ !
We have already made it to the main page of 8chan!
how does it differ from >>>/marx/ ?
the focus of >>>/marxism/ is to discuss Marx's ideas and Marxist theory.
Is Soros everyone's favorite boogeryman now?
Don't want to be a party pooper, but I think there are enough leftist/marxist boards already
Everyone hates Soros
Another day another prominent "China watcher" endorsing racist hearsay and justifying the racial profilling and targeting of Chinese Americans by the government. This time it was unapologetically Chinese Americans and they didn't even dross it up with "Chinese nationals". Talking about Bill Bishop by the way. The flame of elite anti-racism burned out quick. Dark days ahead for all of us.
Did you saw the recent short-film from Huawei? For a promotion video, it is quite obscure
Neoliberals are going to become openly racist and cozy up with fascists.
America and Japan are already de facto a one-party state. It won’t be long until it’s the same for the EU.
Reminder that THESE are the people protesting in Hong Kong right now. Is there ANYONE more cucked than this?
What exactly are they protesting?
not enough Yank/Anglo cock to suck due to communism causing shortages of it
They want Hong Kong to be independent.
They have to block the internet because of the way the people are. The people are sensitive to words.
On some extradition law that is a complete non-issue and will pass anyway. In reality they are protesting the slow nd steady loss of socio-economic status as middle class and ressentiment against mainlanders which are superiors to them in any conceivable metrics. They should be deported to Vancouver or Singapour.
The 70th celebrations are later this year so I made two posters.
Feel free to share them with others.
Hey, does anyone know if XI has painting and posters of him in "socialism realism" style? From what I found Deng was the last one who had them. I haven't even found any of Kim.
Can someone explain what's going on in Hong Kong please? My Taiwanese friend asked me what I thought about it and I really don't have a fucking clue.
HK is protesting over the ability to be extradited to the mainland for taking part in protests like the 2014 Umbrellas
>Can someone explain what's going on in Hong Kong please?
Some people in Hong Kong want Hong Kong to be an independent city state like Singapore.
They want to go back to the 80s and 90s when their parents were making easy money by licking anglo shoes.
How is China's debt going? Is it worse than the US?
I don't know much about China and Chinese communism after Mao so please correct me if I'm wrong, but from the vague understanding I have of the Dengist era, what Xi has been up to and Socialism with Chinese Characteristics in general I came across a couple of passages in The Foundations Of Leninism which seem to be a precursor to then:
>During the period of transition from war to economic construction, when industry was vegetating in the grip of disruption and agriculture was suffering from a shortage of urban manufactured goods, when the establishment of a bond between state industry and peasant economy became the fundamental condition for successful socialist construction-in that period it turned out that the main link in the chain of processes, the main task among a number of tasks, was to develop trade. Why? Because under the conditions of the NEP the bond between industry and peasant economy cannot be established except through trade; because under the conditions of the NEP production without sale is fatal for industry; because industry can be expanded only by the expansion of sales as a result of developing trade; because only after we have consolidated our position in the sphere of trade, only after we have secured control of trade, only after we have secured this link can be there be nay hope of linking industry with the peasant market and successfully fulfilling the other immediate tasks in order to create the conditions for building the foundations of socialist economy.
>"To carry on a war for the overthrow of the international bourgeoisie," says Lenin, "a war which is a hundred times more difficult, protracted, and complicated than the most stubborn of ordinary wars between states, and to refuse beforehand to manoeuvre, to utilise the conflict of interests (even though temporary) among one's enemies, to reject agreements and compromises with possible (even though temporary, unstable, vacillating and conditional) allies-is not this ridiculous in the extreme? Is it not as though, when making a difficult ascent of an unexplored and hitherto inaccessible mountain, we were to refuse beforehand ever to move in zigzags, ever to retrace our steps, ever to abandon the course once selected and to try others?"
>Under certain conditions, in a certain situation, the proletarian power may find itself compelled temporarily to leave the path of the revolutionary reconstruction of the existing order of things and to take the path of its gradual transformation, the "reformist path," as Lenin says in his well-known article "The Importance of Gold,"1 the path of flanking movements, of reforms and concessions to the non-proletarian classes-in order to disintegrate these classes, to give the revolution a respite, to recuperate one's forces and prepare the conditions for a new offensive. It cannot be denied that in a sense this is a "reformist" path. But it must be borne in mind that there is a fundamental distinction here, which consists in the fact that in this case the reform emanates from the proletarian power, it strengthens the proletarian power, it procures for it a necessary respite, its purpose is to disintegrate, not the revolution, but the non-proletarian classes.
>Under such conditions a reform is thus transformed into its opposite.
>The proletarian power is able to adopt such a policy because, and only because, the sweep of the revolution in the preceding period was great enough and therefore provided a sufficiently wide expanse within which to retreat, substituting for offensive tactics the tactics of temporary retreat, the tactics of flanking movements.
Is this the essence of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics? Has the CPC, despite it's corruption, actually been mostly run by Leninists committed to this line for the last 30 years and Xi is now going back on the offensive?
Debt means nothing, or at least is different from the American context.
I think the destruction generated by the Cultural Revolution can be compared the the Russian civil war in many ways, which is why both Lenin and Deng went this path. Deng was begging for the Chinese people to just get back to work and focus on building shit. All the progress that China had made in the first half of the 20th century was at risk of being lost, and I think Deng sensed that the longer China stayed technologically backward, the harder it would be to catch up.
People can propose this or that socialist policy that China should have followed, but absolutely none of you were in Deng's position and have ever struggled with even a fraction of the problems that plagued 20th century China.
>They really have nothing to offer to businesses besides the fact they are Hong Kongers. So all that is left for them is to rage and fume, blame the locusts and shinajin, and larp as colonial coolies while stewing at home with their parents because Hong Kong has no future for them
Good work but get Jiang Zemin out of the background. He is most hated leader in China. Put Deng, Mao, or Sun Yat Sen there instead.
>I think the destruction generated by the Cultural Revolution can be compared the the Russian civil war in many ways
And I think your a heritage foundation hack.
He prob is. Still, the economy practically came to a halt for about 2-3 years.
For real, what’s up with Dengists, and Revisionists in general spewing neoliberal talking points about market efficiency and al, that crap?
>still buttmad that Lenin didn't magic FALC out of nowhere and conquer the world
>still having zero revolutions to his name
Weather you want to admit or not the cultural revolution was a good thing, and markets are inefficient compared to planning. This is not political arguments, this is objective scientific fact.
>tries to be edgy,but isn't even that funny
>also buys into Maoist propaganda, which was just a cover for internal power struggle
Can any Xiaboo here tell me about the Communist Party’s plan to retake control of private enterprises by 2050? Apparently Xi mentioned something about it during a speech earlier this year.
I’m getting sick of Jack Ma’s rubbish and I’m secretly hoping that the CPC has been playing 4d chess since the Deng Xiaoping capitalist reforms….
It's not that markets are so great. It's just that planning is so shit. Although I have hope that Cockshott saved it.
Sad that only we know.
Communism is truly pathetic. Better off with a monarchy if the citizens are so dimwitted to be unable to govern themselves.
I had based the poster design on the 50th poster which had Zemin, but yes you are right, Mao is a better choice.
Updated civilian poster.
Updated military poster.
A law that makes it possible to let extradict a murderer from Hongkong hiding in Hongkong to be judged in Taiwan where the crime happend.
Somehow thats Chinese oppression because Anglo media.
The USSR fell because the party was infiltrated by people whose interests were better served by capitalism, and you're holding on to a country whose party allows open billionaires in its ranks?
Michael Hudson: Trump’s Trade Threats Are Really Cold War 2.0
America’s wish list: other countries’ neoliberal subservience
At stake is whether China will agree to do what Russia did in the 1990s: put a Yeltsin-like puppet of neoliberal planners in place to shift control of its economy from its government to the U.S. financial sector and its planners. So the fight really is over what kind of planning China and the rest of the world should have: by governments to raise prosperity, or by the financial sector to extract revenue and impose austerity.
U.S. diplomacy aims to make other countries dependent on its agricultural exports, its oil (or oil in countries that U.S. majors and allies control), information and military technology. This trade dependency will enable U.S. strategists to impose sanctions that would deprive economies of basic food, energy, communications and replacement parts if they resist U.S. demands.
The objective is to gain financial control of global resources and make trade “partners” pay interest, licensing fees and high prices for products in which the United States enjoys monopoly pricing “rights” for intellectual property. A trade war thus aims to make other countries dependent on U.S.-controlled food, oil, banking and finance, or high-technology goods whose disruption will cause austerity and suffering until the trade “partner” surrenders.
China’s Willingness to Give Trump a “Win”
Threats are cheap, but Mr. Trump can’t really follow through without turning farmers, Wall Street and the stock market, Walmart and much of the IT sector against him at election time if his tariffs on China increase the cost of living and doing business. His diplomatic threat is really that the US will cut its own economic throat, imposing sanctions on its own importers and investors if China does not acquiesce.
It is easy to see what China’s answer will be. It will stand aside and let the US self-destruct. Its negotiators are quite happy to “offer” whatever China has planned to do anyway, and let Trump brag that this is a “concession” he has won.
China has a great sweetener that I think President Xi Jinping should offer: It can nominate Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. We know that he wants what his predecessor Barack Obama got. And doesn’t he deserve it more? After all, he is helping to bring Eurasia together, driving China and Russia into an alliance with neighboring counties, reaching out to Europe.
Trump may be too narcissistic to realize the irony here. Catalyzing Asian and European trade independence, financial independence, food independence and IT independence from the threat of U.S. sanctions will leave the U.S. isolated in the emerging multilateralism.
America’s Wish for a Neoliberal Chinese Yeltsin (and Another Russian Yeltsin for That Matter)
A good diplomat does not make demands to which the only answer can be “No.” There is no way that China will dismantle its mixed economy and turn it over to U.S. and other global investors. It is no secret that the United States achieved world industrial supremacy in the late 19th and early 20th century by heavy public-sector subsidy of education, roads, communication and other basic infrastructure. Today’s privatized, financialized and “Thatcherized” economies are high-cost and inefficient.
Yet U.S. officials persist in their dream of promoting some neoliberal Chinese leader or “free market” party to wreak the damage that Yeltsin and his American advisors wrought on Russia. The U.S. idea of a “win-win” agreement is one in which China will be “permitted” to grow as long as it agrees to become a U.S. financial and trade satellite, not an independent competitor.
Trump’s trade tantrum is that other countries are simply following the same economic strategy that once made America great, but which neoliberals have destroyed here and in much of Europe. U.S. negotiators are unwilling to acknowledge that the United States has lost its competitive industrial advantage and become a high-cost rentier economy. Its GDP is “empty,” consisting mainly of the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) rents, profits and capital gains while the nation’s infrastructure decays and its labor is reduced to a part-time “gig” economy. Under these conditions the effect of trade threats can only be to speed up the drive by other countries to become economically self-reliant.