(Thread IKs:
fart simpson)
|
Thug Lessons posted:You're looking at China through rose-tinted glasses, magnifying their achievements and minimizing their problems. Chinese economic growth has spurred rising wages but it's also reproduced every problem of capitalism on a massive scale, from inequality to CO2 emissions, and even if "everyone is aware" they're mostly not being fixed but compounded. I understand the desire to latch onto China as a way to say "See! Socialism is succeeding!" but I'm pretty sure you're smart enough to recognize how pathetic that really is. nah, things are observably better than they were a few years ago. even the most jaded people here admit this. but please continue to impugn my motives and suggest i'm some sort of expat pollyanna
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 16:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:01 |
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:still can't speak to their particular situation but the same things i said before remain relevant. also important is the perception prospects are better, whether true or not. the unemployment rate in the prc is much much lower than the us, almost at full employment levels, but that doesn't mean much to someone who truly believes they can do better elsewhere. maybe they can! but the fact is things have been steadily improving for everyone here. if people don't see that it's on the government to make that progress clearer and more tangible. I don't think I can express my thoughts on this very clearly, but if we have real socialism, it should be something truly, revolutionarily new, and not simply a program carried out by a government (that normal people feel little connection to, or control over) in order to improve the lives of its citizens. So Chinese people moving for economic reasons isn't problematic to me because it says that conditions in China are bad, it's problematic because it shows that they view their country just like any other country. There has been no revolutionary change, and their lives are still ruled by the concern of making a living through wage labor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 16:47
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:anyways, please get back to defending China's honor. i won't stop you what the hell did you think this thread was about
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 16:48
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:nah, things are observably better than they were a few years ago. even the most jaded people here admit this. but please continue to impugn my motives and suggest i'm some sort of expat pollyanna Yeah, and I'm sure it's way better than 10 years ago, and even better than 20. The country will improve if they can maintain high growth rates. Maybe one day soon China will have living standards as high as the US's, if that's your goal and GDP growth is your criteria for success.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:I don't think I can express my thoughts on this very clearly, but if we have real socialism, it should be something truly, revolutionarily new, and not simply a program carried out by a government (that normal people feel little connection to, or control over) in order to improve the lives of its citizens. i'm sympathetic to this position. it isn't sexy or particularly inspiring to see this kind of dry, technocratic governance coming after a protracted, heroic revolutionary period. but if you take the party at its word that this era's mission is socialist construction at the primary stage a la the nep, and that in the coming years we'll see a gradual narrowing of inequality and a transformation into a more recognizably socialist economy then that's something to be hopeful about. i obviously do believe this is the path the country is taking, because i read the theory and compare it with concrete policy moves and see correlation. it's less galvanizing to socialists in the west to get onboard with what will be, for a very long time, a more boring process than a revolution. but if the end result is the same, i don't particularly care. getting regular people to feel the same way is, of course, a big challenge and some people will leave.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 17:06
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:what the hell did you think this thread was about 4x games
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 17:14
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:i'm sympathetic to this position. it isn't sexy or particularly inspiring to see this kind of dry, technocratic governance coming after a protracted, heroic revolutionary period. but if you take the party at its word that this era's mission is socialist construction at the primary stage a la the nep, and that in the coming years we'll see a gradual narrowing of inequality and a transformation into a more recognizably socialist economy then that's something to be hopeful about. Thanks for taking the time to write this, your position makes a lot more sense to me now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 17:35
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:if you take the party at its word 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
the good leftist's guide to defending china 1:fake news 2:being mean to daddy xi is racist
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:*sees someone use a word with four syllables* wow lol nice thesaurus. read much, poindexter??? slow down there, william f buckley.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
not capitalism not capitalism not neo-colonialism nanananana i cant hear you http://allafrica.com/stories/201804240187.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:i'm sympathetic to this position. it isn't sexy or particularly inspiring to see this kind of dry, technocratic governance coming after a protracted, heroic revolutionary period. but if you take the party at its word that this era's mission is socialist construction at the primary stage a la the nep, and that in the coming years we'll see a gradual narrowing of inequality and a transformation into a more recognizably socialist economy then that's something to be hopeful about. Even if one was to take the party at its word, it'd be difficult not to look askance at what is ultimately an incrementalist argument given the insidiously corrosive/corrupting nature of capital.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Even if one was to take the party at its word, it'd be difficult not to look askance at what is ultimately an incrementalist argument given the insidiously corrosive/corrupting nature of capital. The nature of material development is that it's inescapably incremental. You can't just make immediate sweeping change like you can with social rules and culture, it takes time to develop the productive forces of a society. I think it's easy to dismiss the fact China has to play a century's worth of catch up with the First World over the course of a few decades, and if they hadn't opened themselves up to partial liberalization to draw in foreign capital and accelerate the accumulation of it generally they'd still be decades behind. It'd be nice if they could have been a little underdeveloped while maintaining a consistent socialist line like Cuba, but as a major power the realities of geopolitics can't tolerate that kind of weakness. This is why we need socialist revolution in the First World, where the productive forces are already developed to their relative pinnacle. I don't like all the compromises China has made, but I can respect the fact that they have to play ball.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The nature of material development is that it's inescapably incremental. You can't just make immediate sweeping change like you can with social rules and culture, it takes time to develop the productive forces of a society. I think it's easy to dismiss the fact China has to play a century's worth of catch up with the First World over the course of a few decades, and if they hadn't opened themselves up to partial liberalization to draw in foreign capital and accelerate the accumulation of it generally they'd still be decades behind. It'd be nice if they could have been a little underdeveloped while maintaining a consistent socialist line like Cuba, but as a major power the realities of geopolitics can't tolerate that kind of weakness. I get that; it's as true for them as it was the USSR, and while clearly the CCP has made better, or at least more sustainable, choices than the Soviets did at the same time I have a harder time than some in buying that the party isn't just selling a bill of goods.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:I get that; it's as true for them as it was the USSR, and while clearly the CCP has made better, or at least more sustainable, choices than the Soviets did at the same time I have a harder time than some in buying that the party isn't just selling a bill of goods. There's no choice for us either way. The only really decisive factor in the future of China is the CCP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 20:56
|
|
|
Eox posted:gently caress me they have such an easy time with naming people's war gets easier with people's long-ranged anti-air missiles and people's aircraft carriers and people's stealth fighter jets
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Wouldn't reading and then actually understanding any of Marx's writing make the average chinese citizen mad as hell that their leadership has pretty much done the opposite and they're living in a lovely state-capitalist dictatorship with the worst of both worlds and out of control class divisions and zero democracy in the workplace? black cat white cat so long as it catches mice
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
Reformism acts within the power structures already developed, and is thereforeincapable of overthrowing them. Suggesting that China can reform its way into socialism is equivalent to suggesting that socialism can simply be voted into the west - its a delusion. The fact that china has developed the technological sophistication of its productive forces, without developing or improving the social relationships that govern the control of said forces in a socialist sense, should be a dead giveaway that promises of future social changes are basically a lie. As Lenin would say, you should look for the class interest behind every statement, every proclamation, first. You should never take any promise at face value. And behind the promise of furute socialism, is simple political pragmatism - having to throw some red meat at the old guard, to keep their support, and stop them from upsetting the current direction. That is their true function. When that ceases to be necessary, the promise will be dropped. Ask yourself this - what exactly is there to hold the party accountable, if it didn't fulfill that promise? Nothing. There's no opposition force compelling it to honesty, and there's no threat to the social order, if it doesn't even try. But what is there to oppose that change? The answer is: everything. Every newly enriched capitalist will fight tooth and nail against anything that threatens the social privileges. The entire SEZ, the areas most responsible for social development, is antithetical to the fulfillment of that promise. It would take something on the scale of the cultural revolution to oppose that. And I doubt know if you've noticed, but that's exactly the situation the party is most terrified of. Its why they can't shut up about 'harmony'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
rudatron posted:As Lenin would say i am the walrus
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
getting pretty loving prolix
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
People in the west reading the tea leaves seem to believe that xi is a sincere maoist trying to yoke the party apparatus and get it moving in the "right" (ie left) direction. This fits with anecdotal evidence from chinese friends and anglos i know there. The problem is that, high profile campaign against corruption or no, the real struggle for the ccp is exerting influence in the regional party cells and local government, which is almost absurdly corrupt and entrenched. It would take an enormous effort to reform the party on that broad and deep a level. Of course, concentrating power and reviving the party line would be a reasonable preamble to such an effort, so maybe that's his plan. Time will tell! This is of course ignoring all the uhh, more 'problematic' elements of ccp rule, like the aggressive colonization of xinjiang and tibet
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Reformism acts within the power structures already developed, and is thereforeincapable of overthrowing them. Suggesting that China can reform its way into socialism is equivalent to suggesting that socialism can simply be voted into the west - its a delusion. The fact that china has developed the technological sophistication of its productive forces, without developing or improving the social relationships that govern the control of said forces in a socialist sense, should be a dead giveaway that promises of future social changes are basically a lie. jesus christ. i’d say this was a good post and that I agree, but that would just open you to mockery, since I’m a SD. so: this was a bad post and you’re stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:There's no choice for us either way. The only really decisive factor in the future of China is the CCP. The fact that you just said CCP and not the proletariat says everything imo
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:The fact that you just said CCP and not the proletariat says everything imo What if vanguardism but too much?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
the fact that this thread has completely ignored the emancipatory potential of the alienated proles in the incel movement in place of chinese socialism pedantry is most shameful to my people  (the incels, not the canadians)
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Reformism acts within the power structures already developed, and is thereforeincapable of overthrowing them. Suggesting that China can reform its way into socialism is equivalent to suggesting that socialism can simply be voted into the west - its a delusion. The fact that china has developed the technological sophistication of its productive forces, without developing or improving the social relationships that govern the control of said forces in a socialist sense, should be a dead giveaway that promises of future social changes are basically a lie. analogizing between reformism in the west and incremental change in china betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation and a desire to fit countries and systems into a comfortable rubric where they don't belong. reformism in capitalism doesn't work because the capitalist class holds economic and political power and stalls any effort to rein in that power. there is a capitalist class in china, but it was developed in a system where political power was and is both superior and antagonistic to it. the party and the government have myriad checks on capitalist influence, even with the minor concessions given to them like party membership and seats in the nppcc. capitalists in china don't fight the party or the government. they toe the line and even still many get thrown in jail anyway. foreign real estate is an investment for the capitalist class in china, but it's also a way to get money out of the country and have a place to flee if the government decides you're getting too inconvenient. if the party really wanted to take the country farther down the "capitalist" road, we'd see real reforms and even more of a pivot away from marxism as the leadership looked for a new theoretical foundation for its legitimacy. the opposite has happened — sure, there's talk of even greater opening-up, but not in any way that would change the level of control the government has over capital.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
yup prolix
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 23:37
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:yup prolix Whatcha gonna do about it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
im gonna say its prolix
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2018 23:59
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:there is a capitalist class in china, but it was developed in a system where political power was and is both superior and antagonistic to it. the party and the government have myriad checks on capitalist influence, even with the minor concessions given to them like party membership and seats in the nppcc. Everyone on the Standing Committee is a billionaire through their families. Capitalists in China have to play ball with the political establishment but what that results in is a government and business sector that are more tightly intertwined.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 01:11
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:This is a really bizarre take on the situation. "Political power" in china is at best sometimes antagonistic, sometimes superior. This is the root of the problem that the ccp is confronting: on the provincial level and lower the party is deeply implicated in corrupt practices and crony capitalism. Obviously Xi recognizes this, hence the spate of symbolic high profile arrests and trials. Problem is, this is a problem that goes beyond the individual into the institutional fabric of government the existence of mechanisms to correct this trend, and the creation of new ones like the national supervisory committee, show that the system has tools to combat these problems. the ccdi isn't a new organ, but only recently became a high-profile anticorruption body after languishing in obscurity for many decades. being given the authority to investigate a former standing committee member sets a new, huge precedent, which many people in the west don't even realize
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/getfiscal/status/989320423673417728?s=19
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
china has the computing power to start going planned economy at any time
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 02:57
|
|
|
"Computer, create a dictator so benevolent not even the chinese business and political class can corrupt it"
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:being given the authority to investigate a former standing committee member sets a new, huge precedent, which many people in the west don't even realize Yes. It means he’s willing to violate the taboo on prosecuting former standing committee members, which means he can never become a former standing committee member (or president or whatever) himself. edit: also, awesome Alpha Centauri nostalgia posts are why I bookmarked this thread, and also where I first saw a mod unironically defending modern chinese despotism as twelfth dimensional chess, lol.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 03:27
|
|
|
xth-dimensional chess, that old chestnut. rudatron, is that you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 03:51
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:xth-dimensional chess, that old chestnut. rudatron, is that you? I haven’t been posting actively long enough to know who some of the old permabanned posters are. I was attempting to uncharitably compare you to some of the Trump fans who keep claiming his bizarre behavior is actually twelfth dimensional chess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 03:57
|
|
|
id much rather this thread be between people who agree with eachother about china, with no other critical perspective. also more racism
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 03:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:01 |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5IobgdPKhc
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2018 04:12
|
|
