stephenthinkpad posted:

This argument about Japan's recession is stupid. You don't have to compare China to Japan and predict China will follow the Japan route. You can just compare the Japanese model and the S Korea model and see S Korea hasn't performed some extreme boneheaded central bank moves and completely popped it's own grow balloon.

What happens with the Japan's recession and it's yen and real estate market roller-coaster was so extreme, it won't likely repeat anywhere else.

Also, if you understand how much control China has over capital flow both in and our of the country you won't bring up Japan anyway.

Ardennes posted:

I would say the thing that would constrain China is that in a raw geopolitical sense, I don’t think it could dominate the world in the same way as the US after the Second World War. China is going to face serious competition, more so than the Soviets

shrike82 posted:

it's weird how all the extreme boosters of China don't seem to know much about China - there was a pretty bad equity crash in 2015 and the markets have re-inflated to hit similar heights leading to concerns about another crash. property-to-incomes in tier 1 cities are probably higher than London and NY right now.

and talking about Japan's decline being singularly tied to the 80s market crash is bizarre.

quote:

it's absolutely a keynesian honeymoon right now in china. but when the contradictions become too much, they have: foundational principles of their state, a massive warning in whats happening in the west to not turn to neoliberalism, and a deathgrip on political power which capital is completely shut out of. i don't think they'll end up like the west did when the rate of return declines

quote:

Average net worth of Chinese urban household nears 3 mln yuan: survey

A team with the People's Bank of China, the central bank, carried out the survey over assets/liability among more than 30,000 households in cities across the country in October 2019. The survey was published on China Finance, a journal run by the central bank.

Nearly 60 percent of the surveyed household assets are real estate, and around one-fifth are financial assets, which averaged 649,000 yuan per family.

shrike82 posted:

ensure capital appreciation.

Rutibex posted:

doesnt the CCP own all land in china? i thought the only thing you can get is a long term lease. seems like that alone would prevent any kind of property crash from messing up too many things

shrike82 posted:

yeah it's weird to see people make tortured arguments about how China is going to "technocrat" better than South Korea and Japan while not confronting the basic issue of people accumulating real estate and financial assets

ToxicAcne posted:

I think people are being a little bit triumphalist about China here. I wouldn't be surprised if something big started to shake up China. There are already stories of young Marxists in China becoming dissatisfied with the state of things.

KaptainKrunk posted:

As for more competition than the Soviets - huh? China will face less geopolitical competition than the Soviets ever did. It's highly integrated into the global economy in a way the Soviets never were. Its at the forefront of many fields and is striving to dominate more. Soviet economy vs US, Japan, NATO countries was 5x in favor of the West in the 1970s and only got worse after that. After the Sino-Soviet split, the USSR had like, three allies, none of them really significant. China doesn't have any formal allies, but has strong partnerships with Russia, Pakistan, and enough ASEAN countries to prevent the formation of anything like a southeast asian NATO. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam would be collectively overmatched by China, and eventually it'll overmatch even all those + the US in most of the pacific and indian oceans.

shrike82 posted:

it's weird how all the extreme boosters of China don't seem to know much about China - there was a pretty bad equity crash in 2015 and the markets have re-inflated to hit similar heights leading to concerns about another crash. property-to-incomes in tier 1 cities are probably higher than London and NY right now.

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

also see this:

https://twitter.com/aparanjape/status/1337090530140819456

shrike82 posted:

extreme boosters of China

Antonymous posted:

oh so now we trust american reporting on china lol

gradenko_2000 posted:

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

also see this:

https://twitter.com/aparanjape/status/1337090530140819456

quote:

China vows to unleash deep market-oriented reforms in new policy directive as economic uncertainty grows

The Chinese Communist Party has vowed to deepen market-oriented reform in key sectors of the economy, from land management to labour

shrike82 posted:

people seem to have forgotten the heyday of the Japanese administrative state (MITI) and how fast their grip fell apart once the economy matured

Antonymous posted:

oh so now we trust american reporting on china lol

gradenko_2000 posted:

shrike82 posted:

let's see if chinese millenials are able to push any meaningful redistributive reforms? the genie's out of the bottle and you can't undo giving people the right to "capital" and all the consequences (e.g., interest on capital exceeding interest on wage labor) easily so color me skeptical

Cao Ni Ma posted:

Wait does the M stand for marxist? And if so is there a non marxist communist party of india?

Cao Ni Ma posted:

Wait does the M stand for marxist? And if so is there a non marxist communist party of india?

Cao Ni Ma posted:

Wait does the M stand for marxist? And if so is there a non marxist communist party of india?

Cao Ni Ma posted:

Wait does the M stand for marxist? And if so is there a non marxist communist party of india?

belgend posted:

i forgot to do this but here it is now:

there are three main currents in indian communism, who are represented by the old cpi, cpi(m) and cpi(ml) parties. the cpi(ml) has since splintered beyond recognition, cpi and cpi(m) are still around. the cpi(m) overall is the most influential communist party in india

the communists started out as the left wing of the indian independence struggle. a bunch of underground communists cells all across india came together in 1925 to create an all-india communist party, the cpi. at first, they tried to ally themselves with leftist factions of the independence movement's big tent party, specifically the workers and peasants faction of the congress party (gandhi's party), which ended up becoming a front organisation for the illegal cpi. this tactic was later denounced by the comintern and as such the cpi had to learn to work mostly illegally instead of half/half.

after independence, the cpi actually had a lot of support from the indian working and peasant classes because they ended up finishing the anti-feodal struggles in a lot of states that the congress wasn't planning on stopping, to the point that in the 50s the cpi was the main opposition to the congress party.

the question that laid before the cpi was: what is the character of the indian state, the congress party and what is the analysis of the objective and subjective circumstances.

the cpi said that the indian state was, inherently, an antifeodal and anti-imperialist state which was controlled by the congress party, the political spearhead of the national bourgeoisie. the cpi(m) said that, while the indian state is an improvement from british rule, the indian congress party and the indian state is inherently still semi-feodal and imperialist, as the indian congress party has formed alliances with big landlords and monopoly capital both in india and abroad. simply put, the cpi thought that the current phase of the revolution in india had to be an anti-imperialist one alongside the congress party, the faction within the cpi that would become the cpi(m) said that the current phase of the revolution is an anti-feodal one against the congress party. this split the party in 1964 (both parties agree on the fact that the objective and subjective circumstances are not there to call for a insurrection)

notice that, contrary to most communist movements in the world, the sino-soviet split was not a big factor in the split. the split mostly happened on difference on the national situation. even the cpi(m)-cpi(ml) split was not rooted in this international issue. the cpi(ml) saw the naxalite insurrection of armed peasants as the start of a fully fledged armed resistance movement against the congress party, and made it its mission to be the political figurehead of the 'avantgarde' of the peasant masses. the biggest political party to use this theory now is the cpi(maoist), which sees all parties as complacent in the imperialist, feodal state of india

these three parties have all made major mistakes in the past, with differing consequences: the cpi's biggest mistake was thinking that the indira gandhi state of emergency, which was used to help establish an autocratic dominance over the congress party, was in fact an anti-imperialist act. it therefore supported the emergency and thus also the arrest and murder of other communists. the cpi(ml) was never able to form a broad insurrection front and turned to individual terrorisme instead, which lead to a split in many parties. the cpi(m) in the 90s became too reliant on its parlimentary work, thereby forgetting to do actual work on the terrain (something the cpi had already long stopped in most states in india). the biggest example of this parliamentism was the formation of a cpi(m)-congress government in west bengal in order to try and keep their positions of power in the state

the big problem right now with indian communism is not unlike the one you have in france right now. you have very strong mass organisations that have a lot of support with working and peasant classes, but with communist parties that only have their support in big bastions, or who because of opportunist mistakes have lost a huge chunk of their support

in 2015, the cpi(m) basically said 'there is no longer an indepndent all-india communist movement'. the big communist parties are no longer active in all of india, and electorally in most cases they have to resort to alliances to even have a chance in most elections. the big exception to this rule is the cpi(m) of kerala, which has found a way to combine parliamentary and state government work with political work on the ground, and prioritising the second part. the selfcriticism the cpi(m) did at the time was to stop forging 'purely secular' alliances like they did in the 90s and 2000s to try and counterweigh the bjp, who became the main opposition party and now the government since, but to go back to 'left and secular' alliances, to attack both the bjp and the congress party (and its main neoliberal offshoots) who in the end represent the same classes

right now you have an informal agreement with 5 parties to make some sort of all-india left front: the cpi(m), the cpi, the cpi(ml)-liberation (a cpiml splinter that put an anti-congress united front as a priority over the people's war, and is seen as the successor of the original cpi(ml), the revolutionary socialist party (a communist party that felt the cpi was too soviet) and the all-india forward bloc (the first leftist split of the congress party after the dissolution of the workers and peasants party)

right now the cpi(m) is the major player in this left front, as it has been historically. they use their mass organisations really well to start an anti-modi/bjp united front. they've even got the bjp's militia to work with them in kerala in covid relief because they're very clearly beyond all other parties on the subject. the covid relief effort they do elsewhere is also bringing back old disillusioned people back to the cpi(m). the cpi wants to use this left front as the reunification of the communist party, but the cpi(m) has already said it won't accept a reunification on the program of the old cpi. µ

tl;dr: cpi(m) owns but there are still a lot of political problems they have to face internally

BrutalistMcDonalds posted:

i think that's in kolkata actually. kinda worth noting (and depressing) that the western left largely doesn't pay much attention to that. but i think it shows that electoral politics is not the main thing you should be thinking about all the time, it's kinda orthogonal or secondary to mass organizations that can mobilize huge numbers of people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDaQ8C6bkCw