(Thread IKs:
dead gay comedy forums)
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Mieville being a Trot would explain the sexual harassment allegations ooooooooooooooooohohohohohoooooooooholy poo poo that's a low blow lmaooo
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 04:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 08:47 |
|
|
fuckin god dammit
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 04:31
|
|
|
what the gently caress are the actual tenets of xi jinping thought? is it just mostly excuses for social-imperialism or does it have something substantive in it
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 04:44
|
|
|
mcclay posted:what the gently caress are the actual tenets of xi jinping thought? communism with neoliberal characteristics
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 04:56
|
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:hit me up with some third world troskyism. it must exist Friend of mine has a Trotskyist cousin who called for the overthrow of the right-wing government in Chile and they were put in prison for it. There was a big petition to have them freed and everything Hashtag not all Trots
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 05:05
|
|
|
https://www.marxists.org/archive/harman/2007/01/chavez.htm Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez recently announced a shift to the left in his government. “Trotsky said that the revolution was permanent, it never finishes. Let’s go with Trotsky,” he said. ... Among the new ministers is one from the Communist Party and another – minister of labour Jose Ramon Rivero Gonzalez – who warned Chavez, “I have Trotskyist ideas.” Chavez replied, “But I am a Trotskyist too, I follow Trotsky’s line of permanent revolution.” Also Posadas was one too I think and he was so nuts that Castro had to throw him in jail. Dude even accused Castro of killing Che, and then later of faking Che's death. Of course that's only the tip of the Posadas iceberg Yossarian-22 has issued a correction as of 07:41 on Jun 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 05:21
|
|
|
mcclay posted:what the gently caress are the actual tenets of xi jinping thought? you gave me a good intellectual jolt and remembered something that I was trying to recall for a very loving long while: Xi's actual address to the National Congress of the CPC that establishes this. Some choice quotes of mine to try to show the gist of it: quote:First of all: Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is socialism. It is not any other sort of “ism.” The foundational, scientific principles of socialism cannot be abandoned; only if they are abandoned would our system no longer be socialist. From first to the last our Party has emphasized that “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” adheres to the basic principles of scientific socialism and is imbued with characteristically Chinese features bestowed by the conditions of the times. Socialism with Chinese characteristics is socialism, not any other ‘ism.’ quote:In recent years there have been a few commentators — both at home and abroad —that have asked if what modern China is doing can really be called socialism. Some have said we have engaged in a sort of “capital socialism;” others have been more straightforward, calling it “state capitalism” or “bureaucratic capitalism.” These labels are completely wrong. We say that socialism with Chinese characteristics is socialism. No matter how we reform and open up, we should always adhere to the socialist road with Chinese characteristics, the theoretical systems of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the structure of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and the basic requirements put forward by the Eighteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China for a new victory of socialism.[iv] quote:These include: the absolute leadership of the Communist Party of China, grounding policy in national conditions, putting economic construction at the center, adhering to the “Four Cardinal Principles”[v] and to the program of reform and opening up, liberating and developing productive social forces, building a socialist market economy, socialist democratic politics, an advanced socialist culture [...] These features embody the basic principles of scientific socialism under our new historical conditions. If we lose these, we lose socialism. quote:We must not ever “go to Handan to learn to walk and forget our native stride.” Instead, we have taken Marxism and Sinicized it. That is socialism with Chinese characteristics. quote:Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Communist Party of the Soviet Union fall to pieces? An important reason is that in the ideological domain, competition is fierce! To completely repudiate the historical experience of the Soviet Union, to repudiate the history of the CPSU, to repudiate Lenin, to repudiate Stalin was to wreck chaos in Soviet ideology and engage in historical nihilism. It caused Party organizations at all levels to have barely any function whatsoever. It robbed the Party of its leadership of the military. In the end the CPSU — as great a Party as it was — cattered like a flock of frightened beasts! The Soviet Union — as great a country as it was — shattered into a dozen pieces. This is a lesson from the past! quote:My third point: Marxism always develops along with the social realities and technology of the times. Marxism cannot stagnate. After the start of opening-up, socialism has only continued to advance. Upholding the development of socialism with Chinese characteristics is much like a great book. To establish foundational principles and ideas, Comrade Deng Xiaoping etched his part in. The Party Central Committee’s third generation, with Comrade Jiang Zemin as its core and Comrade Hu Jintao as general secretary, added their own brilliant chapters to this book. The responsibility of this generation of Communist Party members is to write the next chapter of this great work. quote:Fourth: From beginning to end our Party has always adhered to the lofty ideals of communism. Party members, especially leading cadres, should be firm believers and faithful practitioners of the lofty ideal of communism and the common ideals of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Faith in Marxism, a socialist and communist conviction, is the political soul of the Communist Party member. They are the spiritual pillar that give him the strength to undergo any test. The Party Constitution clearly stipulates that the Party’s highest ideal and ultimate goal is to achieve communism. this part has gold in terms to demonstrate his perspective, imho: quote:Facts have repeatedly told us that Marx and Engels’ analysis of the basic contradictions in capitalist society is not outdated, nor is the historical materialist view that capitalism is bound to die out and socialism is bound to win. This is an inevitable trend in social and historical development. But the road is tortuous. The eventual demise of capitalism and the ultimate victory of socialism will require a long historical process to reach completion. In the meantime, we must have a deep appreciation for capitalism’s ability to self-correct, and a full, objective assessment of the real long-term advantages that the developed Western nations have in the economic, technological, and military spheres. Then we must diligently prepare for a long period of cooperation and of conflict between these two social systems in each of these domains.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 05:23
|
|
|
I find it funny how much Xi thought is simultaneously both pro- and anti-revisionism, but he's clearly such a true believer that I have to respect it. What he's saying is well-stated even. I can see why M-Ls find him so based when he explicitly says that people repudiating Stalin caused the collapse of the USSR. I never in my life thought that a major world leader in 2021 would uphold Stalin's legacy. I may not agree 100% with the guy but he radiates pure chad energy Yossarian-22 has issued a correction as of 10:07 on Jun 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 08:00
|
|
|
Honestly I think he's right. I think maybe it's difficult to say whether China can successfully siphon foreign capital like they're trying to do without creating their own ruling class. But it's OK. Unfortunately we're not going to get any kind of Comintern again any time soon, so China will do what they think is best and hopefully us westerners can do our own thing too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 08:08
|
|
|
It’s incredible seeing a world leader have actual, well thought out opinions, and articulate them clearly. Modern western leaders tend to either stick to safe topics and avoid anything clear and controversial, or express them so poorly that it masks them in a cloud of interpretative doubt.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 09:47
|
|
|
F Stop Fitzgerald posted:are there seriously mfs coming into the dialectics thread saying things are Good or Bad? what Type of Liberalism is that lemme at em starvation is bad. now, let me tell you about this place called the Ukraine,
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 11:20
|
|
|
'we must be socialist with chinese characteristics  'what a clever ruse
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 12:45
|
|
|
Yeah I think some of you going all WOW PRESIDENT XI are getting a bit carried away by a speech that positively refers to socialism and socialist figures rather than what is being said. To say that China is anything other than socialist would be to break from the revolution and obviously there's no point in admitting that when they're wielding authority in the name of the revolutionary legacy just fine. Admitting that 'a long period of cooperation and of conflict between [capitalism and socialism]' is the current state of affairs isn't a theoretically justified point (it certainly isn't dialetical) and seems to be just stating the obvious with the implication that it was planned for. Finally while it's certainly necessary to observe the strengths of capitalism happening elsewhere in the world, why are the particular chinese characteristics of socialism more akin to copying them rather than finding socialist methods to surpass them? The basis of socialism isn't just high levels of industrial development, it's the social relations established during their development and use - if you've already won your revolution then why are you using a wage labour force to maintain it when the need to have a proletarian consciousness around struggle has generally been surpassed by the need to create a socialist consciousness focusing on collective development and production?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 15:22
|
|
|
Wow thanks for repeating literally every criticism about the speech on this page but with 500x the words.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 15:23
|
|
|
namesake posted:if you've already won your revolution lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 15:36
|
|
|
Structurally we are capitalist, but have you considered our rich socialist leadership? Very important. Xi's making incredibly vague promises on progress towards socialism but now is not the time which feels eerily familiar. What sort of goalposts and markers should we look for?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:Wow thanks for repeating literally every criticism about the speech on this page but with 500x the words. In my defence this is the 'use too many words about Marxism' thread. I'm pretty sure they'd claim they did though?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
nice av btw, i thought raskolnikov was the only one being given those
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 15:52
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:What sort of goalposts and markers should we look for? the us military and intelligence budget
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 15:57
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:nice av btw, i thought raskolnikov was the only one being given those some racists were trying to set up shop in the doomsday econ thread
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 15:58
|
|
|
a big part of what brought down the soviet union was elite defection also, which the CCP doesn't have to worry too much about, since they tolerate people getting filthy rich as well as being very powerful so long as they have the ability to take them out back and shoot them if they get too badly out of line, sometimes literally one thing i wonder about a lot is how the CCP has managed to keep its business elites from effectively coopting the party, which they've clearly somehow accomplished thus far. i suspect that their legal tradition plays into it; the rules are a little fuzzier on the edges, which makes it more difficult to stay safe, and that they are somehow kept at arm's reach? idk
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 16:05
|
|
|
the business elites own a bunch of the empty houses in some of the neighborhoods i used to work in and would refuse to communicate about things like shared fences or drainage work
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 16:16
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:one thing i wonder about a lot is how the CCP has managed to keep its business elites from effectively coopting the party, which they've clearly somehow accomplished thus far.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 16:47
|
|
|
I feel like “local government can have you arrested on whim” helps them keep their heads down or lose them
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 16:50
|
|
|
point is that there's no reason to poke your head up. the path to unimaginable profit isn't just open to you, it's been paved and maintained by the government. some of the more dull-witted ones will seek power by crossing the line, the smart ones will realise there's more meaningful power to being a billionaire that's friendly with the government anyway
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 17:09
|
|
|
namesake posted:Admitting that 'a long period of cooperation and of conflict between [capitalism and socialism]' is the current state of affairs isn't a theoretically justified point (it certainly isn't dialetical) and seems to be just stating the obvious with the implication that it was planned for. i'm not sure what's undialectical about it. stalin writes as much in foundations of leninism It scarcely needs proof that there is not the slightest possibility of carrying out these tasks in a short period, of accomplishing all this in a few years. Therefore, the dictatorship of the proletariat, the transition from capitalism to communism, must not be regarded as a fleeting period of "super-revolutionary" acts and decrees, but as an entire historical era, replete with civil wars and external conflicts, with persistent organisational work and economic construction, with advances and retreats, victories and defeats. The historical era is needed not only to create the economic and cultural prerequisites for the complete victory of socialism, but also to enable the proletariat, firstly, to educate itself and become steeled as a force capable of governing the country, and, secondly, to re-educate and remould the petty-bourgeois strata along such lines as will assure the organisation of socialist production. recognizing that capitalism and socialism are going to have to interact in a period of ongoing transformation, rather than that one will cleanly and wholly replace the other, seems perfectly in line with dialectical materialism. whether it was "planned" is debatable; mao certainly didn't plan this, but deng probably did
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:I feel like “local government can have you arrested on whim” helps them keep their heads down or lose them I think one crucial element of Xi Jianping Thought that characterizes is that it is a very little theoretical contribution to Marxism and much more a series of practices and considerations for the Chinese reality in the 21st century A couple of elaborations of his Fourteen Points: xinhua.net posted:
these two elements I think are the most relevant about the matter: the government at its highest level has a constitutional duty to ensure and defend the party's sovereignty over law and the execution of socialism. A billionaire is only such because he is allowed to be so by the party's mandate and if they act out, welp it is an interesting idea because, well, if we are to be ~~*theoretical*~~ about it, they accomplish a foundational element of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the coercion of the wealthy. In what degree this specific aspect is working to the benefit of the working class I cannot say or estimate
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 17:27
|
|
|
Socialism and capitalism do not have a dialectical relationship, socialism is the synthesis of capitalist contradictions. It's true that the period of synthesis could be a long time to complete and so there is a period of coexistence but co-operation? Like I said, socialist states should only look to the particulars of the capitalist world as a situation to overcome, not to integrate into themselves. That may not mean immediate and continuous open warfare between socialism and capitalism but decades of attempting collectivist production being replaced by free labour and stock markets should give anyone pause to say this is a progression of socialism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 17:33
|
|
|
what i see when there's new posts itt 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 17:37
|
|
|
namesake posted:Socialism and capitalism do not have a dialectical relationship, socialism is the synthesis of capitalist contradictions aren't you thinking of them as abstract instead of modes of production, though? like, mercantilism certainly doesn't have a dialectical relationship with feudalism in the abstract, but as modes of production, they worked and interacted concurrently and transformed themselves for centuries before mercantilism properly became capitalism
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 17:38
|
|
|
"socialism" itself can mean a lot of things. if it's just "collectivist production", lenin showed long ago that market vs. command economy is a strategic rather than a moral choice. if it's the dictatorship of the proletariat, that's arguably going on in china as-is. if it's the production for use-value rather than exchange-value, same again two readings i like about what's going on in china are this https://spectrejournal.com/why-china-isnt-capitalist-despite-the-pink-ferraris/ (has a funny ortho-trot "bureaucratic collectivism" ending but does a good job of outlining the cpc's power) and this https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
yeah i read those, and i still don't know what's going on in china, but i'm not sure you could call it a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, if you know what i mean.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 17:53
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:two readings i like about what's going on in china are this https://spectrejournal.com/why-china-isnt-capitalist-despite-the-pink-ferraris/ (has a funny ortho-trot "bureaucratic collectivism" ending but does a good job of outlining the cpc's power) and this https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 18:31
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:I haven't read the second article, but the first one is laughably bad. it's just so utterly unwilling to delve beyond the surface, digging just deep enough to make the argument that china is clearly socialist but no further. did you finish the first one? the first one also flatly denies that china is socialist, instead calling it a a bureaucratic-capitalist-collectivism or some other such western marxist word salad. the interesting part isn't the analysis but the bare facts on the ground, like that the cpc literally owns all land in china and merely leases it to corporations such that they can be dispossessed at will
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 18:36
|
|
|
(reads article about china written by trotskyists) this article is far too nice towards china
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 18:37
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:I haven't read the second article, but the first one is laughably bad. it's just so utterly unwilling to delve beyond the surface, digging just deep enough to make the argument that china is clearly socialist but no further. excellent contribution
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:
I don't think that's a distinction, let alone a salient one. epstein got got in the middle of the night, should we start referring to socialism with american tendencies?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 18:45
|
|
|
The Voice of Labor posted:I don't think that's a distinction, let alone a salient one. epstein got got in the middle of the night, should we start referring to socialism with american tendencies? epstine wasn’t a billionaire dummy
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 18:47
|
|
|
intra-capitalist competition means that capitalists do kill each other from time to time. the question to ask about any instance of the state apparatus being turned on a member or agent of the bourgeoisie is who made it happen and what material interests are served by it happening. i don't think jack ma was recently chastised for having information that would lead to the arrest of hillary clinton
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 18:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 08:47 |
|
|
Ferrinus posted:did you finish the first one? the first one also flatly denies that china is socialist, instead calling it a a bureaucratic-capitalist-collectivism or some other such western marxist word salad. the interesting part isn't the analysis but the bare facts on the ground, like that the cpc literally owns all land in china and merely leases it to corporations such that they can be dispossessed at will the state owning all the land is only relevant based on the assumption that the state is free of sin, as well as the notion that more government control is necessarily more marxist. it also does this blatant stuff like saying the chinese capitalists aren't actually capitalist and that the private sector isn't actually private. just baby-brained ploys. also labour isn't commodified because they use unfree labour. what a gambit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2021 19:03
|
|