|
It's a huge issue going back to Tjenestemandsreformen in 1969, that "traditionally women's jobs" in the public sector are systematically underpaid, compared to "traditionally men's jobs". And of course the entire public sector in comparison to the private sector. My mom has been a teacher for over 25 years. People straight out of vocational school in entry level IT jobs get paid more than she does, which is just ridiculous.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 08:30 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 10:31 |
|
Is it naive to believe, that when unions agree on a strike, it's probably because they have a case for it? It just doesn't gel with the government's ability to refuse negotiations until they can force the matter. It all seems so backwards.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 08:46 |
|
THE BAR posted:Is it naive to believe, that when unions agree on a strike, it's probably because they have a case for it? When it comes to critical services its EXTREMELY difficult to win the PR game with strikes. Houses burning down b/c firefighters want more money? Greedy selfish assholes! Ppl getting worse care and even dying because of the cracy bad environemtn for people working in health care? Greedy selfish assholes! Teachers on strike causing a lost generation who will now forever be failsons? Greedy selfish assholes! Why do you want to steal my money with these mad tax hikes? I'm going to be poor and not afford my house, vacation house, boat, and four vacations per year IT nerds wanting 20k more per month than the above? No problems, we're creating the next unicorn fueled by really stupid VC capital.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 08:53 |
|
BonHair posted:The larger issue is that actually their pay isn't that bad KozmoNaut posted:It's a huge issue going back to Tjenestemandsreformen in 1969, that "traditionally women's jobs" in the public sector are systematically underpaid, compared to "traditionally men's jobs". And of course the entire public sector in comparison to the private sector. There's like a 30% gap in base pay between nurses and a regular building engineer, and the major difference between the two is that the latter is a traditionally male job, while nurses are traditionally women. I suppose building engineers are also generally more qualified at the kind of things the people controlling the purse strings respect, that being project management, budgeting and so on, but that doesn't really justify lower pay. Nurses have their own strengths, such as being able to consistently perform in a stressful environment where a mistake can be potentially deadly, which would justify* higher pay above the base level afforded by their time spent in schooling. *In the context of the principles which ostensibly define our current job market.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 11:43 |
|
https://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/politik/danskpolitik/paludan-i-grov-sexsnak-med-boern/8812577 BonHair posted:The larger issue is that actually their pay isn't that bad What an idiotic notion. SplitSoul fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Aug 27, 2021 |
# ? Aug 27, 2021 11:47 |
|
My point in saying that nurses are paid enough wasn't that they shouldn't get more, but that the way to achieve that could also be to bring everyone else down to their level, for example through the use of progressive taxation. And then, while we're at it, give a "poo poo job" tax credit to any profession that requires handling literal poo poo. Anyway, disregarding my bad take, it's also interesting that from a supply and demand perspective, nurses should absolutely get a pay rise. And this is not unique to nurses. Prison guards are in ridiculously high demand, in large part because it's a tough job, with high risk of injury and getting harassed or beaten when you're off duty. But they're still paid less than an entry level office drone (in this case it's not sexism but classism), so no one applies for the job. So far the solution is to overwork current guards and bad commercials, but no improvement of conditions or pay. When I worked in the prison agency a few years back, they were looking for 300 recruits, and got like 5. And I don't think it's been much better since then. And of course, tjenestemandsreformen was based on a society where the man supported the wife, who in turn did all the informal labour. It's bad and sexist for that reason alone.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 18:51 |
|
Potrzebie posted:When it comes to critical services its EXTREMELY difficult to win the PR game with strikes. Houses burning down b/c firefighters want more money? Greedy selfish assholes! Ppl getting worse care and even dying because of the cracy bad environemtn for people working in health care? Greedy selfish assholes! Teachers on strike causing a lost generation who will now forever be failsons? Greedy selfish assholes! Administrative strikes are a thing, and you can essentially withhold your labor for non-emergency work, and advertise your strike as such. House on fire? here we come! New build needs a fire inspection? Talk to the hand baby. BonHair posted:My point in saying that nurses are paid enough wasn't that they shouldn't get more, but that the way to achieve that could also be to bring everyone else down to their level, for example through the use of progressive taxation. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Aug 27, 2021 |
# ? Aug 27, 2021 19:09 |
|
C’s vice-chair and parliamentary group leader doesn’t know what vaccine efficacy means. loving shoot me.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 19:24 |
|
evil_bunnY posted:
Property taxes are a loving joke. I'm pretty sure my mom made more from living in a house in Copenhagen for 25 years than she did from being a high school teacher in the same period. Now they're going to finally revaluate properties, which hasn't been done since 2001 or so. But because this would increase taxes, they give a 20% rebate, and adjust the tax rate down so the actual payments don't increase. Even the worst liberals agree that this is bad, but Homeowners are such an important voting demographic that no one dare touch them.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 19:39 |
|
evil_bunnY posted:You can strike without compromising emergency/critical services. This is true, I guess the problem is that the unions are MT Suits instead of angry syndicalists then? Our why the gently caress are administrative strikes not a 24/7 thing in healthcare and other failed sectors? quote:Or just start eliminating dumbass loopholes. When we sold our first crib to buy our second one I did the math and figured out we’d essentially lived there for free. WHAT THE gently caress KINDA SYSTEM IS THIS. Yeah I've made so much money living in spaces I purchased it's dumb.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 20:04 |
|
Potrzebie posted:This is true, I guess the problem is that the unions are MT Suits instead of angry syndicalists then? Our why the gently caress are administrative strikes not a 24/7 thing in healthcare and other failed sectors? Ask a teacher. Strikes within the system don't work when the employer side can just make a law to get their way. And doing unlawful strikes would carry risk for the individuals participating, and that makes it much harder to do on a large scale, especially because people need to pay off their mortgage.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 20:15 |
|
BonHair posted:Ask a teacher. Strikes within the system don't work when the employer side can just make a law to get their way. The teachers I know hate the idiots in charge of their union. They write articles in DN bemoaning the situation their members are in but then instantly fold during negotiations. Lawful strikes seem an oxymoron to me. They are supposed to be against the power, not sanctioned by it. But I'm a keyboard warrior, never been on strike so I'm probably part of the problem.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 20:38 |
|
Potrzebie posted:Lawful strikes seem an oxymoron to me. They are supposed to be against the power, not sanctioned by it. But I'm a keyboard warrior, never been on strike so I'm probably part of the problem. Striking as has always been against capital, not the state, and they are (still) different things. However, in a weird horseshoe, u-turn, eternal recurrence, rhyming of history, the state and capital has semi-recently once again tied the knot. While they remain distinct, their interests has become almost completely entangled. Today it's a little more subtle than sending in the army to make cavalry charges against the early union movement like in the old days, but equivalent in the sense that the state (even when governed by the social democrats) is 100% in support of capital and try to suppress labour in various ways and will use violence (symbolic, economic and otherwise) to suppress unions if necessary.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 20:57 |
|
Revelation 2-13 posted:the state (even when governed by the social democrats) is 100% in support of capital Especially when governed by the Social Democrats. Nyrup privatised more than anyone.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 21:59 |
|
Revelation 2-13 posted:Striking as has always been against capital, not the state, and they are (still) different things. However, in a weird horseshoe, u-turn, eternal recurrence, rhyming of history, the state and capital has semi-recently once again tied the knot. While they remain distinct, their interests has become almost completely entangled. Today it's a little more subtle than sending in the army to make cavalry charges against the early union movement like in the old days, but equivalent in the sense that the state (even when governed by the social democrats) is 100% in support of capital and try to suppress labour in various ways and will use violence (symbolic, economic and otherwise) to suppress unions if necessary. Is it fair to say that unions have to a large degree become controlled opposition where the leadership will fold or be bought out as soon as the theater display of striking has been completed? I know nothing about this, but it seems to me like unions are also entangled into this agreement with capital and will not resist too much, combined with a lot of the worker members actually being anti socialist.
|
# ? Aug 27, 2021 22:01 |
|
Party In My Diapee posted:Is it fair to say that unions have to a large degree become controlled opposition where the leadership will fold or be bought out as soon as the theater display of striking has been completed? I know nothing about this, but it seems to me like unions are also entangled into this agreement with capital and will not resist too much, combined with a lot of the worker members actually being anti socialist. Individual unions are quite different when it comes to their practice and how much they view the relationship with employers/capital as adversarial/conflictual or consensus-based. This is btw also a split that exists with people doing research into, and writing academically about, unions. In addition, because unions are political organizations, with elected leadership, there are often different/distinct factions in the unions themselves, whose power to direct the union waxes and wanes with how the members vote (more or less). A central element is that the things that are important to unions, are often quite different from what’s important at a societal level. Unions, locally, have to do things like negotiate with management/employers to get a healthy working environment, getting a free fruit service, or a stress counselor, or a physical therapist, or take action on the recent APV, for example, which requires a collaborative relationship with management/employees (most of the time). This is quite different from the societal conflicts over whether we should have free healthcare, inequality/poverty, and so on. Historically the Social Democratic Party and the LO unions were literally the same organization, that split up into a professional arm and a political arm. As such they tend to follow each other, and while that’s still relevant the social democrats has been sprinting toward right wing liberalism since the 90s, which has had real/material effects on the members of unions (which politicians can ignore, but unions can’t). A union like DJØF, as maligned as it is, probably has more ‘leftist’ than the LO union these days, since LO is dominated by the social democrats, and it’s rare (though it does happen) for someone who isn’t a card carrying SD member to be elected to leadership positions. However in all unions (just like societally), leftist are a minority and the management of the union is usually entirely focused on consensus and collaboration with employers. I’ve been a union representative for several years and as a very leftist leftist, I was often in conflict with other union reps who wanted to focus on collaborating with management, no matter the cost, even in situations where the management was doing some real shady poo poo. Such as firing a bunch of people in a year or record profits, fiddling with budgets so they looked worse than they were, to justify cutting down, and so on. As I started with saying, it really depends on how you view the fundamental relationship between unions and employers. On the one hand, it’s clearly a social institution which purpose/function is to solve conflicts between capital and labor in a way that’s agreeable to both (and as such consensus-based) on the other hand it also started as conflict-based movement, aimed a creating revolutionary change and have fundamentally different interests from the employers. The biggest problem facing unions today imo, is that people don’t give a poo poo. This is partially the unions own fault, but also because of how society has developed and how individualistic it has become. At at place where I was union rep we had incredible problems finding people to replace the union reps who retired because people just didn’t give a poo poo, or they were on a career path and didn’t want to rock the boat (probably a good reasoning tbh), or just too busy to spend time on it, or just didn’t care. Obviously this also to do with how good local unions are at invigorating workplaces, making the struggles they are facing present to the people they represent and so on.
|
# ? Aug 28, 2021 08:01 |
|
Something something the revolutionaries becomes the facto ruling class (see S in Sweden). Or why communist countries were known for their secret police. Since Marx had no idea on how to reach socialist utopia in practical terms, this is where the revolution ends. And since the left refuses to learn from history, they also don’t learn from past mistakes, so this won’t change.
|
# ? Aug 28, 2021 15:42 |
|
BonHair posted:Ask a teacher. Strikes within the system don't work when the employer side can just make a law to get their way. Teacher strikes are on a bit of second-wave in the US and are having a lot of success so that's not necessarily true. Last time swedish teachers striked was 30 years ago and they had a parliamentary consensus against them. Also all striking carries risk lol, it's the unwillingness to accept that risk that has turned swedish unions into a joke. If you're not willing and/or capable of striking, then you have no power but what law and contract provides. Unions did not become dominant institutions by being afraid of losing, but that sure as poo poo is spearheading their decline. Swedish unions problem have always been that they were built for a cold-war era that no longer exists. Change can only come from top-down and most of the top are neck-deep with the governments of our time.
|
# ? Aug 28, 2021 15:50 |
|
I was referring specifically to Danish teachers, who just got screwed over a few years back. In basically the same way as the nurses, except it was a lockout instead of a strike, come to think of it.
|
# ? Aug 28, 2021 16:53 |
|
To take risk you have to little to lose and much to gain. We are still a long way away from teachers in scandinavia being subjected to working conditions that are comparable to the USA. And while teachers dont get rich they aren`t really poor either in Scandinavia, but in many US states they are.
|
# ? Aug 28, 2021 17:45 |
|
Say what you will about the Scandinavian welfare state, but the base "bread and circus" works pretty well to keep people from rocking the boat. I don't know if it's good or bad that the liberals are increasingly not getting that.
|
# ? Aug 28, 2021 19:02 |
|
Hell at my place of work parts of management and admin have done more fore the line personnel the last few years than the local union reps could honestly claim. But we are a Unionen shop so it figures. Lol I even talked to a HR lady a while ago and she sounded mostly disappointed that the Unionen reps were such colossal pushovers. Sooo many things they should be pushing for change in but usually... nothing. e: I almost miss the SEKO folks at my old place. I mean they could be bitchy sometimes but at least you knew they would raise issues and fuss about important (and sometimes not so important) stuff when it mattered. Threadkiller Dog fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Aug 28, 2021 |
# ? Aug 28, 2021 19:06 |
|
Cardiac posted:Something something the revolutionaries becomes the facto ruling class (see S in Sweden). Unless you're asserting that the working class became the ruling class (in which case: lol), this seems like a pretty straightforward instance of divide and conquer by capital. The current Danish model is very clearly trying to get the nurses to fight the other worker groups over how the fixed pool of money should be divided, instead of fighting capital over the size of the pool. Communist countries are "known for" their secret police because that's a convenient concern troll for anticommunists, so it is brought up frequently. Most countries repress dissidents to some extent. Intelligence services regularly monitor or infiltrate dissident organizations, e.g. during COINTELPRO. The monitoring of web traffic in/through DK by FE (and the NSA by extension) is really just an evolution of the Stasi letter-resealing machine. Some secret police forces are more repressive than others in terms of disallowing dissent, but even then I don't think communist countries are necessarily any more brutal than capitalist societies. I have not heard of Vietnam's secret police doing lots of crimes against humanity. Many dictatorial non-communist regimes (Pinochet or the House of Saud for example) have murderous secret police forces. The US is also "known for" extensive surveillance and poor treatment of dissidents, and they don't seem very communist to me.
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 10:19 |
|
Also most "communist countries" are just some flavour of capitalist or oligarchic systems with a red flag slapped on top. Especially China and the Soviet Union.
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 12:07 |
|
I also think that the blame for things going to poo poo can be put directly on ‘leftists not learning from past mistakes’. In particular, I don’t understand why they won’t criticize muslims and other immigrants, when they are clearly the main problem in society today. So afraid to discuss the real issues. If only those stupid leftists would learn from history.
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 12:52 |
Union busting have actually been in the norwegian media lately: https://e24.no/naeringsliv/i/47drXg/fagorganiserte-elkjoep-ansatte-faar-ikke-maanedsbonus
|
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 18:43 |
|
BonHair posted:Also most "communist countries" are just some flavour of capitalist or oligarchic systems with a red flag slapped on top. Especially China and the Soviet Union. Well here's the rub, no? While Marx was spot on iñ identifying wealth accumulation and its effect of top class working to suppress those beneath them his hypothesis of what must follow of reasonable division of labour and resources seems a leap of faith, the material you work with is humans after all. Even a most perfect revolution wears out its momentum in a few generations. Soviet unions threat was a good bargaining piece for socdem parties and unions in western europe and scandinavia to wring concessions from elites and with its demise state and capital have tightened screws on labour for 30 years and likely will grow bolder still. Meanwhile lefts constitutioncy has had a little taste of wealth and wants nothing to do with new lumpenproles. Solidarity comes from community and shared life and experiences, not from statements.
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 19:19 |
|
I mean, agreed, but solidarity also comes from being radicalised at university. As much as it's a it's a lovely right wing conspiracy, it's kinda true that when you really begin thinking about the concept of justice and empiricism and begin applying that to society, you end up either religious (in theory) or either a communist or a fascist.
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 20:24 |
|
Once you realise that we live in a society, you can become an angel or a demon........
Beeswax fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Aug 29, 2021 |
# ? Aug 29, 2021 21:16 |
|
To qualify and then to graduate you've already passed some tight minnowings, then you need some strenght of character to put your skin truly into the fight and after that there is but the small task of convincing your peers to do likewise. Top-down solidarity might have all the best intentions but without some skin in the game it ends as what we would have liked vs. what pays quess what usually wins in this equation(sources: the aforementioned 30 years prior; my rear end).Embrace your technocratic management-status and face to bloodshed. Just sunday-drunk shitposting here, didn't mean anything personal. And looking at future theres no lack of existential hazards rushing at us so maybe people will yet find a cause to rally around.
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 21:38 |
|
Cardiac posted:Something something the revolutionaries becomes the facto ruling class (see S in Sweden). this is an incredibly stupid post
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 23:14 |
|
germlin posted:And looking at future theres no lack of existential hazards rushing at us so maybe people will yet find a cause to rally around. It's mainly gonna be Ultrafascism.
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 23:27 |
|
germlin posted:Well here's the rub, no? While Marx was spot on iñ identifying wealth accumulation and its effect of top class working to suppress those beneath them his hypothesis of what must follow of reasonable division of labour and resources seems a leap of faith, the material you work with is humans after all. Even a most perfect revolution wears out its momentum in a few generations. this is also a very vulgar reading of marx the point that marx makes is that the self-interest of the proletarian in the long term is no longer being a proletarian. since the proletariat is both a) indispensible in a modern, industrialised economy (this remains true), b) tends to suffer from low social mobility and c)is naturally organised collectively (both b and c are less true these days, depending on where one lives). this, as well as the structure of capitalism being such that it will necessarily tend to immiserate and proletarianise the majority of people, will eventually lead to proletarians organising and seizing power for themselves. marx anticipated this as a series of national revolutionary movements following one of the periodic crises of overproduction which were inherent to the capitalism of his day, but which are less obviously prevalent nowadays with the rise of modern finance. instead, we have periodic financial crises which are similar in some ways and different in others and which interacts with overproduction in some more or less complicated ways. the big problem with marx's original analysis as applied to a contemporary framework is that he takes a rather narrow geographical view of things and does not anticipate how mobile and global capitalist economies could realistically get. to old-style marxism gets added theories of globalisation and imperialism, which goes some way to rectify those losses, but those theories are more helpful descriptively than politically for us in the imperial core - i tend to think of scandinavian social democracies being takes on the old stalinist adage of socialism in one country: we successfully abolished our national proletariats, but in such a way as to leave the basic political economy in place - so there's a gradual proletarisation of various other professions, a strong pressure to recoup "wasted" surplus value from private supply of public goods, we have special low-wage worker castes from other nationalities etc. etc. scandinavia is still going to be relatively stable for a pretty long time, though. there's no revolutionary situation on the horizon in these parts, and realistically there hasn't been since the war
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 23:31 |
|
it also bears noting that marx is able to identify an actual interest in society which he can imbue as a progressive actor, so basically you want your party to embody the interest of this group of actual people and you'll do well. this strategy did indeed pay dividends in scandinavia, as parties based off a strong workers' movement built a set of societies based on the idea of proletarian self-interest, often by people who had studied their marx very intently indeed - at least in the norwegian case, i'll admit to knowing rather less about the reading habits of tage erlander or thorvald stauning
|
# ? Aug 29, 2021 23:38 |
|
MiddleOne posted:If you're not willing and/or capable of striking, then you have no power but what law and contract provides. Unions did not become dominant institutions by being afraid of losing, but that sure as poo poo is spearheading their decline.
|
# ? Aug 31, 2021 12:44 |
|
Stasi and Säpo, two organizations absolutely comparable when it comes to oppression and terror.
|
# ? Aug 31, 2021 20:20 |
|
Mr. Sunshine posted:Stasi and Säpo, two organizations absolutely comparable when it comes to oppression and terror. Please reread the post. That was not what I was saying. I was saying that secret police/domestic intelligence services exist in most countries in some form, but the level of repression is very variable. Not all communist countries have Stasi-style secret police, and several non-communist countries have that type of organization, so Cardiac going "Silly lefties, commies = Stasi, amirite guys" is a Bad Post.
|
# ? Aug 31, 2021 21:43 |
|
Esran posted:Please reread the post. That was not what I was saying. Trying to hand wave away the fact that a defining feature of all leninist states have been a very powerful secret police used to repress any political or social dissent is a really bad look, especially coupled with the weak "Oh, everyone's doing it" as if the activities of the Stasi or KGB were in any way comparable to what was going on in, say, Scandinavia at the time.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2021 08:22 |
|
I guess I'm not putting what I'm trying to say across correctly then, if that's what you got out of it. The Stasi are not comparable to Scandinavian secret police. I'm not saying they are. Here are the points I was trying to make, in list form: 1. A secret police function exists in liberal democracies, which are not styled after the Stasi (abductions or torture are not used), but which do perform mass surveillance and may perform political repression against groups that threaten the current social order. 2. Many non-communist countries have very repressive secret police forces, so this type of organization is not unique to communist countries. 3. Some liberal democracies have secret police that are very repressive against certain political groups (e.g. COINTELPRO, War on Terror), so political repression by secret police is not something that does not happen in liberal democracies. 4. Not all communist countries have Stasi-style secret police. As far as I know, Vietnam has never had secret police in the Stasi vein.
|
# ? Sep 1, 2021 11:00 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 10:31 |
|
Cardiac posted:Something something the revolutionaries becomes the facto ruling class (see S in Sweden). The Social Democrats (S) have now become even more right wing by adopting some of the fascist and xenophobic positions of the Swedish Democrats (SD). In the early 1930's Social democrats were called social fascists by communists because of their cooperation with the capitalists and their opposition to a proletarian revolution. Cardiac posted:Or why communist countries were known for their secret police. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IB_affair quote:The IB affair (Swedish: IB-affären) was the exposure of the operations of the IB secret Swedish intelligence agency within the Swedish Armed Forces. The two main purposes of the agency were to handle liaison with foreign intelligence agencies and to gather information about communists and other individuals who were perceived to be a threat to the nation. Some of the stuff that the CIA has done summed up in 2 minutes: https://twitter.com/marina0swald/status/1415762251710144519 The Swedish former Prime Minister, Olof Palme was assassinated and some people have alleged that the killers were foreign intelligence services. I would argue that if the Swedish Social Democrats (S) had been a more radical left wing party or if the more radical Left Party (V) was more successful Sweden would have experienced something similar to the Years of Lead in Italy. The communist party in Italy was the largest in the West (34.4% of the vote in 1976) at the time while the communist party in Sweden (4.8% of the vote in 1976) was not a serious threat to the ruling class. Cardiac posted:And since the left refuses to learn from history, they also don’t learn from past mistakes, so this won’t change. quote:The theory of the productive forces, sometimes referred to as productive force determinism, is a widely disseminated variation of historical materialism and Marxism that places primary emphasis on technical advances as the basis for advances and changes in the social structure and culture of a given civilization. Karl Marx posted:[I]t is only possible to achieve real liberation in the real world [...] by employing real means[.] [S]lavery cannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannot be abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated as long as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and quantity. "Liberation" is a historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historical conditions, the development of industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions of intercourse [Verkehr]. Premier Lenin wrote New Economic Policy in 1921. The New Economic Policy was a mixed economy which was ended in 1928 by Stalin. Premier Vladimir Lenin posted:Get down to business, all of you! You will have capitalists beside you, including foreign capitalists, concessionaires and leaseholders. They will squeeze profits out of you amounting to hundreds per cent; they will enrich themselves, operating alongside of you. Let them. Meanwhile you will learn from them the business of running the economy, and only when you do that will you be able to build up a communist republic. Since we must necessarily learn quickly, any slackness in this respect is a serious crime. And we must undergo this training, this severe, stern and sometimes even cruel training, because we have no other way out. Deng Xiaoping Thought or Dengism is an adaption to the current socio-economic conditions. It moved away from a command economy to a mixed economy. President Deng Xiaoping posted:We did a great deal of work between 1949, when the People’s Republic of China was founded, and 1976, when Chairman Mao Zedong passed away. We were particularly successful during the period of transition from new-democratic revolution to socialist revolution, in which we carried out agrarian reform and then, in the period of the First Five-Year Plan [1953-1957], engaged in large-scale industrialization and completed the socialist transformation of agriculture, handicrafts and capitalist industry and commerce. President Xi Jinping are now introducing new reforms. quote:https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Comment/Xi-Jinping-points-China-to-Communist-Revolution-2.0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcO6fZIKQ1k Jon Pod Van Damm fucked around with this message at 13:35 on Sep 1, 2021 |
# ? Sep 1, 2021 13:09 |