|
I guess wages aren't exploitative either, because you volunteer to sell your labor for it. You're so drat revisionist you've become reactionary lmao. It's almost as if every country thrives on exploitation and labels mean nothing 
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 05:01 |
|
|
wow, goo point
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:19
|
|
|
Pener and Guyovich are masters of mystification and making enigmatic claims about what it means to be communist when the occam's razor of workers' relationships to the means of production are unequivocally not communist I'll keep repeating it because it's all that really needs to be said here
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:sure, I don't disagree- but how does this square with ML theory then? Lenin said imperialism was the last stage of capitalism, is it also the last stage of whatever China is doing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:Conservatism: I'm all of these simultaneously
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
if you're no friend of labor, then you're no friend of mine
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
p sure you don't have friends either way
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:I'm all of these simultaneously [Meredith Brooks voice] I'm a lib, I'm a tankie
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
Leftcom is probably "China was never communist" but otherwise it's perfect. A lot of Maoists would probably say the thing about transitioning to capitalism
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:Pener and Guyovich are masters of mystification and making enigmatic claims about what it means to be communist when the occam's razor of workers' relationships to the means of production are unequivocally not communist
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgkWnODtS6g&t=106s
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
whether or not China is socialist is a political correctness argument that doesn’t really mean anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:whether or not China is socialist is a political correctness argument that doesn’t really mean anything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:whether or not China is socialist is a political correctness argument that doesn’t really mean anything. Well, aside from being an ideological one. around which the past, present and future of socialism and her legacy revolves around. for certain people anyway
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:explain how how it doesn’t mean anything? it’s not going to make China any more or less socialist arguing over whether or not a country with SEZs is a capitalist or socialist country. it’s more accurate to say that China is a mixed economy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
it does however make me continue to wonder what exactly have been the contributions of the Chinese Communist Party for the past century to the wellbeing of the chinese working classes
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:explain how "I do not care if a cat is black or white so long as it catches mice"
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:whether or not China is socialist is a political correctness argument that doesn’t really mean anything. I guess your walls of text about what it means to "resist imperialism" don't either then
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:how it doesn’t mean anything? it’s not going to make China any more or less socialist arguing over whether or not a country with SEZs is a capitalist or socialist country. it’s more accurate to say that China is a mixed economy. Right, like all mixed economies. Thus any kind of purported uniqueness doctrine from both Chinese apologists and scaremongers falls apart But that doesn't explain the constant refrain about how ostensibly socialist regimes deserve our "critical support" from Leninist parties
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:But that doesn't explain the constant refrain about how ostensibly socialist regimes deserve our "critical support" from Leninist parties because states with communist party rule are some of the only left wing governments left in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
if the results are the same, whoop de loving doo
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:Conservatism: @RevisionismWatchDog
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
lollontee posted:if the results are the same, whoop de loving doo the results are demonstrably different lmao
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:sure, I don't disagree- but how does this square with ML theory then? Lenin said imperialism was the last stage of capitalism, is it also the last stage of whatever China is doing? is this question dumb, or hard to answer or what am i missing
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:the results are demonstrably different lmao What I'm getting from this is an extremely roundabout way of saying "socialism in one country can't happen in an encroaching global capitalist system, therefore they're forced to be social democracies while claiming to be socialist, but they have to be ruled by actual communists instead of social democrats because socdems make concessions to capital more often." Is that right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 21:17
|
|
|
Metal Cat posted:What I'm getting from this is an extremely roundabout way of saying "socialism in one country can't happen in an encroaching global capitalist system, therefore they're forced to be social democracies while claiming to be socialist, but they have to be ruled by actual communists instead of social democrats because socdems make concessions to capital more often." Is that right? absolutely. social democrats don’t even have the choice but to make so many concessions to capital, because they operate in a bourgeois democratic framework.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:Conservatism: Libertarian: China has an age of consent and that's why it's bad
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
There isn't much difference between Western social democracy and China, and what there is mostly amounts to special pleading. The share of public ownership in China is roughly the same as the Nordics, and their share of public sector employment is actually less. They also get away with poo poo that no European social democracy ever could in the eyes of leftists. If Norway had the LGBT policy, nationalism and treatment of national minorities we saw in China they'd immediately (and rightly) be labeled as fascists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
its like how after ww2 most of the german command got sent to the hague but for the japanese it was like 'eh, what can you do lol'
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:the results are demonstrably different lmao right, so what part of that difference can the CCP lay claim to?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:If Norway had the LGBT policy, nationalism and treatment of national minorities we saw in China they'd immediately (and rightly) be labeled as fascists. this is true btw
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
I still haven't seen pener or guyovich even acknowledge China's horrible Uyghur concentration camp policy. They only step in when they feel like it's been blown out of proportion "Critical defense" of "socialist" regimes is some obsequious bootlicking poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:I still haven't seen pener or guyovich even acknowledge China's horrible Uyghur concentration camp policy. They only step in when they feel like it's been blown out of proportion They're facilities made to extract surplus value in order to maximize the expansion of productivity and the growth of capital.  capitalism red so what
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
if China had a blue flag and called itself capitalist everyone in this thread would hate it
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:30
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:There isn't much difference between Western social democracy and China, and what there is mostly amounts to special pleading. The share of public ownership in China is roughly the same as the Nordics, and their share of public sector employment is actually less. They also get away with poo poo that no European social democracy ever could in the eyes of leftists. If Norway had the LGBT policy, nationalism and treatment of national minorities we saw in China they'd immediately (and rightly) be labeled as fascists. So China is really fascist now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:So China is really fascist now. They're certainly a Third Position. They're actually the model for Nick Land/Mencius Moldbug and their neoreactionaries.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:They're certainly a Third Position. They're actually the model for Nick Land/Mencius Moldbug and their neoreactionaries. Is the dark enlightenment why you think voluntary transactions can’t be exploitative anymore?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
It must be pretty easy to be critical of both capitalism and communism, like some "both types are bad" south park liberal, but the fact is, these nay-sayers have no idea what they are in favour of. Admitting that communist states have made missteps is not revisionist, but it is revisionist to deny their accomplishments in promoting human development. You can talk all you want about the Asian tigers, but they were developed with foreign currencies as investment, and IMF involvement always comes with punching down in labour laws and conditions. Russia and China are both examples of countries going from whipping boys of foreign powers to the ones holding the whip. Cuba, especially, is a great example of a poor colonial state that successfully leveraged its limited resources for the benefit of mankind. By effectively managing resources, they've managed to massively increase both literacy and health in their own and other poorer countries, being recognised for that by the U.N. What's more, the effect they had in Africa was massively important in ending apartheid, with Nelson Mandela and others praising them as the country that did the most to end apartheid outside of Africa. They sent huge numbers (comparative to population) to fight against South Africa in Angola, also sending doctors and teachers to develop the areas. They (with material assistance from the Soviet Union, who provided airlift resources and technical know-how) build a hydroelectric generating plant in Angola, and upon its completion, gifted it to the Angolan people. If the communists are forced to make concessions towards capital, it is a reflection of the material conditions. Communists still need to eat and drink, our zeal merely keeps us warm. For the nay-sayers, can you elaborate on what your perfect end-game is, or even where we ought to be in a hundred years time? Communists at least have an end-goal in mind, you can make fun of their failures in accomplishing them, but at least they tried. Capitalism is purely get mine, gently caress you. There may have never been a totally successful communist state, but there is plenty that are successfully capitalist. Their failures are a feature.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 05:01 |
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Is the dark enlightenment why you think voluntary transactions can’t be exploitative anymore? I never said anything of the sort. I pointed out that the situations of colonial India and contemporary Chile aren't comparable because the former was brutally imposed by an occupying power and the latter is voluntary international trade.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 22:43
|
|