China does have Capitalism, yes, but you do need to back up the claim that the bourgeoisie control the State, and not the other way around.
China is not pure luxury space gay communism, nobody claims it is.
Do you believe China can better serve the interests of the international proletariat by decoupling from the global economy like the USSR did and risk painting an even larger target on its back, risking the same fate as the USSR, or do you believe China’s international focus requires engaging in Capitalism for the time being, so as to become an influential power?
The reason why the Soviet Union was corrupt was that it became a revisionist country after Stalin’s death. China should continue to follow Mao Zedong’s line, rather than exchanging the blood and sweat of the proletariat for so-called economic development. Because even if it continues to follow the line of the Mao era, it can still have tremendous development, and it does not rely on the exploitation of the proletariat. You have to know that China developed nuclear bombs, missiles and satellites during the Mao era. In 30 years, it developed from a backward agricultural country into an industrial country on par with the United States.
You’re falling for the trap of Ultraleftism, and aren’t looking at China from a Materialist perspective.
Why did the USSR become revisionist after Stalin’s death? Do you believe in Great Man Theory, or do you look at Material Conditions, Contradictions, and move from there?
China did rapidly develop under Mao. Development is not the primary reason for Dengist reform. The PRC decided not to follow in the footsteps of the USSR and repeat their mistakes, instead choosing to become a necessary backbone of the international economy, seeking to create a multipolar world by unseating US Hedgemony. You may be intetested in reading The Long Game and its Contradictions.
Because Stalin did not realize that after the establishment of the socialist country, there would still be two class conflicts. He realized it in his later years, but unfortunately the bourgeois forces within the party were already very strong. What you call “following the footsteps of the Soviet Union” is revisionism, and Deng Xiaoping also followed revisionism. Do you think that the means of production in China are now publicly owned?
Great Man Theory. You believe Stalin could have individually saved Socialism, rather than admitting flaws in the State itself arose from Material Conditions and contradictions unresolved.
Ultraleftism, and a rejection of Historical and Dialectical Materialism. You analyze China as a snapshot, a static, unshifting system, and not as a state that changes each and every day.
I don’t think Stalin could save the Soviet Union, because Stalin’s death was largely due to the assassination of capitalist elements. His fundamental contradiction was between the capitalist group and the socialist collective. Stalin’s death was just a sign, just like in China, Lin Biao’s death represented that the rebels were gradually losing to the capitalist roaders, and Mao Zedong’s death was a sign that China had entered revisionism.
Great Man Theory places the course of history on the shoulders of influential figures, rather than the Material Conditions at hand.
We are all in favor of idealistic conditions, but Idealism is not the same as that. Idealism is, to put it simply, putting vibes and ideas over the practical reality of situations.
China does have Capitalism, yes, but you do need to back up the claim that the bourgeoisie control the State, and not the other way around.
China is not pure luxury space gay communism, nobody claims it is.
Do you believe China can better serve the interests of the international proletariat by decoupling from the global economy like the USSR did and risk painting an even larger target on its back, risking the same fate as the USSR, or do you believe China’s international focus requires engaging in Capitalism for the time being, so as to become an influential power?
The reason why the Soviet Union was corrupt was that it became a revisionist country after Stalin’s death. China should continue to follow Mao Zedong’s line, rather than exchanging the blood and sweat of the proletariat for so-called economic development. Because even if it continues to follow the line of the Mao era, it can still have tremendous development, and it does not rely on the exploitation of the proletariat. You have to know that China developed nuclear bombs, missiles and satellites during the Mao era. In 30 years, it developed from a backward agricultural country into an industrial country on par with the United States.
You’re falling for the trap of Ultraleftism, and aren’t looking at China from a Materialist perspective.
Why did the USSR become revisionist after Stalin’s death? Do you believe in Great Man Theory, or do you look at Material Conditions, Contradictions, and move from there?
China did rapidly develop under Mao. Development is not the primary reason for Dengist reform. The PRC decided not to follow in the footsteps of the USSR and repeat their mistakes, instead choosing to become a necessary backbone of the international economy, seeking to create a multipolar world by unseating US Hedgemony. You may be intetested in reading The Long Game and its Contradictions.
Because Stalin did not realize that after the establishment of the socialist country, there would still be two class conflicts. He realized it in his later years, but unfortunately the bourgeois forces within the party were already very strong. What you call “following the footsteps of the Soviet Union” is revisionism, and Deng Xiaoping also followed revisionism. Do you think that the means of production in China are now publicly owned?
So we have:
Great Man Theory. You believe Stalin could have individually saved Socialism, rather than admitting flaws in the State itself arose from Material Conditions and contradictions unresolved.
Ultraleftism, and a rejection of Historical and Dialectical Materialism. You analyze China as a snapshot, a static, unshifting system, and not as a state that changes each and every day.
Read the article I linked for you.
I don’t think Stalin could save the Soviet Union, because Stalin’s death was largely due to the assassination of capitalist elements. His fundamental contradiction was between the capitalist group and the socialist collective. Stalin’s death was just a sign, just like in China, Lin Biao’s death represented that the rebels were gradually losing to the capitalist roaders, and Mao Zedong’s death was a sign that China had entered revisionism.
So you’re doubling down on Great Man Theory and are an Idealist, rather than a Materialist, got it.
Please tell me your opinion instead of making baseless sarcasm. We are all for an ideal, right?
It’s not baseless sarcasm.
Great Man Theory places the course of history on the shoulders of influential figures, rather than the Material Conditions at hand.
We are all in favor of idealistic conditions, but Idealism is not the same as that. Idealism is, to put it simply, putting vibes and ideas over the practical reality of situations.