Chinese ‘Marxism’: Not Even Trying
- This topic has 5 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I see Xi intends to end poverty in Chinahttps://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/world/asia/xi-jinping-poverty-china.html
Following is a discussion on the page titled: Chinese ‘Marxism’: Not Even Trying.
Below is the discussion so far. Feel free to add your own comments!Right wing and left wing politicians they always talk aboiut eliminating poverty. In reality, China is getting ready for world conquering and to take the place of the US in the world capitalsit market, the birth of Chinese imperialism. Probably we can apply the same expression of Mao Tse Tung who said that when the lion come late to dinner it wants to eat faster than all the others, and it wants to eat everything
Speaking of China, see Michael Roberts' argument that China is not capitalist , followed by some 60 comments, including one by the SPGB's own Red Deathy ( = YMS?). I guess Roberts is some kind of Trot, on this subject anyway, according to which, China's is a 'planned economy'; the only thing missing is democracy.It won't be acceptable to readers of this forum, but there is also a nuanced comment from a left-communist (or left-leninist?) which begins:We have two distinct, but intertwined threads to deal with here. First, we have Michael’s argument that China is not, or not yet, capitalist, or fully capitalist, or dominated by capitalism because of the weight, specific and general, of the state property. The second thread is the long debated designation of “state capitalism” as a proper characterization of — then the former Soviet Union and now, China.The url: https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2017/10/25/xi-takes-full-control-of-chinas-future
I find such distinctions based upon the view of a homogeneous capitalist system, that it cannot be different in time and places but fundamentally the same.Does WW2 capitalism in America with a government-directed economy deserve to be described as a different system?China was never identical in social evolution to Russia even if there were similarities, just as the Russian Revolution cannot be described as the mirror of the French Revolution despite being alike in my regards.We make generalisations of the realities and leave the specifics to the academics to squabble over in their PhDs
A Stalinist known as Enver Hoxha said that Maoism or the so-called Mao Tse Tung thought was a modern version of Confucianism. Maoism became so reactionary that they made an alliance with the government of Augusto Pinochet in Chile based on the so-called Three World Theory. The Maoists ( followers of the gangs of four, or gangs of five ) have rejected the idea that Mao created that theory, but even that he did not create it his ideas served as a basis for its creation. Mao Tse Tung thought was very popular during the 60 and the organizations that adopted it only experienced defeats and killing of their own members. It was a total failure
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.