Bijou Drains
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It is interesting that you have still not answered the question about the “reintroduction” of capitalism (a system of exploitation of man by man), despite the Chinese “communist” Party having claimed to have “superseded the system of exploitation of man by man”
Your silence on this issue speaks volumes
TS, I have spent many years as a Social Worker working alongside and supporting people with intellectual disabilities, some of whom were the kindest, most insightful and thoughtful people I have met.
I find it no insult to be associated with those people.
As someone who purports to be a Socialist, you should hang your head in shame for using oppressive and insulting language about fellow workers who have become one of capitalisms most oppressed groups (operation T4, long term incarceration, institutionalisation, forced sterilation, murder, stigma, bullying, harrasment and your particular favourite, name calling and insult).
I’d far rather be associated with those kind, thoughtful, insightful people like that, than be associated with someone like you, who clearly takes the side of the oppressor and against the oppressed.
I suppose, given your posting and your attitude towards oppressed people, it should not be surprising that you take the part of the Chinese “communist” capitalists against the struggles of workers against the growing Chinese capitalist class. You are clearly no part of the working class struggle.
Re The nature of an Underdeveloped Socialist Society, as referenced by the Chinese Communist Party, as I have already quoted, from
Laws of the People’s Republic of China
Article 6
“The basis of the socialist economic system of the people’s Republic of China is socialist public ownership of the means of production, namely, ownership by the whole people and collective ownership by the working people. The system of socialist public ownership supersedes the system of exploitation of man by man; it applies the principle of ‘from each according to his ability, to each according to his work’.”
If, as the Law of the People’s Republic of China states, that this principle “supersedes” the system of exploitation of man by man, why is it then that it was necessary to “allow capitalism to operate under tight constraints in order to build up the productive forces required to implement socialism.”. Either is superseded exploitation or it did not.
The dictators of your favoured system have claimed that China exists as an underdeveloped Socialist Society. (Their claim has been proven from their own publicity and has been shown beyond doubt on this thread).
They have claimed that it is a system based on “from each according to their ability to each according to their work”.
Yet as you have conceded Chinese society has all the hallmarks of capitalist society (billionaires, millionaires, surplus value, capital accumulation, rent, interest and profit).
As you have also acknowledged this is contradictory. You have also acknowledged that China has a mixed economy.
The only conclusions that can be logically drawn from this is that either:
1 China (which you characterise as a mixed economy) has retreated away from being an underdeveloped Socialist society (Mao’s theory stated that an underdeveloped Socialist economy is a one which has progressed beyond a capitalist or mixed economy)
or
2 China has never been a Socialist society of any type (in fact there is only one basis to socialism which is common ownership of the means of production)
Which option do you go for TS? You need to answer the question.
Also:
Laws of the People’s Republic of ChinaArticle 6
“The basis of the socialist economic system of the people’s Republic of China is socialist public ownership of the means of production, namely, ownership by the whole people and collective ownership by the working people. The system of socialist public ownership supersedes the system of exploitation of man by man; it applies the principle of ‘from each according to his ability, to each according to his work’.”
“This principle of from each according to their ability, to each according to their work is still put forward by the Chinese “communist” Party as the basis of the current economic system within China.”
Provide evidence for this claim.
https://archive.org/details/ChinasSocialistEconomy1986/page/n3/mode/2up
So TS, you acknowledge that there is economic exploitation of workers within the Chinese economy and that the Chinese billionaires and millionaires acrue their capital through the use of accumulation of surplus value.
In orthodox Marxist terms so far so good.
You have also stated that “China’s is a mixed economy. They are in a transition period now.” (although the concept of a “mixed economy” is not one that would fit in with any published work of Karl Marx)
The “communist” party of China has historically stated that China was in a stage of “underdeveloped Socialism” a theoretical position put forward by Xue Maqiao in 1981, based on the Stalin’s Economic Problems in the USSR (1952) (Which I think it is fair to assume that you support fully)
In Xue’s work (currently regularly referenced and acknowledged by the Chinese “communist” Party as a leading work) he stated that there were principles that guided the socialist transition, the key one being the principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his work“. This principle of from each according to their ability, to each according to their work is still put forward by the Chinese “communist” Party as the basis of the current economic system within China. However you have already agreed that this is not the case and that captial accumulation, surplus value and expoitation of labour is a key part of the Chinese economy. (unless you go along with the propagandists of capitalism who put forward the idea that the capitalists got their wealth “through their own hard work”?)
So who’s wrong, you with your acknowledgement of capital accumulation, surplus value and the exploitation of labour within the Chinese economy, or the Chinese “communist” Party’s statement that China is an underdeveloped socialist society which is based on the principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his work. The two things cannot both be correct.
To be honest, TS, I am a bit surprised that you are even able to post on this website, after all you have to complete a simple mathmatical problem in order to log in. From the evidence of your postings, you seem to struggle when it comes to adding 2 + 2 with regard to the so called communist party of China.
Given your failure to answer much more complex questions, a fairly simple question for you then.
As Alan has pointed out the top 30 Chinese Billionaires have accumulated $866.1 Billion. How have this top 30 capitalists accumulated that wealth, if not by exploiting the labour power of the employees that have worked for them?
An additional question to follow up is it possible for these exploitative individuals to achieve that wealth without out the active involvement of the Chinese State and by implication the Chinese “communist” Party.
If, as is clearly the case, these billionaires are able to accumulate their capital only through the exploitation of these workers and the Chinese “communist” Party is complicit with this expoitation, how can you, as self proclaimed Marxist support this historical and ongoing exploitation of these members of the working class?
Don’t worry TS, it’s all just anti Soviet propaganda. Uncle Joe was only interested in the proletariat. No surplus value there, no Nazi collaboration, it’s all “fake news” (copywrite Donald Trump)
TS suggests “There was no “alliance” between the Soviet Union and Germany only a non-aggression pact. Almost every country in Europe had a non-aggression pact with Germany including France and Britain (The Munich Agreement) and Poland (the German-Polish Non-Aggression Pact)“.
However there is no mention of:
German–Soviet Commercial Agreement, signed on August 19, 1939 to deliver commodities (oil, raw materials and grain) to the value of 420 to 430 million Reichsmarks.
This involved the delivery to the Nazis by the USSR of the following:1939 1940 1941
(1st 6 months) Soviet
figures
(September 1939 – 1941)Oil Products 5.1 617.0 254.2 941.7
Grains 0.2 820.8 547.1 1611.1
Manganese ore 6.2 64.8 75.2 165.2
Phosphates 32.3 131.5 56.3 202.2
oils & fats 4.4 11.0 8.9 NA
Chromium 0.0 26.3 0.0 23.4
Copper 0..0 7.1 7.2 NA
Nickel 0.0 1.5 0.7 NA
Legumes 10.9 47.2 34.8 NA
Tin 0.0 0.8 0.0 NA
Platinum 0.0 1.5 1.3 NA
Chemicals:
Finished 0.9 2.9 0.2 NA
Chemicals:
Unfinished 0.9 2.6 1.0 NA
Raw Textiles 9.0 99.1 41.1 171.4
Wood Products 171.9 846.7 393.7 1227.6
Oil Cake 0.0 29.0 8.6 41.8
*thousands of tonsMaterials Germany imported from other countries using the Soviet Trans-Siberian Railway and from Afghanistan and Iran via the Soviet Union as an intermediary, included
1939 1940 1941
(1st 5 mos.)
Rubber NA 4.5 14.3
Copper NA 2.0 2.8
Soybeans NA 58.5 109.4
Whale &
Fish oil NA 56.7 46.2
Nuts NA 9.3 12.1
Tinned
Food NA 5.0 3.8
Textiles 0.0 19.0 17.0
Legumes 0 7.0 2.0
Dried
fruit 8.0 42.0 8.0
*thousands of tonsEricson, Edward E. (1999), Feeding the German Eagle: Soviet Economic Aid to Nazi Germany, 1933–1941, Greenwood Publishing Group, ISBN 0-275-96337-3
It is also well established that Stailn had given Molotov the green light to being negotiations to start full negotiations for the USSR to become the fourth member of the Axis and Molotov and Ribbentrop and Hitler took part in initial discussions between both sides took place on 12-14th November 1940
Nekrich, Aleksandr Moiseevich; Ulam, Adam Bruno; Freeze, Gregory L. (1997), Pariahs, Partners, Predators: German–Soviet Relations, 1922–1941, Columbia University Press, ISBN 0-231-10676-9
TS “I dispute your contention that China is a capitalist country. It is not. It has a mixed economy but the capitalist class does not pull the strings there”
The top 30 Chinese billionaires have an accumulated wealth of 860 billion dollars. In what world does that $860 billion not pull strings!
TS claims to be a Marxist. Perhaps he can explain how that $860 billion was accumulated other by the extraction of surplus value from the working classes of China and other parts of the world. The very system of economic class rule the so called communist party of China are aiding and abetting in every possible way.
TS “ A conspiracist? Really? What conspiracy are you claiming I adhere to?”
So far I’ve noted:
Holocaust denial
Denial of the Katyn Forest massacre
Denial of the Stalinist show trials
Denial of the Ukrainian famine
Denial of the massacre resulting from the Cuktural Revolution……
Etc. Etc.AJ asked – “Are the changes to Hong Kong’s electoral law, fair to the opposition?”
TS replies “Not if the opposition are separatist traitors no”
Our stooge of the Chinese “communist” party condemns himself with his own words. Democracy, according to him, is only available to those who agree with him!
He might not be the only true Scotsman, but he’s definitely the only person that still believes that China is a Socialist society.
