/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"I ain’t driving twenty minutes to riot"

Mode: Reply

Max message length: 8192


Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3


(used to delete files and postings)


Remember to follow the rules

/leftypol/ is a non-sectarian board for leftist discussion. Join the Matrix: https://matrix.to/#/+leftychat:matrix.org Visit the Booru: https://lefty.booru.org/

(23.67 KB 973x819 china.png)
(936.83 KB 2000x1334 1552407442809.jpg)
/prc/ - People's Republic of China general Comrade 08/05/2019 (Mon) 12:39:50 No. 8925
A general thread for all China related discussion
>>900872 >They have Pakistan and Russia. They also have several development project in Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia, Mongolia, Uzbekistan, etc. To say that China is surrounded by enemies would be a joke. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2mUa8VavDc&list=PLbnMTcZEga8RRyTMl4pIAXjQNqsV1xVPM
>>900876 Plus a lot of China's "enemies" end up collaborating with it and going along with its plans anyway. For instance, Vietnam and some other "hostile" Asian countries are cooperating on the Belt and Road initiative.
>>901001 The trade war literally revived good relations between China and Vietnam.
>>901001 Very true. The idea of surrounding China like this was always a bit of a US pipe dream - China might not be well liked, but if you have to live in their neighborhood you don't want to get on their bad side. No matter how powerful, the US is still always an ocean away.
>>898990 >This is why it's necessary to have the proletariat be the ones in charge, not some officials. Ultra abstraction. It's fun to fantasize about OGAS but really we don't have any other model for how to run a non-market economy than through specialized planners. Proletarians are not magical creatures that can intuit input-output tables across nationwide industry. And if you say, spontaneous coordination between the various worker collectives, well that is at best just a market with red paint, and at worst a return to the manor-system.
(2.55 MB 888888.mp4)
>>898935 Nearly nobody predicted even in the 1985 that the USSR would collapse any time soon (much less in 1979 as Deng entered office), so unless Deng was clairvoyant I don't believe it.
>>901214 Do not underestimate diamat Castro made some spookily prescient predictions in his time as did Marx and many other theorists
I would like to congratulate the bottled water tycoon Zhong Shanshan for becoming China's richest man with a net worth of 58.7 billion USD He is famous for founding the Nongfu Spring Co., selling water from wells in China to consumers all around Asia. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-23/jack-ma-no-longer-china-s-richest-as-lone-wolf-s-fortune-soars
>>901191 underrated
>>901191 Bunkerchan history
>>898990 I wanted to respond along the same lines as >>901185. I think you're really abstracting your concepts. First of all, I would challenge your seeming assertion that the CPC is not the manifestation of the proletariat. It is standard Marxist Leninist practice to trust a vanguard body of communists to put forth the will of the people. With the Maoist adoption of the mass line, I don't think one can really disregard that the CPC is a fairly orthodox Marxist party in charge of a dictatorship of the proletariat. But lets go ahead and talk about your ideas. >The consumer goods sector lagged largely because of poor planning and an overly-conservative bureaucracy. This is why it's necessary to have the proletariat be the ones in charge, not some officials. OGAS would have significantly alleviated the USSR's situation and allow it to live beyond 1991, into the time where capitalism is now breaking apart. But what does that mean, to have the proletariat be in charge? Up above you seemed to have alluded to the need for China to be more like the USSR but you also seem to say that the USSR wasn't a dictatorship of the proletariat (proles owning the MoP). So there seems to be something lost in your thought at least as you convey it. Secondly, lets go back to the "proletariat being in charge". If you mean that bodies of workers would vote on every single last thing, from voting whether Fred can take Marcia's shift on Friday to whether we should actually ship the shipment of nails that the factory across the country needs by Thursday... is this what you mean? Because delegation is something that is extremely useful to working as collectives, something that the bourg introduced as well. It is just not possible to have these things as well as the macro parts of the economy be in the bounds of voting at all levels. I think you also disregard the situation the USSR was in. Unlike China, they chose to dedicate a significant portion of their economy to the military. On the other hand, China chose to simple work with the West and kill two birds with one stone: 1) Obtain finance and capital and technology and catch up economically until they could 2) Acquire security through working with the West so they didn't have to basically be prepared to fight at all times. I weep for the Soviet Union, and I weep for the Soviet-Sino split. Stalin is a paradigm of socialism, and it is a damn shame they demonized him after he was gone. But I reject the notion that the Soviet Union only fell because of an overly conservative bureaucracy. Their foreign policy was to be the beacon of socialism the world over, and not only that but to attempt to compete with the USA who was one of the first industrialized countries and also one that wasn't completely savaged by the two world wars. How could you possibly compete militarily on the same footing as well as keep things running smoothly at home, especially when oil is such a big part of your economic basis? It was bound to collapse. China on the other hand developed to socialism the orthodox Marxist way and they went for economy first and are now both a massive consumer economy as well as a military superpower. There's just too much abstraction in your argument. You need a party, you need loyal party members directing the economy, and you need loyal party members to oversee capitalism which is basically a stick of TNT needed to be handled with Marxist sensibilities in order for it not to explode. China's proletariat is in charge of the economy.
>>901509 I was thinking more along the lines of the workers electing officials who would represent them in matters which needed to be voted on, and likewise those officials can be voted out if deemed unsuitable. This way, the proletariat can keep working while not having to vote so much. I'm not always the one replying here, but in my view the USSR did indeed require systemic change, so in a political sense China should not have copied over the USSR's model. Cybernetic planning would of course not solve the country's problems as it still exists in a world largely dominated by capitalism, however would have significantly helped in the usage and distribution of resources… among other things cybernetics is capable of. But again this idea failed to materialize because the bureaucrats thought it was too uncertain, plus they'd lose their jobs — but as for the former, they certainly could have started small and built up as it began to succeed. The United States is dependent on imperialism, and cannot live without it. If China had instead supported the USSR in spreading socialism, then the imperialist economy would falter and this would likely have culminated in the capitalist order collapsing. In America there was major unrest already, over things like the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights Movement, the Oil crisis in the 1970s… if America had lost more neocolonies, which would on the other hand be opposing it then instead, there is a very serious change the "mothership" of capitalism would fall, and even become a socialist force. China played too conservatively, assuming good intentions on the part of its leadership, and ironically this caused more damage than had it taken a more active role in the socialist movement.
>>901185 >Proletarians are not magical creatures that can intuit input-output tables across nationwide industry. you must be retarded if you think politburo apparatchiks bothered with input-output tables and shit. technical side of plan drafting was Gosplans responsibility politburo made decisions regarding some indicators, general investment policy i.e. military vs civilian spending etc and at the core of OGAS was a dialog model of sequential optimization, when you feed machine some data, machine makes first approximation, then you feed more data, it makes further approximation etc etc until you arrive at a relative optimum this was intended to primary resolve conflicts between industrial ministries plus you only need to draft general plan once in five years or something, I doubt you really need referendums for yearly plans, as they follow from a more general five-year plan
>>901685 >technical side of plan drafting was Gosplans responsibility I hate to have to break this to you but they are in fact bureaucrats. This is exactly what I mean, you need a specialized bureaucracy if you want to do economic planning. Determining the general direction of a five year plan is entirely trivial, it can be considered as just a black box - does not matter if it is set by gerontocrats or by some kind of referendum. If the thrust of an argument is that the planning did not work because it was too bureaucratic, then the problem is at the level of the planners that you are here absolving, not the policy setting.
>>901748 >I hate to have to break this to you but they are in fact bureaucrats. lol so are you paranoid that evil planners gonna get your toothbrush or something? that's why you have a separate judicial branch duh if planners fuck up and step outside their boundaries how?, you just put them on trial. planners are just cogs, they have no real power, all of the heavy lifting would be done by a machine anyway you might as well fear a solver in your microsoft excel
>>901789 Planners are treated like cogs far too often. Their knowledge and advice should be taken and used much more seriously.
(188.33 KB 992x1164 EikOdMXXgAAbO7n.jpeg)
Just found this gem on Twatter
>>901279 >>Selling a human right for profit. PRODUCTIVE FORCES
>>902359 >>902359 The mental gymnastics of defending China is ridiculous. >China converts to the capitalist mode of production <They had to do it to develop productive forces >China fails to provide its citizens with basic socdem necessities like healthcare and education <Those things don't build productive forces! >China invades a socialist country <They had to do it to look good for the west in order to develop productive forces >China claims almost all of the South China Sea even though it is only geographically close to a small part <It's not imperialism, it's uh… socialist naval development that's necessary to build productive forces >Multi-billionaire becomes the richest man in China by treating a human right like a commodity <So? It builds productive forces
(7.32 MB 530x299 sdfefwefwfWEFG.gif)
>>902394 You're literally the one coming in here getting sperged out. Above, there are people including myself throwing shade on the CPC for not providing universal healthcare programs (by the way, the average lifespan has increased past many of their peer countries that have universal care policies) and free college education. And again, we've talked about why invading Vietnam was necessary above and then you come in and add absolutely nothing to the conversation. And you're so off base about invading Vietnam its just fucking dishonest, lumping talking points you get from this board into some incoherent shitpost. And no, I don't deny that I hate the trappings that come with the state capitalism. I don't deny that its pretty shit that state capitalism allows for a guy like >>901279 can become rich off of bottled water. But you need to recognize that the Chinese citizen has benefits, and continues to believe that the CPC will provide even more improvements in their life. And as China grows in productive power and influence, things like the B&R initiative are going to be a net positive for places that sorely need development including central Asia and Africa. You gotta recognize that China is at least contributing to the collapse of the USA indirectly, the most evil government on this planet. And the most important question, what else is there??? The USSR failed, and their skipping capitalism caused them to fall. What else? Cuba, Vietnam, Laos? All doing things their way, but we're on a timer right now with climate change. So what else? Do you just come in here to sperg out or are you lamenting that millions of Chinese communists decided through democratic centralism and the mass line not to implement your flavor of socialism that many Chinese have benefited from?
(55.76 KB 992x1164 CHILDSACRAFICE.jpg)
>>902356 BASED
Here is an article about Jiang Shigong, sometimes referred to as the "Chinese Dugin". https://palladiummag.com/2020/02/05/jiang-shigongs-vision-of-a-new-chinese-world-order/
>>902359 While it's easy to polemicize like that, two considerations: 1.) I'd like to point out that we are talking bottled water here, not tap water. I think finding 30 brands of bottled water in the store is something I wouldn't really want under socialism. It's a huge waste, both of labor and plastic. 2.) Like it or not, production of clean water still requires labor, in your perfect socialist society it wouldn't be completely unthinkable that someone would have to use their labor voucher on that. And yes, of course I want water to be free, healthcare to be free and education to be free. I'm merely pointing out that all those things require labor, and if you read Marx you'll actually be shocked what he prescribes, for example, he wants students in schools to produce commodities to be sold in the market to refinance the school. It's one of those speeches of Marx which are rightfully regarded as outdated - but I don't see the moral outrage there, so when China says "we simply don't have the healthcare capacities yet to provide free healthcare for everyone of our 1.3 billion citizens but by 2021 we probably will" everybody freaks the fuck out like "THEY'RE NOT EVEN SOCDEM"
>>901789 Quite the opposite I think a well functioning bureaucracy is a sublime thing and I reject the fethishisation of proletarian agency as a magical fix for any economic problem in the USSR. The problem was not that the planning was done by bureaucrats, but that the task set for them with the means at their disposal was probably impossible at the time. Maybe OGAS, cybernetics and Cockshot Though would have/will solve the planning issue in the future, but this remains to be proven. To summarize the thrust of the argument: all hitherto planned economies could only be planned by specialized bureaucratic services, and even then planning an entire economy was in retrospect not yet efficiently possible, hence I find it hard to fault the CPC for making at least a limited market turn. Though honestly, with their love of starting pilot projects in specialized economic zones, maybe the time has come for them to do a pilot project with cybernetic planning in some locations or sectors. For all we know they already are.
>Dismissal of 8 Officers for Disturbance to City and Working People https://3g.163.com/news/article/ECRF10SA0001875P.html Based.
A lot of people forget that for all the progress, a considerable part of the Chinese populace is less affluent than even your typical middle middle class household in developed nations. So yes, there is a long way yet to go for development there. Belarus and Poland probably have higher per capita GDP.
>>903019 >I reject the fethishisation of proletarian agency as a magical fix for any economic problem in the USSR. the crisis of USSR was first and foremost a political crisis, before Gorby market reforms there was no massive economic crisis, no massive shortages, no empty stores the populism of Gorby perestroika was Glasnost as in free speech, people were tired of fucking CPSU geezers, they were tired of censorship it was first and foremost a crisis of political legitimacy you need democratic process not for efficiency first, but for a political legitimacy nobody in the developed world would buy into this proletarian party bullshit, the party is a fucking dead end, it undermines itself and in the end your system gets couped by your own political "proletarian" elite
>>903141 Two ideas here: a class-conscious vanguard takes power, but its successors seem to always degrade into bureaucrats, but; the proletariat are not class-conscious themselves to take the reigns of power. How can a socialist state remain socialist "in spirit"?
>>903124 >Belarus and Poland probably have higher per capita GDP. They do. Many people forget that. They imagine China to be basically be some hi-tech futurist dystopia when a large section of the country still awaits basic capital accumulation to lift them up.
>>903273 >How can a socialist state remain socialist "in spirit"? socialism in practice - state planning I'm counting on inertia of the system. Even in soviet case when dismantling of planning economy was already at fool speed, it took major effort to finish it off. It took private banking etc and resulting absolute economic collapse. So suppose you have a planned state owned economy, and after some major planning fuck up stupid plebs get duped by some magic market populist to go full market. The next logical step is to privatize state owned industries. But who would buy them? Who even has that amount of money/labor vouchers? Do you think people are THAT stupid they would give for free state enterprises into private hands? In soviet case it took shady banking and voucher manipulation to basically give for free state property. And do you think pendulum of popular opinion wouldn't swing the other way when inevitable economic collapse starts? Fucking old geezer CPRF won 95 elections, it was THAT bad. The most plausible variant is that some enterprises would get turned into coops, but I think it would end in an inevitable conflict between state-wide plan and local profit interests of coops. I find it more plausible that popular opinion would swing to "fuck coops for undermining plan", than to "yay lets turn everything into coops!"
>>902394 the strawman is strong with this one
>>903273 Syndicalist style ML parties. Check out the Zapatista Caracoles.
>>903480 >Syndicalist style ML parties Literally not a thing. Read a fucking book. >Zapatista Literally not MLs.
>>903400 How exactly did Soviet "shady banking" let privatization happen? Did they even have labor vouchers? What exactly is China doing, supposedly, that prevents it from suffering the same brain death as the Soviet Union?
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/25/xi-china-climate-change-saved-the-world%E2%80%A8/ Interesting that FP published this. FP is a mixed bag, I think they’re a pretty good outlet a lot of the time because you will get some very unbiased reporting from them like this that actually steps back from an exclusively American self-interest perspective. The article suggests that both Xi announcing his definitive climate targets as well as China’s continued reporting on its own status on meeting climate obligations is acting as a signal to Europe to come sit with the more stable and serious global power rather than the USA. Of course, FP is publishing this as a bit of a warning about how the US political situation is causing it to be side-lined (a story we have heard plenty in the past 4 years), but it also seems to be crediting the Chinese state with being very responsible and rational. It is almost straddling the line between conceding that China is acting more like a stable world leader than the US, and simply trying to conjure this image to spook a US readership into understanding how important it is for the US to get its act together or else it will lose its claim to legitimate political superiority in an actual meritocratic removal.
An angle I haven’t seen very much in pointing out the cynical realpolitik strategy behind Xinjiang stuff is how the US has maintained relations with other Central Asian states despite their own crimes against Muslims. I’ve seen plenty of the “this is hypocrisy, look at the War on Terror and the border camps” and stuff like that, but not much of the apples to apples comparison of the US response to China’s neighbors. This is basically a more Chomsky like approach of just saying, look at what they aren’t telling you. For instance, the US has consistently sent economic aid to Uzbekistan and invested in the country even though Uzbekistan has restrictive laws on state sanctioned mosques, and at various points has actually been accused of not only imprisoning and torturing Muslims for breaking laws regulating the Muslim Faith (like conditions restricting pilgrimage to Mecca), but has also been accused of boiling Muslim dissidents alive. Tajikistan has also both made a prominent Islamic political party illegal, and jailed and tortured Muslims, and forced Muslims to shave their beards. America actually sent direct military aid to Tajikistan in its counter-terrorism operations when its own high state officials defected to ISIS, even though the US knew that Tajikistan was torturing and repressing Muslims under the same auspices of “counter-terrorism”. And this was happening as recently as 2015, under Obama. The US media and state department have blatantly ignored many of these abuses and had no particular push to sanction them as human rights catastrophes, and the foreign policy think tanks were even advising the US to take a neutral stance on human rights issues in order to continue having strong relations with the Central Asian post-soviet states. No surprise that they take such a neutral policy position of course, because they openly acknowledge the utility in doing so is countering Russian and Chinese dominance in the region. I think it is important to attempt to spread realistic geopolitical perspectives among average people when talking about this stuff. Too many people are trapped in the moralist perspective and believe when they take a position on US action, it is motivated by morality. And they may be right for themselves, but the US is amoral, and so they aren’t actually endorsing an entity that has the same motivations. They’re effectively asking a lion to save a gazelle. It has no particular interest in the gazelle, it is just staking out its own hunting grounds. And maybe even after knowing this they just become more self-conscious American chauvinists, but then at least you are living in reality.
>>903658 >Did they even have labor vouchers? no, not labor vouchers, but the so-called privatization vouchers, that gave holder a share in an enterprise basically the scheme was like this: economic collapse and hyperinflation - no food to eat - trade vouchers for food and necessities - accumulate vouchers - voila! you're a capitalist now >How exactly did Soviet "shady banking" let privatization happen? with the repeal of the state monopoly on foreign trade and the law on cooperatives you could establish "cooperative banks" and engage in foreign trade majority of cooperatives were engaged in reselling of production produced by state enterprises, majority raw materials and in general low value-added goods. Buy cheap state subsidized price controlled goods or just bribe management for a cut - sell them to other countries - PROFIT profit margins were HUGE there was also some aviso fuckery later there were so-called collateral auctions where the state would take loans in private banks with state enterprises as a collateral. The loans were never paid back of course. basically state bureaucrats would just massively undervalue state property for whatever reason for a cut or for "killing communism" etc >What exactly is China doing, supposedly, that prevents it from suffering the same brain death as the Soviet Union? well, china kinda did it gradually, special economic zones and all that, but I don't know china situation very well they have creeping privatization as far as I can tell
Is China susceptible to the middle income trap? Now that they're outsourcing the cheap labor once done by Chinese to Africa, is it a point of weakness to be dependent on foreigners for cheap labor? What if there's some kind of revolution in those countries and suddenly they don't want do produce stuff for China anymore?
>>904118 The middle income trap is getting stuck in low end manufacturing. What you describe is the opposite of the middle income trap. However, we see that the US is embargoing Chinese semiconductor manufacturing so there is pressure from outside to confine China in low end manufacturing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ya1eq5L4b3A >Live: ROK hands over remains of 117 Chinese volunteer soldiers to China
>>904126 >However, we see that the US is embargoing Chinese semiconductor manufacturing so there is pressure from outside to confine China in low end manufacturing. China invests lavishly in homegrown chips since 2015 and has doubled down in 2019, their plan is to catch up in semiconductor technology with the rest of the world in 2025. Will the increased competition result in faster tech advancement ?
>>905486 Why are they crying? Isn't that the job of a soldier?
>>905486 Is it supposed to be a really sad song or some shit?
>>905486 They're not being deployed to the border, more likely they're retiring from active duty, hence the ceremonial red sashes.
>>905568 >They're not being deployed to the border, more likely they're retiring from active duty, hence the ceremonial red sashes. https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4014259 https://disp.cc/b/163-cLtB On Sunday, Pakistani comedian Zaid Hamid uploaded a video showing several PLA recruits crying on a bus as they are allegedly "transferred to Ladakh Border to face Indian Army [sic]." Hamid then wrote that China's one-child policy is "seriously hurting the motivation level of our Chinese brothers." He then added, "We Pakistani support you China. Stay Brave." Although Pakistan is an ally of China, Hamid appeared to be poking fun at the tender, green recruits. The footage was originally posted on the WeChat page of Fuyang City Weekly, but it was soon deleted. The original post shows 10 fresh recruits from Fuyang City's Yingzhou District in China's Anhui Province. All of the new troops were reportedly college students, and five of them had "proactively volunteered to serve in Tibet," which borders the Ladakh region where the bloody Galwan Valley skirmish took place in June of this year. The video was reportedly filmed at the Fuyang Railway Station as they prepared to head to a military camp in Hebei Province. In the video, the soldiers can be seen sobbing hysterically as they struggle to sing the words to the PLA song "Green Flowers in the Army" (軍中綠花). A Chinese netizen who goes by the handle @waynescene reposted the video on Sunday and wrote "They were told that they would be going to the front lines after they got on the bus. The cannon fodder are crying!"
>>905618 >taiwannews [X] doubt
>>905555 Maybe they just like the song.


no cookies?