what's the marxist explanation of the rapid chinese development post deng?, i'm tired of reading liberal critiques, they are always like BLAH BLAH INCENTIVES BLAH BLAH BLAH EFFICIENCY BLAH BLAH, so i want to hear the marxist explanation of why china develop so fast after liberalization, what was it foreign capital?, why did china develop while the ussr went to shit?, was the system really as ineficient as some people like cockshott say?
What's the marxist explanation of the rapid chinese development post deng?, i'm tired of reading liberal critiques...
Carson Young
Other urls found in this thread:
jacobinmag.com
chinascope.org
twitter.com
Caleb Reyes
It didn't.
jacobinmag.com
About as efficient as the western approach
Hudson Nelson
literally what
David Cox
Capitalism flourishing in China should not come as a surprise to anyone familiar with historical materialism. Maoism was fatally flawed because it tried to force socialism on a pre-capitalist society that was not even close to developed enough.
It hadn't "went to shit", it was killed by its own internal political turmoil. The USSR was primarily a failure of Marxism-Leninism's flaws, mainly its fetish for bureaucracy and suppression of dissent.
Programs like the Great Leap Forward definitely went full retard.
The main issue with this criticism, though, is that capitalist economics have their own massive flaws, especially in the long term. The difference is that these flaws are not politically expedient to criticize.
Nathan Rivera
It would have succeeded if Mao had been successful in his attempt to remove the national bourgeoisie during the Cultural Revolution.
Hudson Moore
China basically did a repeat of the NEP, except even more capitalist, allowing foreign investment in order to build up its industry. The difference between that and the liberalisation of the USSR, is that the USSR was already heavily developed.
Mason Edwards
China is socialist.
Mason Bailey
Austin Barnes
I doubt it. The bourgeoisie clinging to power was only exacerbating policies that were failing on their own accord. The CR was also hypocritical in that it did not remove traditional elements as much as it made the majority one formally dominant; Maoism is laden with spooks that fundamentally deviate from Marxist ideas.
Austin Thomas
"Development/Growth" is a capitalist meme.
The situation in modern China is completely deplorable, the life of the modern chinese is complete garbage.
If you're going to use bourgeois measurements of growth to justify capitalism, you might as well shill for the United Snakes empire because they brought a lot of "development" bullshit too
Nicholas Johnson
Simple: foreign money flowed in and provided jobs. Capitalists showered the country in money, from which a new domestic capitalist class was formed. The current divide between China and America is largely due to each country's bourgeoisie fighting each other.
Noah Sanchez
Note: the result was equal amounts divestment in the domestic US as factories closed and communities died, while as mentions China's new workforce was largely that of wageslaves. Also during this time China became the world's largest polluter, which is not a coincidence with the rise of capitalism in their country.
John Gonzalez
America's national bourg may hate China but the international bourg (most of which are located in the US) love them. There really isn't much of a divide.
Sebastian Brown
that is if you consider the end of the cold war as "liberalisation".
if you consider the Kruschev era as "liberalisation" then is technically correct>user
Nathaniel Foster
Take your vulgar marxism back to the second international.
Elijah Nguyen
That's a recent thing, which really only began since the 2008 financial crisis which China powered through via deficit spending while America did halfhearted austerity. It'll end the moment Chinese firms try taking too much of the EU's business, see the existing cement, steel and solar tariffs the EU lodged against Chinese firms for trying to price dump the market.
Ayden Morales
...
Leo Hill
Also the world's largest producer of solar panels - and not by a little can't vouch for reliability of source, to be fair. If there is any take-away from (nominal) socialist experiments thus far is that by hook or by crook, what matters is the development of the productive forces. Without them you cannot even attempt to do anything worthwhile.
Easton Butler
Marxism is not a doctrine but a guide, as Xi Jinping observed, that contains fundamental principles which – in combination with China's reality – can be continuously adapted to the context and times.
Meh nobody wants to live in barracks communism anymore.
Ian Martinez
True, but notice something about solar panels: China only made so many in an explicit attempt to price dump the global market and take it over. They copied a classic capitalist move and got the rest of the world spooked at them in the process, because capitalists know that if they stayed true to their ideals about free markets they'd be ruined. By engaging in capitalism they helped facilitate a major crisis within it, demonstrating capitalism's inherent contradictions.
Also another issue related to energy: despite the surge of manufacturing and productive forces, China's nuclear industry is still stuck in the 80s and they still import US reactors (which is why China was so butthurt when Congress failed to reauthorize the Ex-Im bank) which are the most efficient designs. This happens because despite the US nuclear industry falling out of the commercial sector, uncle sam continues to heavily subsidize it for defense purposes. China largely gave up on this at the end of the Cold War, since they didn't want to piss off their biggest trading partner. It's worth mentioning this because, as with the development of the commercial solar panel in the first place, green energy only happens when it's done by the state not by a private firm. Hence why China continues to get most of their energy from raw coal, and why they recently killed many of their solar subsidies - they want to profit.
Jordan Hall
I'm not an expert on China but my guess is this has a lot to do with it. In order to develop their economy, China bascially decided that they were going to attract foreign capital by whoring out their people to foreign capitalists, letting them work in shitty conditions for low wages. A bunch of money flowing into your country is without a doubt good for the economy, but they sacrificed all traces of socialism for it. Obviously stupid, inefficient shit like guaranteed employment ("iron rice bowl") and universal healthcare had to go. Today China has a politically influential capitalist class (over 100 of China's 500 billionaires are members of the National People's Congress), a labour-power market (which means unemployment), homelessness, no universal free healthcare.
Even someone like Michael Parenti, who always defends 20th century socialism, admits that the socialist system as it existed in the USSR, Mao-era China, Cuba, the DPRK, etc. had it's flaws. The inefficency of the Soviet system shouldn't be overstated, as China still had economic growth for most of Mao's time in power, and the USSR under Stalin developed rapidly, but it's important not to dismiss those problems either. As socialists we should be very interested in how to improve upon actually existing socialism, but if your solution is authoritarian, one-party state capitalism / neoliberalism with chinese characteristics, then you are just a capitalist roader and a traitor.
Thomas Cook
...