Venezuela hands China more oil presence, but no mention of new funds

This but unironically

And yet SE Asia continues to develop at an ever increasing rate. All of which is vital to propel SE out of it's poverty and economic backwardness.

t. Zig Forums

Yeah and the US gives endless Credit to its colonial Vassal states as well so?
IMPERIALISM PAINTED RED IS STILL IMPERIALISM

China isn't imperialist.

Just because it flies a Red flag on the mast it does not make it socialist

Venezuelas struggles come from it not even being willing to enact a NEP / State-Capitalist Model AT THE VERY LEAST and instead allowing the Bougie class to maintain economic dominance which has led to it enacting a Campaign of Economic Terrorism Similar to that inflicted on the USSR in 1989-1991 by Gorbachev and the "New-NEP" men

Unless Venezuela Nationalizes and Collectivizes the Vast Majority of its Industry Agriculture and Commodity Distribution Network (Supermarkets) and Relegates Private enterprise to a Secondary position in the economy as the Bolsheviks did it will continue to suffer these issues and eventually undergo a complete Counter-Rev Such as How the USSR / China etc did

China didn't suffer a counter revolution. Rather it entered the next stage of development after it wiped out the vestiges of feudalism following the Cultural Revolution.
Since then China has sought to accelerate the development of the productive forces (necessary for socialism) through the attraction of foreign investment: Allowing it to recoup the losses it suffered following a century of western imperialism.
And while private enterprise has expanded, the commanding heights of China's economy continue to remain the domain of the party. In recent years there's even been an intensification of nationalization, and a reining in of foreign capital and income inequality.
That's the very opposite of what happened under Gorbachev: Instead of attracting foreign investment, the USSR's industrial capacity was sold off abroad, or surrender to private interests. The party and it's bureaucracy were dismantled. And the Union dissolved against the explicit wishes of the people.

Attached: 951ba7e5a91364e77c3a6c0483e501579a28f16c8bd10216e86d16a4cc374278.png (540x519, 448.28K)

The Chinese government by the 70s had already entered a state Similar to that of the USSR in the 20s AKA a Socialist planned economy with some NEP elements (New Democracy)
What Deng undertook was a complete reversal of the entire economic system so that Private business once again became the dominant mode of production

If Private business led by a Capitalist class is the Dominant method of production then it is not Socialism

Deng's stance was a pragmatic realization that China would be able to industrialize and develop faster with access to foreign capital, than without it.
Sure, China could have developed without it (to an extend), but it would have ended up facing similar problems as North Korea, where development slowed down following earlier rapid industrialization. (Which at the time eclipsed the south)

Capitalism and socialism do not exist as two separate diametrically opposed universes. In reality one presupposes the other. Without the development of the productive forces there can be no eventual emancipation from capitalism. This was as true in the USSR as it is today in China.
In fact, even Stalin acknowledged the law of value operating in the soviet union. And yet the USSR didn't lose it's socialist character even in the face of wage labor and black markets. That's because socialism isn't a system, but a movement.
Ever since Deng the overall aim of economic development in China has been self-sufficiency. The recent commitment to the Made In China 2025 agenda - which would make China largely independent of high-tech imports - again confirms this.
There's also another angle to consider: Unlike the USSR, China is not energy sufficient. It doesn't have access to adequate long-term reserves of hydrocarbons, or even uranium. And thus it cannot embrace the sort of autarchy that Soviet energy resources allowed. As such, socialism in China will have to take a different route than the USSR.

agree.
disagree.
“To me that which is generally called the ultimate aim of socialism is nothing, but the movement is everything”
Eduard Bernstein, Evolutionary Socialism
marxists.org/reference/archive/bernstein/works/1899/evsoc/ch04-conc.htm

"A natural complement to the economic and political tendencies of revisionism was its attitude to the ultimate aim of the socialist movement. “The movement is everything, the ultimate aim is nothing"—this catch-phrase of Bernstein’s expresses the substance of revisionism better than many long disquisitions. To determine its conduct from case to case, to adapt itself to the events of the day and to the chopping and changing of petty politics, to forget the primary interests of the proletariat and the basic features of the whole capitalist system, of all capitalist evolution, to sacrifice these primary interests for the real or assumed advantages of the moment—such is the policy of revisionism. And it patently follows from the very nature of this policy that it may assume an infinite variety of forms, and that every more or less “new” question, every more or less unexpected and unforeseen turn of events, even though it change the basic line of development only to an insignificant degree and only for the briefest period, will always inevitably give rise to one variety of revisionism or another."
Lenin, Marxism and Revisionism
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1908/apr/03.htm

My view is that the PRC is undergoing a very rapid and successful development of capitalism. They now experience the same internal contradictions as other capitalist countries. It is possible they could transition to socialism in 15 or 20 years. But this would probably require a second revolution and I don't think anyone in the CPC is interested in that.

I quoted that bit about Bernstein just because it was interesting to see the same logic being used to defend China.

Venezuela is not socialist, they are retarded spics with too much oil amd decided 'free shit' will placate thier people when they should have been you know, actually taking steps towards communism.

I have no sympathy for them, I have respect for China for securing resources for actual communism.

Cynical, but correct point of view.

Unironically well-read post. You know a lot of theory even if terminology is a bit autistic.(It's not capitalism that is needed to developed socialism, but mixed economy)

Attached: (You).mp4 (188x100, 862.17K)

Well, despite it's flaws, China is moving humanity forward. Vertical farming, lab meat, automatization, etc are all future. If China will use resources of Venezuela better than Venezuela, then all of humanity including Venezuela will benefit.

Also green energy.

Remember when you told people you were some kind of monarchist?

How low can you fucking get?

I'm an actual south east asian (vietnamese) and the reason why my shitty ass country develops is because of Japan and the USA, NOT China.

Naziposter becomes Dengist, as expected out of every desperate Marxists.

They will cling to any red color.

There wasn't enough agent orange in your country

Yo, too bad you can't afford more, right?

The chinks are also the last ones who fought with us, next to the cambodians.

Too bad the US is untrustworthy, but China is even more untrustworthy.

Suicide nets outside of factories is good commie praxis, I guess.

Vietnamese poster! Awesome!! Could you answer couple of questions about your country?

You people are retarded and idealistic gringos

Attached: kermit_laughs.png (445x423, 349.8K)

Why must productive forces be developed under a capitalist economy? Industry largely developed under capitalism in the 19th century. Technology has advanced enough that there is no historical need to seize existing industry. I understand you need modern industry to bring about socialism on a grand scale, but I don't see a need for a capitalist phase when technology is much better than it was in 1917.

does venezuela have anything like combat groups of the working class or just their regular military and police as armed forces?

Attached: 900px-Flagge_Kampfgruppen_der_Arbeiterklasse.svg.png (900x600, 35.6K)

Oy vishnu! This oil belongs to India fellow socialists!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bolivarian_Militia_of_Venezuela
venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13968
foxnews.com/world/2017/04/17/venezuela-maduro-seeks-to-expand-armed-civilian-militias.html
workers.org/2018/07/27/venezuela-popular-militia-advances/
globalsecurity.org/military/world/venezuela/milicia.htm

Attached: Flag_of_the_Venezuelan_National_Militia.png (1078x717, 186.3K)

Events of pro-Maduro colectivos/guerrillas working along with police to chase unarmed rioters away have been reported, but nobody knows what they would do if they were confronted by armed people (if Americans invaded)

awesome, glad to see this isn't neglected

Attached: 1533300697810.jpg (1100x933, 136.35K)