...
China's richest man: overtime work culture a 'huge blessing'
Eli Smith
Joshua Baker
Warlord China was far worse than Russian Empire.By 1940 USSR already was industrialised second largest economy in the world with 100 % literacy rate.
Mason Rivera
1/2
society as a collective effectively is an immortal demi-god, some of the billionaire types are trying to compete with that, hence why they often fall for the self-delusion of claiming the creative output of the collective as their own creative output, a side effect is the believe that self destructive workaholism is the source of this creative output. The alternative to this believe would be to accept their own limitations with regards of being utterly out-classed by large collectives in terms of creative output.
When it comes to Jack Ma you can recognize that he put enormous personal effort into organizing the economic organization and given the scale and capabilities of this organization you can also recognize his skill. But the material reality is that tech companies should advocate a relax work schedule of 4h to max 6h a day, because the hole point of technology literately is getting stuff done with less effort and less time. On top of that brains have to idle to be able to come up with innovations. Also when it comes to capitalists if you deny them access to surplus, they are forced to advance the means of productions for profit, by increasing the productivity of the labour.
The structural reason why socialist support China is because a political organisation outranks the capitalist organizations. Sometimes "Dengism or market socialism" is compared with the Soviet NEP and the difference here is that the Soviets had vast resources, the ability to be self-sufficient in food production and could benefit from technological transfers during the capitalist recession that preceded WW2, where they basically could buy industrial machinery for bargain prices. Chinese material conditions are vastly different they lack resources and only barely could be food self-sufficient, and they cannot buy cheap industrial machinery from desperate capitalists. They have a large population whose surplus they can exchange for industrial machinery. The factor that works in favour for China is that although workers are heavily exploited they do saw enormous increase in living standards which does reduce the detrimental social effects, seen in stagnating living sandards in the west. If you compare the Deng area with the Stalin Era, then you have to point out that the Stalin era was economically more socialist because no Billionaires etc. However the market liberalisation in China did not cause a increase in mortality like it did Russia in the 90s or what it is beginning to happen in western countries now, where some groups in society are beginning to have decreasing life expectancies.
If you want to criticize Deng's reform and open up policies then your first objective should be to ask why did they abolish so many of the mao era collectivist societal structures even those that were not in conflict with the market reforms. Or why did they adopt western decadent consumerism and bourgeois lifestyleism, at least in the more affluent areas. Other questions are why did their Marxist education produce so many "radlibs". When it comes to economics opening up the markets enabled the transfer of means of production, but one has to ask why weren't they more selective towards strategically relevant industries. You could anthropomorphize China as a worker going to work in the global market and to trade their labour power for means of production, and then ask why they needed means of production for useless plastic garbage. If you want to complain about the revisionism then you also have to look at how Mao handled the cultural revolution and relations with the Soviets.
Jackson Taylor
2/2
If you want to see Deng as a deceptive capitalist roader, then you have to do better than just pointing out how the economic relations have developed under his policies, because his theories more or less predicted the current state of affairs. You have to look at China and see that historically they did not have a capitalist revolution, and strictly speaking the Deng theory of having a "sand-boxed" capitalist mode of production is closer to what Marx said about communism happening inthe most advanced capitalist economy. If the so called "4th industrial revolution digital platform capitalism" thing turns out as a real material force, one might point out that the Chinese government and the CPC has at least as much control over this area than Mao-era CPC had over factory production. So the claim of losing state control over industry might not be accurate.
If you want to see China as gestating socialism that will be ready in x-amount of years, then you argue that th cpc can overcome Marx's law of motion and reverse revisionism. Some theory in that direction that made the rounds was that Chinese development will globally raise the living standards of the working class, equalizing the wages and hence removing the ability of capitalists to find cheap labour offshore, restoring the bargaining power of western proles and reducing the political strangle hold of western bourgeoisie. One might be tempted to see automation as force for making the proletariat superfluous, permanently negating the bargaining power of labour, but the same holds for capitalists , whose purpose is extracting surplus from labour. keep in mind that robots with similar abilities as people will require the a similar internal mental processes. If you give robots enough creativity to match humans they will also be able to revolt. So the actual problem the "labour bargaining power restauration theory" has, is capitalism using wars to destroy capital to restore profitability. While full-blown WW3 is unlikely because of nuclear weapons, there still is the neo-liberal permanent destabilization "trickel war". To condense this, we have a plausible claim that the material conditions for socialism are bing created however there also is the problem that capitalism might destroy those conditions on the way out. The "wargeoisie" in America seems to have a harder time overthrowing governments as can be seen in Syria and Venezuela, but still it's not like they lost the ability to wreck those economies.
Alexander Adams
well, if we look at the statistics, we see that Chinas workplace saftey is improving year for year, now succeeding australia
trotskyistplatform.com
Lucas Lewis
To be fair though Australia has a big mining industry.
Michael Harris
working 12 hours is not fatal but you are wasting all of your life in vain for some rich faggot.
his inspirational speeches remind me of a certain quote reminds me of a certain quote…
Luke Reed
at this point Ismail reminds me of a typical debate with autistic Christians who are well-versed in the Bible and who can justify pretty much anything by quoting some passage from it
can be any other religion really, I'm not trying to offend Christians
Leo Sullivan
To be fair, this answer from Ismail was not regarding China. Here's the question and Ismail's answer.
Justin Johnson
I know this is perhaps late, but I have translated (in google translate. don't think highly of me) what the state's newspaper had to say
Advocating struggle does not mean forcing 996
People's Daily Author: People's Daily commentary posted complaints on 2019-04-14 11:57:36
Reading number: 7.57 million +
Controversial about 996, not that you don't want to struggle or work.
Our company not only depends on the sweat of employees, but also inspires employees; not only must employees work harder, but also stimulate employees to work more efficiently; not only by the incentives for overtime pay, but also for family members. Companionship, physical health, and fullness of meaning have also become rewards for work.