Can he go full Stalin and crush the global bourgeoisie?

indiandefencereview.com/news/six-wars-china-is-sure-to-fight-in-the-next-50-years/

Attached: main-qimg-457fe4dbd7913fb7e17a0adc4fa27c53.gif (1173x1129 77.95 KB, 225.98K)

this is sure to be some objective marxist analysis

What does that have to do with his alleged corruption?

Are we sure about taking our fridges and cars to be repaired by Marxist journalists? Apples and oranges.

Not my comment.

I was reading through their basic political programme and everything seems pretty reasonable until
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoist_Communist_Party_of_China
Could someone explain to me how this isn't Dengism? I haven't read much on Mao or Deng so forgive me if I'm just dumb, but from my limited understanding this sounds closer to Mao then it does to Deng.

Sorry, that was a typo. Meant to say

No he cant because the proletarian would glorious uprising as the economy and living standard would collapse overnight.

Attached: chinese_acceleration.png (1186x314, 155.85K)

Ok Xi.

This also happened in Vietnam during the 80s and 90s as well (until they stopped trying to cosying up to China). The only way a true Maoist movement returns to China is through a grassroots uprising.

It was basically what Mao himself did, he also allowed a private sector. In my opinion Maoists often care more about the "road to socialism", "the revolution after the revolution", constant purges and cultural revolutions and struggle against the bureaucracy than establishing a full socialist mode of production without loopholes, because according to MLM Stalin's mechanistic understanding of dialectical materialism was falsy applied in the USSR: A full collectivized socialist mode of production did not prevent the degeneration of social relations within society or within the party, it did not make the victory of socialism evident. Instead, Maoists argue, there needs to be a continuous struggle both ideologically within social and party elements as well as a material struggle, so Maoists advocate to overcome both the state capitalist economy (but some small businesses are a-okay) as well as constant revolutionary rejuvenation.

This isn't Dengism, not only is the scale of free enterprise proposed by the Maoist Party much smaller, Dengism allows hyper-capitalists into the party and proposes to work with them. Dengism fetishises productive forces as a means to overcome even class differences as long as the CPC is in power. This is also juxtaposed to Maoism which wants to build communal structures independently of the development of the productive forces, in that way they are left-wing of Lenin, and got criticised by the Soviets to put the cart in front of the horse. The Maoist doctrine sees the revolution as a wholesome, continuous endeavour, it doesn't end with the victory of the vanguard party, it continues as in communes being built alongside the national bourgeoisie or the petit-bourgeoisie to push further and further into socialism. The idea to collectivize and then slowly building up productive forces Brezhnev-style is rejected as an incorrect line as it produces an ossified bureaucracy and drowns the revolutionary vigor and enthusiasm.

t. former Maoist

I hope that makes things clearer

That's Frogman. Leave Deng out of this.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=5GIj2BVJS2A

Attached: 440x0.jpg (440x667, 24.49K)

Are you Vietnamese, what's the state of Vietnam right now, I used to (or well still am I guess) be a online english teacher for some Vietnamese school and from most of the students I have taught (ages between 20-50) it sounds like they all feel shit for having to work for foreign companies even though they pay much more.
One Engineer guy said he can't say no to overtime since he works for a Japanese firm and that more often than not has to give up any sort of overtime payment.

youtube.com/watch?v=PBgbYQ5QAM0

Can any Xiaboo here tell me about the Communist Party’s plan to retake control of private enterprises by 2050? Apparently Xi mentioned something about it during a speech earlier this year.

Attached: E8144948-E661-47CC-BFBD-054397AEF4CE.jpeg (554x554, 50.46K)

but why?

Then why did you link it to him? There's nothing in that article about dynasty building either.

The base in China is socialist. There is capital, there is exploitation and private property, but it all operates under central planning. The key difference between China and say the US, is that the capitalists are controlled by the government and not the other way around. There are efforts within the party by the neoliberal fraction for a more liberal push, but with intra-imperialist tensions rising, production will be more focused on self-sustainability vs commodity production and the debt market. Key industries in China, like the military-industrial complex, are government-owned. Now the question is, how easy would it be for the party to return to its "roots". I think the closer we get towards a global collapse of capitalism, the bigger the need for central planning will become and if the neoliberal fraction within the party hasn't seized power by then, chances are material conditions will push towards socialized production. Will China export revolution though? Maybe it would set up proxy parties in countries where it has invested largely on infrastructure and has some political pull, but you can never know. We can see they played a part at preventing the coup in Venezuela, so shielding countries from US intervention might be enough to give socialist revolutions a chance to survive

The Nazis were directing what every private firm should make in 1945. Was that socialism? You can't control capital, you dunce, it has no master and serves no one. The CPC's bullshit mental gymnastics trying to explain how their cookie-cutter bourgeois economy is socialist was totally unnecessary. All they had to do was claim they had reverted to the DoTP phase. Unfortunately, any fool can see even that is a lie.

China is a place where Marxist ideas are heavily tolerated and used to justify regime policy. That is as far as it's communism goes for now.

No, because the Nazis directed capital in favour of a selected few monopolies that propped them up. Fascism is the last-ditch effort of capital to stay in power, it is propped by capital and serves capital. There is nothing remotely similar with the situation in China. If the CCP truly wanted to return to capitalism, they would do what the CPSU did.

Hot dialectical scientific analysis my dude. I see that you approach the subject after not only understanding its multi-faceted aspects and the internal contradictions that drive it, but also being fully aware of the material conditions that gave rise to them. Either that or you read a wikipedia article/saw a youtube video

China is some weird pseudo socialist, pseudo capitalist society. I would say the base is capitalist, while the superstructure is socialist. Which way it will go depends on how the history will unfold. If few crashes in world economy happen, capitalist ideas will go away. Capitalist will flourish, so will the capitalist superstructure. In reality though whatever happened to China happened for a reason, likewise what it will become will depend on material conditions. I hate the whole "great men of history" theory that people around here push: That Deng betrayed socialism and Xi could just go full Stalin and so on.

Key industries remain government-run. As capitalism moves towards new crashes, conditions for socialist development will be favourable. I guess we will see

>indiandefencereview.com/news/six-wars-china-is-sure-to-fight-in-the-next-50-years/

lol what ?

They also imported millions of slavs abd western europeans as slave labor into their factories to keep them running. They ultimately envisioned a helot caste of subhumans to slave for the aryan ruling class. Its ends were not socialist by any stretch

Very socialist of China to rob Filipinos of their bananas and selling it back to them at a markup. It's even more socialist to sell weapons to Israel.

I want off this New Zig Forums
No… I was referring to the war economy they created in the last few years of their reign. It wasn't at all like actual planning the CCCP had, but their control over production was stricter than the modern CPC's. You missed what I said. Capital doesn't serve anyone, it only perpetuates itself, and any society that aids this is called capitalist. This board fucking sucks now man.

Vietnam nowadays is pretty much a liberal country with a leading communist party. It only got to this point because of how fucking apathetic both the party members and the common people are. The party is dominated with realpolitik, with most policies aiming to achieve 2 goals:
1. Keep the party in power.
2. Remaining neutral (Cause the last 2 time they tried to support revolutionaries in other countries ended up like shit I.e. Kambochea and economic dealing with Cuba and Venezuela).
The people don’t give a shit about building socialism with most of the youth’s future prospects being getting rich, while the boomers only want to keep the status quo going as long as possible. Their only motivation for socialism by this point is through traditional patriotism. Which I really can’t blame them since how they’re inundated the party’s propaganda of discrediting the time before Doi Moi (Le Duan’s time in office). People only now started to miss that time period as the rampant corruption of today affecting them.
Every kiss is taught to learn as hard as possible so they can be a wageslave abroad. They knew the working conditions in Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are just miserable but the monetary gains of it makes them disregarded that fact.

Attached: 5655EE70-FFE6-4E23-86EE-383BB4FD5F3F.png (680x978, 986.22K)

...

this

Why does he look like the sleazy business villain bad guy from an anime?

Attached: E273154E-916A-4445-81F6-653D62DD154E.jpeg (330x153, 13.37K)

Because China is making cyberpunk anime real.

His pet billionaires aren’t about to let him crush any bourgouisie.

Chinese capitalists control that state under the guise of being controlled by that state, which is the same way Nazi Germany set up its relationship with capital. They’re a fascist state without the Jewicide.

capitalism isn't one thing it has many stages and forms so to call the nazi economy asl well means and ends to achieve its objectives as socialist is false. You're probably Zig Forums masquerading as leftist to try to gaslight people into thinking Nazis were socialist. Fuck you

Never called the Nazis socialist even once, learn to read.

Because China is going full Akira 2025

Attached: akira-china.jpg (700x525, 46.54K)

Why is his face so small what the fuck?!?
The guy looks like an esper from Akita.

This

Attached: 423D6E9D-E4D0-4B5C-9447-AB59550EE45D.jpeg (600x324, 65.06K)

I don't know if I buy that China is actually interested in socialism, but it is pretty fucking ahistorical and idealist to say that a socialist party cannot control capital outright. What was the NEP but a demonstration of this exact relationship?
Capital is beholden to the state in every country where its influence isn't enforced by an imperialist power, in which case the capital enterprises are beholden to the imperialist power. It is always, always more profitable to kowtow to any demands made by the state than be in open rebellion to it, unless you have outside backing. Chinese enterprise, while being extremely important to the world economy, is completely bound to the desires of the Chinese state.

I don't know if I trust the CPC, but I think that they are in an extremely powerful position to advance the revolution if they truly want to.

He can go full Brezhnev, but full Stalin? No.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (320x252, 163.34K)

The CPC might be in a powerful position to advance the revolution but the problem is they gave up and literally see continuing the revolution as ultra leftism. They haven't put the iron rice bowl back, rebuilt the rural primary schools, nor sent ordinary people to the universities.

Why would a socialist country lead a war of aggression? I think this is a case of capitalist projection.

I'm the biggest theorylet here but I'm curious.

Okay, the USSR fell because of its inherent, systematic material flaws, people like Gorbachev and whatnot were inevitable despite the accomplishments of the USSR.

Okay, say China turns full on capitalist in the future due to Deng's reforms. In a proper material analysis, Deng was also an inevitability because of the internal flaws within Mao's system in China.

So what the fuck are we supposed to do now? Cuba and North Korea arguably seem to be the only hope. But I don't get it. If the two great socialist states of the past had fallen due to internal flaws within the system they implemented, what are we supposed to do now?

Also, I haven't even started reading on Marx, so forgive me really but I am just curious. I am planning to however, and I think I can understand what you guys will reply to me as of now anyways.

More materialist and Marxist take than most tankies have tbh.

Thanks but I still want to know what the hell we are supposed to do. Did capitalism have this difficulty implementing itself in the time of feudalism?

It was a gradual process. Feudal priveleges and institutions existed for a long time after the emergence of capitalism, and some still do. In the meantime, you had huge wars, tons of failed and successful revolutions and counter-revolutions. The real deathblow for the feudal system was the incredible productive forces afforded to the new capitalist class through industrialization however. Socialists today face greater challenges, as state power has never been greater and the capitalist class has almost a monopoly on production. We can't wait a couple of hundred years for the process to happen 'organically' either

this

A) China is capitalist
B) Realpolitik

...