• 1 year - 60 posts - Latest - RSS
• OP: 9 Goods vs 3 No Goods
• Thread: 139 Goods vs 98 No Goods

1. Sociologist
   5ad8
   

   Here’s the interesting question. Does rising inequality in China match typical capitalist trajectories? Is it explained by the capitalist reforms, or do we need to consider that institutions persist and attributed to foundations in the Maoist era? Or is it something specific to post socialist emerging markets?

   What we’re not asking is it still at all properly Marxist. Just lay level leftists who don’t know anything about China, right wingers who want to demonize China, and the occasional apologist who insists that they are just accumulating capital for a 4 million year plan or something.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 2 NO GOOD !

2. Sociologist
   36fa
   

   Dividing response into parts as it will otherwise not post:

   But they also identify as �socialist with Chinese characteristics,� and this is in direct response to questions about them abandoning Marxist principles. Since Deng Xiaoping, China has heavily marketized. This is similar to the Doi Moi reforms of Vietnam and like North Korea�s jangmadangs gone institutionalized. The question for economists is, did china lift people out of poverty by direct virtue of embracing capitalism, or was it earlier socialist foundations critical?
   But this is very basic level. The marketization of the communist world isn�t controversial. This is in part why we have the word �post communist� to describe nations outside the former Soviet world.

   "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" would be only contradictory to Marxism in that Marx harbored anti-Chinese prejudice -- and in some sense it's complementary to Marx in accepting Marx's premise of the technology differentiation between races and adapting Marxism to the Chinese mode of technology/behavior.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 2 NO GOOD !

3. Sociologist
   36fa
   

   "Marketization of communism" as you call it is not in any way contradictory to Marxism or even to Marxism-Leninism. Lenin's NEP imposed marketization.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 2 NO GOOD !

4. Sociologist
   36fa
   

   China is not ruled by capital, China is ruled by a communist party. In the United States, big business is politically supreme. China is the only state in the world powerful enough to execute billionaires (Liu Han).

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

5. Sociologist
   36fa
   

   I think "lifting people out of poverty" is not the question with most immediate urgency to the government of China, even if that is an ultimate objective; the question with most immediate urgency to them is winning the Cold War against the United States. That also involves their neo-Cold War manipulations of US corporations. They've nearly accomplished that at this point, looking at the United States which is veering toward regime collapse.

   "That's not Marxist" means you haven't read Marx. Marx even initially argued in support of extending black slavery in the United States for purposes of advancement of the US economy.

   Soviet Union falls, United States falls, Cold War is won by China.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

6. Sociologist
   5c4e
   

   Dividing response into parts as it will otherwise not post:
   But they also identify as ?socialist with Chinese characteristics,? and this is in direct response to questions about them abandoning Marxist principles. Since Deng Xiaoping, China has heavily marketized. This is similar to the Doi Moi reforms of Vietnam and like North Korea?s jangmadangs gone institutionalized. The question for economists is, did china lift people out of poverty by direct virtue of embracing capitalism, or was it earlier socialist foundations critical?
   But this is very basic level. The marketization of the communist world isn?t controversial. This is in part why we have the word ?post communist? to describe nations outside the former Soviet world.
   "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" would be only contradictory to Marxism in that Marx harbored anti-Chinese prejudice -- and in some sense it's complementary to Marx in accepting Marx's premise of the technology differentiation between races and adapting Marxism to the Chinese mode of technology/behavior.

   This sounds like a guess at a definition. Socialism with Chinese characteristics does not mean Marxian socialism that is mindful of Chinese cultural attributes. It is specifically in reference to Deng's economic reforms and the market liberalization that followed.

   It's mostly the major capitalist influences that are in contrast to Marx, and not trivially so.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 2 NO GOOD !

7. Sociologist
   5c4e
   

   I think "lifting people out of poverty" is not the question with most immediate urgency to the government of China, even if that is an ultimate objective; the question with most immediate urgency to them is winning the Cold War against the United States. That also involves their neo-Cold War manipulations of US corporations. They've nearly accomplished that at this point, looking at the United States which is veering toward regime collapse.
   "That's not Marxist" means you haven't read Marx. Marx even initially argued in support of extending black slavery in the United States for purposes of advancement of the US economy.
   Soviet Union falls, United States falls, Cold War is won by China.

   You keep working in non-woke Marx references. I'm not disputing that he had problem views on race. I disputed how foundational it was, and have been met with straw men ever since.

   No, that I haven't read Marx doesn't follow. I'm not sure what you responding to, since you've made up a quote to respond to again. Are you somehow arguing that because Marx had a view of slavery that it doesn't follow that capitalistic reforms are not Marxian?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

8. Sociologist
   5c4e
   

   "Marketization of communism" as you call it is not in any way contradictory to Marxism or even to Marxism-Leninism. Lenin's NEP imposed marketization.

   Len inist go alpost shifti ng as ide (he had a fondn ess for doing this, and we still have to deal with "it's not imperia lism when commu nists do it" because of this). Marketization alone was not offered as the criteria.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

9. Sociologist
   5c4e
   

   China is not ruled by capital, China is ruled by a communist party. In the United States, big business is politically supreme. China is the only state in the world powerful enough to execute billionaires (Liu Han).

   And now you are appealing to ideal types and applying different measures. China's economy is significantly governed by capital and increasingly privatized property gaining influence over the state. The Comm u nist Party has a significant amount of power Thi s is overstated in the west and reforms in local governnance shouldn't be overlooked. Let's al so note th at the Co mmu nist Party rules toward the accumulation of ca pi tal.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

10. Sociologist
    36fa
    

    Let's al so note th at the Co mmu nist Party rules toward the accumulation of ca pi tal.

    Huawei is one of the largest multinational corporations, and is officially owned by its workers. The New York Times disputes that, but they would. Accumulation of capital obviously happens, but in a nationalistic and socialistic way differing strongly from the systems in the west.

    China executes 14 billionaires in 8 years:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-07-23/china-executes-14-billionaires-in-8-years-culture-news-reports

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

11. Sociologist
    36fa
    

    While corporate influence in US political is egregious, and in many ways worse than China, I am not aware of a billionaire class pushing the US to frequently air documentaries on something akin to BBC and CCTV. That, my friend, is a "Chinese characteristic.

    Who controls CNN, MSNBC, Fox News Channel?

    1 year ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

12. Sociologist
    1e30
    

    Also, I doubt you have read "nearly the entire works of Marx" and thinking that the Chinese government is even remotely "Marxist" is evidence of this.
    Explain in your own words why the Chinese government should not be considered Marxist, detailing why you think their self-descriptions are false. Specifically get into the works of Deng and Xi. Bonus points if you can contrast Maoism and Dengism and argue whether one is more "Marxist" than the other, based on the writings of Marx.

    Well, you've essentially asked for what would equate to a publishable article in a top journal, which i have no interest in even attempting due to the autodeletebot. But in short, you're asking me to explain why non-Marixst politicians aren't Marxist despite their affiliation with a self-proclaimed communist party. You yourself know that economically, China is the most capitalistic nation on earth, it is just run by pseudo-rightwing/extremist political entities.

    It would be much, much easier for you to explain even just one or two aspects of the Chinese state that make it Marxist. Go ahead and be as condescending as you want. I will wait.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

13. Sociologist
    5c4e
    

    China has executed billionaires. Vietnam has executed bankers in the Doi Moi era too. China also rapidly produces billionaires through its capitalist reforms and airs fluff pieces on how wonderful their new billionaires are on CCTV. While corporate influence in US political is egregious, and in many ways worse than China, I am not aware of a billionaire class pushing the US to frequently air documentaries on something akin to BBC and CCTV. That, my friend, is a "Chinese characteristic.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

14. Sociologist
    1e30
    

    Saying that china is the only country powerful enough to execute a billionaire is misleading. If Jay-Z went rouge, you don't think the US government would have the "power" to execute him?

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

15. Sociologist
    36fa
    

    This sounds like a guess at a definition. Socialism with Chinese characteristics does not mean Marxian socialism that is mindful of Chinese cultural attributes. It is specifically in reference to Deng's economic reforms and the market liberalization that followed.
    It's mostly the major capitalist influences that are in contrast to Marx, and not trivially so.

    http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-10/08/c_136665156.htm

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

16. Sociologist
    36fa
    

    Saying that china is the only country powerful enough to execute a billionaire is misleading. If Jay-Z went rouge, you don't think the US government would have the "power" to execute him?

    Jay-Z openly supports ethnic cleansing against white people. Is that "rogue"? He is entirely in league with the capitalist ruling class in the United States.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 3 NO GOOD !

17. Sociologist
    5c4e
    

    Let's al so note th at the Co mmu nist Party rules toward the accumulation of ca pi tal.
    Huawei is one of the largest multinational corporations, and is officially owned by its workers. The New York Times disputes that, but they would. Accumulation of capital obviously happens, but in a nationalistic and socialistic way differing strongly from the systems in the west.
    China executes 14 billionaires in 8 years:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-07-23/china-executes-14-billionaires-in-8-years-culture-news-reports

    Again, you're appealing to ideal types, which is a straw man of my position. I argued for capitalistic reforms that are understood in reference to Marx and Lenin as well as China's past. Nobody is claiming they have an ideal type capitalist system in every way. This is why "real xism has never been tried" alone doesn't suffice as a defense for a system. But I see the same logic here.

    Second, single case studies of powerful entities are not sufficient is refuting systemic change. The NYT is not alone in this critique, and flippant dismissal doesn't invalidate the critique.

    Third, this and much of your response is focusing on just one aspect of what was proposed as evidence of China abandoning Marxist principles. Presuming I'm talking to the same person, earlier, you eschewed marketization being sufficient in explaining this. Yet when a full picture with a cumulative case is presented, you then focus on (often dubious) counters to market liberalization claims as sufficient.

    Corporations control the networks here. I thought I had acknowledged massive corporate influence in our economy already, so that's fine.

    Corporate influence over state media is corporate influence over an arm of the state. That's what is happening in China,

    ...See full post

    and illustrates the extent to which capital rules.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

18. Sociologist
    1e30
    

    Lol at the idea of Jay-Z supporting "ethnic cleaning." If by being a proponent of black capitalism you mean ethnic cleansing, sure, nevermind the fact they're galaxies apart.

    Rogue would mean he's doing something to harm the capitalist class in the US. His existence simply puts more money into their pockets. But if he were to, you know, speak out against exploitation and oppression and actually influence some critical thinking, he'd be quickly neutralized.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

19. Sociologist
    5c4e
    

    In other news, People's Daily likewise insists that there's totally no problem in low-key continuing the Maoist cult of personality while instituting capitalistic reforms. The Chinese government totally didn't make any mistakes, except for those pesky people around Mao during the Cultural Revolution, because we can't make you forget that you used to starve.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 0 NO GOOD !

20. Sociologist
    36fa
    

    Lol at the idea of Jay-Z supporting "ethnic cleaning." If by being a proponent of black capitalism you mean ethnic cleansing, sure, nevermind the fact they're galaxies apart.

    Are you familiar with the racial doctrines of the Nation of Islam?

    Do you understand these lyrics:

    I'm ready to chase the Yakub back into caves
    These are the last days, but do I seem phased?

    1 year ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 1 NO GOOD !

Reply »