84% of today’s elite in China are direct descendants of the elite from pre-1949

what about before that? that's what i'm curious about
if it's as you say, then it makes sense that the former elite have returned. the maoist and GPCR era is a different question. if the pre-1949 elites still had power then, that is worrying

That's because 1949 was a bourgeois revolution.

Create a place of terror, suspicion, survival and base instinct, find out that people still act like the opportunistic rats you made out of them, repeat the proces until communism.

As long as it protected him from being raped in a civil war Hobbes would support anything

Check out the pdf I posted unlike during the Russian and Albanian revolutions, the bourgeoisie was not expropriated during the Chinese Revolution. Even during "collectivization" the Chinese national bourgeoisie was compensated by the state for their property and given interest payments at interest for over a decade and the former owners took a positions in the key leadership of these enterprises and were allowed to make decisions about wages, production etc.

Even Maurice Meisner, who is one of the most astute pro-Maoist historians admits that China didn't expropriate their national bourgeoisie but merely bought them out around 1956. Prior to that it was open capitalism with some welfarist/anti-feudal qualities (e.g. New Democracy).

how explain

So basically Mao was a moderate.

That's where you're wrong.

Do you believe Albania achieved socialism hoxhafag?

No he was pretty extreme. The problem was that he had to work with the national bourgeoisie to establish a revolutionary government. The Cultural Revolution was the first real marxist revolution and it unfortunately failed.

If what you mean by socialism is the "lower-phase of communism" then I'd say yeah. Not only was private capital accumulation outlawed, so was private property in land, the economy was planned instead of being determined by the anarchy of the market and income inequality was the lowest in the world 2:1.

If Scheidel's work on inequality is correct then it seems fair to say that there were primitive tribes that probably had greater wealth inequality then Albania did.

I'm not sure what more they could've done beyond abolishing le law of value and initiating super-abundance. I don't think Albania's productive forces were well-developed enough to do that but I think the will was there, and they had successes in turning Albania from the poorest country in the world to a place that was livable plus the first nation to achieve 100% electrification. They probably could've done more if they weren't hated by the US, UK, USSR, PRC, Yugoslavia, Greece etc. that created some difficulties in terms of their economy.

Mao's revolution actually increased the centralization of wealth compared to the average.

Was Mao playing for the capitalists all along?

Jesus, user.

Obviously he wasn't extreme if he actually made the national bourgeoisie richer than even in your average capitalist country.

Better then bourgle.

...

...

The world isn't going to get better in our lifetimes. The capitalists are too entrenched and powerful. The rich will continue being rich and half the population will be successfully brainwashed by capitalist propaganda

How is that even possible?

Were the aristocrats right all along? Is success really all about breeding?

This man embodies everything Holla Forums thinks we are holy shit

It's not an issue of Breeding, Maoist China just continued to provide legal protection to capitalists and basically let them continue in the same positions they were always in.

Rich people tend to marry only other rich people. As society becomes more unequal, the pool of potential partners for the rich gets smaller and smaller. That means more and more inbreeding.

Daily reminder that Marxism Leninism and all its variants is not Marxism

...

GMiL is bourgeois

i love this guys projecting. he obviously never read marx or lenin. or any other book except maybe some fiction.

Counterrevolutionary

that's what i worry about too
depressing to think there might be no way out of this hellhole

WEW LAD

I wonder when the left at large, let alone tankies, will realize that creating a cutthroat, anti-humanist system will weed out the good people while sociopaths prosper.

That has to be a poe.

Is that in the PDF?

That was literally my first thought when I saw op tittle, provide a counter argument that dispels this

Ya I also forgot to include the screens I took from it for the lurkers.

More proof that genes are the only things that matter.

Maoists, who often claim China was the closest thing to "real communism", how do you explain this?

What the fuck does any of this have to do with genes? Mao was too much of a pussy to kill them. They kept on (in)breeding. Nothing more.

So let's see. With the join-state companies capitalists no longer have any risks associated with private ownership because the liability can be transferred to the state. And they don't have to worry about market conditions for profit since they get guaranteed interest instead. Of course the masses must be taxed to pay for these interest payments.

It's literally better to be a capitalist in Mao's China than in the west.

so the counter-argument is inbreeding? Nothing theory related? So it's biology right. Well that's a first. I think the claim that the claim of class stratification on the basis of "they're inbreeding" is a little dubious. Can you explain why??

The argument is they weren't killed so they kept reproducing.

Reminder that this is a direct consequence of second pic related: insurgentnotes.com/2012/10/notes-towards-a-critique-of-maoism/.

so the nature of porkyness related to ones genes and not the relation to the means of production… indeterdasting…

Or is it that because of class relations and normatives whereupon the wealth is passed down?

I'm still down for some sick theory if anyone's got a better explanation than muh genes

The only liberation that happened under Mao was liberating capitalists from market forces. Sounds like the ultimate in corporate welfare.

The OP article isn't talking about the relations to the MoP. It's about intergenerational transfer of wealth. They can't have descendants if they're dead.

To add further to this, is any Holla Forumsp willing to go the extra yard and explain how Mao wasn't a retarded fascist?? Like he was all for class collaboration and nationalism. Granted my knowledge of Chink communism is fairly limited but I'd still like to hear your thoughts

in liu binyan's memoirs he claims that while a few examples were made of the elites in beijing - sending deng to the countryside, throwing his son out a window etc. - the cultural revolution actually strengthened the most corrupt, self-serving elements of the bureaucracy in the provinces. under the facade of socialism, these semi-autonomous provincial leaders still acted much like the warlords that preceded them. the same pre-cultrev figures were still in power in the 1980s, so it's no surprise that this nepotism has continued until the current day

The man has dedicated his life to being a stereotype.
I respect that.

More proof that M-L doesn't work.

Somehow I can still see tankies defending this.

You can't change the winners but you can change the prize.

The best solution to the genetic mental elite is to create a system where their class (in the broadest sense, not the marxist sense) has little to no correlation with luxury and absolute poverty, but rather social perception and political power (with proper checks of course). Technocracy and market socialism/mutualism are the ideas that meet these qualifications.

Someone send this to Unruhe.

Why do people get so butthurt over GMiL?

How does this prove ML does not work??
Mao did lots of things wrong but you cant blame on Marxism the right wingers taking power and intoducing capitalism again after Mao's death

It's a good thing
Mao a complete shit

how did this happen if the revolutionaries killed like 90% of the landowning class

is this proof we don't need to do that

The higher spheres are untouchable. Violent revolution only succeed in destroying landscapes, infrastructure and middle peasants.

Wow, Mao really annihilated the bourgeoisie!

Pic

Because ideological purism is worst purism
You leftcoms are particularly annoying about that

You had one job Mao. One fucking Job

I hate leftcoms

People like you are xhy we can't have nice things

Your salt only makes us stronger, kiddo.

Research

Research has shown that people with last names most common among the pre-1949 elite were part of the elite of the Chinese communists pretty much constantly.

It has everything to do with genetics. The more genetically intelligent will naturally work their way to the top of any hierarchy they're apart of, even in M-L(-M) countries.

This is why you have to kill their male children too when you seize power.

Why not standard ML?

I wonder how this happened? that's so weird, hey didn't all the elites in France do the same thing???

I thought this had little to do with genetics, merit, or whatever, and everything to do with the fact that the overwhelming majority of Chinese porkies were left in place undisturbed by Mao.

All because Mao didn't make Stalin look like an anarchist

Because in ML, the higher ups live the good life while the the workers live in poverty, to say nothing of the the human rights abuses.

That probably didn't help, but even if they completely killed off the families of the the pre-1949 ruling class it wouldn't solve the problem in the long term. The genetically more intelligent members of the surviving workers would simply find themselves with higher social status and pass on the intelligence that got them there to their children.

...

There are legitimate, intelligent criticisms of Marxism-Leninism, but you're just a retard my dude

China had a very large national bourgeoisie and petit-bourgeois population, and that partly had to do with its low-level of industrial development and partly to do with its massive population.

Many Chinese petit-bourgs from 1949 were recruited into the party along with national capitalists proper. So, even if Mao really did kill off 90% of the landlord class as bourg propaganda often claims that still leaves the pre-49 capitalists and they weren't killed off or expropriated in the usual because

You might as well just call out Marx for supporting the 1848 revolution and Lenin for allying with liberals and to install the NEP. Also, please don't quote Hoxha when you try to "debunk" Maoism, he is known to strawman Maoism a lot

China was never even close to socialism.

It was a liberal bourgeois anti-colonial revolution (which is a good thing, btw) and it was class-collaborationist from the very start.

Maoists are literally the worst part of the Left and that includes democratic socialists.

I don't understand how ML's and Hoxhaists can say this, while Maoists at the same time say the exact opposite, that China was the closest thing ever to full communism. It's making me real fucking confused because I haven't read much about socialism in China or Maoism myself. I'm pretty sure I've heard Maoists say that the use of money and certain functions of the state was "withering away" in some areas of China at one point.

Maoists don't understand that you can have conditions of the socialist mode of production while still having a fundamentally capitalist state and capitalist ruling class. So, having a bunch of communes isn't what creates socialism.

They are literally the most delusional political ideology in history. Everything that comes out their mouth is propaganda designed to make you accept their failed ideology.

...

About the flag, pic related was originally Mao's preferred choice and many in the CPC were opposed to adding a star for the national bourgeoisie, but in the middle of the night Zhou Elai was convinced by some shill after the Five Star Flag was already rejected

That's just plain bullshit straight from the "Victims of Communism" playbook.

The Filipino, Nepalese, Peruvian and Turkish Maoists are pretty good and have made great strides.

if there really is some genetic trait that makes this happen, what we should aim for is making sure these people use their ability for the good of the people, not exploitation or personal profit.

That's fair.

1st world Maoists are annoying; 3rd world Maoists are very brave, good socialists.

You mean 1912 numbnuts

Mao didn't kill the landowners like the Soviets did. This was obviously a huge mistake.

Hobbes would support whoever is in power so as not to be killed.

Of all the people in China who actually needed to be purged…

I was under the impression that he did at least that much.

Based Mao