Where did all the fucking Marcyites come from? They're all over leftbook and twitter...

PSL/WWP, both American communist parties with Trotskyist origins. They seem to take the line that the primary goal of communists is opposing American imperialism (Marcy's global class war theory) and thus any party/state standing up to the US is worthy of support.

They've hopped onto the ☭TANKIE☭ tendency of worshipping strongmen who make mostly superficial overtures to socialism.

Weeew I guess some of the people in this thread need to read up on their historical materialism.

It goes like this:

Primitive communism -> Agrarian -> Ancient Society -> Feudalism -> Capitalism -> Socialism/Communism

Marx wanted and thought that the entire world would need to become capitalist before a world wide communist revolution was on the cards. Surface level criticism is poor, because material conditions are what matter at the end of the day. Look at the trajectory China is taking, they've met every single goal they've set in the post Deng era. China currently has a capitalist mode of production, in 2049 they plan to have achieved Communism.

No, they plan to have achieved the "Chinese Dream", which is basically a bootleg American Dream.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism_in_20_years

source?
i can hand you a quote by Engels, which has shown itself to be inaccurate in itself lacking analysis of imperialism that Lenin provided later, which contradicts you there, so i'm genuinly intrigued to see what you're talking about

There is no way to logically denounce Chinese communist party from being Marxist-Leninist and Maoist. In fact, they care about formalism of it more than most religions.

The only question that makes practical sense discussing considering them or anyone else is wether they are progressive or reactionary, competent or incompetent. Whether they commit mistakes or a better way of doing things is possible.

Implying there is anything wrong in accumulation of Capital, development of production forces and reigning in foreign influence and Capital.

There's a problem with it when you do it by crushing the workers and then pumping them out to Western porkies for extra cheap.

That's… not what Marx or Lenin argued.

At no point did they argue that a Communist Party should implement Capitalism so that it could advance to the next stage of development. Hence the October Revolution, the June Days of 1848, the Paris Commune, etc.

The point isn't to become better Capitalists than the Capitalists, it's to abolish the present state of things, and implement a Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

>material conditions
Such as? I've never actually seen a PRC apologist actually point to anything that stops the CCP from moving towards a Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

Ah and be stifled under a wall of sanctions and unable to access foreign technology and develop incredibly slowly? China has DoTP, the Chinese Communist Party has 80 million members. 30% of whom are farmers, herdsmen, and fishermen.

It's funny because the same people who rebuke China today, would denounce Mao for the great leap forward. Pragmatism>Dogmatism

Porky for extra cheap? Annual increases in minimum wage are guaranteed by law.

They still work for abysmal wages which is what attracted Western investment in the first place.

PSL just has a great online presence.

Marcyism is the "easiest" type of communism in our current society because it lets you fool yourself into thinking any country which opposes US hege is effectively communist.

HAHAHA

You realize those farming numbers are inflated because of the Hukou system?

Lol, read Marx before you come make claims like this so confidently. Marx & Engels thought the world was ready for Communism during their lifetime.

The main obstacle to socialism in China is the same as in other capitalist countries. The class interests the princeling billionaires who control the party and their collaborators in the private sector. China may build Socialism one day but it will require large scale upheaval and political violence just like in all other capitalist countries.

Every bouj is essentially on a hitlist, if they ever step out of line they get popped, clearly the bouj aren't in control here

why would they "step out of line" when it's already theirs?
clearly the bouj are in control here

I guess Poland is still socialist then

...

Let's go down the list:

1. Forced evictions of people from their homes so a shopping mall (a place only capitalists have use of).

latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-china-evictions-20171130-story.html

2. Rampant and unapologetic destruction of the environment, as nearly all their power comes from coal.

eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=9751

3. Making deals with the bourgeoisie to undermine workers' solidarity.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon's_1972_visit_to_China

4. Uncaring attitude towards occupational safety.

clb.org.hk/content/grim-and-mundane-reality-work-accidents-china

5. Engaging in capitalist markets as a capitalist would. Specifically, aiming to price dump and destroy workers' livelihoods across the planet so you can make more money for yourself. Socialists have no need for such massive overproduction because socialists do not wish to dominate capitalists at their own flawed game.

cnbc.com/2016/05/20/china-steel-overcapacity-war.html

6. Encouraging citizens to throw all their money into the stock market to further some greater nationalist agenda, which inevitably resulted in people losing their wealth as naive investors made bad stock purchases:

barrons.com/articles/the-culprits-in-chinas-stock-market-meltdown-1442598870

The "unique material conditions" in China at the moment is State Capitalism at best, and full-on crony capitalism at worst. This goes against the CPC's socialist agenda and prevents them from being used as an example of a successful communist country, because they aren't communist. I'll even go so far to argue that China's deals with American capitalists has done more to harm the workers cause than any other event in human history.

also:

marketwatch.com/story/blues-for-the-elderly-in-china-2013-06-03

Either go hard or go home. We're talking about creating Communism, not becoming an cum dumpster for American investors. To that end, there's a reason why communism can only happen in industrialized societies with access to enough knowledge and resources to construct it. Russia and China were this, before 1930 they had vastly underutilized resources (both men and material) that the bourgeoisie was too cheap to assist. So they took it themselves. By 1960, both had nuclear weapons and were capable of fending off the US government.

Fuck's sake, China's entire economy is about absorbing critical industries other countries used to do on their own. Chief among these are cement, steel, car parts, and semiconductor components all of which Trump has made a goal of protecting (and Hilary too through the now failed TPP). China and Russia both have the capability to build whatever they need. Same for most other countries where at least 50% of the population is literate and capable of reading textbooks.

At some point "pragmatism" evolves into becoming a capitalist state. That's the most practical method because it makes a lot of friends with the international bourgeoisie, but it's no longer socialism and ultimately fails over the long term like all capitalism does.

To further this point, look at sanctioned countries like Rhodesia, South Africa, Iran and North Korea. Even amongst the capitalist ones, they managed to survive economic isolation imposed on them by the bourgeoisie. The two that reneged did so due to internal strife as a result of race relations, and not the sanctions.

NEP was State Capitalism.

China is full on Pluto/Corporatocracy.

Marx did think that you could have communism in the strict definitive sense in Russian peasant communes. But FALC is something that can only progress from the foundations laid down by Capitalism, just like previous modes of production. I mean what did Marx and Engels say in the manifesto? Social democracy, and in CotGP? China has literally instituted every single one of the guidelines outlined. And is moving towards planning, even fucking Chinese porkies are now saying that planned socialism is possible with the level of technology they have now.

ft.com/content/6250e4ec-8e68-11e7-9084-d0c17942ba93

ft.com/content/5f483a34-ba5f-11e7-8c12-5661783e5589

Yeah Dengism is extremely revisionist, but what's the alternative? Only thing that can cause the collapse of global capitalism is capitalism itself. Like if there is anything to learn from the 20th century it's that.

Hide and Bide is the long term Chinese strategy, Chinese firms are compelled by the Party to invest continuously in productivity growth. Expanding Constant capital and introducing automation, whereas Capital in the west is on strike and refuse to invest. What do you expect to happen when China overtakes the US economically? Chinese economic policy will force international capital to once again compete, further reducing the rate of profit.

I just love when a good reply is given, no one responds

Except that everyone's rate of profit falls, including China's. Which means their experiment with capitalism will utterly collapse with capitalism, rather than surviving it.

As for the west, the west won't compete. Captains of industry see exactly what China is doing (price dumping anything they can) and have been moving to cut them out entirely from the global capitalist system rather than letting them compete. The original means to do this was the (now failed) TPP, but since Trump was elected most have opted for hard Tariffs. What happens then? Capitalism stops functioning normally within the west, as companies are forced to make investments in men and machinery causing their falling profits to fall further. Meanwhile China looses the ability to cheaply export things, causing their capitalist experiment to burn down and taking everyone who engaged in it with it.

That last part is particularly important. Chinese citizens invested in their stock market because their government told them to do so for the good of the country, now they are the bagholders for the capitalist class who will buy American visas and get out or just buy/bribe the PLA to do their dirty work (as has already been the case in Mongolia, Tibet, and Hong Kong). When the west cuts them out, all the stock those people hold is rendered worthless making them impoverished and unable to pay for mortgages or food. This is the exact sort of collapse that leads to socialism, except instead of championing this change the CPC will be fighting against it.

Yeah you idiot, that's the point

The rest of your post doesn't make any sense

Available evidence says otherwise. If China really were planning a long-term transition to full socialism they are going about it in the worst way possible. In particular, since the 2008 recession the Chinese government has allowed their state owned banks, state owned conglomerates, private companies and private citizens to take on enormous amounts of debt to ensure high growth rates of about 11%. This was done because profits were starting to fall and they wanted to keep growth up, a known phenomenon in capitalism that Beijing sought to avoid rather than deliberately plan for. Now yearly gdp growth is about 6% (less if you don't use gov't numbers) and people are starting to get worried that they won't be able to fully pay back their loans which still have to be paid. If the loans aren't paid, the banks raid deposited cash until they have no money left and close - a classic capitalist banking crisis.

This isn't a controlled demolition, if that's what you mean. This is a head-first fall into a concrete floor. So, Beijing's planners are either incredibly incompetent or they are literally capitalists. Their rates of profit are falling, yet all they are doing is issuing more debt to keep growth up. This is not sustainable.

So basically these people think the Chinese Communist Party is playing 56 dimensional chess to achieve communism in the future?

at least it's better than the idiots (most of the board) who think Bernie Sanders or Corbyn are playing communist quantum jenga.

Yes. In fairness their game has worked thus far, China's abuse of the international trade system is a major factor in it's breakdown. it would work great if such a thing was sustainable into the future.

Corbyn actually is though, but then again it's only because he's playing candyland to May's peekaboo with Brexit.

My thoughts on the whole revolution vs reform thing is that we need normies in the revolution and nothing radicalizes people like the failure of reform. socia democrats are cool until they fail to latch on to the revolution side of things when reform fails.

*sucks troops dicks*

This is a perfectly reasonable stance, it's exactly what Lenin described in Left Wing Communism: And Infantile Disorder, but the key thing is that in order to fully take advantage of the failure of socdems, communists must criticize them at every turn.

...

You can't possibly be serious

I see what you mean but shouldn't we explain to socdems why they are wrong when reform fails? also forgive spelling fuckups because im incredibly drunk.

Uh, that's exactly what I said, but communists have to explain why socdems are wrong the whole time, not just when socdems get into power.

China practices MMT, it's not called MMT but that's what they practice. Their only fear is a Minsky trap, and have instated necessary measures to prevent it.The whole 'defaulting on loans' hand-wringing you're doing is just embarrassing, poor macro economic understanding. Look at the two graphs below, the first one looks alarmist right? (oooh that fast rise so scary!!) And the second one? Oh wow China is right in the middle. That acceleration of debt is due to private property not existing in China 15 years ago, and so the property market/mortgages reforms are the main cause, the other cause is state firms, and provinces borrowing from the central bank through intermediaries, creating multiples sets of loans on the books.

China's high growth rates are a good thing, I don't see how it could in any way be construed as a negative thing? China investing IS the longterm transition to socialism - If China stopped investing in growth they would be Italy tier. Once capital globally starts to feel the heat from China they will be forced to invest and actually compete again or die out. Slowly but surely the global rate of profit will continue to fall and Capitalism will eat itself.

''The current rate of return in the market is quite low, I have idle reserves of cash that I could invest in productive investments, or maybe I can do some asset speculation and get a tidy super profit. Hmm I think I'll do the latter *sips martinee*

Hmm Rate of profit is falling, We are going to invest further in productive capital investments by expanding to international infrastructure projects (BRI) that are longterm and labor intensive. This expansion to new markets should help offset the hemorrhaging. Domestically we'll begin shift our economic composition to service and technology sectors from manufacturing as population ages.

the NEP was just regular capitalism

No it wasn't, it was developmentalist capitalism without a bourgeois class: it was designed to spread the capitalists conditions that existed in Moscow and Petrograd prior to the war, and a few other places during it, to the whole country in the most painless way possible: effectively advancing the dialectic of development towards a position where Russia could have developed socialism on its own. This is opposed to Lenin's original plan, where he was going to piggy-back off the industrial power of a full developed capitalist economy, like France or Germany (the latter of which came close to a communist revolution).

TL;DR: bukharin did nothing wrong purge the trots and M-Ls alike.

Also as for China's material conditions still requiring State-Cap to develop, we have mostly reached the end of that. Looking at China from purely a pol/sci perspective, ironically the only reforms it can now introduced are ones advanced by leftists: trade unionism, legitimate democracy, workers' protects ect. The movement that will advance China and that will take down the CPC will end up being a leftist one, of that I am nigh-sure.

I mean look at the two greatest periods of resistance to the rule of the CPC: the democracy wall movement of 1979 and the protests of 1989 (which include Tiananmen square, although they took place all over the country). The first was a marxist critique of the rule of the CPC: with figures like Wei Jingsheng in his essay "The Fifth Modernisation" legit not sure what the other four were taking a marxist standpoint: Democracy is "rule of the labour classes" over both the political AND economic spheres. The guy even cites dialectical historiography in his view of history and states Yugoslavia is the aim, not America or a NATO state. And in the Tiananmen square, they espoused slogans like "Up with socialism, down with corruption" and in a famous clip from the bbc report on the protests, sang the internationale[1].

If we look at China today and the power structures in place: they are purely corporatist. The bourgeois class is merged with the CPC and the emergent petit-bourgeois are also served by the party to an extent. China is now a developed capitalist state to the same degree that western Europe and the Americas were in the 1900s-1940s; the difference being that China's economic power structure is that of a fascist or third way state (such as Peronist Argentina) rather than that of your classical liberal democracy. Radical liberalism has no place in China, for the bourgeois class has no need of exacting greater representation in the government: it IS the government. As such, the future of China is one of a leftist nature: only proletarian struggle can now change China into a workers' state. Now where do I think the best place to start this is? Trade unionism. China is at the same state where radical, militant unionism was at its height in the west, it is there that the dirving force to turn China from this dictatorship of the bourgeoisie into a proletarian state will happen.

Although tbh, the CPC's rule will disintegrate before that happens me thinks: China is nought more than a corrupt oligarchy, one that is already showing signs of cracking. Such systems are not design to withstand shocks and if the autoloan market fails in the way that the housing market did (which some economists are now predicting) then China will get hit hard. The thing is there is no structures in place (outside of the sepratist regions and Hong Kong) to replace the CPC so it will end up like Russia, except this time the bourgeois classes already exist and will just assume direct control. That is if Xi doesn't actually turn out to be the stealth Stalinist some are predicting, but I can't imagine a personalist rule b him to be much better for the Chinese proletariat.

[1]youtu.be/kMKvxJ-Js3A?t=106

In the context of the discussion (China is not NEP), you are wrong. NEP was qualitatively different from Dengist China. For example, there was state monopoly on foreign trade, there was no way to independently hire wage-labourers, absolute majority of enterprises was state-owned in one way or another.

China is quite far away from Soviet NEP (which is proper State Capitalism) and much closer to Scandinavian Social Democracy.

Are you high?

No. It was partially a peace treaty between kulaks and Bolsheviks (there was a real Civil War starting in 1921: Green vs Red), partially an admission of inability to create Planned Economy in the given conditions.

There was no intent to "spread" anything. Read Lenin's Development of Capitalism in Russia (1899) - everything was already spread.

Kill yourself, larper.

There was no "Lenin's original plan". If anything was, it was first half of 1918 - State Capitalist economy managed by Direct Democracy. NEP is a continuation of this.

tl;dr: you are a retarded larper with no understanding of history (or Marxism).

Not an argument.

Really? because in his letter to M. F. Sokolov [16/05/1921] he says in references to criticisms of the NEP, that "the introduction of capitalism (in moderation and skilfully…) is possible without restoring landowners' property." Now if Lenin believed capitalism existed wholesale throughout Russia, why would he refer to the NEP as the process for "introducing" capitalism, in a way he describes as keeping "the workers' state in control".He then goes on in the letter to describe how he is building a capitalism without a bourgeois class; so to develop Russia. Heck even says "whatever you do lads, don't fucking touch agriculture before we have developed capitalism everywhere or people will die" [not sic] So yes, please do tell me how Lenin thought Russian was capitalism when he said himself the role of the NEP was spreading capitalism.

Sure they have! By preventing stock owners from selling, trapping them with a toxic asset. Since that stock is nonpreforming, investors are left without money which means they go bankrupt and any loans they have are written off as losses/nonpreforming. If this happens to enough people, the bank runs out of money and depositors loose their assets unless the government issues script. This is the death cycle the US economy was hit with in 2007. Even if depositors get their money back, the economy is in shambles because nobody has any credit.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing. Growth is fine, but it's not growing fast enough. The rate of profit has fallen, and will continue to fall further as is expected of capitalism. Instead of realizing this and adjusting to it, the Chinese government has tried to keep the rate of growth up (an impossible task under socialist theory) by relaxing rules on credit spending and issuing more loans. As with any economy this has had the expected consequence: a credit boom and now a bust. Earlier this year China's government was bragging about it's "higher than expected" 6.3% growth rate, which does not have any value for socialists because socialists expect growth to hit 0%. It's only capitalists that expect (or rather, desire) the 10-11% growth rates China had a few years ago. And because the rate of growth has fallen 3.7%, capitalists are seeing losses as their speculative-driven financial instruments break down.

Also, these two things are the same phenoneon:

"Asset speculation" and "invest in further productive capital investments" are exactly the same thing. Exactly. You yourself have just demonstrated that the Chinese government is not only capitalist but supports capitalism's speculative finance. You have also stated how China engages in capitals imperialism by "expansion to new markets should help offset the hemorrhaging". This is not socialism.

This. It's also the reason why so many former tumblrite idpolers have latched onto it - it's another simplistic ideology with little room for nuance and allows you to be contrarian and edgy.

I'd say it's just sucking up to power. China is rising rapidly, so naturally it's going to attract people who see their ideological belief systems in it. China has admirers across the political spectrum.

Blatant bullshit, if you support Cuba, the DPRK, Syrian government, Iran, etc. you will be constantly hounded by basically the entire porky political spectrum and most "socialists" as well.

No it doesn't.

This is an interesting point, but I have a question for you: let's say these reports that China is arming the Nazalites are true. Shouldn't serious revolutionaries be making attempts to gain the CPC's favor and get similar support?

*Naxalites

what serious revolutionaries

Basically none in the USA right now, but if people aren't trying to become serious revolutionaries, then why talk about revolution at all?

u wot mate ?

China has not supported any serious revolutionary movement abroad for at least 45 years at this point. Why would communists trust a country that supported China?

*supported Pinochet

I just mentioned that they're supporting the Naxalites.
indiatoday.intoday.in/story/chinese-intelligence-training-and-funding-maoists-in-india/1/186191.html
indiatoday.intoday.in/story/chinese-intelligence-training-and-funding-maoists-in-india/1/186191.html
China also provides support and trade to a number of states that are resisting empire, such as Cuba, DPRK, Syria, and Iran.

SOCIALISM
WITH
CHINESE
CHARACTERISTICS

personal credit scores literally exist in the US.

True but it isn't affected by your behavior on public transit nor does it really work the same way if she's talking about the new Social Credit score.
wired.co.uk/article/chinese-government-social-credit-score-privacy-invasion

Only within the context of bail adjustment for people arraigned on charges in a court, and even then the accused can see all the information being used to generate that score and how that score is generated - although with the case of computerized bail systems this might require signing an NDA because porky doesn't want his trade secrets leaking out. But even in that extreme case, computerized bail systems are already being sued into the dirt for racial profiling and most states are backing away from them as a result.

Now if you're talking about financial credit scores, that's a completely different thing because you can always choose to opt out by not ever having any credit cards or bank loans.

Can anyone actually elaborate on what these 'unique material conditions' are

Utter claptrap. Asset speculation is a bet on the value of the asset itself, while capital investment aims at the productive returns of an asset. If you buy real estate on the assumption that the real estate will appreciate in value, that's pointless speculation, just moving money around withe aim of enriching the speculator. If you build houses with an aim to use value, you're actually doing something useful, because no matter what happens to the value of the house, it will still be there for someone to live in. Unless there is an acute resource of labour shortage, better to activate those things even for a sub-optimal project than let them sit idle.
Not to say China will be immune to capitalist collapse, only that they will be left with a bigger stock of capital goods after it happens, always a good thing.

the came out of the closet after Xi Jinpijg's "communism by 2049" speech

isnt BO one of those people? LOL

Why did you post a picture of Winnie the Pooh?

Source? when did he give that speech?
Pretty sure Deng said communism by 2049

The CPC's plan is to have a moderately prosperous socialist country by 2049. Not quite as ambitious as full communism. If Deng said communism by 2049 in the 80s then today's CPC is quite the downgrade.

qz.com/1105337/chinas-19th-party-congress-your-five-minute-summary-of-xi-jinpings-three-hour-speech/

The PSL must die.

Practically speaking there is no difference, especially with such massive banks as China's. Everyone is looking to make bets on future infrastructure and gamble. This inherently leads to sellers lying about the potential profit of their projects and buyers demanding government subsidy so they can better support the national economy. Similar arguments were used in America from 2000-2006 in the housing markets, the US government actively encouraging gambling with subprime loans because the common perception was there was no way a house could not be a productive investment.

Then, one day in 2007 banks started having problems with homeowners not being able to make mortgage payments, and loans having to be adjusted as housing prices fell. This led to cash flow crises and the collapse of a few banks. China is on the same route.

This is too simplistic an explanation. Those houses still have to be maintained (at cost) so they are fit for habitation, this costs money and depresses housing markets by keeping the supply of housing high. Not only does this hurt new housing development, but it also hurts anyone else who owns homes because the value of their investment is being kept permanently depressed by this large market of inhabited structures. This is effectively what a price dump is - the only people who benefit from it are the bank (who is still making money from everyone), the construction contractor and the contractor's suppliers.

It's not sustainable as a result. Because the rate of growth keeps slowing (the tendency of the rate of profit to slow), more and more resources are utilized to keep unused structures ready for inhabitants they won't receive for decades. And by the time they do, the buildings are most likely going to be horribly depreciated. Meanwhile housing prices usually crash during this time and homeowners stop making mortgage payments, creating a bank crisis. This is the stereotypical "socialist nightmare" porkys scream about, a government that subsidizes everything yet produces nothing of real value.

Put simply it's bad economic planning. It was bad in 00s America and it's bad in 10s China.

Yeah but in China saying bad things about the government online will hurt your credit score.

m.scmp.com/news/china/economy/article/2127448/chinese-refuse-collector-dies-after-working-long-hours-freezing

Dying from overwork after carrying two tonnes of trash on your back in freezing temperatures every day is actually existing socialism.

LOL FUCK CHINA, they give us shit but for all we care here Xi is a total loser lmao.

They also sell weapons to Duterte. What's clear is that they like to sell things and don't care who they sell it to. Kind of like every other major capitalist nation.

SOUNDS LIKE COMMUNISM TO ME BUT WHAT WOULD I KNOW I AM JUST SOME DUMB BURGERSTANI

imagine believing this

What do you call yourself if you sincerely believe that weakening western (and specifically American) imperial power is the most important project for socialists internationally but also that the people who oppose the US aren't necessarily socialist for doing so?

Someone with a brain.

What the hell was the NEP then?

lmao you goons were so excited to have a gotcha that you've latched onto the weakest talking point I've ever seen. Bringing troops home (and away from where they are) is good. Going about it in a way that hurts your feelings is fine

So it's low Autism Level people like this that take exception to China being socialist? Makes me much more comfortable.

nothing says "I have a strong argument" like "LOL ur dumb xD"

A tactical retreat.

Becoming your enemy is not a "tactical retreat", it's a surrender. Chinese socialism has lost, they won the battle but lost the entire war and their country to a new generation that has no desire for workers' solidarity, at best they might be wooed by Not Socialism fed to them by elites. Just as it is in capitalist America, because China is a capitalist society.

Well, NEP was abolished.

MMMMMMMMMMMM bigggge think

let's be poor forever, who needs capital to develop communism?

Socialism is when you reduce poverty

Socialism is destitution and starvation ;)

I can do this too

All that declining poverty happened due to wealth redistribution from America. Specifically American consumers chose to buy products from rural China instead of their own country. Again this is literally capitalism and like all capitalism it is not sustainable. Either wages rise high enough where US consumers buy their stuff from somewhere cheaper causing economic divestment (the "middle income trap") or conditions inside newly urbanized areas deteriorate due to heavy pollution and wage theft. End result is that people get pissed off and a revolution occurs, a thing which should not be happening in China a country that supposedly is already socialist.

In a more practical sense what causes problem is that Beijing seemingly is unaware of the Marxist theory they are supposed to be practicing. If Beijing did so, they would realize their recession is an inevitable part of capitalism and would have just let it happen instead of desperately shore up capitalist markets by issuing more debts. This would have avoided most of the broader economic problems they are currently facing. Instead there's this half-leftist half-bourgeois abomination trying (and failing) to implement strict controls on capital flows and loans while letting basic issues like wage theft and occupational safety go completely ignored.

But to answer your question: China still could have avoided _all_ of this if they put more SEZ's inland and the central government deliberately devolved as much of it's power as possible to regional districts. This would have prevented the extremely high concentration of capital on the eastern coast.

Hand-wringing for no purpose. Capitalism is bound to collapse everyone knows this. 20th century socialist movements were strangled at every turn by global capital's reactionary forces and were never able to develop their productive forces at the level necessary to make the transition to communism smoothly.

Pragmatism has allowed China to retain DoTP and long term NEP which Lenin and Bukharin would have supported as the socialist development model had he lived past the 1920s. No one would ever dream of calling Lenin a revisionist, and yet Lenin took loans from New York bankers. At the same time Deng is put to coals at every turn. Look at the results, this is Scientific Socialism, not Dogmatic Socialism.

If you could somehow achieve the same goals without interconnecting with the global capital and acquiring the desperately needed technology and expertise please please please let me know how you would do it.

This is already happening thanks to decades of class struggle. The question is if Chinese capital will compensate through automation or by moving production elsewhere. This of course raises the questions of what will happen to the displaced (former)peasantry that used to work in the factories, and where to move production.

bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-02/china-robots-displace-workers-as-wage-spiral-pressures-profits

(a) 1970s - Not working with a capitalist (Richard Nixon) to divide the communist bloc because you are fighting a stupid pissing match with Russia over land borders and Vietnam. Had China instead chose to mediate disputes with Russia it is likely the USSR would still exist. In doing so they could just be socialist countries and develop each other rather than relying on western capitalists.

(b) 1980s - Failing that, putting SEZes further inland to promote broader economic development and preventing all wealth from being concentrated on the coasts, giving rise to a capitalist class.

(c) 2010s - Failing that, not issuing ridiculous amounts of debt to private and state owned companies in a futile attempt to prevent a recession (a natural part of capitalism's business cycle that cannot be avoided). This itself is the thing that will finally break them like it broke every other asian economy in the 90s.

These are all places where China could have made some sensible choices to promote internal prosperity but chose not to because it would not have made as much profit. That is the basic issue here, China's government is putting profits before people and profiteers' businesses before workers solidarity. So it's just another capitalist state.

It won't. Automation is more expensive than wage slavery. So long as their government does not enforce workers' rights then automation cannot happen as industries will see no reason to demand such machines. Beijing's attempts to set quotas on "robot" production here is equally useless, because all they are doing is creating another supply glut that will hamper future investment. This is economic mismanagement, and it's happening because business owners (capitalists) utilize the government for their own benefit.

Proletarian billionaires
Proletarian privatisation

Proletarian poverty
Proletarian co-ops

whats your point?

source?

a) I'm not even gonna address the geopol CCP has made some retarded decisions in the past. In the modern day, China supports the Naxalites in India, Maoists in Nepal, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela etc

b) SEZs were a co-ordinated decision by Xue Muqiao, he argued centralisation of capital allows for the most rapid growth. Even development would take too long to develop an industrial base, instead concentrated consolidate and expand. 30 years of +10% growth speaks to the strategy.

c) China practices MMT so I don't know what you're afraid of, a Minsky trap is the only fear, China structurally cannot have a US style financial crash. All of the borrowing does look dangerous, but it's borrowing for productive investment not speculation. Worst case scenario China does a 1990s Japan, and then large scale private expropriations occur, foreign currency reserves are drained ($3T) and new reforms switching back to a planned economy are implemented.

There is already talk in the Marxist institute of China of using Big data to revive socialist planning.

boingboing.net/2017/09/14/platform-socialism.html (the study is behind a paywall)

finance.sina.com.cn/meeting/2016-11-19/doc-ifxxwrwk1493465.shtml

Notice how this information is internal??

That BBQ looks awesome. I want one.

Poverty > billionaires

Bukharin states it in ABCs of communism

marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1920/abc/index.htm

Lenin taking loans to fund the revolution i.e 'The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them'

counter-currents.com/2013/10/wall-street-and-the-november-1917-bolshevik-revolution/

let me rephrase
source on Lenin saying what you imply with
where is he promoting the idea of NEP being anything but a stepping stone away from capitalism to socialist construction?
can you give me a concrete quote?

because this sounds very much different:

" If in approximately six months’ time state capitalism became established in our Republic, this would be a great success and a sure guarantee that within a year socialism will have gained a permanently firm hold and will have become invincible in this country."
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm

It isn't. If the things being built were so profitable then owners would be seeing profits from them by now, negating the need for new loans to make further investments. Instead the rate of debt growth is not declining, it's growing and grows by at least 25% every year while economic growth is only 6.3%. This is not sustainable, it is clearly evidence of a bubble. As things stand their private debt to GDP is over 300%, larger than the US and Japan.

cnbc.com/2017/06/28/chinas-debt-surpasses-300-percent-of-gdp-iif-says-raising-doubts-over-yellens-crisis-remarks.html

They need to stop freely issuing so much debt, get real and crash the market so an honest recovery can occur. Nobody (except capitalists) are benefiting from new debts being issued, because it's largely being done to finance older debts. The same thing happened in Japan leading up to their crash in the early 90s, same for the US before the 2008 financial crisis.

It is not enough. China's GDP is over $12 Trillion, their private debts over $36 Trillion. $3 Trillion would not help, neither would incompetent central planning that caused this mess in the first place especially when any sort of currency manipulation would result in US sanctions, destroying their economy further (about 20-50% of China's GDP is borne from US exports). The only "safe" way out is letting markets naturally fail then cushioning the blow with judicious use of social programs (social-ism) to ensure people do not become too poor. Beijing is not doing this, they're just issuing more debt in greater volumes in the hope that markets will sort themselves out.

It isn't. Why do you think Moody's cut their ratings for China's debt? Everyone can see what is happening except the Chinese government itself. Even capitalists know that such massive increases in debt will only result in disaster which is why they are so critical of such policies in their home countries. It is plainly obvious their plan will not work, China is not any more special than America or Japan. Their "socialism with chinese characteristics" is no different than the American "homeowner economy" or the Japanese "economic miracle".

Marx`s idea of historic materialism is unrealistic and revisionist history trough, for example his case regarding Crusades does not hold in actual historic examination.

That debt is in their own currency (yuan) and can be cancelled at any time. Don't you know how MMT works lol.

If the debts are cancelled, then the bank suddenly doesn't have any revenue and cannot pay it's obligations (either in the form of deposits or loans to other banks) which causes bankruptcy. The bank then stops operating and usually causes an economic crisis. On the whole, China's debts dwarf their assets 3:1 meaning if a third or more debts are nonpreforming the economy isn't physically large enough to cover the debt through liquidation. The government could go into debt and back all the loans with a truly huge bailout package by printing more money, but all this would do is cause hyperinflation. In this case everything is expensive and there are bread lines because people cannot afford anything else with their wheelbarrows full of money. Exactly the situation socialism aims to prevent, not instigate.

Either way, it's messy, it's predictable and it's very capitalist.

Did you, or did you not read Lenin's "Development of Capitalism in Russia"?