Following the Chinese Civil War and the victory of Mao Zedong's Communist forces over the Kuomintang forces of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, who fled to Taiwan, Mao declared the founding of the People's Republic of China on October 1, 1949.
China isn't communist Fuck China the last guardian of capitalism
Ayden Bailey
China is massively capitalist and, at least until the rise of Xi Jinping, the CPC had taken a hard right turn and had become the Kuomintang in everything but name.
Jaxson Martinez
Correct, however China definitely was socialist.
After the socialist transition in 1956 it became socialist and slowly lost it due to either Deng's reforms or later reforms depending on who you talk to.
On this day the People's Republic of China was founded. Yet to be socialist until 1956, it was still very important.
Thanks a lot. If you want, here is the torrent for the "Founding of a Republic" For watching this afternoo after the lunch. magnet:?xt=urn:btih:82d8046c3140bf247e0982c4a59466d3369baf53&dn=The.Founding.Of.A.Republic.2009.RETAiL.DVDRip.XviD.AC3-ViSiON&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.leechers-paradise.org%3A6969&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fzer0day.ch%3A1337&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.demonii.com%3A1337&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3A6969&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fexodus.desync.com%3A6969
Eli Ortiz
Dude, if your "socialism" could be dismantled by some party apparatchiks there was never any socialism to begin with. Either you literally believe in a "great man" theory of history, in which case you're not a Marxist, or you admit the very existing system enabled and caused it's own collapse.
I admit there was a lot of potential during the Cultural Revolution, but due to it being instigated by the very Party that held them back, it was from a beginning a doomed project. They where slaughtered by the army of the very man they worshipped.
Evan Roberts
Just because it failed doesn't mean it wasn't socialism. I agree that it was its own fault but those two are not equal statements.
The system still brought prosperity to China and developed international communist theory.
It is like arguing that since Marx's socialist theory led to the USSR, and the USSR collapsed and became revisionist, then Marx mustn't have been a socialist. All it means is that we must be extremely vigilant, more so than the USSR and more so than than PRC, in fighting revisionism and capitalists always.
Also when people say that Mao brought China to socialism and Deng (or later reformers) took it away they are not saying it was a single man. They are actually talking about the great amount of people who stood behind those figures (unless you are Jason Unruhe, then you literally mean those 2 people).
I meant ultimately After the reforms
Charles Stewart
Yeah, the subsumed it to the capitalist mode of production, which I'm thankful for - it's the best possible thing once you've turned a theory of class struggle into nationalism.
Are you for real? You're equating a theory that MLs never had a complete understanding of to begin with, to a state? Then again I agree, the ML theory was from the beginning fucked because they didn't get Marx.
Christian Lopez
Sounds like the PRC failed to deliver if you ask me, those sentiments are caused by existing structures, and they are allowed to spread through existing structures.
Brody Sanders
Anyway, since I quite like Mao (he generally had a good grasp of the limits of his project), and is quite fond of the Red Guard. Let's dump qts and music.
I was simply saying that since it failed in the end it doesn't mean it isn't socialist. It does mean we should learn from past mistakes and look forward. You cannot blame the USSR for misunderstanding Marx and learn nothing from it. It was undeniably created from what Marx wrote and, whether or not it was understood correctly, work must be done to stop it from happening again.
Correct. However I do not understand the position that purely due to a society's failure the entire thing must be discarded, mainly because that would mean discarding Marx. The correct response is to look critically, find the parts that failed and find solutions to problems you see might arise.
Well I'm glad you have a mature perspective of the situation, most Maoists I've encountered just believe you need to do it all over again, this time without Deng.
However, a critical repetition of Lenin, to use Zizek's terminology, will require us to accept the fact that the conditions of the 1920s are no longer. The most important being a) the totality of capitalism, there is no longer a outside b) thus the collapse of imperialism as analysis of international politics.
Meanwhile china is the most succefull capitalist country on the planet.
Landon Garcia
Yes. Truly they are Maoists (and here I am using Maoist in the offensive Chinese way, not the international way). Mao always talked about modernization and sinicization/application of Marxism in your own country. He even advocated for anarchism and reformism as possible solutions but not for china at that time.
To repeat Mao Zedong Thought would be to reject Maoism.