• acargitz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      This thing they call “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” has as much in common with Marx and Engels’ idea of Communism as a Big Mac has with a plate of hummus.

      Edit: western dengists, man.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is Marxism-Leninism applied to the PRC’s present productive forces and material conditions. They have not reached Communism, but they are firmly on their way to full socialization of the economy. The only way you could think they have abandoned Communism as a goal is if you have never read Marx, Engels, or Lenin, and therefore have never studied Historical Materialism.

        The reason it’s painfully obvious that you haven’t studied Historical Materialism is because you clearly believe Communism is something that develops through decree, not degree, that the goal of Communism is to immediately socialize all production. This is absurd, and Utopian. Marx believed Socialism to come after Capitalism because Capitalism turns itself into a status ripe for socialism as markets coalesce into few monopolist syndicates, ripe for central planning. If the productive forces aren’t ready, then Communism can’t be achieved without struggles.

        In Question 17 of The Principles of Communism, Engels makes this clear:

        Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke?

        No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society.

        In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity.

        What happened in China, is that Mao tried to jump to Communism before the productive forces had naturally socialized themselves, which led to unstable growth and recessions. Deng stepped in and created a Socialist Market Economy by luring in foreign Capital, which both smoothed economic growth and eliminated recessions. This was not an abandonment of Communism, but a return to Marxism from Ultraleft Maoism.

        Today, China has over 50% of the economy in the public sector. About a 10th of the economy is in the cooperative sector, and the rest is private. The majority of the economy is centrally planned and publicly owned! Do you call the US Socialist because of the Post Office? Absurd.

        Moreover, the private sector is centrally planned in a birdcage model, Capital runs by the CPC’s rules. As the markets give way to said monopolist syndicates, the CPC increases control and ownership, folding them into the public sector. This is how Marx envisioned Communism to be established in the first place! Via a DotP, and by degree, not decree! The role of the DotP is to wrest Capital as it socializes and centrally plan it, not to establish Communism through fiat.

        Read Socialism Developed China, Not Capitalism, and read Marx himself before you act like an authority without even understanding Historical Materialism.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Marx believed Socialism to come after Capitalism because Capitalism turns itself into a status ripe for socialism as markets coalesce into few monopolist syndicates, ripe for central planning.

          I’m sure I’m way out of my depth here, and it’s been over a decade since I studied this stuff in school… But this seems incredibly naive? As we’re seeing now, that environment is far more ripe for fascism, or some type of neo-feudalism.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            I’m dramatically simplifying things for the sake of a Lemmy comment.

            First, fascism is just Capitalism in decline, it isn’t meaningfully separate from Capitalism itself.

            Secondly, when I say that Marx believed Socialism to come after Capitalism because of Capitalism’s mechanisms working towards monopolist syndicates ripe for planning, that doesn’t mean Marx wasn’t also revolutionary. Such central planning and socialism can’t take place without revolution, because the proletariat needs to gain supremacy over Capital, which is impossible electorally.

            Does that clear it up?

      • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        While this is true it is not because China has deviated from socialist theory, including that of Marx and Enfels. China is a dictatorship of the proletariat as described by Marx and Engels as the necessary precursor to communism. It is also taking a very specific strategy towards imperialism that involves special economic zones, or capitalism zones, in order to build productive forces while also coupling the well-being of imperialist countries to China’s ability to produce.

        Communism will never be achieved by a state and no state has ever expected to do so. The idea that any country ever could use a category error, it means a person doesn’t understand the term at all as used by Marx a d Engels. It is, by definition, stateless, and could only happen after all states are eventually abolished. But again, being practical people, they expected this to happen through a long process of struggle with dictatorships of the proletariat being what socialists first formed and could use to overturn the capitalist order