Nah, unlike the two, Deng was vastly better at playing the geopolitical game while those two didn’t come close. It was through Deng that the West lost their manufacturing power, lost their real chance at a successful color revolution in China, and that peaceful reunification with Hong Kong and Taiwan became viable. No amount of whining about Deng being a rightist or capitalist roader will ever change this.
It was somewhat sarcasm. Both are basically rightwing deviations of marxism that rely on economic determinism to drive the change toward socialism. That being said dengism actually has a line of cogent praxis toward that goal while Bernstein was basically just “vote labor” until socialism.
basically rightwing deviations of marxism that rely on economic determinism to drive the change toward socialism
Marxism does involve “economic ‘determinism’ to drive the change towards socialism”:
“the productive forces, practice and the economic base generally play the principal and decisive role; whoever denies this is not a materialist. But it must also be admitted that in certain conditions, such aspects as the relations of production, theory and the superstructure in turn manifest themselves in the principal and decisive role. When it is impossible for the productive forces to develop without a change in the relations of production, then the change in the relations of production plays the principal and decisive role.” — Mao Zedong, On Contradiction
“Socialism is inconceivable without large-scale capitalist engineering based on the latest discoveries of modern science. It is inconceivable without planned state organization which keeps tens of millions of people to the strictest observance of a unified standard in production and distribution. We Marxists have always spoken of this, and it is not worth while wasting two seconds talking to people who do not understand even this (anarchists and a good half of the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries)” — V.I. Lenin, The Tax in Kind
At the same time the vanguard party (CPC) still rules, there is still worker’s organization, and, most telling, the Mass Line remains. I fail to see where this “right deviation” comes into play.
If Dengists were Bernsteinists that’d be an improvement. In this thread they’re indistinguishable from Neoliberal commentators from the Cato Institute writing articles about “the Feminist side of sweatshops” only instead of “basic economics” being the reason why we have to support states that are in direct opposition to working class interests, here its “material conditions” and “contradictions.”
no that’s not what China did. simply putting women in textile mills is what the british did, and it took a fucking century to get the vote.
deleted by creator
Nah, unlike the two, Deng was vastly better at playing the geopolitical game while those two didn’t come close. It was through Deng that the West lost their manufacturing power, lost their real chance at a successful color revolution in China, and that peaceful reunification with Hong Kong and Taiwan became viable. No amount of whining about Deng being a rightist or capitalist roader will ever change this.
deleted by creator
What
How is “Dengism” “basically just” “Bernsteinism” (or do you just mean adherents are similar?)
It was somewhat sarcasm. Both are basically rightwing deviations of marxism that rely on economic determinism to drive the change toward socialism. That being said dengism actually has a line of cogent praxis toward that goal while Bernstein was basically just “vote labor” until socialism.
Marxism does involve “economic ‘determinism’ to drive the change towards socialism”:
At the same time the vanguard party (CPC) still rules, there is still worker’s organization, and, most telling, the Mass Line remains. I fail to see where this “right deviation” comes into play.
deleted by creator
Ok
If Dengists were Bernsteinists that’d be an improvement. In this thread they’re indistinguishable from Neoliberal commentators from the Cato Institute writing articles about “the Feminist side of sweatshops” only instead of “basic economics” being the reason why we have to support states that are in direct opposition to working class interests, here its “material conditions” and “contradictions.”
Sublime nonsense
If this is the tone of a struggle session to come, I will be so confused