• ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Did you or he convinietly forget about the USSR?

    1. the USSR is dead
    2. this discussion is about China
    3. China is not revisionist
    • Moffintosh@berserker.town
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      @ghost_of_faso2

      the USSR is dead

      And not because of socialist planning, rather due to revisionism and professionalization of the party. China wasn’t really helping either since it considered the USSR a greather threat to itself and socialism than the USA

      this discussion is about China.

      It’s about their socioeconomic policy, and their switch away from socialist planning to market economy under the pretext that the latter is a necessary step of development. The USSR debunks this.

      China is not revisionist

      China has a market economy with wage labour and private ownership of the means of production which contributes to 70% of it’s GDP. They also allowed bourgeois into the party since 2002, not to mention their monopolies export capital abroad. Pretty revisionist, surely more than whatever Khrushchev did.

      https://sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1016/j.chieco.2020.101431

      • ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        And not because of socialist planning, rather due to revisionism and professionalization of the party. China wasn’t really helping either since it considered the USSR a greather threat to itself and socialism than the USA

        I tend to feel more sympathetic toward china regarding the sino-soviet split and think Dengs criticisms of the USSR regarding vietnam where potent, they extended themselves too far into wars of aggression like in Afghanistan and where undermined by the west.

        It’s about their socioeconomic policy, and their switch away from socialist planning to market economy under the pretext that the latter is a necessary step of development. The USSR debunks this.

        They are still under control by socialists, just because they decided they needed market economy isnt revisionism, its just another path to allowing material abundance; the vast amount of resources in China are still controlled by the workers, they have a 90% house ownership in a country with over a billion people in it and there is not a present landlord class that holds sway over the workers.

        China has a market economy with wage labour and private ownership of the means of production which contributes to 70% of it’s GDP. They also allowed bourgeois into the party since 2002, not to mention their monopolies export capital abroad. Pretty revisionist, surely more than whatever Khrushchev did.

        Its not revisionist to encoperate capitlaist reforms into a socialist society, Marx & Deng both agree you need material abundance to start socialism, and that you need to progress through capitalism, as its the next stage of economic devolopment. They have managed to maintain socialist control of the government and still excersize socialist authority at every level of buisness, even if there are private entities within it. The USSR isnt the only model and they would be unwise to follow it blindly, as it failed and was failing them.