China and Statism
- This topic has 85 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 6 hours, 22 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
All the leading members of the Chinese “Communist” Party were Kuomintang nationalists. They formed their party within the Kuomintang. Chou En-lai was Chiang Kai-shek’s deputy.
A Kuomintang remnant in Peking was maintained by Mao as the only other political party permitted in China. It was run by Soong Ch’ing-ling, who wrote articles for China Reconstructs and other government journals.Chiang Kai-shek’s name among the British colonials was “the Red General”, and they feared him.
There was more nationalisation (what Grandpa calls socialism) under the KMT than under Mao.
AI: ” The KMT officially followed Sun Yat-sen’s Three Principles of the People, which advocated “restricting private capital while promoting state capital” (jiezhi siren ziben, fada guojia ziben). In practice, this meant the state claimed a dominant role in heavy industry, transport, and finance.”
Also see the Cambridge History of China: Kuomintang China.
LBird: Does it reassure the masses?
Well, the CPC leadership hopes it does.
But my “reassurance” comment was purely satirical.
What else could I take from your Orwellian document which, for a world socialist, is political satire?
It reveals the leadership’s acute awareness that its class rule is fragile and ultimately rests upon mass support.
Hence the leadership reveals its guilty past to the masses.
Will its mea culpa reassure the masses? Probably not.
You can’t reveal closeted skeletons and punishment schedules without fuelling suspicions about the prevalence of conditions that sparked the revelations.
LBird, you once staked your political credibility upon absolute democracy.
Now you agonise over a political leadership’s inability to mollify its ruled masses!
You and GrandpaGP are soulmates.
LBird, you once staked your political credibility upon absolute democracy.
The SPGB claimed to do this, too, which is what attracted me to the SPGB initially.
But… it turned out that the SPGB are undemocratic ‘materialists’, who won’t have the proletariat determining what their ‘reality’ is.
The SPGB believes in an elite, who will determine ‘reality’, a ‘reality’ which is materially apparent to that elite, but not to the masses, who must simply passively follow those like twc, who ‘know better’.
Is twc a follower of Mao, in beliefs and method? Yes, if his posts are to be believed.
LBird: The SPGB claimed to [stake its political credibility upon absolute democracy].
Fantasy of a Crank
The SPGB has never supported any variety of LBird’s absolute democracy — his conception of socialism as a regime of “democratically” compelled thought, where every scientific conception and artistic expression is surveilled for absolute conformity by everyone, “democratically”.
What the SPGB stakes its Political Credibility on
The SPGB has staked its political credibility on its Object and Declaration of Principles from its inception in 1904.
Object
The establishment of a system of society based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of the whole communit.
Declaration of Principles
The Socialist Party of Great Britain holds
-
That society as at present constituted is based upon the ownership of the means of living (i.e., land, factories, railways, etc.) by the capitalist or master class, and the consequent enslavement of the working class, by whose labour alone wealth is produced.
-
That in society, therefore, there is an antagonism of interests, manifesting itself as a class struggle between those who possess but do not produce and those who produce but do not possess.
-
That this antagonism can be abolished only by the emancipation of the working class from the domination of the master class, by the conversion into the common property of society of the means of production and distribution, and their democratic control by the whole people.
-
That as in the order of social evolution the working class is the last class to achieve its freedom, the emancipation of the working class will involve the emancipation of all mankind, without distinction of race or sex.
-
That this emancipation must be the work of the working class itself.
-
That as the machinery of government, including the armed forces of the nation, exists only to conserve the monopoly by the capitalist class of the wealth taken from the workers, the working class must organise consciously and politically for the conquest of the powers of government, national and local, in order that this machinery, including these forces, may be converted from an instrument of oppression into the agent of emancipation and the overthrow of privilege, aristocratic and plutocratic.
-
That as all political parties are but the expression of class interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically opposed to the interests of all sections of the the master class, the party seeking working class emancipation must be hostile to every other party.
-
The Socialist Party of Great Britain, therefore, enters the field of political action determined to wage war against all other political parties, whether alleged labour or avowedly capitalist, and calls upon the members of the working class of this country to muster under its banner to the end that a speedy termination may be wrought to the system which deprives them of the fruits of their labour, and that poverty may give place to comfort, privilege to equality, and slavery to freedom.
Wavering Absolute Democratist
For over a century the SPGB has never wavered.
But how about LBird, the absolute democratist who spent a fruitless decade foisting his regime of absolute democracy upon the SPGB, and now [in his tendentious phrase] “if his posts are to be believed” is visibly wavering about absolute democracy.
I gently asked LBird how could he fall in love with the anti-democratic Chinese regime to the extent that he now openly agonises over the inability of its 5th Plenum communiqué to mollify its ruled masses?
No answer. Silence…
So low has the mighty absolute democratist fallen!
The leaders of the Kumnitang were the founders of the Anti communist league, and Mao Tse-tung and his gangs were allies of the Kumnitang. The so-called Mao Tse-tung thought has been used to ally with the most reactionary forces on Earth, and some lunatics call it socialism.
Mao Tse-tung did not collaborate with Donald Trump because Trump was not a leader at that time.
Ho Chi Min was like Mao too; he would collaborate with anybody, including the French colonialists and the USA.
There is not one centimetre of socialism in the writing of Ho Chi Min; he was another guerrilla fighter, a nationalist like Mao.
Kim Il Sung and his son were part of the Mao gangs. Proclaimed as great leaders of socialism
Mao Tse-tung was a well-trained guerrilla fighter. Che Guevara developed his Foquismo conceptions from Mao military writings; his grandson, who was an anarchist, said that he was Maoist, and he had ideological conflicts with the soviets.
His grandson on the Yahoo Groups forum said that Guevara had differences with his uncle Fidel, and that is the reason why he left for Bolivia. In Bolivia, the communist party, which was a pro soviet vanguard party, abandoned Che Guevara, and he was isolated, and he did not have the support of the Bolivian peasants
Some people come to this forum pretending to be teachers and trying to give lectures to the socialist party. In the end, they become students; they do not know that the socialist party has an arsenal of information about socialism and world history.
Chiang Kai-shek’s name among the British colonials was “the Red General”, and they feared him.
There was more nationalisation (what Grandpa calls socialism) under the KMT than under Mao.
——————————————-
And the first capitalist nationalisation was done by the Manchesterists in England; that is the reason why some so-called public services were under the control of the state apparatus: socialism was done by the capitalist? Ignorance has no limit
Chiang Kai-shek’s name among the British colonials was “the Red General”, and they feared him.
There was more nationalisation (what Grandpa calls socialism) under the KMT than under Mao.
——————————————-
And the first capitalist nationalisation was done by the Manchesterists in England; that is the reason why some so-called public services were under the control of the state apparatus: socialism was done by the capitalist? Ignorance has no limit
-
That society as at present constituted is based upon the ownership of the means of living (i.e., land, factories, railways, etc.) by the capitalist or master class, and the consequent enslavement of the working class, by whose labour alone wealth is produced.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.