China's gonna be a phenomenal world leader.

    • Ildsaye [they/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Yes, that's what China did. They also used media control to blanket the nation in antisexist messages from the moment the PRC was established, but chattel marriage customs only really began to break down in areas where factory work was available - the wage work allowed women to be financially independent from their clans for the first time. Even establishing dictatorship of the proletariat doesn't mean immediate freedom from the harsh contradictions of being a developing country.

      • Dolores [love/loves]
        ·
        11 months ago

        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.

          • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]
            ·
            11 months ago

            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.

          • robinn_IV
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            What

            How is “Dengism” “basically just” “Bernsteinism” (or do you just mean adherents are similar?)

            • CrimsonSage [any]
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              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.

              • robinn_IV
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                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

                “…in consequence of the growth of productive forces, out of one system of social life another and higher system develops” — V.I. Lenin, The Three Sources and Three Component Parts of Marxism

                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.

          • Lester_Peterson [he/him]
            ·
            11 months ago

            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."

            • robinn_IV
              ·
              11 months ago

              Sublime nonsense

          • Dessa [she/her]
            ·
            11 months ago

            If this is the tone of a struggle session to come, I will be so confused