People have internalized the vacuous and performative liberal political theater and language so things stated as "calls for such"/"sends such message" (even if its probably somewhat off by translation) seems empty and meaningless.
But CPC is a governing party and structure that is
A.Suffuciently detatched from capital and is ideologicaly driven and steeped in its radical history in a degree that ,tho not what we would like, is still miles ahead of any western government
B.Has ready, well oiled and proven regulatory and policy enforcing structures and levers to control and enact economic and social changes and the strong backing and trust from the population to do so
C. Has shown the political will and ability to take such measures and reign in on capital and market powers, increasingly so in the last year and in situations where their intervention are "anti-profit" and "anti-capitalist" in scale ,results and timeframe that even the best "social democracies" dont dare to try .
D. As a general rule recently has trended leftwards and away from capital running things and corruption and they show to meet their policy lines and goals . But at the same time even if full socialism is their end goal in whatever years or if its to be the wolrd best social democracy without imperialism or whatever they know what moves to do and how much to push the needle at any given time given their still developing economy , their internal contradictions, cold war shennanigans and their still need for capital participation and development
But in general Xi has no need to do populism and make empty promices .These are the preliminary ways these shifts in policy are discussed and said and announced .Things like these, focused on by Xi and the party's central committees and stated as such encapsulate the approach of the party for the next decade. And its not news. One of the primary focuses economicaly in the next decade has already been stated as being one of combating uneven economic development and unequal wealth districution
Yeah, Xi abolishing term limits is kinda sus if viewed in isolation, but it allows him and his regime to not have to worry about getting reelected in the short term, which is a big flaw of democracy in my opinion. Making radical changes can absolutely suck for many people in the short-term, even if it would be beneficial in the long run, and as the last two years (and most of capitalist history) has shown us, people don't really think further ahead than next week. So even if a party actually tried to do good things, people would fucking hate having to make even the most minor concessions and go back to electing ghouls.
Xi doesn't have to worry about that. He has the power to make actual, drastic changes and the millions of people who prefer short-term comfort over long-term improvement can go cry a river, basically.
tbh even with multi party sytem introduced rn the cpc is so popular and Xi the by far least corrupt and most left president since deng that you would see at worst a Chavez situation of sweeping elections despite insane levels of undermining. But nothing really is gained even considering that the chinese system is far from perfect or ideal.
Nothing is gained cause the political wings inside the 90 million member CPC are of more political variety than most western parliementary "democracies" and their relative degree of presence and support from the people ideologicaly and within the party determine shift and changes in China's policy more effectively than change in governing parties has shifted any policies in western countries. And for the individual democratic and grassroots participation and voting at the local and lower levels is available for all and along with in party pressure, political struggle , groups and movements there are more than enough democratic avenues to make any change towards a more western liberal democracy a step down. And that can be true while thinking that as a socialist the CPC is still far behind in the democratic and worker's power avenues and structures i would like them to have.
Only thing that would be accomplished by multi party term limit system is for the CPC to gain legitimacy in the eyes of A MINORITY of westerners , a minority of wetern leftists even. And thats without considering the thousand ways it could fuck up everything china has accomplished and make it stagnant and inefficient and the thousand more ways the west would gainfor destabilization and astroturfing
still need for capital participation and development
Why? What exactly is there to develop further within a capitalist framework? You cant make "developing productive forces" argument for a country that is already by a far leading producer. Like 30% of entire worlds manufacturing is there.
China is still significantly behind. They've been trading places with the US on GDP PPP but they have like 5x the population. Per capita China is nowhere near parity with the USA. Poverty line is significantly lower. They are still a third world country in terms of living conditions and they are still behind on medical sciences, etc.
The West literally killed Huawei's mobile business overnight while it was at the no. 1 spot for smartphone manufacturing. Capitalist encirclement and the collapse of China is still a very possible scenario. The reason China is still around today while the Soviet Union is gone is that China is maintaining mutually assured destruction on the American economy. It's holding the west hostage by keeping exclusive expertise and advanced production techniques concentrated in places like Shenzhen. They maintain that technological supremacy over the rest of the global south through constant technology exchange with a multitude of public and private entities across the globe. It will fall behind in most industries if it has to develop production techniques if its international trade completely blocked by the USA.
China is still a developing country by most metrics with big rural population, big amounts of their population not in absolute poverty or poverty but dangerously close to it, rural/urban split, uneven development and shitton of infastructure left to built. "Producting forces" in that sense isnt just about abiltiy to produce good and services or raw production output. Bringing the whole 1.4 billion people country into modernity and daily material and infstructual conditions of the "first world" is still a job that is half way there and the only thing the CPC has declared about the country's condition after decades of reform and opening up is succeeding in the monumentous but incomplete goal of becoming a "moderately prosperous in all aspects" modern country
Considering this and the huge gap between the current degree of presence and influence of the capitalist framework within China and the situation you describe of "continuing the development and distribution from now on outside of the capitalist framework" its obvious that ,even assuming an end goal of full communism, the presence of capital in development and economy and culture of China will continue and persist in probably and hopefully diminishing degrees for the next few decades.
And thats probably whether the cpc likes it or not since even if you assume that everything from now on in China CAN be accomplished completely outside of the capitalist framework and even if we assume that the CPC KNOWS this and wants to realize it as soon as possible ,the shift can only be gradual at this point . Both with how the geopolitics are with the US ready to jump and exploint any instability and wrong decisions and with how intertangled china has become with domestic and foreign capital and how spread bourgois mindset has been in china .Large leaps and radical attempts to overnight move away from capitalism can only be disasterous at this point and the gradual process does mean continuing participation of capital in Chinas development. You may be surprised but i actually view the cultural revolution quite positively historicaly and at that point in time but since only that short of thing times 2-3 can uproot capitalism playing a major part in China's development within less than a decade, i have to say no thanks.
People have internalized the vacuous and performative liberal political theater and language so things stated as "calls for such"/"sends such message" (even if its probably somewhat off by translation) seems empty and meaningless.
But CPC is a governing party and structure that is
A.Suffuciently detatched from capital and is ideologicaly driven and steeped in its radical history in a degree that ,tho not what we would like, is still miles ahead of any western government
B.Has ready, well oiled and proven regulatory and policy enforcing structures and levers to control and enact economic and social changes and the strong backing and trust from the population to do so
C. Has shown the political will and ability to take such measures and reign in on capital and market powers, increasingly so in the last year and in situations where their intervention are "anti-profit" and "anti-capitalist" in scale ,results and timeframe that even the best "social democracies" dont dare to try .
D. As a general rule recently has trended leftwards and away from capital running things and corruption and they show to meet their policy lines and goals . But at the same time even if full socialism is their end goal in whatever years or if its to be the wolrd best social democracy without imperialism or whatever they know what moves to do and how much to push the needle at any given time given their still developing economy , their internal contradictions, cold war shennanigans and their still need for capital participation and development
But in general Xi has no need to do populism and make empty promices .These are the preliminary ways these shifts in policy are discussed and said and announced .Things like these, focused on by Xi and the party's central committees and stated as such encapsulate the approach of the party for the next decade. And its not news. One of the primary focuses economicaly in the next decade has already been stated as being one of combating uneven economic development and unequal wealth districution
Yeah, Xi abolishing term limits is kinda sus if viewed in isolation, but it allows him and his regime to not have to worry about getting reelected in the short term, which is a big flaw of democracy in my opinion. Making radical changes can absolutely suck for many people in the short-term, even if it would be beneficial in the long run, and as the last two years (and most of capitalist history) has shown us, people don't really think further ahead than next week. So even if a party actually tried to do good things, people would fucking hate having to make even the most minor concessions and go back to electing ghouls.
Xi doesn't have to worry about that. He has the power to make actual, drastic changes and the millions of people who prefer short-term comfort over long-term improvement can go cry a river, basically.
tbh even with multi party sytem introduced rn the cpc is so popular and Xi the by far least corrupt and most left president since deng that you would see at worst a Chavez situation of sweeping elections despite insane levels of undermining. But nothing really is gained even considering that the chinese system is far from perfect or ideal.
Nothing is gained cause the political wings inside the 90 million member CPC are of more political variety than most western parliementary "democracies" and their relative degree of presence and support from the people ideologicaly and within the party determine shift and changes in China's policy more effectively than change in governing parties has shifted any policies in western countries. And for the individual democratic and grassroots participation and voting at the local and lower levels is available for all and along with in party pressure, political struggle , groups and movements there are more than enough democratic avenues to make any change towards a more western liberal democracy a step down. And that can be true while thinking that as a socialist the CPC is still far behind in the democratic and worker's power avenues and structures i would like them to have.
Only thing that would be accomplished by multi party term limit system is for the CPC to gain legitimacy in the eyes of A MINORITY of westerners , a minority of wetern leftists even. And thats without considering the thousand ways it could fuck up everything china has accomplished and make it stagnant and inefficient and the thousand more ways the west would gainfor destabilization and astroturfing
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Why? What exactly is there to develop further within a capitalist framework? You cant make "developing productive forces" argument for a country that is already by a far leading producer. Like 30% of entire worlds manufacturing is there.
China is still significantly behind. They've been trading places with the US on GDP PPP but they have like 5x the population. Per capita China is nowhere near parity with the USA. Poverty line is significantly lower. They are still a third world country in terms of living conditions and they are still behind on medical sciences, etc.
The West literally killed Huawei's mobile business overnight while it was at the no. 1 spot for smartphone manufacturing. Capitalist encirclement and the collapse of China is still a very possible scenario. The reason China is still around today while the Soviet Union is gone is that China is maintaining mutually assured destruction on the American economy. It's holding the west hostage by keeping exclusive expertise and advanced production techniques concentrated in places like Shenzhen. They maintain that technological supremacy over the rest of the global south through constant technology exchange with a multitude of public and private entities across the globe. It will fall behind in most industries if it has to develop production techniques if its international trade completely blocked by the USA.
China is still a developing country by most metrics with big rural population, big amounts of their population not in absolute poverty or poverty but dangerously close to it, rural/urban split, uneven development and shitton of infastructure left to built. "Producting forces" in that sense isnt just about abiltiy to produce good and services or raw production output. Bringing the whole 1.4 billion people country into modernity and daily material and infstructual conditions of the "first world" is still a job that is half way there and the only thing the CPC has declared about the country's condition after decades of reform and opening up is succeeding in the monumentous but incomplete goal of becoming a "moderately prosperous in all aspects" modern country
Considering this and the huge gap between the current degree of presence and influence of the capitalist framework within China and the situation you describe of "continuing the development and distribution from now on outside of the capitalist framework" its obvious that ,even assuming an end goal of full communism, the presence of capital in development and economy and culture of China will continue and persist in probably and hopefully diminishing degrees for the next few decades.
And thats probably whether the cpc likes it or not since even if you assume that everything from now on in China CAN be accomplished completely outside of the capitalist framework and even if we assume that the CPC KNOWS this and wants to realize it as soon as possible ,the shift can only be gradual at this point . Both with how the geopolitics are with the US ready to jump and exploint any instability and wrong decisions and with how intertangled china has become with domestic and foreign capital and how spread bourgois mindset has been in china .Large leaps and radical attempts to overnight move away from capitalism can only be disasterous at this point and the gradual process does mean continuing participation of capital in Chinas development. You may be surprised but i actually view the cultural revolution quite positively historicaly and at that point in time but since only that short of thing times 2-3 can uproot capitalism playing a major part in China's development within less than a decade, i have to say no thanks.