The Soviets post Stalin were revisionist, but much of that was walked back by Brezhnev, and yet the split intensified (and the reason for this is squarely laid at Deng's feet here, as he was in charge of the negotiations.) The PRC abandoned critical support and went into shockingly bad tit-for-tat policy measures against the SU when together they might have very well survived. The west nearly fell in the late 70s, during the oil crisis. And that's the most damning criticism I have as someone who supports left unity. The first rule is don't fucking split, support everyone who isn't literally Pol Pot (who was an agrarian-primitivist-nationalist with communist trappings).
Perhaps some market reform was inevitable during the 80s to lessen siege socialism and allow primitive accumulation, the fall of the Union and full Chicago-School Dengism was not. China may have survived, for which I'm grateful, but like Vietnam they're playing with fire and risking Capitalist co-option.
That said, if China is "State Capitalist" it is a deliberate, worker driven state capitalism with a defined goal. And it's under the control of a genuine DotP. Under these circumstances I think critical support is justified.
As for the take of leftists in the West. well it's hard for us to critique without playing into red-scare propaganda. Firstly, most of Xi's work is in English. Comrades should read On the governance of China, or at least a sympathetic summary before critiquing. As for political positions, we should support and uphold the thought of his advisors on the Neo-Maoist left like Wang Shaoguang while critiquing the Autocratic Rightists in the government like Wang Huning and the hard-partyist revisionists like Jiang Shigong who openly seek to drop the "utopian judeo-chrstian" aspects of Marx in favour of an eternal Party rule.
As for Xinjiang, China's doing some bad things, some cultural oppression, some isolated Han nationalistic acts, and we should say they're bad.
It doesn't appear to be Genocide or any worse than what the US does to its own population or its client states, let alone what it would do to a rebel-sympathetic population on a strategic border. You try putting down a CIA funded Wahhabi extremist led rebellion in a province that has had CIA rebellions since the 1960s without breaking eggs.
The Soviets post Stalin were revisionist, but much of that was walked back by Brezhnev, and yet the split intensified (and the reason for this is squarely laid at Deng's feet here, as he was in charge of the negotiations.) The PRC abandoned critical support and went into shockingly bad tit-for-tat policy measures against the SU when together they might have very well survived. The west nearly fell in the late 70s, during the oil crisis. And that's the most damning criticism I have as someone who supports left unity. The first rule is don't fucking split, support everyone who isn't literally Pol Pot (who was an agrarian-primitivist-nationalist with communist trappings).
Perhaps some market reform was inevitable during the 80s to lessen siege socialism and allow primitive accumulation, the fall of the Union and full Chicago-School Dengism was not. China may have survived, for which I'm grateful, but like Vietnam they're playing with fire and risking Capitalist co-option.
That said, if China is "State Capitalist" it is a deliberate, worker driven state capitalism with a defined goal. And it's under the control of a genuine DotP. Under these circumstances I think critical support is justified.
As for the take of leftists in the West. well it's hard for us to critique without playing into red-scare propaganda. Firstly, most of Xi's work is in English. Comrades should read On the governance of China, or at least a sympathetic summary before critiquing. As for political positions, we should support and uphold the thought of his advisors on the Neo-Maoist left like Wang Shaoguang while critiquing the Autocratic Rightists in the government like Wang Huning and the hard-partyist revisionists like Jiang Shigong who openly seek to drop the "utopian judeo-chrstian" aspects of Marx in favour of an eternal Party rule.
As for Xinjiang, China's doing some bad things, some cultural oppression, some isolated Han nationalistic acts, and we should say they're bad.
It doesn't appear to be Genocide or any worse than what the US does to its own population or its client states, let alone what it would do to a rebel-sympathetic population on a strategic border. You try putting down a CIA funded Wahhabi extremist led rebellion in a province that has had CIA rebellions since the 1960s without breaking eggs.