Again, you’re ignoring the fact that socialism is not a defined set of policies that gets to be uniformly applied in a vaccum. The trajectory even has historically varied from one socialist state to another. To attribute the accomplishments of the PRC to “capitalism” is inaccurate. What there is in China is a market economy that is predominated by public ownership and state-owned enterprises, which is nowhere close to capitalism.
You condemn the consequences of the early Maoist policies, and then equally condemn Dengist reforms. What’s the point of critiquing for the sake of critiquing, whem there is no constructive effort on your part to properly assess and understand the material and historical circumstances that have led to China’s development into what it is now, only being guided by emotions and a confident lack of theory. One recent book on the matter that I recommend is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics by Roland Boer.
China has always and will always be imperialist
This is ahistorical and untheoretical thinking on your part. Imperialism is an advanced form of capitalism. An imperialist state is one that has saturated its domestic markets and as a consequence seeks to expand its markets and the reproduction of private capital overseas, by all means possible and most notably by force. China simply does not possess the features of imperialism. Prolewiki has a very informative article that explains the concept.
Until now, you’ve only indiscriminately sprinkled terms like imperialism and capitalism and fascism without much thought in the process, and so we’ve reached an impasse.
As to the Xinjiang matter, your views reflect those of the western propaganda machine. I’ve already mentioned above a FAQ compiled by Dessalines (yes, Lemmy’s lead dev) which contains many articles and documents that may at the very least give a different perspective on this matter.
Again, you’re ignoring the fact that socialism is not a defined set of policies that gets to be uniformly applied in a vaccum. The trajectory even has historically varied from one socialist state to another. To attribute the accomplishments of the PRC to “capitalism” is inaccurate. What there is in China is a market economy that is predominated by public ownership and state-owned enterprises, which is nowhere close to capitalism.
You condemn the consequences of the early Maoist policies, and then equally condemn Dengist reforms. What’s the point of critiquing for the sake of critiquing, whem there is no constructive effort on your part to properly assess and understand the material and historical circumstances that have led to China’s development into what it is now, only being guided by emotions and a confident lack of theory. One recent book on the matter that I recommend is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics by Roland Boer.
This is ahistorical and untheoretical thinking on your part. Imperialism is an advanced form of capitalism. An imperialist state is one that has saturated its domestic markets and as a consequence seeks to expand its markets and the reproduction of private capital overseas, by all means possible and most notably by force. China simply does not possess the features of imperialism. Prolewiki has a very informative article that explains the concept.
Until now, you’ve only indiscriminately sprinkled terms like imperialism and capitalism and fascism without much thought in the process, and so we’ve reached an impasse.
As to the Xinjiang matter, your views reflect those of the western propaganda machine. I’ve already mentioned above a FAQ compiled by Dessalines (yes, Lemmy’s lead dev) which contains many articles and documents that may at the very least give a different perspective on this matter.
Seeing as you have be unable to effectively refute anything I have said I think we are done here. Cheers!