Update: they have ascertained that Parabola was Wisconcom lmao. In that light, if correct, it's more of a wrecker doing what he does than the project failing. We still don't have a lot of info though. They've written about it here: https://wiki.leftypol.org/wiki/Leftypedia:Community_hub

Earlier today, the new rendition of Leftypedia finally imploded. Going off the block list, it's a real mess.

Leftypedia was brought back from its last incarnation in early 2023. If you remember (or not), it had issues with Wisconcom then who latched onto it. The problem is because they had no active admins and couldn't find them, they couldn't ban him indefinitely.

Eventually, they did find new admins who kicked the project back into gear, or at least they tried to.

Earlier today though, it seems there has been a split and one of the admins (Parabola) basically banned all the others as well as several other users. Where it gets weird is that another admin (Aussig) then banned Parabola, but didn't undo the bans Parabola issued. Aussig also banned me and Forte's account, which we used back when Wisconcom was on there, for "ideological deviations", but Aussig calls themselves a Marxist-Leninist on their user page.

From what I understand there was a split between the different tendencies. So anyway that's how the "left unity" wiki is going lol sorry but this is funny.

  • GarbageShoot [he/him]
    ·
    4 months ago

    It certainly is not a liberal capitalist state as such, though the bourgeoisie represent a real force as you imply, but there is also capitalism in state industries when they are run for profit, which currently is the bulk of China's economy.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      there is also capitalism in state industries when they are run for profit

      Are any of the state run industries actually run for profit? Because if so, I wonder why, because I can think of no reason why they’d need to make a profit. The Chinese state can and does print as much of its sovereign fiat money as it pleases. They might run some things “for profit” as a form of taxation. The purpose of taxation at the sovereign state level is not to accumulate money but to destroy money, removing it from the economy.

      I never really thought about what if any foreign currency-denominated profits the Chinese state might be trying to make. I guess I just assumed that all state industry is for domestic use.

      • GarbageShoot [he/him]
        ·
        4 months ago

        The rightly-praised train system is not for-profit, but they make a killing on oil, for example.

        I'm not an economist, I can't really tell you why that's what they do, but I'm pretty confident they do it.

        • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I'm not an economist, I can't really tell you why that's what they do

          I'm not an economist either but this one isn't that hard to figure out. A socialist state won't require all its SOEs to operate that way but it also obviously won't object if some of them do make a profit, since that can be used to offset some of the losses of the unprofitable SOEs.

          This has always been a part of how socialist economies work. Even the USSR had some form of this iirc. The idea was that consumer goods industries were more "naturally" profitable and could be used to prop up the essential but less profitable heavy industries. (I'm simplifying here as i don't necessarily want to get into a whole discussion about the Kosygin reforms.)

          This is a core idea of economic planning, that one part of the economy can balance and support another for the good of society rather than forcing every element of the economy to function as its own isolated entity competing against all others.

          This is one of the features that distinguish economic planning from liberal market economies which require each individual enterprise to turn a profit (and ideally more so than it's competitors if it wants to survive long term).