Has anyone a genuine idea why ultras are like this? It's not like anyone was happy introducing the reforms and taking an (admittedly big) step back but reaching Communism eventually is a process.
Why is it so hard for them to realise that countries don't exist in a vacuum. To ensure the long time survival of the Revolution taking a step back is a small price to pay when the alternative is failing and getting pillaged by the west.
its just ultras being blinded by idealism. the road to socialism must adhere exactly to their idealistic, squeaky-clean plan and anything less is stalinist authoritarian dictatorship genocide or whatever. material conditions be damned, the path is prescribed to be one way and it must be followed. its a critically poor understanding of dialectical materialism.
or maybe they, deep down, want to see socialism fail across the world. if they didn't, why would they attack AES so ruthlessly? i'm not sure exactly, but these are my two thoughts on why ultras are the way they are.
It's just so weird. I know a few Ultras in real life and some of them are really well read in theory and yet they fail the absolute basics. Which is the part that confuses me.
Like they have so much niche knowledge of Marxism but don't get the basics. How do you end up like this?
Yeah my father was a naxal he used to say this. Inter commie fighting in 1960-70 was awful. There were hoxaists, romanian commies, khrushchevites, maoists and pol pot types 😁
These western ultras are learning things here and there. We had left unity governments but truth to be told left parties fell apart when they went for important challenges. Like industrialization in bengal, CPM supported the Chinese way, right wing and left wing deviations moved away and helped ultra right wingers to kill the process and so on.
"countries don't exist in a vacuum", that is exactly it. Their view of nature is still metaphysical idealist, thats how we are taught at school.
Ultras have internalized metaphysic idealism and are still in the process of replacing it for dialectical materialism (if they actually read anyways), after all dialectics also apply to us. It takes time for us to move on from old concepts to newer ones.
Under Deng China invaded Vietnam, supported the Khmer Rouge, helped the US against the USSR with Operation Cyclone, supported the South Africa-backed UNITA and FNLA, and didn't re-normalize relations with the USSR until pizza man visited. To characterize the critique of China as irrational ultra-leftism is to argue in bad faith.
And is China still doing any of those things? No.
Was I talking about anything else but the reforms? No.
Are Ultras still targeting modern day China? Yes.
My man I am not arguing with you about Chinas foreign policy in past decades. It was absolute dogshit. But it is not like ultras attack modern day China for past mistakes in foreign policy. Heck it's not even unusual for Ultras to support the Khmer Rouge or the Shining Path so I really don't know where you are going with this.
As i said earlier in this thread, the fact that these things happened is justification enough to question China's commitment to socialism. In spite of his abandonment of Stalin, Khrushchev didn't ditch Cuba and back a Batista color revolution or something. Just because they aren't doing these specific monstrous things now doesn't mean it's ridiculous to question the CPC. What sense does it make to separate the reforms from the policies that literally helped the United States continue its imperialist hegemony?
These are crimes on a massive scale that helped contribute to the collapse of the socialist bloc and to the period of vicious reaction we currently live in. They aren't just 'mistakes', and if you understand them as seriously as they should be it makes sense to question the legitimacy of the socialist project
Yeah… that’s why I see Deng as a complicated figure, who wasn’t the best, but didn’t totally deviate from socialism. Non-revolution-exporting and integrating into the world market to benefit from capitalism were beneficial in the long run, though.
I agree with the first sentence and disagree with the latter. The world capitalist system was in decline by the end of the 1980s, the USSR was successful in exporting revolution even as they were actively impeded by China, and the socialist bloc walled off a vast portion of the world to capitalist exploitation. The Soviet Union's fall gave the West a shot in the arm that is only wearing off today. These things are awful for humanity in the long run, but the CPC's continued governance is likely the best of a terrible situation atm.
capitalism is when you use tiny amounts of private investments in order to bolster socialist state industry? i had no idea!
ultras seriously believe that deng just made china into america or something in the 80s
Has anyone a genuine idea why ultras are like this? It's not like anyone was happy introducing the reforms and taking an (admittedly big) step back but reaching Communism eventually is a process. Why is it so hard for them to realise that countries don't exist in a vacuum. To ensure the long time survival of the Revolution taking a step back is a small price to pay when the alternative is failing and getting pillaged by the west.
its just ultras being blinded by idealism. the road to socialism must adhere exactly to their idealistic, squeaky-clean plan and anything less is stalinist authoritarian dictatorship genocide or whatever. material conditions be damned, the path is prescribed to be one way and it must be followed. its a critically poor understanding of dialectical materialism.
or maybe they, deep down, want to see socialism fail across the world. if they didn't, why would they attack AES so ruthlessly? i'm not sure exactly, but these are my two thoughts on why ultras are the way they are.
It's just so weird. I know a few Ultras in real life and some of them are really well read in theory and yet they fail the absolute basics. Which is the part that confuses me. Like they have so much niche knowledge of Marxism but don't get the basics. How do you end up like this?
Mao might be able to help you understand ultras issue.
Yeah my father was a naxal he used to say this. Inter commie fighting in 1960-70 was awful. There were hoxaists, romanian commies, khrushchevites, maoists and pol pot types 😁
Thats why left unity among marxists is so important, and the crucial thing ultras forget.
These western ultras are learning things here and there. We had left unity governments but truth to be told left parties fell apart when they went for important challenges. Like industrialization in bengal, CPM supported the Chinese way, right wing and left wing deviations moved away and helped ultra right wingers to kill the process and so on.
"countries don't exist in a vacuum", that is exactly it. Their view of nature is still metaphysical idealist, thats how we are taught at school.
Ultras have internalized metaphysic idealism and are still in the process of replacing it for dialectical materialism (if they actually read anyways), after all dialectics also apply to us. It takes time for us to move on from old concepts to newer ones.
Under Deng China invaded Vietnam, supported the Khmer Rouge, helped the US against the USSR with Operation Cyclone, supported the South Africa-backed UNITA and FNLA, and didn't re-normalize relations with the USSR until pizza man visited. To characterize the critique of China as irrational ultra-leftism is to argue in bad faith.
And is China still doing any of those things? No. Was I talking about anything else but the reforms? No. Are Ultras still targeting modern day China? Yes.
My man I am not arguing with you about Chinas foreign policy in past decades. It was absolute dogshit. But it is not like ultras attack modern day China for past mistakes in foreign policy. Heck it's not even unusual for Ultras to support the Khmer Rouge or the Shining Path so I really don't know where you are going with this.
As i said earlier in this thread, the fact that these things happened is justification enough to question China's commitment to socialism. In spite of his abandonment of Stalin, Khrushchev didn't ditch Cuba and back a Batista color revolution or something. Just because they aren't doing these specific monstrous things now doesn't mean it's ridiculous to question the CPC. What sense does it make to separate the reforms from the policies that literally helped the United States continue its imperialist hegemony?
pointing out foreign policy mistakes is significantly different from claiming that deng executed a coup that made china capitalist
These are crimes on a massive scale that helped contribute to the collapse of the socialist bloc and to the period of vicious reaction we currently live in. They aren't just 'mistakes', and if you understand them as seriously as they should be it makes sense to question the legitimacy of the socialist project
Yeah… that’s why I see Deng as a complicated figure, who wasn’t the best, but didn’t totally deviate from socialism. Non-revolution-exporting and integrating into the world market to benefit from capitalism were beneficial in the long run, though.
I agree with the first sentence and disagree with the latter. The world capitalist system was in decline by the end of the 1980s, the USSR was successful in exporting revolution even as they were actively impeded by China, and the socialist bloc walled off a vast portion of the world to capitalist exploitation. The Soviet Union's fall gave the West a shot in the arm that is only wearing off today. These things are awful for humanity in the long run, but the CPC's continued governance is likely the best of a terrible situation atm.
Fair, it may not have been best for the world, but the people of China are doing decent right now.
they dum