CLICK CC FOR SUBTITLES IN PORTUGUESE.READ FULL TRANSCRIBED INTERVIEW IN ENGLISH AND ESPAÑOL HERE ‣ http://qiaocollective.com/home/conversation-vijay-prashad....
No I am not walking back at all. There is a difference between what Marx actually wrote (mostly sensical, but partially historical assumptions that have been disproven by now) and how “marxist” theory about historical determinism is often interpreted by self-proclaimed marxists like Vijay.
There is no marxist theory of historical determinism. That’s just a straw man you keep using.
Marx observed that a laissez-faire Capitalist society (similar to the one he faced in his contemporary Germany and England at that time) is likely to result in such bad conditions for the workers that he felt that they would have no choice but rise up and progress towards a more egalitarian socialist society (very much simplified and you can probably add some additional nuance to this description).
You conveniently omitted the part where Marx argues that worker organization along with the mode of production developed under capitalism is an important prerequisite for a successful socialist society. Marx recognizes that capitalism is able to develop productive forces, and that this development is valuable.
Despite the fact that this actually never happened and is also unlikely to happen, this is a totally different situation to a authoritarian socialist state (like China was under Mao) artificially introducing capitalist means of production while at least superficially ensuring that conditions would not get too bad for the workers (but they got pretty bad never the less).
Last I checked the Russian revolution did in fact happen. Meanwhile, it’s quite clear that introduction of capitalism did in fact allow China to leverage this aspects of this system to drastically improve both the standard of living and working conditions in the long run. Life in China today is drastically better for the vast majority of people than it was even a decade ago. This is an undeniable fact.
If anything, such a state-monopolist approach to Capitalism, stabilizes against the inherent self-destructive tendencies of Capitalism and does not further a society towards communism at all.
Another baseless claim.
Thus as a result China has been transformed into an authoritarian single-party run capitalist country, euphemistically called socialism with Chinese characteristics.
This is a demonstrably absurd statement. One only needs to compare China with any actual capitalist country to see how idiotic this claim is.
Russia at the time of the bolshevik revolution was a mostly agrarian feudal society and not an capitalist industrial one. Even Lenin claimed that the revolution would rather happen in Germany then in Russia.
Russia was less developed than western capitalist powers, but the revolution was run by the proletariat that was radicalized under capitalism. In fact, this was the main difference between Russian and Chinese revolutions.
And yes the early extension phase of Capitalism is remarkably capable of improving the economic conditions of the people as the history of the industrial revolution has shown everywhere. The same happened quite a bit later in China after the capitalist reforms were introduced and the CPC curbed the worst excesses of their form of Capitalism.
You’re so very close!
You can’t compare China of today, with a late-stage capitalist society like the US. Comparing China to the US in the 1950 or so would be more fair, and you will see that this isn’t an absurd claim at all.
Of course you can compare the trajectory that China is on with that of actual capitalist nations. Compare it with India that started roughly in the same spot or with Russia. It’s pretty clear that outcomes in capitalist societies are quite different from those in China. Pandemic handling in particular shows a stark difference. Not a single capitalist nation chose to prioritize healthcare over profit the way China did. China is the only major country pursuing covid-zero startegy.
Capitalist countries aren’t run by capitalist economists. They’re run by people who own capital, and those people have no interest in doing any sorts of lockdowns. In fact, that is precisely the demographic in China that’s opposed to zero covid strategy.
Again, a capitalist country is one where the capital owning class holds power, a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Such countries all followed the same pattern while China did not.
And it’s absolutely hilarious for you to claim that the reason China was able to beat covid was because it’s more authoritarian than the west. Westerners are truly the most propagandized people in the world.
There is no marxist theory of historical determinism. That’s just a straw man you keep using.
You conveniently omitted the part where Marx argues that worker organization along with the mode of production developed under capitalism is an important prerequisite for a successful socialist society. Marx recognizes that capitalism is able to develop productive forces, and that this development is valuable.
Last I checked the Russian revolution did in fact happen. Meanwhile, it’s quite clear that introduction of capitalism did in fact allow China to leverage this aspects of this system to drastically improve both the standard of living and working conditions in the long run. Life in China today is drastically better for the vast majority of people than it was even a decade ago. This is an undeniable fact.
Another baseless claim.
This is a demonstrably absurd statement. One only needs to compare China with any actual capitalist country to see how idiotic this claim is.
deleted by creator
Russia was less developed than western capitalist powers, but the revolution was run by the proletariat that was radicalized under capitalism. In fact, this was the main difference between Russian and Chinese revolutions.
You’re so very close!
Of course you can compare the trajectory that China is on with that of actual capitalist nations. Compare it with India that started roughly in the same spot or with Russia. It’s pretty clear that outcomes in capitalist societies are quite different from those in China. Pandemic handling in particular shows a stark difference. Not a single capitalist nation chose to prioritize healthcare over profit the way China did. China is the only major country pursuing covid-zero startegy.
deleted by creator
Capitalist countries aren’t run by capitalist economists. They’re run by people who own capital, and those people have no interest in doing any sorts of lockdowns. In fact, that is precisely the demographic in China that’s opposed to zero covid strategy.
Again, a capitalist country is one where the capital owning class holds power, a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Such countries all followed the same pattern while China did not.
And it’s absolutely hilarious for you to claim that the reason China was able to beat covid was because it’s more authoritarian than the west. Westerners are truly the most propagandized people in the world.