Two of the posts linked in this text that supposedly show how the pro-China position is bad, the ones he calls “increasingly incorrect” and “vile and reactionary” are anything but. They are very well grounded in Marxist theory and there is absolutely nothing reactionary about them unless you already proceed from the pre-assumption that modern China is wrong and Maoists are right. The third linked post praising Duterte is from one of those subs which are known for their socially reactionary “conservative socialist” line (sometimes called “nazbol”), which most of us MLs who are pro-China and socially progressive denounce. Those kinds of subs represent a tiny online sect that is essentially insignificant in the real world.
Overall this article even in its introduction fails to make the case for why modern ML should be abandoned in favor of Maoism, a tendency which is becoming increasingly irrelevant even as ML continues to grow and flourish encouraged by the rise of China, the sharpening of contradictions in capitalism, and the dawn of the multi-polar era.
I see no point in clinging dogmatically to some (real or imagined) “philosophical purity” and mechanical “anti-revisionism” when the very essence of dialectical materialism is acknowledging that the world is constantly changing. As such Marxism must also change and adapt tactics (without sacrificing its socialist core as the USSR did when it repudiated the dictatorship of the proletariat and paid the ultimate price for that mistake). China has managed to become the socialist success story it is today because the CPC has proven incredibly adaptable and flexible and willing to experiment and try new things. Our ideas must reflect the material conditions. We "seek truth from facts
The correct ideology will be shown by whose revolution manages to succeed and thrive and build a prosperous socialist society. I have yet to see Maoists build their own China, their own Cuba, their own Vietnam, their own DPRK or their own USSR.
Two of the posts linked in this text that supposedly show how the pro-China position is bad, the ones he calls “increasingly incorrect” and “vile and reactionary” are anything but. They are very well grounded in Marxist theory and there is absolutely nothing reactionary about them unless you already proceed from the pre-assumption that modern China is wrong and Maoists are right. The third linked post praising Duterte is from one of those subs which are known for their socially reactionary “conservative socialist” line (sometimes called “nazbol”), which most of us MLs who are pro-China and socially progressive denounce. Those kinds of subs represent a tiny online sect that is essentially insignificant in the real world.
Overall this article even in its introduction fails to make the case for why modern ML should be abandoned in favor of Maoism, a tendency which is becoming increasingly irrelevant even as ML continues to grow and flourish encouraged by the rise of China, the sharpening of contradictions in capitalism, and the dawn of the multi-polar era.
I see no point in clinging dogmatically to some (real or imagined) “philosophical purity” and mechanical “anti-revisionism” when the very essence of dialectical materialism is acknowledging that the world is constantly changing. As such Marxism must also change and adapt tactics (without sacrificing its socialist core as the USSR did when it repudiated the dictatorship of the proletariat and paid the ultimate price for that mistake). China has managed to become the socialist success story it is today because the CPC has proven incredibly adaptable and flexible and willing to experiment and try new things. Our ideas must reflect the material conditions. We "seek truth from facts
The correct ideology will be shown by whose revolution manages to succeed and thrive and build a prosperous socialist society. I have yet to see Maoists build their own China, their own Cuba, their own Vietnam, their own DPRK or their own USSR.