geikei

geikei, 3 months ago

Also its beyond meaningless when you consider that at most idk 3% of the population of Xinjiang and 1% in Tibet is considering themselves to be occupied by China and are remotely likely to participate or aid in an armed struggle against the CPC, even at the best possible conditions

Like sure, Tibetians have a right to engage in an armed anti-colonial struggle or kickstart an indeginous liberation movement ok. You probably couldnt even fill an NBA stadium with those willing so what does that leave their lib free Tibet dreams. The CIA was trying to recruit and instigate an anti-chinese sessesionist movement last century and they gave up because they couldnt find enough willing Tibetians to get the project off the ground. And they had a budget of dozens and dozens of millions to pay off poor ass Tibetians and they still couldnt find any fertile sessesionist sentiment. And thats on record

geikei, 6 months ago

People who were not Chinese got the same progress like the Chinese did at different speeds (earlier or later).

Those who did either did it on the back of the rest of the world and by plundering and colonizing billions (west and western protectorates) with China still managed to catch up with that in half a century or they just havent yet and wont in the forseeable future (most of the third world) and their progress marely amounts to the most generalized side effects of world wide medical and tech progress. China is bringing to 1.5 billion people the progress, QoL and modernity the former group achieved (and then some) without colonizing, imperializing or impovershing any other nation or people and in 1/5th of the time.No one else did that, no one else is doing that. Other than you know, the USSR (relative to era)

geikei, 9 months ago

Chinese socialist revolution before Mao’s leadership is pretty legit. Chen Duxiu, Li Dazhao, are all real socialists, they truely cares about the worker and envisions a better future for China.

So no revolution at all? 95% of the critical mass and anything that can be called a large scale revolution (with organizational successes of the masses) happened in China in the 30s and had little to do with Chen Duxiu and Li Dazhao previous work ,no matter how admirable. The CPC almost died and was built back up multiple times by the time Mao succeeded and Mao was vital in that. You cant get more legit than revolution under Mao. Under probably the worst odds and situation any communist party and revolution had to face they endured, made correct and miraculous choices and political and military manuvers at every turn and won, uplifting and liberating hundreds of millions of peasants and women. No Mao, no successfull revolution in China and no emancipation of the masses. Good luck doing the long march and outmanuvering the KMT from the countryside by amassing immense support with Chen Duxiu’s ideas about the peasantry.

Chen Duxiu, Li Dazhao may have envisioned a better socialist future for China but they were and would have been unable to make it happen. They lacked both the military genius, the correct analysis on the peasantry or the rhetoric and vision of mass politics that Mao had that allowed the CPC to pull through against all odds and win

geikei, 9 months ago

People here miss the main reason for the Chinese graph. Due to rapid modernaziation and urbanization China is at a point where it has two countries with different levels of income within itself. One with some 200-300 million people in the big cities earning basicaly European level salaries and incomes and one of some 200-300 million rural residents that make 2-3 times less at least (and then various stages in between).So in the process of massive urbanization in a very short period of time a shitton of people have been uplifted to high income status while a shitton are in the way and a shitton are still not uplifted but most likely will. That creates a very unique impact in inequality metrics without context

Also that doesnt translate to equaly huge disparty in quality of life or purchasing power since in rural or small town China life ,even beyond rent, is indeed much cheaper compared to urban ereas in a degree not seen in the vast majority of countries . That particular configuration is very specific to China. For example the median US “rural” income is just 20% lower than the median urban one and despite that income inequality is so immense nationwide

And all that ignoring the particularities that arise if you try to make a wealth graph for China instead of income. With 90% home ownership rate, very large savings compared to other countries, an ever present in kind welfare state and a “at least on paper” people’s state that can be argued to actively control most of the wealth in various ways . Even for a “de formed” workers state how can you really make a wealth graph that accounts for the non capitalist particularities of ownership and control

Also how can you even compare stats like that between different modes of production. The bottom 50% in 1930s China were landless peasant serfs slaving on feudal warlords and living till 33 years old. What does them having 25% of Chinas income share even mean or even matter? How can you compare it to the situation I described above. How is it even calculated in such a context ?

It’s nothing like comparing and calculating the stats in Western capitalist countries now vs in the 30s or 40s

geikei, 9 months ago

How would Trotskyism be any less “authoritarian” Than marxism leninism ? Also almost every claims on some level to be “orthodox marxist”, lenin most of all and MLs as well

geikei, 9 months ago

these unarmed chinese college students must have been built like Baki characters since 40 PLA soldiers and police officers died in the clashes

geikei, 9 months ago

Export decrese is in line with almost every other east asian country and its very much so a “western economies go into recession and import less” problem. Groth slowing to ~5% is in line with what everyone is expected and China doesnt sweat too much about it. Its pretty solid especially since its higher quality. Deflation is only a problem if it persists for a long time and if it actualy spans in various types of commodities. If you exclude energy and housing everything else shows small inflation in China still and the real estate sector is going through tough but needed restructuring and regulation periods since last year. Deflation introduced from that part of the economy is more or less a by product of them deleveraging the sector and bursting some bubbles

geikei, 9 months ago (edited 9 months ago)

Even if China’s demographic issues are as big as dumbass clickbait YT vids and reddit comments make it out to be that would still put China in the demographic position of SK a couple of decades ago. S. Korea quintupled industrial production between 1992-2010 and their productivity rose x6 while it’s factory workforce dropped 25%. It’s all about education, tech, and productivity. More important than the aggregate Chinese population is the technically proficient,college educated, Chinese population. That has grown 20-fold, or by 2,000%, in the past 40 years and will continue to grow due to the hundreds of millions of untapped rural population despite the decline in population.

So point is, economy is still growing. The plan has always been to create self-sustaining growth in exports to the Global South with BRI infrastructure + productivity leap at home. Both of those aspects show great success. Exports and imports to the GS are expanding and the entire SEA is brought in the sphere of Chinese digital economy. The “greater China” economy includes another billion people in SE and Central Asia.China is getting 2x to 8x productivity leaps with AI/5G apps in industry/mining/logistics.

And all that is assuming China cant and will not tackle demographic issues in any other manners