There is a unwritten law in China that once a company reaches a certain scale it can no longer pursue profits as its sole objective. It must carry social responsibility and serve the society. That is the difference.
In the meantime China's billionaire class siphons wealth from the working class on a unimaginable scale. Perhaps this is a benevolent form of extraction.
Fantastic talk, I wish only that some of these speakers could have gone on longer! Cheng Enfu and Roland Boer specifically had such great insight and presented their ideas in such a well-researched Marxist framework that I find them indisputable. I do dispute the idea put forth by John Ross that the post-1929 Soviet economic model was an adventurist one though, as their economy flourished under this model and showed that the productive base necessary for correct relations had been built. It may not work in a modern context but had the USSR not succumbed to such revisionism, ossification, and aggressive dismantling I believe it would still be the superior economic formation today.
Wasn’t it only natural that such revisionism, ossification, and dismantling would happen under the model though? It’s not a criticism it’s a legitimate question I have.
@@educateyourself3872 not necessarily. alot of the revisionism happened under Khrushchev who deviated from Stalin's more careful path. The USSR model did work but it had problems little ones that grew into big ones. and since Khrushchev and Brezhnev never dealt with them and neglected them the problems led to massive economic Disadvantage and even tech wise. hell corrupt bureaucrats and leadership is the reason that the USSR Internet project never took off. the lack of a Cultural Revolution and purging these people out is what did them in.
These apologists are helpless to explain away China's billionaire class and a nation rife with wage theft the most heinous labor practices imaginable. It's utterly mind blowing how anyone with a conscience can entertain this nonsense.
They also failed to mention that Chinese billionaires removed over $4 Trillion Dollars in wealth from the economy and placed it in private offshore accounts with the help of UBS over the past 20 years. Done while the government looked away. How is this not applicable.
Any discussion of a centralised DotP without an acknowledgement of Marx’s and Engels’ revision of that centralisation as a Bonapartist bias on their part, is a sign of an incomplete analysis. Their works apart from Kapital and Communist Manifesto, like the Critique of the Goethe Programme, are very important
One reason for overabundance of new terms thrown around is due to the lack of practise that can help in deciding the value of various terms. The overintellectualization without action is a disease of U.S left.
The table is from his book, "China's Economic Dialectic" (highly recommended), and the thesis of his remarks here is a high level summary of arguments he makes in that book.
Amazing widespread and in depth discussions. 1) There seems to be different definitions of public control, from pro worker govt and party to direct grassroots control. Perhaps some varying balances are the answers, which need a lot more research and active experiments all over the world, including China.
There are even more views from inside China since 1960s--Cultural Revolutions 1967 Shanghai Commune and Hunan Provinces Shengwulian, Chinese New Left intellectuals afterwards, various Hong Kong socialists and anarchists since 1970s. and through it all, the Li Y I Zhe group. Most or all seem to see selves as loyal opposition. or certainly as keftists. On internet, see website categories like "Hong Kong left" or under own different names. Hope that these. help.
In response to John Ross: Old-school Maoist would argue that capitalism was restored in the PRC with Mao's death, the arrest of the "Gang of Four" and other leftist allies, and the return to power of Teng and other capitalist-roaders.
How is it Trotskyist? The post-1929 economic policy he referred to as ultra-leftist, was a departure from NEP and somewhat in line with the policy of the Left Opposition. Post WWII, The Trotskyist movement was fractious; Tony Cliff and his theory of State Capitalism wasn't accepted by all.
@@stuartwray6175 I’ve run into a Trotskyist movement that is very much of the opinion that every current socialist state is actually state capitalist, including former USSR after Lenin. They’re also against cooperation with other left movements. I think they’re not going to go far like that.
No. Personally, I believe china is state capitalism. It's authoritarian politic system is problem, chinese need civil right activism, labour movement, socialism or left wing movement for a fair and justice development.
This is some of the highest level discussion on SWCC that I have been able to find. Thank you so much for doing this.
Proffessor Roland Boer is the man! Solidarity from the CPA to all comrades.
There is a unwritten law in China that once a company reaches a certain scale it can no longer pursue profits as its sole objective. It must carry social responsibility and serve the society. That is the difference.
source?
proof?
Emmawang1999 is a 50 cent warrior without a source. An account copypasting comments.
In the meantime China's billionaire class siphons wealth from the working class on a unimaginable scale. Perhaps this is a benevolent form of extraction.
"unwritten law?" Are we really entertaining this? Seriously?
Fantastic talk, I wish only that some of these speakers could have gone on longer! Cheng Enfu and Roland Boer specifically had such great insight and presented their ideas in such a well-researched Marxist framework that I find them indisputable. I do dispute the idea put forth by John Ross that the post-1929 Soviet economic model was an adventurist one though, as their economy flourished under this model and showed that the productive base necessary for correct relations had been built. It may not work in a modern context but had the USSR not succumbed to such revisionism, ossification, and aggressive dismantling I believe it would still be the superior economic formation today.
Yes, the serious economic problems in the USSR emerged alongside the revisionist economic reforms by Khruschev.
Wasn’t it only natural that such revisionism, ossification, and dismantling would happen under the model though? It’s not a criticism it’s a legitimate question I have.
@@educateyourself3872 not necessarily. alot of the revisionism happened under Khrushchev who deviated from Stalin's more careful path. The USSR model did work but it had problems little ones that grew into big ones. and since Khrushchev and Brezhnev never dealt with them and neglected them the problems led to massive economic Disadvantage and even tech wise. hell corrupt bureaucrats and leadership is the reason that the USSR Internet project never took off. the lack of a Cultural Revolution and purging these people out is what did them in.
These apologists are helpless to explain away China's billionaire class and a nation rife with wage theft the most heinous labor practices imaginable. It's utterly mind blowing how anyone with a conscience can entertain this nonsense.
They also failed to mention that Chinese billionaires removed over $4 Trillion Dollars in wealth from the economy and placed it in private offshore accounts with the help of UBS over the past 20 years. Done while the government looked away. How is this not applicable.
Any discussion of a centralised DotP without an acknowledgement of Marx’s and Engels’ revision of that centralisation as a Bonapartist bias on their part, is a sign of an incomplete analysis.
Their works apart from Kapital and Communist Manifesto, like the Critique of the Goethe Programme, are very important
If you can activate the English subs. It is very useful for not native English speakers.
56:00 Professor Roland Boer
Com Radhika, red salute to you! What a fantastic subject with perfect speakers! Like to see more and more of these kind of discussions!!
Roland needs a 2 hour talk - u can hear him on Geopolitical Economy w Ben Norton today
The soviet economy worked pretty well, until they went back to privatization under Chruschtschow.
....and surrendered the birthright of the Russian people over to JP Morgan.
Excellent lectures. Thank you very much
One reason for overabundance of new terms thrown around is due to the lack of practise that can help in deciding the value of various terms. The overintellectualization without action is a disease of U.S left.
Anyone knows the reference for the table used by professor Cheng Enfu at 49.35 please?
The table is from his book, "China's Economic Dialectic" (highly recommended), and the thesis of his remarks here is a high level summary of arguments he makes in that book.
John Ross nailed it, i haven t the seen the other yet though.
Amazing widespread and in depth discussions.
1) There seems to be different definitions of public control, from
pro worker govt and party to direct grassroots control. Perhaps
some varying balances are the answers, which need a lot more research and active experiments all over the world, including China.
Complex Dynamic Socialistic and Paradoxical For New Generations in Christ Amen
There are even more views from inside China since 1960s--Cultural
Revolutions 1967 Shanghai Commune and Hunan Provinces
Shengwulian, Chinese New Left intellectuals afterwards, various Hong Kong socialists and anarchists since 1970s. and through it all, the Li Y I Zhe group.
Most or all seem to see selves as
loyal opposition. or certainly as
keftists. On internet, see website categories like "Hong Kong left"
or under own different names.
Hope that these. help.
Combine the best of everything and formulate a good balance base on experience.
David Lane 06:23
In response to John Ross: Old-school Maoist would argue that capitalism was restored in the PRC with Mao's death, the arrest of the "Gang of Four" and other leftist allies, and the return to power of Teng and other capitalist-roaders.
CCP bot, Mao killed more than 30 million people
✔
Trotskyte animosity towards USSR from John Ross was unnecessary and really only zooms in his flawed analyses.
How is it Trotskyist? The post-1929 economic policy he referred to as ultra-leftist, was a departure from NEP and somewhat in line with the policy of the Left Opposition.
Post WWII, The Trotskyist movement was fractious; Tony Cliff and his theory of State Capitalism wasn't accepted by all.
@@stuartwray6175
I’ve run into a Trotskyist movement that is very much of the opinion that every current socialist state is actually state capitalist, including former USSR after Lenin. They’re also against cooperation with other left movements. I think they’re not going to go far like that.
Jenny Craig... I loved her weight loss program 😂
did you know that today and before the world poorest country is a capitalist country?
My definition of the new China social journey… I call it… “ Scientific Capitalism”
They're both oxymoron terms. It's double speak, orwellian
No. Personally, I believe china is state capitalism. It's authoritarian politic system is problem, chinese need civil right activism, labour movement, socialism or left wing movement for a fair and justice development.
I think we can use both "State Capitalism" and "Market Socialism" for the same country.