[Marxism] China's high speed rail plans

S. Artesian sartesian at earthlink.net
Thu Sep 3 22:38:31 MDT 2009

MG writes:

  It's the logical extension of your statement that "a workers'...state, 
> certainly face a tremendous onslaught from the bourgeoisie within and
> without its borders, and so the question of 'breaking' with the US  by
> abolishing that connection of purchasing  US Treasury instruments will not
> be a question at all, as the US will immediately embargo sales to China, 
> and
> will refuse, probably to redeem the instruments that the 'real workers'
> state' finds in its possession." There's no question an American embargo 
> and
> debt default would have a devastating effect on the living standards of
> Chinese, American and other workers and greatly raise the stakes of a
> military confrontation between the two powers.

Huh?  That is certainly not the "logical extension of my statement," for you 
are claiming that an actual, and successful proletarian revolution in China 
would be a disaster for the workers of China, the US, and by extension, the 
entire world.  So I guess the logical extension of your logical extension is 
that the world cannot afford such a revolution and we must work to prevent 
same, seeking instead the benign synchronization of the Chinese and US 

Well, if that's your logic, then of course we should never have had any 
revolution, because didn't the living standards of the proletariat worsen 
after the October Revolution?  Didn't the conditions of the sans-culottes 
worsen during the Convention?  Sure did.

Of course, conditions worsen when civil war is imposed on a class struggling 
to take power, to establish a new relation of production.

So what should we do, besides I mean become social-democrats and vote our 
approvals of the bourgeoisie's various budgets which of course hold no 
immanent disaster for the living standards, or just the plain living, of the 
workers and poor?

Like I said before, what makes you think that the current path of US-Chinese 
economic ties does not spell disaster for workers everywhere?

Your argument is not a logical extension, its an irrational absurdity in 
that it assumes that capitalism itself does not create the conditions for 
revolution; that the revolutionary struggle is discretionary, voluntary and 
not driven by necessity.  Your argument is an irrational absurdity in that 
it assumes that capitalism itself won't, if maintained in power, establish 
conditions one hundred times more horrific than the supposed disaster to the 
workers if a revolutionary state in China stops buying US Treasuries.

 Look back at every revolution that has failed, has been cut down, and what 
have the results been?  Try Spain in the 1930s, China in the 20s, look at 
the reconstitution of  European colonial rule in Asia after WW2.  Look at 
Germany after 1933.  Hell, look at the world after China, Germany, Spain, 
etc. etc. What made the conditions worse, the success of the revolution, or 
its defeat?  And should those struggles have never been joined by the 
workers because of the prospect for defeat, for declines in living 
standards?  As if it wasn't such declines that precipitated the 

You don't have to look even that far back.  To all those who think 
"development" "growth" "nationalization" is a social program so inherently 
revolutionary, look at the rule of the MNR in Bolivia 1952-1964 and its 
results.  Look at Chile under and after Allende.  What were the results of 
not following through on expropriation, and utilizing "development" "growth" 
"nationalization" strategies?

Funny isn't it how neither Trotsky in his History of the Russian Revolution, 
nor Lenin in his various writing mentions that the Petrograd and Moscow 
Soviets during the 1905 or 1917 period, and particularly under Kerensky, 
pushed for "growth"  "development" and "infrastructure" rather than 
articulate sharpening terms of class struggle.  Can you imagine what might 
have happened if instead of "All Power to the Soviets," the watchword, the 
condensation of the program for revolution had been "Create two, three, many 
trans-Siberian Railroads!"  "All Power to Infrastructure Investment!"

It seems clear to me that the only alternative, the only way to preempt the 
disaster that is capitalism in its reproduction, in both expanding and 
contracting cycles, is through achieving just that thorough, complete, 
uninterrupted revolution.  The only way to achieve that success in any one 
country, even one as resource rich as China, is by the reproduction of the 
revolution on an international scale. I think that's what a famous Marxist, 
not Ripley,  meant by socialism or barbarism.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marv Gandall" <marvgandall at videotron.ca>
To: "David Schanoes" <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 11:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] China's high speed rail plans


More information about the Marxism mailing list