[Marxism] Voting with feet, not commendable in Argentina Re: China's high speed rail plans,
nmgoro at gmail.com
Sat Sep 5 08:07:35 MDT 2009
What I think is
(a) that I am not informed enough on the Chinese situation as to
provide a definitive statement on the consolidation (or not) of
socialism there, and that
(b) in the end I am not very enthusiastic around the debate over
whether socialism is stengthened in China or not, since I am more
interested in a debate over whether socialism is strengthened BY China
through its economic development of China, which
(c) whether under bourgeois rule or proletarian rule, is a challenge
to the existing imperialist order inasmuch as it is not building an
extrovert economy but a self-centered one,
and in this sense, at the very least (repeat "at the very least"),
(d) said economic development makes it harder for the imperialist core
to extract surplus value from the periphery in order to keep their
rusting social machinery in smooth motion. Which, taking into account
that the socialist project is a _global_ proyect and socialist
struggle is a _global_ struggle, may well be
(e) a strong objective propeller towards a victory of socialist forces
on the global scale in the very measure it implies a weaker
imperialist bourgeoisie at the core.
So that here is what I think and say:
Since the imperialist bourgeoisie ruling the USofAm is _your_ direct
enemy and _my_ indirect enemy, at the very least (again, I repeat, "at
the very least") I find that this economic development gives an
important help to the struggle for socialism the world over.
2009/9/5 S. Artesian <sartesian at earthlink.net>:
> NG wrote: " Really, S. Artesian, neither did I suggest this that you think
> I suggested"
> Really Nestor, what I stated is based on your statements and LW's.
> LW said explicitly that both the proletariat and the bourgeoisie were being
> made stronger in China. The Chinese "nation" is being made stronger, and
> see China is not a bourgeois nation, but a nation that experienced a
> revolution that expropriated its bourgeoisie and expelled the international
> bourgeoisie, I think it's fair to say that LW's statements clearly mean
> socialism is being strengthened.
> You yourself wrote:
> " It is one thing
> to _use_ capitalism, and a different one to _bow_ to capitalism. The
> whole thing when it comes to the China debate is whether the Chinese
> leadership _uses_ capitalism or _bows_ to it, which implies bowing to
> imperialism. China is not doing the latter. Doing the former, of
> course, entails the most serious risks. But no serious debate can be
> held on China if we do not start by the evidence that "the Chinese use
> the proceeds from their production of consumer goods for extensive
> investments in the infrastructure", that is they are bringing down to
> Earth the bourgeois fantasies of the Latin American bourgeoisies. If
> somebody believes that this has little or nothing to do with the
> relative weight of the bourgeoisie in the social structures of China
> and, say, Brazil (or, daresay, India), this is a mistake."
> You wrote the above lines jumping on LW's bandwagon about the whole thing.
> The fault is not in my dialectic, but yours.
> So do you NOT think socialism is being strengthened in China? Do you not
> think the creation of the SEZ in Guangdong was essential to China's present
El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autoría
More information about the Marxism