Socialism isn’t anti-market, necessarily, nor do MLs believe in immediately implementing Communism like Anarchists do. MLs are characterized among Leftists by focusing on the immediate material conditions of the Proletariat, and aiming to improve those via ramping up industrialization so that Communism can eventually be achieved, rather than direct implementation from current systems. It’s perfectly in line with ML leadership to be over a state at different stages in the general transition towards Communism, at least when judging within the overall ML belief.
Whether or not Xi is an actual ML is another question entirely, with arguments on both sides of the aisle, even among leftists.
China is getting to the point of economic and technological development that they should soon be giving the means of production to the people. It’s time for China to transition into a true socialist state. The test of whether or not they’re real ML is whether they make that transition or not.
Lenin believed the Dictatorship of the Proletariat to be a temporary solution to Russia’s unique economic system (being super underdeveloped, uneducated, and big as fuck.) The whole point being to use the State’s resources to rapidly develop the country until they can establish a true socialist economy. The problem is, they never get that far. If they ever do cross the goal line, they’re just successful MLs
Most MLs I know extoll the achievements of actually existing socialism though, so while that may be true for Lenin I don’t think it is very accurate to Marxist-Leninists.
Sure, that’s a perfectly valid stance to hold. I do think the people of China should make that decision for themselves, democratically, if they are ready or not to make that transition. Much of China is still rural, but I imagine in cities and other more developed areas this could be done currently.
Socialism isn’t anti-market, necessarily, nor do MLs believe in immediately implementing Communism like Anarchists do. MLs are characterized among Leftists by focusing on the immediate material conditions of the Proletariat, and aiming to improve those via ramping up industrialization so that Communism can eventually be achieved, rather than direct implementation from current systems. It’s perfectly in line with ML leadership to be over a state at different stages in the general transition towards Communism, at least when judging within the overall ML belief.
Whether or not Xi is an actual ML is another question entirely, with arguments on both sides of the aisle, even among leftists.
China is getting to the point of economic and technological development that they should soon be giving the means of production to the people. It’s time for China to transition into a true socialist state. The test of whether or not they’re real ML is whether they make that transition or not.
If they don’t, they’re ML. If they do they’re M.
Lenin believed the Dictatorship of the Proletariat to be a temporary solution to Russia’s unique economic system (being super underdeveloped, uneducated, and big as fuck.) The whole point being to use the State’s resources to rapidly develop the country until they can establish a true socialist economy. The problem is, they never get that far. If they ever do cross the goal line, they’re just successful MLs
Most MLs I know extoll the achievements of actually existing socialism though, so while that may be true for Lenin I don’t think it is very accurate to Marxist-Leninists.
Sure, that’s a perfectly valid stance to hold. I do think the people of China should make that decision for themselves, democratically, if they are ready or not to make that transition. Much of China is still rural, but I imagine in cities and other more developed areas this could be done currently.
Yeah… I’m looking forward to the Second Coming, too. I sure do hope these two momentous (and totally real) events don’t occur in the same time slot.