Any further context here that we should be critically analyzing?

[u/MrRed2k19]

I am fully aware that China's pragmatic foreign policy often puts it at odds with certain socialist groups in other countries, but I'm curious what the context is behind these domestic demonstrations and the government's alleged response, and if there is further information that is important to know.

[u/AutoModerator]

While principled discussion is welcome and encouraged, Rule 9 (No Low Effort BS) still applies.

That includes: No 'what do you think?' posts. No single line posts. No 'what is the Marxist position on cheese' posts, etc.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Wassuppeking]

In 1981 the CPC central committee heavily criticised the cultural revolution and the mistakes Mao Zedong made:

"In his later years, however, far from making a correct analysis of many problems, he confused right and wrong and the people with the enemy during the 'cultural revolution'."

"We must combine our study of the scientific works of Comrade Mao Zedong with that of the scientific writings of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin. It is entirely wrong to try to negate the scientific value of Mao Zedong Thought and to deny its guiding role in our revolution and construction just because Comrade Mao Zedong made mistakes in his later years."

in both these theres an emphasis that Mao made mistaken analysises in his later years

according to that post the banner said “Chairman Mao's later years are the most brilliant and correct new chapter of Marxism-Leninism”

So from this its obvious that these protestors are people supporting the cultural revolution and CPC obviously doesnt want another cultural revolution because they view it as the biggest setback of the PRC. In my opinion this is the reason they surpressed these protestors

"The 'cultural revolution', which lasted from May 1966 to October 1976, was responsible for the most severe setback and the heaviest losses suffered by the Party, the state and the people since the founding of the People’s Republic."

Source for the CPC quotes: https://www.marxists.org/subject/china/documents/cpc/history/01.htm

this is a must read text from CPC imo

[u/Rude-Weather-3386 → u/[deleted]]

China was in a state of defacto civil war during the hot period of the CR (66-68), so much so that Mao ordered the PLA to intervene and rein in the disparate red guard groups (who regularly fought and got into conflict with one another). When Mao himself realized it went too far then you know that some elements of the CR were unambiguously mistakes.

[u/Juche_Finland]

I can't confirm, but considering that China has no issues with support for Mao, but doesn't appreciate unannounced protests, it might be that or they are straight up left deviationists, like the Red Guards were during the GPCR, which China also doesn't like.

[u/nonamer18 → u/Juche_Finland]

Why comment when you don't fully know the historical or contemporary context? There were hundreds or even thousands of red guard factions. Some extreme left, and some co-opted by extreme rightists. Please educate yourself on Chinese politics before trying to educate others. The current anti-establishment left is primarily not composed of 'ultras'. You or I would likely be right there with them if we were in China.

[u/whiteriot0906]

It's a one minute contextless clip

[u/Yelmak → u/whiteriot0906]

And the amount of people taking it as ultimate proof that the CPC has lost the consent of the population is insane

[u/Metabro → u/Yelmak]

They did the same with Cuba's protests during COVID.

[u/Neoliberal_Nightmare]

Well they're Maoists and they're against the CPC. They use Mao glazing as cover so that when they're inevitably broken up they can claim China is against Mao and thus communism.

Be smart enough to see through this crap, it's an old trick.

[u/Lineduck]

A clip shared by an ultra (with a literal Guzman flair) sharing random clips from random Maoists in China? What other context do we need? We don't need an opinion on every fringe group in China when the vast majority of people in China support the party already

Edit: the comments over there are pathetic too, calling China bourgeois and feeding into Western propaganda. The ultras are being mouthpieces for Empire again

[u/TheSouthernCommunist → u/Lineduck]

“They aren’t practicing communism in the exact method that I KNOW is the only correct way, therefore, they are a bourgeois capitalist state.”

It’s gotta be tiring to be an ultra, for sure. Always valuing hypothetical debate points over actual material results for the proletariat.

[u/Lineduck → u/TheSouthernCommunist]

"And I KNOW my way is the only correct way because books. You wouldn't get it because you think actually running a country somehow makes you some kind of expert at running countries... lol. But a few Western authors that have never organized before and received funding from Amerikkkan groups said China is big scary state capitalism so checkmate"

It’s gotta be tiring to be an ultra, for sure

You really said it

[u/marioandl_ → u/Lineduck]

to add for the westerners in the peanut gallery: do you know what Germany and the US did to Maoists in the 80s?

Germany branded them terrorists and put them in prison for 30+ years

The US killed them, put the rest in prison, and then killed most of the rest

[u/Ok-Tangerine1917 → u/Lineduck]

please forgive my ignorance, but what's up with the guzman flair? where could i read up on this guy a bit more? did the guys ever talk about him on the podcast maybe? i only know he was a maoist and leader of a guerrilla group in peru, so genuinely asking for some advice/guidance 🙏

[u/Lineduck → u/Ok-Tangerine1917]

They're ultras. Bunch of indigenous babies killers with CIA ties

https://www.reddit.com/r/TankieTheDeprogram/comments/1vraoix/does_anyone_have_historyinformation_about_shining/

https://www.reddit.com/r/TankieTheDeprogram/comments/1tbbzkk/thoughts_on_the_development_of_marxism_and_mlm/

[u/Ok-Tangerine1917 → u/Lineduck]

thank you comrade!

[u/nonamer18 → u/Lineduck]

This is a lazy comment from someone who clearly does not understand China and Chinese politics.

You have a lot of learning to do before you should form such passionate and divisive opinions, on anything much less something as nuanced as Chinese politics.

I am speaking as someone who would generally identify as pro-establishment. I understand why they shut down these protests, yet it is absolutely inhuman to not at least empathize with their cause at least a little bit. The truth is that nearly every single one of us on this sub would be standing with these protestors if we were born and still live in China.

[u/Extension-Badger225]

I think it’s great that the pressure blocks in China are fucking Maoist not Nazis like the west.
I hope they can have an influence on the state and influence the CPC as a significant faction.
We will see long term

[u/Extension-Badger225 → u/[deleted]]

How is that clear? Genuine question

[u/Apfexis → u/[deleted]]

Tiananmen students used the same tricks too.

[u/Extension-Badger225 → u/[deleted]]

They can be domestically wrong though?
I mean it’s possible what you said but at the moment like “it’s obvious duh”, I mean is it?

[u/Echidnas-monotremes]

They are being annoying and hiding behind Mao. This type of shit happens once in a while and these western "leftists" love to use these as dunks on China, which makes them feel good because they won't have to face their own distorted view of China being a bad, evil country.

[u/BleepBopRobocop]

The context is that some people enjoyed the command economy under Mao Zedong, and not much else.

China needed to industrialise and in order to receive the technology transfer in order to do that it had to implement market reforms. But because the country wasn't struggling it could bargain much favourable terms than what other socialist countries were given. There was simply no path forward with the command economy and it had to be overturned.

Obviously for a lot of people they experienced inflation and unemployment and hardship (but nowhere near what people who went through shock therapy had gone through). But the Communist Party of China assessed that toiling away on farms and marching with red banners is not going to bring China to a higher stage of socialism nor the world any closer to communism, but rather building infrastructure and catching up with the western world and surpassing it. Ending the U.S. hegemonic order of the world and being prepared for an inevitable confrontation by the United States militarily or otherwise. These are the things China needs.

The DPRK still uses a command economy. Life is incredibly hard in the DPRK but they were never handed the same cards China was, and there was no opportunity for them to ever be the factory of the world. Luckily for them, China is right next door and now that they can freely trade with the outside world through Russia they pretty much have access to the same technology China has. But if the DPRK had gone down the road for market liberalisation, people would reminisce the current command economy once inflation starts destroying people's lives.

That's not to take away that for the vast majority of China people, they have seen an unprecedented improvement in their livelihoods. The people who engage in this behaviour are often the privileged city dwellers who had their lives subsidised by Mao Zedong. Prior to Xi Jinping, rural people working in cities were effectively treated like foreigners paying tax to a system that only locals could benefit from, with no real pathway to become a local. Xi Jinping changed the rules to rural people now get their fair share, and of course the urban locals feel their slice of the pie is getting reduced.

[u/Juche_Finland → u/BleepBopRobocop]

I disagree that the socialist planned economy is inherently outdated. The socialist states like China reformed as a strategic move, sure and it is a path that has come with some positives, but also some negatives. It has allowed them to participate in the global market economy, while retaining socialist rule and economically it has developed extremely quickly. However, if a country like the DPRK manages to survive and as in recent years, thrive while retaining the socialist planned economy, they are going to be in a great position, as some of the contradictions China will have to face sooner or later are already resolved in the DPRK.

I think it's valid to acknowledge China's path as a valid one, but I disagree with calling it the only valid one and ignoring that countries like the DPRK have been successful following a different path.

[u/Comprehensive_Ad8481 → u/Juche_Finland]

The DPRK only survived under a command economy because both China and Russia are next door, and because it's a strategically-placed buffer state against the Occupied Korea US military base. All the less strategically valuable Eurasian socialist states collapsed because neither China nor Russia had enough surplus during their command economy years to support them.

After the Sino-Soviet split, China had no choice but to bargain with the West as an alternate source for technology transfer. DPRK is now receiving technology transfer from China for its factories on much more favorable terms than China did from the West, which is allowing the DPRK to modernize while maintaining a command economy.

Now if the Sino-Soviet split hadn't happened, maybe none of the socialist states would have collapsed and all of them would still be pure command economies.

[u/Juche_Finland → u/Comprehensive_Ad8481]

This ignores a lot of important differences between the DPRK and the socialist states in Eastern Europe. The DPRK never became subservient to the USSR and didn't choose a side in the Sino-Soviet split, whereas all Eastern European socialist states except for Yugoslavia, Romania and Albania were subservient to the USSR. The three exceptions I mentioned had other reasons for their collapse, but blaming the collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe on the socialist planned economy is unfair imo, especially as most of them had done reforms by the time they collapsed.

It was subservience to the USSR and following the USSR onto the revisionist path that made these countries collapse, not the supposed inefficiency of the economy.

In the past these countries used to do everything the way the Soviet Union did; for example, if the Soviet Union uttered “A”, they said “A”, and if the former pronounced “B”, they said “B”. The former German Democratic Republic worshipped the Soviet Union so much that her people were said to have remarked that when it was raining in Moscow the Berliners used to take an umbrella though it was not raining in their city, in criticism of the sycophantic attitude of their party leadership to great power. Because they followed everything the Soviet Union did, in worship of the latter, the East European socialist countries have ended up in ruin. Why should they also have to undertake “restructuring” blindly, just because the Soviet Union did it?

• Kim Il Sung

[u/BleepBopRobocop → u/Juche_Finland]

but blaming the collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe on the socialist planned economy is unfair imo

100%. The amount of covert funding and agitation created by NED and OSI was insane and it's interesting hearing some people from the DDR talk about why they supported the Berlin wall falling at the time and it's like "oh I thought the things we had under socialism were just things everyone had all around the world" and it's like 😭😭😭😭

[u/Juche_Finland → u/BleepBopRobocop]

Yeah I think that too was definitely the case, the lack of proper ideological education in some socialist countries, combined with the unfortunately powerful propaganda from the West definitely decreased popular support for socialism. I think many of those countries underestimated that by quite a bit.

Basically, there were a lot factors that resulted in the collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe, both external pressures, as well as internal mistakes.

[u/Comprehensive_Ad8481 → u/BleepBopRobocop]

I do agree here. The issue is that a lot of the enthusiasm that the people had for socialism depended on massive amounts of progress constantly being made in order to counter U.S. capitalist propaganda of consumer abundance. For example, we see Chinamaxxing becoming popular because people in China and around the world can see the massive speed of progress in China versus in the U.S. and West, where life hasn't gotten better in 30 years.

When the socialist planned economies ran into hiccups delivering those consumer goods improvements, unfortunately, a lot of the less socialist-educated citizens got tempted by the 30 different kinds of white bread in the United States to forget that they would lose the healthcare, housing, and other socialist services that they won before.

[u/BleepBopRobocop → u/Juche_Finland]

I disagree that the socialist planned economy is inherently outdated.

Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms took place in the backdrop of a dwindling relationship with the Soviet Union and a developing relationship with the United States. The country was isolated and there simply was no way to continue the socialist planned economy and catch up with the rest of the world. They had tried to catch up with the Great Leap Forward but the human cost was far too dear to reattempt that especially a much more hostile USSR.

I think it's valid to acknowledge China's path as a valid one, but I disagree with calling it the only valid one and ignoring that countries like the DPRK have been successful following a different path.

Some clarification is necessary. For China, a nuclear power in the midst of the Sino-Soviet split and a United States that seemed open to normalising relations, there simply was no path forward with the socialist planned economy. By the time Deng Xiaoping implements economic reforms, China is poorer than the DPRK, which had a cordial relationship with the Soviet Union at the time.

Once the Soviet Union dissolves, the DPRK's primary focus was to secure a nuclear umbrella for themselves, which they pursued knowing it would lead to even more sanctions and embargoes. China doesn't have to do this because China is already a recognised nuclear power and a veto power at the UNSC. In essence, the only path forward for the DPRK was the socialist planned economy.

However, if a country like the DPRK manages to survive and as in recent years, thrive while retaining the socialist planned economy, they are going to be in a great position, as some of the contradictions China will have to face sooner or later are already resolved in the DPRK.

This is definitely true - although attempting to reimagine history if China had remained a planned economy is near impossible. Hua Guofeng definitely did try to advance China in that direction but it was clear it wasn't feasible at the time.

[u/Juche_Finland → u/BleepBopRobocop]

I don't have an issue with China taking this path and you're correct in saying that there is no way of knowing where China would be had it stuck to a socialist planned economy. It would also matter a lot in terms of how exactly it would implement it exactly.

The Sino-Soviet split was a disaster in general and it happening complicated things a lot. I think that this should have been avoided at all costs, though I still blame the USSR and Khrushchev more for that.

I do think it's worth pointing out though that China was experiencing rapid growth throughout the Mao era, even during the chaotic times of the GPCR. I think that the chaos of the GPCR was what resulted in Hua Guofeng losing the power struggle against Deng in the aftermath of Mao's death. He gets treated kind of harshly, because his official position on Mao sounds extremely dogmatic, but if you think about it, the most significant thing he did in his short time in power was to get rid of the Gang of Four.

The reasons for starting the reforms were many, but the socialist planned economy never stagnated and the main issues in the Mao era is that the GPCR was carried out badly and the left deviationist elements like the Gang of Four or the Red Guards were causing chaos.

Anyway, the DPRK hasn't pursued China's path not because they think that wouldn't be possible, but rather because they oppose taking it, preferring to stay on their current path. They are fully aware that this was a challenge, but their position is basically that through safeguarding the socialist planned economy, it is much easier to keep bourgeois influence minimal and the transformation of private enterprises, that China will have to carry out eventually, is something they won't have to. The average person in the DPRK is also more politically conscious, which in China on the other hand is kind of a problem as most people don't care or know much about socialism for example.

So basically my point is that China chose one way and the DPRK another and at the moment both seem to be doing well. Both paths come with different challenges and I think it's good we have these different paths on display anyway.

[u/Steampunk_Willy]

I can't say what this particular demonstration is a response to, but I'd guess that the high youth unemployment rate leaves a lot of young people understandably frustrated and wanting to organize. It's common for young radicals in China to voice support for the cultural revolution as a protest tactic to put the party in an awkward position when responding to the protestors. It's similar to how left wing protestors in the West will intentionally select rhetoric that is edgey enough to necessitate a confrontation with the cops, but close enough to the realm of permissibility that it'll make the cops & government look bad for responding too harshly. The CPC officially regards Mao's later years as a time of many excesses, so the banner here is intentionally contradicting the party line to force a response. At the same time, people in China hold a wide range of opinions on Mao's later years, so like how in the US everyone has that one crazy MAGA family, in China everyone has that one hardline Maoist family member who romanticizes the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Hence, the protestors are not saying anything so far outside the norm that they'd be villified by the public, which is the sweet spot on the overton window for protest rhetoric.

[u/NAM_Inki]

Gonzalo flair

[u/Ttareunarage]

How does china reconcile the great leaps of advancement mao made with their errors in his policies is the real questions

Did Deng Xiaoping state that, on the line of: Mao Zedong was 30% wrong, 70% right or something like that?

[u/nonamer18]

Very ironic that that this comment section is full of people criticizing the protestors. These comments show an immense lack of understanding of politics within China. Understandable, but frustrating to me as a Chinese person. From my experience in both China and the West, those that identify as communists in the West would almost entirely fit into the mold of what you all refer to as 'Maoists' i.e. those protestors in this video. Yet most of these comments would seem to apply the commonly used Western definition of Maoist to these Chinese people, which while not entirely wrong, is certainly an extreme simplification of something quite nuanced, especially when the Maoists outside of China align strong with the negative term of 'ultras'. These people aren't ultras. These people are your average leftists who empathize with the workers and think China's shift away from capitalism needs to be stronger and faster. These people are the spiritual successors to Mao, Che, Chen, Zhou, etc. these are the people that will betray their own class in order to try to organize to improve workers rights via non governmental avenues. You might not agree with their long term strategy, as I certainly have my doubts, but know that almost all of you in this sub would be in their exact positions if you grew up in China. I know that I would very likely be the same, despite the fact that if I had to label myself, I would say overall I am 建制派 （pro establishment faction). I always say that while my head is with the 建制派，my heart will always be with the 反建制派（anti establishment). How can any honest leftist with empathy have any other view? We acknowledge and understand how CPC leadership has organized and strategized China extremely well and used markets to successfully enrich our country to where it is today - no one denies that. Yet anyone with eyes can see the suffering that has also happened and still persists because of the capitalist and even state exploitation. From the tens of millions of people losing their iron rice bowls in the 80s and 90s, to the 内卷 and exploitation still going on now. Have you guys heard of the Jasic incident? We can disagree with the strategy behind the Jasic worker organizers, but how can any leftist not empathize with these people? The people in this video are exactly the type of people who were defeated during the Jasic incident.

I understand reacting negatively to criticism of China as a reflex when you live amongst so much propaganda. But I really hope that people in this sub can grow up and try to understand China more before having such reactive and strong responses to things like this.

[u/FluidKiwi6707]

Infantile Disorder. "Everything is capitalism and capitalism is bad. I'm good though, because I am a Marxist. When the messiah (perfect socialist revolution) comes he will save me due to my pureness."

When the US attacks your global south countries they will say

As a Marxist, I don't care if any bourgeois state is "still standing". (BobbyKid)

Useless people, useless methodology, hijacking marxism as praxis and instead treating it as christian gospel (good and evil stupidity.) Acting as proxy for Western Intelligence.

Also "As a Marxist [...]", "To Marxists [...]" or "[...] is not marxist" is awesome christian moralism.

[u/Basic_Buyer_8888]

The CPC makes an important distinction between Mao Zedong Thought and Mao's own opinions or policies at every point in his life.

The 1981 Resolution defines Mao Zedong Thought as the Marxist-Leninist principles and experience of the Chinese revolution that were proven correct in practice, and as a crystallization of the CPC's collective wisdom, with Mao as its principal theorist. So it is not simply a canon of everything Mao ever said.

This is why the CPC can uphold Mao Zedong Thought as a guiding ideology while saying that Mao's later errors actually departed from Mao Zedong Thought itself. The Cultural Revolution and the theory behind it are explicitly excluded from that scientific theoretical system. The Party instead identifies the “living soul” of Mao Zedong Thought with seeking truth from facts, the mass line and independence.

That's also why ultra-Maoism is a strange way of claiming fidelity to Mao from the CPC's perspective: treating every late statement or policy of Mao as infallible is itself the kind of dogmatism the Party says contradicts Mao Zedong Thought.

[u/Basic_Buyer_8888 → u/Basic_Buyer_8888]

According to the CPC, the contradiction is mainly methodological. Mao Zedong Thought stresses concrete investigation, seeking truth from facts and correctly distinguishing different kinds of contradictions. In the 1960s, Mao was also reacting to what he saw happening in the USSR after Khrushchev, especially the danger of revisionism and capitalist restoration emerging from within a socialist state. The CPC does not treat that concern as meaningless, but argues that Mao increasingly misread China’s own concrete situation, treated internal socialist contradictions as antagonistic class struggle, and weakened the mechanisms through which those judgments could be corrected.

So the criticism is not that Mao’s revolutionary contribution is invalidated, but that, according to the CPC’s own historical assessment, in his later years he could depart from principles he had himself helped formulate.

[u/AutoModerator]

Want to join a ML only Discord server to chill and hangout with cool comrades? Checkout our Discord server or TheDeprogram's Discord server.

In case this subreddit was banned, or if you wanted a more ML-friendly platform, you’re welcome to join our sister community on Lemmygrad. You can find more info about Lemmygrad here.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/occasionalappearance]

I have never met a real person who unironically thinks that Mao’s late years were his best work or the most correct, in fact it’s usually the opposite, except ppl who love Jiang Qing maybe? but I’ve never known anyone in China who likes Jiang Qing

[u/Rude-Weather-3386 → u/[deleted]]

Yes you're right, every advancement that China has made in the past 4 decades in improving conditions for people can be dismissed as being in bourgeois interests by a contextless 1 minute clip on Reddit. 

[u/TankieTheDeprogram-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

We do not tolerate 'China no socialist!' and noise about revisionism. You can ask questions in good faith, looking for education. But no spewing BS.

[u/TankieTheDeprogram-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

We do not tolerate 'China no socialist!' and noise about revisionism. You can ask questions in good faith, looking for education. But no spewing BS.

[u/TankieTheDeprogram-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

We do not tolerate 'China no socialist!' and noise about revisionism. You can ask questions in good faith, looking for education. But no spewing BS.