In a retelling of a conversation Zetkin had with Lenin he supposedly says “scratch a communist and a philistine bleed” …a phrase I think you can appreciate
"Deng was a leading player in the Anti-Rightist campaign of 1957-58, during which an estimated half a million were sent to labour camps, and was at first an ardent proponent of the Great Leap Forward. He spent much of 1958 touring the country, urging stepped-up steel production at the expense of grain, while insisting rice export targets should be met to maintain face abroad. Famine set in that winter. But as late as September 1959, Deng attacked ‘right opportunists who do not see the successes of the Great Leap’ in the People’s Daily" What a realist
Dongping Han defense of the cultural revolution and both of the books by Ralph Ruckus cover this. I would add that both these authors read Mandarin and can’t be called anti-Chinese whereas Losurdo and co don’t seem to be able to seriously go into source texts
Is there any review you did on Greenes book on Stalin, that i could read? If not could you per chance give some small bullet points what you don't like about it? I am currently reading it and find it quite intriguing.
@@VarnVlog Yeah the interview is what introduced me to the book, but i haven't heard any critizism in the video, maybe i should watch it again more carefully.
@@VarnVlog I'm pretty sure I know Maoists who still think that. I think though, that this kind of Maoism raises it's set of questions. Like if Mao had really established a worker and peasant dictatorship, how was it that capitalist roaders in the party could so easily turn around, and in a few years institute a development program based on hyper-expliotation of the peasantry? Some of them, like Badiou suggest that this shows the limits of the party state, but this raises of the question of why one would uphold the ML tradition in the first place, since it seems to have a misformed relationship between the Party and masses, and tends to revert back to something like capitalism anyways?
In a retelling of a conversation Zetkin had with Lenin he supposedly says “scratch a communist and a philistine bleed” …a phrase I think you can appreciate
"Deng was a leading player in the Anti-Rightist campaign of 1957-58, during which an estimated half a million were sent to labour camps, and was at first an ardent proponent of the Great Leap Forward. He spent much of 1958 touring the country, urging stepped-up steel production at the expense of grain, while insisting rice export targets should be met to maintain face abroad. Famine set in that winter. But as late as September 1959, Deng attacked ‘right opportunists who do not see the successes of the Great Leap’ in the People’s Daily"
What a realist
Hi Varn, apologies if already stated, but can you recommend any books on Deng era China and the disempowerment of workers?
Dongping Han defense of the cultural revolution and both of the books by Ralph Ruckus cover this. I would add that both these authors read Mandarin and can’t be called anti-Chinese whereas Losurdo and co don’t seem to be able to seriously go into source texts
👍
Is there any review you did on Greenes book on Stalin, that i could read? If not could you per chance give some small bullet points what you don't like about it? I am currently reading it and find it quite intriguing.
I can go back, but I haven't written a review. I interviewed him about it a year ago.
@@VarnVlog Yeah the interview is what introduced me to the book, but i haven't heard any critizism in the video, maybe i should watch it again more carefully.
Is it just me, or does the "Dengist's" "realism" make communism sound a lot of like state centric capitalism with a police state?
@@redberdyaev6648 it isn’t just you-hell most Maoists thought this after 1982 until about a half decade ago
@@VarnVlog I'm pretty sure I know Maoists who still think that. I think though, that this kind of Maoism raises it's set of questions. Like if Mao had really established a worker and peasant dictatorship, how was it that capitalist roaders in the party could so easily turn around, and in a few years institute a development program based on hyper-expliotation of the peasantry? Some of them, like Badiou suggest that this shows the limits of the party state, but this raises of the question of why one would uphold the ML tradition in the first place, since it seems to have a misformed relationship between the Party and masses, and tends to revert back to something like capitalism anyways?