Actually read Deng's work. Left or right, it would be insane to ignore the material outcomes of his policies (built off the framework and infrastructure of Mao)
The labels "Marxist-Leninist" and "Maoist" suggest that Lenin's thought is closer to Marx's than Mao's is. Is that true, and if so, how/to what extent/in what respect(s)?
@@red-baitingswine8816 thats not my suggestion... what i believe is that leninism is marxism in the age of imperialism. maoism is leninism on china, not a universal new development of marxism. thats what i believe at least, not that this is the most important discussion inside the left lol
@@brunoqueiroz2759 You are not talking about maoism than. You are referring to Mao Zedong Thought Maoism is the ideology of Gonzalo and the shinning path
Thank you Breht! Everyone needs to read Carl Riskin's China's Quest For Development Since 1949, Chris Bramall's Rural Industrialization In China, Joshua Eisenman's Red China's Green Revolution, Zhun Xu's From Commune To Capitalism and Mobo Gao's Constructing China.
Not a good analysis of Mao at all. His analysis does not show any Marxist dialectics. Both the Great Leap Forward and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution were great achievements in socialist China with, of course, some problems. Through these revolutionary movements, Mao had upheld Marxist principles, successfully built and developed socialist economy, changed hundreds of millions people's life for the better everyday, China became strong clearly, also China supported national independence liberation worldwide. Mao's time laid foundation for today's fast development in China. The speaker amplified the problems too much and that is why his analysis doesn't speak to the truth.
Correction: actual Marxist-Leninists don't support the reforms of Deng Xiopeng. What you said in the video around 45:30 is just false. There is a big mess of confusion among leftists today that has largely formed because of shitty LARPy 'meme communists' online who don't actually organize in real life. With very few exceptions (like the DKP in Germany, for example), ML parties are extremely critical of China after Mao's death, and even more so of modern China due to the social imperialist characteristics they have taken on (which is exactly what Mao saw happening in the USSR after Stalin). Those same 'internet commies' calling themselves Marxist-Leninist also like to fanboy about the USSR or the DDR being true AES all the way up until 1991 rather than acknowledging that they turned into revisionist nightmares of bureaucracy, nepotism, and a new bourgeoisie. Again, actual Marxist-Leninists do not follow this line; they recognize the character changes and liberal reforms that happened later on and put a lot of emphasis on learning from these mistakes rather than parading around with a nostalgia for the past with no useful analysis.
You're confusing Marxist-Leninists with Ultras and Maoists. Most disciplined MLs and MLMs understand China's historical and material conditions that necessitated the reform and opening up
@@michaelbarton7835 Is the CCP (as you seem to be possibly implying here) allowing China to go through a "Capitalist" stage, in order to expedite its transition to a more desirable Marxist type society? Also: Why hasn't more Russian/Chinese industrial and tech capability made its way to e.g. Venezuela and Bolivia? Wouldn't that strengthen all those involved in the long run?
I like Mao, but his criticism of “Soviet imperialism “, “Soviet bureaucracy “ and his wish to lead the world communist movements caused a lot of damage
The "Three Worlds Theory" and claiming the Soviet Union to be "Social Imperialist" and more dangerous to the world communist movement than US imperialism were Mao´s greatest mistakes. But they were made in about the last 5 years of his life. Which is a very small part of his legacy, where he was already very old and removed from the chinese people and revolutionary process and even more from the world communist movement.
I strongly recommend From Victory To Defeat by Pao-yu Ching and The Battle for China’s Past by Mobo Gao as a counterpoint to the Dengist perspective of the guest and the book recommendations in this episode.
Excluding farmers (peasant or not) from the "working class" is imo anti-empirical, unscientific, and myopic/prejudiced - or at least a serious error - and imho might reflect what is, if I'm not mistaken, the historically bourgeois heritage of most Marxist theorists. . I say this with the understanding that scientific/technological/industrial evolution is a crucially important goal for any society. It seems more than reasonable to expect that stewards of the land and its productivity should be able to, in addition to providing nourishment, etc. for everyone, provide a decent life for themselves through their crucially necessary creativity, ingenuity, understanding and productive work. , For those not familiar with it, I highly recommend the work and rhetoric of Vandana Shiva.
@ around 25:56 and just before: Was it really absolutely necessary to "collectivize" the rural economy? That's hard for me to see as anything but a total betrayal. And in retrospect (from my Western "free enterprise" perspective) it seems like a contributing factor to the proceeding great famine.
@ around 41:25, and before; I think the "tiger/monkey" idea could be an obfuscating factor in understanding Mao. After all, we know for a fact that all Mao's moments were just that - "Mao" moments - his entire mentality, mainly "tiger", was always in there. And if he was, as you say, Machiavellian, his deepest motives might well have been different than he claimed.
The labels "Marxist-Leninist" and "Maoist" suggest that Lenin's thought is closer to Marx's than Mao's is. Is that true, and if so, how/to what extent/in what respect(s)?
The name "Maoist" is just short for Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. It is also important to make a distinction between Maoism and Mao Zedong Thought. To say it basically: Maoism is Mao Zedong Thought made universal. Us Maoists also see Maoism as just a more developed form of Marxism-Leninism
Also, when parties like the Black Panther Party are called Maoist, it is important to note that they where more proto Maoists as Maoism only got synthesized decades later by the Chairman Gonzalo of the Peruvian Communist Party.
@@HongXiuquanDerPolderen lmao baby boiler Gonzaloite… Maoists are like Trotskyist, adherent to Ideologies held by the uneducated and naive. It is revisionist and dogmatic simultaneously, but seeing how deep in the sauce you are you must be some western ultra cosplayer so nothing to take serious lol Embarrassing *Edit: lmfao a white Dutchman who would’ve guessed
Im ML, not MLM tho i still support the legacy of mao...
Its really not fair to say that all MLs are dengists. I am certainly not one of them.
Actually read Deng's work. Left or right, it would be insane to ignore the material outcomes of his policies (built off the framework and infrastructure of Mao)
The labels "Marxist-Leninist" and "Maoist" suggest that Lenin's thought is closer to Marx's than Mao's is. Is that true, and if so, how/to what extent/in what respect(s)?
@@red-baitingswine8816 thats not my suggestion...
what i believe is that leninism is marxism in the age of imperialism. maoism is leninism on china, not a universal new development of marxism. thats what i believe at least, not that this is the most important discussion inside the left lol
@@brunoqueiroz2759 Thanks.
@@brunoqueiroz2759 You are not talking about maoism than.
You are referring to Mao Zedong Thought
Maoism is the ideology of Gonzalo and the shinning path
Thank you Breht!
Everyone needs to read Carl Riskin's China's Quest For Development Since 1949, Chris Bramall's Rural Industrialization In China, Joshua Eisenman's Red China's Green Revolution, Zhun Xu's From Commune To Capitalism and Mobo Gao's Constructing China.
Not a good analysis of Mao at all. His analysis does not show any Marxist dialectics. Both the Great Leap Forward and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution were great achievements in socialist China with, of course, some problems. Through these revolutionary movements, Mao had upheld Marxist principles, successfully built and developed socialist economy, changed hundreds of millions people's life for the better everyday, China became strong clearly, also China supported national independence liberation worldwide. Mao's time laid foundation for today's fast development in China. The speaker amplified the problems too much and that is why his analysis doesn't speak to the truth.
Cool to hear an early episode of RevLeft. Breht is a treasure. This guest is fantastic!
I love the way he directly translates Chinese idioms into English... “sweet and sour”
This talk provides really profound insights.
Correction: actual Marxist-Leninists don't support the reforms of Deng Xiopeng. What you said in the video around 45:30 is just false. There is a big mess of confusion among leftists today that has largely formed because of shitty LARPy 'meme communists' online who don't actually organize in real life. With very few exceptions (like the DKP in Germany, for example), ML parties are extremely critical of China after Mao's death, and even more so of modern China due to the social imperialist characteristics they have taken on (which is exactly what Mao saw happening in the USSR after Stalin). Those same 'internet commies' calling themselves Marxist-Leninist also like to fanboy about the USSR or the DDR being true AES all the way up until 1991 rather than acknowledging that they turned into revisionist nightmares of bureaucracy, nepotism, and a new bourgeoisie. Again, actual Marxist-Leninists do not follow this line; they recognize the character changes and liberal reforms that happened later on and put a lot of emphasis on learning from these mistakes rather than parading around with a nostalgia for the past with no useful analysis.
You're confusing Marxist-Leninists with Ultras and Maoists. Most disciplined MLs and MLMs understand China's historical and material conditions that necessitated the reform and opening up
@@michaelbarton7835 Is the CCP (as you seem to be possibly implying here) allowing China to go through a "Capitalist" stage, in order to expedite its transition to a more desirable Marxist type society? Also: Why hasn't more Russian/Chinese industrial and tech capability made its way to e.g. Venezuela and Bolivia? Wouldn't that strengthen all those involved in the long run?
Can you provide the transcript?
wanted to give a birds eye view of the scenario, as a lot gets lost in the details, or even interest.
I like Mao, but his criticism of “Soviet imperialism “, “Soviet bureaucracy “ and his wish to lead the world communist movements caused a lot of damage
The "Three Worlds Theory" and claiming the Soviet Union to be "Social Imperialist" and more dangerous to the world communist movement than US imperialism were Mao´s greatest mistakes.
But they were made in about the last 5 years of his life. Which is a very small part of his legacy, where he was already very old and removed from the chinese people and revolutionary process and even more from the world communist movement.
@@maxmeggeneder8935 makes it even more sad. Cause that 5 years is a huge part of his legacy now 😢
Why can't I find this episode on Google podcasts?
I strongly recommend From Victory To Defeat by Pao-yu Ching and The Battle for China’s Past by Mobo Gao as a counterpoint to the Dengist perspective of the guest and the book recommendations in this episode.
I fucking love the intro song...and also found so cute Bret's daughters
Excluding farmers (peasant or not) from the "working class" is imo anti-empirical, unscientific, and myopic/prejudiced - or at least a serious error - and imho might reflect what is, if I'm not mistaken, the historically bourgeois heritage of most Marxist theorists.
.
I say this with the understanding that scientific/technological/industrial evolution is a crucially important goal for any society. It seems more than reasonable to expect that stewards of the land and its productivity should be able to, in addition to providing nourishment, etc. for everyone, provide a decent life for themselves through their crucially necessary creativity, ingenuity, understanding and productive work.
,
For those not familiar with it, I highly recommend the work and rhetoric of Vandana Shiva.
@ around 25:56 and just before: Was it really absolutely necessary to "collectivize" the rural economy? That's hard for me to see as anything but a total betrayal. And in retrospect (from my Western "free enterprise" perspective) it seems like a contributing factor to the proceeding great famine.
@ around 41:25, and before;
I think the "tiger/monkey" idea could be an obfuscating factor in understanding Mao. After all, we know for a fact that all Mao's moments were just that - "Mao" moments - his entire mentality, mainly "tiger", was always in there. And if he was, as you say, Machiavellian, his deepest motives might well have been different than he claimed.
Hi
xi salvaged deng's legacy.
The labels "Marxist-Leninist" and "Maoist" suggest that Lenin's thought is closer to Marx's than Mao's is. Is that true, and if so, how/to what extent/in what respect(s)?
The name "Maoist" is just short for Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. It is also important to make a distinction between Maoism and Mao Zedong Thought. To say it basically: Maoism is Mao Zedong Thought made universal. Us Maoists also see Maoism as just a more developed form of Marxism-Leninism
Also, when parties like the Black Panther Party are called Maoist, it is important to note that they where more proto Maoists as Maoism only got synthesized decades later by the Chairman Gonzalo of the Peruvian Communist Party.
@@HongXiuquanDerPolderen Thanks!
@@HongXiuquanDerPolderen lmao baby boiler Gonzaloite…
Maoists are like Trotskyist, adherent to Ideologies held by the uneducated and naive. It is revisionist and dogmatic simultaneously, but seeing how deep in the sauce you are you must be some western ultra cosplayer so nothing to take serious lol
Embarrassing
*Edit: lmfao a white Dutchman who would’ve guessed
@@guccipucci3941 Thanks for your great comment. Truly enlightening.
Fuck yeah!
proof that the stupidity is not just on the right 😂
@@Vastilious lmao