I am old enough to remember when a lot of the West was social democratic with the utilities and resources owned by the people for their benefit and development.The wealthy corporate sector has seized those sectors with privatisation and used them as an exorbitant means of rent extraction which has left us in debt and a negative birth rate because too much of peoples income is extracted leaving none for creating a family unit.A system that cannot create a healthy future generation is a dead society,which the form of cruel USA capitalism that has been foisted on us in the West has created.
That hits hard as a German, even if I was born when privatisation was in full swing and grew up during the financial crisis (at this point, the term is meaningless, I know. I'm talking about 07/08) which blasted our remaining social net away like the Solar Wind did with Mercury's atmosphere. It pains me to think about the fact that it was Germany which had the best trains not too long ago, and every older person I spoke to agreed that our railway used to be orders of magnitude better pre-1993 (?). Same with Deutsche Post, our postal system, which they privatised 100% into three big corporations (Telekom, Deutsche Post, Postbank), two of which are monopolists offering, for example, the absolute worst telecommunication system in almost all of Europe. Water is still mostly a municipal thing, I believe, but our energy is the biggest joke of the century, I don't even want to write about it - not sure whether it used to be public as well, though. If we can't even have mild social democracy, which is all it was, then we are obviously doomed to continue our way to the bottom, especially considering the recent geopolitical developments.
As a fellow European, I feel you my German bro. Shit's even worse in Mediterranean countries. The fall of the USSR was the worst thing to happen to Europe.
@@Qrtuop Oh yes. I'm ashamed what my country and France have done to you by proxy of the EU bureaucracy, enriching our US-loyal ruling classes on the cost of our own neighbors, destroying every hope of solidarity between the European workers to make our countries stand together to challenge American hegemony. Amazingly, it looks like even the German model is now over for good, there is just no workaround to cheap Russian gas, and the Russians are rightfully DONE with us.
I would agree but what other Western countries have actual socialist parties that would carry out the political will of the people rather than the existing parties that are in service to the capitalist class? What is to be done is for workers to organize on the political and economic fields for a system change.
@@JohnT.4321 the people have to make it happen, organization and collective action. Socialism is built by the base, this is the only way. And Europeans are hopeless
Hey, from a very socialist place of my heart, do you really take no issue with Chinese socialism having landlords, health care system that resembles more the US system, billionaires, severe inequality?
Thanks Ben My country could learn a lot from the Chinese system Our system is totally flawed My leaders are inept inexperienced unqualified and not capable of handling the positions they hold
The US's and UK's systems have been highjacked by the rich oligarchs who own the politicians of both countries. That's why the politicians always make the laws to favor the rich -- because the rich bribe the politicians with their money and help finance their political campaigns! In return the politicians pass laws to favor the rich! That is how the systems of the US and UK work and why both countries are going under despite constantly stealing from other countries, especially poor countries that they can dominate!
I am from NZ and totally agree. The amount of anti China shit we get here is terrible but not as bad as you get over there. Ashamed to live in the least-worst 5 eyes country and listening to our FM bleat on about China but never push back on Israel or the US.
Chinese system is not without its own bureaucratic problems. But so far as overall social progress, tough meritocracy promotes the best and brightest into many of the everyday government positions. It seems the complete opposite in Western countries where the least desired end up in the public service. I always found that odd seeing how much government salary positions waste for comparatively subpar results but that in itself is as broken as the Chinese system (nepotism, favors, connections, etc.) One side is pretty honest about it, the other tries to sell another story. What one may lack in "freedom" however that is culturally defined, the Chinese are largely objectively gaininng a increasing living standard. I'd say it's really hard for a foreigner to just say China is great and faultless from a short-term unlived life there. But let's say in the last 30 years and next 30, I would rather bet on China moving their people forward further more than the States or other countries that are faltering post-neoliberalism antics. A homogenous society certainly helps with things too but that's not too relevant. We don't need every country to be China redux, only to accept that if you want to expand state power to be overreaching, at least do something with that big intervening role. There's plenty of Western alliance countries that share a reusable blueprint without "giving in to the commies" 🙄
@mounouzel “The western obsession with having many …”. Translation: The practice in western countries of like minded people forming parties that reflect diverse political philosophies and ideologies yet in government perform core governmental functions beneficially for proper government is different from the system I exist under.
@@lou7319 what does proper government mean to you? (Genu..." Proper government is having the government is delivery of ordinary government services e g unemployment benefits; defence services, provision of services to the citizens, the economy etc
The moment China challenged our number-one position as the number one economy and global power in the world justified us going to war even if it ends in nuclear Armageddon.
Plutocracy impairs the ability of the US to compete economically with China. Our mega-rich create the motives for a war which the US likely would lose if it's conventional. If it goes nuclear, no one wins.
Hey, from a very socialist place of my heart, do you really take no issue with Chinese socialism having landlords, health care system that resembles more the US system, billionaires, severe inequality? Is it a great discussion if it omitted all of this and only had congratulatory rhetoric?
[ THE QUESTION OF HARMONY IN CHINESE SOCIETY ] - I watch chinese videos every day - and one of the things that fascinates me - if how is it possible for so many thousands to intermingle each and every single day in such an [ Absolute Harmonious Manner ] - Thanks Prof. Boer - Now I know - A 1000- thanks
I've always been impressed by the way the Chinese government developed so quickly and lifted many of it's people out of poverty. Now Chinese are one of the people that travel the most for tourism, business, & leisure. Very impressive 👏💯.
As of now, China has already overtaken Japan to be the biggest auto exporters in 2023 1st quarter. One thing you guys haven't addressed was the western propaganda about the so called Mao being a "murderer to his own people." I have researched that 15+ years ago and found out it was all lies & even US government official figures showed there wasn't any significant drop in population during the 60s and your World Bank graph of life expectancy of China @10:57 during the same period further support my findings then. Nonetheless, it was a very tough Chinese period as China was heavily sanction by the US led West as well as Russia forcing China to pay back its debt. Hence the great leap forward was introduced by Mao's government trying to increase productivity to address such issues. But like many countries such as Cuba, Venezuela & the like, people was struggling not because of their government being incompetent but was a direct result of US led sanctions. So if anyone was murdering people, it would be those in Washington DC.
I was also shocked to learn the whole Tiananmen massacre did not happen, no photos of mass bodies, even the tank guy did not get run over. It was all Western Media lies.
30 million people starved to death, Tank Man, Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the West keeps making lies in order to demonize China. But if you repeat it enough, someone will believe it. Nobody bothers to discover the truth because they only believe what they want to believe.，until one day the world they believed collapse.
Not true. Of course they are/were all incompetent. Almost every marxist regime prior to the 80s ( when China started anew) finally failed. What is more, totally planned economies will always suffer heavy inefficiencies. Sanctions? Look at the non working of the heaviest sanctions imposed on Russia. So what? The Chinese were smart enough to install their mixed economy which works very well.
Except you’ve completely overlooked the ‘Cultural Revolution’. It wasn’t the product of ‘Western Propaganda’. It was the creation of Mao-and it killed many millions, while breaking what should have been a united polity.
Also - 3.7K views - under 700 likes - come on guys - the only way to get more people educated on reality we need likes & to share this channel so that it reaches as many as possible
Thanks Ben and Roland. This is a one stop attitude corrective and must watch stream for all westerners that have neither been to China or experienced life outside of their own culture. I left my own culture over 40 years ago, lived several years in China in late "wild" 1990's and spent many months in China since 2000. I found this stream exteamly illuminating and confirming.
Thank you, Ben, for another great interview! Frederick Engels stated in the Communist Manifesto, “…in 1847, Socialism was a middle class movement, Communism a working class movement.” In his speech at a discussion session with National Model Workers on April 28, 2013, President Xi Jinping stated, “we must make sure that the working class is our main force. The working class is China’s leading class.” Regarding what economic and political system China is based on, in his November 9, 2013 Explanatory Notes (on Some Major Issues) made to the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee, President Xi Jinping stated, “…only socialism can save China, and only reform and opening up can develop China, socialism and Marxism.” He further states, “our market economy is socialist, of course. We need to give leverage to the superiority of our socialist system, and let the Party and government perform their positive functions. The market plays a decisive role in allocating resources, but it is not the sole actor in this regard.” He pretty much describes what “socialist market economy” is and how it ties to the Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. Anti-China propagandists can blabber on and on about their opinions, but to get the answers, it’s best to go to the source.
And market allocated resources, creating lots of billionaires and working class in capsule like living conditions. Wouldn't socialist system at least put restrictions on maximum wealth or capital gains? The way you can very efficiently reduce poverty is with some redistribution, you know?
I saw Roland smile when you said some people think China gave up on socialism. If you make an effort to understand China and socialist history, you'll understand why. They still keep statues and framed images of Mao and they still haven't rehabilitated Chen Duxiu, who was known as "China's Lenin". But they're quite over Stalinism. Whereas Stalin made a wreck of the New Economic Policy, which very few have understood; Deng Xiaoping, he and his father both jailed by the Mao faction, made it a success in China. In the capitalist dictatorships, the government harnesses the working class to enrich the capitalists. In China, the government harnesses the capitalists to enrich the working class. [more] Marx and Engels always celebrated capitalism's successes and expected capitalist rule to give way to socialism until they found they had to deal with capitalism's decadence. It took their successors to discover the value of the revolutionary party and confront fascism. China defeated fascism and the imperialists who tried to restore it in China. In China they built a party that could inspire the workers, urban and rural, to bury fascism and brought 90 million dedicated colleagues into the Party to make the revolution universal. Confucianism isn't all that different from good Leninism and surprisingly compatible with the best entrepreneurial practices. Watch W Edwards Deming, whose team of managerial experts brought Japanese industry back from demise, as he talks here about harmony and defeating sub-optimization. ruclips.net/video/YgMoDHyPQ0s/видео.html
I've been a Marxist for 60 years, but one of my heroes is a capitalist manager. When I was in business school for computer information systems, looking to improve my résumé, I went with my class to attend a lecture by a forward-looking managerial theorist. During the Q & A session, I asked the lecturer how his team is received by business managers. He replied that, "Well, they think we're a bunch of socialists." W Edwards Demings' biography: ruclips.net/video/tDu47czfwiI/видео.html
after the fall of the Soviet Union, Deng toured the country and "Doubled down" on socialism he believes in, that's the reason why they founded the Communist Party, a more just society. their motto is, "To serve the people."
This was excellent! I've only recently begun to hear about debates going on between people in China that take the form of written commentary that is readily available for everyone to read & issue their own comments. WOW! Can you imagine how different life in USA would be if we had this? Yes, of course we've been taught to consider debate as adversarial. If we could learn that through discussion & debate new perspectives can open up leading to new, previously unknown solutions, our culture could grow up! It isn't about "being right" but honestly offering your best thoughts & then LISTENING to what others contribute. Some will posit a different or even contradictory view, others might embellish your view, leading you to see your ideas from a larger perspective. This is not only "democracy" but fabulous collective learning through individual ideas!
Tricontinental recently started publishing Wenhua Zongheng in English (for free). Worth checking out to better understand the different intellectual discussions in China.
Tricontinental recently started publishing Wenhua Zongheng in English (for free). Worth checking out for anyone interested in better understanding the different intellectual discussions in China.
Prof. Boer - I hope you are pleased to be added to my list of Australians that I MUST LISTEN TO - [ JULIAN ASSANGE - JOHN PILGER - PROF. STEVE KEEN - PROF. ROLAND BOER ] - Much thanks for your contribution to my knowledge Base...
But few people listen to long programs, I'd say tackle specific issues in 20 minute segments. You'll reach a larger audience-- and that's absolutely critical now!
@@kateoneal4215 There's a 10 minute video "The right to bear knowledge" posted 10 years ago that only has 1.2k views. I don't think it's the length but the content that determines if it gets pushed out by the AI.
Sorry to ramble - incredible guest the best I’ve ever heard on how the Chinese economy & Govt really works - what an impressive success story still morphing unlike the football politics of the US
Socialism is NOT when the government does things. Socialism is when the people or workers vote on issues affecting their lives, from the local to the national or regional level - nothing is centrally determined or planned, or rather nothing is determined without determinative input from the people who are effected by such decisions. In other words, socialism is the dismantling of central authority and the implementation of direct democracy. I would call China a mixed economy with central planning and some features of socialism that do not go far enough. It is socialism-lite, if you like. This is not a criticism, as such. The current Chinese system is infinitely preferable to Western neoliberalism/capitalism.
I feel the ending note, was very important. Go to China if you want to know or speak about China. We are looking forward to going back to China later this year. In my opinion travel to, and see with your own eyes, is the best form of self education. Thank you for this great interview. Cheers from Australia.
Thanks man, I've heard Mr. Boer before in some webinars of the International Manifesto Group, it's cool to listen for a more extended time about his analysis.
PROF. ROLAND BOER, THANKS FOR UR TRUTHFUL N INSIGHTFUL REPORT N ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION OF DEMOCRACY, RULE OF LAW. HUMAN RIGHTS, ECONOMICS, OF CHINA. THE WORLD WUD UNDERSTAND WHY CHINA HAS GROWN RICH. N BECOME MILITARILY POWERFUL. YET, CHINA IS A PEACE LOVING COUNTRY.
Professor Roland Boer is great. Unfortunately, Ben didn't dive deeper with more questions for the point Boer made, instead just asked different questions
Thanks Ben and Roland, for this clarification of Socialism with Chinese characteristics. Especially good to hear it coming from down under; there is hope for the great Southern land yet.
the absolute pearl where he states to the effect that : true communism would only be possible in some centuries, depending, and that the socialist process leads to it, indicates the depth of understanding of the human psyche/spirit and that the Chinese model is leading the way to an enlightened humanity, where integration of the different levels of being/s (including between individual and collective) are indeed harmonious, coherent, prosperous, creative, and beautiful. This is second tier spiral dynamics and "bound to be succesful".
I wonder what is so difficult to fathom concerning Socialisn with Chinese characteristics. It is a mixed economy because there are many components in the public sphere of governance which have to be managed by the state so that the productive forces can focus on delivering goods and services to meet the essential needs of the people while on the other hand, there are surplus productive forces which can be nurtured for Chinese people and entrepreneurs to compete with one another domestically in preparation for competition globally in the country's longterm planning for economic development.
People are generally capable of recognizing quality leadership from among their peers, Provincial and National candidates are just strangers no matter how long they stand at a Podium
China runs on pragmatism above all. They don't care about "models", they care about what works and fulfils their goals. They studied the strengths and weaknesses of both socialism and capitalism, and employ them both as tools to leverage their economy, making changes along the way as required. They learned to never be blinded by ideology and never lie to themselves. Truth from facts. Whatever China is labeled, either "socialist" or "capitalist" or "socialism with Chinese characteristics", is irrelevant.
Brilliant stuff, Always bringing me back to the root of the ideological problem of the absolute fiction of the free market; How much of the US market is planned by the private sector directly and indirectly through media and government influence? The Free vs Controlled dichotomy is such BS
I believe Mao knew him much much better than we do with all that revolutionary experience together. Mao judged him with Marxist principles, not any othe criteria used by revisionist economists.
China is not communist. It's state capitalism co-existing with private enterprises. However, while corporations are above US government, the Chinese government is above the corporations, meaning corporations in China can't control the government. China's one-party system is not based on communist ideology. When China became a Republic, it had two factions - the Communists and the Nationalists. This caused a power struggle eventually leading to a deadly Civil War. This is why China avoids a two-party system. It doesn't work for them.
Typical western teen trying to come up as an expert in something, he has no fcking clue. When corporations are below the government, that is not Capitalism. You can counter my point by refering to Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia is not under the national bourgeoisie, rather American/Western. China is Socialist and will continue to be, for the disappointment of western kool-aid kids.
I have to sasy that the impression I get from your videos, Ben, is that you cut the Gordian Knot of obfuscation that Western propaganda weaves around any discussion of China and their developement of their system of governance. It's literally like you take a firehose to a mountain of bullshit and wash it all away. Many thanks to your guest, Roland Boer, for his clear explanations of the way their democracy works. It makes me want to visit China and see for myself :)
Market economy involving the interaction between supply and demand which translates into private companies doing business in a free environment, thus creating the mechanism to determine prices, does not in any way negate the need for a strong government which determines priorities for development of a country in which that very market exists. The fact is just the opposite, it NECESSITATES the presence of such government. This is the essence of market socialism, which is what China has been doing the last few decades. A healthy dose of both market mechanism and socialist policies is exactly what a country needs to maximize its speed of building and spreading prosperity and optimize its advancement as a civilization. This is not a hard concept to grasp.
The poor always being with us does not mean their needs shouldn't be met. Poverty still exists in China, just not absolute or deep poverty as the US calls it.
@@fun_ghoul a lot of migrant workers do, and the state is trying to support migrant workers as much as they can. The first step is meeting basic needs for ALL then the next step is building moderate prosperity
@@DC-wg1cr Please explain the role of Chinese billionaires, and why they cannot simply be dispossessed and reeducated, their capital returned to the (ostensible) workers' state.
@You Row, Joe! billionaires are subservient to the party, they are allowed to gain wealth IF they generate it in a way that uplifts the lower classes. If they misbehave they get gulagged or guillotined. The reason why class struggle has not intensified is because China is working on addressing external contradictions, since internal social struggle would weaken them for the imperialists. The reform and opening up is explained in this quotation from the attached article: "Under the pressure of both domestic problems and external aggression, China embarked on the path of ‘learning from the outside world to defend against foreign intervention’ (师夷长技以制夷, shī yí zhǎng jì yǐ zhì yí), which has been fundamental theme of Chinese history over the past century or so. This formulation, despite having been ridiculed by many since the 1980s following the initiation of China’s economic reforms, epitomises the country’s strategy. On the one hand, China has closely studied the key drivers of Western power, namely industrial production, technological development, economic organisation, and military capability, as well as methods for social mobilisation based on the nation-state. On the other hand, China has sought to learn from other countries for the purpose of advancing its development, securing its independence, and building upon its own heritage." dongshengnews.org/en/whzh-vol1-no1-article2/
@@DC-wg1cr Put another way, how many migrant workers could have their own apartment for what capitalists spend -- or make! -- on a luxury condo block in a major city? Daniel Dumbrill toured a new condo in Shenzhen a while back that was being sold for (the yuan exchange on the day of) US$30M. It was 930m² (10,000 square feet), had a servant's quarters, and Bentley and Lamborghini dealerships on the ground floor. This is the basis for comparison and, dare I say, improvement. 💪
By state Ben means public. Nothing wrong with a planned economy. The US and Western capitalist nations are afraid of actual worker run government in which the people have a say in how the economy is run when they have collective ownership. Workers should have collective ownership of the machinery. The American Socialist Daniel De Leon wrote back in 1894: "The only manner in which man can act upon nature is by motion. In this respect John Stuart Mill observed: “Man moves a seed into the ground; he moves an axe through a tree; he moves a spark to fuel; he moves water into a boiler over a fire; the properties of matter do the rest.” In other words, “This one operation of putting things into fit places for being acted upon each other by their own internal forces is all that man does, or can do, with matter.” This is a statement of fundamental import, and John Stuart Mill so highly valued it that he claimed the credit of having first made it. Yet, with the usual shortsightedness of political economists, bounded in their views by their narrow, middle-class environment, he utterly fails to draw from it the only possible conclusion, viz., the social character of machinery and the stupendous wrong done to man, a social being, by the private ownership of the mechanical organs of motion. Confined to the use of his own physical power, man is one of the most helpless animals. In proportion to his size and requirements, he is unquestionably very weak and slow. But the superiority of his organism consists precisely in the aptitude of his brain and the fitness of his hands for the contrivance and use of mechanical devices, through which he may take from nature, by artifice, those forces in which he is naturally wanting. Every such contrivance is to him like a new organ by which his power of motion is increased. But the point is soon reached in the development of these artificial organs, where a single individual can {can not?} produce or use them. Beyond the most primitive of hunting, fishing and cultivating implements, every tool, not to speak of the more complex machine, requires in its make {making?}, or in its handling, or in the purpose for which it is handled, the co-operation of several individuals. In other words, all the benefit of machinery lies in its social, co-operative use. Give a man all the knowledge and machinery of this age, and place him on the richest land in a country isolated from the rest of the world. Of what benefit will all that be to him, as compared with the welfare which he can obtain among his fellows in exchange for what he can produce with an infinitesimal part of that knowledge and of that machinery? Mark, furthermore, that every tool, like every form or product of knowledge, is, in fact, a social growth, requiring the co-operation of successive generations. Show me a machine to-day whose patentee can claim freedom of indebtedness to some predecessors. From Archimedes to Watt; nay, from the first savage who made use of a stone axe to the most eminent of modern inventors, the social chain of observation, discovery and co-operation is unbroken. From the comparative physical impotency of man in his natural state, and from his inability to invent, make and use, unaided by his fellows, all the tools he needs to multiply his power of motion in the degree required for his safety and welfare, comes the social state, in which the tool is necessarily a social organ; social in its origin, social in its growth, social in its purpose, social in its incorporation of natural forces which of right belong to all; set in motion by human muscles, for the good of the social body, under the direction of the social will. Hence the tendency of society itself to develop into a constantly higher organism as the differentiation, power and socialization of tools becomes more complete; while the social will, enlightened by a better knowledge of the requirements of the body in all its parts, becomes less uncertain, less undecided, less erratic, and, therefore, less arbitrary or tyrannical. More evidence might be adduced to show the social character of machinery. Upon what precedes we may, however, safely rest the following generalization: “Each man has an equal social right to multiply his power of motion by all the social factors of civilization. Private property in any of these factors is inconsistent with this fundamental right; it must, obviously, prove a source of economic despotism and industrial slavery.”
Democratic systems with AMERICAN characteristics. 90 pct poor and 10 pct rich with 10 pct living in cars, under bridges, tents and begging. Balance 80 pct some need to Q up for food banks. 🙈🙈😱😱🇺🇸🇺🇸🥶🥶
Isn't it obvious that the middleclass is those workers who own their own home. You become a stakeholder in the capitalist system you're living in. If the economy grows, so does your wealth.
Hu Jintao and Zhang Zemin were also a continuity from Deng, and neither was a capitalist roader or anything either. In fact the whole market reform and movement toward the West comes from late Mao thought. They weren’t able to properly moderate those forces sustainably though, and China’s economic progress meant inevitable conflict with the West, which is where Xi came in. There’s always a tendency for betrayal narratives when looking at socialist history but in this case there is mostly continuity and no betrayal at the level of these leaders.
Not specifically a theoretical thought of late Mao. PRC were already implementing NEP-like economic policy earlier on in 1951, read "The Socialist Transformation of Capitalist Industry and Commerce in China" by Kuan Ta-Tung. And going back further, Mao had already experimented with market economy much earlier when CPC-PLA were still operating numerous soviet zones. It was post-Stalin Soviet Union who became a major obstacle to the market economic development in China due to their "anti-revisionist" ideological policy forcing other countries to follow the same step as theirs. And the pressure from Sino-Soviet Split forced China to begin implementing similar policies to Stalin's collectivism in order to sustain necessary economic self-sufficiency.
China successful balancing Socialism & Capitalism, with Meritocracy selection quality of goverment this system actually far before Adam Smith & Karl Marx exist, thousand years ago Chinese Dynasties already have Capitalism in Ancient Silk Road & Socialism in Han to Ming Dynasties are founded by the farmers also Meritocracy invented by China Dynasty, an official-selection by exam In 1776 Adam Smith said: "China is much richer country than any part of Europe"
Btw u need titles like CHINA IS WINNING /or the US is LOSING TO CHINA 🇨🇳 I’m not great at this but I can tell ur not getting exposure thx to these algos Titles that grab people get more views - I do know that & ur work deserves a FAR larger audience
Ben , please invite RF Kennedy Junior on your platform . Very few have the temerity to host him . i so wish to listen how he is going to take America out of systemic poverty . I may vote for him , depending on his answers . thank you so very much.
I do SO wish KENNEDY was well-informed on this and other topics!!!! It makes me tear my hair out that he's smart and his heart's in the right place, but he's swallowed so much propaganda about some CRITICALLY VITAL issues!!!! AND HE'S THE ONLY REASONABLE CANDIDATE WE'VE GOT...... ... damn..... 😢
Great information. I'm amazed and fascinated by China's complex and successful (for its people) economic and political systems. After watching this interview I immediately searched for Prof Boers books. They are priced so high by the Western vendors, like Amazon and others, that l cannot afford them. Anyone know of retailers with down to earth prices for Prof Boers books?
If you have an e-reader or are open to reading on a screen, I'm almost certain you can find his work on Z-Library. There are drawbacks to this approach, namely 1) some technical savvy may be required and 2) it's not strictly speaking the most legal way to acquire published works. To 1, there are instructions available to walk you through the process and to 2, if that action weighs on your conscience you might look for a way to donate to him directly. Considering what a small cut of sales authors typically get, this would almost certainly be a better deal for him. In any case, many scholars are just happy to have their work being read and making an impact-some will even send you PDFs of their work if you email them and ask nicely!
Ask your public library to purchase them! Also, if you are near a College or University check their library! At some schools citizens can get a library card and borrow books. This is especially true if you are a Senior Citizen. 58:56
There are two main misconceptions in this discussion of socialism that I have to point out. 1) Socialism like democracy is a spectrum with no distinct end points. A society can only be more or less socialist, more or less democratic. There is no sense in which there is a distinct state of socialism or capitalism, democracy or authoritarianism. These binaries refer to directions not states. All society can do is aim for higher and higher levels of socialistic and democratic achievement knowing that there are no distinct end states for the pursuit of either. 2) This idea that socialism can only be enacted when society is very rich is wrong. Socialism is a state of social organization. The ideal is not choosing between top down management VS bottom up management but the conception of all of society as one. The right parallel is to think with is that of multi-cell living organisms VS collections of single cell living organisms. All multi-celled organism form a cooperative whole of smaller parts. Take your body, there is no sense in which your brain exploits your hands, the body in a true symbiosis of parts where all parts truly exhibit the behaviors of "to each according to need and from each according to ability". That is what socialism truly is or what socialism is really aiming for. To pursue for the whole of society, the organization, at least wholistically, of the single multi-celled living organism. Every person or sub-group is a unique cell/organ of the body with a role to play and a well being to be looked after for. We don't need to do empty theorizing when it comes to how such an organization could be setup. We have the billions of years of evolutionary history showing us the ways. It shows very clearly that every multi-celled organism is made of parallel processes of top down and bottom up management integrated in the most ingenious ways. Clearly for us to harp on which method is better is completely misguided. It also makes no sense for us to talk about that this machinery can only be set up once society reaches a certain level of wealth of complexity when we see life teaming with socialism everywhere at all complexity levels, in all shapes and sizes, and in every nook and cranny. The setting up of this machinery is possible at all levels of development and is not easy at any level of development. The hope for socialism is not in making society richer but in pursing an evolutionary path towards socialism based on experimentation and learning. Unfortunately the only people currently taking this approach are the Chinese.
Re. Chinese "democracy", maybe someone can explain how their single party capitalism is not sui-generis fascism?, especially since they essentially changed the C of Communism to mean Confucianism (where Confucius is the Chinese equivalent of Plato: authoritarian reactionary philosopher of old).
You make a lot of comments I disagree with, but the above is not among them. Chinese workers need to reliberate themselves from Chinese capitalists! As for your point on fascism, I wish I could remember who recently made an apt comparison of "SWCC" and "National Socialism" as two examples of capitalist opportunism, using worker-oriented branding and talking points to lubricate the capitalist machine...
@@fun_ghoul - " Chinese workers need to reliberate themselves from Chinese capitalists!" - Sure thing but that's like saying nothing: some people are selling that Chinese Capitalistm is "communism" and even that Chinese Fascism is "democracy". And that's something that the whole global working class must analyze and judge. There's only one Planet, there's only one Humanity. BTW still waiting for Chinese internationalism to ever happen at all: compare all that tiny Cuba has done for the overall revolutionary cause globally and whatever (nothing at all?) that China has done (even in the good old times of Mao). As for the second part, "nationali socialism" is not the word I'd use: fascism is a form of nationalist Capitalism... of which nazism is the racist genocidal utterly mad most extremely imperialist version. No, I don't think that China is nazi (the USA and Ukraine are close but China is not). Do Chinese even have universal healthcare of some sort? Last time I checked (the infamous milk poisonings of a decade ago) they didn't, they have to pay for healthcare just like USians do. Where is the socialism? Just having a strong government that meddles in the economy, much as Germany or Japan did traditionally, does not Socialism make, Socialism is about worker rights and ultimately about worker empowerment, not about Reinischekapitalismus. Sure: there is probably a big difference between the oligarchs running the nation as in the USA (or traditionally in Anglosaxon style Capitalism) and the nation (state) keeping the oligarchs under control for their own good (Russia and China now, Germany and Japan historically). The latter is needed to outcompete the Anglosaxon powers that have dominated global capitalism and to avoid owns bourgeoisie from becoming "comprador", i.e. subservient of foreign ones. This is a matter of nationalism and national development but not of Capitalism vs Socialism: both are capitalist -- just ponder what Marx and Lenin thought of German Capitalism, of their central planning and of their "socialist" crumbs to keep social peace and prevent revolutionary buildup. It's nationalist, it's developist but it's 100% capitalist.
I am old enough to remember when a lot of the West was social democratic with the utilities and resources owned by the people for their benefit and development.The wealthy corporate sector has seized those sectors with privatisation and used them as an exorbitant means of rent extraction which has left us in debt and a negative birth rate because too much of peoples income is extracted leaving none for creating a family unit.A system that cannot create a healthy future generation is a dead society,which the form of cruel USA capitalism that has been foisted on us in the West has created.
That hits hard as a German, even if I was born when privatisation was in full swing and grew up during the financial crisis (at this point, the term is meaningless, I know. I'm talking about 07/08) which blasted our remaining social net away like the Solar Wind did with Mercury's atmosphere. It pains me to think about the fact that it was Germany which had the best trains not too long ago, and every older person I spoke to agreed that our railway used to be orders of magnitude better pre-1993 (?). Same with Deutsche Post, our postal system, which they privatised 100% into three big corporations (Telekom, Deutsche Post, Postbank), two of which are monopolists offering, for example, the absolute worst telecommunication system in almost all of Europe. Water is still mostly a municipal thing, I believe, but our energy is the biggest joke of the century, I don't even want to write about it - not sure whether it used to be public as well, though.
If we can't even have mild social democracy, which is all it was, then we are obviously doomed to continue our way to the bottom, especially considering the recent geopolitical developments.
Our social democracies where built on imperialism. I don't think they are viable anymore. We need something new upholding the principles of past times
As a fellow European, I feel you my German bro. Shit's even worse in Mediterranean countries. The fall of the USSR was the worst thing to happen to Europe.
@@Qrtuop Oh yes. I'm ashamed what my country and France have done to you by proxy of the EU bureaucracy, enriching our US-loyal ruling classes on the cost of our own neighbors, destroying every hope of solidarity between the European workers to make our countries stand together to challenge American hegemony. Amazingly, it looks like even the German model is now over for good, there is just no workaround to cheap Russian gas, and the Russians are rightfully DONE with us.
the Scandinavian countries are more socialist than you can imagine and that's why they rarely get mentioned in the media.
This episode really nailed it, the world should talk more about the Chinese system and take cues from it.
I would agree but what other Western countries have actual socialist parties that would carry out the political will of the people rather than the existing parties that are in service to the capitalist class? What is to be done is for workers to organize on the political and economic fields for a system change.
Should we emulate 28% of workers living in dormitories?
@@JohnT.4321 the people have to make it happen, organization and collective action. Socialism is built by the base, this is the only way. And Europeans are hopeless
@@AbtinX I could not agree with you more.
@@fun_ghoul The world is much bigger than "you"
Another home run with this one Ben. Thanks for bringing Prof Boer and his book to the program.
Hey, from a very socialist place of my heart, do you really take no issue with Chinese socialism having landlords, health care system that resembles more the US system, billionaires, severe inequality?
Thanks Ben
My country could learn a lot from the Chinese system
Our system is totally flawed
My leaders are inept inexperienced unqualified and not capable of handling the positions they hold
The US's and UK's systems have been highjacked by the rich oligarchs who own the politicians of both countries. That's why the politicians always make the laws to favor the rich -- because the rich bribe the politicians with their money and help finance their political campaigns! In return the politicians pass laws to favor the rich! That is how the systems of the US and UK work and why both countries are going under despite constantly stealing from other countries, especially poor countries that they can dominate!
If you didn't have the Australian flag in your name, we could all name a random Western country and reasonably expect you to be from there.
Cheers.
I am from NZ and totally agree. The amount of anti China shit we get here is terrible but not as bad as you get over there. Ashamed to live in the least-worst 5 eyes country and listening to our FM bleat on about China but never push back on Israel or the US.
The west and it's people ignored a much more violations of every right of billions of people for centuries and they still do so.
Chinese system is not without its own bureaucratic problems. But so far as overall social progress, tough meritocracy promotes the best and brightest into many of the everyday government positions. It seems the complete opposite in Western countries where the least desired end up in the public service. I always found that odd seeing how much government salary positions waste for comparatively subpar results but that in itself is as broken as the Chinese system (nepotism, favors, connections, etc.) One side is pretty honest about it, the other tries to sell another story.
What one may lack in "freedom" however that is culturally defined, the Chinese are largely objectively gaininng a increasing living standard. I'd say it's really hard for a foreigner to just say China is great and faultless from a short-term unlived life there. But let's say in the last 30 years and next 30, I would rather bet on China moving their people forward further more than the States or other countries that are faltering post-neoliberalism antics. A homogenous society certainly helps with things too but that's not too relevant. We don't need every country to be China redux, only to accept that if you want to expand state power to be overreaching, at least do something with that big intervening role. There's plenty of Western alliance countries that share a reusable blueprint without "giving in to the commies"
🙄
The western obsession with having many political parties that say somewhat different things but all do the same is so weird, demented, and telling.
Nah, what's weird are governments that betray their citizenry.
@mounouzel “The western obsession with having many …”. Translation: The practice in western countries of like minded people forming parties that reflect diverse political philosophies and ideologies yet in government perform core governmental functions beneficially for proper government is different from the system I exist under.
@angusmckenzie9622 what does proper government mean to you? (Genuine question I would like to know.)
@@lou7319 what does proper government mean to you? (Genu..." Proper government is having the government is delivery of ordinary government services e g unemployment benefits; defence services, provision of services to the citizens, the economy etc
thank you Ben and guest
This is the type of videos Americans need to watch before they think going to war with China is a just cause.
The moment China challenged our number-one position as the number one economy and global power in the world justified us going to war even if it ends in nuclear Armageddon.
Plutocracy impairs the ability of the US to compete economically with China. Our mega-rich create the motives for a war which the US likely would lose if it's conventional. If it goes nuclear, no one wins.
Excellent show, Ben. Keep up the amazing work. 🙏
yes, GREAT show!
Hey, from a very socialist place of my heart, do you really take no issue with Chinese socialism having landlords, health care system that resembles more the US system, billionaires, severe inequality? Is it a great discussion if it omitted all of this and only had congratulatory rhetoric?
[ THE QUESTION OF HARMONY IN CHINESE SOCIETY ] - I watch chinese videos every day - and one of the things that fascinates me - if how is it possible for so many thousands to intermingle each and every single day in such an [ Absolute Harmonious Manner ] - Thanks Prof. Boer - Now I know - A 1000- thanks
I've always been impressed by the way the Chinese government developed so quickly and lifted many of it's people out of poverty. Now Chinese are one of the people that travel the most for tourism, business, & leisure. Very impressive 👏💯.
28% of China's workers live in dormitories, and will not only never travel abroad, but will mostly die alone, save for their co-exploiteds.
As of now, China has already overtaken Japan to be the biggest auto exporters in 2023 1st quarter.
One thing you guys haven't addressed was the western propaganda about the so called Mao being a "murderer to his own people." I have researched that 15+ years ago and found out it was all lies & even US government official figures showed there wasn't any significant drop in population during the 60s and your World Bank graph of life expectancy of China @10:57 during the same period further support my findings then. Nonetheless, it was a very tough Chinese period as China was heavily sanction by the US led West as well as Russia forcing China to pay back its debt. Hence the great leap forward was introduced by Mao's government trying to increase productivity to address such issues. But like many countries such as Cuba, Venezuela & the like, people was struggling not because of their government being incompetent but was a direct result of US led sanctions. So if anyone was murdering people, it would be those in Washington DC.
I was also shocked to learn the whole Tiananmen massacre did not happen, no photos of mass bodies, even the tank guy did not get run over. It was all Western Media lies.
Well said！
30 million people starved to death, Tank Man, Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the West keeps making lies in order to demonize China. But if you repeat it enough, someone will believe it. Nobody bothers to discover the truth because they only believe what they want to believe.，until one day the world they believed collapse.
Not true. Of course they are/were all incompetent. Almost every marxist regime prior to the 80s ( when China started anew) finally failed. What is more, totally planned economies will always suffer heavy inefficiencies. Sanctions? Look at the non working of the heaviest sanctions imposed on Russia. So what?
The Chinese were smart enough to install their mixed economy which works very well.
Except you’ve completely overlooked the ‘Cultural Revolution’. It wasn’t the product of ‘Western Propaganda’. It was the creation of Mao-and it killed many millions, while breaking what should have been a united polity.
Great segment, thank you Ben! Really interested in learning more about China's system.
Also - 3.7K views - under 700 likes - come on guys - the only way to get more people educated on reality we need likes & to share this channel so that it reaches as many as possible
in the west we don't want nothing to do with these commies that's just how it will always be.
Tube's Algo spagetti
Thanks Ben and Roland. This is a one stop attitude corrective and must watch stream for all westerners that have neither been to China or experienced life outside of their own culture.
I left my own culture over 40 years ago, lived several years in China in late "wild" 1990's and spent many months in China since 2000. I found this stream exteamly illuminating and confirming.
As a Westerner we don't care.
Ben 😊 thank you very much - this is from my sister. She loves your work 🤩
Thank you, Ben, for another great interview! Frederick Engels stated in the Communist Manifesto, “…in 1847, Socialism was a middle class movement, Communism a working class movement.” In his speech at a discussion session with National Model Workers on April 28, 2013, President Xi Jinping stated, “we must make sure that the working class is our main force. The working class is China’s leading class.” Regarding what economic and political system China is based on, in his November 9, 2013 Explanatory Notes (on Some Major Issues) made to the Third Plenary Session of the 18th CPC Central Committee, President Xi Jinping stated, “…only socialism can save China, and only reform and opening up can develop China, socialism and Marxism.” He further states, “our market economy is socialist, of course. We need to give leverage to the superiority of our socialist system, and let the Party and government perform their positive functions. The market plays a decisive role in allocating resources, but it is not the sole actor in this regard.” He pretty much describes what “socialist market economy” is and how it ties to the Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. Anti-China propagandists can blabber on and on about their opinions, but to get the answers, it’s best to go to the source.
28% of China's "leading class" live in dormitories, usually part of the factory they're exploited in. What a load of Xit.
And market allocated resources, creating lots of billionaires and working class in capsule like living conditions. Wouldn't socialist system at least put restrictions on maximum wealth or capital gains? The way you can very efficiently reduce poverty is with some redistribution, you know?
Thank you for this excellent interview. All your presentations on your channel are unique and necessary.
your work is very important, Ben!
I saw Roland smile when you said some people think China gave up on socialism. If you make an effort to understand China and socialist history, you'll understand why.
They still keep statues and framed images of Mao and they still haven't rehabilitated Chen Duxiu, who was known as "China's Lenin". But they're quite over Stalinism.
Whereas Stalin made a wreck of the New Economic Policy, which very few have understood; Deng Xiaoping, he and his father both jailed by the Mao faction, made it a success in China.
In the capitalist dictatorships, the government harnesses the working class to enrich the capitalists. In China, the government harnesses the capitalists to enrich the working class.
[more]
Marx and Engels always celebrated capitalism's successes and expected capitalist rule to give way to socialism until they found they had to deal with capitalism's decadence.
It took their successors to discover the value of the revolutionary party and confront fascism. China defeated fascism and the imperialists who tried to restore it in China.
In China they built a party that could inspire the workers, urban and rural, to bury fascism and brought 90 million dedicated colleagues into the Party to make the revolution universal.
Confucianism isn't all that different from good Leninism and surprisingly compatible with the best entrepreneurial practices. Watch W Edwards Deming, whose team of managerial experts brought Japanese industry back from demise, as he talks here about harmony and defeating sub-optimization. ruclips.net/video/YgMoDHyPQ0s/видео.html
I've been a Marxist for 60 years, but one of my heroes is a capitalist manager. When I was in business school for computer information systems, looking to improve my résumé, I went with my class to attend a lecture by a forward-looking managerial theorist. During the Q & A session, I asked the lecturer how his team is received by business managers. He replied that, "Well, they think we're a bunch of socialists." W Edwards Demings' biography: ruclips.net/video/tDu47czfwiI/видео.html
after the fall of the Soviet Union, Deng toured the country and "Doubled down" on socialism he believes in, that's the reason why they founded the Communist Party, a more just society. their motto is, "To serve the people."
@@willengel2458 What a novel idea! We in the West simply can't believe such a society is possible.
This was excellent! I've only recently begun to hear about debates going on between people in China that take the form of written commentary that is readily available for everyone to read & issue their own comments. WOW! Can you imagine how different life in USA would be if we had this? Yes, of course we've been taught to consider debate as adversarial. If we could learn that through discussion & debate new perspectives can open up leading to new, previously unknown solutions, our culture could grow up! It isn't about "being right" but honestly offering your best thoughts & then LISTENING to what others contribute. Some will posit a different or even contradictory view, others might embellish your view, leading you to see your ideas from a larger perspective. This is not only "democracy" but fabulous collective learning through individual ideas!
Debates divide. Dialectic unite!
@@mrwilloughby8684 Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis! It’s the new “live, love, laugh”
Tricontinental recently started publishing Wenhua Zongheng in English (for free). Worth checking out to better understand the different intellectual discussions in China.
My thoughts exactly, Bertha!
So China is an idealistic version of what the founding fathers wanted for the United States?
Despite the professor’s surname, this was hardly a bore and truly illuminating
Very informative video. Professor Boer is very knowledgeable on this subject.
Awesome interview. Very insightful
Tricontinental recently started publishing Wenhua Zongheng in English (for free). Worth checking out for anyone interested in better understanding the different intellectual discussions in China.
thanks for this intel!
Hello - Is it possible the Prof. Boer can be on Once Each Month - His knowledge is invaluable - and should be more widely expressed - Please
Prof. Boer - I hope you are pleased to be added to my list of Australians that I MUST LISTEN TO - [ JULIAN ASSANGE - JOHN PILGER - PROF. STEVE KEEN - PROF. ROLAND BOER ] - Much thanks for your contribution to my knowledge Base...
There are no "Australians". I presume you mean British leftovers.
Way too wide a term. Pretty much everyone in the us is that
Great discussion. I like the description - a cottage industry of China experts" and Roland's last words on them. Thanks BN
Please bring him back for a longer segment. Very interesting stuff.
But few people listen to long programs, I'd say tackle specific issues in 20 minute segments.
You'll reach a larger audience-- and that's absolutely critical now!
@@kateoneal4215 Not sure how Joe Rogan or Lex Fridman get millions of views on their 2+ hour shows.
@@kateoneal4215 There's a 10 minute video "The right to bear knowledge" posted 10 years ago that only has 1.2k views. I don't think it's the length but the content that determines if it gets pushed out by the AI.
Great interview would love to hear more about different economic models! 👍
Sorry to ramble - incredible guest the best I’ve ever heard on how the Chinese economy & Govt really works - what an impressive success story still morphing unlike the football politics of the US
Socialism is NOT when the government does things. Socialism is when the people or workers vote on issues affecting their lives, from the local to the national or regional level - nothing is centrally determined or planned, or rather nothing is determined without determinative input from the people who are effected by such decisions. In other words, socialism is the dismantling of central authority and the implementation of direct democracy. I would call China a mixed economy with central planning and some features of socialism that do not go far enough. It is socialism-lite, if you like. This is not a criticism, as such. The current Chinese system is infinitely preferable to Western neoliberalism/capitalism.
Another excellent program. Thank you Ben and Prof. Boer.
42:43 Excellent description of capitalist democracy and how it leads to short-termism and political antagonism
Amazing description of China society and politics 😮 hope to have more soon from your guest 😊
Hey, Zhugeliang, don't you think we SHOULD be studying this topic? What's your real problem?
I feel the ending note, was very important. Go to China if you want to know or speak about China. We are looking forward to going back to China later this year. In my opinion travel to, and see with your own eyes, is the best form of self education. Thank you for this great interview. Cheers from Australia.
Thanks man, I've heard Mr. Boer before in some webinars of the International Manifesto Group, it's cool to listen for a more extended time about his analysis.
Brilliant Mr. Norton!
Thank you for yet another delicious report.❤
Fantastic! Thank you.
I really wish the clipping feature was turned on. If it were, I'd be sure in these videos like crazy
Great show-----Thanks
PROF. ROLAND BOER, THANKS FOR UR TRUTHFUL N INSIGHTFUL REPORT N ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION OF DEMOCRACY, RULE OF LAW. HUMAN RIGHTS, ECONOMICS, OF CHINA. THE WORLD WUD UNDERSTAND WHY CHINA HAS GROWN RICH. N BECOME MILITARILY POWERFUL. YET, CHINA IS A PEACE LOVING COUNTRY.
I M HAPPY THAT CHINA IS NOW THE SECOND BIGGEST PRODUCER OF CARS, N MOST OF THEM R ELECTRIC CARS. NEXT ONLY TO JAPAN. BUT IT WILL SOON OVERTAKE JAPAN.
super exciting. I really want to study with him at Renmin University
Professor Roland Boer is great. Unfortunately, Ben didn't dive deeper with more questions for the point Boer made, instead just asked different questions
That is the most Chinese apartment. I could have instantly told you where he was, even without knowing the topic of the video.
Thanks Ben and Roland, for this clarification of Socialism with Chinese characteristics. Especially good to hear it coming from down under; there is hope for the great Southern land yet.
Ugh. At least you didn't say Au******a.
One of your best interviews 👍👍👍
watching again - this is such an incredible conversation
Great discussion, thanks very much for this!
Thankyou gentlemen 🌿
Superb episode! As are all. Informative, in depth, focused, clear. Thank you.
the absolute pearl where he states to the effect that : true communism would only be possible in some centuries, depending, and that the socialist process leads to it, indicates the depth of understanding of the human psyche/spirit and that the Chinese model is leading the way to an enlightened humanity, where integration of the different levels of being/s (including between individual and collective) are indeed harmonious, coherent, prosperous, creative, and beautiful. This is second tier spiral dynamics and "bound to be succesful".
More Boer! Please
Very very nice interview!! Thank you from Brazil!
I wonder what is so difficult to fathom concerning Socialisn with Chinese characteristics. It is a mixed economy because there are many components in the public sphere of governance which have to be managed by the state so that the productive forces can focus on delivering goods and services to meet the essential needs of the people while on the other hand, there are surplus productive forces which can be nurtured for Chinese people and entrepreneurs to compete with one another domestically in preparation for competition globally in the country's longterm planning for economic development.
we need more talks like this!!
Honestly, my dude, thus one was a BANGER. So interesting!
People are generally capable of recognizing quality leadership from among their peers,
Provincial and National candidates are just strangers no matter how long they stand at a Podium
Proper prior planning prevents piss poor performance. What do you know? Planning actually works!
very in depth and informative video
Great work! Learned hips!
The remark about the German foreign Minister made ne laugh so much since it is unfortunatly true
That was superb.
China runs on pragmatism above all. They don't care about "models", they care about what works and fulfils their goals. They studied the strengths and weaknesses of both socialism and capitalism, and employ them both as tools to leverage their economy, making changes along the way as required. They learned to never be blinded by ideology and never lie to themselves. Truth from facts.
Whatever China is labeled, either "socialist" or "capitalist" or "socialism with Chinese characteristics", is irrelevant.
Brilliant stuff,
Always bringing me back to the root of the ideological problem of the absolute fiction of the free market;
How much of the US market is planned by the private sector directly and indirectly through media and government influence?
The Free vs Controlled dichotomy is such BS
I believe Mao knew him much much better than we do with all that revolutionary experience together. Mao judged him with Marxist principles, not any othe criteria used by revisionist economists.
@zhugeliang Copypasta king 👑
@zhugeliang Get off it, buddy! You're doing yourself a disfavor.
For those who would like further understanding of the Chinese way, I would recommend books and lectures by professor Wen Tiejun.
Greetings from Australia
👏👏👏👏
This is great. Make the China experts at least learn the language to participate in the debate.
China is not communist. It's state capitalism co-existing with private enterprises. However, while corporations are above US government, the Chinese government is above the corporations, meaning corporations in China can't control the government. China's one-party system is not based on communist ideology. When China became a Republic, it had two factions - the Communists and the Nationalists. This caused a power struggle eventually leading to a deadly Civil War. This is why China avoids a two-party system. It doesn't work for them.
Typical western teen trying to come up as an expert in something, he has no fcking clue.
When corporations are below the government, that is not Capitalism. You can counter my point by refering to Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia is not under the national bourgeoisie, rather American/Western. China is Socialist and will continue to be, for the disappointment of western kool-aid kids.
I have to sasy that the impression I get from your videos, Ben, is that you cut the Gordian Knot of obfuscation that Western propaganda weaves around any discussion of China and their developement of their system of governance.
It's literally like you take a firehose to a mountain of bullshit and wash it all away.
Many thanks to your guest, Roland Boer, for his clear explanations of the way their democracy works.
It makes me want to visit China and see for myself :)
China has no democracy.
也算是一种把过去既有的认知重新认识的过程
Market economy involving the interaction between supply and demand which translates into private companies doing business in a free environment, thus creating the mechanism to determine prices, does not in any way negate the need for a strong government which determines priorities for development of a country in which that very market exists. The fact is just the opposite, it NECESSITATES the presence of such government. This is the essence of market socialism, which is what China has been doing the last few decades. A healthy dose of both market mechanism and socialist policies is exactly what a country needs to maximize its speed of building and spreading prosperity and optimize its advancement as a civilization. This is not a hard concept to grasp.
Can Roland find a publisher that will make his book range at $13-$30 instead of $83-113?
The poor always being with us does not mean their needs shouldn't be met. Poverty still exists in China, just not absolute or deep poverty as the US calls it.
Exactly. 28% of Chinese workers live in dormitories.
@@fun_ghoul a lot of migrant workers do, and the state is trying to support migrant workers as much as they can. The first step is meeting basic needs for ALL then the next step is building moderate prosperity
@@DC-wg1cr Please explain the role of Chinese billionaires, and why they cannot simply be dispossessed and reeducated, their capital returned to the (ostensible) workers' state.
@You Row, Joe! billionaires are subservient to the party, they are allowed to gain wealth IF they generate it in a way that uplifts the lower classes. If they misbehave they get gulagged or guillotined. The reason why class struggle has not intensified is because China is working on addressing external contradictions, since internal social struggle would weaken them for the imperialists. The reform and opening up is explained in this quotation from the attached article:
"Under the pressure of both domestic problems and external aggression, China embarked on the path of ‘learning from the outside world to defend against foreign intervention’ (师夷长技以制夷, shī yí zhǎng jì yǐ zhì yí), which has been fundamental theme of Chinese history over the past century or so. This formulation, despite having been ridiculed by many since the 1980s following the initiation of China’s economic reforms, epitomises the country’s strategy. On the one hand, China has closely studied the key drivers of Western power, namely industrial production, technological development, economic organisation, and military capability, as well as methods for social mobilisation based on the nation-state. On the other hand, China has sought to learn from other countries for the purpose of advancing its development, securing its independence, and building upon its own heritage."
dongshengnews.org/en/whzh-vol1-no1-article2/
@@DC-wg1cr Put another way, how many migrant workers could have their own apartment for what capitalists spend -- or make! -- on a luxury condo block in a major city? Daniel Dumbrill toured a new condo in Shenzhen a while back that was being sold for (the yuan exchange on the day of) US$30M. It was 930m² (10,000 square feet), had a servant's quarters, and Bentley and Lamborghini dealerships on the ground floor. This is the basis for comparison and, dare I say, improvement. 💪
By state Ben means public. Nothing wrong with a planned economy. The US and Western capitalist nations are afraid of actual worker run government in which the people have a say in how the economy is run when they have collective ownership. Workers should have collective ownership of the machinery. The American Socialist Daniel De Leon wrote back in 1894:
"The only manner in which man can act upon nature is by motion. In this respect John Stuart Mill observed: “Man moves a seed into the ground; he moves an axe through a tree; he moves a spark to fuel; he moves water into a boiler over a fire; the properties of matter do the rest.” In other words, “This one operation of putting things into fit places for being acted upon each other by their own internal forces is all that man does, or can do, with matter.”
This is a statement of fundamental import, and John Stuart Mill so highly valued it that he claimed the credit of having first made it. Yet, with the usual shortsightedness of political economists, bounded in their views by their narrow, middle-class environment, he utterly fails to draw from it the only possible conclusion, viz., the social character of machinery and the stupendous wrong done to man, a social being, by the private ownership of the mechanical organs of motion.
Confined to the use of his own physical power, man is one of the most helpless animals. In proportion to his size and requirements, he is unquestionably very weak and slow. But the superiority of his organism consists precisely in the aptitude of his brain and the fitness of his hands for the contrivance and use of mechanical devices, through which he may take from nature, by artifice, those forces in which he is naturally wanting. Every such contrivance is to him like a new organ by which his power of motion is increased. But the point is soon reached in the development of these artificial organs, where a single individual can {can not?} produce or use them. Beyond the most primitive of hunting, fishing and cultivating implements, every tool, not to speak of the more complex machine, requires in its make {making?}, or in its handling, or in the purpose for which it is handled, the co-operation of several individuals. In other words, all the benefit of machinery lies in its social, co-operative use. Give a man all the knowledge and machinery of this age, and place him on the richest land in a country isolated from the rest of the world. Of what benefit will all that be to him, as compared with the welfare which he can obtain among his fellows in exchange for what he can produce with an infinitesimal part of that knowledge and of that machinery? Mark, furthermore, that every tool, like every form or product of knowledge, is, in fact, a social growth, requiring the co-operation of successive generations. Show me a machine to-day whose patentee can claim freedom of indebtedness to some predecessors. From Archimedes to Watt; nay, from the first savage who made use of a stone axe to the most eminent of modern inventors, the social chain of observation, discovery and co-operation is unbroken.
From the comparative physical impotency of man in his natural state, and from his inability to invent, make and use, unaided by his fellows, all the tools he needs to multiply his power of motion in the degree required for his safety and welfare, comes the social state, in which the tool is necessarily a social organ; social in its origin, social in its growth, social in its purpose, social in its incorporation of natural forces which of right belong to all; set in motion by human muscles, for the good of the social body, under the direction of the social will. Hence the tendency of society itself to develop into a constantly higher organism as the differentiation, power and socialization of tools becomes more complete; while the social will, enlightened by a better knowledge of the requirements of the body in all its parts, becomes less uncertain, less undecided, less erratic, and, therefore, less arbitrary or tyrannical.
More evidence might be adduced to show the social character of machinery. Upon what precedes we may, however, safely rest the following generalization: “Each man has an equal social right to multiply his power of motion by all the social factors of civilization. Private property in any of these factors is inconsistent with this fundamental right; it must, obviously, prove a source of economic despotism and industrial slavery.”
Democratic systems with AMERICAN characteristics. 90 pct poor and 10 pct rich with 10 pct living in cars, under bridges, tents and begging. Balance 80 pct some need to Q up for food banks. 🙈🙈😱😱🇺🇸🇺🇸🥶🥶
Actually I would call it a capitalist society with American characteristic and describe it as you did.
Sounds like China, except beggars instead of wage slaves trapped in dormitories for their entire lives.
Hi Ben: is there a link for the book? I tried searching for it, only Springer Singapore showed it.
Isn't it obvious that the middleclass is those workers who own their own home. You become a stakeholder in the capitalist system you're living in. If the economy grows, so does your wealth.
My favorite part is when you discuss needing capitalism so that socialism is possible.
Thank You! This has been so informative! I plan to order this book! 38:12
Very informative.
Hu Jintao and Zhang Zemin were also a continuity from Deng, and neither was a capitalist roader or anything either. In fact the whole market reform and movement toward the West comes from late Mao thought. They weren’t able to properly moderate those forces sustainably though, and China’s economic progress meant inevitable conflict with the West, which is where Xi came in. There’s always a tendency for betrayal narratives when looking at socialist history but in this case there is mostly continuity and no betrayal at the level of these leaders.
Not specifically a theoretical thought of late Mao. PRC were already implementing NEP-like economic policy earlier on in 1951, read "The Socialist Transformation of Capitalist Industry and Commerce in China" by Kuan Ta-Tung. And going back further, Mao had already experimented with market economy much earlier when CPC-PLA were still operating numerous soviet zones.
It was post-Stalin Soviet Union who became a major obstacle to the market economic development in China due to their "anti-revisionist" ideological policy forcing other countries to follow the same step as theirs. And the pressure from Sino-Soviet Split forced China to begin implementing similar policies to Stalin's collectivism in order to sustain necessary economic self-sufficiency.
❤❤❤
China successful balancing Socialism & Capitalism, with Meritocracy selection quality of goverment
this system actually far before Adam Smith & Karl Marx exist, thousand years ago Chinese Dynasties already have Capitalism in Ancient Silk Road & Socialism in Han to Ming Dynasties are founded by the farmers
also Meritocracy invented by China Dynasty, an official-selection by exam
In 1776 Adam Smith said: "China is much richer country than any part of Europe"
🤡
Enlightening - thanks!
Btw u need titles like CHINA IS WINNING /or the US is LOSING TO CHINA 🇨🇳 I’m not great at this but I can tell ur not getting exposure thx to these algos
Titles that grab people get more views - I do know that & ur work deserves a FAR larger audience
I strongly disagree. This target audience is much more sophisticated -- and there are far too many screeching titles competing with each other.
@22:57 explains the direction America is pointed towards in a deliberate effort. Its no accident someone you might know is homeless.
Ben , please invite RF Kennedy Junior on your platform . Very few have the temerity to host him . i so wish to listen how he is going to take America out of systemic poverty . I may vote for him , depending on his answers . thank you so very much.
I do SO wish KENNEDY was well-informed on this and other topics!!!! It makes me tear my hair out that he's smart and his heart's in the right place, but he's swallowed so much propaganda about some CRITICALLY VITAL issues!!!!
AND HE'S THE ONLY REASONABLE CANDIDATE WE'VE GOT...... ... damn..... 😢
You cannot vote out capitalism. Period.
Lol, no
Great information. I'm amazed and fascinated by China's complex and successful (for its people) economic and political systems. After watching this interview I immediately searched for Prof Boers books. They are priced so high by the Western vendors, like Amazon and others, that l cannot afford them. Anyone know of retailers with down to earth prices for Prof Boers books?
If you have an e-reader or are open to reading on a screen, I'm almost certain you can find his work on Z-Library. There are drawbacks to this approach, namely 1) some technical savvy may be required and 2) it's not strictly speaking the most legal way to acquire published works. To 1, there are instructions available to walk you through the process and to 2, if that action weighs on your conscience you might look for a way to donate to him directly. Considering what a small cut of sales authors typically get, this would almost certainly be a better deal for him. In any case, many scholars are just happy to have their work being read and making an impact-some will even send you PDFs of their work if you email them and ask nicely!
Ask your public library to purchase them! Also, if you are near a College or University check their library! At some schools citizens can get a library card and borrow books. This is especially true if you are a Senior Citizen. 58:56
Isn't China's success pegged directly on their banking system is a public utility and not privately owned ?
China's banking system AND land ownership are public utilities
👍✌
Average interest rate for mortgage in China Bank 4%
First new house 3.2%, 2nd house 3.5%
All banks own by state
There are two main misconceptions in this discussion of socialism that I have to point out.
1) Socialism like democracy is a spectrum with no distinct end points. A society can only be more or less socialist, more or less democratic. There is no sense in which there is a distinct state of socialism or capitalism, democracy or authoritarianism. These binaries refer to directions not states. All society can do is aim for higher and higher levels of socialistic and democratic achievement knowing that there are no distinct end states for the pursuit of either.
2) This idea that socialism can only be enacted when society is very rich is wrong. Socialism is a state of social organization. The ideal is not choosing between top down management VS bottom up management but the conception of all of society as one. The right parallel is to think with is that of multi-cell living organisms VS collections of single cell living organisms. All multi-celled organism form a cooperative whole of smaller parts. Take your body, there is no sense in which your brain exploits your hands, the body in a true symbiosis of parts where all parts truly exhibit the behaviors of "to each according to need and from each according to ability". That is what socialism truly is or what socialism is really aiming for. To pursue for the whole of society, the organization, at least wholistically, of the single multi-celled living organism. Every person or sub-group is a unique cell/organ of the body with a role to play and a well being to be looked after for. We don't need to do empty theorizing when it comes to how such an organization could be setup. We have the billions of years of evolutionary history showing us the ways. It shows very clearly that every multi-celled organism is made of parallel processes of top down and bottom up management integrated in the most ingenious ways. Clearly for us to harp on which method is better is completely misguided. It also makes no sense for us to talk about that this machinery can only be set up once society reaches a certain level of wealth of complexity when we see life teaming with socialism everywhere at all complexity levels, in all shapes and sizes, and in every nook and cranny. The setting up of this machinery is possible at all levels of development and is not easy at any level of development. The hope for socialism is not in making society richer but in pursing an evolutionary path towards socialism based on experimentation and learning. Unfortunately the only people currently taking this approach are the Chinese.
Deng was the man! Enough said.
The man who threw 500 million workers under the bus.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Today is 75th anniversary of Nakbat!!😡
And the celebration resistance of Palestinians against injustice committed by Israel!!🙌👏🎉🎊
Thanks
Re. Chinese "democracy", maybe someone can explain how their single party capitalism is not sui-generis fascism?, especially since they essentially changed the C of Communism to mean Confucianism (where Confucius is the Chinese equivalent of Plato: authoritarian reactionary philosopher of old).
You make a lot of comments I disagree with, but the above is not among them. Chinese workers need to reliberate themselves from Chinese capitalists!
As for your point on fascism, I wish I could remember who recently made an apt comparison of "SWCC" and "National Socialism" as two examples of capitalist opportunism, using worker-oriented branding and talking points to lubricate the capitalist machine...
Fyi, they have nine parties, not one. Do research on it.
@@fun_ghoul - " Chinese workers need to reliberate themselves from Chinese capitalists!" - Sure thing but that's like saying nothing: some people are selling that Chinese Capitalistm is "communism" and even that Chinese Fascism is "democracy". And that's something that the whole global working class must analyze and judge. There's only one Planet, there's only one Humanity.
BTW still waiting for Chinese internationalism to ever happen at all: compare all that tiny Cuba has done for the overall revolutionary cause globally and whatever (nothing at all?) that China has done (even in the good old times of Mao).
As for the second part, "nationali socialism" is not the word I'd use: fascism is a form of nationalist Capitalism... of which nazism is the racist genocidal utterly mad most extremely imperialist version. No, I don't think that China is nazi (the USA and Ukraine are close but China is not). Do Chinese even have universal healthcare of some sort? Last time I checked (the infamous milk poisonings of a decade ago) they didn't, they have to pay for healthcare just like USians do. Where is the socialism? Just having a strong government that meddles in the economy, much as Germany or Japan did traditionally, does not Socialism make, Socialism is about worker rights and ultimately about worker empowerment, not about Reinischekapitalismus.
Sure: there is probably a big difference between the oligarchs running the nation as in the USA (or traditionally in Anglosaxon style Capitalism) and the nation (state) keeping the oligarchs under control for their own good (Russia and China now, Germany and Japan historically). The latter is needed to outcompete the Anglosaxon powers that have dominated global capitalism and to avoid owns bourgeoisie from becoming "comprador", i.e. subservient of foreign ones.
This is a matter of nationalism and national development but not of Capitalism vs Socialism: both are capitalist -- just ponder what Marx and Lenin thought of German Capitalism, of their central planning and of their "socialist" crumbs to keep social peace and prevent revolutionary buildup.
It's nationalist, it's developist but it's 100% capitalist.
@@jazondelta4976 - No, you bring me the reference, I have no time to do your homework.
@@jazondelta4976 Are the other 8 parties more hostile to capitalism, or less so? If the latter, your comment is a non sequitur.
Best😊
Thank you much may Allah bless :)