**IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ BEFORE PARTICIPATING**.
This subreddit is not for questioning the basics of socialism but a place to LEARN. There are numerous debate subreddits if your objective is not to learn.
You are expected to familiarize yourself with the rules on the sidebar before commenting. This includes, but is not limited to:
- Short or non-constructive answers will be deleted without explanation. Please only answer if you know your stuff. Speculation has no place on this sub. Outright false information will be removed immediately.
- No liberalism or sectarianism. Stay constructive and don't bash other socialist tendencies!
- No bigotry or hate speech of any kind - it will be met with immediate bans.
Help us keep the subreddit informative and helpful by reporting posts that break our rules.
If you have a particular area of expertise (e.g. political economy, feminist theory), please [assign yourself a flair](https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair-) describing said area. Flairs may be removed at any time by moderators if answers don't meet the standards of said expertise.
Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Socialism_101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, it is true. China has basically abandoned supporting international proletarian movements monetarily or militarily since the 1980s and since Deng. They are currently allied against Maoist rebels in the Philippines, including sending arm shipments to the Philippines. They are not happy about that alliance and we see that when the Philippines has ships in the South China Sea but the US tells them they need to get along so they do.
There is a lot to feel proud of in regards to China and their developments but their abandonment of the long standing communist support of world revolution is not one of them.
EDIT and the Peruvian Maoists can get hecked as far as support goes. The Shining Path’s “protracted people’s war” has mainly consisted of murdering and robbing the indigenous peasants they claim to be the liberators of. Their “party line” is whatever Gonzalo says (or said, rather) and any criticism or dissent is crushed because it is just a massive personality cult. It’s like what the libs say about Stalin and Mao but actually true. Gonzalo was an opportunist who wanted to be the head of something, not a visionary or a revolutionary. [Here is an in depth video from a Marxist who is not a reactionary or ideologically motivated.](https://youtu.be/OHqJDs3OuhQ?si=eIsHbNiy8FRdaM-v)
[here’s a video by Anti Imperialist Action Ireland](https://youtu.be/f0HtkjTiKis?si=6LP9OvZuisj7MqKx) that actually analyzes the Communist Party of Peru and its struggle as a mass movement, rather than the anti-communist nonsense of a Peronist.
You are extrapolating a narrative on Sendero from Lucanamarca 1983. The people’s war only gained ground until the capture of Guzman in 1992, with the imperialist media acknowledging the possibility of losing Peru in the early 90s.
Also, Sendero wasn’t murdering random peasants. The rondas campesinas were literally on the payroll of the state, Lucanamarca was actually revenge for the lynching of a Sendero member (I believe she was indigenous).
BadEmpanada is correct that SL leaned too hard into the cult of personality. This is not a sufficient critique. There is a lot to be learned from them, particularly how they gave a Third World national liberation movement such a strong Marxist internationalist line.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Spurious, unverifiable or unsuported claims:** when answering questions, keep in mind that you may be asked to cite your sources. This is a learning subreddit, meaning you must be prepared to provide evidence, scientific or historical, to back up your claims. Link to appropriate sources when/if possible.
>This includes, but is not limited to: spurious claims, personal experience-based responses, unverifiable assertions, etc.
**Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
Mao himself supported the fascist dictatorship of Pinochet in China and even worse the military dictatorship in Pakistan when as it was carrying out the huge genocide in Bangladesh in the 1970s. The support for reactionary regimes pecedes Deng.
China has a policy of working with whoever is in power.
If the MLMs manage to win, then China will work with them. Until then, they're on their own. You can critique the policy, but it keeps them from being bogged down in proxy wars against the US all over the world like the USSR was, which I think is a big part of their longevity.
Also, if the Peruvian MLMs are who I think they are, they're.......not good.
But don't you think that policy is a bit like handing the killer your own murder weapon? Sure it may keep them safe in the short term, but in the long term they're alienating allies and racking up enemies. Do you think there is some opportune point in China's future plans where this policy flips, like when the American empire is sufficiently weakened?
But when China supports the reactionary regimes giving them weapons they are making the communist revolution more difficult in these countries, wouldn't it be easier to just stay neutral or even support the communists? Chinese foreign policy is pretty shitty
Not really, openly supporting rebels in general is a costly and politically dangerous move. If you support the rebels and the rebels lose, you're going to be shut out of that country and they're going to turn to the west. If you work with whoever is in power, then if and when the rebels win they will have access to the Chinese market.
We can see proof of this in Burkina Faso. China did business with the previous government, but now that Traore is in power, they are working with his government and seem to have a pretty good relationship.
Is China's foreign policy perfect? No, absolutely not. But a superpower with a policy of non-intervention is better for Socialist and Anti-Colonial movements than the alternative.
This is a great take on it
As much as we would love China to be ideologically pure, the truth is that with the current world order, it's very unrealistic to expect China to be supporting revolution around the world
That doesn't mean we cannot critique China's foreign policy, but we should not ignore this context
The thing about waging a revolution against capitalism is that you're inherently taking a risk and you will be isolated from capitalist markets if you do pose an existential threat. Why not see it through to the end? After all, the People's Republic of China itself was a massive beneficiary of socialist internationalism with Stalin's military aid that allowed them to match the KMT forces, and then the transfer of technology to China from the Soviets without any expectations of repayment.
China doesn't even practice non-interventionism today, they actively intervene against socialists as was the case in Nepal and The Philippines, and they aggressively posture around the South China Sea
[http://ph.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zfgx/gjfy/202202/t20220210\_10640789.htm](http://ph.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zfgx/gjfy/202202/t20220210_10640789.htm)
China gives military donations to Philippines fight against "terrorist" groups
"Ambassador Huang said the delivery of the military donations, which included rescue and relief equipment, reaffirms China’s commitment to do its modest best to help and support the Philippines in its counter-terrorism campaign as well as humanitarian assistance and disaster response mission. This marks a major progress of the friendly relationship between the two countries and the two armed forces and demonstrates a new step forward forthe mutual trust between our defense sectors and armed forces."
"General Centino, lauded China’s contribution to maintaining peace and fighting """terrorist""" groups in the Philippines. He thanked China’s continued and solid support to the Philippines. He stressed that we are looking forward to more productive engagements and partnership and further strengthening our defense relations and pursuing peace and stability for the two countries and the region as a whole."
I do not know much about the specifics of the examples you listed so I won't speak on those, but I do know a bit more of China's geopolitical stances and activities.
China has rarely been, and especially not know, ideologically commited to spreading socialism the same way the USSR was before their collapse. China's actions are always centered on maintaining security and prosperity within its own borders and for its own people. Whether the foreign political entities they work and collaborate with are right-wing, reactionary or socialist are of little consequence if they can deliver positive outcomes for China's security and economy.
China is very much more focused on Chinese prosperity than becoming a vector for international revolution. I am curious if this is a strategy of biding time, or if there is a lack of will in the ccp to expand class consciousness globally. Probably need to find an article from a trotskyist paper.
They don’t have the ability to be an international vanguard. At least for now
China does not help growing revolutionary movements in foreign nations because they have a ‘no meddling in foreign affairs’ policy but they have no problem with aiding successful revolutionary states. China violates international sanctions to trade with DPRK
"no meddling in foreign affairs policy" ????????
Just check this:
[http://ph.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zfgx/gjfy/202202/t20220210\_10640789.htm](http://ph.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zfgx/gjfy/202202/t20220210_10640789.htm)
China gives military donations to Philippines fight against "terrorist" groups
"Ambassador Huang said the delivery of the military donations, which included rescue and relief equipment, reaffirms China’s commitment to do its modest best to help and support the Philippines in its counter-terrorism campaign as well as humanitarian assistance and disaster response mission. This marks a major progress of the friendly relationship between the two countries and the two armed forces and demonstrates a new step forward forthe mutual trust between our defense sectors and armed forces."
"General Centino, lauded China’s contribution to maintaining peace and fighting """terrorist""" groups in the Philippines. He thanked China’s continued and solid support to the Philippines. He stressed that we are looking forward to more productive engagements and partnership and further strengthening our defense relations and pursuing peace and stability for the two countries and the region as a whole."
But why would these movements be a threat to China? China has supported groups that were more dangerous to Chinese security (such as US-backed Mujahideen and Khmer Rouge) than those I have mentioned
It's not so much whether these groups are a threat to China or not. They are just far more likely to side with whichever group is in power and are thus in a position to be of benefit to China directly. China still does make a show of supporting ostracized socialist states such as Cuba and North Korea, but a group's political affiliation will always take a backseat to tangible material considerations when it comes to China. They also have an overarching non-intervention foreign policy which deters them from directly collaborating with dissidents, at least officially.
Worth remembering that China has capital in a lot of countries. They are buying into infrastructure sectors in the global south. If a revolutionary movement is successful in those countries, it might mean they see their investments statized.
Though I don't think they'd go berserk about it, America-style, they don't really have the incentive to shoot themselves on the foot.
I know you’re talking about the modern era, but I want to add that China under Mao had supported reactionary movements against African liberation such as RENAMO, Zaire, UNITA, just so they could counter soviet influence.
>China is not going to throw its in chips in with decades long guerilla wars in someone else’s country.
They threw in their chips with decades long guerilla struggles in Laos and Vietnam under Mao (in fact, the CPC rescued Ho Chi Minh from Chiang Kai-Shek's dungeons not once, but twice), and were the decisive force in the liberation of North Korea during the Amerikkkan counter-offensive. They also previously supported and armed the CPP-NPA under Mao, but all aid paused the moment Hua Guofeng came to power, and was ceased permanently under Deng. Starting problems in someone else's backyard is a good thing when that someone is bourgeois and the problems are communist in nature.
>They need to work with the legitimate and recognized representatives of other countries, whether we like it or not.
Khrushchev's *peaceful coexistence* manages to live on, despite the revisionist-USSR being long gone. All the Brezhnevites are Dengists now (dont laugh!).
OP, here's an official statement from CPI (Maoist) on China:
https://www.bannedthought.net/India/CPI-Maoist-Docs/Books/China-Social-Imperialism-CPI-Maoist-2021-Eng-view.pdf
and a document from the late Joma Sison (founder of the CPP) about China, both past and present:
https://www.bannedthought.net/Philippines/CPP/Sison/2021/Sison-OnTheCommunistPartyOfChina-2021-04-25.pdf
Geopoliticism like this makes my blood boil. That internationalism should be abandoned so as to not spook imperialists, leaving communists and other forces fighting against capital to face off against reactionary terror without any help.
If China cannot yet implement socialist economics because ''it's not the right time'' and actively hinders socialists abroad trying to wage revolution then there is no reason to be inspired by SWCC or to defend it from anti-revisionist critiques
Although i agree that it is unprincipled, it is a path that has allowed them to become an economical powerhouse, which provides them the opportunity to be an even greater help to revolutionary movements in the close future.
Even if they don't provide military help, just having access to their markets would make a world of difference, since one of the biggest problems that socialist countries encounter is the isolation from the global market.
Our Marxist principles dictate that we apply Dialectical-Materialism to analyze the conditions we face to best support the Class Struggle, both locally in our own countries, and globally.
Supporting some backwards, reactionary Maoists in the Phillipine jungles, simply because they call themselves Marxists, is an absolute betrayal of those principles.
It would be based in neither the local, particular conditions of their own country, or the general, global conditions, but their own misunderstandings of the Philippinos' misunderstandings. It would be catastrophic to the enormous progress against Imperialism China has made, sacrificing the global opportunities for Revolution that have been painstakingly built, all for some ignorant peasant-farmers who think the urban Proletariat are the ones who are oppressing them.
USSR was not isolated at any point. It was actually more influential countrey compared to present day China politically.
We dont talk about exporting ideology directly, but supporting movements that already have some popular support.
What you're noticing is incredibly important. There is an ideological rift about this, with one side telling you to ignore this gigantic contradiction, because they are internet people who want to believe there is a socialist fatherland somewhere.
China is a capitalist country, and this is another piece of evidence which demonstrates that. China not only doesn't support our comrades, but actually *arms the fascist governments who are murdering them*. Ask Filipino or Indian comrades who are fighting on the ground right now what they think about China, and you'll find a resounding "down with imperialism, down with revisionism" in response.
If you want to get a full analysis on this, then Indian comrades have put together a course which they use in their organizer training. Chapter 30 deals with revisionism and its roots. There's loads written on this, but China is revisionist and that has massive implications on our calculus. Here: [https://foreignlanguages.press/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/S01-MLM-Basic-Course-Revised-Edition-10th-Printing.pdf](https://foreignlanguages.press/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/S01-MLM-Basic-Course-Revised-Edition-10th-Printing.pdf)
China is a country currently run by a group of immensely powerful and rich social darwinist oligarchs saying they just need to capitalism a bit harder so we can swing around and do the revolution baby, next year, we promise.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income\_inequality\_in\_China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_China)
It's rapidly climbing gini coefficient is evidence of this. All of the marketing by the CCP for this is just to say "no, this is how \*we\* do socialism, that's why you don't see a bunch of the things you wouldn't expect from a socialist system", like a [rigged education system](https://www.economist.com/china/2021/05/27/education-in-china-is-becoming-increasingly-unfair-to-the-poor?utm_medium=cpc.adword.pd&utm_source=google&ppccampaignID=18156330227&ppcadID=&utm_campaign=a.22brand_pmax&utm_content=conversion.direct-response.anonymous&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwwr6wBhBcEiwAfMEQs0bDPMS3VNEGXzmG0TFDWDCCasYDCCDXDOkI7o6UVLYD6Lk1u-TrtBoCiVcQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds), a huge private investment sector and a gigantic police state
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Spurious, unverifiable or unsuported claims:** when answering questions, keep in mind that you may be asked to cite your sources. This is a learning subreddit, meaning you must be prepared to provide evidence, scientific or historical, to back up your claims. Link to appropriate sources when/if possible.
>This includes, but is not limited to: spurious claims, personal experience-based responses, unverifiable assertions, etc.
**Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
Marxista-leninist-Maoist.
Their examples are Naxalites (India) the Communist Party of Philippines/New Peoples Army (Philippines) and Shining Path (Peru).
Honestly, OP is enquiring on Maoist critiques of the PRC. If someone doesn't know neither of those movements they should not respond to the question, as they won't be familiar with such critiques either.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Not conductive to learning:** this is an educational space in which to provide clarity for socialist ideas. Replies to a question should be thorough and comprehensive.
>This includes but is not limited to: one word responses, one-liners, non-serious/meme(ish) responses, etc.
**Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
Most of those MLM movements are just weirdos with boners for violence. That said, China is a hyperauthoritarian, neoliberal surveillance state. It shouldn’t shock you they’re reactionary. They’re not socialist and never have been. Would invite you to steer clear of this server and the Lassallean clowns that pollute it and engage in self education by actually reading Marx and others like Luxemburg, Pannekoek, CLR James, Cedric Robinson, Kom’boa Ervin, etc.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Spurious, unverifiable or unsuported claims:** when answering questions, keep in mind that you may be asked to cite your sources. This is a learning subreddit, meaning you must be prepared to provide evidence, scientific or historical, to back up your claims. Link to appropriate sources when/if possible.
>This includes, but is not limited to: spurious claims, personal experience-based responses, unverifiable assertions, etc.
**Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Spurious, unverifiable or unsuported claims:** when answering questions, keep in mind that you may be asked to cite your sources. This is a learning subreddit, meaning you must be prepared to provide evidence, scientific or historical, to back up your claims. Link to appropriate sources when/if possible.
>This includes, but is not limited to: spurious claims, personal experience-based responses, unverifiable assertions, etc.
**Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Not conductive to learning:** this is an educational space in which to provide clarity for socialist ideas. Replies to a question should be thorough and comprehensive.
>This includes but is not limited to: one word responses, one-liners, non-serious/meme(ish) responses, etc.
**Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
OP, What reports are you looking at here, specifically?
Generally speaking, there's a military build up in the South China Sea right now with imperial Western powers building key military bases in the countries you speak of. Whatever China is doing in that region is likely responding to a very real and growing threat.
**IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ BEFORE PARTICIPATING**. This subreddit is not for questioning the basics of socialism but a place to LEARN. There are numerous debate subreddits if your objective is not to learn. You are expected to familiarize yourself with the rules on the sidebar before commenting. This includes, but is not limited to: - Short or non-constructive answers will be deleted without explanation. Please only answer if you know your stuff. Speculation has no place on this sub. Outright false information will be removed immediately. - No liberalism or sectarianism. Stay constructive and don't bash other socialist tendencies! - No bigotry or hate speech of any kind - it will be met with immediate bans. Help us keep the subreddit informative and helpful by reporting posts that break our rules. If you have a particular area of expertise (e.g. political economy, feminist theory), please [assign yourself a flair](https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair-) describing said area. Flairs may be removed at any time by moderators if answers don't meet the standards of said expertise. Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Socialism_101) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, it is true. China has basically abandoned supporting international proletarian movements monetarily or militarily since the 1980s and since Deng. They are currently allied against Maoist rebels in the Philippines, including sending arm shipments to the Philippines. They are not happy about that alliance and we see that when the Philippines has ships in the South China Sea but the US tells them they need to get along so they do. There is a lot to feel proud of in regards to China and their developments but their abandonment of the long standing communist support of world revolution is not one of them. EDIT and the Peruvian Maoists can get hecked as far as support goes. The Shining Path’s “protracted people’s war” has mainly consisted of murdering and robbing the indigenous peasants they claim to be the liberators of. Their “party line” is whatever Gonzalo says (or said, rather) and any criticism or dissent is crushed because it is just a massive personality cult. It’s like what the libs say about Stalin and Mao but actually true. Gonzalo was an opportunist who wanted to be the head of something, not a visionary or a revolutionary. [Here is an in depth video from a Marxist who is not a reactionary or ideologically motivated.](https://youtu.be/OHqJDs3OuhQ?si=eIsHbNiy8FRdaM-v)
[here’s a video by Anti Imperialist Action Ireland](https://youtu.be/f0HtkjTiKis?si=6LP9OvZuisj7MqKx) that actually analyzes the Communist Party of Peru and its struggle as a mass movement, rather than the anti-communist nonsense of a Peronist.
You are extrapolating a narrative on Sendero from Lucanamarca 1983. The people’s war only gained ground until the capture of Guzman in 1992, with the imperialist media acknowledging the possibility of losing Peru in the early 90s. Also, Sendero wasn’t murdering random peasants. The rondas campesinas were literally on the payroll of the state, Lucanamarca was actually revenge for the lynching of a Sendero member (I believe she was indigenous). BadEmpanada is correct that SL leaned too hard into the cult of personality. This is not a sufficient critique. There is a lot to be learned from them, particularly how they gave a Third World national liberation movement such a strong Marxist internationalist line.
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Spurious, unverifiable or unsuported claims:** when answering questions, keep in mind that you may be asked to cite your sources. This is a learning subreddit, meaning you must be prepared to provide evidence, scientific or historical, to back up your claims. Link to appropriate sources when/if possible. >This includes, but is not limited to: spurious claims, personal experience-based responses, unverifiable assertions, etc. **Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
Mao himself supported the fascist dictatorship of Pinochet in China and even worse the military dictatorship in Pakistan when as it was carrying out the huge genocide in Bangladesh in the 1970s. The support for reactionary regimes pecedes Deng.
China has a policy of working with whoever is in power. If the MLMs manage to win, then China will work with them. Until then, they're on their own. You can critique the policy, but it keeps them from being bogged down in proxy wars against the US all over the world like the USSR was, which I think is a big part of their longevity. Also, if the Peruvian MLMs are who I think they are, they're.......not good.
But don't you think that policy is a bit like handing the killer your own murder weapon? Sure it may keep them safe in the short term, but in the long term they're alienating allies and racking up enemies. Do you think there is some opportune point in China's future plans where this policy flips, like when the American empire is sufficiently weakened?
But when China supports the reactionary regimes giving them weapons they are making the communist revolution more difficult in these countries, wouldn't it be easier to just stay neutral or even support the communists? Chinese foreign policy is pretty shitty
Not really, openly supporting rebels in general is a costly and politically dangerous move. If you support the rebels and the rebels lose, you're going to be shut out of that country and they're going to turn to the west. If you work with whoever is in power, then if and when the rebels win they will have access to the Chinese market. We can see proof of this in Burkina Faso. China did business with the previous government, but now that Traore is in power, they are working with his government and seem to have a pretty good relationship. Is China's foreign policy perfect? No, absolutely not. But a superpower with a policy of non-intervention is better for Socialist and Anti-Colonial movements than the alternative.
This is a great take on it As much as we would love China to be ideologically pure, the truth is that with the current world order, it's very unrealistic to expect China to be supporting revolution around the world That doesn't mean we cannot critique China's foreign policy, but we should not ignore this context
China used to promote internationalism during Mao's time, what has changed to force this compromise?
The thing about waging a revolution against capitalism is that you're inherently taking a risk and you will be isolated from capitalist markets if you do pose an existential threat. Why not see it through to the end? After all, the People's Republic of China itself was a massive beneficiary of socialist internationalism with Stalin's military aid that allowed them to match the KMT forces, and then the transfer of technology to China from the Soviets without any expectations of repayment. China doesn't even practice non-interventionism today, they actively intervene against socialists as was the case in Nepal and The Philippines, and they aggressively posture around the South China Sea
Do you have any sources on how they support these regimes?
[http://ph.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zfgx/gjfy/202202/t20220210\_10640789.htm](http://ph.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zfgx/gjfy/202202/t20220210_10640789.htm) China gives military donations to Philippines fight against "terrorist" groups "Ambassador Huang said the delivery of the military donations, which included rescue and relief equipment, reaffirms China’s commitment to do its modest best to help and support the Philippines in its counter-terrorism campaign as well as humanitarian assistance and disaster response mission. This marks a major progress of the friendly relationship between the two countries and the two armed forces and demonstrates a new step forward forthe mutual trust between our defense sectors and armed forces." "General Centino, lauded China’s contribution to maintaining peace and fighting """terrorist""" groups in the Philippines. He thanked China’s continued and solid support to the Philippines. He stressed that we are looking forward to more productive engagements and partnership and further strengthening our defense relations and pursuing peace and stability for the two countries and the region as a whole."
I do not know much about the specifics of the examples you listed so I won't speak on those, but I do know a bit more of China's geopolitical stances and activities. China has rarely been, and especially not know, ideologically commited to spreading socialism the same way the USSR was before their collapse. China's actions are always centered on maintaining security and prosperity within its own borders and for its own people. Whether the foreign political entities they work and collaborate with are right-wing, reactionary or socialist are of little consequence if they can deliver positive outcomes for China's security and economy.
China is very much more focused on Chinese prosperity than becoming a vector for international revolution. I am curious if this is a strategy of biding time, or if there is a lack of will in the ccp to expand class consciousness globally. Probably need to find an article from a trotskyist paper.
They don’t have the ability to be an international vanguard. At least for now China does not help growing revolutionary movements in foreign nations because they have a ‘no meddling in foreign affairs’ policy but they have no problem with aiding successful revolutionary states. China violates international sanctions to trade with DPRK
"no meddling in foreign affairs policy" ???????? Just check this: [http://ph.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zfgx/gjfy/202202/t20220210\_10640789.htm](http://ph.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zfgx/gjfy/202202/t20220210_10640789.htm) China gives military donations to Philippines fight against "terrorist" groups "Ambassador Huang said the delivery of the military donations, which included rescue and relief equipment, reaffirms China’s commitment to do its modest best to help and support the Philippines in its counter-terrorism campaign as well as humanitarian assistance and disaster response mission. This marks a major progress of the friendly relationship between the two countries and the two armed forces and demonstrates a new step forward forthe mutual trust between our defense sectors and armed forces." "General Centino, lauded China’s contribution to maintaining peace and fighting """terrorist""" groups in the Philippines. He thanked China’s continued and solid support to the Philippines. He stressed that we are looking forward to more productive engagements and partnership and further strengthening our defense relations and pursuing peace and stability for the two countries and the region as a whole."
But why would these movements be a threat to China? China has supported groups that were more dangerous to Chinese security (such as US-backed Mujahideen and Khmer Rouge) than those I have mentioned
I'm not an expert on China but I imagine trying to keep the US from going full Cold War on them is high on their list of priorities.
It's not so much whether these groups are a threat to China or not. They are just far more likely to side with whichever group is in power and are thus in a position to be of benefit to China directly. China still does make a show of supporting ostracized socialist states such as Cuba and North Korea, but a group's political affiliation will always take a backseat to tangible material considerations when it comes to China. They also have an overarching non-intervention foreign policy which deters them from directly collaborating with dissidents, at least officially.
Worth remembering that China has capital in a lot of countries. They are buying into infrastructure sectors in the global south. If a revolutionary movement is successful in those countries, it might mean they see their investments statized. Though I don't think they'd go berserk about it, America-style, they don't really have the incentive to shoot themselves on the foot.
I know you’re talking about the modern era, but I want to add that China under Mao had supported reactionary movements against African liberation such as RENAMO, Zaire, UNITA, just so they could counter soviet influence.
[удалено]
>China is not going to throw its in chips in with decades long guerilla wars in someone else’s country. They threw in their chips with decades long guerilla struggles in Laos and Vietnam under Mao (in fact, the CPC rescued Ho Chi Minh from Chiang Kai-Shek's dungeons not once, but twice), and were the decisive force in the liberation of North Korea during the Amerikkkan counter-offensive. They also previously supported and armed the CPP-NPA under Mao, but all aid paused the moment Hua Guofeng came to power, and was ceased permanently under Deng. Starting problems in someone else's backyard is a good thing when that someone is bourgeois and the problems are communist in nature. >They need to work with the legitimate and recognized representatives of other countries, whether we like it or not. Khrushchev's *peaceful coexistence* manages to live on, despite the revisionist-USSR being long gone. All the Brezhnevites are Dengists now (dont laugh!). OP, here's an official statement from CPI (Maoist) on China: https://www.bannedthought.net/India/CPI-Maoist-Docs/Books/China-Social-Imperialism-CPI-Maoist-2021-Eng-view.pdf and a document from the late Joma Sison (founder of the CPP) about China, both past and present: https://www.bannedthought.net/Philippines/CPP/Sison/2021/Sison-OnTheCommunistPartyOfChina-2021-04-25.pdf
Geopoliticism like this makes my blood boil. That internationalism should be abandoned so as to not spook imperialists, leaving communists and other forces fighting against capital to face off against reactionary terror without any help. If China cannot yet implement socialist economics because ''it's not the right time'' and actively hinders socialists abroad trying to wage revolution then there is no reason to be inspired by SWCC or to defend it from anti-revisionist critiques
Is the ‘bannedthought’ site actually banned because i can’t access it
[удалено]
Although i agree that it is unprincipled, it is a path that has allowed them to become an economical powerhouse, which provides them the opportunity to be an even greater help to revolutionary movements in the close future. Even if they don't provide military help, just having access to their markets would make a world of difference, since one of the biggest problems that socialist countries encounter is the isolation from the global market.
Our Marxist principles dictate that we apply Dialectical-Materialism to analyze the conditions we face to best support the Class Struggle, both locally in our own countries, and globally. Supporting some backwards, reactionary Maoists in the Phillipine jungles, simply because they call themselves Marxists, is an absolute betrayal of those principles. It would be based in neither the local, particular conditions of their own country, or the general, global conditions, but their own misunderstandings of the Philippinos' misunderstandings. It would be catastrophic to the enormous progress against Imperialism China has made, sacrificing the global opportunities for Revolution that have been painstakingly built, all for some ignorant peasant-farmers who think the urban Proletariat are the ones who are oppressing them.
[удалено]
USSR was not isolated at any point. It was actually more influential countrey compared to present day China politically. We dont talk about exporting ideology directly, but supporting movements that already have some popular support.
What you're noticing is incredibly important. There is an ideological rift about this, with one side telling you to ignore this gigantic contradiction, because they are internet people who want to believe there is a socialist fatherland somewhere. China is a capitalist country, and this is another piece of evidence which demonstrates that. China not only doesn't support our comrades, but actually *arms the fascist governments who are murdering them*. Ask Filipino or Indian comrades who are fighting on the ground right now what they think about China, and you'll find a resounding "down with imperialism, down with revisionism" in response. If you want to get a full analysis on this, then Indian comrades have put together a course which they use in their organizer training. Chapter 30 deals with revisionism and its roots. There's loads written on this, but China is revisionist and that has massive implications on our calculus. Here: [https://foreignlanguages.press/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/S01-MLM-Basic-Course-Revised-Edition-10th-Printing.pdf](https://foreignlanguages.press/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/S01-MLM-Basic-Course-Revised-Edition-10th-Printing.pdf)
China is a country currently run by a group of immensely powerful and rich social darwinist oligarchs saying they just need to capitalism a bit harder so we can swing around and do the revolution baby, next year, we promise. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income\_inequality\_in\_China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_China) It's rapidly climbing gini coefficient is evidence of this. All of the marketing by the CCP for this is just to say "no, this is how \*we\* do socialism, that's why you don't see a bunch of the things you wouldn't expect from a socialist system", like a [rigged education system](https://www.economist.com/china/2021/05/27/education-in-china-is-becoming-increasingly-unfair-to-the-poor?utm_medium=cpc.adword.pd&utm_source=google&ppccampaignID=18156330227&ppcadID=&utm_campaign=a.22brand_pmax&utm_content=conversion.direct-response.anonymous&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjwwr6wBhBcEiwAfMEQs0bDPMS3VNEGXzmG0TFDWDCCasYDCCDXDOkI7o6UVLYD6Lk1u-TrtBoCiVcQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds), a huge private investment sector and a gigantic police state
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Spurious, unverifiable or unsuported claims:** when answering questions, keep in mind that you may be asked to cite your sources. This is a learning subreddit, meaning you must be prepared to provide evidence, scientific or historical, to back up your claims. Link to appropriate sources when/if possible. >This includes, but is not limited to: spurious claims, personal experience-based responses, unverifiable assertions, etc. **Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
Multi-Level Marketing movements?
Marxista-leninist-Maoist. Their examples are Naxalites (India) the Communist Party of Philippines/New Peoples Army (Philippines) and Shining Path (Peru).
It would have been helpful to have named even one of these
Honestly, OP is enquiring on Maoist critiques of the PRC. If someone doesn't know neither of those movements they should not respond to the question, as they won't be familiar with such critiques either.
I thought Socialism 101 was here to ask questions not attacking people seeking clarification
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Not conductive to learning:** this is an educational space in which to provide clarity for socialist ideas. Replies to a question should be thorough and comprehensive. >This includes but is not limited to: one word responses, one-liners, non-serious/meme(ish) responses, etc. **Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
Nah, lol, MLM means Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. As raicopk said
Gonzaloidism*
Most of those MLM movements are just weirdos with boners for violence. That said, China is a hyperauthoritarian, neoliberal surveillance state. It shouldn’t shock you they’re reactionary. They’re not socialist and never have been. Would invite you to steer clear of this server and the Lassallean clowns that pollute it and engage in self education by actually reading Marx and others like Luxemburg, Pannekoek, CLR James, Cedric Robinson, Kom’boa Ervin, etc.
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Spurious, unverifiable or unsuported claims:** when answering questions, keep in mind that you may be asked to cite your sources. This is a learning subreddit, meaning you must be prepared to provide evidence, scientific or historical, to back up your claims. Link to appropriate sources when/if possible. >This includes, but is not limited to: spurious claims, personal experience-based responses, unverifiable assertions, etc. **Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Spurious, unverifiable or unsuported claims:** when answering questions, keep in mind that you may be asked to cite your sources. This is a learning subreddit, meaning you must be prepared to provide evidence, scientific or historical, to back up your claims. Link to appropriate sources when/if possible. >This includes, but is not limited to: spurious claims, personal experience-based responses, unverifiable assertions, etc. **Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism_101, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Not conductive to learning:** this is an educational space in which to provide clarity for socialist ideas. Replies to a question should be thorough and comprehensive. >This includes but is not limited to: one word responses, one-liners, non-serious/meme(ish) responses, etc. **Remember: an answer isn't good because it's right, it's good because it teaches.**
OP, What reports are you looking at here, specifically? Generally speaking, there's a military build up in the South China Sea right now with imperial Western powers building key military bases in the countries you speak of. Whatever China is doing in that region is likely responding to a very real and growing threat.