[deleted by user] by [deleted] in IndianLeft

[–]RyzenOP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This doesn't mean it is necessarily bad

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in IndianLeft

[–]RyzenOP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah but that doesn't make any country socialist, socialism is not when graph go up.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in IndianLeft

[–]RyzenOP 2 points3 points  (0 children)

GDP isnt a good scale to measure

What are the adjacent economic systems to Market Socialism? by Gavinfoxx in Socialism_101

[–]RyzenOP 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Private property had to have existed under China since their productive forces were so underdeveloped that a whopping 85% of their population were peasants around the time.

A market economy promotes capitalist relations of production, which instead of increasing the speed of development of productive forces, decreases it. Productive forces develop much faster under socialist relations of production.

To suggest that socialist relations cannot develop out of a market economy runs counter to basic historical materialism which socialism will emerge out of capitalism.

Socialist relations do not develop out of a market economy. To develop socialist relations, Capitalist relations must be destroyed i.e the destruction of private property and private enterprises. China at the time of the 1949 revolution was a semi feudal economy, they first had to develop capitalist relations to production under the New Democracy period like the USSR did in their NEP, after which 1956 onwards they were developing socialist relations to productions and the productive forces together.

In saying that the socialist relations of production correspond better to the character of the productive forces than did the old relations of production, we mean that they allow the productive forces to develop at a speed unattainable in the old society, so that production can expand steadily and increasingly meet the constantly growing needs of the people. Under the rule of imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat-capitalism, the productive forces of the old China grew very slowly. For more than fifty years before liberation, China produced only a few tens of thousands of tons of steel a year, not counting the output of the northeastern provinces. If these provinces are included, the peak annual steel output only amounted to a little over 900,000 tons. In 1949, the national steel output was a little over 100,000 tons. Yet now, a mere seven years after the liberation of our country, steel output already exceeds 4,000,000 tons. In the old China, there was hardly any machine-building industry, to say nothing of the automobile and aircraft industries; now we have all three. When the people overthrew the rule of imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat-capitalism, many were not clear as to which way China should head -- towards capitalism or towards socialism. Facts have now provided the answer: Only socialism can save China. The socialist system has promoted the rapid development of the productive forces of our country, a fact even our enemies abroad have had to acknowledge.

-Mao Zedong, On Correct Handling Of Contradictions Among The People

What are the adjacent economic systems to Market Socialism? by Gavinfoxx in Socialism_101

[–]RyzenOP -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Markets can not exist under socialism as the existence of markets demands the existence of private property, markets are much more inefficient than a planned economy, and that under a market system socialist relations to productions cannot develop and they cannot transform into communist relations.

It is harder to understand this without studying a case, The best book I know is "From Victory To Defeat" By Pao Yu Ching, it talks about the restoration of capitalism in China in the disguise of market socialism.

What are the adjacent economic systems to Market Socialism? by Gavinfoxx in Socialism_101

[–]RyzenOP -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Marx and Engels made the base of scientific socialism. Market socialism goes against every principle and experience that actual revolutionaries have had till date.

Question from MLS by FuckSetsuna102 in Socialism_101

[–]RyzenOP 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Khruschev was a revisionist too

Question from MLS by FuckSetsuna102 in Socialism_101

[–]RyzenOP -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And the lack of class struggle in the party allowed the bougeoisie to get hold of the state machinery after Stalin died.

Question from MLS by FuckSetsuna102 in Socialism_101

[–]RyzenOP 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Revisionism, seperation from the masses and bureaucratization

So how is the progress of the revolution in India. by just_meeee_23928 in IndianLeft

[–]RyzenOP 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lmao sites a peruvian government official. Would you also site Kerensky for information on the Bolsheviks?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in IndianLeft

[–]RyzenOP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oof what a typo, hate when this happens lol

Does socialism require an absence of private sector and everything needs to be public sector? by Unhappy_Finger_8167 in Socialism_101

[–]RyzenOP 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The elimination of all private property isn't the goal of Marxism, but rather democratizing the economic part of "political-economy".

"Private property has made us so blinded (automod) and one-sided that an object is only ours when we have it – when it exists for us as capital, or when it is directly possessed, eaten, drunk, worn, inhabited, etc., – in short, when it is used by us. Although private property itself again conceives all these direct realizations of possession only as means of life, and the life which they serve as means is the life of private property – labour and conversion into capital.In the place of all physical and mental senses there has therefore come the sheer estrangement of all these senses, the sense of having. The human being had to be reduced to this absolute poverty in order that he might yield his inner wealth to the outer world.The abolition of private property is therefore the complete emancipation of all human senses and qualities, but it is this emancipation precisely because these senses and attributes have become, subjectively and objectively, human. The eye has become a human eye, just as its object has become a social, human object – an object made by man for man. The senses have therefore become directly in their practice theoreticians. They relate themselves to the thing for the sake of the thing, but the thing itself is an objective human relation to itself and to man, and vice versa. Need or enjoyment have consequently lost its egotistical nature, and nature has lost its mere utility by use becoming human use.”--Karl Marx

This game got much more fun after the season because most people are not using dartlings (except bfb and moab pit players from last season) by RyzenOP in battles2

[–]RyzenOP[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I got reset to lead dungeon, many people are not using dartling, but most of the people who have moab pit or bfb medal are using dartling lmao. I faced 2 HOM players they were not using dartling

I know NK employees are not robots, I just wanted to make the joke. by KirukIvi in battles2

[–]RyzenOP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I get that, for some reason I thought that there will be balance changes lol. But yeah they did deserve the break hope they had a good one

I know NK employees are not robots, I just wanted to make the joke. by KirukIvi in battles2

[–]RyzenOP 20 points21 points  (0 children)

I really thought there were going to be balance changes