China Abandoning its Socialist Health Care

[rachstev]

Perhaps I wasn't the only one who listened to a very lengthy piece on All Things Considered last Friday (please, noone babble on about how National Public Radio is some right wing enterprise as, ironically, there is some member of congress accusing it of being a left wing opinion factory) about how Chinese are having to work harder to pay their public doctors extra money for beeing seen early; selling medications not available to the people through their healthcare, and that each year, larger numbers of Chinese cannot afford medical attention. Also, the villiage doctors, who visited ALL of the lands of the farmers have virtually disappeared from the country society, all of them moving to the city, where money and more exciting culture is available to them.

Disgustapated recenly cited some comment by one "Blum", who stated that all socialist or communist experiements had been thwarted by the United States.

What a dumb view.

But beyond that, I am faced by the left with a dimlemma its appologists fail to address: That while they are screaming of the failure of capitalism, more and more people under socialism are leaving socialism.

It is especially interesting in China because, especially in the 1960's, China clamped down on any individualsim expressed by people, and used the power of the state to force its citizens to do X or Y or Z. And the place became more socialistic. When more freedoms were allowed, the more educated one was, the less likely they were to buy into socialism.

None of this makes sense. One of the chief anti-American arguments have been that, if we become more educated we would become more inclined toward socialism. Here is the reverse. The more educated one is, the more they choose to leave socialism.

From a total layman (which I admit I am in the world of geo-politics) China is becoming a large capitalist organization filled with smaller capitalist organizations.

Needless to say, the Party has become an irrelivancy. And as it tries to establish its relivancy both the world, and the Chinese people, laugh.

I wonder if, after Castro dies, Cuba will follow the same corse, and I will live to see all "socialist nations" (yeah, I know, they're really not socialsit...whatever) wither away and die. Hey! Just like Marx said that it would!

Rachstev

[LSD]

The PRC is continuing on the road to capitalism that it started on in 1949; this is just another step.

The US didn't prevent the Chinese "socialist experiment" from succeding, it was hopeless to being with. The revolution of 1976 wasn't about the restoration of capitalism, it was about the realization of capitalism.

Maoism, like Leninism before it, has never been anything other than a roadmap for capitalism, albeit a particularly brutal one. Of course these third world "socialist" states are adopting mixed-economy capitalism; it beats the state-feudalism and state-monopoly-bureacracism they have today.

[rachstev]

Lysergic Acid,

I've never heard that before. Why is that the case? Why a road map to capitalism. Oppression maybe. But why can't communisim STAY communism? I understand why people choose freedom, but this is a puzzle to me. Why not to you?

Also, what does your name mean?

Rachstev

[LSD]

Why is that the case? Why a road map to capitalism.

Maoism or "agrarian socialism", as a theory, attempts to advance unindustrialized peasant populations to some form of (unclear) socialist society by rapid industrialization, command production, and authoritarian government.

In theory, this is supposed to lead to some sort of communalistic society, but in practice it serves to accelerate the gap from agrarian feudalism to industrial capitalism, much as Leninism did in the USSR.

By forcing industrial development Maoism creates advanced production far sooner than it would otherwise emerge, and by destroying traditional class relationships, it destroys the feudal model and acclimatizes the population to more conventional labour-relationships.

All of this means that people living in Maoist states skip the often centuries long transition between fedual power-relationships and capitalist class-relationships; from serfdom to consumer.

Inevitably, the fallacy of the "communist" part of these "communist" states becomes too apparent and something happens. In China, it was the cultural revolution and the coup of '76.


But why can't communisim STAY communism?

China is not and never has been communist.

Communism can only develop in a society where the material infastructure can sustain it.


I understand why people choose freedom, but this is a puzzle to me.

People choose the best available option that they are aware of. Often, of course, this awareness is limited by those in a possition to influence it.

In the PRC, it's a bit of a mixed bag.

Would the people be better off under a social-democratic mixed-economy than the oppresive rule of the CCP? Of course, but that's not what the CCP's doing.

It's trying to introduce neoliberal reforms while still holding on to political power. It's also opening the country to great foreign investments, which are good for the government, but no so good for the people.

It's being rather cagey about them, however, so we'll still have to see how that goes.

Right now, the best case for China would be if the people would overthrow the PRC, get themselves a democratic republican social-democratic government, organize strong labour unions, close their borders, and fix their economy. In a few decades they'll be ready for an actual revolution.

That's the only "road" to communism.


Also, what does your name mean?

Lysergic Acid Diethylamide = LSD (from the german)

[Clarksist]

It is especially interesting in China because, especially in the 1960's, China clamped down on any individualsim expressed by people, and used the power of the state to force its citizens to do X or Y or Z. And the place became more socialistic. When more freedoms were allowed, the more educated one was, the less likely they were to buy into socialism.


Socialism has to include many things for it to be a government of the workers: democracy with excessive freedoms & rights.

You can't be a government of the workers without those things! Thus China wasn't socialist, isn't socialist, and isn't moving anywhere but further open market capitalism. Give it up China has never been a communist country.

[Hiero]

Rather then leave you with a stale taste of petty bouegios Anarchist thought who are willing just to deny the existence fo socialist states rather then face criticism, i will give you the Maoist angle on China from Lin Biao "Report to the Ninth National Congress of the Communist Party of China". This are the quotes he uses in his main body.


...the bourgeoisie, whose resistance is increased tenfold by its overthrow (even if only in one country), and whose power lies not only in the strength of international capital, in the strength and durability of the international connections of the bourgeoisie, but also in the force of habit, in the strength of small production. For, unfortunately, small production is still very, very widespread in the world, and small production engenders capitalism and the bourgeoisie continuously, daily, hourly, spontaneously, and on a mass scale. (Lenin, Collected Works, Chinese ed., Vol. 31, p. 6.)


in China, the question of which wins out, socialism or capitalism, is already solved” Chairman Mao specifically pointed out: “The question of which will win out, socialism or capitalism, is still not really settled.” “The class struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, the class struggle between the different political forces, and the class struggle in the ideological field between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie will continue to be long and tortuous and at times will even become very acute


Socialist society covers a considerably long historical period. In the historical period of socialism, there are still classes, class contradictions and class struggle, there is the struggle between the socialist road and the capitalist road, and there is the danger of capitalist restoration. We must recognize the protracted and complex nature of this struggle. We must heighten our vigilance. We must conduct socialist education. We must correctly understand and handle class contradictions and class struggle, distinguish the contradictions between ourselves and the enemy from those among the people and handle them correctly. Otherwise a socialist country like ours will turn into its opposite and degenerate, and a capitalist restoration will take place. From now on we must remind ourselves of this every year, every month and every day so that we can retain a rather sober understanding of this problem and have a Marxist-Leninist line.

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/.../1969/04/01.htm (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/lin-biao/1969/04/01.htm)

So if you read that you will see that the real Communists in China always knew the possibility for restoring capitalism was real.

So i don't know why you think you were so smart to come in here and wave in our faces what we already knew.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

If I were you I would ignore the Leninist excuses for the failure of their paradigm.


Rather then leave you with a stale taste of petty bouegios Anarchist thought who are willing just to deny the existence fo socialist states rather then face criticism,

What? This is nonsense. Why should we non-leninists face criticism for your failures?


i will give you the Maoist angle on China from Lin Biao "Report to the Ninth National Congress of the Communist Party of China". This are the quotes he uses in his main body.

Can't you ever argue anything without quoting large blocks of text from other MLs? My eyes glaze over at the sight of such things, and doubtless it's the same for cappies. This is why I find you guys amusing.


So if you read that you will see that the real Communists in China always knew the possibility for restoring capitalism was real.

And yet the Leninist experiment has failed every place it has been tried bar one. That's not an encouraging track record.

So much for 'having a Marxist-Leninist' line.

Can we try something that works and doesn't screw over the non-Party member? please?

[Hiero]

If I were you I would ignore the Leninist excuses for the failure of their paradigm.

Wait how is it excuses? Lin Biao and Mao said that capitalist restoration was possible before it happen. So how is it excuses?


What? This is nonsense. Why should we non-leninists face criticism for your failures?

Well what is your reasoning for the failure? There was a state and people become corrupt due to a state.

Your criticism on the situation is poor as it is not Marxist. If an Anarchist situation was in place of a Leninist one, it would still face the same contradictions.


Can't you ever argue anything without quoting large blocks of text from other MLs?

Well i hardly do it anyway. Though these quotes are perfect for this thread, how else was i going to show that the Maoist group in China were quite aware of capitalist restoration in China other then quoting them. So your criticism of my quoting is stupid, as how else was i to show my point?


And yet the Leninist experiment has failed every place it has been tried bar one. That's not an encouraging track record.

There is a clear reason to why this happens. It is going to happen any other way, there is no way around the class conflict in a revolutionary society.

Attempting to not have a state, or form another type of state does move abolish the ability for capitalist restoration.

I had to comment on this topic from Maoism. As you gave no explanation as to why China as reformed and to why 1973 was turning point in China. Your theory does not explain how Mao and Deng were different, as it bundles them into the same catorgory as party buecrats.

[Comrade Hector]

China has been on the capitalist road since after the death of Mao Tse-Tung, and the traitor Deng Xiaoping took over. Remember many of the toys we used to play with and the present day toys kids play; most of them say "made in China". True the USA has nothing to do with it. Deng Xiaoping's reformist (capitalist introduction) policies was only partnership with the West for his own personal gain, and not for China. This road is what led to the Tiananmen Square massacre (the side not shown on the capitalist media) where workers students protested the rising unemployment and declines of the social programs guaranteed by the Chinese Revolution of 1949. In fact, a comrade once told me that China's education system is now privatized. Its a pity, because China has the ability to challenge the West, defend Cuba and North Korea, keep Vietnam from taking the capitalist road, and encouraging Socialist Revolutions.

[quincunx5]

Its a pity, because China has the ability to challenge the West, defend Cuba and North Korea, keep Vietnam from taking the capitalist road, and encouraging Socialist Revolutions.


Funny how it can only do so now, after it being improved by capitalism.

[Comrade Hector]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 08:08 AM
Funny how it can only do so now, after it being improved by capitalism.
But that's exactly my point. China has the ability to defend the remaining Socialist states, and promote Socialist Revolutions, but they don't do this. The only thing on their minds is making money from Western investments, and leaching off the labor of workers (privatization).

[Freedom Works]

You mean by increasing the freedom and thus prosperity of the people living there?