A question on LGBT issues, and on China

Just a question for SPUSA members here:

Does your party have an official political stance on LGBT issues?

More specifically, what do you see as the most important areas in progressive LGBT politics today? And what are the most significant problems in this movement? Do you have an official position on LGBT issues in the Third World?

What is your party's official evaluation of China, both the Maoist era and today?

Thanks for answering.

[FONT=Verdana]On the first question, this is from the SP's platform:

"[FONT=helvetica][FONT=helvetica]The Socialist Party recognizes the human and civil rights of all, without regard to sexual orientation.[/FONT]

[FONT=helvetica]1. We call for the end of all anti-gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBTQ) restrictions in law and the work place, the repeal of all sodomy laws, and the legalization of same-sex marriage.[/FONT]

[FONT=helvetica]2. We call on all schools to adopt policies and procedures to address and prevent student violence and to ban discrimination against GLBTQ people throughout the educational system.[/FONT]

[FONT=helvetica]3. We call for a federal ban on all forms of job discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

4. We are committed to confronting the heterosexism that provides the fertile ground for homophobic violence, and support all efforts toward fostering understanding and cooperation among persons and groups of differing sexual orientations."[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

The SPUSA, as far as I know, doesn't have an official position calling out China specifically, but I think our Statement of Principles is rather clear when it comes to modern China.

Under capitalist and authoritarian "Communist" states, people have little control over fundamental areas of their lives. The capitalist system forces workers to sell their abilities and skills to the few who own the workplaces, profit from these workers' labor, and use the government to maintain their privileged position. Under authoritarian "Communist" states, decisions are made by Communist Party officials, the bureaucracy and the military. The inevitable product of each system is a class society with gross inequality of privileges, a draining of the productive wealth and goods of the society into military purposes, environmental pollution, and war in which workers are compelled to fight other workers.

When it comes to the Maoist period, I think that most people in the Party, if you polled them, would not consider it socialist, but rather, state capitalist, though good luck trying to get a definition as to what that means.

I would argue that the PRC was socialist or attempting to build socialism, for its first forty years, and that Tienanmen represented a counter-revolution and the re-establishment of the dominance of the capitalist mode of production, even though capitalism had been allowed ten years earlier.

Personally, I think your analysis is quite accurate.

Certainly today China is extremely corrupt and oppressive, and is on the verge of capitalist restoration.

However, Tiananmen was a very complex event. Both revolutionary and counter-revolutionary currents were present at the time.

IMO, it's beyond the verge of capitalist restoration. It's a hybrid state - a capitalist economy under the tight control of a stalinist bureaucracy.

Personally, I think your analysis is quite accurate.

Certainly today China is extremely corrupt and oppressive, and is on the verge of capitalist restoration.

However, Tiananmen was a very complex event. Both revolutionary and counter-revolutionary currents were present at the time.

What I mean by Tienanmen representing a counter-revolution was not the people in the streets. Rather, it was the suppression of the demonstrators that represented the counter-revolution (even though there were certainly counter-revolutionary elements among the demonstrators).

Until Tienanmen, there was still a tension and resistance in the Party and Chinese society to capitalist restoration. Tienanmen began as a protest against Party corruption and the growing influence of the capitalists. Once crushed, there was no longer anyone to stand up to the Dengists.

It would be more accurate to say the suppression of Tienanmen represented the final victory of the counter-revolution.

I know what you mean. My point is that not all of the protesters were genuinely revolutionary or even relatively progressive. I'm sure agents of Western imperialism were also present.

As for now, I don't think technically a complete counter-revolution has happened yet, because the "shell" of the socialist state is still present. Since base determines superstructure, if the base has completely changed, then we'd expect the super-structure to completely change too.

But I don't have much hope for the Chinese regime anymore. Maybe within the next 10 years the counter-revolution will be finally complete, and the CCP would change its name as well as the name of the Chinese state.