Communist Party Elders Call for Ending Censorship in China

[Queercommie Girl]

But the choice in China is currently not between "Communism" and "freedom", it is a choice (yet) between two models of capitalism: pro-Western laissez faire and state-coordinated monopolistic capitalism of modern Chinese rulers.

Which is why we need a third choice.

[Queercommie Girl]

That's true ECONOMICALLY. But politically the choice is between free speech democracy and non free speech post Maoist Communism.

It's impossible to divorce economics from politics like this.

[Lt. Ferret]

you cant have maoism unless they send you to labor camps for criticizing the corrupt officials?

[Bud Struggle]

It's impossible to divorce economics from politics like this.

Sure could. Singapore have a lovely Capitalist economy, So does the US, so does Monaco--each with vastly different degrees of Democracy. Unfortunately the Communist model never got beyond the Glorious Leader syndrome. It would seriously get more traction in the real world if it did.

[RGacky3]

That's true ECONOMICALLY. But politically the choice is between free speech democracy and non free speech post Maoist Communism.

Its not that simple, democracy is'nt on the table, what the choice is, is some sort of free speach (I don't know what the exact proposal is) and the status quo, but unless the free speach is one that actually gives the regular population a voice, its nothing but catering to power. But we'll have to wait and see.

BTW, these are FORMER communist party members, which gives me a little bit of hope that they are sincere (you'll notice people out of power are much more reasonable once they get out of power :P). As far as the government taking it, unless its as a responce to their hand being forced, I doubt it would be giving the public a voice.

Sure could. Singapore have a lovely Capitalist economy, So does the US, so does Monaco--each with vastly different degrees of Democracy. Unfortunately the Communist model never got beyond the Glorious Leader syndrome. It would seriously get more traction in the real world if it did.

Not really, your right they all have different levels of public control (democracy) and freedom, however ultimately its up to the ruling class.

For example free speach in a Capitalist country is VASTLY different from free speach in a more socialist country, when you take money out of it its actually free speach, i.e. people with ideas, in the Capitalist context you have a citizens united situation, i.e. monied interests drowning everything out, and monopolizing speach.

So its not so clear cut, for example in China they could say they are allowing more free speach, and then just rent out public space for billboards, but is that ACTUALLY free speach?

OR they could protect workers right to organize, open up the internet, and give more automoy to local governments (where the local people have more say), which would have the effect of giving people more free speach.

So not all "free speach" is made equal.

[Kiev Communard]

Sure could. Singapore have a lovely Capitalist economy.

Well, the political model of Singapore is pretty much authoritarian and repressive, just as with South Korea and Taiwan during the heyday of their respective "economic miracles"...

[Queercommie Girl]

Sure could. Singapore have a lovely Capitalist economy,

Singapore is an authoritarian Confucian-style capitalist state where people suffer from over-work and homosexuality is still legally not allowed.

You go there if you want, it's not my idea of a "progressive state" at all.

[Bud Struggle]

Singapore is an authoritarian Confucian-style capitalist state where people suffer from over-work and homosexuality is still legally not allowed.

You go there if you want, it's not my idea of a "progressive state" at all.

That wasn't my point. I was just saying that both Capitalist and Socialist economic systems can and do have different degrees of freedom and democracy.

And yes, Singapore is one of the bad ones.

[Queercommie Girl]

Well, China at least learned its lesson and is now going down the path of innovation and entrepreneurship. Look how prosperous it's become since the death of the "great leader."

"Prosperous" for the fatcat "princelings" who got rich not through innovation but through their opportunistic selling-out of the public sector economy in China, but literal death for the workers at Foxconn driven to suicide by their semi-fascist capitalist bosses.

And complete destruction for the entire family of radical trade union activist Zhao Dongmin, who gave up everything to fight against the corrupt local government in order to promote worker's rights in China.

Really shows whose class interests you promote.

[Lt. Ferret]

and killing 50 million people to secure the revolution is better than a few companies that obviously need to be fixed in china?

[Queercommie Girl]

and killing 50 million people to secure the revolution is better than a few companies that obviously need to be fixed in china?

How many of those "50 million" were actually killed by capitalist and imperialist forces?

[Bud Struggle]

How many of those "50 million" were actually killed by capitalist and imperialist forces?

None. They all committed suicide.

[ComradeMan]

China is not really communist, it's state-capitalist.

Free speech is fine, as long you don't shout fire in a crowded theatre.

Freedom of access to information is perhaps a bigger issue but not one that gets talked about so much.

[Queercommie Girl]

China is not really communist, it's state-capitalist.

Free speech is fine, as long you don't shout fire in a crowded theatre.

Freedom of access to information is perhaps a bigger issue but not one that gets talked about so much.

No-one is saying China is "communist" now. Obviously that's ridiculous.

The essential point here is that freedom is not "universal" but has a class basis.

We must ask: whose freedom? Freedom for the capitalists or freedom for the workers? The more freedom capitalists have, the less freedom workers have, so in this sense they are opposed.

[Bud Struggle]

No-one is saying China is "communist" now. Obviously that's ridiculous.

You have to look deeper into that Maoist failure--

The essential point here is that freedom is not "universal" but has a class basis.

Mao TRIED that and it obviously didn't work. Maybe somehing else?

We must ask: whose freedom? Freedom for the capitalists or freedom for the workers? The more freedom capitalists have, the less freedom workers have, so in this sense they are opposed.

Geez it's not that simple. It's not about Capitalist propagananda or Communist propaganda--it's about the individual to see through all of tha t and CHOOSE.

You can see that Communism is just the flip side of Capitalism.

There's something more.

[Lt. Ferret]

How many of those "50 million" were actually killed by capitalist and imperialist forces?

um were mao's butchers capitalists and imperialists?

[Weezer]

Communist Party elders? What is this, a CWI chapter?

[RGacky3]

Mao TRIED that and it obviously didn't work. Maybe somehing else?

What did he try??? If its possible to say one person, or a few people "tried" socialism, then they did'nt, its like saying so-and-so "tried" democracy.

[Queercommie Girl]

um were mao's butchers capitalists and imperialists?

Mao mainly killed capitalists and landlords. If you call that "butchery", I don't care.

Did I ever say that I'm always against murdering people or working class terrorism? No.

[RGacky3]

Mao mainly killed capitalists and landlords. If you call that "butchery", I don't care.

What else would you call it? Let me ask you something, if you were the son of a landlord, and inherited his land, do you too deserve to die?

You need help man.