not really but maybe it will help to weaken US imperialism which may help the left wing forces around the world.
A good rule is that anything that’s bad for the US is good for socialism.
China doesnt have a significant landlord class and 90% of people there own a house, whatever the fuck they have going on I want it lol.
Imperialist socdems like sanders want to fund US social services off the backs of workers in the global south (via a tax on imports from commodities produced by workers making pennies, if you’re wondering how this functions).
This is why he and AOC have voted in support of every US war, and why when it comes to foreign policy, they’re indistinguishable from neocons and other liberals.
Socdems like yourself just want to uphold the status quo of imperialist wealth extraction, just with a little more of that stolen wealth allocated to social services.
So, support for Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, which always seem to be the result Bernie gets? That “democratic socialism”?
I agree, but probably for another reason: China’s development model (socialist market economy) was developed in consideration of China’s unique historical circumstances. So, it’s not necessarily a bad thing that other nations are better off developing another economic model.
That’s a good point. Easy to overlook. China had to open up to develop technologically. Much of the west has the technological development but lags behind in development of the relations of production. The west may have to catch up again with industrial capacity. Otherwise, it’s may take a very different set of steps to achieve socialism in the west.
There is no version of socialism that could be “what we want overall”. In each country where it is implemented, and within that country in each province, socialism changes its form to address the practical demands of the situation at hand, as they are dictated by the current local topography, climate, vegetation, state of infrastructure and material conditions, culture, demographics, history, law, foreign relations, military capabilities, advancement of urbanisation, education, bureaucratisation, and familiarity with technology, prevalence of diseases and their countermeasures, pollution, availability of public activities and facilities, et cetera.
The socialism in China is the socialism of China, and the socialism of neighbouring nations such as Vietnam, Laos, and the DPRK already looks very, very different; even moreso than the variation between and within China’s cities and provinces. Neither is its current form of socialism the same as what they did in the 1960s or in the 1990s. I suppose you don’t live in China - that much one can read into your takes - therefore I can already promise (disappoint?) you that when socialism develops where you live, it will be nothing like the Chinese version.
Yes.
complicated question, imma pull a socialist brand of enlightened centrism.
china being number one in economics doesn’t directly mean anything that meaningful to revolutionary movements, other than a morale boost to CPs and some sympathy among some people, since china isn’t yet in the phase of sponsoring revolutionary movements out there like ussr did.
buuuuut, since they are a well develop and industrial powerhouse, they have the material conditions to withstand imperialists assaults and keep the revolution alive, whilst doing fair trade with the global south, weakening a little colonial nations like france and bringing about the multipolar world.
