According to him, the country’s economy “hit rock bottom” in the first quarter, which could lead to a crisis.
Zyuganov also suggested that the situation this fall could resemble the events of 1917, when the communists came to power.
Video with English subtitles available here: https://bsky.app/profile/antongerashchenko.bsky.social/post/3mk3d7tu6m22v
There isn’t a lot of readily available info on as it was crushed by 2 repressive regimes, and the CCP isn’t exactly welcoming to historians interested in a freer society within their borders that “socialists” and the Japanese empire both worked to crush.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_People's_Association_in_Manchuria?wprov=sfla1
This is quite interesting, and since there’s so little information available we can only speculate as to why the Korean Communists assassinated their leadership.
I’m afraid this does reinforce my point that Anarchist experiments tend to only arise locally in chaotic situations - in this case manchuria during the Chinese warlord era - and then get crushed. In wartime, Marxist-Leninist centralization and discipline tends to make for more resiliency, hence the Chinese and Korean communists surviving the war and going on to take power.
Do you think Korean communist took power?
Do you think they still have power (despite writing communism out of their constitution)?
I don’t think the success of a Korean warlord that paid lip service to communism in order to get aid from the communist block, was much of a victory for the working class.
And while Mao was more genuine in his attempt to build a socialist socialist, I don’t think modern day china with it’s ban on unions is in any way more socialist than any other capitalist nation, especially not ones where workers enjoy secotral bargaining.
Neither Korea or China are perfect, but they both survived. Was Kim Il Sung a real ideological communist or just an opportunist? He’s dead, so we can’t ask him, but living standards in the North were higher than in the South under his rule, there was free healthcare. Private capital still seems to have little power in North Korea, and the power of capital is curtailed in China as well. Whether or not they can be called socialist is up for debate, but they’re certainly closer to socialism than any Western democracies.
As far as democracy goes, we’ll take China as an example. You wouldn’t call them a democracy, but they’re much more responsive to the needs and interests of the people than any western democracy. What’s better, a single-party state that acts in the interests of the people, or a democratic state that completely ignores them?
How is a state where workers can’t organize more socialist than one where workers can?
Lol, there is no public healthcare, no free childcare, you have to pay to go to high school, no unions, I don’t see how you can claim they are more responsive to people’s needs than states that y-know respond to people’s needs?
In a socialist state like China before Dengism or the USSR, how would unions work? Under capitalism unions are fantastic, but if you have a socialist economy, an independent union is essentially bargaining with all of society. A union with a lot of leverage, such as dockworkers, could extract inordinate concessions from the rest of society, not the capitalists. They would become a resented labour aristocracy. Now, I don’t think this holds in post-Deng China, but from my understanding there is a fair amount of labour organizing going on there. For instance, a few years ago an American business owner owed a bunch of back pay to his Chinese employees, and they suspected he was about to lay everyone off and close the factory without paying them, so they took his ass captive. They trapped him in his office and the police didn’t raise a finger to free him. Fat chance in hell that you’d see that in any western country.
As for public healthcare, there is, it’s just not completely free. The cost is very low, however, and the same goes for high shool. They just recently expanded affordable public childcare as well. Their recent anti-poverty program was also very successful.
To take a step back, I think you aren’t correctly understanding why western countries have/had a social safety net and toleration of unions. A lot of it was due to the struggle of the domestic labour movement, yes, but a big part of it was also the threat of the Soviet Union - with a prominent alternative to capitalism, they had extra incentive to keep the domestic working class placated. In short, they bought us off by sharing some of the spoils of imperialism. However, with falling rates of profit and the continual drive to increase profit, they’ve been progressively dialing it back in successive rounds of austerity, while letting wages stagnate compared to the cost of living. These social programs are only going to degrade and be dismantled over time.
How is this distinguished from post-Deng China? On one hand, China does not have a global empire to extract profits from, so the steadily increasing standard of living for their working class is a result of their successful economic program rather than them paying off the working class with a share of the plunder. The increase has not been equal, with the standard of living in cities increasing more rapidly than in rural areas, and with the bourgeoisie getting richer faster than the proletariat, but it is nevertheless a general increase across all of society, while the western pseudo-democracies are seeing exponential enrichment for the ruling class combined with stagnation in the middle and worsening conditions for the working class.
The main reason, however, is that capital is not in control of China. Capital is allowed to exist, and has a seat at the table, but it is constrained by the state. If capitalists cross certain lines, if they get too corrupt, act against the national interest, or act egregiously against the interests of society, they are dealt with very harshly, up to and including execution. Jack Ma got too big for his britches and thought he could freely criticize the state banks and financial regulators, claiming that they were stifling innovation. The state made it quite clear who was in charge, and Ma disappeared from public life for about 6 months. China has billionaires, yes, but they keep them on a fairly tight leash, and they routinely execute them.
Once again, they aren’t perfect and I have plenty of criticisms, but they’re doing so much better than any western country, where capital is unconstrained, operates with impunity, and is stripping the copper wire from the walls to chase profits. It’s basically incomparable. Chinese people, having seen concrete and rapid increases to their standard of living, are optimistic hopeful for the future, while we in the west see only doom and worsening conditions.
They would represent workers, you should look into actual communist theory if you don’t understand the point of unions.
Yes, to think that’s a bad thing is insane. Do you oppose public sector unions too? Fucking teachers are essentially bargaining with all of society do you think that’s bad?
Also all unions are bargaining with society, the capitalists are extracting profit but they are also part of the market and some costs/conditions will be passed on to the rest of society.
Plus docks in most of the world are publicly owned! Do you oppose the ILWU refusing to unload Israeli ships because they are holding the rest of society hostage.
Also there was literally a model for this in the USSR before Lenin crushed them, the SOVIETS, there are a bunch of other models too.
Unions are even useful in cooperatives, maybe spend less time reading theory and more time helping workers organize and you’d realize how dumb it is to think that workers (who are a part of society) are evil and selfish.
I mean FFS you’re LARPing as a communist, yet you think workers are too selfish and evil to run society, WTF is wrong with you?
Yeah illegal organizing done in secret like every other authoritarian regime, worse than in social democracies. Also from my understanding much of the organizing is done amongst immigrant communities who are treated worse and often have their passports held in conditions on par with UAE & Saudi Arabia.
Firstly, look into the French & Korean Labor movements. But secondly that doesn’t mean shit, a king can allow pedants to kill a corrupt Lord/Sheriff that doesn’t make him a socialist.
Ridiculous excuse, you are claiming China is more socialist than social democracies where workers get free access to healthcare & education, which are part of the means of social reproduction, how is it more socialist for workers to have less control over the means of production?
Lol, sorry you can’t be serious, labor unions predate the USSR and while the USSR violently crushed labor organizing within it’s borders, the Russian revolution was led by labor (who then stupidly stayed in the war and were replaced by the Bolsheviks)
Lol, economic extraction bad when US does it, good when China does it 🤦♂️
I’m sorry but defending China as socialist because the state is doing well at developmentaliam, is dumb, Indian is doing a lot of terrible developmentalism, that doesn’t make it socialist.
You’re describing a social democracy, except in a well run system you don’t need executions to scare people into compliance.
By what metric?
Also capital isn’t unconstrained in social democracies, it’s funny that you stealman China as if workers hold any real power, but strawman social democracies where workers actually do.
Sorry but if you think you can have a socialist state without worker control of the means of production, you’re delusional to the point of making something definitionally impossible and thinking you’ve made a point, it’s like arguing with a fundamentalist Christian who just says “God has a plan” when confronted with kids with bone cancer.