[ Followups | Post Followup | Comparative Economic Systems Discussion | Help ]

Re: Are Communist Pasrtise Anti-Communist?

Posted by Mika Utprand on November 17, 2001 at 19:31:17:

For a discussion at the university level of the meaning of Chinese Communism, these postings are almost incredibly puerile and naive.

The CCP is not about bringing utopian Communism to the Chinese people, in whose name it maintains its monopoly of power -- either by flexibility or following the Socialist Road to Communism. IT IS ABOUT CLINGING TO POWER BY ANY AND ALL MEANS AVAILABLE. Read the Tienanmen Papers and this becomes crystal clear. In the Papers, the CCP leadership was shown to be quaking in their sandals with the thought that the system was going to collapse and that these tyrants would have to answer for their sins against the people.

The Chinese people are supporting more than 20 million drones and their families (what, 60-75 million people in all?), who produce nothing and take what they please. Oh yes, they spin dreams of a utopia to justify their parasitical existences.

This nonsense about an economic miracle in China is just that. The Party has been in power for more than 50 years, and yet the GDP per capita of its population is less than 1/10th that of South Korea. And South Korea following the North Korean invasion and the Korean War was even more devastated than China.

No party in the world could stay in power with that miserable an economic record -- unless it had a monopoly of power, total control over the media, a vast and ruthless secret police and the willingness to use the Army and the State Organs to crush any and all dissent or revolt. Sounds like our friends in the CCP, doesn't it.

What progress the Chinese have made with their economy is primarily by following Lenin's NEP (New Economic Policy)of the 1920s. Thus, by allowing the peasants to control production and sell their goods, some prosperity came to the countryside, which is the usual result when Communist methods are abandoned. The CCP avoided the mistakes of the Soviets who ended the NEP with a war against the kulaks which led directly to famine and the death of about 25,000,000 people. Lenin's NEP also saw growth in the non-agricultural sector which almost matched the most depressed years of the two decades prior to WWI. A great record. The reason the NEP was ended was because the Party feared its grasp on power was starting to slip away.

As for flexibility, the CCP has learned from the mistakes made by the Russians, for sure. But how can anyone say that Mao shrank from using the worst Stalinist methods ["Mao did not respect the violent and oppressive measures used by Stalin to enforce communism throughout Russia." writes Katherine Clouse]. Perhaps what the writer meant was that Mao didn't respect Stalin's methods because he thought they weren't effective enough and he, Mao, could see how to make them even more violent and oppressive. That might have led to those years, when China's brightest and best were forced to wear dunce caps as they were paraded before jeering crowds by pig ignorant "students" and Communist activists and then packed off for ten years of hard labor in a Laogai. That was one of Mao's brilliant ideas, when he wasn't busy corrupting an endless succession of pre-teen girls. How could Mao, of all the villains of history, be given such a glowing pass? What the hell do they teach at Mt. Holyoke? It can't all be Professor Gabriel's fault.

It is likely that the Chinese version of the NEP will cause it to lose power. The CCP is already irrelevant to the economy, except to the extent it interferes and intervenes. Its failure to crush the Falun Gong shows that its power is beginning to wane. Now that it has been admitted into the WTO, it is likely that its control over the economy will continue to decline.

The fact is that the CCP at present is in the same position as the plantation owners who sipped mint juleps in the shade of the lime trees while the coolies slaved away in the fields under a broiling sun. The problem for the world is that these slave-owners have nuclear weapons and might use them against Taiwan to start a disastrous war in order to divert attention from their own illegitimacy.

Don't count me as one who thinks the CCP is leading its people anywhere but to disaster. Communism has never been anything but an attractive-looking ideological figleaf to cover the naked ambition of its adherents, who have included some of the most ruthless people this side of the Takfirs. Its theoretical contradictions are so glaring that Communism - of any national brand - can't survive even the most basic of analyses.

Best of luck to all you starry-eyed idealistic students out there. Perhaps you'll see the world as it really is one day.


Mika Utprand -- not a fan of the CCP


Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Title of Link:
Optional Image URL: