1
What makes you say that? Why 25 years particularly?
According to the CIA declassified documents he was not a dictator
Even In Stalin's time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team and it seems obvious that Khrushchev will be the new captain. However, it does not appear that any of the present leaders will rise to the stature of Lenin and Stalin,so that it will be safer to assume that developments in Moscow will be along the lines of what is called collective leadership, unless Western policies force the Soviets to stream-line their power organization. The present situation is the most favorable from the point of view of upsetting the Communist dictatorship since the death of Stalin.
Wow! This one is spicy! Can you please provide sources for these, comrade?
This made me laugh so hard bro 🤣
Taken together, these accounts tell a pretty compelling and straightforward story: a worker state led by a vanguard party has placed the productive forces developed by capitalism under human control once again, for the benefit of the many rather than the few, and so definitively begun the complex and difficult transition away from capitalism and into communism that we call socialism. Capitalists, sheltered and insular in their dealings with fellow human beings, don’t understand that they are not sympathetic characters, so they shamelessly self-victimize in the press in the hopes of winning sympathy from the masses, in a futile effort to rally the necessary fervor for military intervention. The situation looks grim for the forces of reaction.
It doesn’t sound like you read anything that I sent you.
Also, doesn’t seem like you know how the Chinese democracy works. All that I hear is complete misunderstandings said confidently.
Let us be clear, the Chinese Communist Party is a Marxist-Leninist organization. The Party General Secretary Xi Jinping sees himself as Josef Stalin’s successor. In fact, as the journalist and former Australian government official John Garnaut has noted, the Chinese Communist Party is the last “ruling communist party that never split with Stalin, with the partial exception of North Korea.” [11]
Leaked cables from 2009 give a clear sense of why Xi Jinping aggravates the US:
Unlike many youth who “made up for lost time by having fun” after the Cultural Revolution, Xi “chose to survive by becoming redder than the red.” … Xi is not corrupt and does not care about money
Response to both 1 and 2:
because socialism isn't defined by how many people in a country have a certain level of wealth. socialism is the transitional period between capitalism and communism, where the proletariat hold state power and build the conditions necessary for communism. before you can have communism you need to have the productive forces in place to make that economically possible. China chose the route of allowing capitalist investment to help develop its productive forces, while maintaining state power and overall control of the economy in the hands of the Communist Party. they decided that it was better for the country to become wealthy unevenly at first, rather than to keep socialising poverty
What is socialism and what is Marxism? We were not quite clear about this in the past. Marxism attaches utmost importance to developing the productive forces. We have said that socialism is the primary stage of communism and that at the advanced stage the principle of from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs will be applied. This calls for highly developed productive forces and an overwhelming abundance of material wealth. Therefore, the fundamental task for the socialist stage is to develop the productive forces. The superiority of the socialist system is demonstrated, in the final analysis, by faster and greater development of those forces than under the capitalist system. As they develop, the people’s material and cultural life will constantly improve. One of our shortcomings after the founding of the People’s Republic was that we didn’t pay enough attention to developing the productive forces. Socialism means eliminating poverty. Pauperism is not socialism, still less communism
as it happens there did arise a great degree of wealth disparity, which the state has begun to tackle since Xi's leadership took over
and that's something they'll need to iron out over time
but the existence of billionaires isn't a reflection of the class character of the state
you might find this article a worthwhile read https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/
-
Can you please define what socialism is for me?
The way that you refute every piece of evidence and data, with excuses based on your own opinion, shows that you are not a logical person. You are just a racist right-wing apologetic who hates black people. I dont think that I can reach someone like that. I hope that some day you can see the light.
CyberGhost
joined 1 year ago
No because appartheid settlers are not civilians, they are part of a military regime. If you don’t want to be a casualty on a liberation army, then don’t settle on their land.