u/ThePeoplesBadger - originally from r/GenZhou
It seems that based on what I have read:

  • WW1 and the foreign-backed civil war utterly destroyed Russia and its population, but the Bolsheviks won out after a very long and drawn out period of devastation.
  • Lenin introduced the NEP to begin to build the basis for an eventually socialist economy by developing industry and agriculture with similar practices to other capitalist countries (but without imperialism)
  • There was disagreement in the Bolshevik leadership after Lenin’s strokes and passing on how to move forward. Some top party leaders suggested moving forward “at a snail’s pace,” but it seems that Stalin had a very “yes we can” attitude, introduced five year plans, and completely revolutionized the country/countries in socialist construction.
  • When Stalin died, Khrushchev turned around and in his “secret speech,” condemned Stalin and hung all blame on Stalin for all of the problems in the USSR.
  • Khrushchev initiated changes and reforms that were seen by China as extremely problematic and revisionist, contributing to the Sino-Soviet split.
  • China followed some very similar approaches to building socialism as the USSR but also approaches unique to the material nature of China, hence “socialism with Chinese characteristics.”
  • Mao dies in the 70s (right? I could have the dates wrong) and the torch is passed to Deng Xiaoping, and China opens up to foreign trade and meets with Nixon and China becomes an economic power on the international market.
  • It seems like since then, China has been working deliberately and exactingly toward eliminating poverty, raising the living standards, and building up industries and trade across the entire spectrum.

Please correct any misunderstandings I may have above, as these are the understandings that form the basis of my questions.

  1. What were the reforms initiated by Khrushchev?
  2. What were the reforms initiated by Deng?
  3. How/why were the Khrushchev reforms revisionist?
  4. Were the Deng reforms revisionist, and regardless, why or why not?
  • archive_botOPB
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    u/ThePeoplesBadger - originally from r/GenZhou
    LOL seriously?

    • archive_botOPB
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      u/blizzsyn - originally from r/GenZhou
      Well. To be fair to him, as much as I don’t want to be. I was sorta paraphrasing.

      His statement was more the “Dictator of the Proletariat” had now become the “Entire State of People”.

      His reasoning was that everyone in the country reasoned like communists now, therefore there were no longer class contradictions (which would be communism), so it was okay to just let everyone into the communist party. Much like Stalin’s, “contradictions don’t come from within our system, only from outside,” except more naive and less paranoid.

      I recommend reading, “Socialism Betrayed,” for a good breakdown of why Khrushchev is considered a revisionist. Fantastic book overall.

      • archive_botOPB
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        u/ScienceSleep99 - originally from r/GenZhou
        I am reading it now and just on the first chapter on the two theoretical camps, I am thinking wow the revisionist camp reads a lot like Dengism. But does that have to be seen as a terrible thing?

        • archive_botOPB
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          u/blizzsyn - originally from r/GenZhou
          The problem isn’t with the actions folks like Bukharin, and Khrushchev took by themselves, though they caused issues. As Lenin showed with the NEP to build up productive forces, using markets can be incredibly useful, when done in a controlled manner.

          The problem is when it becomes the end goal, and starts shifting more toward “Social Democracy”/“Market Socialism”.

          • archive_botOPB
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            u/ScienceSleep99 - originally from r/GenZhou
            I completely agree, and I think we should drop this insistence that what Deng did was to restore capitalism. It was to do as you said, to use markets as a tool, in a controlled manner to build up productive forces.

            But I do think that China almost lost the line in the 90s and there was a shift more toward social democracy until maybe the period of Hu Jintao.

            Xi’s faction is now putting the course back on track in my opinion, but he has a lot to contend with, especially a new capitalist class and it’s corrupt backers in the state.

            How can things fully go back without another sort of “cultural revolution”?

            • archive_botOPB
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              u/blizzsyn - originally from r/GenZhou

              How can things fully go back without another sort of “cultural revolution”?

              ain’t that the million-dollar question?