Read the community sidebar before posting anything. All top-level comments (i.e. non-replies) in this thread must be questions. You can also make your own posts in this community if you have more complex questions.
Some marxists say that Xi Jinping is a billionaire so China isn’t really socialist because it’s not a dictatorship of the proletariat. How to object to this?
EDIT: not billionaire but millionaire
AFAIK the whole ‘Xi Jinping is a billionare’ is cause Western publications count state assets as Xi’s, lol.
I’d first ask them how they got to that conclusion. No doubt he holds some wealth but billions is way out there. Hell, the man earns around 22k dollars a year.
Remember, it’s not always up to you to refute bullshit. First, people have to back up their bullshit to do that.
Remember, it’s not always up to you to refute bullshit.
Unfortunately, I don’t think this is correct in the context of talking to people about socialism. It’s not a formal debate; it’s persuasion and rhetoric. Pointing out that they didn’t source anything can help, but it’s rarely enough to get anyone to change their mind.
The bar is higher for us because we are swimming against the current of a century of anti-communist propaganda.
Asking sincerely “where did you hear that” can sometimes get people to realise that they are just repeating a myth though, it should never be “I bet you can’t source that :smuglord:” but instead a “let’s go through and examine this claim together”. People get defensive when they feel they or their ideas are being attacked, but framing it as a “let’s explore and learn together” has a lot more success than “You’re wrong about that.” which will almost always be interpreted negatively, treated as a personal attack.
This might be a good resource https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/
Being rich doesn’t mean you’re bourgeois.
Not a popular opinion in ML spaces, but it’s true.
It’s your relationship to the means of production and how much control you have over it.
China is also a democracy and has extensive worker control, even in the private sector (which is curtailed in favor of the workers, though there are obviously some issues in a transitory state).
Are there any books that analyze Abrahamic religions and their history from a Marxist standpoint?
This book is a political economy textbook published by the academy of science of the USSR. It’s not really a book about religions in and of itself but it do talk about how the different mods of production shaped the development of religion and spirituality.
And in general it’s a great text on marxist political economy, I think everyone should read it.
What’s the name of the book comrade? It seems the link has expired.
type “POLITICAL ECONOMY A Textbook issued by the Economics Institute of the Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R” on anna’s archive and you should find it.
link: https://annas-archive.org/md5/700da50a0222a1508e8244d4050325db
You might want to look into Roland Boer.
One book that I read that answered a similar question to yours is this one: https://archive.org/details/socialismandreligionanessay/page/n3/mode/2up?view=theater Socialism and Religion by Archibald Robertson
What are your thoughts on organization dues with in potential vanguard parties? – how these dues might be limiting organizational abilities? Does the concept of dues from the proletariat, intrinsically against the mass line approach? I’m firm believer in the mass line approach wherein you need to be organizing the most disenfranchised members of the class society first. If you have to pay $100, $200 in dues every month to an organization is that not negatively impacting our ability to recruit members into an organization? If one can afford $100 a month in additional bills that puts you above a certain amount of people.
Furthermore, doesn’t this method of funding just reproduce the same hierarchy as the systems we intend to dismantle? Many of these organizations have had the same leadership for a decade+, are we funding a vanguard party? – or a vanity effort to get a select group of people elected?
Finally, the idea that the working class members should pay dues to the party, it almost seems like it should be the opposite. It seems like the party should be providing some kind of stipend to its members so that they can be more effectively organizing while reducing the struggles of capitalism. If you’re already struggling day-to-day with capitalism, and then you’re also asked to give another extra $100 on top of that, well now you suddenly have to go, well, do I give my money to the party or do I afford my dog food for the month? Is this counterintuitive to organizing the working class? What are your thoughts?
Good question. Our party actually works this way. You can become a member for I think 20 euro a year. Then you can become an active member and join a local action group and you will pay something like 5 euro each month. Last, you can become a militant member. You can get education on marxisme through the party and some other extra’s.
Militant members have to give up their pay slips to the party. They will calculate how much you are above the income cap they have set (around 1900 net). You have to give up an amount above that pay and give it to the party. You can choose yourself how much you want to give but I believe they’d actually prefer you give it all. The funding should go to the party and their efforts to organize. Our elected officials do this too. They get paid 11k a month but give most of it to the party to remain an average salary.
Now, I have been thinking about this for a while too. They asked me to become a militant member because they saw potential in me. After a long thought I declined. My salary is above the line but I didn’t feel comfortable donating the extra money I make. I wouldn’t be able to justify it towards my gf and honestly not even towards myself either. I already do a lot of things for the party, from organizing actions to making new members to writing the party program. Life is expensive as it is. A little bit of extra financial security is giving me a lot of mental wellbeing causing me to be able to put in effort for the party.
I think it’s a difficult balance. Our party never reached any position of power for decades. Only since 2019 we have been in Parliament for example. Getting elected in Parliament gave us a budget increase of several millions. Before that our funds had to come from members. Without funds it will be difficult to organize. That’s unfortunately the sad reality of today. I think you do need ways to get the people without the funds and get them to co-operate without paying membership fees. Preferably have the other, more affluent members pay for them.
Very informative response, thank you. Gotta have cash to work towards abolishing cash I suppose.
Why are the dues $100?
Just a number I used for this
How does Christianity influenced the defeatist ideology behind the Western leftist? Also, quick question, what does cracker mean? (I am assuming it meant white/western liberal or soon to be fascist)
deleted by creator
Cracker is a prejorative for white people.
Removed by mod
Why was this comment deleted?
There’s a modlog.
What does it show?
Removed by mod
This thread is for serous posting only, please read the rules.
Oh my bad.
If anyone has questions about the labor movement or communist history in the United States, ask me, and I can definitely answer.
It’s something of a specialty of mine.
Comrade, all top comments should be questions.
Oh, alright. Now I see why my previous comments were deleted.
