Ladakh Flash Point

[Richard Santos]

Communism is a Marxist fantasy land wherein "to each according to their need, each according to their ability" is realized and resources are wholly shared. No "Communist" country has claimed to be truly Communist, since in their own ideology Communism is a goal and Socialism is a reality.

Marxism regards capitalism as a necessary and inevitable step to human progress to the ultimate end point of human societal development, which he believe to be communism. Marx also regarded fully developed capitalism to represent natural progress over previous stages of human development.

But most nominal communists believes capitalism has already largely run its course and the time for what Marxist consider to be the natural next step to socialism is at hand. So capitalism should be overthrown ASAP to bring about socialism.

For Marxism to hold any theoretical persuasive power, one must buy into Marx’s view that not only is human progress inevitably linear and predicable, the steps and their sequence as he outlined them must also be correct.

China essentially went backwards, and said the real progress from a fuller form of socialism it practiced before is a diminished form of socialism adulterated by a very large dose of capitalism.

China in effect said the correct form of Marxism is the exact opposite of Marxism understood by nominal communist.

 

[coolieno99]

Lol accusing others of lying while starting off with a blatant lie.

They are better at scamming, then lying. Call center scamming is not some small time criminal operations in India. It's an industry in India. Countless victims fall prey to these scammers losing hundreds, and even thousands of dollars. Most of the victims reside in Anglo countries like U.S. , UK and Canada. Fortunately they don't victimize Chinese people because the scammers are unable to speak Chinese.

 

[Inst]

Marxism regards capitalism as a necessary and inevitable step to human progress to the ultimate end point of human societal development, which he believe to be communism. Marx also regarded fully developed capitalism to represent natural progress over previous stages of human development.

But most nominal communists believes capitalism has already largely run its course and the time for what Marxist consider to be the natural next step to socialism is at hand. So capitalism should be overthrown ASAP to bring about socialism.

For Marxism to hold any theoretical persuasive power, one must buy into Marx’s view that not only is human progress inevitably linear and predicable, the steps and their sequence as he outlined them must also be correct.

China essentially went backwards, and said the real progress from a fuller form of socialism it practiced before is a diminished form of socialism adulterated by a very large dose of capitalism.

China in effect said the correct form of Marxism is the exact opposite of Marxism understood by nominal communist.

In reality, pure capitalisms do not exist, except perhaps in Somalia. Most states are some form of mixed economy. The United States has a safety net mixed economy where there are some provisions to bail people out who get completely hosed by capitalism. Some European countries have a more active form of mixed economy wherein the state actively intervenes to guarantee better outcomes for losers. China, on the other hand, is still technically a socialist state, with a vast SOE sector (much of which is publicly listed) alongside a private sector that provides a large amount of employment.

===

As for myself, Marx's mode of analysis is often useful (creating classes or groups and analyzing things in terms of classes or groups, trying to determine the course of events through economic bases). The fundamental assumptions, however, that human societies will progress further or linearly (the Agricultural Revolution that started proper civilization was a disaster in terms of human outcomes) are flawed.

===

Regarding China, the large SOE sector as well as its growth in the aftermath of the GFC means that revised socialism (i.e, with market elements imposing market discipline) can work. However, it does need further adjustment (i.e, the state moves more toward a financial role as opposed to a managerial role in SOEs). Tellingly, according to Richard McGregor's book on Chinese SOEs, the SOE sector actually pays around 10% of Chinese government revenues, and this was before Xi asked the SOE sector to cut perks and increase dividends. This actually is good for the private sector in that it allows the Chinese state to impose lower taxes than it would have had to do otherwise. Finance socialism is thus potentially an actually workable social model in that the SOE sector, which delivers profits, is effectively used to subsidize the private sector, which delivers innovation.

 

[siegecrossbow]

This is not a Marxism/Communism thread. Please get back on topic!

 

[coolieno99]

tallgamer said:
India needs to test some tactical nuclear weapons. Its a much cheaper alternative to conventional arms. And shelve the no first use policy. Unnecessarily tying up our hands.
Using nukes in face of conventional attacks is a well established practice in western Europe and in our neighborhood.

I don't think that's a good idea.

Comparison of most powerful nukes between China and India:

India most powerful tested nuke(not weaponized): 45 Kt (equivalent to 2 Hiroshima bombs). Partial failure because of incomplete burn of heavy hydrogen.

China most powerful tested nuke(weaponized): 3 Mt (equivalent to 150 Hiroshima bombs)

Naturally occurring Uranium ore is scarce in India, But it has plenty of Thorium. Thorium bomb makes poor nuclear weapon - yield about 1/2 Kt.
China's largest Uranium mine is reserved for military use only.

 

[Inst]

tallgamer said:
India needs to test some tactical nuclear weapons. Its a much cheaper alternative to conventional arms. And shelve the no first use policy. Unnecessarily tying up our hands.
Using nukes in face of conventional attacks is a well established practice in western Europe and in our neighborhood.

I don't think that's a good idea.

Comparison of most powerful nukes between China and India:

India most powerful tested nuke(not weaponized): 45 Kt (equivalent to 2 Hiroshima bombs). Partial failure because of incomplete burn of heavy hydrogen.

China most powerful tested nuke(weaponized): 3 Mt (equivalent to 150 Hiroshima bombs)

Naturally occurring Uranium ore is scarce in India, But it has plenty of Thorium. Thorium bomb makes poor nuclear weapon - yield about 1/2 Kt.
China's largest Uranium mine is reserved for military use only.

The reason both China and India have NFU is actually to permit aggression. With a NFU-pledge, regional conflicts become much more viable because the parties involved know that the other side won't escalate first.

Indians won't admit that, like the United States, European powers, and China, India is in fact an expansionistic power. Without NFU, India can't really attempt to expand because the neighbors will run into someone else's nuclear umbrella and military force of arms becomes unviable due to the prospect of nuclear exchanges.

 

[jfy1155]

tallgamer said:
India needs to test some tactical nuclear weapons. Its a much cheaper alternative to conventional arms. And shelve the no first use policy. Unnecessarily tying up our hands.
Using nukes in face of conventional attacks is a well established practice in western Europe and in our neighborhood.

I don't think that's a good idea.

Comparison of most powerful nukes between China and India:

India most powerful tested nuke(not weaponized): 45 Kt (equivalent to 2 Hiroshima bombs). Partial failure because of incomplete burn of heavy hydrogen.

China most powerful tested nuke(weaponized): 3 Mt (equivalent to 150 Hiroshima bombs)

Naturally occurring Uranium ore is scarce in India, But it has plenty of Thorium. Thorium bomb makes poor nuclear weapon - yield about 1/2 Kt.
China's largest Uranium mine is reserved for military use only.

Please educate our Indian guest about the nuclear delivery capability.

China is able to put 10-12 warheads in an ICBM while India can only carry a single warhead.

 

[Nobaron]

If you go by the purely Marxist definition, there are no communist countries.

If you go by purely democratic definition, there are no democratic countries either.
The word vote was never mentioned in definition of democracy given by the one who invented it
But no other political system has ever turned a country into a marketing stunt or circus as democracy has done

 

[natnairda68]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1418517044228616193

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1417838266896748544

Keep on dreaming. Lay off your filthy hands. Mount Kailash will always be part of China. Be grateful China still allows your citizens to conduct pilgrimage at Mount Kailash.

 

[ougoah]

India has 120 estimated nuke warheads.
India also has a per capita income of 2000 usd while China has around 10k .
Also lots of fancy cities in china and massive dams.
Who has more to lose ? India or China.
After the first few nuclear missiles hitting china , the communist government will be pleading for peace.
The point is the nuclear weapons should not be for adornment. They should form a central part of Indian defence.

Indeed China has more to lose in an all out nuclear exchange.

That is insanity though. India will not use nuclear hostage option. No one has in the past used this. Particularly with relatively small nuclear stockpile, low means of delivery, lower yield warheads, and just as much to lose i.e. everything. India threatening to use nukes on China for the two nations border disputes is like a person threatening to murder the entire office staff because someone used their pen.

India does not have a monopoly on violence or depravity. Violence and hate beget the like.

China would be utterly stupid to consider threatening the US with nukes if they don't get their way about all matters. It doesn't happen. It doesn't even get mentioned by higher ups because it is downright insanity. Not even a Trump character would initiate that line of threat. When trashtalking with an equally unstable man - KJU (we assume since all we hear is from western media) then yeah they talk a lot of nonsense and backhanded remarks but serious countries don't even mention this stuff officially because there is no need to. If you resort to nukes, you have lost and will be receive nukes too let's not forget.