Learning and critique are the same thing. If you look at China and go “this is perfect in every way and we should copy it,” then you aren’t actually learning anything at all. In my experience MLs don’t get angry with anarchists and others critical of China because they don’t learn from Chinese socialism, but because they don’t like the conclusions they’ve made.
No ML makes the point that China is perfect, nor that we should copy it. Perfection is an impossibility, and China’s model of socialism is the socialism suited to China, not to be dogmatically copied. Every country will have their own socialist construction process suited to their own conditions, China being highly agrarian at the time of its revolution has had a dramatic impact on how it has pursued socialism.
I’m responding to the meme which presents learning and critique as separate and mutually exclusive. In order to learn from something you have to critique it, and if you believe that China is not perfect then you know this and should agree with me.
There’s also another thing you’re doing that I see MLs do all the time, which is posit that Chinese socialism is uniquely suited to China and that it must be implemented differently in other places. While I do agree that this is the case, I often see MLs use this argument to excuse flaws in the implementation of socialism in China as necessary alterations required due to the particular conditions and historical circumstances in which it was created.
IMO there were many wrong turns and mistakes that China made in its socialist transition that have had lasting negative consequences, and though they can often be explained by China’s particular conditions and historical circumstances, that doesn’t excuse them.
The point of the meme is that critique is easy, learning is hard. It doesn’t pit the two against each other, it says westerners have one without the other. Further, I’d say genuine critique that allows for learning is much harder than any critique, which can be low-effort.
As for the vague aspects you listed at the end, I can’t really respond without specifics. Nobody has ever said China has never made a mistake in the construction of socialism, but if you aren’t going to give an example of what you consider to be negative and avoidable lasting ramifications that MLs sideline as necessary, then there’s nothing for me to add other than I don’t see this. All that leaves is a perspective difference on the same topics, most likely.
If you look at China and go “this is perfect in every way and we should copy it,” then you aren’t actually learning anything at all
MLs do not hold this view. China isn’t perfect, and copying their model completely wouldn’t work at all. The Soviet Union, China, and the DPRK all use different models of socialism.
I have met MLs (not on lemmy) who tout the DPRK as a utopia and shut down all of my criticism as western brainwashing.
Again, MLs don’t hold the view that the Soviet Union, China, the DPRK, Cuba, Vietnam, or any socialist country is perfect. Here’s an example of criticisms brought against Stalin (thanks Dessalines for compiling an excellent resource list). We absolutely do critique past and present failures and contradictions and try to do better.
Learning and critique are the same thing. If you look at China and go “this is perfect in every way and we should copy it,” then you aren’t actually learning anything at all. In my experience MLs don’t get angry with anarchists and others critical of China because they don’t learn from Chinese socialism, but because they don’t like the conclusions they’ve made.
No ML makes the point that China is perfect, nor that we should copy it. Perfection is an impossibility, and China’s model of socialism is the socialism suited to China, not to be dogmatically copied. Every country will have their own socialist construction process suited to their own conditions, China being highly agrarian at the time of its revolution has had a dramatic impact on how it has pursued socialism.
I’m responding to the meme which presents learning and critique as separate and mutually exclusive. In order to learn from something you have to critique it, and if you believe that China is not perfect then you know this and should agree with me.
There’s also another thing you’re doing that I see MLs do all the time, which is posit that Chinese socialism is uniquely suited to China and that it must be implemented differently in other places. While I do agree that this is the case, I often see MLs use this argument to excuse flaws in the implementation of socialism in China as necessary alterations required due to the particular conditions and historical circumstances in which it was created.
IMO there were many wrong turns and mistakes that China made in its socialist transition that have had lasting negative consequences, and though they can often be explained by China’s particular conditions and historical circumstances, that doesn’t excuse them.
The point of the meme is that critique is easy, learning is hard. It doesn’t pit the two against each other, it says westerners have one without the other. Further, I’d say genuine critique that allows for learning is much harder than any critique, which can be low-effort.
As for the vague aspects you listed at the end, I can’t really respond without specifics. Nobody has ever said China has never made a mistake in the construction of socialism, but if you aren’t going to give an example of what you consider to be negative and avoidable lasting ramifications that MLs sideline as necessary, then there’s nothing for me to add other than I don’t see this. All that leaves is a perspective difference on the same topics, most likely.
MLs do not hold this view. China isn’t perfect, and copying their model completely wouldn’t work at all. The Soviet Union, China, and the DPRK all use different models of socialism.
You say this, but I have met MLs (not on lemmy) who tout the DPRK as a utopia and shut down all of my criticism as western brainwashing.
I feel both our perspectives are anecdotal and the real answer lies between our observations.
I haven’t seen anyone claim the DPRK is a utopia, just an existing socialist country with its own struggles.
Again, MLs don’t hold the view that the Soviet Union, China, the DPRK, Cuba, Vietnam, or any socialist country is perfect. Here’s an example of criticisms brought against Stalin (thanks Dessalines for compiling an excellent resource list). We absolutely do critique past and present failures and contradictions and try to do better.
Care to share some examples?
But you’re talking to MLs right now…