jsf:There is no splitting of hairs when comparing Leninist Marxists
with Marxists who are anti-Lenin.Marxists of various stripes share
some common dogma. But there can be vast differences between them.Business people of various stripes share the belief in their right to
"private property".The owner of a slave market in 1840 South
Carolina is totally committed to his right to "private property". His
customers also share his commitment.Abolitionist business people
also share their belief to their right to "private property". The
dogma of "private property" has its limits. Marxists and
business people have some common dogma among themselves. But there can can be
vast differences among each group.
America, and China are switching on religion.
OD: I think you split hairs. Each of the tyrants and dictators has offered
their own version of Marxism. But in the end they all have reverted to what
you call the Leninist model. Marx and Engels both said the institution of
Communism by revolution , is the ultimate result of and goal of Socialism.
The concept of Marxism by any other name still ends with the
elimination of classes usually through violent means. "The
Workers Party in America is a workers’ political organization dedicated to
the defeat of capitalism and capitalist rule, and the establishment of a
workers’ republic as the first step to the achievement of the communist
society." We seek to be the political leadership of the
proletarian movement."In the end of Marxism there are left two
classes, the proletariat, the lower class, and the Central Committees and their
party controllers. What does Marxism provide? Nothing to the
proletariat and death if they object. Venezuela is currently a good example of
how Marxism goes wrong. Now comes the elimination of opposing proletariats to
the dictatorial ruling class.
China was quite advanced, even a world power centuries ago, and it wasn't
communism and Mao that provided their prominence.
jsf:I agree with about 90 percent of your post at 10:03 a.m.However, there is one very important error in your post. If you had
used the term of Marxist-Leninist, then I believe you would have been about 100
percent correct.There are many varieties of Marxists. There are
also many anti-Leninist-Marxists.It is the Leninist interpretation
and application of Marxism that has killed 10s of millions of human beings.
"But what would China be like absent Mao?" 40 to seventy million people
stronger. Regarding Mao, "whose rule is estimated to have
contributed to the deaths of 40 to 70 million people through starvation, forced
labour and executions, ranking his tenure as the top incidence of democide in
human history." What was one of those things that would get you killed under
Mao's regime, religion. This is the goal of all Communists
(Marxists political ideology) in the world. It has been estimated by a Marxist
(political adherent) here in the US that for Marxists (political ideology) to be
successful in changing the US to their way of government, 25% of the population
would need to be eliminated. That is about 80 million. Can any
Marxist please give us an accounting of the number of people killed under the
regimes of Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung and his son and grandson, Ho Chi
Minh, Fidel Castro and Ernesto Guevara. All Marxists (political ideology).
I don't agree with marxist at all, but it wasn't just population that
made them a global power... or else India would've been right behind China.
Mao's communism did allow the country to be more ready than India to take
on their version of a state-owned capitalist/socialist country that they are
now, but there's no saying what would've happened if Mao never
existed.... probably China, as we know it, would've been divided into
multiple countries and there's no knowing what would've succeeded from
there.... What we do know, is right now, an alarming amount of US
dollars are funneled through China... so much so, that Hong Kong and other
countries with a large population of Chinese nationals (Singapore, Malaysia,
Thailand, etc...) have no way of controlling the laundering of US funds like we
do here in the U.S., resulting in so much corruption of foreign
"investments" that we truly are becoming "Chimerica"...
connected at the hip.In sum, both of you are speaking a lot of
truth, but neither is telling the whole story....
The surge in China came when capitalism and private property rights were
permitted. Under Mao the country was very poor though with over 1 billion
people some things can change. 40 countries have had communism and it
doesn't work. This was a wonderful article. Maybe one day Mormon Elders
will be allowed, but the Church will not send them without the permission of
"Yes, it's true. There are more Bibles printed in China than anywhere
else!"--See 10:21 p.m.Most are probably for export and not for
internal consumption??"Mao... industrialized China."After the twin tragedies of the "Great Leap Forward" and the
"Cultural Revolution", China was in ruins."I don't
approve of much of Mao's program, but he did reestablish China as a global
power."Take "Mao" out of the above sentence and
substitute "Joseph Stalin".Also when Mao died it was only
China's population that made China a global power".
As in all things, it's only a matter of time.
I'm interested to see what will happen. I think as China's people
gradually taste freedom a little bit at a time, their government will slowly
continue to creep toward republicanism and democracy. As that happens, religion
will continue to grow and reestablish a foothold among the Chinese people. I
wouldn't be surprised to see native Taiwanese and Hong Kong members of the
Church called to serve missions in mainland China inside of my lifetime.
Yes, it's true. There are more Bibles printed in China than anywhere
else!This is fine. But what would China be like absent Mao? Before
Mao China had been a doormat for the world for centuries. Mao threw the
foreigners out and industrialized China. I don't approve of much of
Mao's program, but he did reestablish China as a global power.Those curious about China today may want to watch Niall Ferguson's
"Ascent of Money." Today China and the U.S. are so tightly interlinked
as to be virtually one country - "Chimerica" as defined by Ferguson.