I read this a few years ago and several things jumped out at me as troubling. Primarily defining “risk labor” as a legitimate category of work, allowing for capitalists to be counted as workers.
I generally support China, in that they should resist American Imperialism and are not as repressive as liberal propaganda says, however from a Marxist point of view it’s difficult to read discussions like this happening within the party and conclude China is actually socialist. How is this discussion not simply the logical end of Dengism, an attempt to discredit Mao and his leadership of China after the civil war?
I think we can admit China has flaws, not the flaws most western media calls out, but imperfect none the less. This dismantling of SOEs in favor of western shareholder models is a tragedy. It definitely seems like that discussion was a push by capitalist ambitions to make China more open to foreign investment.
I really don’t like that concept of “risk labor”. It’s not well defined and somehow allows people to extract infinite money from something? Very fishy in my book. Definitely just a justification for entrepreneurs in the CCP. I’d prefer “risk labor” done by some level of democratic decision of where investments and focus of a nations productive forces should go. If someone wants to create some new product or service, argue for it and convince others it’s worth pursuing
I’m glad you agree. I’m not a Marxist-Leninist by the typical usage on the internet, I’m much more of an Open Marxist, and I think actual discussion of China and any other AES’s faults is necessary for a healthy community.
Yeah, Risk Labor as a concept is just simply capitalist apologia, no other way to describe it. I know China was founded on the union of the four classes, including the bourgeoisie, but at this stage allowing any capitalists into the CCP is straight up betrayal.
