CPI (Maoist) has always been a constant threat to legitimate marxist parties such as CPI (Marxist). I read through it, and it’s basically starting off with a false premise. It immediately asserts itself that China is indeed social-imperialist, but doesn’t really explain why until later on. So basically, if this is supposed to be something ‘educational’ or something to learn from, why state your inherent biases from the very start? More so, why do you need to state an axiom although it contradicts dialectics?
They utilise gish galloping techniques, ignore the material conditions regarding China (especially during the Cultural Revolution), and thinks itself as right, and then immediately starts to state that China indeed does fit the 5 characteristics of imperialism, outright ignoring material conditions. Overall, this work is bullshit, and no one should ever look at this as a legitimate way of learning about China.
CPI (Maoist) has always been a constant threat to legitimate marxist parties such as CPI (Marxist). I read through it, and it’s basically starting off with a false premise. It immediately asserts itself that China is indeed social-imperialist, but doesn’t really explain why until later on. So basically, if this is supposed to be something ‘educational’ or something to learn from, why state your inherent biases from the very start? More so, why do you need to state an axiom although it contradicts dialectics?
They utilise gish galloping techniques, ignore the material conditions regarding China (especially during the Cultural Revolution), and thinks itself as right, and then immediately starts to state that China indeed does fit the 5 characteristics of imperialism, outright ignoring material conditions. Overall, this work is bullshit, and no one should ever look at this as a legitimate way of learning about China.