Comments by "GuyWhoLikesTheSnarkies14" (@guywholikesthesnarkies1435) on "Hakim" channel.

  1. 556
  2. 181
  3. 165
  4. 145
  5. 103
  6. 94
  7. 82
  8. 78
  9. 76
  10. 72
  11. 56
  12.  @selaangel6225  Socialism isn't a fixed definition, it doesn't mean perfection or some romanticized idea of a supposed persistent model of governance and guiding ideas/principles that allows a country to steadily develop itself into a better version of itself. Ppl should stop romanticizing the Soviet model too much because it's far from perfect either. China, for all of its ups-and-downs and imperfection, will always be a socialist country no matter what. Being in the primary stage of development means you have to embrace mistakes, flaws and errors. Like I said in my previous argument, China doesn't "mix up" socialism and capitalism. It's still in the primary stage of socialist development and thus, *hasn't* progressed and moved away completely or substantially from capitalist mode of production just yet. And since it's embracing the scientific path of socialist development, on the basis of Lenin's NEP model that's being continued upon and gradually developed and adapted to the ever-changing material condition throughout times, the result is inevitably slow and gradual. Also, I don't agree w. your assertion on China which seems to be based on skewed, distorted and misrepresented information of the country. "After the pandemic, China's economy has hit the bust" This is just an utter bs and I don't think you really understand the ramification of the things that you just said there. We're assuming a scenario that's gonna have an implication on serious domino effect and impacts to the surrounding regional economy (speaking as a resident from SEA myself) and ultimately, the rest of the world. So you better cross check your information again and don't conflate economic contraction in the past few years to a major crisis. I'm not even going into detail w. worker condition because this is such a grey area where information could easily be distorted and/or misrepresented. All I'm gonna say is there's *no* such thing as a "996" work culture except that it's a deliberate media exaggeration/manipulation to the real situation on the ground. Working condition in China's continually improving but nothing in this world is perfect. There'll always be oversights and loopholes to be exploited by corporate elements on every moment from now, then and to come. Also, this whole "996" mostly refers to the controversial remark made by Jack Ma, which somehow linked to a series of separate incidents of workers in *service sectors* who died from crunch. This had long been addressed and solved, and resulted in a government push to reduce work hours for service job workers. Only the most ardent anti-China libs or online "Maoist" would be so hellbent to bring this up to the news. And as for the concern over the supposed increase in "unemployment" (but primarily among the youths), it's not what you and many ppl think it is because y'all miss the key important contexts. First of all, China's currently transforming its economy from developing into a developed one. Means that China's raising its supply chain standard to the higher level based on cutting edge IoT management and advanced hi-tech manufacturing. Therefore it's seeing change in working dynamics where manufacturing's becoming more streamlined and efficient alongside increase in IT-based/oriented job. What's happening in China's overabundance of productive force that doesn't keep quiet in pace w. the rapid development of advance manufacturing, particularly in the developed metro regions of Chinese, leading to some layoffs of workers in several cases. Wrt this issue, the Chinese govt. has been actively working to address this issue through several policy measures. Among them is the mobilization of productive forces to work on the auxiliary manufacturing & service sectors scattered throughout the smaller cities & town across the rural side of China. But this requires many workers to be retrained and reoriented for the new job environment, resulting in a slow process. And secondly, the supposed "high unemployment" figure only refers to a specific phenomenon among the Chinese youth demographic, which is about +20% of total Chinese youths *eligible for works* between age 18-29. Means that these +20% could be "unemployed" for various reasons incl. required to take post-grad study at their university respectively. Moreover, anybody insisted that China has always been loomed w. "unemployment problems" better have a good explanation over some randomly picked small remote modern town in China and how come it's getting well-built and populated in the first place https://youtu.be/eUN2nEN5KuQ All in all, there's simply no denying that China is still and will always be a socialist country. Its contribution and positive impacts to the global economy and geopolitics is nonetheless a significant one.
    43
  13. 35
  14. 34
  15. 31
  16. 31
  17. 29
  18. 29
  19. 27
  20. 25
  21. 22
  22. 21
  23. This is why China's BRI is a league apart of Western extractive multinational corporation deal through IMF leverage. Sure, China's enterprises coming over to open business, for example in Africa, might be perceived to bear some neocolonial subtext. But here's the major differences with Western scheme: China also come to help Africa, Sub-Saharan countries in this particular, to develop their crucial infrastructures e.g. transportation, industry, healthcare, education etc etc. all things necessary to support their economy and material development. On top of that, Chinese loan terms tend to be much favorable with not only extended repayment due date but also moratorium and additionally, Chinese BRI also includes a debt restructuring program where China would help writing off debts possessed by these countries, usually owed to the Western financial companies incl. IMF debts. All these without additional strings attached. Even when these countries are supposedly getting indebted toward China in turn, but another reality behind this is that Chinese firms often have the tendency to delay/intentionally refuse to ask for repayment from the debtors, despite overtime. This is only possible because of China's pure intent to cooperate with these countries through a B2B scheme and therefore, these BRI projects are more being seen as a form of long-term investment and China has no reason to immediately demand return of profit unless it has created the desired growth and development effects. Edit: added missing context. Also, I kept fixing some grammatical errors. English isn't my 1st language😅
    16
  24. 13
  25. 12
  26. 12
  27. 11
  28. 11
  29. 10
  30. 10
  31. 9
  32. 9
  33. 8
  34. 7
  35. 7
  36. 7
  37. 7
  38. 6
  39. 6
  40. 6
  41. 6
  42. 6
  43. 6
  44. 5
  45. 5
  46. 5
  47. 5
  48. 4
  49. 4
  50. 4
  51. 4
  52. 4
  53.  @pequenoperezoso3743  The NEP of the Soviet Union under Lenin is effectively a mixed economic policy in practice, one can't just take a strict doctrinal interpretation of ML and just goes along w. a narrow understanding of what "socialism" is. NEP in its implementation has always been intended as a workaround to the capitalist mode. Where the existing Marxist economic theory and ideas were applied to address and solve the contradictions of capitalism in a more practical and methodical way, rather than a radical approach to "abolish law of value" altogether. Even the latter "collectivization" policy of Stalin is arguably a form of state monopoly capitalism in itself (just as Lenin intended), albeit an experimental one where the intent is to streamline and concentrate the market and its mechanism into a central command. Private and foreign enterprises still existed in place, but the State (the Party) simply has way more direct leverage into the economic analysis, planning and decision making. Thus, effectively making the domestic private entities a part of the State economy in practice, as well as forcing foreign companies to abide by the State's policies and rules. If you somehow didn't notice it already from my previous argument in response to Op above, the role of local govts/party branch and SOEs coordinating together to foster the development and growth of the domestic sectors of the national economy, alongside the Central Govt. policy to force "competing" foreign business entities to operate through joint ventures w. domestic ones. Those essentially serve the same purpose as the Soviet's centrally-planned "Collectivization", albeit differently oriented and w/out the burdensome rigid central planning process. The role of the Central Govt./CPC, therefore will be prioritized more on the core Marxist theoretical teaching, orientation and application to their own cadres. And in turn, the role of the rest of the 98 millions of CPC cadres is to supervise, coordinate, advise and discipline the relevant local govt. organs and entities e.g. local enterprises, institutions, other forms of NGOs and grasroot movements/initiatives. Rather than having to rigidly follow the direct central plan, instruction and order from the government. Because it's more important to foster self-discipline and responsibility among them, in place of the relative bureaucratic independence due to the decentralized nature of the governance. A central planning and supervising mechanism remains in place, albeit it's made simplified and efficient thanks to the integration of technology and the IoT network system into the bureaucracy. And thus, allowing for a necessary degree of self-governance and independent decision making among regional and local level governments while also greatly reducing the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of a rigid centralized framework of governance and economic decision-making. And last but not least, I highly suggest you read (or re-read) my lengthy direct response to Op's reply earlier on in order to understand my point here.
    4
  54. 4
  55. 4
  56. 3
  57. 3
  58. 3
  59. 3
  60. 3
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1