geikei [none/use name]

Also its beyond meaningless when you consider that at most idk 3% of the population of Xinjiang and 1% in Tibet is considering themselves to be occupied by China and are remotely likely to participate or aid in an armed struggle against the CPC, even at the best possible conditions

Like sure, Tibetians have a right to engage in an armed anti-colonial struggle or kickstart an indeginous liberation movement ok. You probably couldnt even fill an NBA stadium with those willing so what does that leave their lib free Tibet dreams. The CIA was trying to recruit and instigate an anti-chinese sessesionist movement last century and they gave up because they couldnt find enough willing Tibetians to get the project off the ground. And they had a budget of dozens and dozens of millions to pay off poor ass Tibetians and they still couldnt find any fertile sessesionist sentiment. And thats on record

The USSR from the early 70s until its collapse basicaly held a pro-palestine 2 state solution position. WHat makes you think even if they survived they would have had a noticably better position than China’s

People who were not Chinese got the same progress like the Chinese did at different speeds (earlier or later).

Those who did either did it on the back of the rest of the world and by plundering and colonizing billions (west and western protectorates) with China still managed to catch up with that in half a century or they just havent yet and wont in the forseeable future (most of the third world) and their progress marely amounts to the most generalized side effects of world wide medical and tech progress. China is bringing to 1.5 billion people the progress, QoL and modernity the former group achieved (and then some) without colonizing, imperializing or impovershing any other nation or people and in 1/5th of the time.No one else did that, no one else is doing that. Other than you know, the USSR (relative to era)

Nah they just , by some weird twists and turns and historical context, have arived in basicaly an ultra left/maoist/heavy leftcom analysis of a bunch of international issues including China. Extremely weird cause they are equaly anti-maoist/ anti-leftcom. It just some brainworms thats very hard to explain. The party still has more positives and wins to show than almost any other communist party in the west in modern times , which of course doesnt say much. If it was run by sellouts they had plenty chances to go eurocommunist through the decades

KKE is probably the most CIA/spook proof communist party in the west. Its just that through sheer “antirevisionism”,older leadership and refusal to update their analysis they basicaly have arived at a maoist/leftcom position on China. Also yeah they do suck on lgbt issues (even tho they have very slowly be moving towards less reactionary positions, especially as the youth league and youth vote share grew a bunch) but idk by what standards they keep taking massive Ls. Relative to pretty much every western “communist” party they are doing very good and are probably at their strongest in decades rn. This doesnt say much since most countries dont even have a non irrelevant non socdem communist party with strong grassroots and union organizing, being at the forefront of a lot of the most important class struggle issues in Greece and netting wins. A bunch of the most prominent ones in recent being union struggles against Chinese multinationals that have bought large parts of the port of Piraeus so that may explain some of the China stance too

Chinese socialist revolution before Mao’s leadership is pretty legit. Chen Duxiu, Li Dazhao, are all real socialists, they truely cares about the worker and envisions a better future for China.

So no revolution at all? 95% of the critical mass and anything that can be called a large scale revolution (with organizational successes of the masses) happened in China in the 30s and had little to do with Chen Duxiu and Li Dazhao previous work ,no matter how admirable. The CPC almost died and was built back up multiple times by the time Mao succeeded and Mao was vital in that. You cant get more legit than revolution under Mao. Under probably the worst odds and situation any communist party and revolution had to face they endured, made correct and miraculous choices and political and military manuvers at every turn and won, uplifting and liberating hundreds of millions of peasants and women. No Mao, no successfull revolution in China and no emancipation of the masses. Good luck doing the long march and outmanuvering the KMT from the countryside by amassing immense support with Chen Duxiu’s ideas about the peasantry.

Chen Duxiu, Li Dazhao may have envisioned a better socialist future for China but they were and would have been unable to make it happen. They lacked both the military genius, the correct analysis on the peasantry or the rhetoric and vision of mass politics that Mao had that allowed the CPC to pull through against all odds and win

How would Trotskyism be any less “authoritarian” Than marxism leninism ? Also almost every claims on some level to be “orthodox marxist”, lenin most of all and MLs as well

Maybe because by having a headstart of 2 centuries in industrialization and modernization along with pillaging and imperializing most of the globe for the last century , the US has accumulated a ton of riches and a global cultural hegemony that makes citizens even in a rapidly developing nation like China want to go there , especially for richer western-phile ones for whom America might provide a better living. And of course as i said western cultural hegemony and global media dominance make it seem like the American Dream is still a thing and that the grass is greener at the other side. But still your point ,even without this nuance, is losing steam. Chinese migration numbers to the US has been rapidly falling ,as are Chinese enlistments to US collages and schools, with the number of Chinese people repatriating multiplying over the years and the common feeling being “US kinda sucks after all”

most of them by the time the actual violent clashes happened certainly werent maoists. Yeah there was a significant % of the protestors that were coming from the left of the CPC but you have to remember that the unrest span month(s) and many cities. In Tainanmen by that point in the movement and leading to that the make up of those that stayed and engaged in lynchings and clashes with the PLA and police was solidly “pro-democracy/free-s[peech/liberalism” youth. Also western intelligence focus and assets had already zeroed in in Beijing and those elements after smelling blood from the more organic initial country wide unrest.