• TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Not off the top of my head, no, but my point is that the principles themselves were not Marxist nor Communist

    So, just a vibe check then?

    In what manner? Vibes?

    Lol, in the same way as the Khmer Rouge…you never extrapolated how they were feudal to begin with.

    Mao was not a deinustrialist, nor was he a nationalist. Yes, different forms of revolution are required, but intentionally setting the clock on progress backwards, rather than forwards, is inherently a reactionary position, which became self admitted!

    First of all, I don’t think anyone can rightly claim Mao wasn’t a nationalist. He was an ardent anti imperialist and he wasn’t an ethno-nationalist, but still a nationalist at heart. Secondly progress is relative to the revolution, Cambodia prior to the revolution was for the most part dependent on substance farming. Adapting a centralized apparatus to control the economy is still progress.

    but he was never operating under Marxist principles. At most, he took inspiration from the Chinese revolution with regards to the agrarian focus, but instead focused on deindustrialization and nationalism.

    They didn’t deindustrialze, they were never industrialized to begin with.

    More vibes.

    Hilarious considering your arguments have been completely vibe based. Even when I ask you specify your claims… Nope just vibes.