(A long thread)
I argue (in "C,A") that the key global historical role of communism was the transformation of (some) colonized & "backward" societies into (i) "modern" and (ii) independent capitalist nations.
I argue (in "C,A") that the key global historical role of communism was the transformation of (some) colonized & "backward" societies into (i) "modern" and (ii) independent capitalist nations.
In that interpretation, communism created autochthonous national capitalisms, and its role was similar to the role played by the bourgeoisie in the more developed West.
Another implication of that point of view is centrality of China. The Russian revolution is seen merely as the "enabler" of transmission of Marxism to the Third World. Lenin's decision to conflate workers' movements with anti-imperialism was thus of primary importance.
Without his decision to move beyond the narrow Marxist Western Path of Development (WPD), there would not have been broad anti-colonialist coalitions that liberated colonized countries.
Were Western powers more successful in spreading capitalist relations of production in colonized countries (as Marx thought) there would not been a role for communist parties to do it themselves.
In other words, Marx overestimated the transformational power of Western capitalism
In other words, Marx overestimated the transformational power of Western capitalism
So, today's rise of China is built historically on (i) the weakness (or cupidity) of Western powers that managed to create capitalist entrepot economies but not to move to the hinterland, and (ii) the creation of a national liberation movement led by communists.
