Yeah this is how I’ve been talking about it as well. We’ve ended up with regional capitalists who intuit a conflict with international finance capitalists. They’ll throw around the term globalist because they don’t quite understand what classes are, or where they belong. And since economic politics are paralyzed, they instead fight over differences in manners, they fight over how much racism a person is allowed to express verbally.
One of the central claims of Mao Zedong thought is that regional capitalists are not necessarily antagonistic to the working class if a socialist revolution is occuring. I have to wonder how that would play out in the USA, because our domestic capitalists are by and large the most reactionary contingent of the country. And they’re not satisfied being personally reactionary, they’re the ones funding things like PragerU, or the Daily Wire, or whatever other fascist rag. They’re actually organized and have goals against the working class. I really do wonder what Mao would have done with these jetski dealership owners, or these Texan oil shit heads
Mao believed the national bourgeoisie could collaborate with the other classes of China because of the particular historical conditions of China as a country that had been exploited by western imperialism. In other words the primary contradiction was (is still, I’d say, until US led capitalist bloc is no longer a global menace to the third world and socialism) imperialism, and the national bourgeois has a part to play in combating it. Once that contradiction is resolved, the primary contradiction in is likely to be the bourgeois v proletariat class struggle, but the good news on that front is that the proletariat via the Communist Party already controls the state and all the power that comes with that. The bourgeoisie are not the ones with their hands on the levers of power.
None of this is applicable to the United States. The US is the imperial superpower, the national bourgeoisie of the US has no progressive historical role to play and is in fact reactionary as you say.
I really do wonder what Mao would have done with these jetski dealership owners, or these Texan oil shit heads
Yeah this is how I’ve been talking about it as well. We’ve ended up with regional capitalists who intuit a conflict with international finance capitalists. They’ll throw around the term globalist because they don’t quite understand what classes are, or where they belong. And since economic politics are paralyzed, they instead fight over differences in manners, they fight over how much racism a person is allowed to express verbally.
One of the central claims of Mao Zedong thought is that regional capitalists are not necessarily antagonistic to the working class if a socialist revolution is occuring. I have to wonder how that would play out in the USA, because our domestic capitalists are by and large the most reactionary contingent of the country. And they’re not satisfied being personally reactionary, they’re the ones funding things like PragerU, or the Daily Wire, or whatever other fascist rag. They’re actually organized and have goals against the working class. I really do wonder what Mao would have done with these jetski dealership owners, or these Texan oil shit heads
Mao believed the national bourgeoisie could collaborate with the other classes of China because of the particular historical conditions of China as a country that had been exploited by western imperialism. In other words the primary contradiction was (is still, I’d say, until US led capitalist bloc is no longer a global menace to the third world and socialism) imperialism, and the national bourgeois has a part to play in combating it. Once that contradiction is resolved, the primary contradiction in is likely to be the bourgeois v proletariat class struggle, but the good news on that front is that the proletariat via the Communist Party already controls the state and all the power that comes with that. The bourgeoisie are not the ones with their hands on the levers of power.
None of this is applicable to the United States. The US is the imperial superpower, the national bourgeoisie of the US has no progressive historical role to play and is in fact reactionary as you say.
Undoubtedly something very cool.