MLRL_Commie [comrade/them, he/him]

Marxist-Leninist-Rondeyist-Losurdoist, the only correct combination of names.

Life motto: If Deng didn’t do it, did it even happen?

  • 2 Posts
  • 679 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 10th, 2024

help-circle
  • For sure , and I just see some options forming (not yet concrete, also I’ll not be the one to figure it out from the other side of the world lol). I think south America could do some radical move to actually separate more from China in exports (keep importing Chinese non-strategic stuff) and convince the USA to invest in them heavily, but doing this while maintaining some sovereignty. Deng was able to do this by using the USSR as the counter weight. I think China will survive such a thing easily (unlike the USSR which was materially weak relatively), and then Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico will be able to build up some needed production means without the US bombing them. Right now, I think we are underestimating how major the lacking production means is playing a role in subservience to the US.

    There are tons of problems with this Idea, but I would like to work through more of the contradictions and see what’s possible.















  • I think we do something, as communists (mostly) not in the periphery, by discussing this sort of problem with the caveat ‘Whether the US will militarily try to prevent this’ instead of making that a starting point of the discussion. That is an assumption we must make, which is the US will intervene the moment it can safely do so (politically, not about safety of lives) whenever it deems the shifts to be against its interests. Deng started here also and found a way to become beloved by the US while accomplishing China’s goals.

    A state can make this assumption and takes the stance of increasing the difficulty of US invasion (get the nuke, make it so damaging that it’s not worth it, partner up to increase the investment needed to win for the US). This is what the AES seems to be doing, and is what the USSR managed after WW2 (and Stalin tried hard beforehand). It’s, in my opinion, a short-sighted position unless the rest of the world does the same. It relies on too many factors to be stable. It’s noble, and I love them for trying. I want to make it work by keeping the west from invading, too. But it’s an inherently unstable place to be, and I wouldn’t recommend it except for the absolute most strong movements in the world. The bolivarian one isn’t strong enough, I think, for this road. (not Latin American, but basing this off of how precarious it seems the past 20 years from outside)

    The other lever to pull is the attractiveness of the invasion. Don’t make it difficult, make it senseless for the US to want to invade. This is what China did. How can Venezuela theoretically do that now? Playing China and the US off each other is one way, though its a huge sacrifice and will likely damage the neighbors too. Then Venezuela can say ‘look US, I’m helping you by trading with you and not China, with the only requirement being that you invest more capital into us from which you benefit’. I think this might work. Is that good for global communism? I’m genuinely not sure, but over a 75 year period, I think it might be because the US would’ve deindustrialized again and built up a new powerful enemy.


  • agreed, but that’s why I wanted to talk about how to do Deng’s strategy by changing some of the tactics according to material conditions. Now, with the current global political dynamics, how can a country get the capitalists to help them develop in a way that ultimately goes against the capitalists’/imperailists’ interests? What needs to shift in the tactics or world situation to make it possible?

    I think that China, for example, can be used as leverage. The US states its desire to decouple from China (probably gonna fail) and Venezuela could use that as leverage to pull a similar strategy. China won’t be hurt by that in the long run, I think, because their independent development is so accelerated at the moment that I have little worry they would come through (inb4 Xiaohongshu comes in with the monetary failures and lack of internal demand lol).





  • https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/28/can-venezuelas-delcy-rodriguez-become-a-latin-american-deng-xiaoping

    Article filled with brainworms, but I am wondering what Hexbears think about this concept in general. Delcy trying to follow the model of Deng (hallowed be his name deng-cowboy) seems like a very difficult path without major change to the method. Deng was able to leverage Chinese huge proletarian labor capacity, many ports, and sovereignty to invite capital, make that capital reproduction valuable for the capitalists, and benefit from the effect of built infrastructure and knowledge. Venezuela would need to make some huge changes to their infrastructure very quickly to be able to do this (could be posisble if enough outside investment comes) and would be taking a bigger risk seeing as the bolviarian revolution less defensible is than the CCP was. That, or Venezuela tries to do a Opening Up but limiting it to the oil industry… which I think is a bad strategic path and will result in failure (with Oil being phased out for cheaper renewables). And it will only result in useless built up knowledge and infrastructure.

    What am I missing here? Are there other strategic options that I’m ignoring or don’t know about?

    Or is this bullshit that is being assumed about Venezuela but not actually how anything on the ground is working?