Podcast recommendations, episode discussions, and struggle sessions about which shows need to be cancelled.
Rest In Power, Michael Brooks.
The way this division manifested really aligned China with some dark forces, it would seem.
You've nailed it. It's just literally this. Could've been another way, but it wasn't.
Also get ready because season 6 will be about Angola, where China backed UNITA which while fighting the portuguese also collaborated with them against the soviet and cuba backed MPLA.
The sino soviet split is one of the elephants in the room of modern leftist discourse. But hey, if China manages to become the world’s leader and spreads world wide communism, that era will be forgiven I imagine
Socialist states absolutely can and have done cringe. Western socialists ("socialists") need to understand that even when they fuck up that's still "our guy" in charge [the party]. Unfortunately, the power received in victory includes the power to fuck things up. Look it in the eye, understand it, don't repeat the same mistakes. Any westerner who starts using the word "socialist" to describe themselves must be held to this.
With people on the more liberal end, be more smug than mean:
"Oh you're 'socialist'/'anti-capitalist' too? Yeah of course the Russian, Chinese, Cuban, and Vietnamese (etc) revolutions are fascinating cause they went out and actually defeated capitalism. You don't like that some of them were revisionist? I don't agree with every decision that was made after the revolution either, that would be ridiculous with hindsight and all that. It's definitely worth discussing what went on and understanding what the decision making process was in the circumstances of those countries.If we are successful at overthrowing capitalism like you just said, we are probably going to be faced with some similar decisions. It's also important that we contrast with the more palatable movements like in Chile, Burkina Faso, and Central America that ended in failure."
Out of all the seasons, this one has been the hardest for me to understand the "blowback" part. All the consequences of US foreign policy seemed to fall on the Cambodian people, even after the bombing stopped.
The main critiques I recall (it's been a while since I finished it) are that the attempts to force untrained people into agricultural work failed and racist / nationalist elements within the revolution prevented international cooperation, both of which created a feedback loop of paranoia and human misery.
I also am learning more about the sino-soviet split, which seemed to play a large part in this too.
All the consequences of US foreign policy seemed to fall on the Cambodian people, even after the bombing stopped.
My takeaway so far, having not finished the final episode, is that this is definitely the blowback. No one except, maybe Vietnam, had any interest in the well-being of the Cambodian people, including China and the USSR.
I guess that doesn't exactly constitute blowback, since the instigators walked away pretty clean from the whole ordeal... Perhaps after 5 seasons, "Blowback" has become more of a title than a directive. This really feels more like an untold history than anything else.
I agree. It calls to mind that proverb "when elephants fight, the grass gets trampled." I think you're right that this is more an untold history.
Just processing out loud here: it's useful for getting rid of brainworms as well. Embarrassingly, I sat with the cognitive dissonance of the PRC supporting Pol Pot for a long time before resolving it with the obvious answer of it being wrong and bad, as others have mentioned in this thread. Getting out of that mindset of geopolitical "teams" is rough lol
"when elephants fight, the grass gets trampled."
Yeah, that really sums up my feelings here too. It's also a good reminder that geopolitical economy can still divide camps, even if they're supposed to be ideologically aligned.
The soviets were 100% in the right in the sino soviet split. Whatever issues the Chinese govrrnment had with the soviets (The arrogance of the Soviet government in dealing with other communist countries including the refusal to consider others equal partners in building, and disagreement about the implementation of communism) were rendered totally moot by the Chinese government deciding to buddy up to the Americans who were openly anticommunist and in this capacity supporting basically every major anticommunist movement in the second and third world. I simply don't accept that your problem with the soviets is their revisionism hen you're willing to ship guns to Pol Pot and help the Great Satan kill communists in Afghanistan
I agree with you, though I'd say that the chinese were right in their issues for the split, which you outlined, but completely wrong in their conduct after it. Their original points aren't rendered moot because of what happened afterwards but they don't justify what they did either, which I think is what you're saying.
Yeah, well communism with Chinese characteristics is just, like, do some capitalist bullshit with your communism. Shockingly this leads to crimes against humanity.
Yes, they have some capitalist bullshit, but the capitalists don't own the state. They don't buy politicians or dictate policy. It's not too dissimilar from the New Deal. It's how China is currently leading the world in solar and nuclear -- new technologies don't have to struggle in the shadow of established firms.
What are we doing here? This is straight up china as a "deformed" workers state bs.
I didn’t say that. Chinas style of communism has been improving the lives of their working clans for decades and is far superior to the way capitalist countries do things.
Ehh, whether one believes that Reform and Opening Up lead to capitalist restoration in China, or not, is kind of immaterial here.
The Sino-Soviet Split, which is what Chinese support for the Khmer Rouge against Vietnam was an expression of, is far more pertinent, and predates the Reform period by a couple of decades.
Some real "The enemy of my enemy" type logic on display for China at the time. I feel like a Blowback season on The Sino/Soviet Split might be interesting, but then again, probably a highly covered topic already. It just runs right through so much of the previous seasons though, that in some ways it would act as a thread stitching many of these seasons together.
I feel like “the enemy of my enemy” happens a lot on the world stage, especially during the Cold War. And I get it. But it still sucks.
Been saying this for years now, on sino-Soviet split issues always side with the Soviets. (Not an absolute rule but I've yet to stumble on something where the Soviets were on the wrong side and the pre-21st century PRC was on the right side)
It seems to me that China's one and only W from this era was surviving to become the 21st century PRC.
Perhaps the Biafra conflict?
The Biafra conflict was (And remains) complicated and I'm not going to be the one who solves the moral issues of it. But it does bear remembering that the anti-Nigerian side included Rhodesia, Apartheid South Africa, and Israel for a reason.
This is a completely uneducated guess based off of the vibes in the chart below. I have literally zero knowledge on the topic and this spitball assertion should not be taken remotely serious.
Things had to be so fucked up there to say that Colonialist France, fascist Portugal, post-6-day-war Israel, Apartheid South Africa, and the fascist settler statelet Rhodesia were on the right side of history with the PRC.
The Biafra conflict was in part france trying to regain a sphere of influence at the expense of the UK. Thats why the sides fell the way they did.
Yeah as if them getting their asses beat in Vietnam at the same time wasn't enough for them the fuckjng frogs
France also did the same thing in the Congo, which was the reason for soviet support for Nigeria, despite the Igbo's having a leftist element and having "global sympathy".
Also what anglo wikipedia omits is that israhell supported both sides:
From early on, Israel perceived that Nigeria would be an important player in West African politics and saw good relations with Lagos as an important foreign policy objective. Nigeria and Israel established a linkage in 1957. In 1960, the United Kingdom allowed the creation of an Israeli diplomatic mission in Lagos, and Israel made a $10 million loan to the Nigerian government. Israel also developed a cultural relation with the Igbos based on possible shared traditions. These moves represented a significant diplomatic success given the Muslim orientation of the northern-dominated government. Some northern leaders disapproved of contact with Israel and banned Israelis from Maiduguri and Sokoto. Israel did not begin arms sales to Nigeria until after Aguyi-Ironsi came to power on 17 January 1966. This was considered an opportune time to develop this relationship with the federal government. Ram Nirgad became Israeli ambassador to Nigeria in January. Thirty tons of mortar rounds were delivered in April. The Eastern Region began seeking assistance from Israel in September 1966. Israel apparently turned down their requests repeatedly, although they may have put the Biafran representatives in contact with another arms dealer. In 1968, Israel began supplying the Federal Military Government with arms—about $500,000 worth, according to the US State Department. Meanwhile, as elsewhere, the situation in Biafra became publicised as a genocide. The Knesset publicly debated this issue on 17 and 22 July 1968, winning applause from the press for its sensitivity. Right-wing and left-wing political groups, and student activists, spoke for Biafra. In August 1968, the Israeli Air Force overtly sent twelve tons of food aid to a nearby site outside of Nigerian (Biafran) airspace. Covertly, Mossad provided Biafra with $100,000 (through Zurich) and attempted an arms shipment. Soon after, Israel arranged to make clandestine weapons shipments to Biafra using Ivory Coast transport planes. The nations of sub-Saharan Africa tended to support the Arabs in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute by voting for resolutions sponsored by Arab states at the United Nations. A major goal of Israeli diplomacy was to wean the African states away from the Arab states and given the way that the majority of African nations supported Nigeria, Israel was loath to antagonise them by supporting Biafra too overtly.
Darn I just posted something like that. The Biafra conflict is complicated. Because the Igbo people absolutely were persecuted prior to the war, and it's hard to argue that Yakubu Gowon wasn't a ridiculously corrupt dictator or that the charges of genocide against him aren't at least credible. But the conflict was also on behalf of every non Nigerian/Igbo person involved nakedly a proxy war over the future of post-colonial africa (With the UK joining the Nigerians solely because their oil companies ran the Nigerian oil trade)
Yeah that sounds like a nobody wins scenario
The PRC even ended up on the same side as Taiwan, backing the contras to spite the soviets.
I like your quality commie-posting new guy, I'm gonna remember your name
oh fuck now there's pressure. I'm gonna fuck this up, but I promise to do so in a new and interesting way
Just to let you know we've already had annoying leftcoms and shitheel patsocs bits play out so I'm excited for some new lore to add to the hexbear iceberg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUpWuxhj1_8
American Prestige just did a good two-parter on the Sino-Soviet Split.
I was just about to type this exact comment. Don't forget the primer episode that sets it up as well!
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
I'll check it out.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
