I am a Marxist in China
Orthodox Marxists in the Chinese internet community often view Russia and Iran as weak links in imperialism, rather than as anti-imperialist forces .However, in the view of Chinese Marxists, opposing the global hegemony of the United States takes precedence over opposing secondary imperialisms (Iran, Russia).
The person in the picture is Yang Heping, a US citizen with a Chinese green card, and he is the most popular orthodox Marxist-Leninist-Maoist self-media figure on the Chinese internet (with 3 million followers on Tiktok and 800,000 on Bilibili). Yang Heping advocates that whether it's Ukraine, Russia, or Iran, "the truth is on the side of the proletariat, not on the side of any government or capitalist."
In China, those who unconditionally support Iran and Russia are usually nationalists or national leftists.
I wonder if the differences between the left-wing in Europe and America and the left-wing in China are really that significant?
Nobody on the left supports Russia what they support is the disarmament of nato and killing of nazis that Russia is engaged in.
Iran is a borderline socialist nation. If you read their constitution there are obligations to helping the poor and fighting oppression. They may not be "ML" but they are practicing Socialism with Islamic characteristics, they have a long ways to go and they will need to rejigger some things but they are on the right path.
Although I'd argue a non-negligible amount of socialist inspiration exists within the current Islamic doctrine of Iran (largely due to the writings of Ali Shariati) its very far from the truth to say they are "borderline socialist". The Iranian economy and state is not dominated by the proletariat or an organization a ting solely on behalf of the proletariat. The Iranian capitlist class not only exists, like in China, but actively influences or commands state power, which makes it chiefly different from the Chinese capitlist class.
Socialist ideas exist within the Islamic Revolutionary theory, but they aren't all encompassing and the factions within the revolution differ between neoliberals and arguably socialist, a gap too wide to make such a sweeping statement.
This doesn't mention the fact that the Iranian economy continues to be gutted in favor of the bourgeoisie at the expense of Iranian workers, rather than continously development of the productive forces. The development of productive forces mainly comes from the public sector and IRGC, but they have to contend with the bourgeois Iranian parliament and presidency.
There is an argument that a form of "Islamic socialism" could be built within Iran, but frankly I don't see that happening as long as the Iranian oligarchs receive no punitive measures, and the government doesn't implement systems that stop the Iranian bourgeoisie from hijacking state power. Iran is frankly a strange case, and difficult to analyze in my opinion. It's clearly a hybrid state of sorts, sharing power between an anti-colonial nationalist faction in the military and state security sector, and a diverse national bourgeoisie which projects power through the Civil institutions such as the parliament, presidency, and distribution of goods/services.
However I'm confident in saying they are not "borderline socialist".
Compare Iran to Venezuela or Vietnam. The bourgeoisie have significant control over the government and economy in those nations and yet no one says they aren't socialist. Iran has free university and healthcare, It has social welfare and heavily subsidies necessities including homes and fuel. Their oil industry and Auto manufacturers are majority state owned.
They may have significant influence but they do not hold state power, whereas the bourgeoisie in Iran do hold state power, at least partially, through representives in the parliament, and other political figures. The assembly of experts, Supreme Leader, and IRGC, though they may hold the power to keep the most ravenous tendencies of the bourgeoisie in check, they do not formally hold the power to develop the economic direction of the country, or the everyday affairs of state, those are the planned and implemented by the parliament and presidency. The IRGC (I'll use as a shoethand to mean the Supreme Leader and Assembly of Experts, but mind you the IRGC itself has factions beyween revolutionary, regormist, and moderate) only acts as a tool to maintain national sovereignty, a powerful tool mind you, but a singularly purposed tool.
Venezuela has a bourgeois parliament but the communes are increasingly replacing organs of the old state and self govern more and more. Not to mention, the party/coalition in power is an explicitly socialist one that is guiding the country with the working classes interest at the primary guiding interest.
Vietnam has established a dictatorship of through a ML vanguard party. The party makes plans explicitly to advance the interests of the working class, and the government is structured in a way that doesn't allow for the bourgeoisie to pick out representives that directly govern state affairs in their interest.
Individual policies aren't indictive of which class the state serves. Most of Iran’s welfare policies came about due to being holdover from British welfare policies and wartime policies implemented during the Iran-Iraq war. As soon as the war winded down, many welfare policies were gutted by khatemi and the reformist faction, who instituted a neoliberal shock doctrine using the economic logic of the Chicago School (where they studied). These bourgeois representives and technocrats, nearly all educated in the west as mentioned, have continued to dismantle the Iranian welfare system till this day. Their constant privatization and corruption has led to massive exlploitable protests for the west, which have had to be put down in increasingly bloody manners.
Also, those policies aren't entirely accurate. Yes you can have free university access, but that doesn't mean anyone can or will. In order to qualify for a major in Iran, you need to get a certain score on a test after high-school known as the Konkoor. This isn't strange, and most of East Asia has something like this if I'm correct. However, if you don't get a proper score, you'll have to eitheir go to a shitty expensive private school or not go to university at all unless you can improve your score. It's not abnormal for a country like Iran, and I'd kill for it myself, but it's a bit more complicated then just free university.
There is a public healthcare option, and I'll also say that retirement is at the age of 55 with mandatory state pensions. It has some issues I've heard from my relatives, but all things considered it's very good for the position Iran is in.
Subsidies on Fuel and housing is where I take the most issue however. Yes, they do have subsidized gas and home ownership/construction us supported by the state, but the former is a bit of a contentious thing to bring up. I say this because it's not as much of a bedrock as you make it out to be, with the reformists still trying to gut this policy after decades, and successfully doing so to adjacent policies like food subsidies. The whole reason their was tinder for the Zan, Zendigee, Azadi (Woman, Life, Freedom) protests before the death of Amini, was because the government tried to remove this subsidy and rilex the people up in protests the months prior.
These policies aren't bedrocks of Iranian soceity, they are hard fought gains that the Iranian bourgeoisie is chipping away at without much push back from the IRGC. This is why I argue they're not "borderline socialist", because the state constantly hollows itself out in favor of the bourgeoisie and at the expense of the working class. It only manages to self correct because the IRGC is tasked with maintaining national sovereignty, so whenever there's a rupture, they have to deal with it.
True, but many of the people involved with managing the state oil sector have gotten absurdly rich off of acting as conduits to avoid sanctions. They may not own the oil industry, but they enrich themselves to unscrupulous levels overseeing it.
In the case of auto manufacturing (and electronics) those are either largely owned by public sector or the IRGC, which basically acts like an extension to the state. Your correct to point thus section of the economy out, but they're basically the most major industries that are allowing for the economic development of Iran. I'll agree that they're a major section of the economy, and that they are actively a force behind revolutionary portions of Iran’s leadership.
Yet my point isn't that no potentially socialist formations exist within the Islamic Republic. It's that the Islamic Republic is a hybrid formation that disqualifies it from being "borderline socialist." It would still not be socialist if the reformists were completely destroyed, but I could see it obtaining that borderline status. Until that occurs, the Islamic Republic of Iran will be domestically controlled by the national bourgeoisie, while the sovereignist factions of the state protect it from collapse into a US puppet or splinters of US puppet states.
高考属于是我最可怕的噩梦了，没想到伊朗也一样，这似乎是所有后发国家的必然
It also exits in India and South Korea I believe, at least that's what I've been told.
Yes, almost all Asian countries have this. It seems to be determined by the globalized market economy model—late-developing countries cannot achieve a technological leapfrog through moderate means.
The most terrifying thing about this college entrance exam system is that, during its operation, due to the diminishing marginal returns of educational resources (high school > junior high > primary), a group of people have already lost the competition in primary school. This inevitably produces a group of 'de facto proletarians' and 'nominal useless classes'—people who are in fact working-class, yet do not enjoy any of the traditional prestige of workers. In this way, the ideological red line (the red line of social Darwinism) can be bypassed, leaving the working class to wallow in self-pity rather than awakening class consciousness, while society can 'legitimately' look down upon workers.
No Iran’s leadership and ruling ideology is idealist. The revolutionary movement soaked up Maoist & ML elements but that doesn’t make Iran borderline socialist.
there can be no such thing as socialism with islamic characteristics, quite literally mutually exclusive with materialism.
Marxism is materialist but Marxism is not socialism. Marxism is a tool for analysis. Socialism is a way of organizing society. Marxism explains why socialism will and must come into being but it does not say that socialism must be organized a certain way. Marxism has been used as a rhetorical rally point for revolutionaries but there is nothing stopping non Marxist socialism from happening, on the contrary Marxism shows that even if historical and dialectical materialism analysis are ignored the socialist revolution against capitalism will happen.