I understand the argument you’re making, but isn’t the sentiment that “Chinese capitalism” is not my problem” just a complete abandonment of proletarian internationalism?
Like if you’re drawing your thought from Marx and Engels at the baseline, they are pretty damn clear that “The working men have no country.”
This isn’t an idealist position in either sense of the word—capital doesn’t respect national boundaries and literally treats the working class as an international pool of labor power:
Hundreds of thousands of workers thus wander hundreds and thousands of versts. Advanced capitalism drags them forcibly into its orbit, tears them out of the backwoods in which they live, makes them participants in the world-historical movement and brings them face to face with the powerful, united, international class of factory owners.
- Lenin “Capitalism and Workers’ Immigration”
Just as the development of capitalism leads to an international capitalist class, the working class, too, is an international class, with international class interests. “An injury to one is an injury to all” is not limited to workers of “your” nation: the victories of the working class in China (or Bangladesh or Burkina Faso or Chile or wherever) are the victories of your class, and their defeats are your defeats.
What you lose when you take the position that “Chinese capitalism is not my problem,” is the internationalist perspective that is an essential part of what it means to be a communist—it’s all part of the same struggle, and the solution is an international working class solution.
“The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality.”
- Communist Manifesto, Chapter 2
I mean, there’s some interesting points in there, but I’m not really persuaded to abandon the Marxist perspective in favor of your analysis.
Capitalism is a world system, but moreover it is a set of productive and social relationships that grew over time into a world-encompassing system. The US is, for the time being, the most dominant capitalist nation within that world system, but it hasn’t always been, and may not always be, given US capitalism is either on the precipice or has already begun its decline. We already see how US imperialism is less effective now than 100 years ago: trade agreements are not so one-sided, the US hasn’t decisively won a war in decades, regional powers Outside of the US sphere are exerting more influence in places like the Middle East.
America sets some of the ground rules for how capitalism operates, but again, capitalism predates the US dominance of the system and, to some extent, does not require the US to dominate the system.
More than that, I want the working class in China to take power, just like I want the working class in Italy to take power, or Chile, or South Africa. I want the international working class taking power and building international socialism, because that is the only way to transform and overthrow the existing international capitalist order. We need not only an international perspective, but international coordination.
I mean, a good bulk of capital is based in the US, but this is mostly plainly incorrect. Of the 10 largest companies in the world by revenue, only 2 are based in the USA. Many large companies not only operate globally but are conglomerations of capital from different nations. The company that makes Budweiser, the quintessential American beer, is actually a conglomerate of US/Brazilian/Dutch capital, and has headquarters in all three nations.
How are you appraising that the Maduro administration is “doing the best it can?”