如何看待中共20大的纲领 Politics and governments

马克思列宁并不能预测几十年，几百年后的事，唯物主义史观也提出要辩证的看待问题，我们不可否认现在存在的弊端，但我觉得现阶段利大于弊，至少我们的国家富强起来了，共同富裕也不等于同步富裕，难道我们应当回到那个纯粹的计划经济，没有法制的社会中去吗？真是这样，那么我难以想象现在现在会是什么情况，你可以安稳的坐在教师读书吗？你甚至可以打着红卫兵的旗号随意打砸抢。又或者，中国是否还存在？有自己的想法是一件好的事情，但请谨慎发表，你只有那么大的年纪，我觉得再怎么天才，见识也会有限！退一万步，因为你的不当言论导致此网站被封，我们失去了一个很好的交流平台，难道是一件好事吗？我认为，你在这里，只考虑到了自己，想要发表自己的观点，而未考虑我们的集体利益，是否为一种自私行为？

@fengkui
首先我不得不指出您这段话就存在很多事实错误，而且对我的观点或多或少有一些曲解...我承认一切事物都是有局限性的，马克思主义也不例外，可是谁说它一定要是100%正确的呢？马克思理论的价值是把社会主义提高到了科学的层面，列宁、斯大林、托洛茨基（尽管这俩人不对付但是贡献雀食都挺大）、毛主席进一步在其基础上完善和发扬了马克思主义，但是其根本部分并没有改变。我想说的是，社会科学之所以叫做科学而不是“玄学”或者其他的什么东西，正是因为有一些根本的真理是不会改变的，就像自然科学一样，所以说我们对于这些可能“过时”的理论应该是在不动摇其根本的基础上加以完善，而不是彻底的颠覆和扬弃。
（后面还有很多话要说，缓更哈

@fengkui
还有另一个问题，国家富强一定等于人民幸福吗？或者是说，“富强”的到底是谁？
众所周知，20世纪有四大经济奇迹——白人南非、巴列维伊朗、民国黄金十年、智利皮诺切特，这些国家当时来看确实是“富强”的，但最后都变成了笑话。
共同富裕确实不是同步富裕，但是现在问题是不患寡而患不均，先富带动后富是好的想法，可是变成了先富剥削劳苦大众似乎就不太合理了

马克思主义的革命原则和策略告诉我们：完整的无产阶级革命它一定是有三个环节的：第一，进行武装革命以夺取政权。其实这个环节，哪个阶级上台都得进行。第二，进行经济基础的社会主义革命。唯独无产阶级要将私有制变为公有制。第三，进行包括文化领域在内的、包括上层建筑领域在内的文化领域的社会主义革命。无产阶级革命的全过程，少了任何一个环节它都得停止，它都不完全。我并没有说wg是好的，只是客观评价，宗旨是正确的，但是手段过于激进方法不得当导致结果失败。所以说要正视历史，没有什么非黑即白，要辩证看待问题，唯结果论不可取。

“你只有那么大的年纪，我觉得再怎么天才，见识也会有限”
这句话。。。可能是我误解了，但是我咋感觉有点瞧不起人的意思呢？
我能说我是国际红色通讯志愿者，读过马列选集和毛选，还去过工厂调研么？

我强调了好几遍了，前30年的经济体制可不是纯粹的计划经济，那叫自上而下的指令性经济，真正的计划经济可不是那样的。况且没有前三十年积淀的生产力，过早的参与进国际贸易体系只会让我国的经济任人摆布。不能只看到改开带来的变化，而全盘否定前人的成绩

（还有说前30年是“没有法制”就挺离谱的
我去查了一下，从1966到1976年的人口增长表，wg十年的时间，人口从七亿两千九百万，直接暴涨到九亿三千四百万。反正十年最乱的时间增加了两亿多人。我又去问了爷爷奶奶老一辈人，他们都是历史的见证者，就听说只有村里一个倒霉蛋去参加运动，被步枪打折了一条腿，他们身边其他人，没听说有几个因为wg挂掉的。唯一的影响就是墙上多刷了几条标语，多听几遍广播，住了些知青，还带来赤脚医生、扫盲班和科学种田，文盲率反倒还下降不少。。。
长辈说运动都是在城市，当时他们那农村几乎没影响，而且城市也就一两年，后面就还挺安定的

要看的好的，也要看到不好。不能否定批评，不接受批评，不然社会怎么进步？

中国共产党的确是光荣伟大的。
唯一的不足就是资本主义乔装打扮混进改革开放的队伍中，见缝插针，腐蚀我们的国人思想和政治制度，这是很可怕的。

@Lianshen
Yeah I agree with you! Now on Chinese social medias everyone seems to be praising the gomverment (although we can't deny that CCP has done many good things) But criticizing the goverment and pointing out actual problems is almost impossible because of the filter. I don't think it is reasonable because you cannot really solve a problem if you don't even face it.

马克思列宁并不能预测几十年，几百年后的事，唯物主义史观也提出要辩证的看待问题，我们不可否认现在存在的弊端，但我觉得现阶段利大于弊，至少我们的国家富强起来了，共同富裕也不等于同步富裕，难道我们应当回到那个纯粹的计划经济，没有法制的社会中去吗？真是这样，那么我难以想象现在现在会是什么情况，你可以安稳的坐在教师读书吗？你甚至可以打着红卫兵的旗号随意打砸抢。又或者，中国是否还存在？有自己的想法是一件好的事情，但请谨慎发表，你只有那么大的年纪，我觉得再怎么天才，见识也会有限！退一万步，因为你的不当言论导致此网站被封，我们失去了一个很好的交流平台，难道是一件好事吗？我认为，你在这里，只考虑到了自己，想要发表自己的观点，而未考虑我们的集体利益，是否为一种自私行为？

纸老虎。China seems strong, but isn't as much as it wants people to think so, as shown by how China is cautious in its relationships for now. On the same vein, be careful not to attribute all the merit to a government while China has long been prosperous in the past with a different ideology. Here, I mean that China is a country that has a lot of potential and possibilities that are inherent to its geography and history. In other words, if you are sitting on a pile of diamond, even if you manage it poorly, you'd still get a few diamonds, and your country happens to be a pile of diamonds. Now, it doesn't mean that the chinese government is bad (I don't think it can be worse than in my place), but that one has to be cautious when looking at the achievements there.

Also, talking about history, you can do many things with "if". For instance, would China have had so many problems in the past if Cixi wasn't a greedy old lady who messed up with Chinese modernization (戊戌变法 )?

AS for the prosperity, what can be seen outside - and despite the efforts that are done to reduce this- is that mostly people in the city benefits of it and rural China still hasn't caught the train, whereas it would be a totally different story in a country like France for instance.
Like it also has been said, a rich country isn't necessarily a country where the people are happy, and I supposed that you could see that only looking at the prevalence of depression in the West for instance, or how many people are pissed in Europe at the moment despite countries here being """rich"""".

@Lianshen
Yeah I agree with you! Now on Chinese social medias everyone seems to be praising the gomverment (although we can't deny that CCP has done many good things) But criticizing the goverment and pointing out actual problems is almost impossible because of the filter. I don't think it is reasonable because you cannot really solve a problem if you don't even face it.

A few years ago, I heard that the younger generations especially were more pro government and radical than the former one (typically mine), but I didn't know if it was true or not. I also have seen the filter being problematic when I was talking to some people ((while on my side, I receive absolutely nothing, and could lead to potential issues with what I express).
From what I understood of China, and it wasn't specific to the CCP, is that a critique is welcomed if you provide a solution with it, but I fail to see how that would work if you can't express some ideas anymore, either because of an algorithm, or because of the public retaliation you might face. The last beingg true not only in China, but in a country like France as well, more and more.

All the reactionaries are the Papertiger，so is revisionism.

And yeah,there's no "if" in history.

真的服了现在的CCP这个老六，又当又立，扛着红旗反红旗不说还美其名曰“特色”，这叫啥：别人那叫穆扎，我们这叫莫扎特（
阶级矛盾都啥样了还不解决，官媒就会一顿夸，路线都歪到了太平洋内宣还好意思说“不忘初心”
让我西藏的朋友送他们一句话：扎不多德勒

删了吧胖友，容易被戴帽子

CCP是啥。。（）

CCP是啥。。（）

China Communist Party,
中国共产党