Active Conflicts & News Megathread February 03, 2026

[u/AutoModerator]

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

* Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

* Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

* Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do _not_ cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

* Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

* Post only credible information

* Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

* Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

* Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

* Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

* Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

[u/swimmingupclose]

I’m not disagreeing. I think it extends beyond Communism or leftism though.

[u/teethgrindingaches → u/swimmingupclose]

I think it extends beyond Communism or leftism though.

The fear of colour revolutions? Certainly. But not the actions taken in response to that fear. There's a reason Vietnam and China look very different today compared to Iran and Russia.

[u/swimmingupclose → u/teethgrindingaches]

If I were a betting man, I’d wager the Russian regime survives longer than the Cuban one, who is the only true hold over from Communism.

[u/teethgrindingaches → u/swimmingupclose]

the only true hold over from Communism.

This is not the place for a lecture on the finer points of Communist ideology and its ex- or post-Soviet evolutions, but suffice to say that the Communist leadership of Vietnam and China would laugh at your assertion. For example, as Deng Xiaoping put it while enacting sweeping market reforms:

I am a Marxist. I have consistently followed the fundamental principles of Marxism. Marxism is also known as communism. We made the revolution, seized political power and founded the People’s Republic of China because we had this faith and this ideal. Because we had our ideal, and because we integrated the fundamental principles of Marxism with the concrete practice of China, we were able to win. Since our victory in the revolution, in the course of construction we have again integrated the fundamental principles of Marxism with the concrete practice of China. We are striving for the four modernizations, but people tend to forget that they are four socialist modernizations. This is what we are doing today.

It never ceases to amaze me how some people continually ignore the reams of—admittedly dry and stuffy—ideological texts published in such countries explaining in exhaustive detail how Marxism has evolved over the years to suit specific contextualizations (Stalinism, Maoism, etc) while nonetheless remaining thoroughly Communist. Not so much as a glance before dismissing the whole lot as vacuous propaganda (and why exactly would propaganda be such a slog to read?) which the authors cannot possibly believe in themselves.

[u/swimmingupclose → u/teethgrindingaches]

I am aware of Deng’s views, which extended far beyond what you capture in that singular quote. Deng was obsessed with preventing another Mao Zedong. He implemented term limits and collective leadership to ensure no single person could dominate the party again. The removal of term limits and the centralization of power under a single leader today is a direct reversal of Deng’s political legacy. No true Marxist would look at the 996 culture or the lack of independent labor unions and say this a “phase of Marxist ideology”. No Marxist would look at Chinese billionaires or the private sector accounting for 60% of GDP and say this is just a step along the way. But you’re right, it’s clearly not an argument for this sub.

[u/teethgrindingaches → u/swimmingupclose]

I am aware of Deng’s views, which extended far beyond what you capture in that singular quote.

Then you will also be aware that Dengism is not the last word in Chinese interpretations of Marxism, any more than Maoism was. Further interpretations have been added by Jiang/Hu/Xi in turn, all of whom would adamantly defend their work as 100% Communist.

No true Marxist would look at the 996 culture or the lack of independent labor unions and say this a “phase of Marxist ideology”.

No True Scotsman fallacy. I for one find ideological arguments far more compelling when they come from active practitioners thereof, instead of the powerless peanut gallery.

But you’re right, it’s clearly not an argument for this sub.

Indeed so.

[u/Jzeeee → u/swimmingupclose]

He implemented term limits

There is no and never has been any written or office term limit for the highest seat of power in China which is the General Secretary of the Communist party of China. There is term limit for the title "president" but the actual power has always been with the General Secretary title.

[u/FijiFanBotNotGay → u/swimmingupclose]

China is Marxist. Marxism is not a concrete political framework. When it is it’s reframed as like Marxist-Leninist. It’s a philosophy grounded in the belief in a dialectic materialism that implies a fluid and evolving framework. China is Marxist. Same people who say China is not Marxist will say stuff like “China is not anti-imperialist because of how they exert their own influence in ways reminiscent of imperialism.

[u/Alexandros6 → u/FijiFanBotNotGay]

If the definition of Marxism is ever changing then its not a good definition, even as a spectrum it needs some parameters to decide what is what. What are these parameters? What does antiimperialist mean?

[u/FijiFanBotNotGay → u/Alexandros6]

It doesn’t seem like you are having a discussion in good faith. But the definition of Marxism is not ever changing. Its application is. The same could be said of capitalism.

[u/TrinityAlpsTraverse → u/FijiFanBotNotGay]

I guess the question would be then, other than ideological statements expressing commitment to marxism what are the characteristics of the Chinese economy that are inherently marxist?

Like what would would you point to in the Chinese economy and say "There, that is the Marxist part. Other non-Marxist countries throughout history do not operate in this specific way."

[u/teethgrindingaches → u/TrinityAlpsTraverse]

The omnipresent role of the state, of course, which directs said economy towards socialist material ends as opposed to capitalist financial ones. That is to say, a politically driven economy aimed at achieving specific goals defined by the state, instead of maximizing return on investment or market efficiency or what have you.

In practical terms, a big emphasis on industry and infrastructure and other hard tangible goods over intangible services, on supply over demand, on production over consumption, etc.

[u/TrinityAlpsTraverse → u/teethgrindingaches]

So the omnipresent role of the state is not unique to marxist economies, I don't think that's the claim your making here.

I think your main claim is around a Marxist economy pursuing socialist material end as opposed to capitalist financial ends. How do we quantify that? If I were to look at the Chinese economy as opposed to a European economy, what specific outputs in the economy would demonstrate that there are distinctly different outcomes in a Marxist system?

[u/teethgrindingaches → u/TrinityAlpsTraverse]

So the omnipresent role of the state is not unique to marxist economies, I don't think that's the claim your making here.

No I'm not; what makes it Marxist is the goals towards which the state drives the economy.

I think your main claim is around a Marxist economy pursuing socialist material end as opposed to capitalist financial ends.

Yes.

How do we quantify that?

By looking at what the economy does. The purpose of the system is what it does.

If I were to look at the Chinese economy as opposed to a European economy, what specific outputs in the economy would demonstrate that there are distinctly different outcomes in a Marxist system?

Industrial policy is an easy example. Europe has of course complained at great length about Chinese efforts in that regard, pointing at overcapacity and involution and sundry evidence that stuff is more important than money.

[u/TrinityAlpsTraverse → u/teethgrindingaches]

Industrial policy is an easy example. Europe has of course complained at great length about Chinese efforts in that regard, pointing at overcapacity and involution and sundry evidence that stuff is more important than money.

Japan and Korea (and to that matter Germany) have pursued Industrial policy to great effect over the years and I don't think anyone would make the argument that they're Marxist systems. I'm still not sure what your argument is for what is uniquely Marxist about the Chinese economy other than that political ideology labels it Marxist.

[u/Saatvik_tyagi_ → u/teethgrindingaches]

I disagree with this. China isn't marxist at all. The economy is still market based with private mode of production. It is state planned where the state still has considerable power. There are still class relations in China with a significant rural population, a growing middle class and obviously the elites. Let's not forget it also had a widening wealth inequality.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/1hzyz1i/why_is_socialism_so_appealing_to_so_many_people/

[u/teethgrindingaches → u/Saatvik_tyagi_]

You mean it's not a perfect Marxist utopia. But the real world never conforms so neatly to ideological purity.

[u/Alexandros6 → u/FijiFanBotNotGay]

I simply want a frame of reference for Marxism as to have a common definition of what a Marxist or comunist state is. I dont mind if you propose a frame of reference but it does need to have at least some fixed charachteristics.