According to the blogger’s own words, this forum is an open environment for offline exchange of ideas, welcoming people from all walks of life to discuss content related to Marxism
So is this really a bait-and-hook operation by the authorities, or is it “private” Duma? Or is it actually, as the blogger claims,
a sincere, good-faith use of their own resources—“to open the way for candid speech”?
Can openly discussing these issues touch on the question of violent revolution? It just feels like this person is shamelessly using Marxism to build their own personal fame and line their own pockets.
And your title has already judged them to be a “revisionist blogger”—so why are you still raising questions about whether they genuinely believe what they’re saying?
I saw on Zhihu someone said that this person also supports the China revision
https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/1945034833400160976
I’ve seen this guy in Bilibili circles before, kind of. But honestly, I don’t even think he counts as being “left-circle” — it feels more like he just uses political talk to grab attention and chase fame and money.
OP, why don’t you reply to the comments everyone made on your self-introduction post earlier?
This guy is right-wing. The video that made him famous was on Bilibili debating whether China is revisionist, arguing that China isn’t revisionist. What’s the point of putting on this kind of public debate? In a Chinese revisionist site, aren’t they just tricking people in to get them killed?
This so-called “something—not oatmeal, not Little Golden Retriever”—is nothing but a clique/cluster. Even a lot of opportunistic left circles go after him, cursing and condemning him. Because in the ideological realm, what he practices is nothing less than full-on, thoroughgoing revisionism in the style of “Chinese revisionism.”
He’s completely a man of no learning and no skill—stealing a little from the slave-owning class of so-called Plato’s “Europe,” and then clinging to a big leg in today’s “Chinese revisionist” political economy. In “Is China Revisionist?” the first thing that made me burst out laughing is that somehow someone would claim a certain country is “revisionist”; even the way the question is framed is wrong. But his videos are popular, drawing in a whole lot of people just like him—ignorant and clueless.
Next comes the distortion of all class struggle into contradictions between Sino and U.S. imperialism. That’s the “Chinese revisionism” framing: as long as you say there was a worker uprising at home, or that students “rose in revolt,” then everything gets stamped with the label “carried out on foreign instructions.” It turns the life-and-death struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie into imperialists’ jockeying and争霸, and it turns domestic struggles into “insufficient economic development.” One minute it’s social Darwinism saying that “the water-ship can’t hold people,” and the next minute it’s Deng Xiaoping’s revisionism. Personally, I think this kind of revisionism is the most thoroughgoing revisionism of imperialism. Maybe Kautsky and Bernstein still advocated reform and parliamentary struggle to ease class contradictions; sometimes they even pretend to support workers’ actions—letting them do a bit of movement here and there. But this revisionism allows absolutely no room at all; it’s the most vicious enemy.
And on top of that, he’s arrogant and self-important, saying things like, “My achievement is that I’ve managed to put into words the problems that couldn’t be spoken.” He turns the relationship between materialism and the relationship between matter and consciousness into abstract dogma for debate. And he uses Marxism as a gimmick to make money—what, then, isn’t the most despicable, lowest, foul dog?
Because I’m still in class 
Before I came across the forum, I often watched his videos too. Even then, I thought his reasoning was confused—he was simply talking nonsense, with no coherence whatsoever. Someone like him can only fool students who have a superficial understanding of Marxism.
I don’t think this has much to do with whether you attend class or not. If you have the time, you can reply—it just depends on whether you want to.
