The term “social-imperialism” was invented by Trotskyists to justify their habit of attacking and denigrating the USSR and adopting a “both sides bad” stance to the global class war (aka the “cold war”). The USSR was constantly slandered as “social-imperialist” by the imperialism-compatible western left. It is a meaningless label that was only made up to somehow try to square the circle of a socialist country that was the greatest enemy of the capitalist imperialist camp and that contributed more than any other power in history to decolonization and liberation movements in the global south allegedly being at the same time itself imperialist. It made no sense then and it makes no sense now for the PRC.
How can a country be imperialist when it is socialist? The very notion goes against Lenin’s recognition of imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism. The simple answer is that it cannot. This is why it is vital for those seeking to muddy the waters and confuse the global proletariat, if they wish to be able to credibly label China as imperialist, to first deny China’s socialist nature. Hence all the accusations you hear of “state-capitalism”, China being “socialist in name only”, etc. This is much more effective than the whole “social-imperialism” angle that the average person is not gonna understand unless they are already a dyed in the wool ultra-leftist fully immersed in Trotskyist/Maoist dogma and terminology.
The term “social-imperialism” was invented by Trotskyists to justify their habit of attacking and denigrating the USSR and adopting a “both sides bad” stance to the global class war (aka the “cold war”). The USSR was constantly slandered as “social-imperialist” by the imperialism-compatible western left. It is a meaningless label that was only made up to somehow try to square the circle of a socialist country that was the greatest enemy of the capitalist imperialist camp and that contributed more than any other power in history to decolonization and liberation movements in the global south allegedly being at the same time itself imperialist. It made no sense then and it makes no sense now for the PRC.
How can a country be imperialist when it is socialist? The very notion goes against Lenin’s recognition of imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism. The simple answer is that it cannot. This is why it is vital for those seeking to muddy the waters and confuse the global proletariat, if they wish to be able to credibly label China as imperialist, to first deny China’s socialist nature. Hence all the accusations you hear of “state-capitalism”, China being “socialist in name only”, etc. This is much more effective than the whole “social-imperialism” angle that the average person is not gonna understand unless they are already a dyed in the wool ultra-leftist fully immersed in Trotskyist/Maoist dogma and terminology.