Not for the first time Ted outlines Hegel's theory and attributes it to Marx. Ted says "Forces of production" are objectifications of ideas. That's what Hegel thought. This is what Marx said:
'it is only possible to achieve real liberation in the real world and by employing real means, that slavery cannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannot be abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated as long as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and quantity. "Liberation" is an historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historical conditions, the development of industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions of intercourse'
Liberation in an historical and not a mental act - write those words on a post-it note and stick them on your monitor.
Forces of production are not simply mental ideas realised, because they incorporate non-mental elements, natural forces, which for Marx, where he is at odds with Hegel, exist outside of the Idea. What technology does, says Marx, following Francis Bacon, is not overthrow natural laws, but mediate them. More than that, he says that the division of labour itself is a nature imposed necessity, whose exigency is not wholly transcended but only moderated in its operation by the social organisation of production.
So I am still of the opinion that Charles has a better grasp of Marx than Ted, and am still reluctant to attribute the failure of the cultural revolution to the endemic stupidity of the Chinese people.