• slumlordthanatos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Remember folks: China is communist in the same way that North Korea is democratic and the Nazis were socialist.

    It’s just a smokescreen.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      China has a Socialist Market Economy, it hasn’t reached Communism of course but at the same time the Public Sector covers over half of the economy, and is gradually folding the Private Sector into it with the degree to which it develops. This is the process Marx and Engels described a Socialist State would take. From Principles of Communism:

      Question 17 : Will it be possible to abolish private property at one stroke?

      Answer : No, no more than the existing productive forces can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. Hence, the proletarian revolution, which in all probability is approaching, will be able gradually to transform existing society and abolish private property only when the necessary means of production have been created in sufficient quantity.

      The backbone of the PRC is central planning and public ownership, Marx is regularly taught in class, and Marxism-Leninism continues to be the dominant and guiding ideology. They are ideologically Communist, and it is rather silly to protest otherwise simply because they haven’t immediately siezed all property, which would be anti-Marxist as the PRC is still underdeveloped.

      The purpose of Marxian analysis of Capitalism is the insight that markets naturally centralize and develop complicated methods of planning. You can’t just will these into existence, and markets provide a quick way of creating them. Once they have sufficiently developed, markets cease to be the best tool to use, and public ownership and central planning becomes more efficient. Given that the PRC is Marxist, it stands to reason it is useful to analyze them with a Marxist lense. I have yet to see a genuine Marxist take on why the PRC is not Socialist, only liberals paying lip service to Marx yet vulgurizing him into a Utopian Idealist, and not a Materialist.

      • cm0002@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        You can call their economy whatever you want, doesn’t stop them from being a dictatorship.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          That’s moving the goalposts though, isn’t it? I was responding to the claim that the PRC isn’t at all Communist, which is false regardless of your opinion of it being “good” or “bad” whether overall or in comparison to the US.

          Further, I am not sure why you describe it to be a dictatorship, even Mao was forced to step down after the tremendous struggles during the Cultural Revolution. Xi is an elected official, and there are 8 political parties besides the CPC that actively contribute to the decision making progress of the PRC, the CPC is merely the largest at 96 million members out of 1.4 billion people.

          In order to accurately judge the merit or lack thereof of the PRC, you have to actually take a real look at what it looks like, question why Beijing has an over 95% approval rate, and see what the living conditions look like for the people that actually live there. If you perpetuate sloganeering because it is convenient, then actual, systemic problems you could be criticizing go under the radar.

  • ZeroOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Except US is biggest imperialist & no one intelligent is supporting Russia just cause “America Bad” Typical RadLib Let’s hear your complains about Socialism (He’s gonna call me a Tankie & ban me huh😂)

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wait, are you saying “both sides bad?” “Both sides are the same?” Am I hearing this right?

    Look, if either Xi Jinping or Donald Trump is going to emerge as leader of a global hegemon, then any and all criticism of Xi Jinping is the exact same as being a Trump supporter. When are we going to do something about all these secret Trump supporters pretending to be leftists?

    At least, that’s what I’d say if I accepted the absurd logic of lesser evilism the liberals were constantly berating everyone with.

    • Fridam@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      No, they are saying one side being bad doesn’t make “the other side” perfect or immune to criticism

      The US participating in the Palestinian genicide does not excuse Russia invading Ukraine. The US invading Iraq does not excuse nationalists in India attacking Muslims

      It is not the same thing, and western imperialism doesnt make non-western imperialism ok. Even if it is a lot worse

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Right, and what I’m saying is that by that very same logic, Trump supporting the Palestinian genocide doesn’t justify the democrats supporting the Palestinian genocide - they should not be considered immune to criticism either, and when people criticize them, they should not be assumed to be supporting the other side.

        • Fridam@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Right, so I was replying to you trying to make the meme into a " both sides bad" or “both sides are the same”-argument, pointing out how it is not

          I find your answer to my reply irrelevant to the point I was making

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            It’s not saying that both sides are bad? You sure about that one, chief?

            What’s it saying about US imperialism? Good or bad?

            What’s it saying about countries the US opposes? Good or bad?