It should be Musk, Thiel, Bezos, etc standing in the dock like this.
I was imagining how differently the world and our ecology would be, if the West did this kind of looking out for the generations behind us.
Yeah, but to do this they would have to be socialist in the first place. How would you expect capitalist dictatorships of the bourgeoisie to actually crack on the bourgeoisie for doing what capitalism is about, that is maximising profit?
I know. It was imagination.
Nah they should just face the wall.
Houses are for living, not for speculation.
workers of the world, unite!!
ooOOoo! Nice concise agiprop to debunk the “China is state capitalism” losers.
This is cool and all but just because the CPC is harder on the bourgeoisie than other countries’ governments doesn’t mean that China doesn’t have vast amounts of private ownership, worker exploitation, etc., or that the proletariat are really in power and not just CPC bureaucrats. I still don’t see how they’re not just a different kind of social democracy
I still don’t see how they’re not just a different kind of social democracy
In social democracies the capitalists still control the state. They give people social programs and decent wages to buy them off so they don’t seize the means of production… until the contradictions of capitalism start pressing harder. Then you end up with a hard turn to neoliberalism like in the so called “nordic model” nations which have had all their publicly owned infrastructure sold off over the last 30 years.
In China individuals can “own” the means of production but they do not control the means of production, or the state. The Communist party is the one in control of the means of production and they make sure that no group of individuals can threaten The Party. The people are not the ones in power, the Vanguard Party is. The upper levels of the CPC are chosen to lead because they are true believers in the mission of a classless society. They understand that not all officials are pure in their dedication to the project but as long as they fake it and do what is needed, that doesn’t matter. Because the entire party is centered around Marxist Leninist Mao Zedong thought, every generation will be more dedicated to communism.
That generational approach is also being taken to the elimination of Capitalism and private ownership. Every business over a certain size in China must have a Staff and Workers’ Representative Congress. A form of democratic voice for the workers. While they do not officially have the power to demand changes they do have some serious sway sway and in a generation they will likely be much more powerful.
Whether it’s traditional capitalists or self-interested bureaucrats owning the state, the end result is the same. Doesn’t China have a Gini coefficient almost as high as the US’s? Why would any truly socialist state be allowing this level of inequality? I’m not so sure the top CPC members are really all that interested in working towards communism over preserving their careers and benefits. Even if they were, if everyone below them was corrupt or non-dedicated how would the CPC be able to properly work towards its goal while its members cant work together?
Because the entire party is centered around Marxist Leninist Mao Zedong thought, every generation will be more dedicated to communism.
This is a huge trust-me-bro.
You don’t have to trust me. Go read the official policy papers published by the Columnist Party of China. Go read Xi’s published speeches. Go read any of the number of books on history and political theory officially endorsed by the CPC.
They talk the talk and as evidenced by corrupt business owners and corrupt party officials being prosecuted they walk the walk. What the fuck more do you want?
what i fucking want is there to not be anymore poverty and widespread inequality in a country that is supposedly led by a communist party. do you have any rebuttals to the first part of my previous comment? if you send me an actual study or something disproving these points i’ll retract what i said, i have no idea where to start with reading xi’s speeches or whatever
what i fucking want is there to not be anymore poverty
Poverty reduction is absolutely not something we have made strides in. Over 940 million lifted out of poverty?Who? Being the country almost solely keeping global anti poverty trend positive through domestic poverty alleviation and investment in the global south? So? (Massive /S)This was overly mean but the point stands that poverty alleviation has been one of the forefront policies of the CPC. Poverty can’t be removed at the wave of a wand.
Doesn’t China have a Gini coefficient almost as high as the US’s?
No. Actually China’s Gini coefficient is one of the lowest in the world
China: 0.26 US: 0.418
i have no idea where to start with reading xi’s speeches or whatever
The Governance of China is probably a good start
I’m aware of how well China has performed regarding poverty alleviation, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that there are still people in poverty at the same time as billionaires. That level of inequality allowed by a communist party is pretty suspicious, along with the special economic zones and other things that reek of class collaboration. I used the world bank numbers, which says China’s gini is 0.36, but that is from 2022. Did it really change that much in the last four years? I am really impressed by China’s growth in the past few decades, don’t get me wrong, but it seems like they’re headed towards a mixed economy direction rather than really caring about communism. I’ll check out your recommendation at some point but I’m too busy with classwork to do any heavy reading
what i fucking want is there to not be anymore poverty
That doesn’t happen over night. China is eliminating poverty and has made massive strides on that front. To ignore the fact that life expectancy has over well over doubled since the formation of the CPC is quite disingenuous.
and widespread inequality
You can’t get rid of inequality. Some people will always want to work harder than others and they deserve to be compensated for that. The goal is to make sure that everyone has the same opertunities to make the most of their natural aptitudes.
That is what China’s recent ban on for profit education has been about. By eliminating people’s ability to buy superior education for their kids they even the playing field for all children regardless of their parents wealth.
Abolition of inequality is an affront to all of human history. You cant just do that you have to build up to it on a historical scale. The trend of history is towards equality but it cannot be rushed. Dialectical materialism shows us that qualitative changes must come from quantitative changes. You can’t just make things be what you want them to be. You have to make the conditions that cause things to become what you want.
the end result is the same.
no it isn’t.
Doesn’t China have a Gini coefficient almost as high as the US’s?
no it doesn’t and gini is a flawed system of measuring inequality anyway. It measures the size of the spread instead of measuring how many people are close to the middle. You could have a nation where a million people had the exact same income but there was 10 people in absolute poverty and 10 that were a million times as wealthy as the middle class and gini would say it was a deeply unequal society.
Why would any truly socialist state be allowing this level of inequality?
because inequality is the natural state of society in all of recorded history and eliminating it with the stroke of a pen would be disruptive and unsustainable. In the USSR there was a massive black market because they tried to force equality and it only made the problem worse.
I’m not so sure the top CPC members are really all that interested in working towards communism over preserving their careers and benefits.
This is just vibes. “No investigation no right to speak.” Go do some digging into how China is governed.
Even if they were, if everyone below them was corrupt or non-dedicated how would the CPC be able to properly work towards its goal while its members cant work together?
Not everyone would be corrupt or non-dedicated. All people are flawed but if everyone is reading the same books and pretending that they are dedicated they have to recognize the ones who pretend the best. If the system selects only those who look and act the most dedicated to the cause of communism the true believers must float to the top. The CPC’s system is built specifically to do exactly that.
There are lots of sources for learning about China’s governance if you are willing to read them. Here is a good place to start
A Social Democracy is a bourgeois state with treats.
Yeah but my point is the top CPC members are basically the new bourgeoisie
Do they write policy in Bourgeois interests?
I mean, they have to be if the gini coefficient of china is almost as bad as the USA and there is still widespread poverty in the country at the same time as there are billionaires
edit: also, didn’t hu jintao make it so that capitalists can literally become CPC members? lol
Look up their poverty alleviation programme from 2012 to 2020. Also lookup the incredibly tight regulations on tech and AI sector. No way a bourgeois state would ever allow such restrictions on their fastest growing industry!
I know about their poverty alleviation programs, I just think that they need to be doing more to restrict the power of billionaires, and think that the CPC isn’t necessarily a dictatorship of the proletariat because it’s rather autocratic. I also like that their tech industry has restrictions, but that just means their government acts wisely
With the key difference that the “new bourgeoisie” isn’t accumulating capital for themselves, but for the mass of people. Standard of living, life expectancy and a plethora of other metrics has been rising since the Revolution
And that’s good, but inequality has also risen dramatically
That has been true under Deng, but not under Xis “common prosperity” where a clear trend reversal can be seen
