Jump to content
guilluamezenz

So long as socialism does not collapse in China, it will always hold its ground in the world. (Deng Xiaoping)1

Recommended Posts

The first of October marks the China’s National Day, the 69th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. With China’s rise and its increasing importance to the global economy, China is a ‘hot topic’ in the world of politics and economics. And, after four decades of market-oriented economic reforms, many on the left are asking: to what extent can China reasonably be considered a socialist country?

After all, China today has nearly 500 billionaires and is the world’s top destination for foreign direct investment, attracting over $100 billion each year. There are branches of McDonalds and Starbucks in all major Chinese cities; and there is startling inequality between the coastal cities and the inland countryside, and between rich and poor more generally. There are stock exchanges in Shanghai and Shenzhen; there is finance capital; there is privately-owned capital. Is this really what Marx and Engels had in mind?

On the other hand, the People’s Republic of China has some interesting characteristics that make it rather different from the average capitalist country. Most importantly, although inequality has increased over the past 40 years, the standard of living for ordinary workers and peasants has risen dramatically along with it. Wealth under capitalism generally has its counterpart in poverty and exploitation (at home and/or abroad), but in China practically everyone enjoys a far better standard of life than they used to. Extreme poverty is on the cusp of being completely eliminated – an extraordinary achievement for a country of China’s size.

Secondly, China is run by a communist party that continues to adhere to Marxism-Leninism. While it no doubt suffers from corruption, and although its ideological purity has been diluted, its history and traditions mean that it derives its legitimacy and support from the masses of workers and peasants. As such, the Chinese state operates primarily in the interests of the working classes, unlike any capitalist state.

Thirdly, as much private capital as there is in China, the economy is still very much dominated and directed by the state.

So while China has introduced elements of capitalism in the 40 years since the start of ‘reform and opening up’, these do not constitute a negation of socialism, any more than they did in the New Democracy period in the 1950s, or under the New Economic Policy in the Soviet Union in the 1920s. The point of the reforms is to to lay the ground for a more advanced socialism: ”In order to realise 

communism, we have to accomplish the tasks set in the socialist stage. They are legion, but the fundamental one is to develop the productive forces so as to demonstrate the superiority of socialism over capitalism and provide the material basis for communism.”2

communism, we have to accomplish the tasks set in the socialist stage. They are legion, but the fundamental one is to develop the productive forces so as to demonstrate the superiority of socialism over capitalism and provide the material basis for communism.”

Is China Still Socialist?

14517433_10153940243055950_3597096423759

Public ownership still dominates, and the state is in charge of the economy

Although the number of employees of private enterprises has overtaken the number of employees of state- and collectively-owned companies, the basic economic agenda is set by the state. Private production is encouraged by the state only because it contributes to modernisation, technological development and employment. While some Marxists may insist that markets can have no place under socialism, it’s difficult to reconcile such a view with Marx’s own view of socialism as a transitional stage on the road to communism. China has proven in reality that it can use (heavily regulated) market mechanisms in order to more rapidly develop the productive forces and improve the living standards of its people.https://www.invent-the-future.org/2018/10/is-china-still-socialist/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bonus points for finally admitting the goal of socialists is to achieve Marxist style communism.

 

Let's at least get real about what BS and the far-left envision for America's future.

 

It isn't Nordic style capitalist social democracy. Its a Marxist state.

 

No thanks.

 

#NeverBernie

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isn't the belief in karma rooted from China. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. what they sent around conquering hearts, bodies, and souls to mind hypothetical standards embezzling ancestry historically since the dawn of civilization is coming back at them with a global vengeance.

 

 

Art of war was also Chinese correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, SpyCar said:

Bonus points for finally admitting the goal of socialists is to achieve Marxist style communism.

 

Let's at least get real about what BS and the far-left envision for America's future.

 

It isn't Nordic style capitalist social democracy. Its a Marxist state.

 

No thanks.

 

#NeverBernie

 

Bill

thats goal might take 1000 years it might take 10 000 my advocacy at least in my individual ideals is for gradualism incrementalism, i think that socialism failed to the extent it did is because people tried to chage everything at once, of course that failed, its amazing it did not fail worse than it  id the fact that it persisted for as long as it did convinceds me there is still a valid idea in there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sole result said:

isn't the belief in karma rooted from China.

buddism came from india and moved to china and elsewhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, guilluamezenz said:

thats goal might take 1000 years it might take 10 000 my advocacy at least in my individual ideals is for gradualism incrementalism, i think that socialism failed to the extent it did is because people tried to chage everything at once, of course that failed, its amazing it did not fail worse than it  id the fact that it persisted for as long as it did convinceds me there is still a valid idea in there

 

That's some interesting logic. The fact socialism didn't fail "worse" than it did—with 100 million deaths to its discredit—convinces you that there is a "valid idea in there."

 

I come to the exact opposite conclusion. Socialism/communism are inherently evil ideologies that will always lead to human rights abuses. It is an anti-liberal ideology. 

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, guilluamezenz said:

Extreme poverty is on the cusp of being completely eliminated – an extraordinary achievement for a country of China’s size.

 

you've never been to China, try going there and visiting villages outside of tier 5 cities and some tier 4 cities you will see the real face of poverty

try visit xinjiang and villages around Kashgar, and you poverty , its not or nowhere near to being eliminated.

 

The truth is China was having problems, Mao's vision isn't working, the fact that Deng Xiaoping opened up economic zones saved china and one of them was 

shenzhen, during Mao's time it was poor as poor can be, after Mao died ( best thing that happened to China) Deng opened up the city and within 20 years it flourished, today its has over 18 million people, its rivals  Hong Kong.

 

Marxism is dying off as the new younger generation sees that its better  to have some freedom than none like their cousins in North Korea, they see the differences between Seoul and Pyongyang, they see the difference between a Tier one city like Beijing, Shenzhen and a not so great capital city like  Umanqi in Xinjiang and think nah, Marxism isnt appealing.

 

I predict China will be a mixed economy and will lose the communist party and socialism to a degree when the old guards finally die off and the billionaires most of which is in the communist party will give their inheritance to their one child and that generation will transform China into what we see in America, that is assuming they have to political will to do so or maybe they will forged their own idea of what China should be 

 

  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sole result said:

isn't the belief in karma rooted from China. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. what they sent around conquering hearts, bodies, and souls to mind hypothetical standards embezzling ancestry historically since the dawn of civilization is coming back at them with a global vengeance.

 

 

Art of war was also Chinese correct?

No.

Karma is a Hindu belief, not a Chinese one. It is also a part of some sects of Buddhism, so it is not unknown in China.

The book "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu is a well known classic, but the idea of war goes back before there was a China.

Chinese culture has always been collectivist to a greater degree than in the West. It is quite unlikely that China is likely to morph into something like the US.

Facial recognition technology and  encouraging good behavior with rewards and bad behavior with punishment seems to be a goal of the current government.

Once the go9vernhment knows everything about everyone, excessive individuality is bound to suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"After all, China today has nearly 500 billionaires, , although inequality has increased over the past 40 years for workers and "peasants".

 

Looks like monarchy with a few dukes, lords and knights,

 

Hey.... lets all be socialist so that we can call people peasants again.

 

Democrats: make Americans peasants again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Chongo said:

"After all, China today has nearly 500 billionaires, , although inequality has increased over the past 40 years for workers and "peasants".

 

Looks like monarchy with a few dukes, lords and knights,

No, it does not. China is through with emperors and nobility.

 

Hey.... lets all be socialist so that we can call people peasants again.

 

Democrats: make Americans peasants again.

You are an idiot, seriously. 

Trump is the guy that thinks of himself as some sort of inherently superior being: ONLY I CAN FIX IT!  I HAVE THE BEST WORDS! I HAVE THE BEST PEOPLE!

The Chinese government is not about creating a nobility or a monarchy.  It portrays itself as more of a meritocracy, actually.

The Chinese are not very religious in the Western sense of the word. Instead of guilting people with sin, China tends to control people by instilling in them a feeling not to lose face or disgrace their family and ancestors.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, chairmanOFTB said:

 

you've never been to China, try going there and visiting villages outside of tier 5 cities and some tier 4 cities you will see the real face of poverty

try visit xinjiang and villages around Kashgar, and you poverty , its not or nowhere near to being eliminated.

 

The truth is China was having problems, Mao's vision isn't working, the fact that Deng Xiaoping opened up economic zones saved china and one of them was 

shenzhen, during Mao's time it was poor as poor can be, after Mao died ( best thing that happened to China) Deng opened up the city and within 20 years it flourished, today its has over 18 million people, its rivals  Hong Kong.

 

Marxism is dying off as the new younger generation sees that its better  to have some freedom than none like their cousins in North Korea, they see the differences between Seoul and Pyongyang, they see the difference between a Tier one city like Beijing, Shenzhen and a not so great capital city like  Umanqi in Xinjiang and think nah, Marxism isnt appealing.

 

I predict China will be a mixed economy and will lose the communist party and socialism to a degree when the old guards finally die off and the billionaires most of which is in the communist party will give their inheritance to their one child and that generation will transform China into what we see in America, that is assuming they have to political will to do so or maybe they will forged their own idea of what China should be 

 

  

 

i hve not but many members of my family have you are appealing to anecdotal evidence in 1980 90% of the population lived in 2$ or less a day today that % is about 2 they have come further faster than anyone provingthe superirority of their present system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Chongo said:

"After all, China today has nearly 500 billionaires, , although inequality has increased over the past 40 years for workers and "peasants".

 

Looks like monarchy with a few dukes, lords and knights,

 

Hey.... lets all be socialist so that we can call people peasants again.

 

Democrats: make Americans peasants again.

According to the World Bank, more than 500 million people were lifted out of extreme poverty as China's poverty rate fell from 88 percent in 1981 to 6.5 percent in 2012, as measured by the percentage of people living on the equivalent of US$1.90 or less per day in 2011 purchasing price parity terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Chongo said:

"After all, China today has nearly 500 billionaires, , although inequality has increased over the past 40 years for workers and "peasants".

 

Looks like monarchy with a few dukes, lords and knights,

 

Hey.... lets all be socialist so that we can call people peasants again.

 

Democrats: make Americans peasants again.

China lifting 800 million people out of poverty is historic:World Bank

Starting in 1990 with the evolution of the Chinese economic system and its embrace of the global market China has lifted over 800 million out of poverty, said WB President

Press Trust of India  |  Washington Last Updated at October 13, 2017 03:22 IST

 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, guilluamezenz said:
According to the World Bank, more than 500 million people were lifted out of extreme poverty as China's poverty rate fell from 88 percent in 1981 to 6.5 percent in 2012, as measured by the percentage of people living on the equivalent of US$1.90 or less per day in 2011 purchasing price parity terms.

This is a  decent article. MUCH better than the nonsense Chongo uses to warp his mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, XavierOnassis said:

This is a  decent article. MUCH better than the nonsense Chongo uses to warp his mind.

i try to look at all CREDIBLE  sources i want to know the truth not confirm mine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

You are an idiot, seriously. 

Trump is the guy that thinks of himself as some sort of inherently superior being: ONLY I CAN FIX IT!  I HAVE THE BEST WORDS! I HAVE THE BEST PEOPLE!

The Chinese government is not about creating a nobility or a monarchy.  It portrays itself as more of a meritocracy, actually.

The Chinese are not very religious in the Western sense of the word. Instead of guilting people with sin, China tends to control people by instilling in them a feeling not to lose face or disgrace their family and ancestors.

 

 

    Ha, you are possibly going to make through 6 more years with Trump and then we are going to elect him to the UN so he can straighten out the entire world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, guilluamezenz said:

i try to look at all CREDIBLE  sources i want to know the truth not confirm mine

No country of any size has ever managed to maintain a growth rate such as China did between the mid 1980's and the present,.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chongo said:

 

    Ha, you are possibly going to make through 6 more years with Trump and then we are going to elect him to the UN so he can straighten out the entire world.

The world rightfully hates Trump's guts. He is an ignoramus and a corrupt blowhard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, XavierOnassis said:

No country of any size has ever managed to maintain a growth rate such as China did between the mid 1980's and the present,.

it has been almost 40 years it unbeleivable absolutely an econmic miracle, and to be honest a tstiment to the french econmic theory of dirgisme https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirigisme  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirigisme

Dirigisme or dirigism (from French diriger, meaning 'to direct') is an economic doctrine in which the state plays a strong directive role, as opposed to a merely regulatory role, over a capitalist market economy.[1] As an economic doctrine, dirigisme is the opposite to laissez-faire, stressing a positive role for state intervention in curbing productive inefficiencies and market failures. Dirigiste policies often include indicative planning, state-directed investment, and the use of market instruments (taxes and subsidies).

The term emerged in the post-war era to describe the economic policies of France, which included substantial state-directed investment, the use of indicative economic planning to supplement the market mechanism, and the establishment of state enterprises in strategic domestic sectors. It resulted in an unprecedented economic and demographic growth, leading to the coinage of the term Trente Glorieuses ("Thirty Glorious [years]").

The term has subsequently been used to classify other economies that pursued similar policies, most notably the East Asian tiger economies, and more recently the economy of the People's Republic of China.[2] A related concept is state capitalism.

Most modern economies can be characterized as dirigiste to some degree – for instance, the state may exercise directive action by performing or subsidizing research and development of new technologies, through government procurement (especially military) or through state-run research institutes.[3]Les trente glorieuses: 1945-1975

 

As a result of these nationalisations, France became the most state-controlled capitalist country in the world. Another factor behind economic recovery was the Marshall Aid Plan an American initiative which gave grants, loans and subsidies to struggling post-war nations. The issue of raising the birth rate was an additional factor in France's industrial recovery: more babies meant more demand for goods and services and more potential worker-consumers. There was a clear link, then, between production and reproduction, conception and consumption. Immigration too played a central role in the economic modernisation and growth that characterises les trente glorieuses.

 

 

 


  • The New Affluence 

    Les trente glorieuses witnessed rapid economic growth. For those who like their statistics neat, between 1945 and 1975 the economy grew on average by 5% per annum, which was a considerable economic achievement at the time. Both industry and agriculture were undergoing a process of increasing modernisation.https://eserve.org.uk/tmc/contem/trente1.htm

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, XavierOnassis said:

The world rightfully hates Trump's guts. He is an ignoramus and a corrupt blowhard. 

i've been looking at poll data trump may have survied russiagate, but he is not doing well, his re election is very doubtfulhttps://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/3/22/18276155/donald-trump-2020-presidential-election-odds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SpyCar said:

 

That's some interesting logic. The fact socialism didn't fail "worse" than it did—with 100 million deaths to its discredit—convinces you that there is a "valid idea in there."

 

I come to the exact opposite conclusion. Socialism/communism are inherently evil ideologies that will always lead to human rights abuses. It is an anti-liberal ideology. 

 

Bill

they used to say that about republicans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SpyCar said:

 

That's some interesting logic. The fact socialism didn't fail "worse" than it did—with 100 million deaths to its discredit—convinces you that there is a "valid idea in there."

 

I come to the exact opposite conclusion. Socialism/communism are inherently evil ideologies that will always lead to human rights abuses. It is an anti-liberal ideology. 

 

Bill

the french revolution was a disaster and was for decades a caveat against liberal democracy, but guess what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, guilluamezenz said:

i hve not but many members of my family have you are appealing to anecdotal evidence in 1980 90% of the population lived in 2$ or less a day today that % is about 2 they have come further faster than anyone provingthe superirority of their present system

what is your point?

 

Im appealing to anecdotal evidence? what exactly are you talking about?

 

the population living on 2 dollars a day in the rural town is a Godsent ( pardon the pun) you have no idea how cheap it is parts of rural China, I went to Datong in the northern Shanxi Province , its the tier 5 city ,I spend the day there and I brought 75 dollars and ate out, visited the 9 dragon wall and the shadow caves, bought a bunch of crap and by the time we left we had under just under 50 dollars, that was between 3 people, that was 3 years ago, the lowest tier of all cities in China. I didn't buy anything foods from the market as its small coal city and not very appealing 

 

Ive seen what   some  earned on average about 2000 US a year, and some of them lived fine according to some of the folks, just outside of Datong, a town called Xiguancan( not sure if I spelled it right) if some of the workers earn 2 dollars a day they are in heaven.

 

Like I said you  have no idea until you see it for yourself and say thank God we live in America.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chairmanOFTB said:

what is your point?

 

Im appealing to anecdotal evidence? what exactly are you talking about?

 

the population living on 2 dollars a day in the rural town is a Godsent ( pardon the pun) you have no idea how cheap it is parts of rural China, I went to Datong in the northern Shanxi Province , its the tier 5 city ,I spend the day there and I brought 75 dollars and ate out, visited the 9 dragon wall and the shadow caves, bought a bunch of crap and by the time we left we had under just under 50 dollars, that was between 3 people, that was 3 years ago, the lowest tier of all cities in China. I didn't buy anything foods from the market as its small coal city and not very appealing 

 

Ive seen what   some  earned on average about 2000 US a year, and some of them lived fine according to some of the folks, just outside of Datong, a town called Xiguancan( not sure if I spelled it right) if some of the workers earn 2 dollars a day they are in heaven.

 

Like I said you  have no idea until you see it for yourself and say thank God we live in America.

 

 

Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes: evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony.

The term is sometimes used in a legal context to describe certain kinds of testimony which are uncorroborated by objective, independent evidence such as notarized documentation, photographs, audio-visual recordings, etc.

When used in advertising or promotion of a product, service, or idea, anecdotal reports are often called a testimonial, which are highly regulated[1] or banned in some[which?] jurisdictions.

When compared to other types of evidence, anecdotal evidence is generally regarded as limited in value due to a number of potential weaknesses, but may be considered within the scope of scientific method as some anecdotal evidence can be both empirical and verifiable, e.g. in the use of case studies in medicine. Other anecdotal evidence, however, does not qualify as scientific evidence, because its nature prevents it from being investigated by the scientific method. Where only one or a few anecdotes are presented, there is a larger chance that they may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases.[2][3] Similarly, psychologists have found that due to cognitive bias people are more likely to remember notable or unusual examples rather than typical examples.[4] Thus, even when accurate, anecdotal evidence is not necessarily representative of a typical experience. Accurate determination of whether an anecdote is typical requires statistical evidence.[5] Misuse of anecdotal evidence is an informal fallacy and is sometimes referred to as the "person who" fallacy ("I know a person who..."; "I know of a case where..." etc.) which places undue weight on experiences of close peers which may not be typical.

In all forms of anecdotal evidence its reliability by objective independent assessment may be in doubt. This is a consequence of the informal way the information is gathered, documented, presented, or any combination of the three. The term is often used to describe evidence for which there is an absence of documentation, leaving verification dependent on the credibility of the party presenting the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...