Is China Capitalist or Socialist? w/ Tings Chak

There is an ongoing debate on the international left about whether China is a capitalist or socialist country. It has billionaires and it is integrated with and essential to the global capitalist economy. However many core industries at the commanding heights of the economy are in state hands and subordinate to planning. Is capital in command of politics or politics in command of capital? How should we define China’s economy and address these contradictions?
This is a clip from Rania Khalek’s interview with Tings Chak, a writer and researcher with Dongsheng News and the Tricontinental Institute.
Watch the full interview here: • How China Is Taking On...
Listen to every episode of Rania Khalek Dispatches anywhere you get podcasts.
Apple: apple.co/3zeYpeW
Spotify: spoti.fi/3za9DRK

[@amihart9269]

I really recommend people to read Mao's _On Contradiction_ and learn to think with a bit more nuance and a bit more dialectically. The problem is that a lost of people tend to by default think in black-and-white purist terms. Socialism is about public ownership and capitalism is about private ownership, so they think that means a capitalist society must be pure, entirely privately owned, and a socialist society must be entirely publicly owned. If you point out that an economic system can have aspects to it that _contradict_ with the overarching system, they act like that's absurd, contradictions can't exist in reality! Yet, they do, no system is pure, all systems are mixed. You have to focus on not whether or not the system fits an arbitrary standard of purity, but what is the _principal_ aspect (主体) of that system, because the principal aspect will shape all things below it. Public property is not really "public" in a capitalist society because the public is not in power, the capitalists are, so the state only introduces "public" property at the behest of the capitalist class. In a similar sense, private property in a socialist society is heavily constrained and restricted by the socialist system they exist within, they lack full autonomy as they are not in power. Too many online leftists like to just point out that private property exists or that private capitalists exist as a "gotcha" against China rather than trying to do any real analysis of the society to determine what aspects of the contradictions are actually the principal one.

[@guywholikesthesnarkies1435]

Also read another Mao's work, a follow-up to the same earlier work, "On The Correct Handling Of Contradiction Among The People".

[@terrystack2643]

China isn't a socialist country because it isn't democratically controlled by the working class. China today is still the same bureaucratic dictatorship established by Mao that he mirrored after the Stalinist Soviet Union. Socialism is about the working class owning and controlling the means of production, thus they would own and control society Democratically via worker organizations like worker councils or soviets. China is communist in name only. The working class in China has no real power. In fact, the CCP is scared of them because the working class in China is the largest and most powerful in human history. I would love to see them organize and overthrow the bureaucratic, capitalist dictatorship of the CCP to establish a workers' state.

[@amihart9269]

@@terrystack2643 China is a democracy. The workers control the means of production through the workers' state, or even directly if they work in a public enterprise or on a collective farm. The public enterprises are controlled by workers' congresses. Funny how you admit that China has the largest and most powerful working class in history... yet conveniently ignore the fact that this largest and most powerful working class supports the Party with a 90% approval rating. Hmm, *_I wonder why the Chinese working class isn't overthrowing the CPC?_* Oh, I'm sure white boy Terry Stack knows more about the working class of China than Chinese people.

[@guywholikesthesnarkies1435]

@@amihart9269 This man sounds like one of those Demsoc utopianist. He think a country as huge as China could just adopt some kinda hypothetical workers commune society or something lol

[@terrystack2643]

@@amihart9269 I'm skeptical, you cite a random poll of "90% approval" to back up your claim. What is the source of that poll? Did the CCP fund that poll? How did they frame the question? A real socialist society would have ZERO billionaires. China has the second most behind the United States. Billionaires would never allow workers to control anything because they would lose their wealth and power. Just because an enterprise is "public" doesn't mean it is controlled by the working class. I work in a "public" enterprise here in Canada and my colleagues and I have no control over the organization.

[@willengel2458]

China has a lot of State owned enterprises (SOE), banks, electricity, oil and gas, and transportation that provide products and services at cost plus at affordable price to its citizens. telecommunication companies must provide service to remote rural areas.

[@ThePeaceReport]

The US does too, doesn't make them socialist.

[@tankseverywhere1492]

@@ThePeaceReport China's State dominate the market capitalization with over 60% state ownership over the market capitalization ( National balance sheet ), and the private market is regulated by the state and is under the control of the state, this economy can only be called State Capitalism at highest. The U.S is a Monopoly Capitalist Economy. your argument is as stupid as any other western Lib and conservative

[@davidhummel3858]

Socialism is not when the government does stuff. Having more or less state involvement says nothing about China being socialist or capitalist. Socialism refers to workers owning the means of production, which they clearly do not in China, hence China is not socialist.

[@weizhang2834]

@@ThePeaceReport you can’t find good signal in america remote area. In China even a small village with 10 families , the government is still built 5G/4G for those 10 families. Road as well. No consider the cost

[@weizhang2834]

@@davidhummel3858 you are just a joke for teaching Chinese who speak English and Chinese and loved both the west and China. China is a socialist democracy, we 1.4 billion Chinese are all know that . Thanks

[@shiningstar6659]

You both are great! Love getting the alert that you both will be in an episode. ♥️

[@skywire5595]

China many SOEs are huge and objective are to serve peoples and not just profit driven only.

[@ryanmilliken6106]

SOEs have nothing to do with communism.

[@exarkun8250]

China is not a capitalist country. It has a state-led market economy that allocates resources and capital to maximize the benefits for society. The needs of capital never rises above the needs of the society, and capital is not allowed to dictate policy making. This is the complete opposite of a country like the US, where capital controls politics and has resulted in a massive wealth gap in society.

[@hamizanyunos1502]

I agree that Capitalists does not dictate policy making in China but I am very skeptical of the claim that this makes China socialist. A state controlled market economy is called Dirigisme

[@amihart9269]

@@hamizanyunos1502 It's more than just state control but the state has to also be controlled by a politically organized proletariat, and Marxists view all political power as originating from production so the state necessarily can't just dictate policy but has to own a significant amount of production itself.

[@hamizanyunos1502]

@@amihart9269 Ok but I don't agree that the State in China is controlled by the proletariat.

[@amihart9269]

@@hamizanyunos1502 Not the proletariat but a politically organized proletariat. Not all capitalists in capitalist countries participate in directly controlling the state either, they have organized representatives, liberal parties, and then the class as a whole interacts with those parties in various ways to keep them in power and writing laws for them. Not every worker will ever be part of the state. some just don't even want to be, but the organized proletariat with their party is what controls the state, and they have the ability to influence if they want. The state in China is obviously an organized proletarian party as it is a communist party that is perfectly fine with undermining the authority of capital, regularly nationalizing businesses, executing wealthy people, all for the benefit of working people, and working people support the party as it has a 90% approval rating. Wealth inequality has even been going down in China for some years now.

[@hamizanyunos1502]

Ok I understand that both the proletariat and capitalist class can't control the state directly thus rely proxies such as political parties and think tanks to control state institutions. Regarding your claims can you give me some links and papers about that?

[@michaelrahal3802]

Rania is great 👍🏻🥰

[@HxH2011DRA]

The best comparison of how market socialism in China works as of right now is Venice while it was working as an independent Merchant Republic. The Venetian system of handling the economy was based on Free Trade, but they built institutions that turned Capitalists into something approximating public servants. Rich merchants were subject to higher punishments for crimes, systematic surveillance & the state was not just allowed, but expected to seize private wealth from the rich when needed for the common good. It was a system where the average people enjoyed quite a lot of freedom, but getting rich meant giving up your civil rights and accepting that your head will be chopped off if you do anything blatantly detrimental to Venice's welfare.

[@ryanmilliken6106]

Market socialism isn't a real thing. Read Marx.

[@henokmulatu2314]

The ONLY Foreign Medias I trust and listen to is CGTN English & Break Through News (Your Media) !!! Thank you for Not being an extremist media like CNN, France 24, Aljazeera, BBC, DW, AFP and etc... when it comes to China, S. America & Africa !!! ##THANK YOU SO MUCH AGAIN BT NEWS !!!## Henok, from Ethiopia.

[@salsachip4980]

Describing China as just a capitalist or socialist country is not very accurate, as Deng has put it "black cat, white cat as long as it catches mice then it is a good cat", basically the fixation on a certain rigid ideology is not necessary beneficial, so China tries to take what works from different models and then test/implement them in China. Xi puts it better in saying that China is socialist with Chinese characteristics.

[@amihart9269]

That is not what Deng meant by that phrase at all! Deng was the one who introduced the Four Cardinal Principles and insisted that China must continue its socialist path and the CPC must always stick for Marxism-Leninism. Deng was very ideological! Even in his reforms he insisted that they must never go so far as to undermine the leading role of the public sector and the public sector must always remain the principal aspect of the economy in order for China to remain on the socialist path. He was not advocating for abandoning socialism for capitalism or not caring about socialism! The term "socialism with Chinese characteristics" also originated with Deng Xiaoping, not Xi!

[@TIENxSHINHAN]

Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is just capitalism with the state at the helm.

[@ryanmilliken6106]

Read Marx

[@rootin222]

China’s revisionist majority of its economy is based on private market demands and speculation not to mention majority of its economic growth almost exclusively comes from the private sector After the Sino Soviet split the Chinese economy was propped up by Western investment in order to encircle the Soviet union a large chunk of China’s both economic and military modernization that happened during the later part of the Cold War was almost exclusively built upon western capital As a counterweight to the USSR. Not just that they supported anti-Soviet movements along side the CIA and other Western intelligence agency’s in order to receive military economic support

[@flysmask]

Yes no sh1t. If the public sector could have pulled the economic growth that the reforms had brought, there would have not been any reforms. They would have just kept going.

[@ryanmilliken6106]

Even if 100% it's growth came from state owned sector it would still not be socialist.

[@fallenswan1670]

I was actually going to mention Eric X. Li, who said in some point in somewhere, that China is not capitalist country, since "Wall Street" could not give orders to the politburo as it does in USA. Capitalists (or bourgeoisie) cannot say, what politicians must do, like in USA. And I see this very core thing. Most important thing is, who really have the power, not by de jure but by de facto.

[@misterhill5598]

China is a pragmatic socialist country with a mixed economy. Every economy is a planned economy. The different is who does the planning. When the private companies do the planning, the objective is to transfer wealth from the 90% to the 1%.this is capitalism. When the government does the planning, the objective is to spread to wealth out to the majority of the population. When the government achieve this, it is socialism.

[@erinboom]

great take, people who don't see private firms as their own autocratic systems don't understand that free markets don't exist without state planning, overall, and planners in general.

[@ragnar999tobi]

@@erinboom FED, EZB and Wallstreet are central planners they keep the same people always rich and bail them out, its also socialism for a special kind of people....

[@urrywest]

I suppose we could adopt another definition of captiolist that is fairly steight forward. In another deffinition if you create capitol you are a capitolist. If you destroy capitol, I don't know what you are but you are not a capitolist.

[@Anonymous------]

Sociapitalism.

[@TheNguyenGiap]

And all the vital parts of an economy is under state control which has turned out for the better in China´s case

[@ronnyron007]

Clearly China is running a capitalist economy under a strong government ... that is always balancing between letting the capitalists develop themselves and helping maintain a social order .

[@carlosmejia5728]

In China the Capitalists are a big part of the economy *but they're NOT part of the government* and they have to be constantly reminded of it. The people if China is the Army and the Army of China is the people and they rule the Country through one Party system because there's only one People an only one Army ...(and only one China as a territory ...after Chiang kai-shek defeat Taiwan *was allowed to have their own capitalist system* . PRC (Popular Republic of China) is its name where Popular means *a Nation in the process of building a socialist State* . China's state body consist of people's congresses, multiparty cooperation and political consultation led by the Communist Party of China (CPC), regional ethnic autonomy and community level self-governance. Global wealth tripled over the last two decades, with China leading the way and overtaking the US for the top spot worldwide, Bloomberg reported.

[@ronnyron007]

@@carlosmejia5728 There are billionaires in teh Chinese Communist Party... so yeah, capitalist are in the government.

[@flysmask]

@@ronnyron007 Party member doesn't mean government. There are some 90 million party member, but obviously there are not 90million government members.

[@TIENxSHINHAN]

@@flysmaskallowing billionaires and capitalists to even join the Communist Party is a huge step backward.

[@arindamsaha735]

Not capitalist economy .feee market economy control by chinese govt.😅

[@carlosmejia5728]

In China the Capitalists are a big part of the economy *but they're NOT part of the government* and they have to be constantly reminded of it. The people of China is the Army and the Army of China is the people and they rule the Country through one Party system because there's only one People an only one Army ...(and only one China as a territory ...after Chiang kai-shek defeat Taiwan province *was allowed to have their own capitalist system* . PRC (Popular Republic of China) is its name where Popular means *a Nation in the process of building a socialist State* . China's state body consist of people's congresses, multiparty cooperation and political consultation led by the Communist Party of China (CPC), regional ethnic autonomy and community level self-governance. Global wealth tripled over the last two decades, with China leading the way and overtaking the US for the top spot worldwide.

[@TIENxSHINHAN]

The communist party allowed capitalists to join the party back in the early 00s. So they are part of the government.

[@mindmybusynassm1645]

Yes, it is always a pleasure to listen to you both ladies, Your minds are so clear and make a lot sense to me. Thank you again for this new video.

[@antediluvianatheist5262]

'I don't know the difference between trade and capitalism.'

[@misterhill5598]

Capitalism is about private control of means of production. It's a system of employer and employee. This system is about wealth transfer from the many to the few. As American like to say it - wealth transfer from the 99% to the 1%. A parasite scheme if you will. Trade happens after the products have been produced. Trade is about exchange of produce/goods. Smart traders over the milenia made good money but it had nothing to do with Capitalism. Trade has existed thousands of years before the emergence of Capitalism and will still be here after humanity leave Capitalism behind.

[@urrywest]

@@misterhill5598 So far you haven't distinguished yourself from people who read the comunist manifesto and/or marx one and think they know everything.. While it is a crying shame to worship neoliberalism, it is important that we who don't develop an understanding that is realistic and can communicate clearly.

[@misterhill5598]

@@urrywest 🤨 And here I thought you wanted to know the basics. I will leave you alone.

[@urrywest]

@@misterhill5598 To me the basics start with a describption of where the money is going and how economies work right now.

[@amihart9269]

@@misterhill5598 You described aspects of capitalism but not capitalism itself. Capitalism itself is about the rule of capital, the dominance of capital as the main aspect of the economy, the dominance of capital to such a large degree that it even seizes state power. Capitalism is capital in command. Plenty of societies prior to capitalism had capital. Feudal societies had capital, but it wasn't in command, business owners were underneath the aristocracy.

[@Zerpentsa6598]

It's socialist because capital is not allowed to dictate. Enterprise, ownership and profit making are not exclusive to capitalism.

[@TIENxSHINHAN]

This isn't what socialism means. Socialism is a dictatorship of the proletariat. China isn't anything close to that, nor are they moving toward that.

[@maoistgonzaloitepolpotist7743]

​@@TIENxSHINHANThe cope from people that think China is socialist in any marxist sense is funny. The CPC literally redefined billionaires in the government as not borgeouis(somehow) in their theory.

[@menassies3224]

Same with Ethiopia any commercial entity that goes against the government will cease to exist

[@TIENxSHINHAN]

Ethiopia is the exact example I always use when I explain that China isn't socialist. Ethiopia is, in practice, a one-party state. The country is developing rapidly. The government cut poverty in half. The government is supported by the majority of Ethiopians. But the ruling party in Ethiopia is an openly centrist, liberal, capitalist party despite basically being the same as the CPC. If China is socialist, then Ethiopia is socialist. Rwanda is socialist. South Africa is socialist. Japan is socialist. Singapore is socialist. China is a capitalist country, they just do capitalism in an Asian/African way.

[@LordPist65]

Thank you, perfectly explained.

[@ThePeaceReport]

The small question is if China is socialist or not. The bigger question is: do we understand what socialism is and is not? Highly recommend reading the following researchers: Pao-Yu Ching, Mobo Gao, Nick Knight, Zhun Xu, WIlliam Hinton, Han Suyin, and Dongping Han. Remember, your source matters. Breakthrough News is the media outlet of PSL, who has an eclectic ideology, essentially a mixture of Marxism and Trotskyim that stems from Sam Marcy, aka revisionism.

[@urrywest]

Why is it more important to define spisific words under this cercomstance or that than to understand how the money goes around and how capitol is made? Defining the words don't say nothing about how the sausage is made.

[@HxH2011DRA]

I counter that it matters even less how you define words & assert that what really matters is material reality: who is raising productive forces around the global, who is raising their people & other nations out of poverty?

[@urrywest]

@@HxH2011DRA Adam Smith felt that wresting control of the land from the land lords was the way to create what he termed at the time 'free market'... It wasn't until Marx coined the word 'capitolism' that we say it.. Marx thought that once we had an ecnomy that was 'capitolist' efficiency and economic justice would only increase from there... It never seemed to bother him that the roman empire fell... ... One way to look at it is if you are creating capitol you are a capitolist, if you are destroying capitol you are not a capitolist... China creats captitol and the US destroys it... So is the meaning of capitolists one who calls themselves comunist and the meaning of a non capitolist one who calls themselves a capitolist? Listening to scollars of clasical ecnomists, I think I have a better handle on what is going on than those who feel some certainty about what these words mean.

[@zhengduquan]

capitalism with feudal remains indeed，said as a Chinese

[@arenchatanews9201]

Welcome to Ethiopia ..we love you so much!

[@tankseverywhere1492]

Nice explanation, i'd suggest people with lack of knowledge to educate themselves instead of crying over China online, Scientific Socialism is a revolutionary science, and China is applying this to their needs. They might not be perfect and have some flaws.

[@olafsrensen9578]

great short description of the chinese structures in the way to socialism. If US dont"change there neolib. model, it wil continue to decline and lots of social unrest will grow even more than today,

[@DeBeard]

wow…amazing ＜3 two gorgeous ladies touching on geopolitical things…nothing more beautiful than that

[@urrywest]

Yep... They both cute...

[@stevencolatrella3512]

The US government owns 50% of all home mortgages and 25% of the land in the US, it had the Homestead Act, which nationalized land and then parceled it out to businesses and individuals, and Lenin said that nationalization was the basis for his own government's nationalization after the revolution. So ownership of land is not enough to deny that a country's dominant mode of production is capitalism - see Engels on the Erfurt program and in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. It is more plausible that capitalism is not the dominant influence in the state in China, which is another matter.But it is also possible that it is or can become that dominant influence. China is mercantalist, with the state holding power, neither primarily socialist (worker controlled) nor capitalist per se.

[@georgewilder7423]

Two very smart ladies here...well done girls!!

[@photonquantum4863]

The original full-length interview got deleted by youtube?

[@urrywest]

It was cool but it didn't cover this much... Is this the interivew that you are referring to? kzbin.info/www/bejne/qpezmq14mquphJo

[@gellegrainja9805]

bravo. ***

[@twood2032]

When I think about the Chinese system, the person often come to my mind is Bruce Lee, which he once said "Be like water". The Chinese system is beyond current people's understanding, the Chinese are not interest in settling in a particlar system, their way is all about use what works. Just like gears, if the gear dont fit then change a new one, if the gear is getting old they will oil it, however if the gear is out of date then they will replace a new one. The talk of whether or not China is capitalist or socialist is such a waste of time, because they are neither.

[@Albert_Einstein_not]

That’s the corniest thing I have ever heard.

[@jxmai7687]

Even CPC admit they may not last forever, hope something better would replace them.

[@twood2032]

@@jxmai7687 Nothing last forever, dynasty rise and fall. I got a strong feeling that whatever that is going to replace the CCP will be a much stronger than the CCP. Be careful what you are wishing for, CCP is a left wing party, the thing that comes after the CCP will be a right wing party.

[@tofolcano9639]

No, they're socialist as she explained it in the video

[@coolorochi]

This is actually exactly Marxist scientific principle. Maybe that's why China adopt Marxist so well.

[@dedg0st]

love john ross. highly recommend.

[@matheusgomessoares6180]

It's funny because for me Tings talks with Brazil

[@borkingborker5567]

China is a mix of capitalism and state socialism. The majority of its economy is state owned but its fastest growing sector is the private sector which is privately owned by individuals, which is the definition of capitalism; Private ownership of the means of production. If that wasn’t the case, China wouldn’t rank 2nd for countries with the largest population of billionaires. And we all know you can’t become a multi-millionaire or billionaire without exploiting the workers. Also, the Chinese government allowing foreign corporations like Foxconn to abuse and exploit its people for profit by taking advantage of the countries lack of workers’ rights laws and regulations is a prime example of laissez fair capitalism.

[@coolorochi]

Every private company have to build a government regulation structure. It's made up of humans, It can be corrupt. By the way you have to be at late stage of capitalism to develop next step by Carl Marx.

[@andrewlin6136]

So what does it have to do with America or EU if they're capitalist or socialist ?

[@EchtInnviertler1996]

Strictly speaking, according to Lenin's definition of the 1921 NEP, china is state-capitalist. but 100 years have passed and most people have no idea what that means. and the excessive use by ultras has also robbed the term "state capitalism" of its original meaning. everything is now supposed to be "state-capitalist", the USSR after 1956, Yugoslavia, Saudi Arabia, the western social democratic countries, etc. that's why i call china "socialist" myself, although i understand that this is not the perfect word.

[@weizhang2834]

This is 2021, not 1921 . China is a socialist democracy with Chinese characters.

[@roscoedash6673]

Saudi Arabia isn’t capitalist at all, it’s a Neo Feudal monarchy. Private capital doesn’t control Saudi Arabia, the monarchy does. Private capitalist in that country function more like lords and vassals. Sure, the state helps direct production, but the State is controlled by a literal monarchy, and the purpose of production in Saudi Arabia is to enrich the monarchy and the lords, vassals, etc loyal to it. They may be moving towards a form of Durgism, but I don’t see how they’re state capitalist in the way that Lenin described.

[@urrywest]

I have no idea what they are talking about... If you are making capitol I figure you are a capitolists.... If you are destroying capitol I figure you are not a capitolst.

[@HxH2011DRA]

@@urrywest capitalism destroys capital all the time ala imperialism

[@amihart9269]

Not at all. Lenin described Russia at the time as a country dominated by small production, and described the NEP as free market system. The socialist market economy is neither of these things, it is dominated by public ownership, and the markets are under control. Take a look at how China handled COVID for example. They didn't try to fix COVID with market mechanisms like the in the US, they were able to rationally plan their way out of the crisis and to override the markets. It's not "free" market, and China is not a country dominated by small production anymore. The CPC maintains political power by controlling the commanding heights of the economy, which are enormous enterprises. Lenin implemented the NEP because he did not have those kinds of enormous enterprises to make public in Russia, the point of the NEP was to build those enterprises, to build socialist socioeconomic structures, as Lenin described it.

[@weiskl887]

Short answer is capitalist dictate market rules and casino owner. Just replace capitalist to Communist party as owner and rule maker. You need capital to build socialism.

[@arindamsaha735]

But indian cant do that.😅😂

[@menassies3224]

Ethiopia land is public too

[@henriklande19966]

Ascencion 2021 film

[@solomon7981]

US and Western powers,raw capitalism and "democracy" for citizens and indirect colony or monitored capitalism wrapped up with democracy and human rights abroad while China, socialism plus controlled capitalism for Chinese and capitalism plus one China policy abroad.

[@Anti-CornLawLeague]

The land is in public hands. Sun Yat-Sen lead the way for China to be what it is today. It’s not capitalist or socialist. It’s Georgist.

[@urrywest]

That is a very good step...

[@ronnyron007]

Capitalism is a relationship.... this relationship is between an employer and an employee.... clearly China is dominated by this relationship in one way or another... Is there a working class in China.... yes.... so China is capitalist and not a classless society.

[@Scere]

Socialism doesn’t entail a classless society though

[@Zhicano]

They never claim to have gotten rid of the classes.

[@TIENxSHINHAN]

@@Zhicanoand they don't plan on getting rid of the classes. China isn't socialist nor are they moving toward socialism.

[@arindamsaha735]

​@@TIENxSHINHAN china already socialist country. do u know what is socialism .😅😂

[@elena25671]

A very superficial analysis...What do you think about the exploitation of hundreds of millions of migrant workers? You have never asked yourselves why the capitalist reform of Deng Xiaoping eliminated free education and free health services, the workers' right to strike, the permanent worker status and the four freedoms? You said china under Mao was poor. Yes, China was still poor but the education and heath services were free... Now China is much richer with almost 6 million of millionaires but why the education and health services are not free and millions of migrant workers can not afford it....Did Marx or Lenin teach that socialism can be built by exploiting hundreds of millions of workers, robbing the plus value created by the working class who work 12 hours per day, 6 days per week? It seems to me that you don't know the difference between socialism and capitalism..

[@TiananmenPrism]

Stupid ultra. Socialism is when you break up the communes and allow bourgeoisie in the party.

[@TIENxSHINHAN]

You're just too bourgeois to understand the way workers think. Everyone knows that the first thing the working class would do after seizing power is start working 12 hours a day, 6 days a week with no overtime pay! The workers would immediately demand to start paying for healthcare in order to grow the productive forces. If the workers had power, we'd cheer for the tiny minority of people becoming billionaires by exploiting our labor. To get rich is glorious! White cat or black cat, as long as it catches mice, it's a good cat!

[@CannabinatedFantasy]

these tings chak out.....

[@dontaskmewhy100]

Best is to go to China and see things for yourself.

[@TiananmenPrism]

Socialism by 2050 trust me bro

[@watchman835]

满满的教条主义。

[@jy3ster]

They talked about not owning land in China is a reason why it’s not capitalist. I understand in China they rent the land correct? In Canada, we can “own” a piece of land and build property but we have to pay property tax. Is that really owning a piece of land? Or is it more like I’m renting it if I’m paying for it every year

[@Zhicano]

Private ownership of land meant for worker exploitation to get profits is non-existent. It handicaps the ability of capitalists to generate a meaningful power base the land is owned by the state. Capitalists are forced to lease it.

[@Anonymous------]

Sociapitalism.

[@liriobolaffio3255]

Mixed economy.

[@SuhandiWijaya]

Basically like Singapore, State Capitalist 2.0

[@HxH2011DRA]

In Singapore production still ultimately serves capital, In China it serves the public

[@folag]

These women need to immerse themselves in what they're discussing. They're clueless as to what's happening. How can ù

[@DataJYdocs]

Beyond 'socialism': Humanist Universalism. 👍🏻

[@aunttifa6794]

Enes Kanter, likely owns indigenous land, is 100% Eurasian colonizer enjoying his Eurasian settler colonialist social domination hierarchy since Christopher Columbus, when Indigenous, and mixed indigenous people people who are 100% the victims of US Eurasian settler colonialist rentier hegemony, are supposed to stay in Mexico and they are genetically indigenous mostly & including indigenous Africans (Haitians & other AfroLatinx) displaced and dispossessed of their land and turned in the human capital by Eurasian colonizers. 😒🙄😭 because all settler colonialist states are themselves evidence of crimes against humanity.😒

[@watchman835]

Who the hell cares what it is called as? The key measure is If the economy has been improving , are people’s life getting better? Should we really care whether the current condition fully fits to Marx, or Lenin who ever lived 200 years says? It is ludicrous.

[@HxH2011DRA]

Plus even if you want to say it matters lenin himself said socialism is worker council power plus electrification of the whole country, which China has achieved

[@amihart9269]

You can't achieve anything through guesswork. Formulating theories is how you develop. China's rise was directly carried out by people inspired by certain theories which they've continued to work on and develop. You are acting like China's growth was just random, that one day China just appeared as a fast developing and powerful country. It wasn't an accident, wasn't by chance. It was done deliberately by people who were well researched into topics of socioeconomics and did what they thought was best from those theories and then tried to update the theories based on their experiences in what worked and what didn't. Saying we should abandon their theories and ignore everything they have told us they learned is just anti-intellectualism. Also, you really really should read a book, Lenin wasn't alive 200 years ago and Marx would've been 3 years old. The CPC's theories are lot more complex than Marx and Lenin as well, I don't know why you dogmatically obsess over them, it's insulting to all the Chinese theorists who developed the theory through China's experiences. You have no respect.

[@flysmask]

Yes we should, because if we let capitalism slip in and mix up terms and concepts, China will eventually run into the problems all capitalist and soc-dem republics face and it will hit a stone wall. All may seem rosy right now, but it will not be long lived - just like the 60's America, growing middle class, strong manufacturing economy, great opportunity, look how fast it deteriorated. We have to clarify terms, keep careful watch of the system and ensure fully socialist and eventually communist transition, or the prosperity will not be long-lasting.

[@watchman835]

@@flysmask Go to check the history book, there is name for people like you, ideologues.

[@ReparationsForImperialism]

Censored

[@terrystack2643]

China is not a workers state thus it isn't a socialist country. The working class in China doesn't democratically own and control society there. Just because a country has state-owned businesses doesn't make them socialist. If those state-owned corporations are not owned and democratically governed by the working class, it isn't socialism. After the 1949 peasant revolution (not working class) Mao mirrored China after the Stalinist bureaucratic dictatorship. It is evident today because China is governed by a bureaucratic dictatorship led by Xi Xinping. China is communist in name only. A real socialist country would have ZERO billionaires, no bureaucracy and by governed by the working class.

[@hamizanyunos1502]

I mostly agree with you it is kind of shocking why some people think that China is socialist just because the state owns the corporations or that the state bureaucracy coordinates the economy instead of the private sector.

[@flysmask]

How do you define 'working class' and democratically own and control society? Can you give examples?

[@hamizanyunos1502]

@@flysmask Revolutionary Catalonia from 1936 to 1939 is a good example of a socialist experiment. Working class refers to people that use and operate the means of production but don't own them directly or indirectly

[@Checkmate07351]

It's state capitalist

[@rootin222]

@totoki The economy of the USSR up to 1954 and the Warsaw Pact a current example would be either Belarus or the DPRK

[@urrywest]

@totoki My qestion exactly. I have no idea.

[@amihart9269]

No, you are a bit outdated. China was state capitalist in the 1950s. It's not the 1950s no more.

[@rootin222]

@@amihart9269 Wasn’t talking about China,You’re a bit dense also explain to me how they were state capitalist

[@amihart9269]

@@rootin222 Who are you and why should I care about what you were talking about? Whyt did you even ping me?

[@gar915]

Capitalist pretending to be communist

[@HxH2011DRA]

A capitalist country with no private land ownership????

[@LinLinvy]

Childish comment with childish understanding of China

[@gar915]

@@LinLinvy how about you teach us about China?

[@ReparationsForImperialism]

Censored

[@ReparationsForImperialism]

Censored