(Thread IKs:
fart simpson)
|
my favorite bouquet definition of socialism is just producing things based on their use-values rather than their exchange values. i'm not sure if you can reasonably claim that china's doing that in general but they're at least able to do it in response to contingent circumstances
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 03:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 08:31 |
|
|
Black cats and white cats was a Deng quote from the early 1960s when Deng and Liu Shaoqi came back to power after the Great Leap Forward. It wasn't related to the current reform and opening up period, a better quote would be to feel the stones while crossing the river.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 03:47
|
|
|
stephenthinkpad posted:As far as the current Chinese economic model, you don't need to call it "State Capitalism", because it's distinctive enough from any other country. You can call it "CPP Capitalism" or Dengonomic or whatever roll off the tongue better. In fact the State Capitalism branding was from the international capital (The Economists Magazine) I call it "crapitalism"
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 03:54
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Black cats and white cats was a Deng quote from the early 1960s when Deng and Liu Shaoqi came back to power after the Great Leap Forward. It wasn't related to the current reform and opening up period, a better quote would be to feel the stones while crossing the river. Both quotes can be used to describe the economic reform era of China. The problem of the river quote is it still implies there is only one correct path to get to the destination, while the cat quote implies the pragmatic and pluralistic nature of the Chinese approach.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 04:06
|
|
|
sincx posted:remember, it's not socialism, it's socialism with Chinese characteristics Wow, this is one of the most meaningful and insightful images I have ever seen on the Internet. Thank you for showing it to me- its profundity allows me to see the objective truth which underlines all of existence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 04:34
|
|
|
central planning is the antithesis of anarchy of production so its what Marx is talking about in any case the point is to make the social aspect of production come to the forefront and take a hold of it much like a lightbulb is the domesticated version of lightning, central planning is the domesticated version of economic development , from there you are able to take a hold of the reigns of human development and under the leadership of a communist party toward communism
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 04:52
|
|
|
can the china give its citizens toilet paper? my country can’t
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:00
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:can the china give its citizens toilet paper? my country can’t yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:05
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:lol Jack Ma suspending his IPO is truly a victory of socialism. of course, a socialism where IPOs happen and a billionaire capitalist privately owns the largest company and stock markets exists seems a bit weird but eh, I mean. Hey who knows maybe in a year he ends up having to “sell” his company and then spends a year in prison for “crimes against the state”.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:32
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:It's true that Marx was not so prescriptive about what socialism would specifically look like. It’s this. China is actually socialism or at least its early stages and it works well. Say it loud and proud to crush the right liberals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:34
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:can the china give its citizens toilet paper? my country can’t
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:38
|
|
|
for example, there is a wide variety of snacks to choose from
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:41
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:It’s this. China is actually socialism or at least its early stages and it works well. Say it loud and proud to crush the right liberals. lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:52
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:lol Jack Ma suspending his IPO is truly a victory of socialism. of course, a socialism where IPOs happen and a billionaire capitalist privately owns the largest company and stock markets exists seems a bit weird but eh, The CCP still has the power to prevent capitalists from redirecting the economy to a truly capitalist economy, a dictatorship of the bourgeoise. If China was "capitalist" they would appear as if they were a capitalist country, but they really don't. The current five-year plan includes nationalizing massive amounts of private enterprise. What other countries can do that without getting completely hosed up? Venezuela barely got away with nationalizing their oil companies - and the bourgeoise still have significant control over their economy even as we tend to call them socialist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 05:54
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:It’s this. China is actually socialism or at least its early stages and it works well. Say it loud and proud to crush the right liberals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:02
|
|
|
State should always put leashes on the capitalists. None of them have half ounce of loyalty. I have always said CCP should have taken Li Ka-Shing out back and shot him and split his wealth to 600 million HKers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:07
|
|
|
im sure the knowledge that china is genuinely socialist is a comfort to the majority of workers, who are employed in private firms where their surplus labor goes to the profit of private capitalists, or the hundreds of billionaires, who live in a socialist society that has miraculously allowed them to accumulate 10000x the wealth of the average person and hold ownership of the means of production.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:13
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:im sure the knowledge that china is genuinely socialist is a comfort to the majority of workers, who are employed in private firms where their surplus labor goes to the profit of private capitalists, or the hundreds of billionaires, who live in a socialist society that has miraculously allowed them to accumulate 10000x the wealth of the average person and hold ownership of the means of production. I don't think you can reasonably look at the position of the capitalist class in China and pretend it's identical to the position of capitalists in the world at large. The point that you're making re: massive inequality within the country is well taken, but it's myopic and reductive to pretend that the existence of private firms somehow irrevocably taints the socialist project. that's just my two cents tho, im not a l33t china watcher deeply immersed in the nuances of xi jinping thought or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:31
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:I don't think you can reasonably look at the position of the capitalist class in China and pretend it's identical to the position of capitalists in the world at large. The point that you're making re: massive inequality within the country is well taken, but it's myopic and reductive to pretend that the existence of private firms somehow irrevocably taints the socialist project. im not sure where ive said chinese capitalism is identical to everywhere else? and my main argument is not inequality, but who owns the means of production which is supposed to be what all this socialism or capitalism business is all about. who owns the means of production in China? the majority of the economy is in the hands of private capitalists, the majority of the workers must sell their labor to those private capitalists. that is capitalism, and frankly people saying otherwise is pointing at the sky and saying its not blue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:37
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:im sure the knowledge that china is genuinely socialist is a comfort to the majority of workers, who are employed in private firms where their surplus labor goes to the profit of private capitalists, or the hundreds of billionaires, who live in a socialist society that has miraculously allowed them to accumulate 10000x the wealth of the average person and hold ownership of the means of production. Every private firm that got transferred back to the state would also have much of their surplus value transferred as well, unless the state purchased the firm at fair value (giving the shareholders the bulk of surplus value). I doubt the CCP are buying out firms at anything close to a capitalist definition of fair value. I'm sure many shareholders are getting off mega-rich, but no matter how much cash they amass, the CCP will never allow them to control the means of production. Obviously China has a host of problems, especially with inequality... But the CCP do not manage the economy as capitalists, far from it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:43
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:im not sure where ive said chinese capitalism is identical to everywhere else? and my main argument is not inequality, but who owns the means of production which is supposed to be what all this socialism or capitalism business is all about. who owns the means of production in China? the majority of the economy is in the hands of private capitalists, the majority of the workers must sell their labor to those private capitalists. that is capitalism, and frankly people saying otherwise is pointing at the sky and saying its not blue. it just seems premature to me to say that they 'own' the means of production within the country when state firms are still a huge proportion of employment and the party can take any private firm away from the capitalists with a snap of their fingers if they wish.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:48
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:it just seems premature to me to say that they 'own' the means of production within the country when state firms are still a huge proportion of employment and the party can take any private firm away from the capitalists with a snap of their fingers if they wish. so what are they waiting for
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:51
|
|
|
Kindest Forums User posted:Every private firm that got transferred back to the state would also have much of their surplus value transferred as well, unless the state purchased the firm at fair value (giving the shareholders the bulk of surplus value). I doubt the CCP are buying out firms at anything close to a capitalist definition of fair value. I'm sure many shareholders are getting off mega-rich, but no matter how much cash they amass, the CCP will never allow them to control the means of production. im not sure what you are talking about, there are no significant nationalizations or expansions of SOEs going on, and every year the private sector has grown larger as a % of the economy under xi.  this is a bit outdated but the trend has continued.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:51
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:it just seems premature to me to say that they 'own' the means of production within the country when state firms are still a huge proportion of employment and the party can take any private firm away from the capitalists with a snap of their fingers if they wish. if the CCP were committed communists with the absolute power to immediately end capitalism and liberate hundreds of millions of workers from having their surplus labor go to the profit of capitalists, well, they would do that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:52
|
|
|
indigi posted:so what are they waiting for xi's still channeling qi i guess e; or to be less flip, this is where my complete ignorance of whatever the actual party line and theoretical basis of 'jinping thought' comes into play Fuligin has issued a correction as of 06:58 on Nov 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:53
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:im not sure where ive said chinese capitalism is identical to everywhere else? and my main argument is not inequality, but who owns the means of production which is supposed to be what all this socialism or capitalism business is all about. who owns the means of production in China? the majority of the economy is in the hands of private capitalists, the majority of the workers must sell their labor to those private capitalists. that is capitalism, and frankly people saying otherwise is pointing at the sky and saying its not blue. That's not exactly true. This graph from a garbage source shows SOE with a >60% asset share in 2002, and ~38% in 2014. I doubt these number accurately reflect the broader asset picture, since China has complete control over the banking system. I'm sure China is already greater than 50%, and will be much higher following their current trajectory. And even if the ownership numbers lean to private firms, it doesn't really matter, since the CCP still has significant control over them. The private firms shareholders are currently being paid as managers (handsomely, of course), since they have no actual power over their own equity, as they could lose it any day.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:57
|
|
|
China won't be a modern socialist country until 2050, but they have achieved, and maintain, a dictatorship of the proletariat in alliance with the peasantry. The reforms and opening up were necessary to keep the country developing after corn boy went revisionist. They liberalized as much as they had to to get in good with the WTO and so on, the liberalization arguably peaked in the 90s. Let's have the same dumb conversation for the 500th time e: Percentage of SoEs is meaningless when Xi's strategy is to exert control over private firms by forcing them to cede managerial ground to party cadres. Mantis42 has issued a correction as of 07:02 on Nov 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 06:57
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:China won't be a modern socialist country until 2050, but they have achieved, and maintain, a dictatorship of the proletariat in alliance with the peasantry. The reforms and opening up were necessary to keep the country developing after corn boy went revisionist. They liberalized as much as they had to to get in good with the WTO and so on, the liberalization arguably peaked in the 90s. Let's have the same dumb conversation for the 500th time it boggles my mind that someone could call Khrushchev a revisionist and defend post-deng china as secretly committed to communism in the same sentence lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:03
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:e: Percentage of SoEs is meaningless when Xi's strategy is to exert control over private firms by forcing them to cede managerial ground to party cadres. extracting surplus value from workers and transferring it to capitalists seems pretty meaningful from a socialist perspective
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:09
|
|
|
i'm just seeking truth from facts, sorry if it hurts your feelings you seem mad that the CCP doesn't just will communism into existence and is focused on developing the necessary material conditions first, but thats just praxis vs idealism
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:15
|
|
|
no one is wearing drab overalls while sitting on top of tractors anymore, therefore it isn’t socialism bing bong so simple
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:19
|
|
|
The CPC still controls the surplus on a macro level; the party still holds the whip. I really don't see what the post-Mao alternative was. Become a pariah state? Or let the capitalists invite you in and make yourself so central to the world economy that they couldn't possibly do to you what they did to the Soviet Union.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:24
|
|
|
Comrade Koba posted:no one is wearing drab overalls while sitting on top of tractors anymore, therefore it isn’t socialism
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:26
|
|
|
Even if you believe erroneously that the party has fallen to Capitalist roaders, they still administer a country where the average citizen studies Marx in school, there is no stigma surrounding Communism, and there is a real expectation of rapid material change resulting from state action. The PRC has not succumbed to Capitalist Realism, they still exist in the realm of possible politics, and when marketization eventually falters, when the rate of profit falls as it must, and China reaches it's zenith of development, it's the only society I can see escape the gravity of neoliberalism. Face it kid, all possible paths to a Socialist future lie with Chinese hegemony.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:28
|
|
|
indigi posted:so what are they waiting for https://i.imgur.com/Bl8jBOD.mp4
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:29
|
|
|
Oh my god people still think china is a socialist country or is aiming to be socialist and not what it actually is a hardcore Capitalist one-party surveillance fascist state? that's really adorable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:51
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:Oh my god people still think china is a socialist country or is aiming to be socialist and not what it actually is a hardcore Capitalist one-party surveillance fascist state? that's really adorable. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 07:57
|
|
|
Sheng-Ji Yang posted:it boggles my mind that someone could call Khrushchev a revisionist and defend post-deng china as secretly committed to communism in the same sentence lol i don't see any significant difference from Maoist new democracy you still have the communist party leading the four classes peasants, proles, small holders and national capitalists
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 09:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 08:31 |
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:for example, there is a wide variety of snacks to choose from I would like to try some chinese snacks, my country makes a variety of multiflavored oreo brand American sandwich cookies
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2020 09:40
|
|