It’s not capitalism, nor is it socialism in the traditional sense.
It’s socialism with Chinese characteristics. This is the key qualifier. It’s kinda its own thing.
Removed by mod
can we not outsource ideological debates to AI
Slop robot with Chinese characteristics
I asked DeepSeek about this and here’s what it had to say:
DeepSeek
poo poo pee pee shidding and a farding butt lmao
Finally an AI that is coherent
There is something very trying about coming to non-mainstream forum to ask other human beings a question and getting a copy-pasted computer-generated response
welcome to web 4.0 I guess
not much of a debate on this one, guess I could drop some links to redsails next time tho
def nods nods, they have pretty good essays
next person to answer a human question with ai slop gets blocked
Would you like an essay from prolewiki?
Tl;dr: it doesn’t capture the full essence of China’s economy by simply calling its economy a state-capitalist or such mode of production. (unlike what others like Vidiwell might imply)
There are many major factors to take into account, such as:
Land ownership
State planning
State owned enterprises, as the commanding heights of the economy
State guided investment funds
Cooperatives
CPC ran banks and CPC bond markets
Party-commitee involvement
Extra-legal control rights (recuperation/co-option of private enterprise into the relatively more socialist framework)
Social credit score et anti-{private} monopoly laws in regulating market sector
How accurate? It’s not correct, if that’s what you mean. I’ve been compelled by the argument that it’s state capitalist as defined by lenin with regards to the stages of communist development, though
I would argue it’s state socialism still because there’s a clear path to everything becoming state owned, but they’re playing the market to get global trade a capital up. As they build their economy. Quite brilliant if you’re thinking about hundreds and thousands of years into the future while still building the best situation for Chinese people today.
nah, even by deng’s own requirement China has restored capitalism. He wanted capitalism restrained to foreign investment and for the public/collective sector at 90 percent of the economy, without a development of large domestic capitalism. China post deng liberalized extremely hard which has only been put to a halt by Xi. By literally any Communist definition, even by the one who started ‘reform and opening up’, China does not have a socialist economy, but a state capitalist or even just capitalist one. The problem is the governing structure is explicitly socialist, and governed by a communist party (although some areas are not very devoted to communism at all, and want to restore capitalism like the Shanghai clique). But still, this is at most state capitalist as the base of all things under marxist analysis is the economy.
Its hard to say they are or aren’t building socialism because i see them at a crossroads. They can increase socialist reforms or increase capitalist ones. Socialist restoration is possible but needs some strong movements to get rid of the groups who restored capitalism in the first place.
I totally disagree with this analysis and so does Xi and the Chinese government. There’s no reason not to trust their plan.
of course xi would disagree, but the ‘chinese government’ is far too wide. The USSR’s party officially was building socialism but within had a liberal faction that overthrew the actual socialists and restored capitalism to a destructive effect. This is a party of 90 million people, there are definitely large factions within it with different aims. Maoists, Trotskyists, Marxist leninists, Dengists, Liberals, Nationalists, social democrats, and much more.
Xi would disagree because he is part of the faction trying to increase socialist reforms within the country, but also not rock the boat too much. He wants it dedicated to building socialism, but also wants markets to take a large part in the economy. He’s stopped it from further liberalizing, definitely.
The second centenerary goal of developing a modern socialist country in all respects isn’t until 2049.
2049 is 25 years away that’s 9/11 til now for reference. That’s why I said on the scale of hundreds and thousands of years that’s clearly the direction.
sorry although i do trust the CPC way more than other governments, this just gives me vibes of kruschev’s “communism in ten years”. what is key is that the CPC has redefined what they mean by ‘achieving socialism’ to almost a capitalistic idea of industrial development and enrichment.
Although i would like to point out that they have redefined ‘socialism’ to prosperity. Although building prosperity is very important, it shouldn’t be what socialism is primarily.
I personally think China is socialist for the record
Extra long and fancy NEP
but lenin said NEP was just state capitalism and was a very temporary measure. Making it longer kinda defeats the point.
Yep that’s the joke
autism moment, the joke flew over my head and i tried to catch it
It’s a very oblique and dry joke. I wouldn’t blame anyone going “whuh?”
So what suckdems pinky-promise but never deliver? Sounds like a big improvement
an improvement, to be sure, but state capitalism at most
