Comment on It really is like this
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 day agoChina has become a psudo Capitalist country in its quest for world domination.
Capitalism goes hand in hand with right wing extremism
I think China would have to do a lot more for the avg person before they could be considered socialist or communist again
I think China would have to do a lot more for the avg person before they could be considered socialist or communist again
Within the last five years China completely eliminated the worst category of poverty in their borders. I’d say they are currently actively engaged in doing a lot more for the average person than most countries.
If you can take the Chinese Government for their word. Which I can’t
Do you take the Chinese citizens at theirs?
We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. Second, the attitudes of Chinese citizens appear to respond (both positively and negatively) to real changes in their material well-being, which suggests that support could be undermined by the twin challenges of declining economic growth and a deteriorating natural environment.
Very few governments on this planet have approval numbers this good, and even fewer have ones this good when it’s a neutral third party conducting the surveys.
I’m sorry but a dictator for life is a dealbreaker.
It’s going to collapse once daddy dies like every dictatorship.
Schmoo@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
Socialism isn’t when the government does stuff for the people, it’s when the people take matters into their own hands and do stuff for the good of each other. Even if a state behaves in the most benevolent way possible, it is not socialist unless the workers have collective ownership of the means of production.
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 day ago
By the definition there are no socialist countries.
When people talk about socialism in the real world it doesn’t mean owning the means of production
Schmoo@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
Only because the very concepts of ownership and the collective-individual dichotomy are necessarily vague and subjective. China considers themselves socialist because they equivocate the people with the state. If the people are collectively represented by the state and the state owns (some of) the means of production, then at least transitively the people own (some of) the means of production.
As an anarchist I don’t believe the state adequately represents the interests of the people, nor do I think it could even if it were radically democratic and egalitarian, though I would still certainly prefer that to the existing status quo. Somewhere a line must be drawn arbitrarily and I prefer to draw it on the other side of authoritarian state control.
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 18 hours ago
Isn’t that kinda the line between socialism and communism? That communism has no state, but that a socialist state can act as a sort of intermediary.
Not that it’s the only socialist model, mind you; a market economy composed entirely of individual private worker co-ops is another model, for example. Then there’s the issue of implementation, whether the people actually democratically control the government.
But ideologically, while not communist, I don’t see how that structure can’t be considered socialist.