China considers themselves socialist because they equivocate the people with the state.

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.