GenZhouArchive

224 readers

1 users here now

A space to archive anything from /r/GenZhou

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Does china have any intention of ending state capitalism? (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

u/StalinJunior7492 - originally from r/GenZhou

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

u/TheRealSlimLaddy - originally from r/GenZhou

Lenin’s NEP did not even have Five-Year plans.

I don’t see your point here, unless you’re implying that China’s economy is reminiscent to Lenin’s NEP, which would be contradictory as China does have planning and a fairly thriving market economy.

The word “free” seems to be an amorphous term that people just use whenever is convenient.

I agree, though I could ask the opposite argument. What makes China’s economy a socialist market economy? Isn’t it the point of socialism to abolish markets?

Even the USSR had markets which Stalin said were useful because for reasons of economic calculation since the Soviet planners were “inexperienced” at the time.

Now this is interesting, but wouldn’t this mean that Stalin’s USSR was not materially socialist? Or would it mean it would be similar to current China’s economy, in which it could humorously be called “socialism with Soviet characteristics”?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

u/aimixin - originally from r/GenZhou

I don’t see your point here, unless you’re implying that China’s economy is reminiscent to Lenin’s NEP, which would be contradictory as China does have planning and a fairly thriving market economy.

Bro, that's obviously my point. Did you not stop to think that "maybe the logical conclusion to your argument is the actual point you're trying to make"?

You're trying to say state capitalism has "planning and free markets" when the state capitalist system as implemented in the NEP did not have planning, so China's system is obviously not comparable to that. Your definition of state capitalism is just overly simplistic.

I agree, though I could ask the opposite argument. What makes China’s economy a socialist market economy?

For the reason I cited. Public ownership is the principal part of the system.

Isn’t it the point of socialism to abolish markets?

You are approaching this from an idealist angle where the economic system is entirely the result of the politics of the system, and not vice-versa. You can't just "abolish markets" and such a thing would lead to an economic disaster. Markets gradually reduce down in and of themselves as a result of economic development, even in a capitalist society.

If there is any "point" to the communist movement it's not to achieve some arbitrary utopian system, it's to raise people's living standards, to achieve common prosperity, which requires liberating the productive forces by overthrowing bourgeois rule and establishing a workers' state.

If you think we should "abolish markets" by government decree just because you don't like them without any regards to the actual material conditions and don't care about how that might harm material development, then I think you miss the point.

Now this is interesting, but wouldn’t this mean that Stalin’s USSR was not materially socialist?

Have you ever considered that maybe if your definition of socialism would lead you to say the literal freaking USSR is not socialist, then your definition of socialism is patently absurd and incredibly disconnected from the real world?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

u/TheRealSlimLaddy - originally from r/GenZhou
There’s no need to be so combative. I’m on your side.

You’re trying to say state capitalism has “planning and free markets”

That isn’t what I’m saying at all. I’ve said that, verbatim, China’s economic system is fairly unique in its aspects of both planning and markets. I would consider it still within the umbrella of state capitalism.

It’s intellectually dishonest to compare Stalin’s USSR to modern China, because you and I both know that they are materially, fundamentally, very, very different.

Your definition of state capitalism is just overly simplistic.

Possibly, but then again I’m not defining state capitalism. You are. I’m saying China could be within its umbrella of meanings.

Public ownership is the principal part of the system.

What public ownership? AFAIK, most productive forces inside China are not owned collectively. Even if they were, the productive outputs in the capitalist market system they allow far outweighs the production of their publicly owned industry.

If you think we should “abolish markets” by government decree just because you don’t like them without any regards to the actual material conditions and don’t care about how that might harm material development, then I think you miss the point.

This, again, is not what I’m arguing. I currently do not see the CPC slowly dismantling the market system it has been allowing since their reform era. Xi Jinping himself said that, paraphrasing here, “China will not move away from this specific market system”.

Have you ever considered that maybe if your definition of socialism would lead you to say the literal freaking USSR is not socialist, then your definition of socialism is patently absurd and incredibly disconnected from the real world?

You say “literal freaking USSR” as if it’s supposed to be socialist in name and with no nuance.