this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
11 points (78.9% liked)

Memes

44087 readers
1474 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This is not "one or the another" situation, communism is the next qualitative stage in development of society. It solves the primary contradiction that we experience in capitalism, that is socialized production being privatized by individuals, aka capitalists.

You can't just declare communism by signing a document, because it is a process of development in which small quantitative changes in production (socialism) lead to a qualitative change (communism), thus to achieve the communism stage you have to achieve a certain level of development.

This is why China is considered a communist country by marxists-leninist even though qualitatively it is a capitalist country. They are actively working to develop communism, this can be clearly seen throughout their rhetoric (i.e. "The Governance of China") and their material results.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The problem with China being that it's authoritarian, not that it's capitalist or communist. There's no choice other than the Communist Party, so when the party is wildly corrupt, you have no recourse at all short of revolution. And we all know what China does to counter-revolutionaries.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And that is a problem to whom? Every single state is authoritarian, the question is whose interests are they protecting.

China is clearly a dictatorship of the proletariat and they use authority to protect the interests of the proletariat. Yes, sometimes their policy is wrong and does harm but ultimately they work to improve their policies, governing is a learning experience after all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's a problem because people don't feel like stakeholders when they don't have a say and can't participate in their system of governance. This in turn means that they aren't incentivized to willingly participate and have to be forced or indoctrinated, both of which are violations of human rights.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Do you think people there don't participate in elections? The party has literally 100 million members, people in China are politically involved.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

When was their last general election?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And how many parties were they allowed to make selections from? Were there any candidates that weren't pre-approved by the leading party?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

One party where a basic platform is defined and differences are expressed vibrantly on top of that is better than two parties that brand themselves as different but only offer a couple of aesthetic differences and concessions to keep people mad at the opposing party and not the underlying structure

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

...You're really saying that one party where you have no functional choice is better than a multi-party system, just because you think that Republicans and Dems are too alike, while ignoriing the plethora of other parties that not only actually exist in the US, but hold office at local and state level?

Shouldn't expect any more from a tankie though.