3 ms·
You can't blindly assert that Maoist China was not Euro style and modern China is Euro style, and also claim that Maoist China has nothing to do with modern Chi
by gertef 10y ago
You can't blindly assert that Maoist China was not Euro style and modern China is Euro style, and also claim that Maoist China has nothing to do with modern China's economy. There's a near-direct line from Maoist China to modern China -- the next generation of the same Communist Party is in charge.
- muninn_ 10y agoYou did notice that they liberalized the Chinese economy, right? That's why it's Modern China and not still Maoist China. Maoist China is unequivocally not European style, and is one of the worst tragedies in all human history. Modern China has created wealth, people who can attend university, start businesses, etc. even if it has some issues as we perceive them in the West.
- parhurs 10y agoYou are not addressing gp's points - that Maoist and "Modern China" are directly related and that "Modern China" is not "Euro style".
- berntb 10y agoThe Chinese industrialization and growth was mostly based on capitalism. Which is more of a Western economy than the Great Leap. Which was the point you comment on. (At least, compared to the failure before, with just central planning.) If you have anything contradicting that, it would be interesting? (Edit: Ah, I commented on a karma 23 secondary account? :-) )
- parhurs 10y agoI don't have anything to contradict it, since I'm not arguing either way. I just like pointing out communication issues in HN's discussions. What about the second point?