3 ms·
> "communist dictatorship" is inexact enough to be outright dishonest. Describing an oligarchy as a communist dictatorship is near-equivalent. Far from dishone
by BearilyHappy 8y ago
> "communist dictatorship" is inexact enough to be outright dishonest.
Describing an oligarchy as a communist dictatorship is near-equivalent. Far from dishonest.
> Their economy is obviously capitalist
It's capitalist at specific granularities. This is a derail, at best.
> They have a process, they have regular handovers of power.
So does an oligarchy.
- yourbandsucks 8y agoThank you! It's an oligarchy! Not a dictatorship! But they're not near-equivalent. Group vs individual. Politics are entirely different. Both deemphasize citizen rights but that doesn't make them the same! Why are people so offended that this distinction exists?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- BearilyHappy 8y ago> But they're not near-equivalent. > Group vs individual. If the organizational operation isn't transparent, it's observably the same top-down dictatorship (worrying about one versus many is silly, insofar as no human governs alone).
- yourbandsucks 8y agoThe decision making process is different and the decisions are different. It's different. Perceived lack of transparency[1] does not change that. [1]: There are vastly different levels of transparency for, in order: Foreigners, rural poor, non-party members (there are 90M party members), party members, people who are well-connected locally and/or nationally -- cynical people might say it's the same here in certain ways, with the biggest difference being party membership as a prestige badge to work for and benefit from.