6 ms·

supposedly something similar happened when Kruschev visited Los Angeles decades ago and thought that all the cars/trucks he saw jamming up roads and freeways we

supposedly something similar happened when Kruschev visited Los Angeles decades ago and thought that all the cars/trucks he saw jamming up roads and freeways were put there to impress him. we tell ourselves these stories to make ourselves feel good about our misshapen consumer-oriented economy. and it doesn't quite work as well now because they more or less have the same stuff in China. also, we're buying a lot of that stuff from China, so it makes even less sense.

titanomachy 7y ago
Is there any meaningful sense in which China is communist?
- eropple 7y ago
  My understanding is that the party controls all land, has controlling interests in many if not most critical companies--as of 2016 the Chinese government owned three percent of all companies in China and up to thirty percent of industrial output[0]--and even theoretically independent companies have former Party officials or relatives of those officials running the show. So it's surely not your textbook Leninist system, but it has many aspects thereof; I suppose you might characterize it as a mixed-command economy. It isn't what we would describe in the vernacular as "socialist"--as that word today generally, outside of the fever swamps of the American right wing, refers to countries like the Nordic or other Western European countries that work within something of a mixed-market system; it's definitely more command-oriented than that, still. Leninist/Stalinist communism generally sports a number social factors that definitely still exist in China outside of the economic structure, such as strong informational control, a smorgasbord of human rights abuses, and a generally totalitarian mode of governance and operation. So I guess the question becomes "well, what does 'communist' mean?" My own, inexpert answer would be "it's not 'communist', except insofar as 'communist' is defined to mean 'what China does'," and my own thinking is that today it maps more to an ethnonationalist--though this isn't a perfect description as many groups are accepted, but at the same time one can see see the routine oppression of Tibetans, Uighurs, etc.--totalitarian state with a largely centrally-controlled economy. That doesn't map to any historical definition of 'communist' that I know of, but reasonable minds can differ. [0] - https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Wendy-Leutert-Challenges-ahead-in-Chinas-reform-of-stateowned-enterprises.pdf https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Wendy-L...
  - lostconfused 7y ago
    There's a pretty simple definition of communism and it's "workers own the means of production". That's the one defining trait of communism according to any communist.
    - eropple 7y ago
      Sure, but that also has never been practically the case in any communist nation of which I am aware. Getting into No True Communist discussions isn't meaningfully productive, but there might at least be something to be made from looking at other self-declared communist states and teasing out the differences.
      - lostconfused 7y ago
        And I don't want to start that discussion. I just think it's easier to call China a totalitarian capitalist state, without torturing other labels to make them fit. It's not unthinkable for a state to miss represent it self when it comes to names or labels.
        eropple 7y ago
        I...agree? I mean, I said that. ;) Unless your definition of "communist" is "what China is," it doesn't qualify.
        lostconfused 7y ago
        Then I didn't fully understand your initial post, I am sorry.
        stcredzero 7y ago
        I just think it's easier to call China a totalitarian capitalist state, without torturing other labels to make them fit. I think calling them capitalist doesn't involve much less "torturing labels" than calling them communist.
- seabrookmx 7y ago
  I think people associate a "one party system" with communism. But really the system of government isn't strictly tied to how the economy is managed (see: monarchies, fascism). You're right though. Economically China isn't communist. Especially in their "Special Administrative Regions" (Hong Kong, Macau).
Animats 7y ago
supposedly something similar happened when Kruschev visited Los Angeles decades ago Anatoly Dobrynin, the USSRs ambassador to the US from 1962 to 1986, wrote that when he arrived in New York, he was amazed to see traffic jams were real. In the USSR, they were claimed to be American propaganda. The world has advanced a lot since then. The third world now has much worse traffic jams than the US. (Dobrynin's autobiography describes how he became a diplomat. One day, Stalin was grumbling about the old diplomats around him, and said that the USSR needed New Soviet Men, like aircraft designers, as diplomats. The next day, Dobrynin, aircraft designer, was essentially arrested at his drafting table at work and sent to the Higher Diplomatic Academy in Moscow.)

titanomachy 7y ago

Is there any meaningful sense in which China is communist?

eropple 7y ago
My understanding is that the party controls all land, has controlling interests in many if not most critical companies--as of 2016 the Chinese government owned three percent of all companies in China and up to thirty percent of industrial output[0]--and even theoretically independent companies have former Party officials or relatives of those officials running the show. So it's surely not your textbook Leninist system, but it has many aspects thereof; I suppose you might characterize it as a mixed-command economy. It isn't what we would describe in the vernacular as "socialist"--as that word today generally, outside of the fever swamps of the American right wing, refers to countries like the Nordic or other Western European countries that work within something of a mixed-market system; it's definitely more command-oriented than that, still. Leninist/Stalinist communism generally sports a number social factors that definitely still exist in China outside of the economic structure, such as strong informational control, a smorgasbord of human rights abuses, and a generally totalitarian mode of governance and operation. So I guess the question becomes "well, what does 'communist' mean?" My own, inexpert answer would be "it's not 'communist', except insofar as 'communist' is defined to mean 'what China does'," and my own thinking is that today it maps more to an ethnonationalist--though this isn't a perfect description as many groups are accepted, but at the same time one can see see the routine oppression of Tibetans, Uighurs, etc.--totalitarian state with a largely centrally-controlled economy. That doesn't map to any historical definition of 'communist' that I know of, but reasonable minds can differ. [0] - https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Wendy-Leutert-Challenges-ahead-in-Chinas-reform-of-stateowned-enterprises.pdf https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Wendy-L...
- lostconfused 7y ago
  There's a pretty simple definition of communism and it's "workers own the means of production". That's the one defining trait of communism according to any communist.
  - eropple 7y ago
    Sure, but that also has never been practically the case in any communist nation of which I am aware. Getting into No True Communist discussions isn't meaningfully productive, but there might at least be something to be made from looking at other self-declared communist states and teasing out the differences.
    - lostconfused 7y ago
      And I don't want to start that discussion. I just think it's easier to call China a totalitarian capitalist state, without torturing other labels to make them fit. It's not unthinkable for a state to miss represent it self when it comes to names or labels.
      - eropple 7y ago
        I...agree? I mean, I said that. ;) Unless your definition of "communist" is "what China is," it doesn't qualify.
        lostconfused 7y ago
        Then I didn't fully understand your initial post, I am sorry.
      - stcredzero 7y ago
        I just think it's easier to call China a totalitarian capitalist state, without torturing other labels to make them fit. I think calling them capitalist doesn't involve much less "torturing labels" than calling them communist.
seabrookmx 7y ago
I think people associate a "one party system" with communism. But really the system of government isn't strictly tied to how the economy is managed (see: monarchies, fascism). You're right though. Economically China isn't communist. Especially in their "Special Administrative Regions" (Hong Kong, Macau).

Animats 7y ago

supposedly something similar happened when Kruschev visited Los Angeles decades ago Anatoly Dobrynin, the USSRs ambassador to the US from 1962 to 1986, wrote that when he arrived in New York, he was amazed to see traffic jams were real. In the USSR, they were claimed to be American propaganda. The world has advanced a lot since then. The third world now has much worse traffic jams than the US. (Dobrynin's autobiography describes how he became a diplomat. One day, Stalin was grumbling about the old diplomats around him, and said that the USSR needed New Soviet Men, like aircraft designers, as diplomats. The next day, Dobrynin, aircraft designer, was essentially arrested at his drafting table at work and sent to the Higher Diplomatic Academy in Moscow.)