3 ms·

The author made the assertion that it was 'not due to free market capitalism' while essentially using facts to demonstrate that this was the case. When a natio

by jariel 6y ago

The author made the assertion that it was 'not due to free market capitalism' while essentially using facts to demonstrate that this was the case. When a nation is poor and backwards, due to, gosh, 50 years of 'Central Planning' inspired by Marx, well then it's not that hard for the state to do things like 'build roads'. But factories in China, Tencent, DiDi etc. are not state creations. State supported, yes, and ultimately 'state controlled' (i.e. they state can do as they please with them), but it's considerably more 'free market' than otherwise. It's ridiculous to split hairs by pointing out 'some of India's growth started in the 1980's' or that 'some things in China are state directed' when overwhelmingly the change was towards free markets, in some cases, with state oversight and control but not direction or planning by and large. China is one of the most 'free market' places on earth, lacking in all sorts of regulation - you just have to remember that 'for the important things', the CCP is in charge. (I should add that the banks are state owned and their loans are directed, however, they are backed by the Central Bank which is entirely politicized and is a primary driver of actual influence.) The answer is 80% capitalism.

nabla9 6y ago
His point is not free market capitalism. Industrial government controlled policy based capitalism is how all Asian Tigers became rich. Big Chinese companies grow in in government controlled financial environment that supports them.
vidarh 6y ago
> 'Central Planning' inspired by Marx, The Communist Manifesto starts with a chapter praising capitalism for bringing unheard of increases in productivity, growth. Even for trade serving as a "battering ram" that drives down xenophobia. Here's a quote praising capitalism: > The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of Nature’s forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam-navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalisation of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground — what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labour? He goes on to praise the advances brought by "free competition". Then he turns the tables and argues that the reason capitalism will eventually fail is that it is too efficient: That it will eventually bring crises of simultaneous over-production and under-employment; that it will automate away employment to the point that the proportion who can afford to buy their products will be unable to consume all that it can produce. "Central Planning" has no basis in Marx. Central planning is a largely Stalinist conception, developed out of ashes of "War communism" during the Russian Civil War. Lenin saw how it failed, hence New Economic Policy, which re-opened some markets and allowed for a softening of planning similar to what Deng later did in China. It was Stalin who undid most of those reforms again after Lenins death, and who went even further in making centralised planning a dogma, and it was based on his wilful misinterpretation of Lenins ideas, not on Marx.

by jariel 6y ago

nabla9 6y ago

His point is not free market capitalism. Industrial government controlled policy based capitalism is how all Asian Tigers became rich. Big Chinese companies grow in in government controlled financial environment that supports them.

vidarh 6y ago

> 'Central Planning' inspired by Marx, The Communist Manifesto starts with a chapter praising capitalism for bringing unheard of increases in productivity, growth. Even for trade serving as a "battering ram" that drives down xenophobia. Here's a quote praising capitalism: > The bourgeoisie, during its rule of scarce one hundred years, has created more massive and more colossal productive forces than have all preceding generations together. Subjection of Nature’s forces to man, machinery, application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam-navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, clearing of whole continents for cultivation, canalisation of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground — what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labour? He goes on to praise the advances brought by "free competition". Then he turns the tables and argues that the reason capitalism will eventually fail is that it is too efficient: That it will eventually bring crises of simultaneous over-production and under-employment; that it will automate away employment to the point that the proportion who can afford to buy their products will be unable to consume all that it can produce. "Central Planning" has no basis in Marx. Central planning is a largely Stalinist conception, developed out of ashes of "War communism" during the Russian Civil War. Lenin saw how it failed, hence New Economic Policy, which re-opened some markets and allowed for a softening of planning similar to what Deng later did in China. It was Stalin who undid most of those reforms again after Lenins death, and who went even further in making centralised planning a dogma, and it was based on his wilful misinterpretation of Lenins ideas, not on Marx.