3 ms·

Opinions like these are the reason why this “communism v capitalism” discussion never evolves beyond “them bad us good”. China is often the target of anti comm

by cced 2y ago

Opinions like these are the reason why this “communism v capitalism” discussion never evolves beyond “them bad us good”. China is often the target of anti communist propaganda so how do you square that hole? 1# economy when looking at GDP(PPP) so your “analysis” falls short. Communist “regimes” often have to deal with outside interference from the “superior” capitalist system. OP’s point is extremely valid: Cuba does not have the right to self determination as other countries impose themselves on them and prevent their economic growth. The Cuba case is really quite interesting when you compare it to more recent cases of indivisibility of security. We all have short memories I guess, super heros and cartoon villains. Never change hn.

luckylion 2y ago
> China is often the target of anti communist propaganda so how do you square that hole? 1# economy when looking at GDP(PPP) so your “analysis” falls short. And that primarily came to be when they cut back on the centrally planned economy and allowed more free markets. Whether they will allow that to continue is to be seen. > Communist “regimes” often have to deal with outside interference from the “superior” capitalist system. No, they generally don't, but they use that as propaganda. Eastern Germany built their "anti-fascist barricade" in Berlin officially to keep the evil Western infiltrators out, but their guns were turned to the east, and they murdered people for trying to escape from communism. The Soviet Union as a whole often attributed its failures to the meddling of the Imperialistic West, because admitting that you messed up is dangerous. Communists always find a reason for their failure, and it's never them. That's really nothing new.
- underlipton 2y ago
  >And that primarily came to be when they courted Western investment and resource-sharing with promises of access to their massive population, and then proceeded to steal and copy everything not nailed down, heavily restrict foreign firms' ability both to access their consumer markets and to repatriate capital, employed sweatshop labor, all while supporting quasi-state quasi-monopolies that literally could not fail in any meaningful way. Don't take this as unqualified criticism; it worked, and compensated for some of the worst injuries and excesses of the West's relations with the Chinese state. But the point is that it wasn't adherence to tenets of "fair-market capitalism" so much as abuse of labor and investor trust that gave them an edge. (And, to be fair, a tamer version of this strategy featured in America's own rise to economic powerhouse; Liu and Andrew, Ma and Ma Bell.) Also, as an anecdote, the superfest story says hi. The Reds invented a superior glass manufacturing process that was ignored by the West until they could control and profit off it without it benefiting the USSR. You're familiar with it because it's (probably) the screen you're reading this on.

by cced 2y ago

luckylion 2y ago

> China is often the target of anti communist propaganda so how do you square that hole? 1# economy when looking at GDP(PPP) so your “analysis” falls short. And that primarily came to be when they cut back on the centrally planned economy and allowed more free markets. Whether they will allow that to continue is to be seen. > Communist “regimes” often have to deal with outside interference from the “superior” capitalist system. No, they generally don't, but they use that as propaganda. Eastern Germany built their "anti-fascist barricade" in Berlin officially to keep the evil Western infiltrators out, but their guns were turned to the east, and they murdered people for trying to escape from communism. The Soviet Union as a whole often attributed its failures to the meddling of the Imperialistic West, because admitting that you messed up is dangerous. Communists always find a reason for their failure, and it's never them. That's really nothing new.

underlipton 2y ago
>And that primarily came to be when they courted Western investment and resource-sharing with promises of access to their massive population, and then proceeded to steal and copy everything not nailed down, heavily restrict foreign firms' ability both to access their consumer markets and to repatriate capital, employed sweatshop labor, all while supporting quasi-state quasi-monopolies that literally could not fail in any meaningful way. Don't take this as unqualified criticism; it worked, and compensated for some of the worst injuries and excesses of the West's relations with the Chinese state. But the point is that it wasn't adherence to tenets of "fair-market capitalism" so much as abuse of labor and investor trust that gave them an edge. (And, to be fair, a tamer version of this strategy featured in America's own rise to economic powerhouse; Liu and Andrew, Ma and Ma Bell.) Also, as an anecdote, the superfest story says hi. The Reds invented a superior glass manufacturing process that was ignored by the West until they could control and profit off it without it benefiting the USSR. You're familiar with it because it's (probably) the screen you're reading this on.