I would not call Social Programs “socialistic.” For Asia, China is the dominating economy and is heading down the path of Socialism. Capitalist economies like South Korea and Japan are heading downward, with extreme rates of suicide, rising fascism, and massive disparity.
Communism itself isn’t merely an “alternative” to Capitalism, it’s the end result of the failures of Capitalism, after Socialism provides the ground for it to blossom from.
China has stated intentions of becoming fully Socialist by 2050 and Communist by 2100, according to the CPC. Doesn’t seem dead in the water to me.
Additionally, that’s just China. In places where Capitalism has been on a steady decline, such as America, Socialism and Communism are gaining in popularity among the masses. Capitalism is unsustainable and leads to massive inequality and inefficient allocation of resources, which leads to crisis.
China has only moved away from a state-run economy in the last 50 years, resulting in its current, larger and much more dynamic economy. It’s probably the world’s best current example of a country abandoning communism for capitalism, and reaping the benefits. There is wealth inequality, but fewer people are starving. All they’re keeping from their former regime is centralized single party political control.
Under economic Communism they proved over and over that a central government can’t command a entire set of industries and markets better than they can run themselves. People starved in the tens of millions finding this out. An uptick in suicide rates is nothing by comparison.
No, what they proved is it’s hard as fuck to go from zero industry to the most industry when most of the world’s wealthy want you to fail. Famine was and is a real societal threat and we forget that it happened regularly not that long ago.
-The CPC brought in Capitalists to rapidly develop, while maintaining full control and refusing to let Capitalists control the state. That’s why it’s incredibly authoritarian there, to prevent the Capitalists from controlling the state. Socialism is supposed to come after Capitalism, not Feudalism.
-The CPC has stated intentions to become fully Socialist by 2050 and Communist by 2100.
-Even under Mao, they weren’t “economically Communist.” They still had a state, still had money, and still had classes. They were Socialist, and still are, just with more of a mixed market.
-Mao was an idiot, but it wasn’t Socialism or Communism that caused the starvation. It started as a naturally occurring famine (the last of its kind in China, actually), but Mao responded so stupidly he told his men to kill Sparrows that were eating rice. Well, those Sparrows were holding the bugs back, and without the Sparrows the bugs ate far more rice. Is that Communism? When no Sparrows? Or one really stupid leader?
Finally, my eggs aren’t all in the China basket. I’m not a massive China stan like some people here, I’m very critical of them. Socialism and Communism are gaining in popularity in other places where Capitalism is declining, such as America.
I would not call Social Programs “socialistic.” For Asia, China is the dominating economy and is heading down the path of Socialism. Capitalist economies like South Korea and Japan are heading downward, with extreme rates of suicide, rising fascism, and massive disparity.
Communism itself isn’t merely an “alternative” to Capitalism, it’s the end result of the failures of Capitalism, after Socialism provides the ground for it to blossom from.
China embraced capitalism because it’s economy was dead in the water. China has not ever been less socialist since the commies first took over.
Communism is a thought experiment and has no place in the real world.
China has stated intentions of becoming fully Socialist by 2050 and Communist by 2100, according to the CPC. Doesn’t seem dead in the water to me.
Additionally, that’s just China. In places where Capitalism has been on a steady decline, such as America, Socialism and Communism are gaining in popularity among the masses. Capitalism is unsustainable and leads to massive inequality and inefficient allocation of resources, which leads to crisis.
Lol gotta love these takes from the sommunists
Gotta love not having an actual counter, so you just down vote and feign superiority. Be a little more self-aware next time, lol
China has only moved away from a state-run economy in the last 50 years, resulting in its current, larger and much more dynamic economy. It’s probably the world’s best current example of a country abandoning communism for capitalism, and reaping the benefits. There is wealth inequality, but fewer people are starving. All they’re keeping from their former regime is centralized single party political control.
Under economic Communism they proved over and over that a central government can’t command a entire set of industries and markets better than they can run themselves. People starved in the tens of millions finding this out. An uptick in suicide rates is nothing by comparison.
No, what they proved is it’s hard as fuck to go from zero industry to the most industry when most of the world’s wealthy want you to fail. Famine was and is a real societal threat and we forget that it happened regularly not that long ago.
There’s no way I’m going to let you characterize the Great Leap Forward as “famine happens.” That is absolutely criminal apologism.
Quick few things:
-The CPC brought in Capitalists to rapidly develop, while maintaining full control and refusing to let Capitalists control the state. That’s why it’s incredibly authoritarian there, to prevent the Capitalists from controlling the state. Socialism is supposed to come after Capitalism, not Feudalism.
-The CPC has stated intentions to become fully Socialist by 2050 and Communist by 2100.
-Even under Mao, they weren’t “economically Communist.” They still had a state, still had money, and still had classes. They were Socialist, and still are, just with more of a mixed market.
-Mao was an idiot, but it wasn’t Socialism or Communism that caused the starvation. It started as a naturally occurring famine (the last of its kind in China, actually), but Mao responded so stupidly he told his men to kill Sparrows that were eating rice. Well, those Sparrows were holding the bugs back, and without the Sparrows the bugs ate far more rice. Is that Communism? When no Sparrows? Or one really stupid leader?
Finally, my eggs aren’t all in the China basket. I’m not a massive China stan like some people here, I’m very critical of them. Socialism and Communism are gaining in popularity in other places where Capitalism is declining, such as America.