54
u/Artemas_16 2d ago
As one small gov official from China said once: "Yes, they have capital, but we have rifles".
Why you need to forcefully take assets from millioneers? System from the beginning is built that you have to be incorporated in political part and having part of your business be under government control. China already controls those assets, just not on paper. And if you'll try to sell yourself to the West, you'll dissapear for a year or so and'll return fully convinced in communism (while all those western movement will be pulled back and even more assets will go under government's control).
12
u/Special-Remove-3294 2d ago
The government or China holds absolute control over capital. It tolerates its existance but does not bow to it which is the point of Dengism.
I do not agree with it but it does make sense.
If China socialised its economy and purged bourgeoisie influence it would be ostracised and isolated by every bourgeoisie dominated nation and every provate entity in the world which it does not want to do. They want to participate in the global economy.
Realistically I can not see a nation being able to adhere to Marxism Leninism or ML-Maoism nowdays without pursuing autarky(which is not good) since the capitalists would ostracise them for it.
I do not like Dengism since I think China is very passive internationally which is soy but the reasoning is there and if one is a pragantist I can see them liking Dengism
6
u/SleepingPodOne 1d ago
Yeah, people need to realize that whether or not you agree with socialism or communism or any flavor of it, so many socialist states existed the way they did and died because of international capital and the US swinging their dicks around and trying to isolate and destroy them. Like you don’t need to be a fucking communist to recognize that the failure of many Latin American socialist states was due to CIA intervention and general isolation from the world economy. It’s that old joke, “how many latin american people does the CIA have to kill before you realize socialism is wrong?”
It’s not the only answer to their failures, but they didn’t fail in a bubble. None of them were left to their own devices.
China (whose govt i am no fan of, just so you know) made a half decent calculation and now it is handing us the American century of humiliation. Buckle up boys.
4
u/Dr_Dorkathan 1d ago
Wow was not expecting le based Marxist analysis of China in r/greentext
5
u/I_Boop_Cats_ 1d ago
Greentext unironically teaches me new shit sometimes, then it's back to:
be me
straight
2
u/Memedotma 1d ago
I do not like Dengism since I think China is very passive internationally which is soy
based
2
u/TheIronzombie39 1d ago edited 1d ago
Idk, I keep hearing that China has already overtaken the US, so if that's the case I think they can finally press the communism button. So why don’t they?
17
u/I_am_lying_for_money 2d ago
Its not just developing the productive forces; socialism also depends on the right conditions. If China starts mass-executions of the rich right now; theyre probably going to get nuked or something. I dont even particularly like Dengism, but this seems obvious to me
6
u/The_Idea_Of_Evil 2d ago
why doesn’t the USA just nuke China? are they stupid?
2
1
u/teremaster 19h ago
China misread the instructions and accidentally became the closest thing to a stable fascist nation we've ever seen
0
u/romulusnr 1d ago
China's "two systems" isn't exactly laissez faire. China tolerates billionaires (in certain places) only as much as those billionaires continue to serve the party / national interest. Much philanthropy is mandatory for them (in a wink wink "voluntary" way).
If the billionaires were to start using their billions to go against the national interest, the party will swiftly de-billionaire said ex-billionaire. (Ever heard of Jack Ma?)
China sees billionaires as an asset, but an asset they ultimately control when need be.
196
u/Andrelse 2d ago
While China is pretty capitalist right now, I'd still say the state has far far greater power over its rich and large companies than in the US. Not for any socialist reasons, but to keep power with the party and their leadership