• slumlordthanatos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    121
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    11 days ago

    Remember folks: China is communist in the same way that North Korea is democratic and the Nazis were socialist.

    It’s just a smokescreen.

    • JWayn596@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      A core tenant of socialism is a democratized workplace, being able to vote for your wage and company policy, like an Engineer choosing when to launch the rocket instead of some MBS degree.

      Last time I checked I dont think factory workers in China that make all our shit can do that.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        Yes. That was the point of what they posted. None of those groups are what they claim to be beyond nominally.

      • Antiproton@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 days ago

        Which is also why socialism will never work. Humans are piss poor at evaluating the common good and making decisions collectively (see also: the last US election.)

        • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          And ceos are somehow significantly worse and consistently (and in many industries), almost exclusively make decisions directly opposing the common good including intentionally leading the world forward into societal and ecological collapse and quadrupling down on that stance… Because it makes them more quarterly profit. I guess we just have to let AI do it.

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      Eh, there’s a notional aspiration to socialism at least, which is more than can be said about the US sphere of countries.

      In practice though? Yeah, China is hyper-captialist, without much of the social security present in wealthier countries.

      Why Leftist get a hard-on for the former USSR, Russia and China, or frankly any country, is beyond me.

      There are positive and negative outcomes in line or against socialist ideals everywhere (I think people are too black and white about China in both directions personally)

      I just do not understand simping for any country, just because they are “socialist”.

      • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        The USSR at least outwardly promoted socialist values like solidarity and being kind to your fellow people. They fucked up pretty bad in practice, but at least they made an attempt.

        • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          I think in both cases (modern China, and the USSR), there is a genuine feeling/desire towards the ideals.

          In both cases though, it is co-opted for propaganda purposes, and falls pretty flat when inequality is off the charts.

          Which is a shame, if you have socialist beliefs

          I wish them the best though, and hope they figure things out to bring outcomes more in line with the ideals.

      • sparky@lemmy.federate.cc@lemmy.federate.cc
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 days ago

        IMO this is why it takes an additional axis to define a government, not just left/right but also free/authoritarian. You can find examples of all combinations. Left wing and repressive? Cuba. Left leaning and free? Sweden. Right wing and repressive? Russia, Saudi Arabia, whatever. Right leaning and free (mostly)? USA.

        Obviously, there’s a gradient within these axes, but it’s strange to see people cheering on a country that matches their preferred left or right wing ideology if they’re super repressive.

        • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 days ago

          This is why we need to reeducate people and stop using the traditional left-right spectrum and start using the axis spectrum

        • RidderSport@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 days ago

          I think Saudi Arabia is the perfect example of why even that model isn’t even enough. I mean sure they are a monarchy and quite self-focused but not really in a nationalistic way. To be fair I don’t know much about their domestic politics. To put them into the same corner as Russia, eh dunno.

          • Authoritarianism doesn’t necessarily require nationalism or vice versa, though they’re often linked, that doesn’t necessarily have to be the case. The USA is pretty flag waving, nationalist brained but individual freedom exists. Versus a country like Saudi as you mention is not particularly nationalist, but repression is widespread.

            They are quite different than Russia, but looking only at individual freedom, the two are similar in that freedom of speech is not respected and leaders are not fairly elected.

        • chaogomu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          The thing is, Left vs Right is already a measure of authoritarian vs Democratic.

          The original use of the terms comes from the French Revolution. There was a vote on if the King should have an absolute veto over laws passed by the assembly. Those who said no sat to the left of the Speakers podium. Those who said yes sat on the right.

          The reason why left and right were applied to economic policy was because Marx described Communism as a form of extreme Democracy. Whereas Capitalism concentrates power into the hands of a select few.

          It’s still a measure of where the power rests. In the hands of the people or the hands of the state/leader.

          You can break it down to dozens of categories, but it’s all authoritarian vs Democratic in the end.

          As a note, Lenin style single party “communism” is about as far from Marx’s ideal as you can get.

          Dictators and Kings are all the enemies of the people.