I want you to really try to make a singular definition of Authoritarianism and Libertarianism that applies to all examples you would classify as authoritarian or libertarian. Is it theoretically possible for them to exist at the same time in the same place? Would that be a common definition? If not, why is your definition different and more importantly do you have enough evidence to justify having a different definition from the majority of people who use those terms?
China is a country where they have to put nets on the roofs of factories to prevent people from throwing themselves over the side because they work 14 hours a day for a slave wage making garbage that is sold in our 99 cent stores.
Sounds like capitalism to me.
The nets were at foxconn in capitalist occupied Taiwan. You clearly have never been to China or researched China beyond just absorbing western headlines with no scepticism.
The Foxconn suicides were a spate of suicides linked to low pay and brutal working conditions at the Foxconn City industrial park in Shenzhen, China, that occurred alongside several additional suicides at various other Foxconn-owned locations and facilities in mainland China.
Yeah, I mixed up the location of the foxconn factory fair catch. Doesn’t change the core point though.
Those nets were a Foxconn-specific response to a cluster of suicides at one company, not a national symbol of “China.” If you actually look at the data, China’s suicide rate is 8.9 per 100k, ranking around 65th globally. That’s lower than the US (15.6), Canada (9.4), Australia (13.1), UK (9.5), Japan (14.7), South Korea (20.6) and much of mainland Europe.
China makes everything from cheap trinkets to (most likely) the phone you’re typing this on. It’s not a monolith. Yes, working conditions were harsh during the early offshoring boom, that was the brutal calculus of catching up. But that strategy lifted nearly a billion people out of absolute poverty. China now has the world’s largest high-speed rail network, metro systems that dwarf most Western cities, and excess overtime has been explicitly ruled illegal by the Supreme Court, with enforcement ramping up.
On the system itself: China is in the socialist transitional period. Contradictions remain because capitalism is still hegemonic globally, but the commanding heights (finance, energy, telecoms, heavy industry) are publicly owned. The state isn’t a neutral arbiter; it’s the tool through which the dominant class enforces it’s power, in China that is the masses (the proletariat). Harvard’s Ash Center has tracked Chinese public opinion since 2003 and consistently finds approval of the central government above 90%. Chinese people don’t view their system through a Western liberal lens, they see democracy as whole-process people’s democracy: elections, consultation, grassroots feedback, policy adjustment, all integrated. The NPC has nearly 3,000 deputies, including representatives from all 55 minority groups, hundreds of frontline workers (manual labourers) and farmers, and workers from every sector. That’s structural representation. You can critique labor issues without falling back on orientalist tropes that flatten 1.4 billion people into a caricature.
Yeah, I mixed up the location of the foxconn factory fair catch. Doesn’t change the core point though.
I mean, it doesn’t change my point, that being corporations exploit workers in China because China is capitalist in all ways that matter.
It changes the lie you tried to tell me, that it was “Capitialst occupied” Tiawan, and that the glorious CCP would never allow such atrocity, which is clearly not true.
That’s lower than the US (15.6), Canada (9.4), Australia (13.1), UK (9.5), Japan (14.7), South Korea (20.6) and much of mainland Europe.
Those other countries also don’t have workers throwing themselves off of buildings because their jobs crush their will to live, but I guess that’s besides the point.
Yes, working conditions were harsh during the early offshoring boom, that was the brutal calculus of catching up.
On the system itself: China is in the socialist transitional period blah blah blah
Hence, “China is capitalist in all ways that matter.”
Harvard’s Ash Center has tracked Chinese public opinion since 2003 and consistently finds approval of the central government above 90%.
If you really believe this then I have a bridge, two furry trout farms, and a wooden nickle factory to sell you.
You can critique labor issues without falling back on orientalist tropes that flatten 1.4 billion people into a caricature.
Me stating the fact that the government of China allows corporations to exploit it’s population is not an “orientalist trope.”
You could also stop defending a country of oligarchs which doesn’t care about human rights and clearly exploits it’s population for the benefit of global corporations,
I think most of your (real) questions would be answered if you read Lenin and Chairman Mao and did some research on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and the socialist market economy alongside the realities of the socialist transitionary period where many of the contradictions of capitalism remain as they are slowly synthesised and worked through. You’re clearly running on vibes for now and it’s leading you to not grasp the situation at hand properly.
It’s good for the working classes to wield state authority against capitalists and fascists. To not do so would be to allow capitalism to reform, and the alternative is capitalist authority used against the working classes.
No, it isn’t. Public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state, it’s socialist. What do you think socialism and capitalism are? Vibes?
I’m convinced (based off interactions I’ve had on NextDoor) a lot of people think capitalism=uses money. But also that socialism/communism=failed/corrupted capitalism. China looking better than the USA nowadays means they have to be capitalist since they obviously aren’t failing.
That’s certainly how some people see it! Liberals look at China’s success and some try to twist that into a victory for capitalism, even if that doesn’t actually describe China’s success accurately.
Removed by mod
I want you to really try to make a singular definition of Authoritarianism and Libertarianism that applies to all examples you would classify as authoritarian or libertarian. Is it theoretically possible for them to exist at the same time in the same place? Would that be a common definition? If not, why is your definition different and more importantly do you have enough evidence to justify having a different definition from the majority of people who use those terms?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Willful ignorance is not ignorance.
Removed by mod
Yes like every state. Capitalism is entirely based on the violent control of people and things.
Removed by mod
That’s a cute opinion. Did Epstein give it to you?
China is a country where they have to put nets on the roofs of factories to prevent people from throwing themselves over the side because they work 14 hours a day for a slave wage making garbage that is sold in our 99 cent stores. Sounds like capitalism to me.
The nets were at foxconn
in capitalist occupied Taiwan. You clearly have never been to China or researched China beyond just absorbing western headlines with no scepticism.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn_suicides
Care to modify your previous misinformation?
Yeah, I mixed up the location of the foxconn factory fair catch. Doesn’t change the core point though.
Those nets were a Foxconn-specific response to a cluster of suicides at one company, not a national symbol of “China.” If you actually look at the data, China’s suicide rate is 8.9 per 100k, ranking around 65th globally. That’s lower than the US (15.6), Canada (9.4), Australia (13.1), UK (9.5), Japan (14.7), South Korea (20.6) and much of mainland Europe.
China makes everything from cheap trinkets to (most likely) the phone you’re typing this on. It’s not a monolith. Yes, working conditions were harsh during the early offshoring boom, that was the brutal calculus of catching up. But that strategy lifted nearly a billion people out of absolute poverty. China now has the world’s largest high-speed rail network, metro systems that dwarf most Western cities, and excess overtime has been explicitly ruled illegal by the Supreme Court, with enforcement ramping up.
On the system itself: China is in the socialist transitional period. Contradictions remain because capitalism is still hegemonic globally, but the commanding heights (finance, energy, telecoms, heavy industry) are publicly owned. The state isn’t a neutral arbiter; it’s the tool through which the dominant class enforces it’s power, in China that is the masses (the proletariat). Harvard’s Ash Center has tracked Chinese public opinion since 2003 and consistently finds approval of the central government above 90%. Chinese people don’t view their system through a Western liberal lens, they see democracy as whole-process people’s democracy: elections, consultation, grassroots feedback, policy adjustment, all integrated. The NPC has nearly 3,000 deputies, including representatives from all 55 minority groups, hundreds of frontline workers (manual labourers) and farmers, and workers from every sector. That’s structural representation. You can critique labor issues without falling back on orientalist tropes that flatten 1.4 billion people into a caricature.
I mean, it doesn’t change my point, that being corporations exploit workers in China because China is capitalist in all ways that matter.
It changes the lie you tried to tell me, that it was “Capitialst occupied” Tiawan, and that the glorious CCP would never allow such atrocity, which is clearly not true.
Those other countries also don’t have workers throwing themselves off of buildings because their jobs crush their will to live, but I guess that’s besides the point.
“Were harsh.” Lol ok. Hey look at this video of these Chinese workers sitting inside of a hydraulic press, it totally doesn’t show harsh working conditions.
Hence, “China is capitalist in all ways that matter.”
If you really believe this then I have a bridge, two furry trout farms, and a wooden nickle factory to sell you.
Me stating the fact that the government of China allows corporations to exploit it’s population is not an “orientalist trope.”
You could also stop defending a country of oligarchs which doesn’t care about human rights and clearly exploits it’s population for the benefit of global corporations,
Have you considered doing research and applying analysis before just saying things?
Removed by mod
So you haven’t. I would recommend it. It’ll help you void these vibes based politics errors.
Removed by mod
I think most of your (real) questions would be answered if you read Lenin and Chairman Mao and did some research on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and the socialist market economy alongside the realities of the socialist transitionary period where many of the contradictions of capitalism remain as they are slowly synthesised and worked through. You’re clearly running on vibes for now and it’s leading you to not grasp the situation at hand properly.
Removed by mod
Production is not capitalism.
It’s good for the working classes to wield state authority against capitalists and fascists. To not do so would be to allow capitalism to reform, and the alternative is capitalist authority used against the working classes.
But China is capitalist.
Wrong.
Is China State Capitalist?
No, it isn’t. Public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state, it’s socialist. What do you think socialism and capitalism are? Vibes?
I’m convinced (based off interactions I’ve had on NextDoor) a lot of people think capitalism=uses money. But also that socialism/communism=failed/corrupted capitalism. China looking better than the USA nowadays means they have to be capitalist since they obviously aren’t failing.
That’s certainly how some people see it! Liberals look at China’s success and some try to twist that into a victory for capitalism, even if that doesn’t actually describe China’s success accurately.