An Update for Friday

| May 29, 2020

Map of Pag-asa Island – China claims it as property

It seems that someone is in complete denial about the PRC, so here’s some up to date information about the Communist government of China and Xi Jinping, the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party.  https://www.forbes.com/profile/xi-jinping/#3a328bca1601

The government of China is, and has been, a Communist government since 1949, when Mao took over the government and began his Great Leap Forward, a disastrous plan that resulted in the starvation deaths of somewhere between 20 million and 80 million Chinese citizens.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/stories-49829435/the-day-china-became-communist

Thanks to bad weather, including drought and floods, as well as crop destruction by insects, there was no food available, and those desperate enough to do so killed and cannibalized other people. It was a lot like Joe Stalin’s Holodomor in Ukraine, where people were kicked off their own land and starved to death to get rid of them, but none of this was admitted to until the Soviet Union fell apart and the real history of what happened in Ukraine was dug up.

…. because China is a Communist country with a Communist government, has been since 1949, and continues with it and its harsh rules and harsher punishments to this day. All that glitz in modern architecture and shiny stuff is surface glam, and nothing else. Under that surface lies the grinding poverty that keeps people in a subsistence existence. The glitz and glam of “modern” Beijing is a facade and nothing else. Yes, there is a high speed supertrain, but it has no passengers.

And Xi Jinping is the head of the Chinese Communist Party;.

There is this, as well:  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49631120

Repression of those who speak out against the authorities shows no signs of abating and a crackdown on human rights has intensified under President Xi.  The brutality that had existed under the emperors was simply carried forward into the modern world.

Nor do the crackdowns spare high-ranking party members. Bo Xilai, once a powerful regional party chief, was found guilty of corruption and abuse of power in 2013 in a show trial and sentenced to life in prison.

China insists it is upholding human rights and justifies its harsh hand on dissent by saying that lifting millions out of poverty trumps individual liberties. The reality is that wages are barely $0.25/hour, if that, and the factory workers, whether in textile mills or garment sweat shops or anything else, start work around 7AM and work until 9PM. They have no choices in housing, much of which is so shabby that it can only be termed slums worse than CHA housing in Chicago before those slums were demolished.

It only makes sense in the real world that, if the Chinese government says that it is a Communist government, then that’s what it is. One would think the Chinese government knows how to identify its political leanings, right? So if someone is in complete denial about it, who is right?  I’d put my money on the Chinese government’s opinion.

After all, if Xi Jinping’s position is head of the Communist Party, then what could be more realistic than his own statement about it?

Therefore, if the head of the Chinese Communist Party is a Communist and the government is a self-declared Communist government… well, that’s the reality of the world in Red China.

Secretary Xi has been telling the military to prepare for war.  https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/scale-up-battle-preparedness-xi-jinping-tells-chinese-military/articleshow/76011659.cms

“Xi Jinping who is also the General Secretary of the ruling Communist Party of China and head of the two-million-strong military with prospects of lifelong tenure in power, made the remarks while attending a plenary meeting of the delegation of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and People’s Armed Police Force during the current parliament session being held here.” – Economic Times of India

It may have something to do with a potential face-off between the militaries of India and China at the Line of Actual Control (LAC), as well as those disturbances going on with the people of Hong Kong. China has, for decades now, claimed that Tibet is part of China, which may have something to do with a possible conflict at the LAC. That these distractions started a short while ago and so closely aligned is telling, as if both the HKers and India are talking to each other. It is a small step from police crackdowns or military border action to a massacre by the Chinese military. The massacres that shocked the world several decades ago were bad enough. To repeat that may not be as easy as it was then, but the Chinese military is quite capable of supporting pure brutality by a brutal government that hides behind a wall of tall buildings, glittering glass and neon lights.

No Chinese citizen can access information about the events of the past, or photos of them. The current crop of Chinese citizens has no idea how brutal their own government was in the past and how bad it can be now.  We Westerners can easily access events of the past 7 decades of Chinese misrule.  It’s easy to control history these days: eliminate any access to the past to keep the Chinese people unaware of it.

When you want to change reality to suit your need for control, you eliminate access to reality and lie repeatedly about it. Hitler did that by controlling the press so that the German people never knew what really went on in those death camps. Stalin did it by keeping a team of photo retouchers available to eliminate the evidence of existence of people who fell out of favor with him, and by blocking media access to information about massacres like the Holodomor in Ukraine and the mass execution of Red Army officers in 1918 in St. Petersburg.

Since Secretary Xi is expecting trouble on his border with India as well as in Hong Kong, it’s possible that, as happened 30+ years ago, only Westerners will get the word out. The mainland Chinese will know nothing about any massacre that takes place.

Category: "Truth or fiction?", China

Comments (38)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Skippy says:

    We are definitely talking about Communist China
    Here the People’s Republic of Communist China

  2. SFC D says:

    This thread is gonna get real interesting real fast. Popcorn, anyone?

  3. thebesig says:

    The Chinese Communist Party is an “all encompassing organization”. The “People’s Liberation Army” is a part of it. So is every government institution at all levels. They’re a part of the Chinese Communist Party. The legislative branch, executive branch, and judicial branch? They are all a part of the Chinese Communist Party. Major Chinese corporation? The corporation may be a “single entity”, but its members, the majority of them especially at the leadership level”, are members of the Chinese Communist Party. Hospital staff? Many are members of the CCP. Many of these “independent organizations” have a political officer who ensures that the will of the CCP is complied with.

    So, their institutions aren’t designed to serve the public, as their Western counterparts are designed. They’re designed to serve the objectives of the CCP. This is part of the reason to why their court system is more like a kangaroo court than an independent one that judges on fairness and merit based on the facts. Their Soldiers don’t serve their people, they serve the CCP.

    When the Chinese government talks about “working to make the world a more peaceful and prosperous place,” they’re not saying that in the same sense we would say it. Their idea of “peaceful and prosperous” is what they’re currently doing to the Chinese citizen. It’s “peaceful and prosperous” with the CCP at the helm in control of global governance.

    The United States is in their way.

    • Commissar says:

      The Chinese party does not serve the public.

      The Chinese party serves the party and its allies.

      Claiming they are acting to further communism is just their propaganda.

      There is nothing about the Chinese economic model that is communist at this point.

      That is why their economy is so damn powerful. Because it abandoned the communist economic model.

      • thebesig says:

        Based on their own statements, and documents, their objective is to push their brand of communism throughout the rest of the world. Their leader even talked about creating a form of socialism that’s superior to capitalism.

        They didn’t abandon the communist model. They made adjustments in order to make it possible for their system to work longer. The Soviets did the same thing.

        Their economy is not as powerful as you think it is. It’s inflated both with government fabricated numbers and things like false economic activity… Or artificial economic activity. It’s also heavily dependent on intellectual theft and government intervention to aid Chinese businesses at the expense of non-Chinese counterparts. President Trump is putting policies in place to force them to be fair… Less we play hardball with them as they are playing with us. So far, it has harmed Chinese momentum.

        The cold hard reality is that their model, which did not abandon communism, is not sustainable. A large reason why they’ve ramped up with pushing their luck, militarily, against their neighbors is to drive up nationalism within China to cover up for the fact that the CCP can’t provide for the people. They’re engaging in distraction… Something they wouldn’t do had they abandoned the communist economic model and had their economy been as powerful as you claim.

        The CCP knows that if the Chinese citizen sees them as not being able to deliver, they lose their legitimacy. They lose their legitimacy, Hong Kong would just be an appetizer. They’re well aware of what happened to the Soviet Union, they fear that happening with them.

        • Commissar says:

          Their objective is not to push their brand of communism around the world. They are not communist.

          Mao wanted to export his model to other countries in the Region.

          Mao is dead.

          Deng XioaPing immediately abandoned the communist model. Immediately.

          They do not wish to push their modern , not communist, economic model around the world either. They don’t want create competitors in the labor market that will take foreign factories, investors, and jobs out of China.

          Stop trying to shoehorn middle 20th century communist ideological agendas onto a modern, not communist, technologically advanced state.

          The communist ideological model just does not fit.

          The former Chinese communist ideological model, which emphasized the power of rural citizens and agrarian society applies even less so to the modern Chinese state which almost entirely marginalizes rural citizens.

          China does want to be the regional hegemony. And they are developing the military capacity and capability to neutralize US seapower in the region if necessary to force a defensive stalemate that prevents the US from being willing to use the threat o even presence of military force to portect its current regional hegemony.

          So if you want to focus on the threat China presents to the US, then focus on that.

          Or the fact that our ideological loyalty to free market economic trade policies has given China a massive trade advantage with the US.

          You can focus on that too. Trump does. Though he rashly and stupidly abandoned the regional trade negotiations that had a chance of reducing China’s advantage.

          • The Other Whitey says:

            Once again, Lars.

            https://youtu.be/yjnJcRhQpn0

            For a guy who’s been so consistently wrong about so many things, you sure are smugly convinced of your own infallibility.

          • thebesig says:

            Commissar: Their objective is not to push their brand of communism around the world. They are not communist.

            Tell that to the Chinese Communist Party. They’re the ones that talk about this concept of exporting Chinese style communism, and then the nation that it is exported to labels it the [nationality] style communism. For example, “American style communism”. The CCP talked about how the communism that they export would have to be adjusted to the nation that it is exported to.

            They are communist, note the statement Chinese Communist Party. Additionally, approximately 30% of their military training is in communist doctrine. So, who should we believe? You, or the Chinese who still think that they are communist?

            Commissar: Mao wanted to export his model to other countries in the Region.

            You have to export it to the region first before you export it to the world. Despite the fact that they decided to follow something a little bit different from what the Russians were following, the ultimate objective was the same. Communism was supposed to be the end stage of economic evolution. Capitalism was on a lower stage. Once that evolution occurred and reached fulfillment, we would be in the state of communism. That is how the theory went. It was supposed to start in the more advanced countries. However, it did not work that way. Result? They have to use other ways to export it.

            Commissar: Mao is dead.

            But the move to export communism did not die with him.

            Commissar: Deng XioaPing immediately abandoned the communist model. Immediately.

            Actually, he, like Lenin, had to make adjustments in the system in order for it to survive. Communism, in theory, is inconsistent with reality. Both the first Communists in the Soviet Union, as well as in China, realized that quickly. They did not abandon communism, nor did they abandon the communist model. They adjusted it. Deng Xioaping also made adjustments for political purposes. He has a long-term strategic goal that required him to make those adjustments. However, he did not abandon the communist model.

            Commissar: They do not wish to push their modern , not communist, economic model around the world either.

            False. Xi Jinping argued for the development of a form of socialism that is “superior” to capitalism. Add this to this statement of creating a “more prosperous and peaceful” world into the mix, and you would get a hint of what China’s intentions are.

            Additionally, their modern form of an economic model is not what you would call something outside of the communist model. The Chinese government still has a strong influence over business operations. That is a part of the communist model. In theory, if all or most of the Chinese are supposed to be communist, a part of the Chinese Communist Party, then what they have today still falls under the umbrella of a communist model. The entire country is a “communist collective”.

            Commissar: They don’t want create competitors in the labor market that will take foreign factories, investors, and jobs out of China.

            Then how do you explain the fact that China has been outsourcing lately? They’ve been outsourcing even before the pandemic. If they did not want to take foreign factories out of their country, that will contradict their own moves to do what other countries have done.

            Additionally, what President Trump is threatening to do, with regards to Hong Kong’s special status per US law, would do precisely what you say they don’t want have done… Foreign factories, investors, and jobs out of China.

            Approximately three-quarters of foreign investment in China is through Hong Kong. Remove the special investment designation that the US has and that is lost. If the Chinese were so concerned about losing that, they would not be pushing their security law over Hong Kong.

            Commissar: Stop trying to shoehorn middle 20th century communist ideological agendas onto a modern, not communist, technologically advanced state.

            First, you have absolutely no clue about what I am arguing, just as you do not have any clue about what you are arguing. Instead of trying to tell me to stop shoehorning things, you need to quit shoehorning my argument to fit your misunderstanding of what conservatives are arguing.

            Second, China is still a developing country. China cannot exactly be labeled as a “technologically developed state” when it relies heavily on intellectual property theft. A technologically advanced state does not need to engage in ecological property theft as the main objective for maintaining a technological edge.

            Third, China’s modernization does not change the fact that they still hold the communist ideals that they held prior to being accepted into the World Trade Organization. In fact, the current leadership is rolling back on many of these “reforms” with regards to their economy, rights, politics, etc.

            Commissar: The communist ideological model just does not fit.

            False. The communist ideological model still continues to prevail in their policies. Leave it to Communists to tell Christians in China to change their religion-related text to putting Xi Jinping on a pedestal. Leave it to a bunch of communists to wage thug tactics against those who practice spiritualism. The belief in God, a spiritual practice, simply contradicts the communist model. If what you said is true, China would not be persecuting Folung Gong practitioners, Muslims, Christians, etc. in a communist model, humans are put on a pedestal. They determine what is right and what is wrong. Any true capitalism model, where free-market reigns supreme, there has to be rule of law. This includes respect for property, life, and freedom.

            Such respect goes hand-in-hand with religious practice. The bedrock of American philosophy, the right to life, liberty, and property, are traceable to Judeo-Christian philosophy. As traceable to the first pages of the Book of Genesis.

            God determines what is right and wrong. That philosophy leads to a true economic capitalistic model. Not so with that the communist model. This is a fundamental, core, difference between a true modern economic model and the communist one.

            Commissar: The former Chinese communist ideological model, which emphasized the power of rural citizens and agrarian society applies even less so to the modern Chinese state which almost entirely marginalizes rural citizens.

            Not exactly. If this was about emphasizing the power of rural citizens and agrarian society, then that became a lie starting from the beginning. Again, as with their Soviet counterparts, the movement was about consolidating power in the hands of a bunch of thugs. As with the Soviets, they were a thugocracy.

            Additionally, read up about the great Chinese famine. Mao Zedong was in charge during that time. If it were about empowering the rural people, they would not have been forced to implement the changes that the Chinese government forced on them. They would have been allowed to run business the way they normally run it. They weren’t. Result? The great famine.

          • thebesig says:

            Commissar: China does want to be the regional hegemony. And they are developing the military capacity and capability to neutralize US seapower in the region if necessary to force a defensive stalemate that prevents the US from being willing to use the threat o even presence of military force to portect its current regional hegemony.

            Not exactly. China claims the entire South China Sea, as contained within its “nine-dashed line” map. This claim brings them in conflict with Vietnam, South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, etc. Many of the islands that they are militarizing are claimed by other countries. Most of the disputed islands are much closer to these other countries that are claiming them.

            China is building the military capacity to defend this claim. When the Chinese talk about “defending their territorial integrity”, they are talking about defending their claims in the South China Sea.

            Yes, they’re building up their forces in order to take on the United States military in the South China Sea. They want to be able to deflect the United States, or an international military coalition, from preventing China from exerting its claims on these South China Sea Islands.

            This, by the way, is not supported by international law. The Philippines took China to the international court and won. China disregarded the international organization’s decision.

            Second, you need to read up on China’s Belt and Road initiative. China is building a global infrastructure that will be needed to support their global military reach. Not just a global military reach, but also a global geostrategic, geoeconomic, and geopolitical reach.

            The countries that they get into an agreement with, with regards to this initiative, receive a healthy amount of loans from the Chinese government. These loans are dedicated to projects aimed at building this “Built and Road” initiative. However, when these countries cannot pay up, China forces these countries into an arrangement that benefits China. They forced one country to lease one of its ports to China for 99 years. This port can be converted into a military base.

            This is a far cry from your claims of them wanting to build regional hegemony. Mark my words, they intend to displace the United States as a superpower and they intend to build their strength in order to exert their influence over global governance.

            Their actions, around the world, supports my argument.

            Commissar: So if you want to focus on the threat China presents to the US, then focus on that.

            That’s precisely what I’m doing, with my comments in the thread, as well as my blog article posts. The threat China presents the United States, as well as to the rest of the world, is done under the umbrella of unrestricted warfare.

            I highly recommend that you read the book, “Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America”. I read that book in 2002, and again in 2007. It nicely explains the games that China has been, and still is, playing around the world.

            Commissar: Or the fact that our ideological loyalty to free market economic trade policies has given China a massive trade advantage with the US.

            False. What has given China massive trade advantage, relative to the United States, are willing exemptions that we had put into trade agreements involving China. China subsidizes and backs Chinese companies. They do so at the expense of US companies. They do so without the US government providing equivalent support to US companies. US companies are competing with an extreme disadvantage, economic and political disadvantage, against their Chinese counterparts.

            Hence, President Trump’s trade war against China. The object of this trade war? The main objective is to force China to compete on equal terms, fair terms, with US companies. In other words, China does not subsidize and help Chinese corporations while providing obstacles and challenges to US corporations trying to compete with the Chinese corporations.

            President Trump wants to force China to quit cheating. If the Chinese were competing with the United States on fair terms, under a true competition, and they gained the upper hand, that is one thing. In fact, given the number of people they have, and the resources that China has, I would expect that.

            If China were a truly modern democratic country, using an economic model similar to what the United States, Japan, South Korea, and others use, they undoubtedly would be the leading economic power of the world. This being accomplished without cheating.

            However, the Chinese are cheating, stealing, robbing, coercing, etc. Nobody should be willing to allow China to get away with that. I highly doubt that if you’re playing a game against someone, that you would be okay with them cheating against you while preventing you from doing the same… Then acting like they are actually better than you despite the fact that they cheated against you.

            Commissar: You can focus on that too. Trump does. Though he rashly and stupidly abandoned the regional trade negotiations that had a chance of reducing China’s advantage.

            Again false. The massive Pacific Rim trade block, as well as a similar Atlantic trade block, provided the advantages to our counterparts at our expense. These would have weekend United States even further… Giving our corporations incentives to leave the United States beyond the incentives they had.

            It would have accelerated the siphoning of our industrial capability and it would have hurt the worker. Add Democrat economic policies into the mix and you would have an acceleration of job outsourcing from the United States.

            President Trump wisely put a stop to that. Then unsigned us from the Pacific trade agreement, put a stop to talks with the Atlantic counterpart.

            Does this mean that there is no hope for such agreements? President Trump would support such agreements if they allowed competition on fair terms… Just as he supports the current version of NAFTA.

          • NHSparky says:

            Jesus H. Fucking Tapdancing Christ, you are epically dense.

  4. 26Limabeans says:

    Like it or not we did slow down and somewhat contain the
    Domino Effect with our Korean and Viet of the Nam forays.
    There was Laos and Cambodia as well. And we gave much aid
    to France’s Indo China War. Formosa was and still is giant
    game piece that we had better not lose. Heh, I said Formosa.

    It cost a lot of Amercan blood. Here we are though.

  5. 11B-Mailclerk says:

    But but but!

    They are doing Communism -wrong- so not real Communism!

    They are -corrupt- so not real Communism!

    They are producing horrific results, so not real Communism!

    The folks who say crap like that have this bizarre faith in a failed philosophy of Marx, where the purity of belief is in ignoring the inevitable outcome.

    And since it is repeating the same deliberate mistake over and over again, expecting “this time we the right people will do it the right way -this- time!” it is both evil and insane.

    The fruit of the Tranzitree is agonizingly fatally poisonous to intelligent life. Marx spawned only misery and death, and his adherents and apologists are willing participants in that evil insanity.

    • Commissar says:

      Bullshit…

      They are not doing communism at fucking all.

      Soviet Union did communism wrong and was corrupt: but they were communist.

      I can go down the list of every damn communist country. They were doing communism wrong, they were also corrupt. None of them used the true model but they did adopt communism. They were communist.

      I don’t think communism is possible without corruption, it is absurdly idealistic. And it fails to account for basic human behavior and motivations,

      China was communist. It used an entirely different model than the Soviet Union, and a different ideological foundation than Marx or Lenin… but they were communist.

      They are no longer communist.

      There really is nothing left to say other than you are just willfully and obstinately being a damn moron at this point.

      • 26Limabeans says:

        How about Baathism? The Arab version of Communism.
        Did they do it right? Did Saddam hang for the Party?

        Half the people said yes and half the people said yes.

        • Commissar says:

          Ba’athism is closer to Arab fascism than communism.

          There is literally nothing in Ba’athism that had anything to do with collective ownership of the mechanism of production, collective distribution of the goods of production, or anything of the sort.

          Also, communism is aggressively anti ethnic/nationalist. It argues for a global revolution of workers. Or in the Chinese model; farmers. A borderless revolution. “Workers of the world unite!”.

          Fascism does the opposite. As did Ba’athism. Both are about nationalism, identity, and ethnicity. Purifying the society of undesirable identity groups. Consolidating power under whatever nationality or ethnicity the fascists are.

  6. Commissar says:

    WTF?

    None of your links provide any evidence that China is communist.

    All you show is that Xi is an authoritarian shitbag.

    Which nobody is disputing.

    And that China was communist a half a century ago.

    Which nobody is disputing.

    China is an authoritarian state. Yes. Of course. Again…nobody is disputing that.

    But it is not fucking communist.

    Have you ever tried to reconcile in your tiny addled mind how it is possible for a communist state to have become the global producer of goods? The world’s leading trading partner?

    How no other communist state has ever managed to have a genuinely functional and productive economy…, much less become anywhere near the global producer of anything?

    Yet China has…

    Maybe it is because they are not fucking communist anymore!

    Has that tiny spark of a thought never ever flashed in your mind Ex?

    Regardless of what I say; common damn sense should make you question the CCP propaganda that China is communist.

    Why are so so damn insistent on supporting and promoting CCP propaganda?

    What the hell is wrong with you?

    • SFC D says:

      Fish on!!

    • Skippy says:

      BHWHAHAHAHA !!!!

      I just lost my popcorn

    • The Other Whitey says:

      Lars, you are parroting the party line of every communist, sympathizer, and apologist of the past century. The “theory” of communism is pure propaganda bullshit. The practice of communism has been remarkably consistent all over the world. It always ends in tears and blood. And then dickheads like you preach about how it wasn’t “real” communism, and you’ll get it right next time!

      By the way, has anyone ever told you the definition of insanity?

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      No, Lars, you vulgar, foul-mouthed, lazy, self-serving, lazy, ungrammatical, subliterate, blockheaded, misogynistic numbskull, you did NOT read anything at any of the links I provided.

      If you had, you would realize that this refutes everything you said:

      The Communist Party of China is in complete control of the country, from government to police to military.

      With some 90 million members, it is organised like a pyramid, with the politburo and eventually President Xi Jinping at the top.

      While there is a parliament, the National People’s Congress, it merely rubber stamps the decisions taken by the party leadership.

      The party also has a tight grip on the media and the internet to silence dissent.

      Love for China is equated with love for the party, while more pluralistic and democratic models of government are dismissed for the sake of national cohesion and growth. – finis

      It’s at one of those linkie things I provided. I won’t do your homework for you. You are too lazy to do your own homework yourself, and all you can do is pick quarrels. You are repeatedly proven to be wrong about whatever you say, and you provide no backup for any of it. And you wonder why people rebut and refute almost everything you post.

      Tough bananas.

      • Commissar says:

        So god damn clueless.

        Everything you described is authoritarianism.

        Being authoritarian does not make a country communist.

        Communism is an ECONOMIC model that has historically been implemented using authoritarian mechanisms.

        But most authoritarian countries are not communist.

        Including China.

    • Hondo says:

      (sigh) You really might want to read the PRC’s Constitution, Koalemos (AKA Commissar AKA Poodle AKA Seagull AKA Cthulhu).

      https://npcobserver.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/PRC-Constitution-2018.pdf

      Led by Communist Party? Check. (Preamble)

      Dictatorship of the Proletariat? Check. (Preamble)

      Guided by Marxism-Leninism? (check) Preamble.

      Principle of class struggle? Check. (Preamble)

      Socialist public ownership of means of production? Check. (Chapter I, Article 6)

      State owned economy? Check. (Chapter I, Article 7)

      Rural collective economic organizations? Check. (Chapter I, Article 8)

      State ownership of land and natural resources? Check – except for that owned by rural collectives. Private ownership of land forbidden. (Chapter I, Articles 9 and 10)

      Sounds kinda like most other states generally regarded as being Communist to me.

      • 5th/77th FA says:

        I’ll just leave this right here. And Larsie? They were able to start producing products to ship all over the world because they weren’t paying any labor cost to speak of and mush is cheap. The Globalist New World Order Manufacturers fronted the money to build the plants and used stolen technology to build said products. That big sucking sound you heard when BJ Willy signed the MFN Treaty with Communist China was jobs leaving every country in the world.

      • HMCS(FMF) ret says:

        Damn, Hondo…

        I think Larsie like getting verbally abused here.

      • Commissar says:

        The Chinese constitution is a propaganda document.

        It does not mean anything.

        It also says it is a democracy. Do you believe that part?

        The North Korean constitution provides citizens more rights than the US constitution does.

        It also claims North Korea is a democracy.

  7. timactual says:

    “The theoretical system of socialism with Chinese characteristics (Chinese: 中国特色社会主义; pinyin: Zhōngguó tèsè shèhuìzhǔyì)[1] is a broad term for political theories and policies that are seen by their proponents as representing Marxism–Leninism adapted to Chinese circumstances and specific time periods. For instance, in this view Xi Jinping
    Socialism with Chinese Characteristics–

    “Thought is considered to represent Marxist–Leninist policies suited for China’s present condition while Deng Xiaoping Theory was considered relevant for the period when it was formulated”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_with_Chinese_characteristics

    Anybody remember Lenin’s NEP (New Economic Policy)?

    ‘ Lenin characterized the NEP in 1922 as an economic system that would include “a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control,”, while socialized state enterprises would operate on “a profit basis”.[ ”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy

  8. Commissar says:

    So far the only evidence the regulars have been able to provide that China is communist is that the CCP calls itself communist.

    Which is damn near a tautological argument.

    The CCP also says it is democratic.

    • Penguinman000 says:

      So what is the form of government the Chinese have and how does it differ from communism?

      And I mean explain in a tangible way. Not regurgitate/plagiarize Howard Zinn or other “historians/academics”. I mean your own thoughts developed in a cogent manner.

      From my view point communism and socialism are pretty much part and parcel of the same package. They both take the view point the state has priority over the individual.

      Companies in capitalist economies do business there because they can manufacture widgets cheaper than in places where people care about human life. You don’t do business in China to develop intelectual property/new technology.

      In a democracy or a republic the individual has priority over the state. This is the reason capitalism has raised more people out of poverty (the #1 killer) than any other form of government.

      For the life of me I can’t figure out why you are focusing on BS academic points in an attempt to demonstrate the Chinese gov isn’t communist. The end result is the same. Commies/socialism is a failed experiment that has been repeated over and over.

      It turns out human beings of all political stripes like money and power. Capitalism works best because it acknowledges that basic human flaw exists. Communism/socialism only work in a theoretical framework formed in a vacuum devoid of human reality.

      Burying your head in the sand to this basic fact and pretending the obstacle doesn’t exist because you’ve taken a few college courses is the absolute height of hubris. In fact, it’s in complete opposition to what higher ed is supposed to achieve.