Socialism

hideshow 12 child comments

parent

[–] QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago (11 children)

leading Party official

Ok now I know for sure you're twisting things on purpose. Best of luck to you.

hideshow 11 child comments

parent

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Yea, shit like this and saying the Statesian moon landing was fake are seriously damaging the appearance of sincerity.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

I think it's what I'd expect from someone (sort of reasonably) drunk on nostalgia for what was a genuinely better time refusing to admit that that time has unfortunately passed and said better time despite being better was not perfect or globally applicable without any tailoring to each places specific conditions.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago

Yep. I think a good deal of the problem is the language barrier, but it's unfortunate that it seems to be an unfortunate mixture of nostalgia with the jealousy of seeing socialism still being built in China while in Russia it's a (for now) bygone era.

parent

[–] Sedan@lemmy.ml -1 points 5 months ago (7 children)

Comrade, you have to understand that this might have been hyperbole.

He is a Party member—a billionaire. That is all I know about him. And I heard him speak when he was in Kyiv. He addressed Ukrainian youth and lectured them on how one ought to live.

He spoke about himself, claiming that he never takes a break—that even during his morning run or in the shower, he is constantly thinking about work. He even said that while sleeping, he wakes up with ideas and jots things down in a notebook.

He urged the Ukrainian youth to be just like him.

It is the truth; I am not twisting anything.

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (6 children)

He is a Party member—a billionaire. That is all I know about him.

If this is true that this is all you know, you would probably benefit from the teaching of Chairman Mao: No investigation no right to speak.

If you had investigated you would have found that while true that due to the failings of Jiang and Hu a handful of capitalists were given party membership, that in reality it is in name only and they hold no power.

The one and only time they tried to exert power by pushing to loosen banking regulations, so they could offer consumer micro loans, the party made them disappear and restructured the company. Foreign capitalists cried about this for years because it showed the truth, capital has no real power in China.

Also since 2014 the faulty lines of Jiang and Hu are being corrected.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] Sedan@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 months ago (5 children)

If this is true that this is all you know, you would probably benefit from the teaching of Chairman Mao: No investigation no right to speak.

Jack Ma, male, Han Chinese, member of the Communist Party of China, born September 1964 in Shengzhou, Zhejiang Province, is the chairman of the board of directors of Alibaba Group (China) Co., Ltd.

...He has been awarded the title of "Outstanding Builder of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics in Zhejiang Province."

http://cpc.people.com.cn/n1/2018/1126/c419242-30420351.html

Comrade, what kind of investigations are there? Don't you know how the oligarchs make their billions?

They make their money by oppressing the proletariat.

For example, he forces his workers to work overtime for the same wages. He doesn't pay compensation for overtime. He's not ashamed of it.

Look on YouTube to see the conditions the workers at his factories live in.

I'm not talking about all of China now; I'm talking specifically about the oligarch Jack Ma, who is a member of the CPC and who received an award "for outstanding services in building socialism."

Comrade, please don't be offended by me; I'm dealing exclusively with facts, not speculation.

Jiang and Hu a handful of capitalists were given party membership, that in reality it is in name only and they hold no power.

Yes, oligarchs are all parasites—you're right.

Their money is money stolen from the people. And it doesn't really matter whether they're in the Communist Party or not, because they're parasites a priori!

The one and only time they tried to exert power by pushing to loosen banking regulations, so they could offer consumer micro loans, the party made them disappear and restructured the company. Foreign capitalists cried about this for years because it showed the truth, capital has no real power in China.

It's encouraging that work is actually being done in China. This gives hope for the best....

But until the oligarchs are exterminated as a class in China, they will continue to strangle the people!

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (4 children)

oligarch /ˈɒlɪɡɑːk/ An oligarch is a very wealthy and powerful individual who uses their vast financial and business resources to directly influence a country's government and political landscape. The word stems from the Greek term oligarchia, which translates to "rule by the few".

They have no power they are not oligarchs. There are no oligarchs in China only a bourgeois element that is shrinking year on year that holds no real power.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] Sedan@lemmy.ml 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

oligarch /ˈɒlɪɡɑːk/ An oligarch is a very wealthy and powerful individual who uses their vast financial and business resources to directly influence a country’s government and political landscape. The word stems from the Greek term oligarchia, which translates to “rule by the few”.

Yes, I agree with you about the term "oligarch." I never mentioned Ma's influence on the state, though; I talked about the workers and how Ma made his billions.

And I don't know about China, but in the USSR, all party workers were a priori involved in government activities.

I suppose China also has "party meetings" at various levels, where party workers make key decisions by voting. At these meetings, such a distinguished and distinguished figure surely enjoys considerable authority. Or am I mistaken?

They have no power they are not oligarchs. There are no oligarchs in China only a bourgeois element that is shrinking year on year that holds no real power.

Yeah, I've heard about that, but right now China is second in terms of billionaires after the US.

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Or am I mistaken?

Yes

Yeah, I’ve heard about that, but right now China is second in terms of billionaires after the US.

Yes because China has a very large population and thus all absolute numbers not adjusting for this will be extremely large and out of step with reality. In reality the rate of billionaires in China is 0.288 (Between India and Kazakhstan while being far less poor and far more advanced) where as it is 2.42 in the US and 0.821 in Russia for example.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] Sedan@lemmy.ml -1 points 5 months ago (1 child)

Yes, I agree with you. But that doesn't change the essence of Ma and the others.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago

It does. Ma and other capitalists having no political power is absolutely a change in essence of their position