Communism experdites the process of wealth centralization, because that’s what happens when you give all the resources to a single party, under communism the process takes less than 10 years, under capitalism it takes over 10 years, because you need to convince people to part with their money, under communism you have no choice, you own nothing and what you do own is the property of the party.
Late 1991, but yep, that’s when inequality skyrocketed, as it was illegally disbanded and the former state sliced up and sold for parts to the highest bidder against the wishes of the public at large, causing roughly 7 million deaths.
Left column isn’t labelled, no source is provided, Russian points on the graph are sparse when compared to the USA and France lines, there’s no heading explaining what the graph says. Please do better.
I’m usually quite particular about labelling axes, but this graph has both axes partially labled, and while the dates are easily inferred, the meaning of the left axis is in the footer, as is the general explanation.
You’re confusing private property with personal property. While this is a very common mistake, you can’t claim to have an informed opinion about communism while still making it, it’s 101 level stuff.
Further, you are also making the other very common error of assuming the state is oppressive because it is like some kind of monolith somehow cut off from the rest of society as though the peoples staffing it weren’t as much part of society as everyone else, this is not the case, whether a state apparatus is oppressive and against whom it is oppressive is dictated by the class character of the state, a factor that is systematically neglected by the peoples using variations of “power always corrupt” truisms to “analyze” a state.
tl;dr: you’re knowledge of communism and communist theory and praxis is very surface level at best, go read some reading list from prolewiki’s library, To criticize something you need to know at least the basics of it first.
Wealth inequality was far lower in the USSR than the Tsarist system before it, the Capitalist system after it, and than western countries. Additionally, Soviet Democracy was extensive, with far more political participation than western countries have.
I’m seeing /u/10_0 from lemmy.ml in this thread trying to argue against socialism, currently. I guess they are anticommunist only when… what was your point again?
Anyone claiming China isn’t socialist is grossly misinformed.
Lemmy.ml isn’t like Lemmygrad or Hexbear, where you are required to be a Leftist, or accept Leftism and want to learn. Lemmy.ml is maintained by Marxist-Leninists and the ML references Marxism-Leninism, but non-Communists use it too.
Yeah, but that excuse is only used when people are criticising communist using China as an example, that’s why I consider China’s status as a communist nation an opinion that lemmy.ml always flip flops on.
And by what metric is China considered a communist nation?
And by what metric is China considered a communist nation?
It’s headed by a Communist Party along the principles of Marxism-Leninism with the goal of using Socialism with Chinese Characteristics to oversee a Market Economy and build up their productive forces to achieve full socialization of the economy.
If you have an hour and genuinely want to know, read China Has Billionaires. It isn’t a fully socialized system, but it does use Central Planning extensively, and the Party is in control of the Bourgeoisie, not the other way around.
And also a small group of people monopolize power and wealth to oppress those who didn’t
…You’re describing capitalism.
Communism experdites the process of wealth centralization, because that’s what happens when you give all the resources to a single party, under communism the process takes less than 10 years, under capitalism it takes over 10 years, because you need to convince people to part with their money, under communism you have no choice, you own nothing and what you do own is the property of the party.
Hmm?
Poverty rates are steadily decreasing in China...
...under every income group.
While homeownership rates have been steadily rising, reaching 90% in 2018
Those are some bold claims to make with nothing to back it up, when in fact reality says otherwise.
Technology and a booming capitalist economy do that, or well, a booming economy and leading tech at least ; )
A market economy under a socialist state, similar to what the USSR had under the NEP for its first 20 years.
Explain this graph:
Also wasn’t 1995 when the USSR collapsed?
Late 1991, but yep, that’s when inequality skyrocketed, as it was illegally disbanded and the former state sliced up and sold for parts to the highest bidder against the wishes of the public at large, causing roughly 7 million deaths.
Left column isn’t labelled, no source is provided, Russian points on the graph are sparse when compared to the USA and France lines, there’s no heading explaining what the graph says. Please do better.
I’m assuming you’ll actually answer now that the full source is linked, correct? Or are you just incapable of facing reality?
For images that don’t list the source in themselves like these I like to put the source in the alt text like this
Oh, nice! Thanks!
I’m usually quite particular about labelling axes, but this graph has both axes partially labled, and while the dates are easily inferred, the meaning of the left axis is in the footer, as is the general explanation.
You’re confusing private property with personal property. While this is a very common mistake, you can’t claim to have an informed opinion about communism while still making it, it’s 101 level stuff.
Further, you are also making the other very common error of assuming the state is oppressive because it is like some kind of monolith somehow cut off from the rest of society as though the peoples staffing it weren’t as much part of society as everyone else, this is not the case, whether a state apparatus is oppressive and against whom it is oppressive is dictated by the class character of the state, a factor that is systematically neglected by the peoples using variations of “power always corrupt” truisms to “analyze” a state.
tl;dr: you’re knowledge of communism and communist theory and praxis is very surface level at best, go read some reading list from prolewiki’s library, To criticize something you need to know at least the basics of it first.
Incorrect.
Wealth inequality was far lower in the USSR than the Tsarist system before it, the Capitalist system after it, and than western countries. Additionally, Soviet Democracy was extensive, with far more political participation than western countries have.
Read Blackshirts and Reds.
Also, poverty rates are steadily decreasing in China...
...under every income group.
While homeownership rates have been steadily rising, reaching 90% in 2018
I’d also recommend Human Rights In The Soviet Union, Including Comparisons With The U.S.A. by Albert Szymanski
Excellent addition, comrade.
I’ve heard lemmy.ml claim China is not communist, before. I guess they are communist only when it supports your argument.
I’m seeing /u/10_0 from lemmy.ml in this thread trying to argue against socialism, currently. I guess they are anticommunist only when… what was your point again?
Anyone claiming China isn’t socialist is grossly misinformed.
Deng Xiaoping on productive forces
Socialism With Chinese Characteristics by Roland Boer
Lemmy.ml isn’t like Lemmygrad or Hexbear, where you are required to be a Leftist, or accept Leftism and want to learn. Lemmy.ml is maintained by Marxist-Leninists and the ML references Marxism-Leninism, but non-Communists use it too.
Yeah, but that excuse is only used when people are criticising communist using China as an example, that’s why I consider China’s status as a communist nation an opinion that lemmy.ml always flip flops on.
And by what metric is China considered a communist nation?
It’s headed by a Communist Party along the principles of Marxism-Leninism with the goal of using Socialism with Chinese Characteristics to oversee a Market Economy and build up their productive forces to achieve full socialization of the economy.
If you have an hour and genuinely want to know, read China Has Billionaires. It isn’t a fully socialized system, but it does use Central Planning extensively, and the Party is in control of the Bourgeoisie, not the other way around.