When I look at other communist nations, they were invaded, couped, and/or sabotaged at every opportunity, and (forgive me, my history of China is weak) while I’m sure that China faced obstacles from capitalists outside of the country, it somehow rose up to be the power that it is today while the USSR fell, Vietnam and Korea got bombed to hell and back, Cuba was put under crippling sanctions, and surely countless other uprisings got squashed young.

But china didn’t just survive, they thrived. How?

  • PKMKII [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    1 day ago

    Years of Cold War propaganda convinced western libs that markets are the antithesis of socialism. So the emergence of markets in China was mistakenly interpreted as meaning the end of socialism in China.

      • PKMKII [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The liberalization of the Russian economy was shock liberalism to the extreme. Zero transition, some “ownership vouchers” the people got as a perfunctory nod to the state capital being public, but that quickly descended into a speculative market, which given the lack of guard rails meant an oligarchy formed. So the sudden fallout of social services plus a non-competitive market meant millions of pre-mature deaths, brain drain, corruption.

        China, on the other hand, engaged in a system of requiring the factories of making X number of widgets per month or quarter for the state, but then allowed them to sell anything production past that on the market. This allowed for the introduction of markets in a controlled, gradual way, maintained government ownership to an extent (this is why so many Chinese corporations are owned in no small part by the state, a lot of them were spin offs the state kept an interest in), while avoiding the productivity downtime issue that Marxist-Leninist economies can sometimes run into. This is also why, while China has a capitalist class, it’s on a much tighter leash than in social democratic economies.

      • Ildsaye [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        China didn’t permit key foundational elements of its state and economy to liberalize. Energy, minerals, steel, cement, and other such basics are cornered by state enterprises, and banking is on a very short leash. Meanwhile Gorby gave everything away, and had no leverage over the black marketeers who couped the USSR and become the oligarchs of the Russian Federation and other former Soviet countries