China razes Mosque ...

[Albus Dumbledore]

But that's not Capitalism.

Yes it is. It's the purest ideal of capitalism on the planet.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

But that's not Capitalism.

(Hmm, It seems this debate has already taken place on the forum)

Hmm, personally, I would think it takes the most efficient in communism dictatorship, the most efficient in capitalism, it mixes ... ... ... and here we are! The result is China! 2008 version.

Well, I've already said it, and that's just my point of view, but I think everyone should be prepared that it becomes more or less the future of the world.

Masses around the world are less and less educated to democracy, even in West, they are more and more manipulable, they care less and less about principles, but more and more about material, so, I think they will let them going step by step, with small and big steps, in such regimes.

And what would be the best to keep under control the populations of these regime?

"GOD"!

Yes, more of that, more and more peoples, despaired or just lost in the current realities are looking for some transcendent things in which they can forget all their problems and by which they can be reassured. And I also consider spirituality as part of the human, so I consider as normal that the humans are looking for it. But I think the spiritual voices they will be proposed will just make promises to them and will exploit their naivete and their despair, to establish hard political regimes, and maybe those who will do it will be convinced they do the right thing, they do it for "God", that "God" wants it...

Evangelicals are going very well in the largest part of the chinese population, I mean the poorest part, peasants, working-class, all those who build these very big modern chinese cities, so, all who are not part of the new chinese middle class which represent just 300 millions on 1 billions and 400 millions of chinese. Evangelicals are going very well even if they are forbidden there, they are currently 100 to 200 millions.

If China knows a big crisis (war, economy, etc) what I consider as really possible, I think that evangelicals can go further and further there and if ever there is a US gov in their favor, they could be helped in order to establish a new regime, West-friendly, and maybe officially evangelical. To me, in case of a war China-US it could be a 1917 scenario, when Germany helped Russian communists to change the regime and so that shut the east front.

Hmm, well, this seem unrealistic today, doesn't it? Maybe it is and maybe it will be but when we envisage future I think we should really pay attention to the background trends, these are the future trends, they just need a developer. What would be the developer? Are these the good background trends?

Well, I can't say, to me these are big probabilities, the future will talk and say, but I would advice to pay attention to this...

[dead0man]

But that's not Capitalism.

Yes it is. It's the purest ideal of capitalism on the planet.

A state run economy?  How far are you guys willing to bend facts and reason to get your bias across?  But don't stop, please don't stop.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Whoever told you that the state and capitalism are enemies was a lier.

[dead0man]

Whoever told you that the state and capitalism are enemies was a lier.

That's nice, but I never said that.  All I'm saying is that China aint Capitalist, if you guys want to look like fools and keep saying they are, feel free.  I'll point out how wrong you are every time you do it.  The reader can decide.

capitalism–noun an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Albus Dumbledore]

China is fascist.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

capitalism–noun an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

Sorry, but I would like to be explained why it is forbidden to say that China makes both of the 2 opposed propositions in this definition? Doesn't it? Doesn't it share the state-owned means to  multi-national capitalist enterprises who makes the best offers?

[Flying Dog]

China is fascist.

Communist, actually...

[John Dibble]

China is fascist.

Communist, actually...

Well, they call themselves that but I'd say they are closer to facism from a practical standpoint looking at how they run their economy. They use private and public enterprises where it suits them, rather than solely public like a communist economy would. That's more in line with how the fascists operated. Either way though they are still authoritarian.

[Albus Dumbledore]

China is fascist.

Communist, actually...

Well, they call themselves that but I'd say they are closer to facism from a practical standpoint looking at how they run their economy. They use private and public enterprises where it suits them, rather than solely public like a communist economy would. That's more in line with how the fascists operated. Either way though they are still authoritarian.

[dead0man]

..and authoritarian is always bad.

[Albus Dumbledore]

..and authoritarian is always bad.

[Flying Dog]

China is fascist.

Communist, actually...

Well, they call themselves that but I'd say they are closer to facism from a practical standpoint looking at how they run their economy. They use private and public enterprises where it suits them, rather than solely public like a communist economy would. That's more in line with how the fascists operated. Either way though they are still authoritarian.

Their shift from a command economy to a mixed one is noted. However, it still has many socialist-type controls in effect for the economy. Such as planning a yearly economic plan and a state-controlled budget. China also still manages the economy in a socialist style top-down chain of command. China's numerous ministries also still have relatively wide powers over sections of the economy, such as Banking, agriculture, coal and communications. So there system of regulation I think more still mirrors that of a moderate leftist-socialist system.

[12th Doctor]

China is fascist.

Communist, actually...

Well, they call themselves that but I'd say they are closer to facism from a practical standpoint looking at how they run their economy. They use private and public enterprises where it suits them, rather than solely public like a communist economy would. That's more in line with how the fascists operated. Either way though they are still authoritarian.

There really is no difference between communism and fascism, at least in practice.  Any suggestions to the contrary are just wrong.

[afleitch]

China is fascist.

Communist, actually...

Well, they call themselves that but I'd say they are closer to facism from a practical standpoint looking at how they run their economy. They use private and public enterprises where it suits them, rather than solely public like a communist economy would. That's more in line with how the fascists operated. Either way though they are still authoritarian.

There really is no difference between communism and fascism, at least in practice.  Any suggestions to the contrary are just wrong.

There are significant differences between fascist and communist social theory.

[Verily]

China is fascist.

Communist, actually...

Well, they call themselves that but I'd say they are closer to facism from a practical standpoint looking at how they run their economy. They use private and public enterprises where it suits them, rather than solely public like a communist economy would. That's more in line with how the fascists operated. Either way though they are still authoritarian.

Their shift from a command economy to a mixed one is noted. However, it still has many socialist-type controls in effect for the economy. Such as planning a yearly economic plan and a state-controlled budget. China also still manages the economy in a socialist style top-down chain of command. China's numerous ministries also still have relatively wide powers over sections of the economy, such as Banking, agriculture, coal and communications. So there system of regulation I think more still mirrors that of a moderate leftist-socialist system.

Certainly true, but fascist societies also have substantial government participation in economic affairs, albeit the goal of fascist governments tends to be the glorification of the nation rather than providing for proletariat.

[Flying Dog]

China is fascist.

Communist, actually...

Well, they call themselves that but I'd say they are closer to facism from a practical standpoint looking at how they run their economy. They use private and public enterprises where it suits them, rather than solely public like a communist economy would. That's more in line with how the fascists operated. Either way though they are still authoritarian.

Their shift from a command economy to a mixed one is noted. However, it still has many socialist-type controls in effect for the economy. Such as planning a yearly economic plan and a state-controlled budget. China also still manages the economy in a socialist style top-down chain of command. China's numerous ministries also still have relatively wide powers over sections of the economy, such as Banking, agriculture, coal and communications. So there system of regulation I think more still mirrors that of a moderate leftist-socialist system.

Certainly true, but fascist societies also have substantial government participation in economic affairs, albeit the goal of fascist governments tends to be the glorification of the nation rather than providing for proletariat.

Fascists and Communists certainly have more in common than they would like to admit, that's for sure.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

How strange to see the theory of Totalitarianism being presented as though it were new and radical.

[John Dibble]

Their shift from a command economy to a mixed one is noted. However, it still has many socialist-type controls in effect for the economy. Such as planning a yearly economic plan and a state-controlled budget. China also still manages the economy in a socialist style top-down chain of command. China's numerous ministries also still have relatively wide powers over sections of the economy, such as Banking, agriculture, coal and communications. So there system of regulation I think more still mirrors that of a moderate leftist-socialist system.

In my view their shift is enough to make it closer to fascism. It's quite clear their state no longer runs on anything resembling communist ideology. Communism bases it's economy on an ideology, fascism on the other hand bases it on utility. Even though leaders in communist countries gave themselves a more than equal share of the wealth of the country the economy was still run so that the misery was spread pretty much equally. Nobody could get rich, and not even the leaders were rich - they could just get what they wanted freely due to their position rather than through actually having money.

On the other hand fascist countries would decide if something was run privately or by the state based on whether it would benefit the state. If your company was of great benefit to the state, you were allowed to become as rich as you could get. If your company was a detriment, the state would take over and run it or destroy it, whichever was better for the state. If you company was beneficial but they thought they could gain greater benefit by regulating you heavily, they would do that. A fascist state would implement a completely state controlled economy provided the rulers believed it would bring the greatest benefit to the state.

Today's China runs more like the second model than the first.

There really is no difference between communism and fascism, at least in practice.  Any suggestions to the contrary are just wrong.

In many ways their practices in maintaining control of the people are similar, but economically fascism tends to be more efficient. As I said above, their aims are more for utility than ideology, so an economy under fascism can actually work. Under fascism your chances of getting decent food on a regular basis go up significantly. If I had to choose a tyrant to live under I'd rather have one that keeps my stomach quiet.

[minionofmidas]

..and authoritarian is always bad.

Yes, I agree. Corporations are always bad.

[dead0man]

..and authoritarian is always bad.

Yes, I agree. Corporations are always bad.

Are you saying corporations are authoritarian?

[minionofmidas]

..and authoritarian is always bad.

Yes, I agree. Corporations are always bad.

Are you saying corporations are authoritarian?

Well it's bleeding obvious, isn't it?
Just look at management chains of command.

[dead0man]

Maybe we define the words differently.  How do you define authoritarian?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm sure most businesses would love if they could enforce number 1 on you, but they can't.  I guess one could argue that some corporations are run in the style of number 2, but certainly not all (or even most) businesses are run that way and they certainly don't have that power over their customers in the same way a govt has it over it's citizens.  What am I missing?

[afleitch]

I'm sure most businesses would love if they could enforce number 1 on you, but they can't.  I guess one could argue that some corporations are run in the style of number 2, but certainly not all (or even most) businesses are run that way and they certainly don't have that power over their customers in the same way a govt has it over it's citizens.  What am I missing?

Authoritarianism is found at all levels and the penalty for acting against authority differs from example to example. The family unit for example, and the power hierachy within, is often cited as an authoritarian structure though the highest punishment for disobedience is (hopefully) a small smack.

[dead0man]

Ok, fine.  Not ALL authoritarians are bad.  All authoritarian governments are bad.

But again, in what way can a corporation be authoritarian against their customers?  (except where our various govts allow them or force them to be)  If I'm wrong, I'd really like to know how and why.