That’s a very liberal understanding of socialism, and explicitly rejects the fact that China is in the beginning stages of socialism, not claiming it’s a higher stage. The large firms and key industries are publicly owned, while the medium and small firms are cooperatively owned, privately owned, or joint-stock. Cheng Enfu made a model to make it easier to understand:
China was a largely feudal county working its way out of brutal colonial exploitation - for which the exploiters have never paid reparations and still held on to Hong Kong for decades.
How long does it take to build productive forces and modernize while still subject to unequal exchange and general imperialism? That is a social and political question, so you tell me about where China was and what its path has been. How many other imoerialized countries jave eliminated absolute poverty, by the way? Not just taking decades to do it, but accomplish it at all.
They went from a colonized agrarian country emerging from a civil war to arguably the most developed country on the planet in only 76 years. That’s incredibly rapid progress. Britain has been capitalist for centuries and has been the world hegemonic empire for a good portion of that time, and yet is less developed. If your point is that going from an agrarian economy to where China is today in less than a century is slow growth, then I’d love to hear what passes your impossibly high standards.
There’s four stages, they’ve been in the first for seventy-six years.
Doing the math it seems they’ll need another two hundred and twenty-six years to reach the final stage if they got to the second stage tomorrow.
I’m not sure if I have impossibly high standards or thinking it’s reasonable to wait another nearly quarter of a millennium might be incredibly low standards.
Why on Earth would you imagine each stage lasts a specific number of years? Why on Earth do you think thr timer should only start at the founding of the PRC? Why on Earth are you framing it as every stage up until communism is a sacrifice as compared to capitalism, and not as a system gradually and rapidly improving further and further?
This is incredibly incoherent on your part, and thoroughly liberal.
Why not thousands of years ago, when China was first rising? Why not 5 minutes ago? All of it is arbitrary and vibes-based for you, again, there’s no reason all stages take the same time, or why you’re framing it as many years of sacrifice to finally become a “good society” in several hundred years. It’s ridiculous.
That’s a very liberal understanding of socialism, and explicitly rejects the fact that China is in the beginning stages of socialism, not claiming it’s a higher stage. The large firms and key industries are publicly owned, while the medium and small firms are cooperatively owned, privately owned, or joint-stock. Cheng Enfu made a model to make it easier to understand:
The CCP got into power seventy-six years ago how long does it take to get into the next stage?
China was a largely feudal county working its way out of brutal colonial exploitation - for which the exploiters have never paid reparations and still held on to Hong Kong for decades.
How long does it take to build productive forces and modernize while still subject to unequal exchange and general imperialism? That is a social and political question, so you tell me about where China was and what its path has been. How many other imoerialized countries jave eliminated absolute poverty, by the way? Not just taking decades to do it, but accomplish it at all.
It’s gradually increasing, it doesn’t work in spurts or hard lines. There isn’t a “go to next stage” button on Xi’s desk.
Makes sense but seventy-six years is a really long time.
They went from a colonized agrarian country emerging from a civil war to arguably the most developed country on the planet in only 76 years. That’s incredibly rapid progress. Britain has been capitalist for centuries and has been the world hegemonic empire for a good portion of that time, and yet is less developed. If your point is that going from an agrarian economy to where China is today in less than a century is slow growth, then I’d love to hear what passes your impossibly high standards.
There’s four stages, they’ve been in the first for seventy-six years.
Doing the math it seems they’ll need another two hundred and twenty-six years to reach the final stage if they got to the second stage tomorrow.
I’m not sure if I have impossibly high standards or thinking it’s reasonable to wait another nearly quarter of a millennium might be incredibly low standards.
Why on Earth would you imagine each stage lasts a specific number of years? Why on Earth do you think thr timer should only start at the founding of the PRC? Why on Earth are you framing it as every stage up until communism is a sacrifice as compared to capitalism, and not as a system gradually and rapidly improving further and further?
This is incredibly incoherent on your part, and thoroughly liberal.
Should I base it on the founding of the CCP in 1921 instead?
That’s a hundred and four years ago so the math would be closer to three hundred and twelve for the final stage.
Why not thousands of years ago, when China was first rising? Why not 5 minutes ago? All of it is arbitrary and vibes-based for you, again, there’s no reason all stages take the same time, or why you’re framing it as many years of sacrifice to finally become a “good society” in several hundred years. It’s ridiculous.