• vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s plenty of systems that mix both, but Russia and China aren’t actually good examples. They’re pretty capitalist.

    State companies and state-connected companies own more than half of each one’s economy. More than in Nordic countries.

    • agarorn@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you belive that in a communist country everything is owned by the state? If so, I urge you to look up communism again.

          • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Communist means ideologically communist. Because “countries which have built communism according to Marx with stateless society with common ownership of means of production” etc are like Zeno’s Achilles and turtle metaphor. Only I don’t get why would anybody use such an unreachable by design criterion to judge on the effect of communist ideology on societies.

            • agarorn@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well in the examples I gave only in north Korea everything is controlled by the state. So your point is irrelevant.

              • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                There are gradations between “everything” and “critical mass” as well, and part of it is “private” property which can be easily confiscated or in some other way transferred to a more loyal person, just the system has mechanisms to prevent killing the golden goose (for now, it seems comrade Xi has some ideas with potential to affect this).

                I mean, if you consider Nazi Germany capitalist, then China is too.

                Anyway, it all depends on terminology. Some people think that “war communism” is the closest to real communism the world has seen. For others it’s not communism at all, because they don’t forget that “stateless” part. While Makhno’s republic is that. For others the Nordic countries are almost like communism.

                Just like with Christianity, with Communism we should trace all branches of the tree, not just discard everything we don’t like as schismatic.

    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because capitalism with state protection is not capitalism I guess.

      In each, we’re talking about capitalism with the caveat that the owners of the country want a kickback too, and in return local capitalists are protected from foreign capitalists. Vladimir Putin owns Russia, the CCP owns China. In neither case does capital belong to “the people” as a whole.

      • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, it’s not. I mean, for Marxists it is, because Marx describes something similar specifically to XIX century Germany with state-supported enormous trusts, influential aristocracy, and so on. Which is for obvious reason of living there, just not very relevant, because real economists use the term differently.

        In neither case does capital belong to “the people” as a whole.

        Well, CCP is not different from CPSU in this case.