1024
Lemmy might, MIGHT have a small bias towards the left (lemm.ee)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
885 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

We understand perfectly, we just think it's bullshit. All of the countries that are consistently ranked as providing the best quality of life for their citizens share a suite of features, none of which are communism. No amount of condescension on your part will change this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    you completely made up the link in reasoning that the "countries provide ... for their citizens". how does a country provide quality of life? you took a correlation and filled in the blank on causation, that it's purely caused by domestic government systems. not geographical, geopolitical, historical, material realities. the "suite of features" shared by these countries is more than just the ones you wanna focus on and ignore all the rest.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    China is responsible for 75% of poverty reduction, Cuba has a longer life expectancy than the US, chinas median wage is now higher than some european countries, and it is only growing, women in gdr had more orgasms than women in the west, and the current "quality of life" in capitalist countries is only sustained due to exploitation of the third world - not to mention the fact that while these same countries have enough food and housing their peoples are still starving and homeless.

    There you go, no condescension necessary.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Good. I appreciate the lack of condescension. I still think you are wrongheaded in your analysis, but I am happy to cordially disagree with you while not infantilizing your arguments.

    As for China, I think what's notable is that it was able to use command capitalism to achieve its admittedly phenomenal economic success specifically on the back of capitalism.

    But now China is facing demographic collapse together with a collapse of its real estate market.

    It's in the rest of the world's interest to mitigate China's coming economic difficulties as much as we can, but there's only so much we can do for an economy built on a house of cards.

    Mark my words; China is in deep shit economically, and it will be a huge deal in the coming years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Eh, China has been collapsing or about to collapse since the 60's. I'll believe it when I see it. Meanwhile the US isn't doing so hot, which we can actually observe without the need to make the financial troubles of one part of one sector in one region into some sort of sign of an oncoming apocalypse.

    Regarding making use of capitalism: Yeah, that's what dengism is all about. Capitalism has its uses, we've just outgrown it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    China is only doing so well on the back of declining manufacturing in the west. Nixon should never have normalized relations with them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Then why isn’t India doing as well as China economically? They had the same chance to undercut US labor costs in order to industrialize. However, they could not capitalize on that opportunity as successfully as China did. It’s almost as if Chinese economic policy and central planning played a large role in their development. It’s also pretty clear that China is actually become less dependent on US demand as their own internal economy grows.

    This isn’t a one time experiment either. Vietnam is following a similar path and has grown much faster than many comparable south east asian countries.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, I don't doubt that the totalitarian CCP took full advantage of the opportunity to grow their economy to what it is now. And they did that through state controlled capitalism and gross human rights violations.

    I don't doubt they are smart, but the methods they have used, ie being a single party authoritarian state, are barbaric. It was a mistake to help China succeed as we did.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Think about it this way, if you were a Chinese citizen would you rather work in a harsh factory setting or work as a subsistence farmer and risk starvation because it didn’t rain enough one year? Because that was literally the choice. There were no other options.

    The reason why the Chinese government maintains a high level of support from Chinese citizens is not because they’re great propagandists. Rather it’s because hundreds of millions of people went from extreme poverty as peasants to living stable middle class lives within a few decades.

    Why do you see that as such a bad thing? Would you prefer all these people remain in poverty as they have in other countries such as India or the Philippines? I don’t get it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    I don't see capitalism raising people out of poverty as bad. It's one of the greatest achievements of capitalism.

    The way they implemented it is the problem, and clearly not everyone is happy about it as we see in Tiannemen square and, more recently, the way Chinese citizens developed a coded vocabulary to express their discontent.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent