this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2025
157 points (69.5% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
1829 readers
3 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc.
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Calling China communist is a stretch. More like planned authoritarian capitalism tempered with socialism. China has 607 billionaires, communism would have 0.
Also, Japan is very capitalistic and they have amazing trains.
look I don't care who's communist and who's capitalist, we need them trains
It's not a stretch, it's outright false to call it communism or socialism, systems which necessitate the abolishment of capitalist mode of production (commodity production, private ownership, markets) and money. China, meanwhile, literally has billionaires, still produces things under capitalist mode of production and the only oddity it has compared to other Capitalist countries is partially nationalized economy (which Mussolini has also done, it's not socialism by itself).
It's just a social democracy.
Isn’t there only one political party in China? How is that democracy? Not being hostile, genuinely curious how that would work
You can have disagreements within a single party. Like how in the US they banned communist parties because it didn't align with the capitalist ideals that all American parties are required to align with.
The US has not banned communist parties from existing. There's even a few local elected communist mayors. The Red Scare for sure did it's job though, and declaring as a communist in virtually any US office is a surefire way to lose.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Control_Act_of_1954
Brutal.
Which was ruled unconstitutional in 1973 by the federal district court of Arizona. Did you finish the article that you linked?
Blawis v. Bolin
It's like burning down a house and asking what's the problem after the fire has gone out. Repercussions last a long time. The cultural changes produced go on for generations.
Anyways, none of that matters cause this is America. We just did the unconstitutional thing at the State level instead.
https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/GV/htm/GV.557.htm
Please read and hit me with some more complaints. Maybe if I keep knocking them down you will eventually change your mind :)
Yes the cultural repercussions of the Red Scare are pervasive to this day. I mentioned that in my original reply.
The Texas State code you linked has a pretty funny definitions of "Communist":
It's not altogether uncommon in southern states to redefine words to make the name of the act sound extremely right wing. If this was written a decade later I guarantee it would say "Terrorist" instead. This particular act is also silly because it just redefines treason laws that already existed to make it seem like they were stopping communists. States did similar in this past election with "banning illegal immigrants from voting" on ballots. It's a political scare tactic and it clearly is working on you. Again, this law doesn't actually ban colloquial definition of "Communist" just some weird legal rewrite of what would most people would call a terrorist.
It also is kind of shitty to have someone come at you with "Brutal" and linking to an article that debunks their claim. Then continues to move the goalpost and condescendingly tells you that they're going to "knock down" anything you rebut with while also calling them "complaints" instead of facts. As such, I think I'm done with this conversation. Have a nice day!
Before I too let the conversation die I just want to point out how much you devalue "political scare tactics" like they have no effect and can be basically ignored by its targets with no repercussions. I want you to think on that for a while. Figure out yourself why that is a self evidently silly thing to say when discussing how they redefined communist to mean traitor and how that means they actually didn't ban communism.
I bet your a real big fan of the children's game "I'm not touching you"
If you insist on continuing to engage me then let's pivot to a different conversation.
Why are you so hostile towards me and why do you insist on ascribing things to me that I didn't say, or even imply? In fact, I've said the opposite of what you have claimed I said in your comment... The main reason I had for pointing out that communism is not banned is that it actively dissuades people from joining a communist party if people believe it's illegal. Which is the intent of the scare tactic. Which I believe is a bad outcome. Do you follow the logic here? Now can we please put that aside as I actually think we're effectively on the same page or at least on the same chapter.
I've tried to be moderately polite to you but you seem adamant to be a complete ghoul back to me. I just can't figure out why a simple rebuttal sent you flying off into a weird attack mode where you seem to ignore facts put back to you. What I can't stress enough though, is that mindset is not unique to you. It's extremely off putting to me personally, and I'd very much like to figure out where the heck this mindset is coming from.
I will say that I don't care for more insults. I really don't have the mental energy to deal with some random person attacking me for no real reason. So if you do reply please keep it cordial or I think I will completely disengage from further discussions with you.
I don't insist on continuing. I'm sticking to my word and leaving it there.
I think people have some degree of chouce at the more local levels, but you're right.
democracy is a far stretch though, isnt it? And capitalist is also not entirely true, when entire industry branches are nationalized, planned and not privatized
The term state capitalism cover a lot of the basics of the Chinese system.
Thank you. Was looking for a better term.
Lets call it state capitalist, as thats the proper term
It's not even that, given how there's a decent chunk of their economy owned by private individuals
As I understand it, the majority shareholder is the cccp in those little capitalist bubbles?
China is sentencing billionaires to death. You’re just Sinophobic.
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml how does it work in China, again?
to be fair, in communism corruption and favoritism have always been creating rich people as well, similar to capitalism, but usually not in the same scale. greed is a problem that has to be addressed.
Then that system is not communist regardless of what they call themselves or what their political opponent calls them! If they are in a fundamental opposition to the work of Marx then they are not communist
That's the problem though, communism is 'everyone puts their resources in a big pile and then we re-ditribute them evenly' and then you realise you need someone to administrate the distribution and hope like an idiot that they don't just take the whole pile for themselves. Capitalism is 'everyone maintains their own pile' and you hope like an idiot that the people with the biggest piles don't conspire to steal everyone elses for themselves.