• 1 Post
  • 354 Comments
Joined 28 days ago
cake
Cake day: June 3rd, 2025

help-circle
  • QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlJust baffling
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Except factually speaking, China has increase wealth inequality since their initial revolution and again in the cultural revolution so it really appears like they are abandoning socialism and giving it lip service like the USA is abandoning liberalism as a whole.

    You are ignoring realities to make it fit the propaganda you have accepted from the Chinese media/propaganda sphere. Hey does the state, billionaires, or the working classes own the press in China?

    The fact is kiddo. You have accepted propaganda and I am forcing you to confront the hypocrisy and inaccuracy within the notions you claim inappropriately as fact. Nothing I have said is incorrect unless te only permitted perspective is one that wholly accepts leftist theories as truth.




  • QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlJust baffling
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    “ Chinese workers do control the means of production through public ownership being the principle aspect of the economy, the large firms and key industries are firmly in the public sector. “

    No, they do not. Try looking at what is listed on the exchanges sometime. It might surprise you. It’s false to claim workers control the means of production when an investor class and investment banks exist.

    Im not presuming to know socialist “theory” better than those that choose to accept it but there are actual realities that most leftists actively avoid because it makes their claims invalid. In this case an investor class having been created since the revolution is a sign of failure.

    Finally you made a claim of all which ypu then made exceptions to that made the claim of “all” factually incorrect. You want to debate theory when I keep pointing out that “all of them but not really all of them” loterally means not all of them. As your claim that I reject outright relies on “all” your claim is not correct. Everyone who is “explaining” things is over looking that you said “not all” means “all”

    Sorry that your logic is not as solid or valid as you thought in this case.

    Again please remember your beliefs are not facts and much of what marxists claim has not been proven.






  • QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlJust baffling
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Of they aren’t making the change to permit liberalism then it does matter and currently my understanding is the state is dragging theor feet on privatization.

    Chinese workers do not control the means of production and there is a growing wealth inequality. The PRC is simply lying about their pursuits of socialism.

    You probably shouldn’t be talking about any nation given you have trouble grasping hiw “All but not really all” means not all.


  • QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlJust baffling
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    All means 100%. The fact that an exception is made where it does not happens means it is not “all”.

    Of course all of this presumes the rest is true and that has never been adequately demonstrated to be the case. Marxist assertions are called “theory” by leftists but they do not have that level of credibility or validity IRL. It is always worth remembering “theory” is really from from the case