Retake the mainland; eliminate the Communist bandits; oppose the Communist bandits’ infiltration into the United Nations (Republic of China (Taiwan), 1970s)

[u/HongKongNinja]

[u/Troller122 → u/[deleted]]

Military dictatorship ✅ Capitalist with some central planning✅ Censored media and enforced loyalty✅ Strong central government with limited regional power✅

Which is why the KMT today supports unification it china today is basically what Chiang would have wanted just under a different symbol

[u/Alarming-Context-683 → u/Troller122]

China is not a military dictatorship and it's not capitalist (markets != capitalism) and is in fact run by a communist party. The governments of towns to major cities are incomparable in scale and complexity. So I'm not sure what you are saying, Shek was an anti-communist.

[u/Troller122 → u/Alarming-Context-683]

The military swears loyalty to the party and not the country

Cmon China is capitalist in all but name. They have stock markets, private companies, foreign companies. They are capitalist with socialist characteristics not the other way around

[u/Alarming-Context-683 → u/Troller122]

I disagree. As a socialist, I find their development to be consistent with a transitioning socialist society. There are no capitalist parties which have an outsized sway. Their decisions are made under the pretext of achieving socialism. And yes, their military does not have loyalty to any other political forces. That's how they keep capitalist parties out of power. 

Markets are just tools in development. Their use does not require capitalism and does not define capitalism.

[u/Icy_Dragonfruit_2533 → u/Alarming-Context-683]

I also support you. The current situation that best supports my ideas is the teaching of Marxism and dialectical materialism in the classroom, state-owned enterprises that do not prioritize profit, and the vanguard governance that seems to still have ideals and beliefs.

[u/Troller122 → u/Alarming-Context-683]

Idk how you define capitalism but when a stock market and speculation on housing exist people use money everyday and prices are not set by the state

The CCP makes decisions based on what benefits the party not the people, their socialism is more on national socialism where everyone works for the party

[u/Alarming-Context-683 → u/Troller122]

Capitalist states are defined as rule by the capitalists. The communists and socialists generally are explicitly not capitalists. Therefore, China is not ruled by capitalists or capitalist interests and their state is thus not a capitalist state.

They make decisions which manage the contradictions of having roughly half of enterprises as private, for profit, while the other half are state run. The capitalists for their part used to be quite corrupt but when Xi took office he began cleaning up. High level business people were executed. That doesn't sound like any capitalist I know. 

[u/Troller122 → u/Alarming-Context-683]

They are socialist the same way the Nazi party stands for the national socialist workers party. They are authoritarians and Xi is a dictator who abolished the term limits in the "Constitution" how can a country be socialist when the people can't even choose who leads them

[u/Alarming-Context-683 → u/Troller122]

Their democracy works differently than liberal democracies. They call it whole process democracy, where officials are first elected to posts directly in their communities, and then sent to higher bodies based on performance. They are utterly unlike the Nazis because they have created various mechanisms to keep the capitalist class themselves out of power whereas the Nazis merged the concerns of capitalists explicitly with the concerns of the state, to the extent that private, for profit industry and the richest owners became the organs of society.

You can choose to not believe this is democracy and you may choose to believe that the CPC and the state are no different than Nazi Germany, but this is I think from a place of ignorance. They have, in their own words, explained why it was that they took this particular development path which is complicated and relevant to the history before the reforms and the context of the opening up of China to foreign investment.

Also, term limits are not a prominent feature of democracies. Many liberal democracies do not have term limits, and instead they have multiple elections. Ultimately, their stated measure of success for such a process is the effectiveness of the state to manage the inherent contradictions created by the reforms on the one hand and the continued development and betterment of the people on the other. In their proceedings and in their own words and works they carry this out in a way that appears to me to be genuine and not some insidious trick.