Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

106062Re: [evol-psych] Re: Capitalism produces. Socialism distributes

Expand Messages
  • Wade
    Jul 1, 2010
      I think we need to distinguish between.

      1  The label that the ruling party attaches to itself - which is often determined by historical circumstance.
      2  The process by which the ruling party comes to power
      3  The policies and especially the economic policies that the ruling party promotes.

      As far as China is concerned there is a big gap between theory and practice in how the Party maintains itself in power.  In theory local elections elect  representatives who elect regional representatives etc all the way up top the top. In practice the system is rather the reverse.  The people at the top of the pyramid seek to promote their supporters and allies who in turn dish out patronage to those lower down until the "electors" are left to rubber stamp official candidates. 

      As far as the  economy is  concerned, China is  still in a process of  transition, but the dynamism of the economy and the source of all the cheap goods piling up on the shores of the west is the capitalist section of the  economy.  And we are talking about a fiercely, no holds barred type of capitalist economy not the Swedish type.  The socialist section of the economy is best seen as a source of underemployed labour.  Given that all this  arose through RKS claiming that China usurption of US as the  workshop of the world was a counter to RAFs claimm that capitalism produces and socialism distributes, we need to consider what is the  economic  system that  has brought  this about not the political history..

      On 1 July 2010 17:48, Robert Karl Stonjek <stonjek@...> wrote:

      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 4:14 PM
      Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Re: Capitalism produces. Socialism distributes

      Just because the ruling party is officially a Communist party doesn't make it a communist party in any real sense of the world any more the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democracy.  The Communist Party in China is essentially a nationalist party with a communist historical background and trappings.

      China is a communist system (system of government ie elections elect only local representatives who in turn elect regional representatives etc all the way to the chairman).  The system of government is independent from the policy platform.
      In Nicaragua, for instance, a communist party was elected in a democratic system.
      The party adopts particular policies.  Communist policies emphasise distribution of wealth so that the gap between rich and poor is minimised and classes are abolished.
      But some redistribution of wealth occurs in capitalist countries and yet we still call them capitalist so why are you so touchy about a country that allows some capitalist policy eg 'Special Economic Zones' (Hong Kong is one such).
      In the west, policies are tried and those that fail to perform are replaced or modified.  There is nothing in the communist manifesto that says that communism can not do the same, and China does.
      It is unlikely that the welfare of the Chinese and the prosperity of China would improve after adoption of an American style political system and just as unlikely that the USA would improve in any general way upon the adoption of a Chinese style of Communism, though in both cases there would be some winners and losers.
      The main failing of the Russian system was dictatorship in the early days and the failure to embrace change early enough.  The North Korean system is both a dictatorship, which is exactly what the communist manifesto rallies against (so is that really a communist system?), ultra-nationalism and militarism.  Indeed, regardless of the economic and welfare policies, dictatorship+nationalism+militarism has, in the past five centuries, always failed and at a huge cost to the people and the country.  Blaming North Korea's problems on communism is somewhat mysterious in the light of the real excesses of that country.  The only sin they are not guilty of committing is ultra-fanatical religiosity, unless you count worship of dead leaders as a religion...

    • Show all 11 messages in this topic