Communism in theory vs in practice
Communism in theory vs in practice
You're viewing a single thread.
-
can communism survive in a single country was always a big question.
I think the original idea was to try a world revolution but that didn't work out.
Us is the main holdout. Russia is basically socialist, EU is basically socialist. China is communist.
Us is the only serious holdout
-
Russia is Capitalist, the EU is Capitalist, the US is Capitalist, and China is Socialist. Communism must be global, but Socialism is the process of building towards that through publicly owning large firms and key industries. Communism exists as an ideology for now, and hasn't been achieved yet.
-
Russia has universal health care and mandatory vacations and many other perks - it's in Russia constitution in 7.1. Same is EU.
us is definitely capitalist
-
Welfare and social programs are not Socialism. Socialism is when public ownership is the primary basis of your economy.
-
For what purpose - for the purpose of providing these social programs. It's all connected
-
-
-
-
China is a cocktail of socialism, capitalism, nationalism... claiming it's only one ~ism is probably oversimplifying, but communism is probably a bit far stretch.
-
China has a Socialist Market Economy, it isn't so much a cocktail as it is Marxism-Leninism applied to China's current conditions.
-
China has a Socialist Market Economy, it isn’t so much a cocktail as it is Marxism-Leninism applied to China’s current conditions.
This sentence is in Chinese constitution and text book for every first grade student. Repeating it doesn't help any meaningful conversation, unless you are a 7 years old trying to pass exam and get to second grade...
-
It's a sentence I made, just because the PRC agrees with describing themselves that way doesn't mean I'm not adding to meaningful conversation. When you declare that China is a cocktail of Capitalism and Socialism, what does that actually mean? It seemed like your comment was more about not analyzing China's economy than coming up with a coherent and consistent answer, which is what I pushed forward.
Basically, Capitalism and Socialism are descriptors of overall systems, not portions of an economy, so calling a system a cocktail of each doesn't make too much sense and adds confusion more than clarity.
-
-
-
-