I haven’t heard of you yet, what are they complaining about? I’ve only heard complaints about Nazis and fascists, not commies

It’s an instance for Communists, specifically Communists who support AES (actually existing socialism). In short, we think that the USSR and PRC (among others), while not perfect, were legitimate attempts at building Socialism and better than Capitalism as it exists in the West.

Other people don’t like that because, to them, Stalin was just Red Hitler and Xi Jinping is literally committing a genocide right now. Neither are true.

Ah okay I can see how that’s controversial, given China is heavy on censorship and control, and in reality they’re just another form of capitalism run by a rich oligarchy. Plus with the way the world has changed, I think a new system is needed because we’re heading towards enough automation that not everyone should need to work.

I don’t know much about the USSR so I won’t comment on that

China is not run by a rich ogliarchy. source: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIOg_K6Z1fg

I approve of the source, however disagree with the conclusions

Ok but in all honestly, just because there are rich people in China doesn’t mean it’s a ‘capitalist ogliarchy’. Sure, there are billionaires in the party, but they have just as much power as any farmer or worker, no more and no less.

That’s not true in the slightest though? I mean the very fact that there are different wages, there’s poverty, China invests heavily in foreign companies (both the government and private Chinese corporations), that’s all capitalism. The farmer doesn’t have any say in what tencent or the China Evergrande Group does

Oh my god there are companies, guess there’s no more socialism guys!1!1!!1

Just because there are companies does not mean that China is revisionist. And Tencent and China Evergrande have nothing to do with the government. Why would they?

We’re talking about communism here not socialism, I didn’t say China doesn’t have socialism

I’m confused. Do you expect China to be instantly fully communist without money or class? Do you know that China started as a poor and feudal country and has constantly been under pressure and sanctions from the west?

It’s like giving you control of an island full of people with almost no food and enemies thirsting to attack at any moment. Go on, build communism.

No, I’m saying China is a capitalist oligarchy. Currently, right now. I don’t believe it can ever become communism with the current people still in power. That can be debatable, but what they are right now is definitely not communism, and that’s all I was saying

Yes, it’s not communism right now. But Xi Jinping is not a ‘capitalist oligarch’. And China has pulled millions out of poverty, build an advanced public transport system, given massive amounts of aid to third-world countries while helping them develop, and has cracked down on corruption. If this is a ‘capitalist oligarchy’ then I will gladly support it.

I mean, I would also call the US a capitalist oligarchy, wouldn’t call Biden an oligarch, and would say they’ve done the same in the past, so yeah I would still call it that personally. That’s generally how industrialisation under capitalism goes. I’d even go as far as to say the US and UK had a lot of influence on it getting where it is in the first place, and it’s very difficult to do trade with the west in this world without shifting towards capitalism. (Not impossible, but difficult)

The US has not eliminated poverty. Where did you get that from? In addition, the US has done nothing to help 3rd world countries at all, only to exploit them for resources. Before you say that’s what China is doing too, it’s not.

I did not say the US eliminated poverty and you didn’t say China has eliminated poverty?

The US has indeed exploited countries for resources, but that does mean they haven’t also helped in some cases, even if it’s a minority of cases

China has eliminated poverty. And China helped in every case, while the US exploited in every case. I don’t see how those two are similar.

You’re splitting hairs at this point, I don’t understand why

How is that “splitting hairs”? If I go to your house and help you build it, is that really the same as blasting it down with explosives?

No, I’m saying you took one small piece of what I said and latched on to it. Let’s say the US has never helped another country before for sake of argument. It doesn’t change the fact that I see both countries as capitalist aristocracies

Even if China is a capitalist aristocracy, it’s done mostly good for the world. Besides, having rich people does not make a country an aristocracy.

I did not say having rich people makes a country an aristocracy, not did I say China has done no good for the world. You assumed that.

Alright, so your point is that China is run by capitalists, therefore it is revisionist and not true communism?

here

My point is that China has a capitalist market economy, and therefore it’s not communism. Nothing to do with revisionism. Li’s definition of capitalism seems to be narrow, I know it as the ability to own the means of production. If you can own a private company in China, and if that company can profit off of the work of people working for wages, I consider that capitalism. Xu Jiayin of Evergrande Group absolutely benefits from the work of people below him, and they are exchanging their labor for less than it generates. If you consider that to be a feature of communism, then we must have different definitions of communism