China : socialism with chinese characteristics Singapore : democracy with chinese characteristics Conclusion : same soup different label but who cares so long it works
@L _"Socialism is the process of analyzing contradictions and resolving them"_ Lol. That's "Maoism". This is not that, otherwise Xi and Deng would just say it's just "Maoism" or just regular "Socialism". IMO "Socialism with Chinese characteristic" is a "regulated capitalism", a mixed economy not that different to current EU or US economy.
@L What are you talking about? Chairman Mao designed "Maoism" with specific thinking that "Socialism" (Leninism/Marxism) is *not compatible* with largely agrarian society that was China. Hence it fulfills your criterion. IMO current Chinese economic system is a beautiful *mockery* of Marxism, Leninism, and Socialism in general. Lol. Chinese transformation show that "collective ownership of the means of production" is *inferior* to "private enterprise", and that Socialist morons will accept Capitalism as long as the leadership pay lip service and call what is de-facto Capitalism as "Socialism with unique character".
But there's really a key element: A Single Party State, with a hierarchical structure, dominated from top to bottom, and who acts like a Venture Capitalist, assigning resources --credits-- to the areas that the Party prioritizes. The Communist Party leadership is non-negociable.
Whatever your opinion, you can't deny that old school Soviet Union went kaput and new school Communist China is now the world's second biggest economy. Pragmatism beats dogma every time.
@Capitalist I hope you don't believe a word what you said. The CCP has no grand master plan to reach socialism, quite the opposite. It is a clique of bureaucrats who became capitalists by selling to themselves the state-owned companies they privatized. Of course, the bourgeoisie of every country is bringing its own downfall by building up productive forces until it reaches an overproduction crisis, but that's an internal contradiction of capitalism, and by no mean a conscious plan of the bourgeoisie.
The USSR collapsed because Krushchev turned socialism into capitalism when he pursued pleasure economics instead of wartime economics. Krushchev also purged many Soviet cyberneticists who were friendly with Stalin, and these experts basically imagined what we had of an e-commerce economy today - China currently dominates the world through Alibaba, Pingduoduo, and more. China was successful because it never turned away from Stalin's vision.
Deng Thought was that China could benefit from the growth provided by foreign and domestic capitalists, to raise living standards, as long as the workers' Party remained in control of the state and played the dominant role in the economy. He said that the existence of widespread wealth inequality would be a sign that things had gone too far Xi came into office and saw that there was widespread inequality and a rising bourgeois (capitalist) class, so, under his leadership, the party is reasserting state dominance over the economy
*Democracy* with *American* *characteristics* : -we call our selfs a "democracy" even though we have always been a republic since our founding, we also start hundreds of wars for "freedom" such as enslaving entire countries for banana countries. -also we give billions of $$$ to multi national companies like google, amazon, facebook, apple, tesla, oil companies, massive banks responsible for the 2008 collapse, and we also bail them out for free, any millionaire can get free socialized subsidies, but we still call ourselves "capitalist". -also the poor don't own a single thing, everything is monitored and everything the working class owns is given to its lords/oligarchs and government officers who do nothing all day. -no this isn't the textbook definition of feudalism this is CAPTIALISM, YES BLAME CAPITALISM, the government is not giving billions of tax dollars to fund corporations that support the military and keep the government in power (like most communist governments) no blame capitalism
@@ObamaSexGaming2007 The key of a system in a country is who are the owners the capital, like banks, natural resources, etc. As Chinese people are the owners of banks, natural resources, the system is socialism. Welfare and benefits for people don't make a system a socialism, like some of the democratic politicians advocate.
@@williamli6200 Actually, Socialism with Chinese characteristics demand government control over all crucial life-determining industries, which includes more than simply heavy industries. Infrastructure, medical healthcare, military weapons, insurance and many more. Basically any major part of life you can think of has at least one state-owned company in China.
I'd classify it more as adaptability with an inability to challenge founding figures. Pragmatism is too charitable of a name for a party unable to repeal policies solely on the basis that their founding fathers implemented them.
Lee Kuan Yes, the founding father of a tiny city state, yet has established himself as a giant of the political world. He is revered across Asia, as his shrewd management of Singapore and its meteoric economic rise has endeared Singapore as a template for how an ideal Asian society should be governed.
Strictly speaking, Lee Kuan Yew has the greatest influence on Shenzhen, China. Other cities, including political reforms and economic reforms, some cities in the west have retained their pre-1978 appearance and did not really learn from Singapore.
@PANDEMIC BY CCP AND XITLER Chiang Kai-shek had no influence on the political reforms in mainland China. What he tried hard to promote was a one-party system, "the country can only have one party, and your party (the Communist Party) needs to lay down its arms and accept our adaptation." However, the result is a full-scale Japanese invasion. If you want to say that his son Jiang Jingguo is okay. He studied in the Soviet Union, including starting to purge a large number of the Communist Party in Taiwan, including the Kuomintang. The United Kuomintang has changed the issue of internal division. Begin to seize Taiwan’s aristocratic property, reap their lands and return them to the country, and reshuffle the cards to boost Taiwan’s economy. Chiang Kai-shek's economic measures in 46-49 can only be described as tragic.
@@naurasal9165 he pays millions in property tax, and you don’t have to pay income tax when you lose more money than you gain, which was the case for 10 of the 15 years
@@CapitalTeeth basically it's a double edged sword. On one hand, the vagueness can lead to abuse of power, but on the other hand it allows for quite a high amount of flexibility as the conditions in the country change.
The issue with the Flexibility, is the lack of top-down awareness leaders have, and the lack of transparency local leaders have towards the top. You end up getting skyscrapers built in a month, and collapse in a month. Or massive spending on ghost mansions in the wilderness, or collosal waterways serving no legitimate purpose except to ruin the groundwater table The speed of action is great, it's aim is... nearly blind.
@@TheLifeOfKane I don't recall the amount of skyscrapers collapsing being that big, though it did happen a few times it isn't a rate that far surprasses other countries
True Leninist path followed by China...Lenin preached that achieving the highest productivity labour power is the path of Socialism n China rightly shifted to that path of achieving productivity through Capitalist means...There's nothing like Socialism with Chinese characteristics..Its the actual path for a socially n economically backward country to become socialist country....
"Socialism with Chinese characteristics" = market economy with major fully or partially state owned enterprises over key sectors of the economy despite the private sector being the main engine of growth, openess to international trade and investment with protectionist policies like the joint venture requirement for foreign companies, state subsidised healthcare and education, special economic zones with low taxes like Shenzhen and Hainan, capital submitting to political authority and the preservation of the one-party state. Long term thinking and national goals and targets set out in the "5 year plans" are also relics of socialist central planning, though nowhere rigid as before - it still allows for the state to plan and execute out big national projects over a long period of time.
China has made huge progress in the last 20 years or so, and I think that should be commended. However, despite lifting millions out of poverty there exists in China today huge wealth inequality which is fundamentally incompatible with Socialism. Having said that I think the jury is out on whether or not the CPC has the ability and incentive to create a more just and egalitarian society where wealth is shared by all. I hope China can achieve that goal, and I sincerely wish the CPC and the Chinese people success in their endeavour.
@@PatyNeil They are a vangard party proletarian democracy. They are not repressive dictatorship like Dprk or plutocratic liberal multiparty democracy like USA .
Wealth inequality is not incompatable with socialism. Well... depends on what you mean by socialism. But it's not necessarily, if the workers own the means of production or the government who represent the workers
US Red Scare propaganda has worked well it seems. Chinese democracy is actual democracy, unlike US's right-shifting one that's now funding genocide in Palestine.
LOL, certainly not every countries. Your country is stil inferior to what some European countries offer to their people. In Asia, there's Japan who, definitely , does better than China and to the international community.
Teddy Mine not really. Japan’s economy never recovers since 1990. Their infrastructure and tech industry stay old. Their pandemic control is pretty bad. But China surpasses Japan in almost all of those. Plus government China has 1.4 billions of people. 40 years ago China was poorer than Indian and way behind Brazil. The challenges the CCP has overcome to bring china up is way more challenging than Japan. Bringing 800m people out of poverty, converting deserts into forest, building great infrastructure, bringing up the education of Chinese, etc. To the outsiders, they think Chinese government is bad because the media always tells half story and sometimes fake news. Plus, if you never live in China to experience the changes, they never matter to you. And only the bad news would catch your eyes. But Chinese, on the other hand, experience through all the changes and they are satisfied with the government. I’m Chinese and In my opinion, I couldn’t think of a country whose government is better than China. A lot of countries can’t even be comparable to China in terms of population such as Canada that only has 20m of people. It’s less than the population of a province in China. I would never trade my government with them simply I feel that they are incompetent. Singapore’s government is probably the only one that comes close.
@@alexgang408 One of the main contributors to China's economy is their mass production of almost everything the world needs. They employ many people to work in their factories but their actual salaries are much lower so that they (owners) can maximize profit as much as possible. Japan has higher standard of living than most people in China
@malorkayel Hong Kong Apple daily is full of lies and fake news, and they were obviously faking it purposely, I speak Cantonese and I found that myself before I see anyone saying it. This very bias unpro media shouldn't exist at all.
Tbh, Chinese state run media may not report something against their agenda, but in recent years they rarely report fake stuff ... Big difference from Apple media
@@omaralkatmeh6913 Yes if compare to Apply daily. Apply daily were twisted the reality in their report, like saying black is white, like accusing someone innocent for killing... they're disgusting.
I'm a Chinese. The video talks nothing because Socialism with Chinese Characteristics itself talks nothing. It's just a complicated theory that tries to prove that Capitalism is also Socialism 😂. But after all the video introduces Socialism with Chinese Characteristics very well, I have learned the same thing in school.
1，The largest and most important enterprises in China are all state-owned enterprises 2，All the land in China is state-owned and equally distributed for free in rural areas 3，China's politics is run entirely by an elite bureaucracy system,No billionaire can directly interfere in the political system, 4，Financial and monetary policy is not controlled by private capital and bankers, but by technocrats These are the biggest differences between China and capitalism-----The most important means of production、resources and political power of the state are not controlled by capital，Actually I think China's elite bureaucracy is essentially modern Confucianism (elitism, secularism and pragmatism)
@@howtouploadvideos2512 it’s actually a newspaper founded in Hong Kong before communists took over and is currently owned by Alibaba group from the mainland, which is not a state owned company
@@superpppants3820 Well saying "it works" occults the true question: for whom does this system work? Not for the working class, but for the capitalists of course...
The clue is actually in the name itself "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" It's a combination of modern socialism and ancient Chinese beliefs which are Legalism and Confucianism. many Legalist ideals and Confucian ideals overlaps with Socialism.
1，The largest and most important enterprises in China are all state-owned enterprises 2，All the land in China is state-owned and equally distributed for free in rural areas 3，China's politics is run entirely by an elite bureaucracy system,No billionaire can directly interfere in the political system, 4，Financial and monetary policy is not controlled by private capital and bankers, but by technocrats These are the biggest differences between China and capitalism-----The most important means of production、resources and political power of the state are not controlled by capital
They have really done well for themselves. Their system just creates miracle after miracles. I guess they have finally perfected the system. On an unrelated topic, damm that black car the president xi was riding in looks really pimped. What car is that? I would love one of those. Add some huge lags and hydraulics it will look awesome
@@blardymunggas6884 The car is a Hongqi L5 (pronounced Hong-Chi). It is the state car for Chinese president on very special occasions. On normal foreign diplomatic trips Xi takes the smaller Hongqi N501. Making him the first Chinese president to use a special presidential car in foreign countries.
@@bmanagement4657 While "real leftists" will be arguing on Reddit and holding up signs for workers' unions with 20 members, "revisionists" will be bringing China to the forefront. I know which I'd rather side with.
I am a citizen of Singapore. In my country, there is a political party called the Workers' Party, which embraces the ideology of Socialism. However, as only a few members of the WP gets voted into the Parliament, their views (which benefits the people of Singapore) always get rejected by the PAP, our Facist ruling party, which holds the majority seats in parliament. I feel sorry for our WP Comrades who often get bullied and mocked by the PAP in parliament sessions. Recently, an extensive smear campaign had been launched against the WP, courtesy of the PAP. How I wish that Chairman Xi Jinping is our Leader instead of our Prime Minister, the Chief of the PAP.
Well its the same in Turkey. I am a member of "TİP" Turkey Workers Party a socialist party. We have 4 seats in the parliament and one of our congressman is in jail :D with no crime.
China's socialism is about being in control of private corporations, not the other way around. China tried "true" socialism, and as you heard in the video, it did not work out.
@@jerryg9207 hey all animals are equal it's just some are more equal than others I think what happened there is kind of what happened here I don't know much about their history though yes I have been reading too much George Orwell
'‘Socialism with Chinese characteristics’' = Socialism that can be changed in size, depending on the fluctuations of social / economic / political realities, both in China and on the rest of the planet. A socialism of the future, which adapts to reality, whatever it may be, and flexible, compared to a rigid, conservative and authoritarian form (given that this was the mistake of any socialist state in history, or in present-day North Korea)
@@d_1012 what's so neoliberal about China the cpc exerts so much power over the economy neoliberals would liken China to the very antithesis of neoliberalism
"Socialism with Chinese characteristics" is quite literally just a meme at this point. They are so far removed from socialism that it's hilarious to say "but it's socialism with Chinese characteristics, right?"
Well kinda, but the definition and theory of Socialism have change over time, shown by many variant of Socialism and Communism. It seem that Socialism simply adapt with present condition in order to survive
@@febrian0079 Socialism might be always changing, but China is not socialist by any means. Socialism is when the workers have a voice in their workplace but Beijing literally has more billionaires than anywhere in the world. It is not socialist by definition.
@@SuBk. Managing an island of 20 million people is a completely different task compared to managing 1.4 billion people. Nationalist KMT China, 1928-1949, had an incredibly unsuccessful economy, even before the breakout of the Japanese invasion. Weak government, hyperinflation, and the KMT’s mistakes during WW2 made the Chinese people draw to the CPC’s side. Before the KMT left the mainland, they took with them China’s gold reserves; the KMT took the reserves of the entire mainland and now only had to support a fraction of the population. However, to give credit where credit is due, the Taiwanese did create an incredibly successful economy during the 80s-90s due the adoption of a market-based economy. It would be impossible to predict how a different outcome in the Chinese Civil War would affect modern China.
@@SuBk. Without Mao, there won't be a new China, nationalist party would squeeze the last drop of blood from its people, and much much more would die. Both Mao and Deng have their contributions, and yes, it only works in China through communism, for the second choice is much worse
Socialism with Chinese characteristics. Socialism with Vietnamese characteristics. Socialism with Bangladeshi characteristics. These are currently three of the world's most effective systems which is delivering real results to their people.
No, because the American system still fits in line with largely agreed upon definitions of democracy whereas the Chinese system has little to no semblance to any meaningful definition of Socialism that would not encompass almost every Western advanced economy.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 There are plenty of definitions of socialism. it is a word. Words have definitions whether you agree with them or not. America is not less democratic than China. By every definition of democracy this is true. You cannot come into a discussion say X is false and Y is true without providing any evidence then proceeding to say my logic is flawed without stating which part was flawed. I am reluctant to proceed without blocking you because its quite obvious you are either arguing out of bad faith or are too brainwashed to engage in reality. If you are going to continue and want me to acknowledge what you respond with, include a definition of democracy you agree with and why you believe China is socialist.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 There is a definition of Socialism. Socialists like to play around saying there are many different types but in reality its one simple definition. State control of the economy is socialism. That also includes “State Capitalism”.
@@tomb1406 wait so your definition of socialism doesn't only apply to socialism? Also who said that is socialism? Are you saying the dictatorship of the proletariat is socialism?
This is just my opinion. For all those things happened in mainland China, i do adore one thing for it's government. I'm amazed how they could (re)build massive economy for the country by liberalize the people to do work for themselves (and for some were going crazy materialistic about it), while still retaining absolute power at the throne of the ccp. In the modern world which really adore free trade, economic might is the key of power (instead of militaristic conquest since centuries) and they were able to get it without giving people much freedom as much as the west do. They were able to took the key of power of the world without worrying the people would annoy and harass them like what happened to much nation in the west do. They were able to sat on the final step of the food chain, got much benefits from the most of the people while shut them off if it's was threatening them. In those days those things were hard to gain in the west governance, but was very common in mainland china. I know one or two things about chinese history, and i acknowledge that they were have such a significant achievement about world wisdom and glory (and such thing) compared to some other civilization which has similar achievement, and comparing current chinese mainland to the historical one, they were very _different_ in many ways, but still have retain one thing that I'm very sure, _the people on power always had absolute power to it's domain_ . After all, i cannot deny my thankfulness for them. I do writing this on youtube from a xiaomi phone, which the one that only affordable for me. If deng didn't revolutionize the economy i wouldn't got this thing, wouldn't able to understand English, wouldn't have platform to have a look to outside world, wouldn't understand many things, just stuck in a third world that quite have much blindness and isolation, which were i born into. They do have credits for my living now, and i really honor it. But as an undergraduate student on political science, and do learning about human civilization (especially about politics and military conflicts), my view to what those ccp is doing is very astonishing - although, it is still have a cost, they do my country (which have a semi democratic government that quite deaf to it's people demands) have debt to them and maybe would be a future burden for me, and their raising influence would threatened my country's sovereignty - thus again, threatened me. But hey, that's just how politics works. If the west - which quite enough people consider it as another polar of the world beside mainland china for now - didn't raise their awareness and lift their influence and power to the world, the chinese mainlanders would become so significant that even able to dictate them. I do not have problem to that in general actually, I'm glad that everybody have a same slice, but history never write a nice peace when there were multipolar influence across politics. Again, i do not have problem to the chinese mainlanders, but i do have problem to their government works, which i do adore it's effectiveness, and avoiding it because of it does reducing personal liberty values (at least in the westerners standards, which also i do believe).
@@signumxmagnum yeah i also acknowledge that. But i still do believe there's would always exists challenge when each parties were given access, in this context, those companies would do anything to be able to cooperate or even put their people to be _elected_ by the people, by their own will. They were always seems to be nice to the people, and give people access to speak their awareness to if anything happened. That would challenge any power (especially when they were using democracy), and again, make them very aware. The chinese mainland authority don't even have such a case, since they do control the media and the way of the people to speak. Not always becomes a bad thing though, media censorship always grant great security and stability, thus again, to keep them in the power. For me, in the politics, the more you gains influence from the other parties, more stronger you are. No matter they were very pressed and stressful to do living, no matter they were dying to do their living, if you could secure your throne and retains important resource of your power (ie economy might for this case), then there's nothing wrong.
@@218kq in one way, the central government will care for the people because it's where their legitimacy come from, there's no opposition to blame. If there's something wrong it's always the fault of the government, they can't say it's the fault of previous government. The current form of economy model of PRC is similar to previous dynasties. The government control certain sectors of economy while trades are largely free. Taxation law is always changing, but state capitalism, capitalism and socialism coexist.
Who did tell you that Chinese don't have freedom or right to criticize government? You can't understand China by second hand English speaking information.
Western democracy doesn't suit China, China has it's own style of "Eastern democracy", and current system that China using is a lot more advance and friendly than Western democracy.
In his fictional work “Utopia”, Thomas More talked about an imaginary community that possesses a highly desirable or nearly perfect societal qualities for its citizens. The contrasts of the harmony, equality, and prosperity of Utopian society, with the problems of the real world, such as poverty, crime, and political corruption, suggests that he believes that at least some of the virtues underlying Utopian practices are desirable, even if the practices themselves are far-fetched given human imperfections. China is the world most populous country. Just 4 decades ago, its GDP per capita of circa $150 is lower than that of India at $200. But today, it is 7.5 times that of India’s! Of course, China is still far from being a utopia, but China is definitely working towards the ideals of an equitable society. The feat achieved by Beijing, especially with regards to the elevation of the livelihood for its citizenry - the eradication of poverty, the pursuit of liberty, freedom, and happiness - is unprecedented, and undoubtedly the greatest achievement for humanity in the history of mankind. Indeed, this achievement is so compelling that the unbiased could only conclude that China’s achievement is no coincidence. Nor could it have been achieved by means of tyranny, oppression, or slavery.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 socialism leads to more control which is less freedom. In the simplest terms. I'm not gonna sit here and teach you a whole college course on it in a TH-cam comment section. I really don't care what you think.
@@ben69028 well since you aren't educated on the topic then you'd be surprised to know that all "control" under socialism is through the people. Also how do you define freedom? A population can only be free if all have a job, food and housing. Without those fundamentals how can anyone be free? Furthermore if the workers can't have control of their workplace how can anyone be free? The western liberal world has no freedom. China has.
Somewhere in Auth-Left area of Political Compass lies... *Dengism* aka *Socialism with Chinese characteristics* or *Deng Xiaoping Theory* , is an authoritarian, economically debatable (but definitely pro-markets, at least in the short term), nationalist, and culturally mixed ideology. *Dengism* saw that in order for China to adjust to its present economic conditions, capitalism, with party influence and foreign investment, would have to be implemented to increase productivity. This theoretically lifts China out from its primary stage of capitalism into socialism.
it's near impossible in today's political climate to find a country that follows 100% ONE political system. kinda need a mish-mash of everything from dealing with domestic issues to diplomatic relations on the world stage. developing countries may adhere more rigidly to a single system, but china is basically in limbo between developing and developed. so many exceptions to the rule with this country... honestly, as someone who wants to visit where my family came from, i really want to see china change two things AT THE LEAST: 1) allow rights/freedoms of speech and information, and 2) reform its legal system from civil to common law. just so it actually protects the people, and not there simply to enforce party policies. if we can get these two things going in beijing, then i'd say we're looking at real, systemic changes to a brighter and friendly china
This video is not comprehensive enough to understand socialism with Chinese characteristics. It didnt even address things like 'letting free market boost production instead of fuelling capitalism', 'dictatorship of the proletariat' and the 'three representatives'.
Socialism with Chinese characteristics is whatever policies China practices. The term is based on party tradition rather than any rigorous "scientific" definition.
@@markusoreos.233 more like anyone billionaire who says the slightest thing against the CCP. All these years when Jack Ma was so rich the CCP didn’t do anything but the day he criticised Chinese banks, he disappeared .
Depends on what define a capitalism. Most people misunderstand socialist country thinking that they banned Private owned property but in reality many people start to gain more land as their private property in the Soviet Union. Back then the Soviet Union was an agrarian country so much of the land was taken from huge landowner and devided it into smaller fields for farmers. Much of the farming equipments are privately owned by the farmers and so is the land. It was the cold war that dismissed this truth and this is also where the myth of "Socialism against private ownership" started. For more explaination you can check here since i'm afraid i'm not qualified to provide you with detailed knowledge of the matter: th-cam.com/video/3Tbf2bpgs-E/w-d-xo.html
read a book. China is more democratic than your country, and it has eliminated poverty. The opposite of what you wrote is true. And markets have nothing to do with capitalism, as anyone who studied economics knows.
It was Mao that started communism with Chinese characteristics. Mao warned that blindly following Russian style of revolution would be a disaster. Mao and Zhude were the black cats that successfully established the Jiangxi Fujian Soviet base communism with Chinese characteristics style. But Mao was severely criticized for his pragmatic approach. Those communist white cats that failed in their urban revolution in Shanghai fled to Mao base and removed Mao from power. Once in power these politically correct leaders brought disaster and tragic lost to Mao hard won base...and the beginning of what was later known as the Long March. Note that Mao name was not listed in the list of those who should retreat by his political rivals. Mao could had been easily captured and killed. But Zhou Enlai found out and saved Mao fate.
@@Arquiviño china has a market economy and the state economy and the state keeps that market in check/ ensuring it works in the interests of the people, not for the sake of the market itself.
@@benwagner4110 by the "people" you mean the state. If the market was working for the interests of itself then it would be in control of the people. Since it isnt then its just a puppet of the state.
@@ben69028 @Ben G @Ben G if the market serves itself then the economy would be capitalist, that's my point. In terms of serving the peopl, china has erased poverty and is directing the market in ways that serve the long term interests of people like infrastructure, clean energy, health care, etc. Regarding the state, you could make the same criticism of the American government which says it serves it's people while only prioritizing private interest in and for itself.
@@benwagner4110 no system in the world has "erased poverty" not even communism did it. It just made everyone equally poor. So I really doubt China erased poverty because its a feat impossible by the laws of nature. In any system where there are winners there has to be losers.
Chinese characteristics: make money, help its own people in making more and more money, living better and better life. Be more and more powerful, so no country can invade China or force China to sacrifice significant national interest any more.
State capitalism implies the state itself functions as the capitalist. This is worse than that, it's a state for capitalists run by billionaire capitalists where they just do normal capitalism but they call it socialism.
@@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot If the state itself functioned as the capitalist or dictatorship of bourgeoise why did China wipe trillions from tech and construction companies and put them under state control China functions as dictatorship of proletariat the goal is socialism and the aim is to develop productive forces in anyway possible for socialism which includes liberalising elements of the economy there is no pretending socialism if your a billionaire who gets too critical in China you wont be seen again
@@kobemop yes. Central planning and free market fused together. This is what USA trying to do now. 250billion USD granted by US congress to build semiconductor industry. Just like what China doing.
This video doesn't really have a concrete answer because there is none. Socialism with Chinese Characteristics means whatever the CCP needs or wants it to mean. It is fundamentally simply a buzzword used to help justify the parties rule since the path Deng took them on diverged so much from the Marxist-Leninist idea of the state. Xi Jingping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era is simply Xi cementing his rule and that the country will follow his vision. What exactly that means isn't exactly hard to find out since he's ruled the country for 9 years now.
@TerranStriker There used to be. Once Deng Xiaoping rose to become China's paramount leader, he set out to making sure no one could ever rule for life as Mao did. When the position of President was reestablished in the Chinese constitution in 1982, a 2 term limit was imposed. Though the position of President of China is largely ceremonial, with real power being held by the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party and the Chairman of the Central Military Commission (keep in mind the PLA is a branch of the party, not the state), the implication that this was a limit on how long the paramount leader should rule was made clear by Deng himself when he stepped down in 1989, a bit over 10 years (a Chinese presidential term is 5 years) after he became paramount leader. Both Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao respected this precedent, though it is worth noting that both of them were handpicked by Deng himself into the position of paramount leader. Deng meant to ensure that China's leadership would always be stable and never again would the Chaos of the cultural revolution occur. Xi has abandoned the model Deng set for China is many ways, but the most blatant was having the constitution modified to remove term limits on the Presidency. Xi can serve for however long he wants and can hold on to power, and given that he hasn't appointed a successor he likely intends to rule for a long time, possibly even until death.
real "total not socialism" already has a sample on earth: United States of America a country so free that even water , fuel and electric are provided by companies not gov
One thing you can compare. China build high speed train for every corner of China in the interest of its people. US high speed train? Nah, better have more car and promote freedom of travel alongside of carbon mission+ car company+oil company deep pocket
no its socialist (still has somewhat of a similar system to the ussr). many companies are state owned and even private companies are under the cpc's control.
Xiao Mose Actually, it’s a bit more comparable than you might think; we still have Amtrak, which is owned by the US gov and is still pretty effective and extensive. Trains and rail travel were and are incredibly important in the US, the only real difference is that private cars have superseded them as the primary means of travel. You’re right though-a large part of that is due to politics and private pushing of cars.
Ni it's a dictatorship of the proletariat (democratic centralism) socialist state that has adapted Marxism Leninism to a capitalist dominated global economy
In "democratic" world, there are presidential democracy and parliamentary democracy, countries choose different system because it is suitable to their reality. In Socialist world, it is the same thing. You cannot simply follow the original doctrine to build a socialist state, it won't work in practical reality. The former Soviet Union has already prove it.
I agree. Opening market momentarily to get some technology transfer agreements to be able to produce things locally and then closing the economy slowly as the USA goes to karen mode is an intelligent idea. Soviets were kinda different but not that much actually. They did export many stuff too. Market economy is still unfair. Example: there are a lot of homeless people and a lot of jobless talented civil engineers able to engineer homes. This is the failure of the free market. my idea is capitalism => primitive socialism => socialism => pre-communism => communism communism can be achieved only by automating every job so that people don't need to trade their time to make a living. Instead, they do it out of passion. And automation is not magic. It takes time. So, this is my idea. pre-communism can be achieved when food is completely renewable (like people doesn't even need to trade time for food aka free-lunch). communism (aka stateless and classless society) can be achieved by bringing down the time cost of extracting minerals and energy to 0. What i mean by that is, we dont have shortage for energy (energy is completely renewable) and minerals (asteroid mining with robots and automated refining). Bonus is that we will become a tier 1 civilization too. In tier-2 civilization, the species builds dyson spheres around stars (watch kurzgesagt video: th-cam.com/video/pP44EPBMb8A/w-d-xo.html ). Tier-3 civilizations will build similar energy extracting space infrastructure around black holes. My opinion is that a capitalist civilization cannot reach tier-1 civilization, as they are interested in short term greed, not long term gain, being detrimental to science and technology, etc. Maybe I am day-dreaming a lot. But Wish this turns into a reality 🙂
i think its a legitimate form of building ( towards ) socialism in that it supports the independent growth of productive forces to hit the ground running once other movements toward / into socialism happen. this is especially since china was ( and relatively still is ) a very poor country per capita. but whether or not this system is more effective or liberating for its workers and people right now than a purely socialist economy - some things we can and can't know
@@hermannabt8361 If the state represents the workers of that collective and then decides on the chairman of that company, in a way the workers are choosing their chairman
@@zhaoziyang-c5h but the state does not elect the chairman of the company, the workers do. The workers cast the ballots. The workers get 95% of the profit, the chairman gets 5%.
China can stand proud for their start in the belief in communism that have evolved into socialism. The fall of Soviet Union after democracy/Gobachev style, has opened China eyes not to go that way. So when President Xi Jinping came on the scene, he formalise a definite goal to achieve China developent towards China socialism with Chinese Characteristics.
@@justicewarrior9187 There is a very famous saying in China that "be severe with oneself and lenient towards others", while westerns doing exactly the opposit.The so-called world police is actually a hooliganism.
The Bully, Swallow,and International Violations by CCP China Beijing under Mr. Xi and His Nonsense Advisers has done. Sincerely Mr. Deng Xiaoping his vision for Better China : One Country Two Systems for China to learn from Hong Kong Free Market and FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and apply to China. Mr. Xi and His Nonsense Advisers has made an upside down by attacking Mr. Deng Xiaoping and Our Chinese people vision: Trust, Peace and Respect with The World. Sincerely,❤,❤,❤
@@knt1103 I believe you were saying exactly the same thing when Mr. Jiang Zemin and Mr. Hu Jintao were in power. Just admit that Mr. Deng Xiaoping was more friendly to your country, which makes you love him more. You do not blame about 64 in 1989 anymore?
It confuses me that ordinary people seems unable to accept that capitalism under socialist ideology can be formed. We all seemed so stuck with whatever Harvard/MIT feed us to believe.
As long as the government of country serving the interest of people, the kind of governance system they embrace really doesn’t matter. Leadership ability of government matters the most. The countries cover almost the entire world embrace a system so called democracy one vote one count. The phenomenon in these countries; politician/parties is more interested in fighting for their self-political gain, winner take all, the richer is getting richer, the poor is poorer, capitalist making even harder for the invisible/vulnerable groups having access to job security, food, and education, protection of law.
Yes nazi's where an interpertation of socialism. But not social at all and NOT democratic. Tyrannical CCP China are undemocratic capitalists. Both capitalim and socialism can be democratic and undemocratic.
Correct me if I am wrong, socialism is based on welfare of the working class. Like social democracy in northern Europe, government has responsibilities to support its citizens. For example in some European countries if you take loan from a bank to start your business and bankrupt - government pays your debts so that you don't commit suicide. China is more like it's there when you want to own a property, but when it comes to share the wealth, citizens are on their own. Life in cities is shiny, but rural areas do not have enough opportunities. I'm not saying it to compare with other countries. But china can invest in its rural areas instead of African countries
Though China isn’t Marxist by definition, their strategy for their immense rise has worked. Since the waning and fall of the USSR, it has been far harder to run a socialist economy in the capitalist world we live in with the US as it’s hegemon. I hope to see the day that the world tilts socialist and we can see China implement more and more Marxism and undercut the imperialism of the west
Ignorant western leftoid going: "not muh socialism" You don't understand socialism or Marxism if you claim China isn't run by the working class. Stop claiming things while not being educated
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 The chinese working class probably understands better than you that the chinese ruling class are thiefs who enriched themselves by privatizing state property and exploiting workers under brutal conditions.
@@turtlecraft7996 the Chinese ruling class? Who do they rule? I don't see the ruling class having power over the CPC. If you claim so then what CPC member owns a big business and has a high position? You are lost. You are attempting to say socialism can't be certain things but there's no definition for what it is
First of all, i think everyone needed to know what a socialist economy really looks like without the cold war bias. There are too many simplified version of their system which created the many myth about them and start making up about what is the value of socialism based on that. But Democracy at work made a very great analysis of how socialism works during the time of Lenin and then how it is connected to China and the Socialism with chinese characteristic: th-cam.com/video/3Tbf2bpgs-E/w-d-xo.html
@@d_1012 But government still holds lot of assets and interferes in companies day to day policy, they have 5 year plan etc. But it’s true that they use a lot of features of capitalism. In neoliberalism government doesn’t not really do any investment
@L " first off , dont expect anyone to read such a huge passage in the comments lol , this isnt an essay competition . I read the last part of your passage and you seem to be putting blind belief into a system that's increasingly moving away of the things it set out to be just based on a promise . yet the average chinese person wants their kids to study in harvard and oxford , buys louis Vuitton and trades in the shanghai stock market. using capitalism as an excuse to "get rich" means you concede to the capitalists that their system is the only way to make wealth .
@L read basic history dude . the sino soviet split and china's path to capitalism happened while the ussr held enough power , so the fall of ussr isnt a valid excuse . china was closer to the usa than ussr , and thats also why usa stopped recognizing taiwan.
Mao certainly made mistakes, and a lot of people dead because of it. But he also lead China through the darkest period and he fully committed himself to the country and the people.
@@donaldduck1322 Nope. I mean considering Cultural Revolution, Great leap forward, Great Chinese Famine and destroying many Chinese intellectual as a form of anti-rightist campaign.... he's the worst tyrant&ruler of china, HE IS THE ONE who made china enter its DARKEST period. He's not a savior of china, he is the demon
@@muhammadhaikalpermanaatmaj73 As for the darkest period part, only Chinese people know what the life look like during the humiliated century. Anyone other than Chinese doesn't have the right to say about that also doesn't have the right to define what kind of people he is.
Do you think I am using the socialist system now? Actually I am using authoritarian rule now😇😇 Do you think I am using an authoritarian system now? In fact, I am increasing social welfare now🤣🤣
The Bully, Swallow,and International Violations by CCP China Beijing under Mr. Xi and His Nonsense Advisers has done. Sincerely Mr. Deng Xiaoping his vision for Better China : One Country Two Systems for China to learn from Hong Kong Free Market and FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and apply to China. Mr. Xi and His Nonsense Advisers has made an upside down by attacking Mr. Deng Xiaoping and Our Chinese people vision: Trust, Peace and Respect with The World. Sincerely,❤,❤,❤
Based from my observations, I can conclude that China is now a Social Capitalist state. 1. Existence of entrepreneurs who drive the economy. 2. Opening up of trade with other countries 3. Promoting businessess to grow and allow for private owned property. I say it's Social Capitalist as despite it's a capitalist country, it still tries to balance it with the development of society.
The state controls the economy. Trade =/= capitalism. Allowing private property to exist isn't capitalist. It's not capitalist. You don't understand socialism with Chinese characteristics.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 Trade is a form capitalism. Characteristics of capitalism 1. The existence of private properties (in China, we have now seen people owning cars and mansions and most of them have properties overseas) 2. Profit motive. Tell me, why China started its Belt and Road initiative? To encourage more trade which will yield more profit. 3. Competition between companies. In communist/socialist system, such competition are not allowed and all of the businessess are state owned. Yet, in China we have seen the rise of Huawei and Xiaomi, both which are competitors to each others. 4. Consumer power. Don't tell me that China isn't a capitalist country when their people literally have consumer power, ie the right to choose stuff that they wanted. 5. Economic growth. Don't tell me that China isn't a capitalist country when they literally trade with other countries. USSR tried to avoid such thing and look what happened to them. They stagnated. It's not pure capitalist as the state controls the economy still, evidenced by Jack Ma recent cases with the central command. Chinese people are known for one thing, capitalism and trading. We are excellent traders, reaching as far as India and Africa. That is a Chinese characteristic. The ability to trade.
@@edryctan672 these aren't characteristics of capitalism they are just things that exist under capitalism. Such an idiotic way to define capitalism as a certain number of characteristics. Capitalism is when there is private ownership of the means of production and therefore there is a hierarchical system of wealth and power. However private ownership of the means of production can exist under socialism as long as the workers control them through the dictatorship of the proletariat which is democratic centralism. You can't define capitalism as a set few characteristics. The important distinction is that workers aren't in power in China and the bourgeoisie is in power under capitalism. All these things you describe either can or has existed under socialism. Most of these things have existed in most socialist states other than China.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 Unfortunately, under capitalism, anyone that becomes successful is a bourgeoisie. And we have seen the rise of several of them.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 Also, the CCP acknowledge the existence of capitalist groups in China. Like I say before, Capitalist is a broad thing, but whatever China is doing is a partial capitalism, as the state controls the economy.
@@lazy3531 It was not Deng Xiaoping who started the protest, he was the one who settled down the riot. And all those students leaders ran to western countries. If you were the Chinese leader in 1989, what would you do? To compromise completely to the protesters?
Democratic centralism (dictatorship of the proletariat), government owned means of production, it provides it's people with food, housing, education, healthcare and jobs and much more but socialism has no clear definition so it's meaningless to try to attempt to define the ideology
China : socialism with chinese characteristics
Singapore : democracy with chinese characteristics
Conclusion : same soup different label but who cares so long it works
whatever white cats or black cats
with chinese characteristics = who cares so long it works
Who cares, as long as it's with Chinese characteristics.
I care
Indian: Democracy with indian characteristics
It really just means whatever works.
Simple as that.
it means whatever we do that works is the socialism with Chinese characteristics
@L _"Socialism is the process of analyzing contradictions and resolving them"_
Lol. That's "Maoism". This is not that, otherwise Xi and Deng would just say it's just "Maoism" or just regular "Socialism".
IMO "Socialism with Chinese characteristic" is a "regulated capitalism", a mixed economy not that different to current EU or US economy.
@L What are you talking about? Chairman Mao designed "Maoism" with specific thinking that "Socialism" (Leninism/Marxism) is *not compatible* with largely agrarian society that was China. Hence it fulfills your criterion.
IMO current Chinese economic system is a beautiful *mockery* of Marxism, Leninism, and Socialism in general. Lol.
Chinese transformation show that "collective ownership of the means of production" is *inferior* to "private enterprise", and that Socialist morons will accept Capitalism as long as the leadership pay lip service and call what is de-facto Capitalism as "Socialism with unique character".
But there's really a key element: A Single Party State, with a hierarchical structure, dominated from top to bottom, and who acts like a Venture Capitalist, assigning resources --credits-- to the areas that the Party prioritizes.
The Communist Party leadership is non-negociable.
@@ihl0700677525 the cpc was never maoist, mao himself wasn’t even a maoist
It' doesn't matter if the cat is black or white as long as it catches mice. My cat is orange but eats lasagna.
Orange falls in between black and white, therefore it is covered. Only Americans would debate such a thing like they do with gendrs.
I love Garfield
Whatever your opinion, you can't deny that old school Soviet Union went kaput and new school Communist China is now the world's second biggest economy. Pragmatism beats dogma every time.
But wait for it... Chinese aging population will be in the way before China can call itself an economically developed country.
"Communist China" except it is not communist
@Capitalist I hope you don't believe a word what you said. The CCP has no grand master plan to reach socialism, quite the opposite. It is a clique of bureaucrats who became capitalists by selling to themselves the state-owned companies they privatized. Of course, the bourgeoisie of every country is bringing its own downfall by building up productive forces until it reaches an overproduction crisis, but that's an internal contradiction of capitalism, and by no mean a conscious plan of the bourgeoisie.
The USSR collapsed because Krushchev turned socialism into capitalism when he pursued pleasure economics instead of wartime economics. Krushchev also purged many Soviet cyberneticists who were friendly with Stalin, and these experts basically imagined what we had of an e-commerce economy today - China currently dominates the world through Alibaba, Pingduoduo, and more. China was successful because it never turned away from Stalin's vision.
@@ter0874 They have now a 3-Child Policy and they will change the immigration policy
Deng Thought was that China could benefit from the growth provided by foreign and domestic capitalists, to raise living standards, as long as the workers' Party remained in control of the state and played the dominant role in the economy. He said that the existence of widespread wealth inequality would be a sign that things had gone too far
Xi came into office and saw that there was widespread inequality and a rising bourgeois (capitalist) class, so, under his leadership, the party is reasserting state dominance over the economy
I think you switched around Germany and the UK on your GDP chart at 2:11. Germany has a much higher GDP than the UK both nominal and PPP.
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
Pp
PP PuPu
"JoUrNaLIsM"
I saw that too, glad other people caught it.
Democracy with American characteristics: we support democracy, until that stance is in conflict with Chinese policies and jeopardizes our profits
Nothing wrong about that actually, hopefully one day USA can announce it.
*Democracy* with *American* *characteristics* :
-we call our selfs a "democracy" even though we have always been a republic since our founding, we also start hundreds of wars for "freedom" such as enslaving entire countries for banana countries.
-also we give billions of $$$ to multi national companies like google, amazon, facebook, apple, tesla, oil companies, massive banks responsible for the 2008 collapse, and we also bail them out for free, any millionaire can get free socialized subsidies, but we still call ourselves "capitalist".
-also the poor don't own a single thing, everything is monitored and everything the working class owns is given to its lords/oligarchs and government officers who do nothing all day.
-no this isn't the textbook definition of feudalism this is CAPTIALISM, YES BLAME CAPITALISM, the government is not giving billions of tax dollars to fund corporations that support the military and keep the government in power (like most communist governments) no blame capitalism
Youre such a bowlsdagger
China is more of a democracy than America
OR when they go against US intrests.
Socialism on heavy industries, capitalism on light industries.
That, is socialism with chinese characteristic.
Source?
@@ObamaSexGaming2007 Who own the banks in China? do you know from where the evil CCP got money to develop? not from thin air, right?
@@williamli6200 I'm just asking a question because I'm curious. I don't know much about china
@@ObamaSexGaming2007 The key of a system in a country is who are the owners the capital, like banks, natural resources, etc.
As Chinese people are the owners of banks, natural resources, the system is socialism.
Welfare and benefits for people don't make a system a socialism, like some of the democratic politicians advocate.
@@williamli6200 Actually, Socialism with Chinese characteristics demand government control over all crucial life-determining industries, which includes more than simply heavy industries. Infrastructure, medical healthcare, military weapons, insurance and many more. Basically any major part of life you can think of has at least one state-owned company in China.
Pragmatism, that's the spirit. The video made it overcomplicated but still not hit the point.
th-cam.com/video/MatWmclTu3w/w-d-xo.html...
I'd classify it more as adaptability with an inability to challenge founding figures. Pragmatism is too charitable of a name for a party unable to repeal policies solely on the basis that their founding fathers implemented them.
@PANDEMIC BY CCP AND XITLER not at all. Socialism is strong in China
Pragmatism was already there for decades before Xi called it WCC socialism.
On the contrary, the video vastly simplified it to make it palatable for a liberal audience who wants to deny that China is still socialist.
When you look at modern china, one couldn't avoid thinking of this man who gave significant influence - Lee Kuan Yew
cringe
ture, basically CCP is following Lee's idea and path, lots of higher officials were sent to Singapore to observe and learn.
Lee Kuan Yes, the founding father of a tiny city state, yet has established himself as a giant of the political world. He is revered across Asia, as his shrewd management of Singapore and its meteoric economic rise has endeared Singapore as a template for how an ideal Asian society should be governed.
Strictly speaking, Lee Kuan Yew has the greatest influence on Shenzhen, China.
Other cities, including political reforms and economic reforms, some cities in the west have retained their pre-1978 appearance and did not really learn from Singapore.
@PANDEMIC BY CCP AND XITLER Chiang Kai-shek had no influence on the political reforms in mainland China. What he tried hard to promote was a one-party system, "the country can only have one party, and your party (the Communist Party) needs to lay down its arms and accept our adaptation." However, the result is a full-scale Japanese invasion.
If you want to say that his son Jiang Jingguo is okay.
He studied in the Soviet Union, including starting to purge a large number of the Communist Party in Taiwan, including the Kuomintang. The United Kuomintang has changed the issue of internal division.
Begin to seize Taiwan’s aristocratic property, reap their lands and return them to the country, and reshuffle the cards to boost Taiwan’s economy.
Chiang Kai-shek's economic measures in 46-49 can only be described as tragic.
'Democracy with Yankee characteristics' is still in vogue.
@@christinalaw3375 obama is worse tbh
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
@@christinalaw3375 I don’t think you know trump lost billions to make the US a better place
@@Ryan-us6lu Lost billion or only paid $750 income tax?
@@naurasal9165 he pays millions in property tax, and you don’t have to pay income tax when you lose more money than you gain, which was the case for 10 of the 15 years
So basically a decently thought out mixed economy system
Perhaps. But it's also intentionally defined in such a vague way too, so that the CCP can do absolutely anything it wants.
@@CapitalTeeth basically it's a double edged sword. On one hand, the vagueness can lead to abuse of power, but on the other hand it allows for quite a high amount of flexibility as the conditions in the country change.
The issue with the Flexibility, is the lack of top-down awareness leaders have, and the lack of transparency local leaders have towards the top.
You end up getting skyscrapers built in a month, and collapse in a month. Or massive spending on ghost mansions in the wilderness, or collosal waterways serving no legitimate purpose except to ruin the groundwater table
The speed of action is great, it's aim is... nearly blind.
@@TheLifeOfKane I don't recall the amount of skyscrapers collapsing being that big, though it did happen a few times it isn't a rate that far surprasses other countries
@@TheLifeOfKane saying Chinese policy is blind requires in itself a huge amount of intentional blindness.
True Leninist path followed by China...Lenin preached that achieving the highest productivity labour power is the path of Socialism n China rightly shifted to that path of achieving productivity through Capitalist means...There's nothing like Socialism with Chinese characteristics..Its the actual path for a socially n economically backward country to become socialist country....
"Socialism with Chinese characteristics" = market economy with major fully or partially state owned enterprises over key sectors of the economy despite the private sector being the main engine of growth, openess to international trade and investment with protectionist policies like the joint venture requirement for foreign companies, state subsidised healthcare and education, special economic zones with low taxes like Shenzhen and Hainan, capital submitting to political authority and the preservation of the one-party state. Long term thinking and national goals and targets set out in the "5 year plans" are also relics of socialist central planning, though nowhere rigid as before - it still allows for the state to plan and execute out big national projects over a long period of time.
Market Socialism?
@@zhcultivator yes
well said
Capitalist monopoly, thats capitalist not socialist Economy , especially main production
It's neo legalism.
China has made huge progress in the last 20 years or so, and I think that should be commended. However, despite lifting millions out of poverty there exists in China today huge wealth inequality which is fundamentally incompatible with Socialism. Having said that I think the jury is out on whether or not the CPC has the ability and incentive to create a more just and egalitarian society where wealth is shared by all. I hope China can achieve that goal, and I sincerely wish the CPC and the Chinese people success in their endeavour.
Socialism & communism with Capitalism and Dictatorship Combined? is there anything that could go wrong? 🤔
@@PatyNeil They are a vangard party proletarian democracy. They are not repressive dictatorship like Dprk or plutocratic liberal multiparty democracy like USA .
Wealth inequality is not incompatable with socialism. Well... depends on what you mean by socialism. But it's not necessarily, if the workers own the means of production or the government who represent the workers
US Red Scare propaganda has worked well it seems.
Chinese democracy is actual democracy, unlike US's right-shifting one that's now funding genocide in Palestine.
I gotta say their government officials are competent in running the country. More competent than what you can get in most of nations in Asia.
every country in the world, not just most countries in asia, no where can compare with china, only Singapore is close
LOL, certainly not every countries. Your country is stil inferior to what some European countries offer to their people. In Asia, there's Japan who, definitely , does better than China and to the international community.
Can’t underestimate the Chinese.
Teddy Mine not really. Japan’s economy never recovers since 1990. Their infrastructure and tech industry stay old. Their pandemic control is pretty bad. But China surpasses Japan in almost all of those. Plus government China has 1.4 billions of people. 40 years ago China was poorer than Indian and way behind Brazil. The challenges the CCP has overcome to bring china up is way more challenging than Japan. Bringing 800m people out of poverty, converting deserts into forest, building great infrastructure, bringing up the education of Chinese, etc.
To the outsiders, they think Chinese government is bad because the media always tells half story and sometimes fake news. Plus, if you never live in China to experience the changes, they never matter to you. And only the bad news would catch your eyes. But Chinese, on the other hand, experience through all the changes and they are satisfied with the government.
I’m Chinese and In my opinion, I couldn’t think of a country whose government is better than China. A lot of countries can’t even be comparable to China in terms of population such as Canada that only has 20m of people. It’s less than the population of a province in China. I would never trade my government with them simply I feel that they are incompetent. Singapore’s government is probably the only one that comes close.
@@alexgang408 One of the main contributors to China's economy is their mass production of almost everything the world needs. They employ many people to work in their factories but their actual salaries are much lower so that they (owners) can maximize profit as much as possible. Japan has higher standard of living than most people in China
Well China communism is indigenous it's not like Soviet Union
This video miss the two most important and significant Xi's initiatives. Poverty Alleviation and One Belt One Road.
Well poverty alleviation is ..... U should call it extreme poverty alleviation. Poverty is still very very very present in China.
@malorkayel Hong Kong Apple daily is full of lies and fake news, and they were obviously faking it purposely, I speak Cantonese and I found that myself before I see anyone saying it. This very bias unpro media shouldn't exist at all.
@@emhgarlyyeung yes because chinese state run media is definitely not biased and fake at all
Tbh, Chinese state run media may not report something against their agenda, but in recent years they rarely report fake stuff ... Big difference from Apple media
@@omaralkatmeh6913 Yes if compare to Apply daily.
Apply daily were twisted the reality in their report, like saying black is white, like accusing someone innocent for killing... they're disgusting.
The video basically talks nothing.
If you cannot understand just say it we won't laugh
@@不动不静 If you cannot understand what I said, just say it, we won't laugh
I'm a Chinese. The video talks nothing because Socialism with Chinese Characteristics itself talks nothing. It's just a complicated theory that tries to prove that Capitalism is also Socialism 😂. But after all the video introduces Socialism with Chinese Characteristics very well, I have learned the same thing in school.
1，The largest and most important enterprises in China are all state-owned enterprises
2，All the land in China is state-owned and equally distributed for free in rural areas
3，China's politics is run entirely by an elite bureaucracy system,No billionaire can directly interfere in the political system,
4，Financial and monetary policy is not controlled by private capital and bankers, but by technocrats
These are the biggest differences between China and capitalism-----The most important means of production、resources and political power of the state are not controlled by capital，Actually I think China's elite bureaucracy is essentially modern Confucianism (elitism, secularism and pragmatism)
Instead they're controlled by a small group of elites that control the whole country. Pretty neat....
@@XxTripleGhostxX stop it, you're spitting facts and wumao hates that
Whoa, a voice over.
I know, you don’t see that very often with scmp videos
Dis video is so objective that I have to reconsider whether It's a communist founded channel
It's refreshing, and I love it.
@@howtouploadvideos2512 same man hahaha
@@howtouploadvideos2512 it’s actually a newspaper founded in Hong Kong before communists took over and is currently owned by Alibaba group from the mainland, which is not a state owned company
"" It doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white,
AS LONG A$ IT CATCHE$ 🇨🇳
mice 🇺🇸 ""
“Hey man, if it works, it works”
Rather: "Hey man, if the chinese working class is exploited to the blood, we the new chinese capitalists will make all time record profits"
@@turtlecraft7996 I do not comprehend
@@superpppants3820 Well saying "it works" occults the true question: for whom does this system work? Not for the working class, but for the capitalists of course...
A roundabout way to call "state capitalism" 🙄
LOLz
Give a sample in history pls
Market socialism.
If it were truly "state capitalism", the party would not have to go after Jack Ma to rein him in.
@@jerryg9207
Why not? Don't forget that Jack Ma also member of CCP
They have every reason to "discipline" him 😌
Why does your chart say that the UK has a higher GDP than Germany? Did you accidentally swap their places on the chart?
2:12
It's poor journalism, you aren't crazy
The clue is actually in the name itself "Socialism with Chinese characteristics"
It's a combination of modern socialism and ancient Chinese beliefs which are Legalism and Confucianism.
many Legalist ideals and Confucian ideals overlaps with Socialism.
1，The largest and most important enterprises in China are all state-owned enterprises
2，All the land in China is state-owned and equally distributed for free in rural areas
3，China's politics is run entirely by an elite bureaucracy system,No billionaire can directly interfere in the political system,
4，Financial and monetary policy is not controlled by private capital and bankers, but by technocrats
These are the biggest differences between China and capitalism-----The most important means of production、resources and political power of the state are not controlled by capital
They have really done well for themselves. Their system just creates miracle after miracles. I guess they have finally perfected the system. On an unrelated topic, damm that black car the president xi was riding in looks really pimped. What car is that? I would love one of those. Add some huge lags and hydraulics it will look awesome
@@blardymunggas6884 The car is a Hongqi L5 (pronounced Hong-Chi). It is the state car for Chinese president on very special occasions.
On normal foreign diplomatic trips Xi takes the smaller Hongqi N501. Making him the first Chinese president to use a special presidential car in foreign countries.
@@obsidianstatue wow, how did you manage to write over 1k+ comments?
In fact, Revisionist socialism, modified confucianism, National capitalism, and secular pragmatism are 4 key factors in China's modern revival.
牛逼啊
Absolutely Yes
Haha revisionist socialism aka not socialism. You can lie to yourself all day but don't expect Real leftists to take the bait. Liars.
Legalism, another prominent Chinese philosophy is also a key part of the Chinese characteristics in China's Modern socialism.
@@bmanagement4657 While "real leftists" will be arguing on Reddit and holding up signs for workers' unions with 20 members, "revisionists" will be bringing China to the forefront. I know which I'd rather side with.
I am a citizen of Singapore. In my country, there is a political party called the Workers' Party, which embraces the ideology of Socialism. However, as only a few members of the WP gets voted into the Parliament, their views (which benefits the people of Singapore) always get rejected by the PAP, our Facist ruling party, which holds the majority seats in parliament. I feel sorry for our WP Comrades who often get bullied and mocked by the PAP in parliament sessions. Recently, an extensive smear campaign had been launched against the WP, courtesy of the PAP. How I wish that Chairman Xi Jinping is our Leader instead of our Prime Minister, the Chief of the PAP.
Well its the same in Turkey. I am a member of "TİP" Turkey Workers Party a socialist party. We have 4 seats in the parliament and one of our congressman is in jail :D with no crime.
PAP acts like a Capitalist. For such small country Facism wouldn't work out as great as in the US
Lol I don't think socialist countries have billionaires and megacorporations, kinda goes against the idea of socialism ya know?
Yeah it's more towards state capitalism, still has socialist values sprinkled in. But largely capitalistic.
China's socialism is about being in control of private corporations, not the other way around. China tried "true" socialism, and as you heard in the video, it did not work out.
@@jerryg9207 hey all animals are equal it's just some are more equal than others I think what happened there is kind of what happened here I don't know much about their history though yes I have been reading too much George Orwell
The major difference between socialism and capitalism is how the responsibility of governments is defined, not the distribution of wealth.
CCP : CHINA CAPITALIST PARTY
USA democracy with white capitalism characteristics, more homeless and less billionaires.
US still have't solve their poverty problems...
you mean more billionaires.
wait till you see china
@@DK-mx4wn the government: WE NEED MORE TANKS!
there is more homeless in china with a worst situation than in US lol
'‘Socialism with Chinese characteristics’' = Socialism that can be changed in size, depending on the fluctuations of social / economic / political realities, both in China and on the rest of the planet. A socialism of the future, which adapts to reality, whatever it may be, and flexible, compared to a rigid, conservative and authoritarian form (given that this was the mistake of any socialist state in history, or in present-day North Korea)
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
Socialism that can be “changed” so much that it literally transcends into neoliberalism .
@@d_1012 what's so neoliberal about China the cpc exerts so much power over the economy neoliberals would liken China to the very antithesis of neoliberalism
"Socialism with Chinese characteristics" is quite literally just a meme at this point. They are so far removed from socialism that it's hilarious to say "but it's socialism with Chinese characteristics, right?"
Well kinda, but the definition and theory of Socialism have change over time, shown by many variant of Socialism and Communism. It seem that Socialism simply adapt with present condition in order to survive
@@febrian0079 Socialism might be always changing, but China is not socialist by any means. Socialism is when the workers have a voice in their workplace but Beijing literally has more billionaires than anywhere in the world. It is not socialist by definition.
@@febrian0079 So adapt by completely abandoning socialism and being a capitalist country
It's not actual socialism because it works and has lifted millions of people out of poverty.
@@markusoreos.233 based.
W/o Deng n Xi, China wouldn't be where they r today, economically
without communism, china won't be like this today.
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
@@DK-mx4wn yeah, probably end up like 1920s ROC, so glad that communism did occur
@@SuBk. Managing an island of 20 million people is a completely different task compared to managing 1.4 billion people. Nationalist KMT China, 1928-1949, had an incredibly unsuccessful economy, even before the breakout of the Japanese invasion. Weak government, hyperinflation, and the KMT’s mistakes during WW2 made the Chinese people draw to the CPC’s side. Before the KMT left the mainland, they took with them China’s gold reserves; the KMT took the reserves of the entire mainland and now only had to support a fraction of the population.
However, to give credit where credit is due, the Taiwanese did create an incredibly successful economy during the 80s-90s due the adoption of a market-based economy. It would be impossible to predict how a different outcome in the Chinese Civil War would affect modern China.
@@SuBk. Without Mao, there won't be a new China, nationalist party would squeeze the last drop of blood from its people, and much much more would die. Both Mao and Deng have their contributions, and yes, it only works in China through communism, for the second choice is much worse
Socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Socialism with Vietnamese characteristics.
Socialism with Bangladeshi characteristics.
These are currently three of the world's most effective systems which is delivering real results to their people.
Bangladeshi? I’m sorry I don’t know much of Bangladesh but I thought the country is doing very poorly
@@zakaryloreto6526 Well at least alot better than 1971. Growing really fast.
Socialism with German characteristics...1933-1945.
@@zakaryloreto6526but mumta benerjy is accepted
So basically the same as "democracy with American characteristics"
No, because the American system still fits in line with largely agreed upon definitions of democracy whereas the Chinese system has little to no semblance to any meaningful definition of Socialism that would not encompass almost every Western advanced economy.
@@zhaoziyang-c5h there are no definitions of socialism. America is less democratic than China. Your logic is flawed
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 There are plenty of definitions of socialism. it is a word. Words have definitions whether you agree with them or not. America is not less democratic than China. By every definition of democracy this is true. You cannot come into a discussion say X is false and Y is true without providing any evidence then proceeding to say my logic is flawed without stating which part was flawed.
I am reluctant to proceed without blocking you because its quite obvious you are either arguing out of bad faith or are too brainwashed to engage in reality. If you are going to continue and want me to acknowledge what you respond with, include a definition of democracy you agree with and why you believe China is socialist.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 There is a definition of Socialism.
Socialists like to play around saying there are many different types but in reality its one simple definition.
State control of the economy is socialism.
That also includes “State Capitalism”.
@@tomb1406 wait so your definition of socialism doesn't only apply to socialism? Also who said that is socialism? Are you saying the dictatorship of the proletariat is socialism?
This is just my opinion. For all those things happened in mainland China, i do adore one thing for it's government. I'm amazed how they could (re)build massive economy for the country by liberalize the people to do work for themselves (and for some were going crazy materialistic about it), while still retaining absolute power at the throne of the ccp.
In the modern world which really adore free trade, economic might is the key of power (instead of militaristic conquest since centuries) and they were able to get it without giving people much freedom as much as the west do. They were able to took the key of power of the world without worrying the people would annoy and harass them like what happened to much nation in the west do. They were able to sat on the final step of the food chain, got much benefits from the most of the people while shut them off if it's was threatening them. In those days those things were hard to gain in the west governance, but was very common in mainland china.
I know one or two things about chinese history, and i acknowledge that they were have such a significant achievement about world wisdom and glory (and such thing) compared to some other civilization which has similar achievement, and comparing current chinese mainland to the historical one, they were very _different_ in many ways, but still have retain one thing that I'm very sure, _the people on power always had absolute power to it's domain_ .
After all, i cannot deny my thankfulness for them. I do writing this on youtube from a xiaomi phone, which the one that only affordable for me. If deng didn't revolutionize the economy i wouldn't got this thing, wouldn't able to understand English, wouldn't have platform to have a look to outside world, wouldn't understand many things, just stuck in a third world that quite have much blindness and isolation, which were i born into. They do have credits for my living now, and i really honor it. But as an undergraduate student on political science, and do learning about human civilization (especially about politics and military conflicts), my view to what those ccp is doing is very astonishing - although, it is still have a cost, they do my country (which have a semi democratic government that quite deaf to it's people demands) have debt to them and maybe would be a future burden for me, and their raising influence would threatened my country's sovereignty - thus again, threatened me. But hey, that's just how politics works.
If the west - which quite enough people consider it as another polar of the world beside mainland china for now - didn't raise their awareness and lift their influence and power to the world, the chinese mainlanders would become so significant that even able to dictate them. I do not have problem to that in general actually, I'm glad that everybody have a same slice, but history never write a nice peace when there were multipolar influence across politics. Again, i do not have problem to the chinese mainlanders, but i do have problem to their government works, which i do adore it's effectiveness, and avoiding it because of it does reducing personal liberty values (at least in the westerners standards, which also i do believe).
@@signumxmagnum yeah i also acknowledge that. But i still do believe there's would always exists challenge when each parties were given access, in this context, those companies would do anything to be able to cooperate or even put their people to be _elected_ by the people, by their own will. They were always seems to be nice to the people, and give people access to speak their awareness to if anything happened. That would challenge any power (especially when they were using democracy), and again, make them very aware. The chinese mainland authority don't even have such a case, since they do control the media and the way of the people to speak. Not always becomes a bad thing though, media censorship always grant great security and stability, thus again, to keep them in the power.
For me, in the politics, the more you gains influence from the other parties, more stronger you are. No matter they were very pressed and stressful to do living, no matter they were dying to do their living, if you could secure your throne and retains important resource of your power (ie economy might for this case), then there's nothing wrong.
@@218kq in one way, the central government will care for the people because it's where their legitimacy come from, there's no opposition to blame. If there's something wrong it's always the fault of the government, they can't say it's the fault of previous government.
The current form of economy model of PRC is similar to previous dynasties. The government control certain sectors of economy while trades are largely free. Taxation law is always changing, but state capitalism, capitalism and socialism coexist.
Who did tell you that Chinese don't have freedom or right to criticize government? You can't understand China by second hand English speaking information.
Western democracy doesn't suit China, China has it's own style of "Eastern democracy", and current system that China using is a lot more advance and friendly than Western democracy.
In his fictional work “Utopia”, Thomas More talked about an imaginary community that possesses a highly desirable or nearly perfect societal qualities for its citizens. The contrasts of the harmony, equality, and prosperity of Utopian society, with the problems of the real world, such as poverty, crime, and political corruption, suggests that he believes that at least some of the virtues underlying Utopian practices are desirable, even if the practices themselves are far-fetched given human imperfections.
China is the world most populous country. Just 4 decades ago, its GDP per capita of circa $150 is lower than that of India at $200. But today, it is 7.5 times that of India’s!
Of course, China is still far from being a utopia, but China is definitely working towards the ideals of an equitable society. The feat achieved by Beijing, especially with regards to the elevation of the livelihood for its citizenry - the eradication of poverty, the pursuit of liberty, freedom, and happiness - is unprecedented, and undoubtedly the greatest achievement for humanity in the history of mankind.
Indeed, this achievement is so compelling that the unbiased could only conclude that China’s achievement is no coincidence. Nor could it have been achieved by means of tyranny, oppression, or slavery.
Truth
Pursuit of liberty, freedom and happiness is the exact opposite of socialism.
@@ben69028 you clearly don't know what it is and have been fed disinformation about it's theory and historical practice
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 socialism leads to more control which is less freedom. In the simplest terms.
I'm not gonna sit here and teach you a whole college course on it in a TH-cam comment section. I really don't care what you think.
@@ben69028 well since you aren't educated on the topic then you'd be surprised to know that all "control" under socialism is through the people. Also how do you define freedom? A population can only be free if all have a job, food and housing. Without those fundamentals how can anyone be free? Furthermore if the workers can't have control of their workplace how can anyone be free? The western liberal world has no freedom. China has.
2 years back I bugged the Chinese ambassador to India to explain me this "Socialism with Chinese characteristics". Today I get my answer 🤣🤣
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
This didnt really explain the current form of socialism within China
Somewhere in Auth-Left area of Political Compass lies...
*Dengism* aka *Socialism with Chinese characteristics* or *Deng Xiaoping Theory* , is an authoritarian, economically debatable (but definitely pro-markets, at least in the short term), nationalist, and culturally mixed ideology.
*Dengism* saw that in order for China to adjust to its present economic conditions, capitalism, with party influence and foreign investment, would have to be implemented to increase productivity.
This theoretically lifts China out from its primary stage of capitalism into socialism.
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
it's near impossible in today's political climate to find a country that follows 100% ONE political system. kinda need a mish-mash of everything from dealing with domestic issues to diplomatic relations on the world stage. developing countries may adhere more rigidly to a single system, but china is basically in limbo between developing and developed. so many exceptions to the rule with this country...
honestly, as someone who wants to visit where my family came from, i really want to see china change two things AT THE LEAST: 1) allow rights/freedoms of speech and information, and 2) reform its legal system from civil to common law. just so it actually protects the people, and not there simply to enforce party policies. if we can get these two things going in beijing, then i'd say we're looking at real, systemic changes to a brighter and friendly china
Vietnam does it atleast right with having free speech and free market yet they are a socialist
This video is not comprehensive enough to understand socialism with Chinese characteristics. It didnt even address things like 'letting free market boost production instead of fuelling capitalism', 'dictatorship of the proletariat' and the 'three representatives'.
4:49 best moment ever
There will be a lot more these coming up.
@@watchman835 I hope so 哈哈哈
@@watchman835 Oh, do not even hope that. We hope China could be stronger, but not having too much conflicts.
Socialism with Chinese characteristics is whatever policies China practices. The term is based on party tradition rather than any rigorous "scientific" definition.
So basically Pretend Capitalism
Yup, but it curbs millionaires who may grow too big to contr.
@@markusoreos.233 more like anyone billionaire who says the slightest thing against the CCP. All these years when Jack Ma was so rich the CCP didn’t do anything but the day he criticised Chinese banks, he disappeared .
That's just sounds like capitalism with extra steps
Depends on what define a capitalism. Most people misunderstand socialist country thinking that they banned Private owned property but in reality many people start to gain more land as their private property in the Soviet Union. Back then the Soviet Union was an agrarian country so much of the land was taken from huge landowner and devided it into smaller fields for farmers. Much of the farming equipments are privately owned by the farmers and so is the land.
It was the cold war that dismissed this truth and this is also where the myth of "Socialism against private ownership" started.
For more explaination you can check here since i'm afraid i'm not qualified to provide you with detailed knowledge of the matter:
th-cam.com/video/3Tbf2bpgs-E/w-d-xo.html
Basically, an autocratic society allowing a free-market mechanism in lots of parts of the economy.
Which is generally referred to as fascism
@@raskassputin7408 it's not fascism, the Communist party is democratic
@@raskassputin7408 except it's the exact opposite. Read a book
read a book. China is more democratic than your country, and it has eliminated poverty. The opposite of what you wrote is true. And markets have nothing to do with capitalism, as anyone who studied economics knows.
You're describing the US, except the US's corporations are far more exploitative.
It was Mao that started communism with Chinese characteristics. Mao warned that blindly following Russian style of revolution would be a disaster. Mao and Zhude were the black cats that successfully established the Jiangxi Fujian Soviet base communism with Chinese characteristics style. But Mao was severely criticized for his pragmatic approach. Those communist white cats that failed in their urban revolution in Shanghai fled to Mao base and removed Mao from power. Once in power these politically correct leaders brought disaster and tragic lost to Mao hard won base...and the beginning of what was later known as the Long March. Note that Mao name was not listed in the list of those who should retreat by his political rivals. Mao could had been easily captured and killed. But Zhou Enlai found out and saved Mao fate.
It is literally capitalism in diguise imao
@@Arquiviño china has a market economy and the state economy and the state keeps that market in check/ ensuring it works in the interests of the people, not for the sake of the market itself.
@@benwagner4110 by the "people" you mean the state. If the market was working for the interests of itself then it would be in control of the people. Since it isnt then its just a puppet of the state.
@@ben69028 @Ben G @Ben G if the market serves itself then the economy would be capitalist, that's my point. In terms of serving the peopl, china has erased poverty and is directing the market in ways that serve the long term interests of people like infrastructure, clean energy, health care, etc. Regarding the state, you could make the same criticism of the American government which says it serves it's people while only prioritizing private interest in and for itself.
@@benwagner4110 no system in the world has "erased poverty" not even communism did it. It just made everyone equally poor. So I really doubt China erased poverty because its a feat impossible by the laws of nature.
In any system where there are winners there has to be losers.
As canadian I wish we had such great leader😍😍
same here
But Canada is already a developed country.
Chinese characteristics: make money, help its own people in making more and more money, living better and better life. Be more and more powerful, so no country can invade China or force China to sacrifice significant national interest any more.
So why is the wealth gap in China increasing?
its state capitalism. that's what it is.
State capitalism implies the state itself functions as the capitalist. This is worse than that, it's a state for capitalists run by billionaire capitalists where they just do normal capitalism but they call it socialism.
@@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot If the state itself functioned as the capitalist or dictatorship of bourgeoise why did China wipe trillions from tech and construction companies and put them under state control China functions as dictatorship of proletariat the goal is socialism and the aim is to develop productive forces in anyway possible for socialism which includes liberalising elements of the economy there is no pretending socialism if your a billionaire who gets too critical in China you wont be seen again
Capitalism with socialist characteristics
It shall be termed as social capitalism. Socialist government with capitalist economy.
no they have a socialist market economy controlled by the communist party of china. stop coping.
@@kobemop yes. Central planning and free market fused together. This is what USA trying to do now. 250billion USD granted by US congress to build semiconductor industry. Just like what China doing.
"Socialist government" nonsense
Very simple, not to be blackmailed by ideology
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
This video doesn't really have a concrete answer because there is none. Socialism with Chinese Characteristics means whatever the CCP needs or wants it to mean. It is fundamentally simply a buzzword used to help justify the parties rule since the path Deng took them on diverged so much from the Marxist-Leninist idea of the state.
Xi Jingping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era is simply Xi cementing his rule and that the country will follow his vision. What exactly that means isn't exactly hard to find out since he's ruled the country for 9 years now.
@TerranStriker There used to be. Once Deng Xiaoping rose to become China's paramount leader, he set out to making sure no one could ever rule for life as Mao did. When the position of President was reestablished in the Chinese constitution in 1982, a 2 term limit was imposed. Though the position of President of China is largely ceremonial, with real power being held by the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party and the Chairman of the Central Military Commission (keep in mind the PLA is a branch of the party, not the state), the implication that this was a limit on how long the paramount leader should rule was made clear by Deng himself when he stepped down in 1989, a bit over 10 years (a Chinese presidential term is 5 years) after he became paramount leader.
Both Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao respected this precedent, though it is worth noting that both of them were handpicked by Deng himself into the position of paramount leader. Deng meant to ensure that China's leadership would always be stable and never again would the Chaos of the cultural revolution occur.
Xi has abandoned the model Deng set for China is many ways, but the most blatant was having the constitution modified to remove term limits on the Presidency. Xi can serve for however long he wants and can hold on to power, and given that he hasn't appointed a successor he likely intends to rule for a long time, possibly even until death.
Socialism with Chinese Characteristics in Chinese, when directly translated, means "Socialism with a Chinese touch".
Just found it interesting.
It’s more of capitalism with Chinese characteristics. I seen no socialism in China whatsoever lol
real "total not socialism" already has a sample on earth:
United States of America
a country so free that even water , fuel and electric are provided by companies not gov
One thing you can compare. China build high speed train for every corner of China in the interest of its people. US high speed train? Nah, better have more car and promote freedom of travel alongside of carbon mission+ car company+oil company deep pocket
no its socialist (still has somewhat of a similar system to the ussr). many companies are state owned and even private companies are under the cpc's control.
Xiao Mose Actually, it’s a bit more comparable than you might think; we still have Amtrak, which is owned by the US gov and is still pretty effective and extensive. Trains and rail travel were and are incredibly important in the US, the only real difference is that private cars have superseded them as the primary means of travel. You’re right though-a large part of that is due to politics and private pushing of cars.
Since when did you decide what socialism is and isn't when you clearly aren't educated on what socialism is?
It's just a one-party capitalism-adopted socialism.
th-cam.com/channels/ZSxGwqHSd-NCJJTwQnm0jQ.html
Capital and Market Forces are separate.
it's “take whatever's strength and avoid its downsides” system. Isnt that what any country should pursue?
Ni it's a dictatorship of the proletariat (democratic centralism) socialist state that has adapted Marxism Leninism to a capitalist dominated global economy
Is social democracy without democracy?
Imported socialism from the Soviet Union and capitalism from the United States
And dictatorship from Germany
In "democratic" world, there are presidential democracy and parliamentary democracy, countries choose different system because it is suitable to their reality.
In Socialist world, it is the same thing. You cannot simply follow the original doctrine to build a socialist state, it won't work in practical reality. The former Soviet Union has already prove it.
I agree. Opening market momentarily to get some technology transfer agreements to be able to produce things locally and then closing the economy slowly as the USA goes to karen mode is an intelligent idea. Soviets were kinda different but not that much actually. They did export many stuff too. Market economy is still unfair. Example: there are a lot of homeless people and a lot of jobless talented civil engineers able to engineer homes. This is the failure of the free market.
my idea is capitalism => primitive socialism => socialism => pre-communism => communism
communism can be achieved only by automating every job so that people don't need to trade their time to make a living. Instead, they do it out of passion. And automation is not magic. It takes time. So, this is my idea. pre-communism can be achieved when food is completely renewable (like people doesn't even need to trade time for food aka free-lunch). communism (aka stateless and classless society) can be achieved by bringing down the time cost of extracting minerals and energy to 0. What i mean by that is, we dont have shortage for energy (energy is completely renewable) and minerals (asteroid mining with robots and automated refining). Bonus is that we will become a tier 1 civilization too. In tier-2 civilization, the species builds dyson spheres around stars (watch kurzgesagt video: th-cam.com/video/pP44EPBMb8A/w-d-xo.html ). Tier-3 civilizations will build similar energy extracting space infrastructure around black holes. My opinion is that a capitalist civilization cannot reach tier-1 civilization, as they are interested in short term greed, not long term gain, being detrimental to science and technology, etc. Maybe I am day-dreaming a lot. But Wish this turns into a reality 🙂
@@abuthahirumarhathab4201 Dead on. Capitalism is a 20th century ideology.
I love Chinese culture and people but I hate their government.
i think its a legitimate form of building ( towards ) socialism in that it supports the independent growth of productive forces to hit the ground running once other movements toward / into socialism happen. this is especially since china was ( and relatively still is ) a very poor country per capita. but whether or not this system is more effective or liberating for its workers and people right now than a purely socialist economy - some things we can and can't know
I bet the video would end with military scene before clicking, and it did, yay!
How are collectively owned companies defined? Privately owned or state owned?
if the state is a representative of the people, state owned
@@zhaoziyang-c5h but the collective is made up of the workers of that company. They elect the chairman.
@@hermannabt8361 If the state represents the workers of that collective and then decides on the chairman of that company, in a way the workers are choosing their chairman
@@zhaoziyang-c5h but the state does not elect the chairman of the company, the workers do. The workers cast the ballots. The workers get 95% of the profit, the chairman gets 5%.
China can stand proud for their start in the belief
in communism that have evolved into socialism. The fall of Soviet Union after democracy/Gobachev style, has opened China eyes not to go that way. So when President Xi Jinping came on the scene, he formalise a definite goal to achieve China developent towards China socialism with Chinese Characteristics.
Of course, McDonald is also the “healthy food with American characteristics”
How to define Socialism with chinese characteristics? Answer is flexibility
Flexibility in Dictatorship
@@justicewarrior9187you mean dictatorship like western who like to threaten other contry with sanction ?
@@justicewarrior9187 There is a very famous saying in China that "be severe with oneself and lenient towards others", while westerns doing exactly the opposit.The so-called world police is actually a hooliganism.
The Bully, Swallow,and International Violations by CCP China Beijing under Mr. Xi and His Nonsense Advisers has done. Sincerely Mr. Deng Xiaoping his vision for Better China : One Country Two Systems for China to learn from Hong Kong Free Market and FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and apply to China. Mr. Xi and His Nonsense Advisers has made an upside down by attacking Mr. Deng Xiaoping and Our Chinese people vision: Trust, Peace and Respect with The World. Sincerely,❤,❤,❤
@@knt1103 I believe you were saying exactly the same thing when Mr. Jiang Zemin and Mr. Hu Jintao were in power. Just admit that Mr. Deng Xiaoping was more friendly to your country, which makes you love him more. You do not blame about 64 in 1989 anymore?
Deng Xiaoping was like Chinese Gorbachev, except he got things right unlike real Gorbachev.
If China is communist and not capitalist then I am Xi Jinping.
“Socialist with Capitalist characteristics”
It confuses me that ordinary people seems unable to accept that capitalism under socialist ideology can be formed. We all seemed so stuck with whatever Harvard/MIT feed us to believe.
They realized that they needed to speed run through capitalism in order to get to a point where they could actually have wealth to redistribute.
As long as the government of country serving the interest of people, the kind of governance system they embrace really doesn’t matter. Leadership ability of government matters the most. The countries cover almost the entire world embrace a system so called democracy one vote one count. The phenomenon in these countries; politician/parties is more interested in fighting for their self-political gain, winner take all, the richer is getting richer, the poor is poorer, capitalist making even harder for the invisible/vulnerable groups having access to job security, food, and education, protection of law.
So market socialism?
Basically, 'social market economy', a friendly approach of both 'socialism' and 'capitalism'.
it's Socialist* market economy. Social market economy is a contradiction
@@tankseverywhere1492 Wrong, social market economy exists and is different from a socialist market economy
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy
I wish Yugoslavia followed a same path...
Yes nazi's where an interpertation of socialism. But not social at all and NOT democratic. Tyrannical CCP China are undemocratic capitalists. Both capitalim and socialism can be democratic and undemocratic.
you are a bot
It only works when over 90% of population is a single nation like China. I don't think a coined country like Yugoslavia would survive any longer
It should be called bureaucratic capitalism straight forward.
In summary:
"We will allow capitalism again".
Correct me if I am wrong, socialism is based on welfare of the working class. Like social democracy in northern Europe, government has responsibilities to support its citizens.
For example in some European countries if you take loan from a bank to start your business and bankrupt - government pays your debts so that you don't commit suicide.
China is more like it's there when you want to own a property, but when it comes to share the wealth, citizens are on their own. Life in cities is shiny, but rural areas do not have enough opportunities. I'm not saying it to compare with other countries. But china can invest in its rural areas instead of African countries
Though China isn’t Marxist by definition, their strategy for their immense rise has worked. Since the waning and fall of the USSR, it has been far harder to run a socialist economy in the capitalist world we live in with the US as it’s hegemon. I hope to see the day that the world tilts socialist and we can see China implement more and more Marxism and undercut the imperialism of the west
Expectation: power to the working class.
Reality: working 996 with diapers.
Ignorant western leftoid going: "not muh socialism"
You don't understand socialism or Marxism if you claim China isn't run by the working class. Stop claiming things while not being educated
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 The chinese working class probably understands better than you that the chinese ruling class are thiefs who enriched themselves by privatizing state property and exploiting workers under brutal conditions.
@@turtlecraft7996 the Chinese ruling class? Who do they rule? I don't see the ruling class having power over the CPC. If you claim so then what CPC member owns a big business and has a high position? You are lost. You are attempting to say socialism can't be certain things but there's no definition for what it is
First of all, i think everyone needed to know what a socialist economy really looks like without the cold war bias. There are too many simplified version of their system which created the many myth about them and start making up about what is the value of socialism based on that.
But Democracy at work made a very great analysis of how socialism works during the time of Lenin and then how it is connected to China and the Socialism with chinese characteristic: th-cam.com/video/3Tbf2bpgs-E/w-d-xo.html
10 years ago no one took this concept seriously... but now it seems to be more than just empty words...
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/Saq2pYlC1Fo/w-d-xo.html
I disagree. It's rhetoric.
@@HunterShows Indeed, deliberate lies.
Don’t try to understand it. Feel it.
Don't think! FEEEEEEEL～
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
It’s called state capitalism
2:34 concrete realities
In conclusion : post deng Chinese “socialism” is literally neoliberal capitalism . And it seems to be working .
Not exactly neoliberal capitalism but still they use a lot of features of capitalism
@@sirajuddinmohammed6140 special economic zones with poor labour law and low minimum wages to woo american companies , how is that not neoliberalism?
@@d_1012 But government still holds lot of assets and interferes in companies day to day policy, they have 5 year plan etc. But it’s true that they use a lot of features of capitalism. In neoliberalism government doesn’t not really do any investment
@L " first off , dont expect anyone to read such a huge passage in the comments lol , this isnt an essay competition . I read the last part of your passage and you seem to be putting blind belief into a system that's increasingly moving away of the things it set out to be just based on a promise . yet the average chinese person wants their kids to study in harvard and oxford , buys louis Vuitton and trades in the shanghai stock market. using capitalism as an excuse to "get rich" means you concede to the capitalists that their system is the only way to make wealth .
@L read basic history dude . the sino soviet split and china's path to capitalism happened while the ussr held enough power , so the fall of ussr isnt a valid excuse . china was closer to the usa than ussr , and thats also why usa stopped recognizing taiwan.
Basically an Asian version of USSR
It's basically mixed socialism CCCP with nationalism U.S.(cut off the liberalism idealogy) right now.
So basicly “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” is capatilism
But worse
Not yet
In China Gvnt controls $
In US $ controls Gvnt
@@truehker2871 that makes 0 sense
They have hardworking people and a supportive government.
I really want a power that can balance the USA. It seems that USA can do everything in the beginning of the 21st century without Soviet.
China can never enter WTO without the support of USA, simple as that
China should really grateful to Deng Xiaoping's reform, compared to homicidal Mao. Without Deng's legacy, China would be just bigger North Korea
Mao certainly made mistakes, and a lot of people dead because of it. But he also lead China through the darkest period and he fully committed himself to the country and the people.
@@donaldduck1322 Nope. I mean considering Cultural Revolution, Great leap forward, Great Chinese Famine and destroying many Chinese intellectual as a form of anti-rightist campaign.... he's the worst tyrant&ruler of china, HE IS THE ONE who made china enter its DARKEST period. He's not a savior of china, he is the demon
@@muhammadhaikalpermanaatmaj73 As for the darkest period part, only Chinese people know what the life look like during the humiliated century. Anyone other than Chinese doesn't have the right to say about that also doesn't have the right to define what kind of people he is.
Well, the reality is different
Do you think I am using the socialist system now?
Actually I am using authoritarian rule now😇😇
Do you think I am using an authoritarian system now?
In fact, I am increasing social welfare now🤣🤣
中国人自古不拘泥于条条框框，所以一般宗教在中国根本活不下去，佛教没有上帝、没有固定的经典著作，所以佛教融入中华文明活下去了😂😂😂
LOL like some Yo-Gi-Oh anime scene
@@yqisq6966 You think I look like this, but I'm not what you look like🤣
I will always find a balance between the outside and the inside😇😇😇
3:30 that literally proves nothing lol doesn’t even make sense .
In simple words it’s a dictorship of the bourgeoisie just like mao predicted
And they’ve still done a better job than the nutjob Mao was . China is rich now and famines are a thing of the past . Famines were Mao’s specialty lol
imagine supporting a dictator
@@mythrandir8118 if you think I support mao or communism your so wrong I love my lord Jesus
@@d_1012 they both pos
The Bully, Swallow,and International Violations by CCP China Beijing under Mr. Xi and His Nonsense Advisers has done. Sincerely Mr. Deng Xiaoping his vision for Better China : One Country Two Systems for China to learn from Hong Kong Free Market and FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and apply to China. Mr. Xi and His Nonsense Advisers has made an upside down by attacking Mr. Deng Xiaoping and Our Chinese people vision: Trust, Peace and Respect with The World. Sincerely,❤,❤,❤
Based from my observations, I can conclude that China is now a Social Capitalist state.
1. Existence of entrepreneurs who drive the economy.
2. Opening up of trade with other countries
3. Promoting businessess to grow and allow for private owned property.
I say it's Social Capitalist as despite it's a capitalist country, it still tries to balance it with the development of society.
The state controls the economy. Trade =/= capitalism. Allowing private property to exist isn't capitalist. It's not capitalist. You don't understand socialism with Chinese characteristics.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 Trade is a form capitalism.
Characteristics of capitalism
1. The existence of private properties (in China, we have now seen people owning cars and mansions and most of them have properties overseas)
2. Profit motive. Tell me, why China started its Belt and Road initiative? To encourage more trade which will yield more profit.
3. Competition between companies. In communist/socialist system, such competition are not allowed and all of the businessess are state owned. Yet, in China we have seen the rise of Huawei and Xiaomi, both which are competitors to each others.
4. Consumer power. Don't tell me that China isn't a capitalist country when their people literally have consumer power, ie the right to choose stuff that they wanted.
5. Economic growth. Don't tell me that China isn't a capitalist country when they literally trade with other countries. USSR tried to avoid such thing and look what happened to them. They stagnated.
It's not pure capitalist as the state controls the economy still, evidenced by Jack Ma recent cases with the central command.
Chinese people are known for one thing, capitalism and trading. We are excellent traders, reaching as far as India and Africa. That is a Chinese characteristic. The ability to trade.
@@edryctan672 these aren't characteristics of capitalism they are just things that exist under capitalism. Such an idiotic way to define capitalism as a certain number of characteristics. Capitalism is when there is private ownership of the means of production and therefore there is a hierarchical system of wealth and power. However private ownership of the means of production can exist under socialism as long as the workers control them through the dictatorship of the proletariat which is democratic centralism. You can't define capitalism as a set few characteristics. The important distinction is that workers aren't in power in China and the bourgeoisie is in power under capitalism. All these things you describe either can or has existed under socialism. Most of these things have existed in most socialist states other than China.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 Unfortunately, under capitalism, anyone that becomes successful is a bourgeoisie. And we have seen the rise of several of them.
@@daseapickleofjustice7231 Also, the CCP acknowledge the existence of capitalist groups in China. Like I say before, Capitalist is a broad thing, but whatever China is doing is a partial capitalism, as the state controls the economy.
I love Deng Xiao Ping
He's responsible for 1989.
@@lazy3531 shhhh ccp is watching
@@lazy3531 Did you make any donation of even a penny, instead of supporting them by mouth?
@@emmanuelsung Why would I donate money? I'm just simply stating facts. You know there was not only 2 groups that was protesting right?
@@lazy3531 It was not Deng Xiaoping who started the protest, he was the one who settled down the riot. And all those students leaders ran to western countries. If you were the Chinese leader in 1989, what would you do? To compromise completely to the protesters?
Socialism without socialism seems more like it
Go china 🇨🇳 👏 💪 💙 ❤️ 🙌
I usually love SCMP, but this video did a poor job of explaining how it actually works in practice. What socialistic characteristics does it have?
Democratic centralism (dictatorship of the proletariat), government owned means of production, it provides it's people with food, housing, education, healthcare and jobs and much more but socialism has no clear definition so it's meaningless to try to attempt to define the ideology