@@lukakomarov1014 TH-cam is banned in China(I personally support it) , but individuals can use VPN to cross the firewall. What is truly illegal in China is creat and spread illegal VPN.
Sir. I know, it's an other subject, but I have a few questions and I hope that you will have time and wish to answer them. 1) I have often heard from people (especially the older generation) that communists are naive people who believe in utopia. If a man of left-wing views is young, he is not taken seriously because they think that he "doesn't know life". I personally know quite a few of those who, being a pioneer or Komsomol in their youth, became disillusioned with their views. How did you manage to maintain your beliefs? 2) You are a person with a lot of experience and remember the events of which I had only to read. How did you feel when the eastern block fell? Do you think it is possible for it to return? 3)Unfortunately I know very little about China. From different people, I have heard often diametrically opposed points of view. On the one hand, I am glad that there is such a strong country in the world that at least calls itself a socialist. But I have concerns about the nationalism and frankly imperialist ambitions I've heard of. What do you think of China? Will China be able to support and ignite the fire of the world revolution?
@@lukakomarov1014 what revolution? Are you high? China is ultranationalist now, their policies reflect it. HAN SUPREMACY - cleansing of minorities and forcing them to mix with han chinese. This what is happening in Xinjiang. MILITARISM AND AGGRESSIVE RETHORIC - china threatens India, Vietnam, Japan, Austtalia, etc It has LITERALLY no friends except for Russia ( which will regret it soon as China sees Siberia as its "lebensraum" ). They aggtessively use debt trap policies in Africa and the balkans literally FUCKING other countries and their people. There is absolutely NOTHING that classifies this as "communist". Nothing.
Greetings from Eastern Europe! I feel sorry for you and most people here would laugh if you made this statement after having endured 45 years of communism ;)
i am Chinese, the phrase of "socialism with Chinese characteristics“ has been everywhere since i was born, but i didnt really understand it till watching this video. Thank you Proffer ❤️
But that is dismissing the whole point and flaws of this type of governance system, not to mention the current arrangement doesn't represent much of socialism let alone communism. I was hoping Prof. Wolff would go into those interesting nuance critiques instead of talking about the obvious factors that contributed to the rise of China.
I think the way that the Chinese government works would be a very good subject. I thought of it as a capilist/dictatorship. But looking into it, it is much more complicated than that. Explaining the way it works would enlighten a lot of people and maybe change the the view of how people look at it. Of course the corruption is the biggest problem. But before we cast any stones, we should look at our own back yard.
Watch friend of Richard Wolff, Caleb Maupin's youtube channel for more info and an interesting perspective on Chinese Socialism. He is the best person I've ever seen on youtube talk about it.
Honestly with as large as China is it is remarkably impressively uncorrupted. Is there corruption in China? Yeah absolutely of course, but the fact is they actually take the problem seriously. Corruption has been a public topic of conversation in China and people have literally been executed recently because of it. Not only do you not get executed in the United States, best case a corrupt government official here gets a slap on the wrist and a fine, worst case, they become president.
I originally thought the phrase was absurd, but now I've changed my mind. The material conditions of every country are different, so the socialism that develops in each country will also be different.
Chinese culture is rooted in the philosophy of Yin and Yang. If going too far toward one direction, Yang will change into Yin. The thing will naturally move toward the other extreme.Therefore, if one wishes to keep a socialist government, one must accept aspects of capitalism.(and vice versa)
@@yixie6830 hahaha what fucking nonsense. You guys are doing extreme mental gymnastics to justify becoming America #2 and fucking poor people. "Yin and Yang" hahaha!
Brilliant - One other key factor was the Chinese decision to send 1000s of students overseas to learn different ways, and bring them home. They had learnt the costly mistakes of their emperors of the past who had insulated China - they regarded foreigners as largely barbarians. Then the industrial revolution happened, and China missed out.
@@cr4yv3n Uhhh... No. There are actually a lot of breakthroughs in engineering and science done by native Chinese engineers and scientists, but of course you'll never hear about this because of MSM bias. Quantum satellites and quantum radars come to mind as being the most well known, but there are many others such as first to launch a probe to land on the far side of the moon. 6G telecommunications as well as artificial intelligence in China is also known to be far ahead in progress compared to U.S. with recent examples being A.I. and cloud computing being used to predict and track COVID-19 infection patterns, contact trace possible cases of the infected and help in the design and testing of vaccines. China also hold the record and has the number 1 and number 2 ranking in fastest supercomputers in the world and has consistently held this position for years.
@@technatezin can u stop with the MSM bs?! The world does revolve around your shithole of a country, America! No I am based on EU facts that there are theft attempts every DAY of technology. All originate from China or Russia.
No the key factor is not the amount of overseas Chinese students. The key factor is the most of student decides to go back China after tasting the “good” “freedom” and “democracy” of western. That’s why China is powerful --the people stay united
Western world view us as Communism, while communism supporters view us as Revisionism. To me, the *nism is irrelavant, what actually matters is whether the government cares for its people, their life and satisfication. For that standard, the Chinese government is doing a good job in the past decades.
@@FruitlessPicnicjust do some research on your own. even using wildly available western source you will quickly find out it's simply a lie. But no one cares and every western media keep repeating the same lies until people like you fall victims to this brainwashing
Ism? Lmao China is run by Communist ideals... and ya want to dismiss the FACTS? Chinese Communists killed ten of millions of their own Chinese people to push Communist ideals... were those people happy? Bunch of idiotz...Western want to view us as Communist? Lmao China goveenmemt is Communist, model after Russia and China teach Karl Marx Communist manifesto to College students... there is nothing Chinese about Communist, and ya call yourself Chinese? You might look Chinese, but your mind and soul is not Chinese
As a Chinese, I couldn't agree more with Professor Wolff. The feature is the government takes the dominance of political power and essential industries, like public utilities, infrastructures, educational institutes, hospitals, etc., on behalf of the people. Why we let private sectors even foreign ones coexist? Because we are fully aware that some people are more capable than others and these more capable people can promote the development of our society. We are not afraid they would go too far toward capitalism because all essential industries and political power are still under the control of our government as said. BTW, I will not agree to the argument that our system is national capitalism which just doesn't make any sense. It is just a confusing expression some western politicians tried to play our system down. If our government is the only capitalist that dominates everything, I can live with that. Because I know it is doing on behalf of the Chinese people.
@@cr4yv3n when words such dumbass came from your mouth, I knew what you are exactly. I fell sorry for you. it is your own fault being a loser. however, you ll still have the chance if you look at this world more positively.
Very informative as usual from Prof Wolff, but I honestly expected some "evil-Chinese" remarks since it's the media consensus right now, I suppose you would have not advocated for socialism through red scare without having principles and giant balls, respect.
The BRI is funded with deals made with the nations it crosses. US infrastructure still far exceeds China, for instance the water/air pollution there is serious.
Thanks professor Wolff, your video is enlightening as always. But something has always been in my mind, I'm a Chinese and has been affected by the Chinese censorship heavily, how can I tell China's state capitalism will go too far and result in the unfair free market, let's say, wall street has built? it's good to note China‘s wealth gap is not too far away from most of the capitalist countries right now, and seems little interest to go the direction of socialism from state capitalism. Like, we don't even have Medicare for all single-payer healthcare system.
@@MaheshKumar-vw6uoThis is the case in most cases，The vast majority of universities are funded by the government，so It only costs about 6000 yuan a year（800us dollar/year）.In the vast majority of cases, health insurance can cover everyone。
Cristal clear explanation. Extraordinary understanding of this topic by Professor Wolff. Thank you. If you would had been my Economics Proffesor, I would be a great Economist.
I recently spoke to somebody who was born in China and she told me when she was in elementary school there were three pictures kept in a position of prominence - Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaopeng, and Ronald Reagan. I was kind of confused by Reagan until I recalled that most of the outsourcing of American manufacturing occurred under his watch.
Great explanation, Porf. I’d like to add some pieces. I actually thought a lot on how the two pieces - Marxism theory, sth. from German and totally foreign, and China, the middle kingdom with five thousand continuous civilization - fit so well. The answer is quite much about the traditional Chinese culture, which stresses a lot about the sympathy and compassion on ordinary/poor people’s lives. It set the unarguable tone that it’s the duty of emperor and high-ranking scholars (no so called “noble” class in China since the introduction of national exam in Sui Dynasty around 600 A.D.) to act like parents and care for people under govern. If the duty is not performed well and some children as a group got too much and turned indifferent and arrogant towards others while other children starve to death, the parent/dynasty will be overturned and the next round of capable men will be there to performance their duty again. So no matter from the history books written 2000 years ago in Han Dynasty, or the poems created 1400 years ago in Tang Dynasty, or literature finished in Ming or Qing Dynasty around some hundred years ago, I can find the deep sympathy there. When I was in primary /middle/ high school, one challenge was to remember and recite some ancient masterpieces to prepare for the exam. Sure, it’s hard, but later on, I found the beauty in them and felt even proud and glad that I did the job. And no doubt that I would encourage my children to keep doing it. During this process, I know it’s right to care for others. And since no matter we are from a rich or poor family, we almost got the same training in China, I guess we shared the same value that no families should be left behind on this land. That’s what the gov. has been working on - to lift over 550 mm people out of poverty. I’m not a Party member, but I fully support their endeavor. When the Marxism was first introduced in China, I can imagine how excited people like Chairman Mao could be. He was very famous for reading tons of history books and could think issues very strategically. Showing sympathy is not enough; the Poor should unit and act. With the guidance of Marxism, CCP won the war over foreign invaders and KMT in civil war. During the following two decades, the haste to become a socialism country turned into nationwide pilot programs which proved to be mistakes, even disasters. But they learnt the lessons well, and since 1978, under Deng’s leadership, China has been focused on only one thing - developing the economy to make it comparable to other developed countries. Deng is very practical and he fully understand that currently China is still at the early stage of socialism, and the productivity need further develop. He set the tone and we are actually still following his vision, even after China became the world’s second largest economy a decade ago. I feel that people around me in China are becoming more confident about the political system they’re living in. If I draw a line and set pure socialism at 0 and pure capitalism at 100, I think China is at around 40, which could strike a good balance between efficiency and fairness. If I need to put U.S. on the same line, it could be at 80, which means a large amount of ordinary people are left behind, and in turn that will hinder its long-term sustainability. China, as a republic, is still young and could still make mistakes, just as the capitalism did in the first few decades after its birth, but I think it could provide some alternatives for the world to see that what the priority should be in different stage of development.
@@MrHobosFTWCome on, who give you the misconception that a republic must be a multi-party ruled country? Taiwan is not comparable, if you have any common sense. It has never been and will never be a country. Man, have some basic training on history first and then we may have some meaningful conversation. Thanks.
China has much more farmers than Russia, So China CCP musr win by the farmer's support,While Russia win by the City worker, so it is natural that China and Russia go to different way.
This is completely incorrect. The peasantry lead the revolutions in both Russia and China. Both Lenin+Stalin in the USSR and Mao in the PRC called for a transition period into capitalist development in order to transform the peasantry into a proletariat and to develop the productive forces, paving the way to the ultimate goal of communism.
@@tequestaorangejuice6673 My (admittedly novice) impression from various history commentators has been that revolutions are basically never led by the peasantry, but rather by affluent intellectuals who are good at mobilizing the peasantry.
The Chinese word 特别 is hard to translate into English. "Characteristics" has connotations in English that 特别 does not have in Chinese. Western communists with their theological philosophical roots, tended to split into many factions based on the "true" meaning of Marx. Even the word "Marxist" revels this theological orientation. China's Confucian roots, with an emphasis on consensus were incompatible with this Western way. This new Chinese path was already evident in 1937 with Mao's speech, "On Practice." Here he made the point that ideas should be evaluated not by their adherence to ideology, but by how well they work in practice. Socialism with Chinese characteristics is better understood as a socialist path appropriate to the particular and unique Chinese culture and history.
@D "Common sense" in the US, is a word with anti-intellectual connotations. It is used to ridicule intellectuals. "The Earth is flat, It's just common sense." I'm not sure the Chinese word 平凡 means the same thing. The expression "Socialism with Chinese characteristics.," to a Western ear, sounds like a theological dodge: Jesus with Chinese characteristics. We believe there is only one Jesus, only one socialism. We are not political creators, we are political consumers.
Yeah he uses to have the superb monthly several hours long lectures. Then he switched to some obscure site that kept feeding people piece meal clips of 5 minutes as if we're fucking brain dead.
May I further add that the underlying philosophy and objectives of this form of socialist capitalism is that it is by far much more "for the people", their present and future welfare, security, social and economic equality and sustainability, with far less externalisation of the "costs of prosperity", although this last part of the evolution is only more apparent as the "hierarchy of needs" of its people are being elevated through their "people's prosperity programs".
So far the "needs of the people" turned out into so very fat and rich CCP connected rats. We call it nepotism here. In China they call it "good for the people". 🤣
@@cr4yv3n It won’t take long now for you to see if your perceptions, rather than observations turn out to be true or false. Happy believing in the meantime, if you could manage the gnawing cognitive dissonance.
I wonder why professor Wolff never mention Yugoslavian self governing socialism. Chinese communists learned a lot from Yugoslavia. In the 80's Yugoslavia was exporting goods to east and west Europe, USSR and USA too. Fun fact: 40 years ago Chinese delegation arrived in Skopje to learn how to make buses. Now Skopje public transportation have Chinese busses!
Sun's "the father of the nation, the pioneer(Teacher) of the revolution" is grander than Mao's "the Comrade Chairman" title despite having no real power in history. Three gorge dam, state owned subsidized Chinese railway, Chinese dream etc were written goals of nationalists proposed around 1919. In Chinese culture, visionary philosophers are ranked higher in long run even if they were unsuccessful in their lifetime. For a grand undertaking, it is an honour even to fail.
Throughout China's history of about 5,000 years of civilization, many outside cultures were introduced into China because of interaction especially trade. Some were absorbed modified and adapted to suit the Chinese culture and philosophy passed down over the generations. Therefore, socialism with Chinese characteristic is of no exception
Beginning China already have trade with any countries with Chinese community. All of these countries were depending for China to supply all the essential goods for the overseas Chinese. In fact,most of China raise was assisted by the overseas Chinese. No other country can have this type of synergy between the mother land and the Chinese overseas.
You must never read. Real China experts understand very well China is fundamentally fascist in the Italian sense while respecting Chinese Confucian social order; focused on the farmers and workers, employing expert bureaucrats to ensure the state has a completely heavy hand on so called capitalist economic exchange, with a strong central police presence to enforce what is referred to as law & order. Fascism was born in Italy, and there it had no racist component. The Germans applied their sense of national superiority to it and sense of having been betrayed by capitalists to blame Jews for their plight after WW1. The original tenets of fascism read like social democracy, and in fact many Italian Jews were fascist before the war.
If I wanted to start a business in China, a Chinese citizen would have to be at least 50% owner of said business. Many married couples start small businesses or co-workers will do this. Cooperatives are big here too. 😉
Richard, you left out the fact Chiang Kai Shek was the man who connected opium tar being distributed in China by US mail ships with the notorious Triad drug distribution network. That was a major factor behind the US backing Chiang Kai Shek in the Chinese Revolution.,..but in so doing the US pushed Mao into Russia's embrace. I know a retired Physics Professor at Beijing University University who went through the commune experience, she thought it was a good thing to separate the youth from the US opium colony victims. China is heavily invested in transportation and housing. China could be a productive partner if we weren't so damn exceptional. [The source about Chiang Kai Shek info is Sterling Seagraves book THE SOONG DYNASTY which has more accurate information about China than anything I've ever seen in the West. I've also lived in China. ]
All derived from and/or justified by a deterministic view that first you must that capitalism, then socialism, then communism, which is not what Marx said really, it wasn't a manual or necessary program as it defies all logic in more ways than one. It still amazes me that so many people can call themselves "scientific socialists", "historical materialists", etc, and hold such a ridiculous position. Just like it seems absurd that much of what existed in the USSR and at least a post-70's, Dengist Reformed China could be called "socialism" in anything but the loosest possible meaning of the term like "state ownership of most of the economy". Or that some can be so dogmatically and ideological about the idea of a "vanguard" given the mountains of evidence against it and for worker self-management. It's all revisionist and none of it has put us any closer to bringing down capitalism or capitalist hegemony and imperialism. It's just taken on so many of the characteristics of capitalism and the worst of liberal states that it's become nearly the same and if anything it's normalized capitalist relations. It seems a disgusting perversion of everything socialism has stood for by becoming what it stood against in so many ways. But it's called "liberating" countries and "mutually beneficial trade deals" (phrases capitalists love as well as they suck the bones of the "Third World") instead of imperialism. It's "socialism" when billionaires are in your party or the bulk of the billionaires after it's collapse came from the top of the party, when the state owns all the land and leases it to the wealthy in 100 yr increments (intergenerational wealth kept in one family, not distributed to all via direct leasing from the state) so it can be subleased to regular people, when the surveillance systems lead the world in invasions of privacy, a single party has absolute control over a people, etc. With the semi-religious thinking required to buy half of it and the endless apologetics and whataboutisms to defend it, it's no wonder so many people buy into the Red Scare misinformation. Some of us are over here advocating for socialism and democracy to create a society of free equals while others are trying to bring people into their cult-like worldview that resembles half the dystopian media post-1917. It's depressing. I've been a socialist my entire life and it's never been about any of that or Bernie SocDem Welfare Capitalism, it's been about freedom, autonomy, equality, solidarity, peace, justice, security, dignity, ecological living, mutual aid, etc, and while obviously previous attempts have made strides on some of those things, teaching people to read, setting up clinics, daily bread, all that goes a long way. But so far all have failed and many never seemed to even get close to trying and more resembled a cross between the states they overthrew and liberal states than anything like socialism. It's way past time to stop looking backwards for all the answers and start building something new.
This is an illuminating description of China's strategic divergence from other types of socialist development, but it doesn't help me to see what if anything is particularly Chinese about it. Are there specific continuities linking contemporary China's path of economic development to its prerevolutionary history and culture?
This gives us a sneak at just how little we know about political terms and their relationship to our world today ! As they are constantly changing their meaning depending the other social and economic variables that exist in their society ! Confused ? I am ! It ok ! Just goes to show you the difficulty in determining their pros and cons . It's the conversation that is worth havi g and the willingness to communicate these factors to our way of doing business and what it means to us in real time . Having the discussions are the difference in success and failure .
Actually I think America is also Capitalist with American Characteristic, it is no problem to use both market economy and planned economy in one country. During the epidemic period, printing money and bills to save the market, fighting trade wars and increasing tariffs are not free markets but planned economic activities controlled by the government. So it is not appropriate to say planned economy is socialism or market economy is capitalism. What I define about what is socialism or capitalism is depend on the relationship between capital and government. If capital control the government, that is capitalism， like America. If government control the capital, that is socialism, like China.
right on the former (lasseiz faire capitalism) but wrong on the latter. The latter is still capitalism; in China's case you have autharitarian capitalism. Also, in both cases, capital is what controls ultimately. Government controls capital in both countries but "capital as a priority" is what controls government policy in both too; it's a matter of degree i.e. which govts are inclined to respond to which first, the responsibilites of governance or accumulation of capital. Socialism is an entirely different concept seperate from the realities of both USA and China in their current state
@@siggydj I don't think the capital control the CCP. Corruption sill exist, but the richest 100 Chinese can't control the CCP, and the richest 20 Americans can control the White House. For example, in the recent outbreak, China took the lead in shutting down the country for two months to fight against the epidemic, regardless of economic losses.
@@БорисАлександр-п4к Some of the richest people in the country are CCP members if you would care to research them out. And the claim that CCP isn't controlled by big money is demonstrably false; for a start the wildlife trade lobby, one of the biggest lobbying groups in China, is the reason why the wildlife trade wasn't banned back in 2004 after the SARS outbreak when the party was trying to do so. It is just now been banned in the country NOW on paper but practical imposition of that law is lackluster at best to virtually non-existant at worst, as wet markets have opened up and a lot of the wildlife trade has moved online and is thriving there more than before. Capital does control the party; they are just smarter than current US politicians in realizing the economic damage of not taking measures to prevent the spread of a pandemic in the country and have been arguably better at managing the epidemic to the USA government under trump now. China is the world's producer; it cannot risk an epidemic going on forever to shut all economic and production activity for indefinite periods of time and have, as governments should, chose to suffer comparitively smaller losses in the beginning and get rid of the problem early on and count their blessings. Most of USA is on lockdown too now, cause the economic cracks are getting wider as the virus spreads and is something that cannot be simply ignored as it was in the beginning, and it wouldn't have been in lockdown now if it was simply a matter of corporations controlling the govt completely. It's a combination of incompetence of the current populist Trump govt there now, which has to appeal to its supporter i.e. the people, and the fact that capital rules, not that different from China but as I said before, a matter of degree. You really think the ruling elite anywhere care about the working class masses without any monetary strings attached when operating under a capitalist system that allow for such exploitation?
@@siggydj I definitely would not think the ruling elite care about the working class masses without any condition. Some corrupt ccp members are still exist and most Chinese know that. But it would be absurd to say they are as rich as Jack Ma. When Xi was in power, there were several well-known anti-corruption cases, targeting such big people as the director of the General Administration of Railways and members of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee. The amount of embezzled funds reached several hundred million, but it was far from the level of ten billion. Moreover, the information of Chinese enterprises is open. It's impossible to say that a senior official secretly owns a company and people don't know it. What you're talking about is corruption, which has always existed.But judging from the achievements of these decades, it is still good on the whole.
@@БорисАлександр-п4к Hence why i say it's the same as the USA as I have been saying. What you describe, aka corruption, is the same that is attributed to US politicians, unless you operate under the misunderstanding that the US political system fundamentally operates on corruption as a fundamental mechanism that is officially instated, which it doesn't. No country claims that to operate in the political process in it you have to go through corruption; it just is a symptom of how power influences the political process and how it is structured to allow the covert or in some cases overt possibilities of it. It's easy to say its corruption when the judiciary operates subordinate to the party as in China, which is then used to catch corrupt officials but also political dissidents and opponents in the mix; this happens in China, in Philippines with Duetere, Russia when it was USSR under Stalin's rule and resulted in the purges etc etc. Even Xi has links to organized crime and massive corruption in the country but no one can point fingers there cause of how the country's political and judicial systems are structured fundamentally. This happens in the USA too, but the only thing they have managed to do is seperate the institutions from the subordinate ordinate relationship i.e. judiciary is fundamentally independent from the political parties etc; not saying that that has eliminated all influences of power, it hasn't. But the systematic nature has changed that allows both to function for what they are while trying to reduce each other's influence of each other. It's not a matter of he is corrupt of she is corrupt or change this policy or have this policy etc; the change has to be fundamental, which hasn't happened and given China's current direction towards authoratarian capitalism and how it's being reinforced and being made more efficient without room for opposition and change, will probably not happen if this trajectory continues will continue to mirror the USA as it already does in a lot of things during its economic rise in the last few decades. Also, no one in congress is as rich as Jeff Bezos either; dunno what your comparison of CCP members wealth to Jack Ma is about. And Jack Ma was a member of the CCP until stepping down from the Alibaba group; not sure if he is still officially a CCP memebr now but still has ties and affiliation to it. Look at his latest talks on youtube
I struggle to understand how 'Socialism with Chinese characteristics' is still Socialist while they retain Capitalist relations of production?, is the fact that private property exists not anathema to Socialist principles?.
Following what I wrote below, I am not a communist as history shows us, niether a fundamentalist capitalist. I favor honest people searching for the best for their people, and I am a convincing person that capitalism needs to be regulated to suppress once and ever forever the behavior of minorities to the most. But certainly, the gangsters now in power in Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba do not have my least respect nor those who in name of the poor robber the whole money of their own citizens. Best Regards, Fernando.
Greeting Prof Wolff..! My deepest respect: Questions, "Is there any documents, signed by all countries of this planet, at the UN that mention that all countries have to be DEMOCRATS.....? And if there was any, don't you think that document or documents will clash with the very (Essential part of HUMAN RIGHTS) where say; The Color of my skin, My Race, My Reliuos choice, My Political choice, ect and ect ", How come that the US, UK, and EU and almost all countries followers of the US are committed to harassing other countries when their citizens go to a presidential election and choice their own way of Political decisions. All Countries have RIGHTS TO CHOICE THEIR OWN POLITICAL GREEDS..! Either COMMUNISM, SOCIALISM, MARKISM, DEMOCRACY, SOCIAL-DEMOCRATS, Ect. Is this a World Order that CRMINALIZES OUR OWN HUMAN RIGHTS..? How can the world FIX THIS..?
There is a reason the Chinese empire last thousand of years. The rest of the empires come and go. My respect for the Chinese. America empire crumbling because of greed, corporate legally corruption government. Fake Human right ( NSA backdoor, warmongers, Petro dollar, Vietnam gulf of tolkin incident, Iraq WMD, Edward Snowden...++.)
I'm a chinese person, and I have to tell Mr Wolff, we're complete hypocrites. We're openly confucian, even socialists, but privately greedy and selfish, many of us have a gambling problem, some of us are very shrewd and ruthless in business, and nearly all aspire to be wealthy, and have little qualms about how they go about it. He criticises the US a lot, and I don't argue with him, but if he paid more attention to China, he have a lot of criticism there as well.
there's a lot of chinese and they come in every size and taste. strong work ethic, family and county connections, possibly overseas cousins, naturally plenty of wheelers and dealers. amazing how china has been immersed in socialist ideology for three generations, with little change in national character.
@@cr4yv3n It's a backwards country, most of them still believe in ghosts and lucky numbers, they're even superstitious as well. Quite vain and childish even, I grew up like that as well, didn't understand at the time, but now, I see most of them for what they really are, even the one's in my own family.
Yes the USSR and China both built systems that resonated with their cultures. In the USSR you could be jailed for your thoughts (see the excellent 10 part movie here "In The First Circle" by A. Solzhenitsyn). A saying about Russia historically is, "The Russian people yearn for the lash" and thus one can learn to understand how Russians would move from the tyranny of the Czar to the tyranny of the Soviet Central Committee (see: Simon Sebag Montefiore - 2016 - The Romanovs 1613-1918). China was able to conduct massive purges of people who were not cooperative with the authorities, as it has no history of a focus on individual liberty/rights. The centuries old Confucian tradition is focused on social harmony not the individual. And in either case of USSR or China, the start level for the masses was so low that any path to improvement was acceptable to people. The USA has also built systems that resonate with it's culture, with both good and bad results. In the USA the Founders started with the ethical guidelines of the Scottish Enlightenment, that first spoke to limiting the power of Kings whose power supposedly came from a god and demanding that power comes from the consent of the governed. Thus our rights protect property, and thus they limit by nature the scope of government. The government cannot tell you to sing the national anthem in the USA. We created enumerated rights on paper, enforced by law, then society follows from what happens naturally within those rights. We do not set social goals based on one groups philosophy or religion, then adjust rules as necessary to those ends, we set rights. This is our culture. So in the US because property is a right, we have capitalism, more or less regulated at various times in our history, but always regulated legally. In either the USSR or China the idea that your property cannot be violated does not naturally flow from the cultural history. In the case of any system, human nature remains the same under the social structure. People want liberty of action, they want things by which to live, they want to be free to speak and think and act. The will seek these things corruptly or by honest means, depending upon what opportunity is available.
Government system, be it capitalism or socialism, so long as it can provide its people with jobs, good education, security, housing ,medical care...etc is a good system.
No. Those are all worthless without liberty. The only question worth asking is whether there is greater liberty if you are not allowed to have a business.
China's approach to the project of transitioning from capitalism, to socialism to communism has theoretical basis in many of Marx's writings. This becomes evident with a careful reading of Capital volumes 1 to 4. Then again, I'd like to emphasize that there's nothing "automatic' about this evolutionary process, think the question "Is it teleological?," is it inevitable that communism is the endpoint, so to speak. The human element, imho, is still the key factor. We gotta make the cake and eat it, too, imho.
Hahaha! And with billionaires they are going to transition...any day now. Once asked the billionaires will just...give up their wealth for the people 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 This is why rich fucks in China are moving their money out of the country like there's no tomorrow. In Vietnam they buy ALL apartments.
@@cr4yv3n Transition is a long-term process not something that happens overnight. You can keep moralizing about China not developing socialism fast enough but you can't build an economy out of morals any more than you can build a smartphone out of morals.
China is able to do long term planning, something impossible in the West. For 40 years the goal was industrialization, modernization. While doing this, China lifted 700 million people out of extreme poverty. New goals were established in 2017 but got no mention in the Western press. Uneven development, income inequality, is the top priority in the new era.
@D When you throw around numbers like that it would be useful if you provided some factual support. I mean, 300 million out of 1.4 trillion is 21%, not 70% Income inequality has risen in China. It is true. The poor do not rise as fast as the rich, also true, just as everywhere else in the world. This inequality was made the primary focus of the CPC at its 19th Party Congress.
so proff are countries going to raise taxes generally to fund deficits after the great covid bond issue and wealth taxes on super rich multi millionares and billionares ?
@@dinnerwithfranklin2451 well if us at the bottom of the pile end up paying it all a severe recession will turn intoo a severe depression as it will kill our disposable income and our ability to be consumers will the rich have ever again profitable viable busnesses apart from farmers and food processers and sellers and then le ss jobs and continue t ooo spiral xownwards surely companies and super rich have to pay more as after ww1 and 2;
@@markjones4704 Oh I am not saying the super rich shouldn't be paying taxes. I was just guessing what will happen. I agree with you that unless we make a decent living we can't buy and traditionally that would mean they make less profit. However our wages have not increased in 40 year and they are still making record profits. I think that their pivot to China means we, as consumers, are not very important to them. Once, we had value to the super rich as customers and sources of profit but I think they are just sucking the last remaining wealth out of the country now because China is where the customers with money are now. Having said all that I believe a very very strict upper earning limit is a good thing.
yup they have new consumer middle class now and maybe crossed the dubicon but they have been used to saving for bad times and health bills will they save and not spend if.china has a continued slump same as japan did in 90s till now i read they were giving shoppng voucherz and eating vouchers to stimulate same as japan dix with cash but they kept in bank vouchers are bstter as have expiry date we we zee it will be inyerezing to zee how we all get out of this gloabal finanacial /medical mess
@@markjones4704 A year or two ago China's slump as we were told it was meant that instead of 12% growth they were down to 6%. It has been decades since we had 6% growth and that is their "slump" so I wouldn't be so sure that anything other than some unimaginable catastrophe in China will have us replace them as the consumer of choice for American transnational corporations. It will be interesting but the super rich will not suffer. We will.
It is ESSENTIAL, to start speaking about the detailed analysis of the worker coop, operation, from the resource to finished product. What challenges a worker coop will have, how about the democratic choices inside, how it will function in society? For example, when a democratic decision is made it is slow, not always the right one or effective. People might start grouping up to force a majority supported outcome, which is not in the interest of everyone! How would you comment on this?! We got that this is your solution to a Capitalist hierarchical undemocratic structure - democratic transformation of the work place, but democracy is not perfect and even ancient philosophers have criticised it. PLEASE START SPEAKING ABOUT THESE THINGS. The conversation has to go beyond your solution and give a detailed analysis from your perspective of an economist. DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THE WORKER COOP! With examples, please! I will post this comment under all of your videos from now on in the hopes that you Mr Wolff will notice and will address this matter, it is very interesting for a vast amount of people who are your followers and watch you regularly! Otherwise it becomes repetitive if you constantly say what the solution is without delving deeper into the worker coop! Thank you!
The only reason why the commune system fails is because the means of production were placed on the human labour force.. we will try again when innovation such as artificial intelligence, repetitive machines, and robotic technologies can achieve its maximum advancement. Then this time, we will place the means of production on our innovation 💡 and try again..yup.
It’s called “State Capitalism” The Chinese state is engaged in economic & military completion with the west, primarily the USA. In order to remain viable the political bureaucracy exploit their working population thus extracting surplus value which is then used to enrich themselves and funnelled into National” completion with the west.
Aren't like india the Chinese understood as a weak and poor nation it cannot afford to sit on the fence and play a neutral party, so for 11 years the Chinese took side with the Soviets to import the Soviets industrial capabilities and knowhow allowing China to become a nuclear power, and as the Soviet weaken they quickly pursue an opening towards the western block nations to allow their new industrial capabilities to produce for the world markets
Good exposition on the 2 key points between socialist economies of Soviet/Russia and China. However, I think there are several factors to complement this video clip. Firstly, the Chinese experimented first hand with agricultural communes in the 1950s till early 1960s and it ended in dismay. While communism may be a political reality, it is not workable in the field of behavioural economics as the productivity is very low. There is no appropriate reward commensurating with individual effort in an economic system where only collective effort is recognized. IOW, a lazy guy is rewarded the same as an hard working guy; so, where is the incentive to put in more effort? Secondly, Wolff ignored the contributions of the large oversea Chinese communities in their monetary repatriations initially and direct investments subsequently from 1990 onwards when China started to open up. The Russians do not have the oversea diaspora as the Chinese in the last 2 centuries. Many of these oversea Chinese led by the Hong Kongers, Taiwanese and SE Asians fostered joint-ventures in their respective ancestral home towns and led the way in exports. Thirdly, besides outsourcing to China as a production base for exports back to America and EU, China itself is also a huge market for consumer goods. Deng XP personally solicited the Japanese in the late 1970s to establish factories in China to produce 3 key consumer goods to meet domestic demand - refrigerator, TV and washing machines. Again, China with its much larger population than Russia, has a huge domestic market that foreign investors are also interested in besides exports. Fourthly, of course the Russians are also interested in exports and in the last 3 decades of globalization, they compete in areas they comparative advantage, i.e. natural resources and agricultural produce. They definitely cannot compete with the Chinese in terms of cheap labour cost and logistics advantage.
This is kinda sad, that prof Wolf doesn't understand WHY China had open market and was embraced by the West in 60s. It only happened BECAUSE USSR was considered such a threat, China went "on its own way" because Nixon bought them off, because USA was afraid of China + USSR alliance, so they worked extra hard to break it off, and they succeeded, later Chinese economic growth had nothing to do with socialism it was pure capitalist way, they became Factory of the World thanks to USA, again, and after getting too much money & power they decided to overthrow the reigning king, USA. Not because they are bad, but because they realised either they will replace USA, or at least become independent of it or they die.
If you work in a private enterprise, there is a risk of dismissal, like America. State owned enterprises will not fire employees unless you make a big mistake, but the overall salary is lower than that of private enterprises, which is suitable for people with low desire. However, state-owned enterprises have more subsidies in housing，health and pension.
@@ShwetankT Ordinary families can afford high-speed rail, but they don't use it often. Only when I go to college and back home every semester I would choose high speed rail. It takes me 400RMB at a time.In other cases, I will take longtime bus or ordinary train. The average wage of the workers is 5000-10000 a month. Generally speaking, the financial statements of China Railway Corporation are in deficit every year. Because it is a state-owned enterprise, it has financial subsidies
@@БорисАлександр-п4к Thanks. 1) Does all the railways is state owned or is it privatized in parts? 2) And just to get an idea about the speed of ordinary trains, how much time does it take for an ordinary train to travel 500 km.
I think Deng Xiaoping had the best of intentions with his philosophy, but Im still very apprehensive when it comes to China's approach. Ofcourse I hope I'm wrong and will be ecstatic if China successfully achieves communism, but I can't help but feel like the amazing growth we see now will have to be paid for with future obstacles to the development of communism.
I tend to agree with Rosa Luxembourg in that socialist society cannot be reformed to be more capitalist and still be considered socialist. They'll need another revolution or to crank up those billionaire executions.
@@amihart9269 No, you reduced what I said to the point of irrelevance. I said I agree with a specific point made by a historical figure and socialist leader. You are taking from that an entire mentality only tangentially connected to anything I said. But sure, top troll, good job dummy and good luck in your adult reading classes.
@@JulesBrunoJjBaggy I didn't "reduce" what you said, I just rephrased what you said. If you say "the color of the sky is blue" and I rephrase it as the "the sky is blue" that contains the same amount of information, not a reduction. In fact, you saying that all you said was "I agree with a specific point made by a historical figure" is in fact a reduction since it removes information about the leader and the specific point I was responding to. You are the one trying to reduce what you said because you can't defend it so you want to pretend you didn't say what you said.
The "World Won't trade with Socialist Countries" argument is so ridiculous. If your economic system is so bad that it can not survive without trading with the economic system that you are opposing and rebelling against (even when you have a larger population) then something is wrong with it. The Soviet Block countries had a combined population of 265 million in 1980 - almost exactly the same size as the USA at that time. The Chinese state, which is composed not only of Han Chinese, but also subjugated areas such and peoples such as the Mongolian, Tibetan, Uyghur, and Zhuang had a significantly larger population than that of Western Europe. China population is equivalent to 18.47% of the global population while Western Europe's population is only 2.52% of the total world population. The secret is that the Socialists had MORE PEOPLE than the "Capitalist" west. "The world" did not refuse to trade with Socialist Countries. The greater population was in the Socialist countries. So "the world" did not trade with the minority that we call "Capitalist" countries.
Shut up you’re an idiot, US and Europe controlled Latin America and Africa via neocolonialism and imperialism. Africa and Latin America’s labor power was going to the US and Europe, exploiting these regions made them richer and decadent than the USSR and China; who truly did pull themselves up by the bootstraps.
That's what Hong Kong and Macau now . High region autonomy internal administration and district representative election by local . But defense and diplomacy under ONE country constitutions.
That's what Hong Kong and Macau now . High region autonomy internal administration and district representative election by local . But defense and diplomacy under ONE country constitutions.
@@blirdy1365 Sorry, I'm being sarcastic obviously. It's like a form of federalism, as KM mentioned above ^. It was implemented as an incorporation strategy for the ex colonies, which had very different political structures and legal schemes than the rest - Hong Kong, Macau. The idea was to leave them much as they were to see what could be learned, rather than immediately impose the Chinese system. That's about all there is to it.
Thanks for clarifying Richard. Yes true allowing others to prosper but keep firm control & then ripple effect, others in turn will prosper. Now the world is their oyster. How many want to go on the Magic Carpet Ride of their lifetimes to bring the mysteries of the Silk Road adventures ALIVE? Aladin & the magic lamp of 3 wishes! ✌💙
Professor Wolff made no mistake in any part of this talk, but as far as I can tell he basically described a general political-economic history of the PRC in comparison to the USSR. But I think the term "socialism" needs to be defined and there is a question of whether or not the PRC is actually socialist, or some variant of socialism. Some compare the political structure of post-Mao China as a gradual return to (or hybridization of) traditional imperial style rule, but with a major change with more modernist organizational structure that reaches throughout all levels of society via through a one-party/dictatorship political structure. Yet, is the economic structure of China actually socialist? I think that's what needs to be discussed, i feel like this talk was a useful preface to explaining whether or not the PRC is actually socialist from a political-economist standpoint.
The following are *NOT* mutually exclusive: 1. Rejection of U.$. imperialist propaganda. 2. Understanding the unique past and present circumstances in China. 3. Legitimate doubts that modern China is actually socialist, or moving towards socialism.
Thanks for this 2 point explanation prof.Wolf .Do you expect the Chi.Kommunist party in the long run to work for finishing the "comando" economy or will this development come from the buttom op? (a new relvolution) I no its a bit silly question.I hope that the superrice In China will be stoped poisen the system (theres a big corruption problem and we havent heard about it for some time) I"m from Denmark and its very rearly we hear about coruption only there are some serous Taxfrought.(at the moment 150 billons danish kr not paid mostly thanks to the liberal party that hate taxes ,but the left wing parties fortunately won the election half a year ago.
As a Chinese, I have to say, you really have a thorough understanding of our system, thank you for sharing!
Isn't TH-cam banned in China?
Nothing that a VPN not let you do
@@Ateshtesh are you from China as well?
@@lukakomarov1014 TH-cam is banned in China(I personally support it) , but individuals can use VPN to cross
the firewall. What is truly illegal in China is creat and spread illegal VPN.
I have been a comunist for nearly 50 years only understood it well since I have been listening to professor Wolf
Sir. I know, it's an other subject, but I have a few questions and I hope that you will have time and wish to answer them.
1) I have often heard from people (especially the older generation) that communists are naive people who believe in utopia. If a man of left-wing views is young, he is not taken seriously because they think that he "doesn't know life". I personally know quite a few of those who, being a pioneer or Komsomol in their youth, became disillusioned with their views. How did you manage to maintain your beliefs?
2) You are a person with a lot of experience and remember the events of which I had only to read. How did you feel when the eastern block fell? Do you think it is possible for it to return?
3)Unfortunately I know very little about China. From different people, I have heard often diametrically opposed points of view. On the one hand, I am glad that there is such a strong country in the world that at least calls itself a socialist. But I have concerns about the nationalism and frankly imperialist ambitions I've heard of. What do you think of China? Will China be able to support and ignite the fire of the world revolution?
@@lukakomarov1014 what revolution?
Are you high?
China is ultranationalist now, their policies reflect it.
HAN SUPREMACY - cleansing of minorities and forcing them to mix with han chinese. This what is happening in Xinjiang.
MILITARISM AND AGGRESSIVE RETHORIC - china threatens India, Vietnam, Japan, Austtalia, etc
It has LITERALLY no friends except for Russia ( which will regret it soon as China sees Siberia as its "lebensraum" ).
They aggtessively use debt trap policies in Africa and the balkans literally FUCKING other countries and their people.
There is absolutely NOTHING that classifies this as "communist". Nothing.
@@cr4yv3n None of this is true, you've never been to China in your life and are just spreading white supremacist propaganda.
Greetings from Eastern Europe!
I feel sorry for you and most people here would laugh if you made this statement after having endured 45 years of communism ;)
i am Chinese, the phrase of "socialism with Chinese characteristics“ has been everywhere since i was born, but i didnt really understand it till watching this video. Thank you Proffer ❤️
Isn't TH-cam banned there
Wolff确实是一个很好的马克思主义学者，不过其实国内也有很多严谨的左派学者，你可以关注一下，也有一些学者关注到非常具体的领域，比如农业、医疗、教育问题等等。
@@saketupadhyay4117 ... Anyone in China can access Google, Facebook, etc through VPN.
Yes, because we grew up in such a system and don't get to compare it with other systems exist in the world.
It sounds like you have an amazing society. I live in the US in California... want to switch? LOL!
This is the first time I watch a video explaining SWCC without dismissing them or imbuing it with red scare bs.
Great job as always! 👍
yey 🙂
But that is dismissing the whole point and flaws of this type of governance system, not to mention the current arrangement doesn't represent much of socialism let alone communism.
I was hoping Prof. Wolff would go into those interesting nuance critiques instead of talking about the obvious factors that contributed to the rise of China.
there's a great video by BayArea415 on it, highly recommend it
Red Scare BS? Lmao Chinese Communist history killed Ten of millions of their own people, and people shouldnt be scared?
@@Vinh616 the British killed a lot more tbh
I think the way that the Chinese government works would be a very good subject. I thought of it as a capilist/dictatorship. But looking into it, it is much more complicated than that. Explaining the way it works would enlighten a lot of people and maybe change the the view of how people look at it. Of course the corruption is the biggest problem. But before we cast any stones, we should look at our own back yard.
Watch friend of Richard Wolff, Caleb Maupin's youtube channel for more info and an interesting perspective on Chinese Socialism. He is the best person I've ever seen on youtube talk about it.
Honestly with as large as China is it is remarkably impressively uncorrupted. Is there corruption in China? Yeah absolutely of course, but the fact is they actually take the problem seriously. Corruption has been a public topic of conversation in China and people have literally been executed recently because of it. Not only do you not get executed in the United States, best case a corrupt government official here gets a slap on the wrist and a fine, worst case, they become president.
@@anaxa4883 thanks
James Blankenship , it’s fascism in reality
@@mhandley0711 No in reality it isn't. Calling anything you don't like fascism is tired and childish.
I originally thought the phrase was absurd, but now I've changed my mind. The material conditions of every country are different, so the socialism that develops in each country will also be different.
This is the crux of the matter indeed.
Chinese culture is rooted in the philosophy of Yin and Yang. If going too far toward one direction, Yang will change into Yin. The thing will naturally move toward the other extreme.Therefore, if one wishes to keep a socialist government, one must accept aspects of capitalism.(and vice versa)
@@yixie6830 中庸之道哈哈 何必向他们解释
他们不会理解的
@@donovandai9326 为什么不会理解？你是觉得外国人都是半蛮吗
@@yixie6830 hahaha what fucking nonsense. You guys are doing extreme mental gymnastics to justify becoming America #2 and fucking poor people.
"Yin and Yang" hahaha!
Thank you Jordan for asking and Dr. Wolff for answering.
Brilliant - One other key factor was the Chinese decision to send 1000s of students overseas to learn different ways, and bring them home. They had learnt the costly mistakes of their emperors of the past who had insulated China - they regarded foreigners as largely barbarians. Then the industrial revolution happened, and China missed out.
Then they learnt to STEAL from everyone else because they couldn't make shit by themselves.
@V M uhh no, japanese did things BETTER. And they actually research shit not STEAL what others research.
@@cr4yv3n Uhhh... No. There are actually a lot of breakthroughs in engineering and science done by native Chinese engineers and scientists, but of course you'll never hear about this because of MSM bias. Quantum satellites and quantum radars come to mind as being the most well known, but there are many others such as first to launch a probe to land on the far side of the moon. 6G telecommunications as well as artificial intelligence in China is also known to be far ahead in progress compared to U.S. with recent examples being A.I. and cloud computing being used to predict and track COVID-19 infection patterns, contact trace possible cases of the infected and help in the design and testing of vaccines. China also hold the record and has the number 1 and number 2 ranking in fastest supercomputers in the world and has consistently held this position for years.
@@technatezin can u stop with the MSM bs?!
The world does revolve around your shithole of a country, America!
No I am based on EU facts that there are theft attempts every DAY of technology. All originate from China or Russia.
No the key factor is not the amount of overseas Chinese students. The key factor is the most of student decides to go back China after tasting the “good” “freedom” and “democracy” of western. That’s why China is powerful --the people stay united
Thank You Professor. I look forward to your classes all the time.
Great video Prof. Wolff. Keep em coming.
Western world view us as Communism, while communism supporters view us as Revisionism. To me, the *nism is irrelavant, what actually matters is whether the government cares for its people, their life and satisfication. For that standard, the Chinese government is doing a good job in the past decades.
I'm seriously curious, what about Tienanmen massacre, how do you feel about that?
@@FruitlessPicnicjust do some research on your own. even using wildly available western source you will quickly find out it's simply a lie. But no one cares and every western media keep repeating the same lies until people like you fall victims to this brainwashing
@@lordives7181
th-cam.com/video/aUT3QDYka10/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/3iz4L_YWLeM/w-d-xo.html&t
Ism? Lmao China is run by Communist ideals... and ya want to dismiss the FACTS? Chinese Communists killed ten of millions of their own Chinese people to push Communist ideals... were those people happy? Bunch of idiotz...Western want to view us as Communist? Lmao China goveenmemt is Communist, model after Russia and China teach Karl Marx Communist manifesto to College students... there is nothing Chinese about Communist, and ya call yourself Chinese? You might look Chinese, but your mind and soul is not Chinese
@@Vinh616 So what's a real chinese to you?
As a Chinese, I couldn't agree more with Professor Wolff. The feature is the government takes the dominance of political power and essential industries, like public utilities, infrastructures, educational institutes, hospitals, etc., on behalf of the people. Why we let private sectors even foreign ones coexist? Because we are fully aware that some people are more capable than others and these more capable people can promote the development of our society. We are not afraid they would go too far toward capitalism because all essential industries and political power are still under the control of our government as said. BTW, I will not agree to the argument that our system is national capitalism which just doesn't make any sense. It is just a confusing expression some western politicians tried to play our system down. If our government is the only capitalist that dominates everything, I can live with that. Because I know it is doing on behalf of the Chinese people.
How much is your net worth?
@@cr4yv3n similar to 80%-90% of ordinary Chinese. And?
@@dweilyu compare your net worth to the RATS in CCP then repeat me they work "on behalf of the people", dumbass. 🤣😂
@@cr4yv3n when words such dumbass came from your mouth, I knew what you are exactly. I fell sorry for you. it is your own fault being a loser. however, you ll still have the chance if you look at this world more positively.
The best economics Professor ever!
Thank you, as always, for your work Professor
Very informative as usual from Prof Wolff, but I honestly expected some "evil-Chinese" remarks since it's the media consensus right now, I suppose you would have not advocated for socialism through red scare without having principles and giant balls, respect.
The evil has moved to usa 😷
China. Is not. Socialist. 🙄
@@cr4yv3n get out fool
@@MaheshKumar-vw6uo hahaha smell that butthurt.
Reality sucks doesn't it, american 😂🤣
@D yeah, i do.
DO YOU !?
Beautifully put once again! Thank you Dr. Wolff 👍🏼
That is how China has funded their "belt and road initiative", and in the meantime the U.S. infrastructure is crumbling.
The BRI is funded with deals made with the nations it crosses. US infrastructure still far exceeds China, for instance the water/air pollution there is serious.
More "enslave and control initiative".
Thanks professor Wolff, your video is enlightening as always.
But something has always been in my mind, I'm a Chinese and has been affected by the Chinese censorship heavily, how can I tell China's state capitalism will go too far and result in the unfair free market, let's say, wall street has built? it's good to note China‘s wealth gap is not too far away from most of the capitalist countries right now, and seems little interest to go the direction of socialism from state capitalism. Like, we don't even have Medicare for all single-payer healthcare system.
Dude I have one doubt is education health care free in china
@@MaheshKumar-vw6uoThis is the case in most cases，The vast majority of universities are funded by the government，so It only costs about 6000 yuan a year（800us dollar/year）.In the vast majority of cases, health insurance can cover everyone。
Cristal clear explanation. Extraordinary understanding
of this topic by Professor Wolff.
Thank you. If you would had been my Economics Proffesor,
I would be a great Economist.
I recently spoke to somebody who was born in China and she told me when she was in elementary school there were three pictures kept in a position of prominence - Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaopeng, and Ronald Reagan. I was kind of confused by Reagan until I recalled that most of the outsourcing of American manufacturing occurred under his watch.
What a great answer!
Long live SWCC!
Great explanation, Porf. I’d like to add some pieces. I actually thought a lot on how the two pieces - Marxism theory, sth. from German and totally foreign, and China, the middle kingdom with five thousand continuous civilization - fit so well.
The answer is quite much about the traditional Chinese culture, which stresses a lot about the sympathy and compassion on ordinary/poor people’s lives. It set the unarguable tone that it’s the duty of emperor and high-ranking scholars (no so called “noble” class in China since the introduction of national exam in Sui Dynasty around 600 A.D.) to act like parents and care for people under govern. If the duty is not performed well and some children as a group got too much and turned indifferent and arrogant towards others while other children starve to death, the parent/dynasty will be overturned and the next round of capable men will be there to performance their duty again.
So no matter from the history books written 2000 years ago in Han Dynasty, or the poems created 1400 years ago in Tang Dynasty, or literature finished in Ming or Qing Dynasty around some hundred years ago, I can find the deep sympathy there. When I was in primary /middle/ high school, one challenge was to remember and recite some ancient masterpieces to prepare for the exam. Sure, it’s hard, but later on, I found the beauty in them and felt even proud and glad that I did the job. And no doubt that I would encourage my children to keep doing it. During this process, I know it’s right to care for others. And since no matter we are from a rich or poor family, we almost got the same training in China, I guess we shared the same value that no families should be left behind on this land. That’s what the gov. has been working on - to lift over 550 mm people out of poverty. I’m not a Party member, but I fully support their endeavor.
When the Marxism was first introduced in China, I can imagine how excited people like Chairman Mao could be. He was very famous for reading tons of history books and could think issues very strategically. Showing sympathy is not enough; the Poor should unit and act. With the guidance of Marxism, CCP won the war over foreign invaders and KMT in civil war. During the following two decades, the haste to become a socialism country turned into nationwide pilot programs which proved to be mistakes, even disasters.
But they learnt the lessons well, and since 1978, under Deng’s leadership, China has been focused on only one thing - developing the economy to make it comparable to other developed countries. Deng is very practical and he fully understand that currently China is still at the early stage of socialism, and the productivity need further develop. He set the tone and we are actually still following his vision, even after China became the world’s second largest economy a decade ago.
I feel that people around me in China are becoming more confident about the political system they’re living in. If I draw a line and set pure socialism at 0 and pure capitalism at 100, I think China is at around 40, which could strike a good balance between efficiency and fairness. If I need to put U.S. on the same line, it could be at 80, which means a large amount of ordinary people are left behind, and in turn that will hinder its long-term sustainability.
China, as a republic, is still young and could still make mistakes, just as the capitalism did in the first few decades after its birth, but I think it could provide some alternatives for the world to see that what the priority should be in different stage of development.
China isn’t a republic though, it is ruled by a authoritarian one party system, Taiwan is an actual liberal democracy
@@MrHobosFTWCome on, who give you the misconception that a republic must be a multi-party ruled country? Taiwan is not comparable, if you have any common sense. It has never been and will never be a country. Man, have some basic training on history first and then we may have some meaningful conversation. Thanks.
China has much more farmers than Russia, So China CCP musr win by the farmer's support,While Russia win by the City worker, so it is natural that China and Russia go to different way.
This is completely incorrect. The peasantry lead the revolutions in both Russia and China. Both Lenin+Stalin in the USSR and Mao in the PRC called for a transition period into capitalist development in order to transform the peasantry into a proletariat and to develop the productive forces, paving the way to the ultimate goal of communism.
@@tequestaorangejuice6673 My (admittedly novice) impression from various history commentators has been that revolutions are basically never led by the peasantry, but rather by affluent intellectuals who are good at mobilizing the peasantry.
People critize without willing to learn, and if you try to learn they'll insult you
The Chinese word 特别 is hard to translate into English. "Characteristics" has connotations in English that 特别 does not have in Chinese. Western communists with their theological philosophical roots, tended to split into many factions based on the "true" meaning of Marx. Even the word "Marxist" revels this theological orientation. China's Confucian roots, with an emphasis on consensus were incompatible with this Western way. This new Chinese path was already evident in 1937 with Mao's speech, "On Practice." Here he made the point that ideas should be evaluated not by their adherence to ideology, but by how well they work in practice.
Socialism with Chinese characteristics is better understood as a socialist path appropriate to the particular and unique Chinese culture and history.
Excellent comment
@D "Common sense" in the US, is a word with anti-intellectual connotations. It is used to ridicule intellectuals. "The Earth is flat, It's just common sense." I'm not sure the Chinese word 平凡 means the same thing. The expression "Socialism with Chinese characteristics.," to a Western ear, sounds like a theological dodge: Jesus with Chinese characteristics. We believe there is only one Jesus, only one socialism. We are not political creators, we are political consumers.
well said 解释的很好👍
I love to sit and listen for hours and hours to your debate ،shame they are short
Yeah he uses to have the superb monthly several hours long lectures.
Then he switched to some obscure site that kept feeding people piece meal clips of 5 minutes as if we're fucking brain dead.
May I further add that the underlying philosophy and objectives of this form of socialist capitalism is that it is by far much more "for the people", their present and future welfare, security, social and economic equality and sustainability, with far less externalisation of the "costs of prosperity", although this last part of the evolution is only more apparent as the "hierarchy of needs" of its people are being elevated through their "people's prosperity programs".
Well the hierarchy of needs of the billionaires and autocrats are being met well, I'll give you that.
So far the "needs of the people" turned out into so very fat and rich CCP connected rats.
We call it nepotism here. In China they call it "good for the people". 🤣
@@cr4yv3n It won’t take long now for you to see if your perceptions, rather than observations turn out to be true or false. Happy believing in the meantime, if you could manage the gnawing cognitive dissonance.
@@EddieTsui i won't hold my breath.
But i will come back here to laugh at you zombies when it doesn't happen.
@@cr4yv3n Good luck and enjoy your alternative reality.
very good survey, prof. wolff- always more that could be said, but this was the core, and clear.
I wonder why professor Wolff never mention Yugoslavian self governing socialism. Chinese communists learned a lot from Yugoslavia. In the 80's Yugoslavia was exporting goods to east and west Europe, USSR and USA too.
Fun fact: 40 years ago Chinese delegation arrived in Skopje to learn how to make buses. Now Skopje public transportation have Chinese busses!
Chinese government actually adopted “Three Principles of the People” developed by Sun Yat-sen.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Principles_of_the_People
Sun's "the father of the nation, the pioneer(Teacher) of the revolution" is grander than Mao's "the Comrade Chairman" title despite having no real power in history. Three gorge dam, state owned subsidized Chinese railway, Chinese dream etc were written goals of nationalists proposed around 1919. In Chinese culture, visionary philosophers are ranked higher in long run even if they were unsuccessful in their lifetime. For a grand undertaking, it is an honour even to fail.
The defination of the original "three" is very blur. The concept is empty and usless.
Thank you for your work Prof. Wolff.
Great insight and analysis! Love your videos!
Great respect for all your hard work. 👍 Your arguements are evidence based and coherent.
Thank you for the excellent explanation..
Thank you mr. Wolff for sublime explenation, as allways
Throughout China's history of about 5,000 years of civilization, many outside cultures were introduced into China because of interaction especially trade. Some were absorbed modified and adapted to suit the Chinese culture and philosophy passed down over the generations. Therefore, socialism with Chinese characteristic is of no exception
Good explanation! I understand now! Thanks!
Beginning China already have trade with any countries with Chinese community. All of these countries were depending for China to supply all the essential goods for the overseas Chinese. In fact,most of China raise was assisted by the overseas Chinese. No other country can have this type of synergy between the mother land and the Chinese overseas.
Fantastic summary!
I wonder if Abrahamic tradition was a factor in making Eastern European approach to socialism more dogmatic compared to the Chinese approach.
That's an interesting question.
Wow, while other 'China experts' still call China a comunist country. Great explanation, professor!
You must never read. Real China experts understand very well China is fundamentally fascist in the Italian sense while respecting Chinese Confucian social order; focused on the farmers and workers, employing expert bureaucrats to ensure the state has a completely heavy hand on so called capitalist economic exchange, with a strong central police presence to enforce what is referred to as law & order.
Fascism was born in Italy, and there it had no racist component. The Germans applied their sense of national superiority to it and sense of having been betrayed by capitalists to blame Jews for their plight after WW1. The original tenets of fascism read like social democracy, and in fact many Italian Jews were fascist before the war.
@@johnsmith1474 ok boomer
@@johnsmith1474 Stfu uneducated chauvinist. Go read some theory instead of bullshitting on the internet
@@tankseverywhere1492 roll to the trash heap, tankie
thanks a lott sir. You helped me a a lot with this content
What an excellent response
If I wanted to start a business in China, a Chinese citizen would have to be at least 50% owner of said business. Many married couples start small businesses or co-workers will do this. Cooperatives are big here too. 😉
very loud and clear on this particular subject, excellent pro
Richard, you left out the fact Chiang Kai Shek was the man who connected opium tar being distributed in China by US mail ships with the notorious Triad drug distribution network. That was a major factor behind the US backing Chiang Kai Shek in the Chinese Revolution.,..but in so doing the US pushed Mao into Russia's embrace. I know a retired Physics Professor at Beijing University University who went through the commune experience, she thought it was a good thing to separate the youth from the US opium colony victims. China is heavily invested in transportation and housing. China could be a productive partner if we weren't so damn exceptional. [The source about Chiang Kai Shek info is Sterling Seagraves book THE SOONG DYNASTY which has more accurate information about China than anything I've ever seen in the West. I've also lived in China. ]
All derived from and/or justified by a deterministic view that first you must that capitalism, then socialism, then communism, which is not what Marx said really, it wasn't a manual or necessary program as it defies all logic in more ways than one. It still amazes me that so many people can call themselves "scientific socialists", "historical materialists", etc, and hold such a ridiculous position. Just like it seems absurd that much of what existed in the USSR and at least a post-70's, Dengist Reformed China could be called "socialism" in anything but the loosest possible meaning of the term like "state ownership of most of the economy". Or that some can be so dogmatically and ideological about the idea of a "vanguard" given the mountains of evidence against it and for worker self-management. It's all revisionist and none of it has put us any closer to bringing down capitalism or capitalist hegemony and imperialism. It's just taken on so many of the characteristics of capitalism and the worst of liberal states that it's become nearly the same and if anything it's normalized capitalist relations. It seems a disgusting perversion of everything socialism has stood for by becoming what it stood against in so many ways. But it's called "liberating" countries and "mutually beneficial trade deals" (phrases capitalists love as well as they suck the bones of the "Third World") instead of imperialism. It's "socialism" when billionaires are in your party or the bulk of the billionaires after it's collapse came from the top of the party, when the state owns all the land and leases it to the wealthy in 100 yr increments (intergenerational wealth kept in one family, not distributed to all via direct leasing from the state) so it can be subleased to regular people, when the surveillance systems lead the world in invasions of privacy, a single party has absolute control over a people, etc. With the semi-religious thinking required to buy half of it and the endless apologetics and whataboutisms to defend it, it's no wonder so many people buy into the Red Scare misinformation. Some of us are over here advocating for socialism and democracy to create a society of free equals while others are trying to bring people into their cult-like worldview that resembles half the dystopian media post-1917. It's depressing. I've been a socialist my entire life and it's never been about any of that or Bernie SocDem Welfare Capitalism, it's been about freedom, autonomy, equality, solidarity, peace, justice, security, dignity, ecological living, mutual aid, etc, and while obviously previous attempts have made strides on some of those things, teaching people to read, setting up clinics, daily bread, all that goes a long way. But so far all have failed and many never seemed to even get close to trying and more resembled a cross between the states they overthrew and liberal states than anything like socialism. It's way past time to stop looking backwards for all the answers and start building something new.
thank you Dr. Wolff!
Roland Boer ❤Understanding China's economic system: Socialism with Chinese characteristics
In 1980 India had basically the same GDP and PRC. This year the PRC GDP is five times the size of India. Deng Xiao ping was a genius
Yeah for 10% of people anyway
@D at the expense of others, imbecile.
That is the PROBLEM with all these "heroes".
It’s a great explanations Thank youj
This is an illuminating description of China's strategic divergence from other types of socialist development, but it doesn't help me to see what if anything is particularly Chinese about it. Are there specific continuities linking contemporary China's path of economic development to its prerevolutionary history and culture?
This gives us a sneak at just how little we know about political terms and their relationship to our world today ! As they are constantly changing their meaning depending the other social and economic variables that exist in their society ! Confused ? I am ! It ok ! Just goes to show you the difficulty in determining their pros and cons . It's the conversation that is worth havi g and the willingness to communicate these factors to our way of doing business and what it means to us in real time . Having the discussions are the difference in success and failure .
Calling China anything but capitalist is such a horrible take. Being blinded by rapid Chinese economic expansion is hardly an excuse.
Actually I think America is also Capitalist with American Characteristic, it is no problem to use both market economy and planned economy in one country. During the epidemic period, printing money and bills to save the market, fighting trade wars and increasing tariffs are not free markets but planned economic activities controlled by the government. So it is not appropriate to say planned economy is socialism or market economy is capitalism.
What I define about what is socialism or capitalism is depend on the relationship between capital and government. If capital control the government, that is capitalism， like America. If government control the capital, that is socialism, like China.
right on the former (lasseiz faire capitalism) but wrong on the latter. The latter is still capitalism; in China's case you have autharitarian capitalism. Also, in both cases, capital is what controls ultimately. Government controls capital in both countries but "capital as a priority" is what controls government policy in both too; it's a matter of degree i.e. which govts are inclined to respond to which first, the responsibilites of governance or accumulation of capital. Socialism is an entirely different concept seperate from the realities of both USA and China in their current state
@@siggydj I don't think the capital control the CCP. Corruption sill exist, but the richest 100 Chinese can't control the CCP, and the richest 20 Americans can control the White House. For example, in the recent outbreak, China took the lead in shutting down the country for two months to fight against the epidemic, regardless of economic losses.
@@БорисАлександр-п4к Some of the richest people in the country are CCP members if you would care to research them out. And the claim that CCP isn't controlled by big money is demonstrably false; for a start the wildlife trade lobby, one of the biggest lobbying groups in China, is the reason why the wildlife trade wasn't banned back in 2004 after the SARS outbreak when the party was trying to do so. It is just now been banned in the country NOW on paper but practical imposition of that law is lackluster at best to virtually non-existant at worst, as wet markets have opened up and a lot of the wildlife trade has moved online and is thriving there more than before. Capital does control the party; they are just smarter than current US politicians in realizing the economic damage of not taking measures to prevent the spread of a pandemic in the country and have been arguably better at managing the epidemic to the USA government under trump now. China is the world's producer; it cannot risk an epidemic going on forever to shut all economic and production activity for indefinite periods of time and have, as governments should, chose to suffer comparitively smaller losses in the beginning and get rid of the problem early on and count their blessings. Most of USA is on lockdown too now, cause the economic cracks are getting wider as the virus spreads and is something that cannot be simply ignored as it was in the beginning, and it wouldn't have been in lockdown now if it was simply a matter of corporations controlling the govt completely. It's a combination of incompetence of the current populist Trump govt there now, which has to appeal to its supporter i.e. the people, and the fact that capital rules, not that different from China but as I said before, a matter of degree. You really think the ruling elite anywhere care about the working class masses without any monetary strings attached when operating under a capitalist system that allow for such exploitation?
@@siggydj I definitely would not think the ruling elite care about the working class masses without any condition. Some corrupt ccp members are still exist and most Chinese know that. But it would be absurd to say they are as rich as Jack Ma.
When Xi was in power, there were several well-known anti-corruption cases, targeting such big people as the director of the General Administration of Railways and members of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee. The amount of embezzled funds reached several hundred million, but it was far from the level of ten billion. Moreover, the information of Chinese enterprises is open. It's impossible to say that a senior official secretly owns a company and people don't know it.
What you're talking about is corruption, which has always existed.But judging from the achievements of these decades, it is still good on the whole.
@@БорисАлександр-п4к Hence why i say it's the same as the USA as I have been saying. What you describe, aka corruption, is the same that is attributed to US politicians, unless you operate under the misunderstanding that the US political system fundamentally operates on corruption as a fundamental mechanism that is officially instated, which it doesn't. No country claims that to operate in the political process in it you have to go through corruption; it just is a symptom of how power influences the political process and how it is structured to allow the covert or in some cases overt possibilities of it. It's easy to say its corruption when the judiciary operates subordinate to the party as in China, which is then used to catch corrupt officials but also political dissidents and opponents in the mix; this happens in China, in Philippines with Duetere, Russia when it was USSR under Stalin's rule and resulted in the purges etc etc. Even Xi has links to organized crime and massive corruption in the country but no one can point fingers there cause of how the country's political and judicial systems are structured fundamentally. This happens in the USA too, but the only thing they have managed to do is seperate the institutions from the subordinate ordinate relationship i.e. judiciary is fundamentally independent from the political parties etc; not saying that that has eliminated all influences of power, it hasn't. But the systematic nature has changed that allows both to function for what they are while trying to reduce each other's influence of each other. It's not a matter of he is corrupt of she is corrupt or change this policy or have this policy etc; the change has to be fundamental, which hasn't happened and given China's current direction towards authoratarian capitalism and how it's being reinforced and being made more efficient without room for opposition and change, will probably not happen if this trajectory continues will continue to mirror the USA as it already does in a lot of things during its economic rise in the last few decades. Also, no one in congress is as rich as Jeff Bezos either; dunno what your comparison of CCP members wealth to Jack Ma is about. And Jack Ma was a member of the CCP until stepping down from the Alibaba group; not sure if he is still officially a CCP memebr now but still has ties and affiliation to it. Look at his latest talks on youtube
I struggle to understand how 'Socialism with Chinese characteristics' is still Socialist while they retain Capitalist relations of production?, is the fact that private property exists not anathema to Socialist principles?.
That's also what I thought.
yes sir,very analytical \ok socialism like china (from Nepal)
Following what I wrote below, I am not a communist as history shows us, niether a fundamentalist capitalist. I favor honest people searching for the best for their people, and I am a convincing person that capitalism needs to be regulated to suppress once and ever forever the behavior of minorities to the most. But certainly, the gangsters now in power in Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba do not have my least respect nor those who in name of the poor robber the whole money of their own citizens.
Best Regards,
Fernando.
A very clear explanation.
I think I like this "socialism with chinese characteristics". Best of the both world.
Greeting Prof Wolff..! My deepest respect: Questions, "Is there any documents, signed by all countries of this planet, at the UN that mention that all countries have to be DEMOCRATS.....? And if there was any, don't you think that document or documents will clash with the very (Essential part of HUMAN RIGHTS) where say; The Color of my skin, My Race, My Reliuos choice, My Political choice, ect and ect ", How come that the US, UK, and EU and almost all countries followers of the US are committed to harassing other countries when their citizens go to a presidential election and choice their own way of Political decisions. All Countries have RIGHTS TO CHOICE THEIR OWN POLITICAL GREEDS..! Either COMMUNISM, SOCIALISM, MARKISM, DEMOCRACY, SOCIAL-DEMOCRATS, Ect. Is this a World Order that CRMINALIZES OUR OWN HUMAN RIGHTS..? How can the world FIX THIS..?
There is a reason the Chinese empire last thousand of years. The rest of the empires come and go. My respect for the Chinese. America empire crumbling because of greed, corporate legally corruption government. Fake Human right ( NSA backdoor, warmongers, Petro dollar, Vietnam gulf of tolkin incident, Iraq WMD, Edward Snowden...++.)
I'm a chinese person, and I have to tell Mr Wolff, we're complete hypocrites. We're openly confucian, even socialists, but privately greedy and selfish, many of us have a gambling problem, some of us are very shrewd and ruthless in business, and nearly all aspire to be wealthy, and have little qualms about how they go about it. He criticises the US a lot, and I don't argue with him, but if he paid more attention to China, he have a lot of criticism there as well.
there's a lot of chinese and they come in every size and taste. strong work ethic, family and county connections, possibly overseas cousins, naturally plenty of wheelers and dealers. amazing how china has been immersed in socialist ideology for three generations, with little change in national character.
So basically every traders on Wall Street?
@@ZxZ239 bad people are bad regardless of their ethnicity
Holy shit, an honest chinese 😮
Buddy you are a rare sight 😁
@@cr4yv3n It's a backwards country, most of them still believe in ghosts and lucky numbers, they're even superstitious as well. Quite vain and childish even, I grew up like that as well, didn't understand at the time, but now, I see most of them for what they really are, even the one's in my own family.
May be the eventual initiary:
1) capitalism
2) socialism
3) communism
With China:
Chinese characteristics
Funny how they don't seem to want to move from #1.
Call me when THE WORKERS get to decide things in a factory. Not the CCP rats.
Clear and succint, chapeau!
Yes the USSR and China both built systems that resonated with their cultures. In the USSR you could be jailed for your thoughts (see the excellent 10 part movie here "In The First Circle" by A. Solzhenitsyn). A saying about Russia historically is, "The Russian people yearn for the lash" and thus one can learn to understand how Russians would move from the tyranny of the Czar to the tyranny of the Soviet Central Committee (see: Simon Sebag Montefiore - 2016 - The Romanovs 1613-1918).
China was able to conduct massive purges of people who were not cooperative with the authorities, as it has no history of a focus on individual liberty/rights. The centuries old Confucian tradition is focused on social harmony not the individual. And in either case of USSR or China, the start level for the masses was so low that any path to improvement was acceptable to people.
The USA has also built systems that resonate with it's culture, with both good and bad results. In the USA the Founders started with the ethical guidelines of the Scottish Enlightenment, that first spoke to limiting the power of Kings whose power supposedly came from a god and demanding that power comes from the consent of the governed. Thus our rights protect property, and thus they limit by nature the scope of government. The government cannot tell you to sing the national anthem in the USA. We created enumerated rights on paper, enforced by law, then society follows from what happens naturally within those rights. We do not set social goals based on one groups philosophy or religion, then adjust rules as necessary to those ends, we set rights. This is our culture. So in the US because property is a right, we have capitalism, more or less regulated at various times in our history, but always regulated legally. In either the USSR or China the idea that your property cannot be violated does not naturally flow from the cultural history.
In the case of any system, human nature remains the same under the social structure. People want liberty of action, they want things by which to live, they want to be free to speak and think and act. The will seek these things corruptly or by honest means, depending upon what opportunity is available.
Government system, be it capitalism or socialism, so long as it can provide its people with jobs, good education, security, housing ,medical care...etc is a good system.
No.
Those are all worthless without liberty. The only question worth asking is whether there is greater liberty if you are not allowed to have a business.
very.well.explained . To.summarise SWCC, it is a combination of Socialism, Meritocracy and.Capitalism
Marxism as such remain what it is if we don't forget Engels from where such thoughts begins and why it is so to survive and civilize
China's approach to the project of transitioning from capitalism, to socialism to communism has theoretical basis in many of Marx's writings. This becomes evident with a careful reading of Capital volumes 1 to 4. Then again, I'd like to emphasize that there's nothing "automatic' about this evolutionary process, think the question "Is it teleological?," is it inevitable that communism is the endpoint, so to speak. The human element, imho, is still the key factor. We gotta make the cake and eat it, too, imho.
Hahaha! And with billionaires they are going to transition...any day now.
Once asked the billionaires will just...give up their wealth for the people 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
This is why rich fucks in China are moving their money out of the country like there's no tomorrow.
In Vietnam they buy ALL apartments.
@@cr4yv3n Transition is a long-term process not something that happens overnight. You can keep moralizing about China not developing socialism fast enough but you can't build an economy out of morals any more than you can build a smartphone out of morals.
@@amihart9269 that doesn't mean we should support Mao #2.
If the CCP can't do it then FUCK OFF and let people choose another.
@@cr4yv3n Mao was so great they had to come out with Mao 2.
@@amihart9269 rofl ya. Maybe this one will get creative with famine too 🤣
What about the income inequality in China, did their socialistic characteristic allowed them to arrest the increased income inequality?
China is able to do long term planning, something impossible in the West. For 40 years the goal was industrialization, modernization. While doing this, China lifted 700 million people out of extreme poverty. New goals were established in 2017 but got no mention in the Western press. Uneven development, income inequality, is the top priority in the new era.
@D When you throw around numbers like that it would be useful if you provided some factual support. I mean, 300 million out of 1.4 trillion is 21%, not 70%
Income inequality has risen in China. It is true. The poor do not rise as fast as the rich, also true, just as everywhere else in the world. This inequality was made the primary focus of the CPC at its 19th Party Congress.
In so called rich society, the most income inequality are 1/ Hong Kong, 2/ USA.
Of course Hong Kong is part of China
so proff are countries going to raise taxes generally to fund deficits after the great covid bond issue and wealth taxes on super rich multi millionares and billionares ?
I'm no economist but I'd be willing to bet the answer is yes and no. Yes they will raise taxes but no it won't be on the super rich.
@@dinnerwithfranklin2451 well if us at the bottom of the pile end up paying it all a severe recession will turn intoo a severe depression as it will kill our disposable income and our ability to be consumers will the rich have ever again profitable viable busnesses apart from farmers and food processers and sellers and then le ss jobs and continue t ooo spiral xownwards surely companies and super rich have to pay more as after ww1 and 2;
@@markjones4704 Oh I am not saying the super rich shouldn't be paying taxes. I was just guessing what will happen. I agree with you that unless we make a decent living we can't buy and traditionally that would mean they make less profit.
However our wages have not increased in 40 year and they are still making record profits. I think that their pivot to China means we, as consumers, are not very important to them. Once, we had value to the super rich as customers and sources of profit but I think they are just sucking the last remaining wealth out of the country now because China is where the customers with money are now.
Having said all that I believe a very very strict upper earning limit is a good thing.
yup they have new consumer middle class now and maybe crossed the dubicon but they have been used to saving for bad times and health bills will they save and not spend if.china has a continued slump same as japan did in 90s till now i read they were giving shoppng voucherz and eating vouchers to stimulate same as japan dix with cash but they kept in bank vouchers are bstter as have expiry date we we zee it will be inyerezing to zee how we all get out of this gloabal finanacial /medical mess
@@markjones4704 A year or two ago China's slump as we were told it was meant that instead of 12% growth they were down to 6%. It has been decades since we had 6% growth and that is their "slump" so I wouldn't be so sure that anything other than some unimaginable catastrophe in China will have us replace them as the consumer of choice for American transnational corporations. It will be interesting but the super rich will not suffer. We will.
It is ESSENTIAL, to start speaking about the detailed analysis of the worker coop, operation, from the resource to finished product. What challenges a worker coop will have, how about the democratic choices inside, how it will function in society? For example, when a democratic decision is made it is slow, not always the right one or effective. People might start grouping up to force a majority supported outcome, which is not in the interest of everyone! How would you comment on this?! We got that this is your solution to a Capitalist hierarchical undemocratic structure - democratic transformation of the work place, but democracy is not perfect and even ancient philosophers have criticised it. PLEASE START SPEAKING ABOUT THESE THINGS. The conversation has to go beyond your solution and give a detailed analysis from your perspective of an economist. DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THE WORKER COOP! With examples, please! I will post this comment under all of your videos from now on in the hopes that you Mr Wolff will notice and will address this matter, it is very interesting for a vast amount of people who are your followers and watch you regularly! Otherwise it becomes repetitive if you constantly say what the solution is without delving deeper into the worker coop! Thank you!
The only reason why the commune system fails is because the means of production were placed on the human labour force.. we will try again when innovation such as artificial intelligence, repetitive machines, and robotic technologies can achieve its maximum advancement. Then this time, we will place the means of production on our innovation 💡 and try again..yup.
China embarked on a policy analogous with NEP in 1920's Russia.
It’s called “State Capitalism”
The Chinese state is engaged in economic & military completion with the west, primarily the USA.
In order to remain viable the political bureaucracy exploit their working population thus extracting surplus value which is then used to enrich themselves and funnelled into National” completion with the west.
No, it's called socialism. State capitalism only existed in China in the 1950s.
Aren't like india the Chinese understood as a weak and poor nation it cannot afford to sit on the fence and play a neutral party, so for 11 years the Chinese took side with the Soviets to import the Soviets industrial capabilities and knowhow allowing China to become a nuclear power, and as the Soviet weaken they quickly pursue an opening towards the western block nations to allow their new industrial capabilities to produce for the world markets
Good exposition on the 2 key points between socialist economies of Soviet/Russia and China. However, I think there are several factors to complement this video clip.
Firstly, the Chinese experimented first hand with agricultural communes in the 1950s till early 1960s and it ended in dismay. While communism may be a political reality, it is not workable in the field of behavioural economics as the productivity is very low. There is no appropriate reward commensurating with individual effort in an economic system where only collective effort is recognized. IOW, a lazy guy is rewarded the same as an hard working guy; so, where is the incentive to put in more effort?
Secondly, Wolff ignored the contributions of the large oversea Chinese communities in their monetary repatriations initially and direct investments subsequently from 1990 onwards when China started to open up. The Russians do not have the oversea diaspora as the Chinese in the last 2 centuries. Many of these oversea Chinese led by the Hong Kongers, Taiwanese and SE Asians fostered joint-ventures in their respective ancestral home towns and led the way in exports.
Thirdly, besides outsourcing to China as a production base for exports back to America and EU, China itself is also a huge market for consumer goods. Deng XP personally solicited the Japanese in the late 1970s to establish factories in China to produce 3 key consumer goods to meet domestic demand - refrigerator, TV and washing machines. Again, China with its much larger population than Russia, has a huge domestic market that foreign investors are also interested in besides exports.
Fourthly, of course the Russians are also interested in exports and in the last 3 decades of globalization, they compete in areas they comparative advantage, i.e. natural resources and agricultural produce. They definitely cannot compete with the Chinese in terms of cheap labour cost and logistics advantage.
Well explained Richard. China's society is based on Han social values. A big difference between the West and the east.
Any non-han minority is also "dealt" with, xin jiang style.
This is kinda sad, that prof Wolf doesn't understand WHY China had open market and was embraced by the West in 60s.
It only happened BECAUSE USSR was considered such a threat, China went "on its own way" because Nixon bought them off, because USA was afraid of China + USSR alliance, so they worked extra hard to break it off, and they succeeded, later Chinese economic growth had nothing to do with socialism it was pure capitalist way, they became Factory of the World thanks to USA, again, and after getting too much money & power they decided to overthrow the reigning king, USA. Not because they are bad, but because they realised either they will replace USA, or at least become independent of it or they die.
Well said
How are the factory workers treated in China?
If you work in a private enterprise, there is a risk of dismissal, like America.
State owned enterprises will not fire employees unless you make a big mistake, but the overall salary is lower than that of private enterprises, which is suitable for people with low desire. However, state-owned enterprises have more subsidies in housing，health and pension.
@@БорисАлександр-п4к thank you
What about the high speed rail? Can most people afford it or only the rich?
@@ShwetankT Ordinary families can afford high-speed rail, but they don't use it often. Only when I go to college and back home every semester I would choose high speed rail. It takes me 400RMB at a time.In other cases, I will take longtime bus or ordinary train. The average wage of the workers is 5000-10000 a month.
Generally speaking, the financial statements of China Railway Corporation are in deficit every year. Because it is a state-owned enterprise, it has financial subsidies
@@БорисАлександр-п4к Thanks. 1) Does all the railways is state owned or is it privatized in parts? 2) And just to get an idea about the speed of ordinary trains, how much time does it take for an ordinary train to travel 500 km.
I think Deng Xiaoping had the best of intentions with his philosophy, but Im still very apprehensive when it comes to China's approach. Ofcourse I hope I'm wrong and will be ecstatic if China successfully achieves communism, but I can't help but feel like the amazing growth we see now will have to be paid for with future obstacles to the development of communism.
I tend to agree with Rosa Luxembourg in that socialist society cannot be reformed to be more capitalist and still be considered socialist. They'll need another revolution or to crank up those billionaire executions.
Rosa denied that internal contradictions can exist during socialist construction?
@@amihart9269 Stop pretending you can't read, that is not what I said, reductionist.
@@JulesBrunoJjBaggy That is literally what you said lol, you're just having an emotional reaction because the cognitive dissonance is setting in.
@@amihart9269 No, you reduced what I said to the point of irrelevance. I said I agree with a specific point made by a historical figure and socialist leader. You are taking from that an entire mentality only tangentially connected to anything I said. But sure, top troll, good job dummy and good luck in your adult reading classes.
@@JulesBrunoJjBaggy I didn't "reduce" what you said, I just rephrased what you said. If you say "the color of the sky is blue" and I rephrase it as the "the sky is blue" that contains the same amount of information, not a reduction. In fact, you saying that all you said was "I agree with a specific point made by a historical figure" is in fact a reduction since it removes information about the leader and the specific point I was responding to. You are the one trying to reduce what you said because you can't defend it so you want to pretend you didn't say what you said.
So is china socialist or not?
National Socialist.
@@Camcolito no, just socialist
I find it somewhat strange that Russia remains largely a pariah in the global community.
The "World Won't trade with Socialist Countries" argument is so ridiculous. If your economic system is so bad that it can not survive without trading with the economic system that you are opposing and rebelling against (even when you have a larger population) then something is wrong with it. The Soviet Block countries had a combined population of 265 million in 1980 - almost exactly the same size as the USA at that time. The Chinese state, which is composed not only of Han Chinese, but also subjugated areas such and peoples such as the Mongolian, Tibetan, Uyghur, and Zhuang had a significantly larger population than that of Western Europe. China population is equivalent to 18.47% of the global population while Western Europe's population is only 2.52% of the total world population. The secret is that the Socialists had MORE PEOPLE than the "Capitalist" west. "The world" did not refuse to trade with Socialist Countries. The greater population was in the Socialist countries. So "the world" did not trade with the minority that we call "Capitalist" countries.
I also think the dichotomy narrative of "Socialist Countries" vs "Capitalist Countries" is not a very useful way to look at the world.
Shut up you’re an idiot, US and Europe controlled Latin America and Africa via neocolonialism and imperialism. Africa and Latin America’s labor power was going to the US and Europe, exploiting these regions made them richer and decadent than the USSR and China; who truly did pull themselves up by the bootstraps.
Can you speak on a concept the Chinses use called "One Country Two Systems"?
That's what Hong Kong and Macau now . High region autonomy internal administration and district representative election by local . But defense and diplomacy under ONE country constitutions.
That's what Hong Kong and Macau now . High region autonomy internal administration and district representative election by local . But defense and diplomacy under ONE country constitutions.
That means some places are pretended to have more rights, but if anyone moves to assert it it quickly becomes 'One Country, One System' again.
@@Camcolito That's sweet. Thanks.
@@blirdy1365 Sorry, I'm being sarcastic obviously. It's like a form of federalism, as KM mentioned above ^. It was implemented as an incorporation strategy for the ex colonies, which had very different political structures and legal schemes than the rest - Hong Kong, Macau. The idea was to leave them much as they were to see what could be learned, rather than immediately impose the Chinese system. That's about all there is to it.
Thanks for clarifying Richard. Yes true allowing others to prosper but keep firm control & then ripple effect, others in turn will prosper. Now the world is their oyster. How many want to go on the Magic Carpet Ride of their lifetimes to bring the mysteries of the Silk Road adventures ALIVE? Aladin & the magic lamp of 3 wishes! ✌💙
It was Mao who practice communism, that didn't work. It was Deng xioaping who con the phrase communism with Chinese characteristic. Get it right.
SALUTE 💪🏿💯👍🏾❤️
"Socialism With Chinese Characteristics" is a euphemism for revisionism !!!
It's just Orwellian government-speak that indicates anything they think is right is 'socialism'.
"revisionism" lmao. that's really a meme at this point.
That is just so spot on Edwin
Red salute
China is not 'red', stupid 🙄
@D your empty head is red
Professor Wolff made no mistake in any part of this talk, but as far as I can tell he basically described a general political-economic history of the PRC in comparison to the USSR. But I think the term "socialism" needs to be defined and there is a question of whether or not the PRC is actually socialist, or some variant of socialism. Some compare the political structure of post-Mao China as a gradual return to (or hybridization of) traditional imperial style rule, but with a major change with more modernist organizational structure that reaches throughout all levels of society via through a one-party/dictatorship political structure. Yet, is the economic structure of China actually socialist? I think that's what needs to be discussed, i feel like this talk was a useful preface to explaining whether or not the PRC is actually socialist from a political-economist standpoint.
The following are *NOT* mutually exclusive:
1. Rejection of U.$. imperialist propaganda.
2. Understanding the unique past and present circumstances in China.
3. Legitimate doubts that modern China is actually socialist, or moving towards socialism.
Thank you.
Most of these cretins seem to have trouble with 1 and 3.
Thanks for this 2 point explanation prof.Wolf .Do you expect the Chi.Kommunist party in the long run to work for finishing the "comando" economy or will this development come from
the buttom op? (a new relvolution) I no its a bit silly question.I hope that the superrice In China will be stoped poisen the system (theres a big corruption problem and we havent heard about it for some time)
I"m from Denmark and its very rearly we hear about coruption only there are some serous Taxfrought.(at the moment 150 billons danish kr not paid mostly thanks to the liberal party that hate taxes ,but the left wing parties fortunately won the election half a year ago.
A commune has both characteristic primitive or Marxist
Socialism is a recipe not a mountain
If Dr. Wolff stands for President will you vote for him?
Nope.
An approach to Marxism with an Insistence on Statism is a doomed project.
Yes
Watch friend of Richard Wolff, Caleb Maupin's youtube channel for more info and an interesting perspective on Chinese Socialism.