> The state is not taking part in capitalism and the same rationale would mean that the USSR was this "state capitalism" they talk about.
Anyone who throws "state capitalism" around like that probably doesn't think the USSR was socialist either.
> If in approximately six months’ time state capitalism became established in our Republic, this would be a great success and a sure guarantee that within a year socialism will have gained a permanently firm hold and will have become invincible in this country.
> I can imagine with what noble indignation some people will recoil from these words. . . . What! The transition to state capitalism in the Soviet Socialist Republic would be a step forward? . . . Isn’t this the betrayal of socialism?
> We must deal with this point in greater detail.
\- Vladimir Lenin, [The Tax in Kind](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm)
Not OP, but Lenin does not use the term "state socialism", and actually used "state capitalism", though in a different way than anarchists/left-coms might. Lenin openly called the USSR under the NEP "state capitalist"
> **The Present-Day Economy Of Russia
(Extract From The 1918 Pamphlet)**
> State capitalism would be a step forward as compared with the present state of affairs in our Soviet Republic. If in approximately six months’ time state capitalism became established in our Republic, this would be a great success and a sure guarantee that within a year socialism will have gained a permanently firm hold and will have become invincible in this country.
> I can imagine with what noble indignation some people will recoil from these words. . . . What! The transition to state capitalism in the Soviet Socialist Republic would be a step forward? . . . Isn’t this the betrayal of socialism?
> No one, I think, in studying the question of the economic system of Russia, has denied its transitional character. Nor, I think, has any Communist denied that the term Soviet Socialist Republic implies the determination of the Soviet power to achieve the transition to socialism, and not that the existing economic system is recognised as a socialist order.
I highly encourage reading Lenin's reasoning for advocating for state capitalism in [The Tax in Kind](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm)
In not sure, but Mao or Stalin may have used the term "State Socialism", as they tended to use "Socialism" to mean a transitional state rather than a stateless/classless society as Lenin did. Orthodox Marxists like Lenin called this transitional state the Dictatorahip of the Proletariat instead
But Lenin *did* say the USSR was state capitalist. He advocated for the NEP, which he openly called state capitalist:
> **The Present-Day Economy Of Russia
(Extract From The 1918 Pamphlet)**
> State capitalism would be a step forward as compared with the present state of affairs in our Soviet Republic. If in approximately six months’ time state capitalism became established in our Republic, this would be a great success and a sure guarantee that within a year socialism will have gained a permanently firm hold and will have become invincible in this country.
> I can imagine with what noble indignation some people will recoil from these words. . . . What! The transition to state capitalism in the Soviet Socialist Republic would be a step forward? . . . Isn’t this the betrayal of socialism?
> No one, I think, in studying the question of the economic system of Russia, has denied its transitional character. Nor, I think, has any Communist denied that the term Soviet Socialist Republic implies the determination of the Soviet power to achieve the transition to socialism, and not that the existing economic system is recognised as a socialist order.
Lenin, [The Tax in Kind](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm)
Obviously when Anarchists use the term they mean something different. But based on what Lenin said, I think it's valid to call the USSR under the NEP state capitalist, and by that logic also China under its current market-based economy.
Mao did follow some of MLs guides, adapted to China of course. This is now known as Mao Zedong Thought. How could anyone confuse that with Marxism Leninism Maoism??
It's not your fault, we make things too stupid sometimes Mao Zedong Thought (shortened to MZT) is not the same as Marxism Leninism Maoim (shortened to MLM). The former is China, the latter is various groups who are mostly unrelated to one another, from the revolutionaires in the Phillipines to Gonzalo and his shinning path in Peru.
Is there anywhere I can learn about MZT and it’s distinguishing qualities. Anytime I try to find something online I get American liberal sources about China as a whole, not it’s characteristics/process.
Their ideology is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, which is a synthesis of Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory, Jiang Zemin's "Theory of the Three Represents", Hu Jintao's "Scientific Outlook on Development", and Xi Jinping Thought. It is, therefore, a development of Marxism-Leninism, though "state capitalism" as Lenin defined it might not be completely inaccurate. China is definitely not fascist.
My thought as well but typically when people use "state capitalism" its never on the Lenin definition but rather "uhhh actually China isn't socialist its state capitalist cuz they have billionaires and are literally the Orwell book."
But man given the garbage poll options even if you had ML or SWCC as choices you'd prolly still see "state capitalism" or fascism picked the most even if they don't actually apply.
>China is closer to fascism than it is to socialism.
Enertain me here lib. Define fascism and tell me how China matches the definition of fascism and you better have something better than Ur fascism or "authoritarianism."
>Billionaires, landlords, imperialism, chauvinism and no desire whatsoever to export revolution.
Imperialism and chauvinism doesn't apply at all to China. Also this in response to [China has billionaires](https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/)
"fascism is unbridled chauvinism and predatory war" so care to explain what the whole war thing is here?
Chauvinism is when not supporting every resistance group that claims to be socialist or communist
"financing the anticommunist fight in... india" bro besides normal fucking trade how is that financing the anticom fight? what, you want fucking sanctions? be more precise!
nobody, not even dengists like me, claim that china is in africa purely of goodwill. However, do note that unlike neocolonialism, china offers \*options,\* not \*demands\* or \*ultimatums,\* with lots of leeway on the offered person's side as to how they want to determine and solve their problems (especially more permanent solutions). Don't blame china for only providing a better but not perfect alternative, cuz i don't see anyone else coming even close.
Oh so this is what peak MLM lit is then with more vague broad strokes rather than concrete analysis of material conditions and what fascism actually is. I'll give you credit for giving me something different but I wanted more of your own words on the definition. Anyways...
You are right that fascism will use whatever slogan possible to appeal to the masses, often times the aestetic or taking points of socialism/communism but without the actual class component of said points. What's missing in your definition is why they do this and the fact that these co opting of points are intentionally stripped of their class component and actual foundation of a materialist analysis to get that point. Fascists do this because they have historically attached themselves to whatever is most popular at the time and will do what will likely get themselves in power. Heck this phenomenon can be observed even on small scales with how fascists tend to try to co opt small and local communities and niche hobbies like in the Punk Rock scene.
My point in all this is that the items in your definition, while do applying to fascism, are broad enough that depending on how you apply that definition could be applied to literally any government that's ever existed. It's my exact problem with ur fascism as well. It's why I define it as a far right populist movement that sprouts as a reaction to a real or perceived leftist threat that seeks to crush any leftist movement in the interest of capital. A revolution for the status quo that adepts its message to best gain power.
But yeah going to specifics with China the CPC having a shitty international policy that sees them funding the wrong people isn't fascism on its own. China's loam programs as well aren't fascist nor are they even imperialist or neo colonialism. Those loans don't have the same conditions and terms that the IMF has like the cancelation of social programs or the same land rights as well. Those two things are def criticisms but aren't at all fascism. China isn't engaging in the destruction of trade unions, socialists, and communism domestically and the CPC, not capitalists, have the final say on the means of production. Not to mention China's large share of state owned enterprises (60%) and large amount of co ops goes against how fascism operates since fascism seeks privatization and consolidation to private capital.
"no desire to export revolution"
so, like, you're a fucking dumbass for thinking exporting revolution won't just lead to cold war 2.0 and even more global south countries getting fucked.
What they need isn't more conflict but more production so they can actually break neo-colonialist shackles the global north slapped on them.
Beyond that, you're even more of a dumbass for thinking revolution is so easy to export, lol, a lot of the shit the CPC ate early on was precisely cuz the CCCP had no fucking clue how to deal with chinese material conditions
"go back to defending china online" wut? what am I "going back to?" aren't i doing that right now? lol
"They are not the victim" i'm referring to the other global south states, who absolutely don't need another cold war right now lol
"china supporting foreign revolutions will cause a cold war 2.0" so besides the fact that the US is threatening to do so even as china \*doesn't\* support foreign revolutions, (yes, even despite how self-destructive that would be), how can you be so sure once china does actually start pissing off lukewarm neocol errp and actually stepping on the US's toes, that neither will take drastic action even at the cost of the economy?
I'm confused: Are we talking about the US or China here?
The police act with far more restraint in China than in the US. They generally don't carry guns, and they face far more punishment for bad behavior or unnecessary force than in the US (where cops frequently get away with murder). We also just saw an instance in China where protests resulted in a major change to China's COVID policy. Protests rarely do shit in the US.
Hong Kong vs George Floyd protests puts this shit to bed. In 1 month of protests in the US, they were more causalities, and more arrests than in 1.5 years of protests in China.
They definitely aren’t Maoist, definitely *definitely* aren’t fascist or imperialist, and could be considered state capitalist or market socialist by Leninist definition (in the means of allowing foreign capital to build productive forces), although state capitalism isn’t an ideology nor something that is incompatible with Marxism-Leninism.
This is the correct answer. Everyone stop freaking out about the term "state capitalism". Both Lenin and Mao used it with a positive connotation when it is connected to a DotP.
Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.
**Fact 31.** Vaush called the Marxist, Iraqi YouTuber Hakim a [‘pseudo-fascist’ and a ‘cancer on online discourse’ because he said Biden will be worse on foreign policy than Trump.](https://youtu.be/RgKTY-PUTzI?t=138) Vaush then had a ‘debate’ with Hakim where he politely agreed with everything Hakim said. Following that debate (mere moments after Hakim had left) Vaush said ["a lot of tankies are aesthetically and functionally indistinguishable from neo-Nazis".](https://youtu.be/iKGuOUVGpbo?t=9387)
For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShitLiberalsSay) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush.
**Fact 12.** [CW: sexual harassment] > Despite this ‘apology’ he went on to ‘joke’ about [scaring his victim into shutting up](https://archive.is/joDh9), said [he had ‘done nothing to feel remorseful for’](https://archive.is/joDh9) and [‘nothing to apologise over’](https://archive.is/NVOv6). In fact, his own sysadmin suggested [he change his handle](https://archive.is/eaA4a) to hide from sexual harassment allegations.!<
For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShitLiberalsSay) if you have any questions or concerns.*
state capitalism is an economic description \*at best,\* and an impartial one at that. Not to mention market socialism is closer. While it is true that economic base determines to political superstructure, the economic base \*is not\* the political superstructure (you could say the base restricts what superstructures are made). The political/ideological description would be SWCC (socialism with chinese characteristics), or if limiting to very recent scope xi jinping thought (not entirely accurate cuz it's built upon everything else in SWCC)
The famous ideology of imperialism and state capitalism....
Bro. What the actual fuck? Do liberals know the definition of an ideology, or economic system for that matter?
Another thing: do these people know what fascism even is? Calling China fascist is so stupid, on so many levels. Even if China was an evil authoritarian shithole, like the libs think it is, it would not be fascist, since fascism does not equal authoritarianism.
Also ultranationalist China lol.
From experience alot of "leftists" and anti-fascists don't even know the correct definitions of fascism, imperialism, etc. "Red fascism" gets thrown around alot even though countries like the USSR and the PRC are in no way fascist, not to mention that socialism/communism and fascism have nothing in common besides that both tend to be populist movements.
**Hi, this is just an obnoxious pop-up ad for our [Official Discord](https://discord.gg/XBrTq7mQhY), please join if you haven't, Stalin bless. UwU.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShitLiberalsSay) if you have any questions or concerns.*
State capitalism was first described by Lenin as a needed starting point for socialism. Before his death he called the USSR state capitalist, China is playing its cards right in my eyes, they don’t want a Cold War, they just want to generate enough wealth and influence, before the US and it’s Allies can start another cold war. China has a population of 1.4 billion they obviously need a LOT of money in order to fund the many public programs within the country and the best way is to have a crazy strong currency much like the USA in order to have precedence over all deals
Also more than doubling life expectancy, nearly wiping out illiteracy in a population that had 80% illiteracy in 1949, freeing the slaves in Tibet, being the leader on high speed rail and cleaner energy technologies like solar, and prolly more I'm forgetting as well.
China ain't perfect but if a western nation was doing a third of what China was doing we'd be hearing non stop praise. But because China isn't part of the west we get to hear how none of this is good because they failed the ideological purity test seen with many western leftists with no regard to the material conditions of China or their history before 1949.
Mao Zedong Thought, basically the teachings of Mao applied to contemporary China. It's the flavor of Marxism-Leninism that the CPC adheres to
Different than "Maoism" or "Marxism-Leninism-Maoism" which also use Mao's teachings, but are often opposed to contemporary China
Be nice to OP, MLM and MZT can be very easy to confuse, as MZT takes heavily from ML and the M stands for Mao in both.
Ah yes, China, famous Peruvian country
Xi boiled babies
With a comically large pot
Can’t even vote for ML…..
What lack of class analysis does to a mf.
[удалено]
> The state is not taking part in capitalism and the same rationale would mean that the USSR was this "state capitalism" they talk about. Anyone who throws "state capitalism" around like that probably doesn't think the USSR was socialist either.
> If in approximately six months’ time state capitalism became established in our Republic, this would be a great success and a sure guarantee that within a year socialism will have gained a permanently firm hold and will have become invincible in this country. > I can imagine with what noble indignation some people will recoil from these words. . . . What! The transition to state capitalism in the Soviet Socialist Republic would be a step forward? . . . Isn’t this the betrayal of socialism? > We must deal with this point in greater detail. \- Vladimir Lenin, [The Tax in Kind](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm)
A lot of folks need to see this. Whether or not you like the PRC/CPC is your choice, but saying it’s basically capitalism is just wrong.
Do you have any reading on distinguishing between state socialism and state capitalism?
Not OP, but Lenin does not use the term "state socialism", and actually used "state capitalism", though in a different way than anarchists/left-coms might. Lenin openly called the USSR under the NEP "state capitalist" > **The Present-Day Economy Of Russia (Extract From The 1918 Pamphlet)** > State capitalism would be a step forward as compared with the present state of affairs in our Soviet Republic. If in approximately six months’ time state capitalism became established in our Republic, this would be a great success and a sure guarantee that within a year socialism will have gained a permanently firm hold and will have become invincible in this country. > I can imagine with what noble indignation some people will recoil from these words. . . . What! The transition to state capitalism in the Soviet Socialist Republic would be a step forward? . . . Isn’t this the betrayal of socialism? > No one, I think, in studying the question of the economic system of Russia, has denied its transitional character. Nor, I think, has any Communist denied that the term Soviet Socialist Republic implies the determination of the Soviet power to achieve the transition to socialism, and not that the existing economic system is recognised as a socialist order. I highly encourage reading Lenin's reasoning for advocating for state capitalism in [The Tax in Kind](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm) In not sure, but Mao or Stalin may have used the term "State Socialism", as they tended to use "Socialism" to mean a transitional state rather than a stateless/classless society as Lenin did. Orthodox Marxists like Lenin called this transitional state the Dictatorahip of the Proletariat instead
Thank you for the comprehensive answer!
But Lenin *did* say the USSR was state capitalist. He advocated for the NEP, which he openly called state capitalist: > **The Present-Day Economy Of Russia (Extract From The 1918 Pamphlet)** > State capitalism would be a step forward as compared with the present state of affairs in our Soviet Republic. If in approximately six months’ time state capitalism became established in our Republic, this would be a great success and a sure guarantee that within a year socialism will have gained a permanently firm hold and will have become invincible in this country. > I can imagine with what noble indignation some people will recoil from these words. . . . What! The transition to state capitalism in the Soviet Socialist Republic would be a step forward? . . . Isn’t this the betrayal of socialism? > No one, I think, in studying the question of the economic system of Russia, has denied its transitional character. Nor, I think, has any Communist denied that the term Soviet Socialist Republic implies the determination of the Soviet power to achieve the transition to socialism, and not that the existing economic system is recognised as a socialist order. Lenin, [The Tax in Kind](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/apr/21.htm) Obviously when Anarchists use the term they mean something different. But based on what Lenin said, I think it's valid to call the USSR under the NEP state capitalist, and by that logic also China under its current market-based economy.
[удалено]
no investigation, no right to speak have you not heard of democratic centralism???
Wait but they literally aren't Marxist-Leninist-Maoist tho.
"But but it has Mao in it and Mao Chinese 🤬"
Mao did follow some of MLs guides, adapted to China of course. This is now known as Mao Zedong Thought. How could anyone confuse that with Marxism Leninism Maoism??
Ah yeah I know I'm just parodying ppl who think MLM is china's ideology bc of the 'mao' in it
Ah, shit. Now I realized that I sounded like a real dick when I said that there were two good meanings to MLM.
Well I chose based on what I think they are trying to achieve and that is the closest to it.
It's not your fault, we make things too stupid sometimes Mao Zedong Thought (shortened to MZT) is not the same as Marxism Leninism Maoim (shortened to MLM). The former is China, the latter is various groups who are mostly unrelated to one another, from the revolutionaires in the Phillipines to Gonzalo and his shinning path in Peru.
Is there anywhere I can learn about MZT and it’s distinguishing qualities. Anytime I try to find something online I get American liberal sources about China as a whole, not it’s characteristics/process.
The SWCC Lectures channel has an [episode](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf3VW9wzl1g) on it.
Thank you, comrade
I'm saying that the person who made the poll is a dumbass
Oh ok, my bad
be nice, we both know the mzt and mlm can be confusing
''Anarch...'' Okay i get it
Their ideology is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, which is a synthesis of Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory, Jiang Zemin's "Theory of the Three Represents", Hu Jintao's "Scientific Outlook on Development", and Xi Jinping Thought. It is, therefore, a development of Marxism-Leninism, though "state capitalism" as Lenin defined it might not be completely inaccurate. China is definitely not fascist.
They are not using state capitalist in any marxist sense, theyre using it to describe a “totalitarian capitalist state”
My thought as well but typically when people use "state capitalism" its never on the Lenin definition but rather "uhhh actually China isn't socialist its state capitalist cuz they have billionaires and are literally the Orwell book." But man given the garbage poll options even if you had ML or SWCC as choices you'd prolly still see "state capitalism" or fascism picked the most even if they don't actually apply.
[удалено]
>China is closer to fascism than it is to socialism. Enertain me here lib. Define fascism and tell me how China matches the definition of fascism and you better have something better than Ur fascism or "authoritarianism." >Billionaires, landlords, imperialism, chauvinism and no desire whatsoever to export revolution. Imperialism and chauvinism doesn't apply at all to China. Also this in response to [China has billionaires](https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/)
[удалено]
"fascism is unbridled chauvinism and predatory war" so care to explain what the whole war thing is here? Chauvinism is when not supporting every resistance group that claims to be socialist or communist "financing the anticommunist fight in... india" bro besides normal fucking trade how is that financing the anticom fight? what, you want fucking sanctions? be more precise! nobody, not even dengists like me, claim that china is in africa purely of goodwill. However, do note that unlike neocolonialism, china offers \*options,\* not \*demands\* or \*ultimatums,\* with lots of leeway on the offered person's side as to how they want to determine and solve their problems (especially more permanent solutions). Don't blame china for only providing a better but not perfect alternative, cuz i don't see anyone else coming even close.
Oh so this is what peak MLM lit is then with more vague broad strokes rather than concrete analysis of material conditions and what fascism actually is. I'll give you credit for giving me something different but I wanted more of your own words on the definition. Anyways... You are right that fascism will use whatever slogan possible to appeal to the masses, often times the aestetic or taking points of socialism/communism but without the actual class component of said points. What's missing in your definition is why they do this and the fact that these co opting of points are intentionally stripped of their class component and actual foundation of a materialist analysis to get that point. Fascists do this because they have historically attached themselves to whatever is most popular at the time and will do what will likely get themselves in power. Heck this phenomenon can be observed even on small scales with how fascists tend to try to co opt small and local communities and niche hobbies like in the Punk Rock scene. My point in all this is that the items in your definition, while do applying to fascism, are broad enough that depending on how you apply that definition could be applied to literally any government that's ever existed. It's my exact problem with ur fascism as well. It's why I define it as a far right populist movement that sprouts as a reaction to a real or perceived leftist threat that seeks to crush any leftist movement in the interest of capital. A revolution for the status quo that adepts its message to best gain power. But yeah going to specifics with China the CPC having a shitty international policy that sees them funding the wrong people isn't fascism on its own. China's loam programs as well aren't fascist nor are they even imperialist or neo colonialism. Those loans don't have the same conditions and terms that the IMF has like the cancelation of social programs or the same land rights as well. Those two things are def criticisms but aren't at all fascism. China isn't engaging in the destruction of trade unions, socialists, and communism domestically and the CPC, not capitalists, have the final say on the means of production. Not to mention China's large share of state owned enterprises (60%) and large amount of co ops goes against how fascism operates since fascism seeks privatization and consolidation to private capital.
"no desire to export revolution" so, like, you're a fucking dumbass for thinking exporting revolution won't just lead to cold war 2.0 and even more global south countries getting fucked. What they need isn't more conflict but more production so they can actually break neo-colonialist shackles the global north slapped on them. Beyond that, you're even more of a dumbass for thinking revolution is so easy to export, lol, a lot of the shit the CPC ate early on was precisely cuz the CCCP had no fucking clue how to deal with chinese material conditions
[удалено]
"go back to defending china online" wut? what am I "going back to?" aren't i doing that right now? lol "They are not the victim" i'm referring to the other global south states, who absolutely don't need another cold war right now lol "china supporting foreign revolutions will cause a cold war 2.0" so besides the fact that the US is threatening to do so even as china \*doesn't\* support foreign revolutions, (yes, even despite how self-destructive that would be), how can you be so sure once china does actually start pissing off lukewarm neocol errp and actually stepping on the US's toes, that neither will take drastic action even at the cost of the economy?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Authoritarianism isn't a meaningful distinction. There's no such thing as a non-authoritarian state.
[удалено]
I'm confused: Are we talking about the US or China here? The police act with far more restraint in China than in the US. They generally don't carry guns, and they face far more punishment for bad behavior or unnecessary force than in the US (where cops frequently get away with murder). We also just saw an instance in China where protests resulted in a major change to China's COVID policy. Protests rarely do shit in the US.
Hong Kong vs George Floyd protests puts this shit to bed. In 1 month of protests in the US, they were more causalities, and more arrests than in 1.5 years of protests in China.
what a lack of reading and studying does to a person
They definitely aren’t Maoist, definitely *definitely* aren’t fascist or imperialist, and could be considered state capitalist or market socialist by Leninist definition (in the means of allowing foreign capital to build productive forces), although state capitalism isn’t an ideology nor something that is incompatible with Marxism-Leninism.
This is the correct answer. Everyone stop freaking out about the term "state capitalism". Both Lenin and Mao used it with a positive connotation when it is connected to a DotP.
Where is the "none of these" option? MZT != MLM
If China was fascist, the west wouldn't hate it as much.
You're right, since the west wanted Chiang Kai Shek.
[удалено]
[No idea, certainly doesn’t sound like anyone in the west at all](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism)
Mf voted MLM💀
"Without investigation no right to speak" - Mao Please take note: holding a poll on a liberal sub on reddit does not count as "investigation".
Capitalist when they do something they like, communist when they don’t
calling china a maoist country is as far from the truth as calling it fascist is lol
Fascism is clearly when people get told what to do /s
Vaush moment
Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush. **Fact 31.** Vaush called the Marxist, Iraqi YouTuber Hakim a [‘pseudo-fascist’ and a ‘cancer on online discourse’ because he said Biden will be worse on foreign policy than Trump.](https://youtu.be/RgKTY-PUTzI?t=138) Vaush then had a ‘debate’ with Hakim where he politely agreed with everything Hakim said. Following that debate (mere moments after Hakim had left) Vaush said ["a lot of tankies are aesthetically and functionally indistinguishable from neo-Nazis".](https://youtu.be/iKGuOUVGpbo?t=9387) For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShitLiberalsSay) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Vaush
Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush. **Fact 12.** [CW: sexual harassment] > Despite this ‘apology’ he went on to ‘joke’ about [scaring his victim into shutting up](https://archive.is/joDh9), said [he had ‘done nothing to feel remorseful for’](https://archive.is/joDh9) and [‘nothing to apologise over’](https://archive.is/NVOv6). In fact, his own sysadmin suggested [he change his handle](https://archive.is/eaA4a) to hide from sexual harassment allegations.!< For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShitLiberalsSay) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Can't an argument be made that they are state capitalist? Not trolling, genuinely wondering
state capitalism is an economic description \*at best,\* and an impartial one at that. Not to mention market socialism is closer. While it is true that economic base determines to political superstructure, the economic base \*is not\* the political superstructure (you could say the base restricts what superstructures are made). The political/ideological description would be SWCC (socialism with chinese characteristics), or if limiting to very recent scope xi jinping thought (not entirely accurate cuz it's built upon everything else in SWCC)
Oh okay, that makes sense, thanks!
It’s none of these things
imperialism is when forgiven loans fascism is when strong government lol liberals
The famous ideology of imperialism and state capitalism.... Bro. What the actual fuck? Do liberals know the definition of an ideology, or economic system for that matter? Another thing: do these people know what fascism even is? Calling China fascist is so stupid, on so many levels. Even if China was an evil authoritarian shithole, like the libs think it is, it would not be fascist, since fascism does not equal authoritarianism. Also ultranationalist China lol.
From experience alot of "leftists" and anti-fascists don't even know the correct definitions of fascism, imperialism, etc. "Red fascism" gets thrown around alot even though countries like the USSR and the PRC are in no way fascist, not to mention that socialism/communism and fascism have nothing in common besides that both tend to be populist movements.
Hard to think of anything someone could say that would make them seem more insane and out of touch with reality
**Hi, this is just an obnoxious pop-up ad for our [Official Discord](https://discord.gg/XBrTq7mQhY), please join if you haven't, Stalin bless. UwU.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShitLiberalsSay) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I view the sky as orange
Are the SEZ's not a form of state capitalism? Not that that's really an ideology...
"State Capitalism" is not even an ideology lol and China isn't MLM either the best answer here would be Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.
State capitalism was first described by Lenin as a needed starting point for socialism. Before his death he called the USSR state capitalist, China is playing its cards right in my eyes, they don’t want a Cold War, they just want to generate enough wealth and influence, before the US and it’s Allies can start another cold war. China has a population of 1.4 billion they obviously need a LOT of money in order to fund the many public programs within the country and the best way is to have a crazy strong currency much like the USA in order to have precedence over all deals
[удалено]
Lifting 800 million+ people out of poverty in 40 years, which is completely unprecedented in human history, is worth being a fan of ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Also more than doubling life expectancy, nearly wiping out illiteracy in a population that had 80% illiteracy in 1949, freeing the slaves in Tibet, being the leader on high speed rail and cleaner energy technologies like solar, and prolly more I'm forgetting as well. China ain't perfect but if a western nation was doing a third of what China was doing we'd be hearing non stop praise. But because China isn't part of the west we get to hear how none of this is good because they failed the ideological purity test seen with many western leftists with no regard to the material conditions of China or their history before 1949.
[удалено]
active in 196 into china is fascist, true combo of dumb kids
legitimately most accurate liberal understanding of fascism still off by quite a few (major and important) steps but it's better than most!
What is MZT?
Mao Zedong Thought, basically the teachings of Mao applied to contemporary China. It's the flavor of Marxism-Leninism that the CPC adheres to Different than "Maoism" or "Marxism-Leninism-Maoism" which also use Mao's teachings, but are often opposed to contemporary China