• JahuteSkye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Oh, I have. What’s really fun is talking to Chinese expats who no longer fear government reprisal. I did a lot of interviews as part of a thesis on the concept of a social panopticon and panoptic influence.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Only speaking to expats and not actual citizens is like talking only to Cuban exiles about Cuba and not Cubans themselves.

      • JahuteSkye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Chinese citizens will only criticize their government when they’re 100% sure it’ll never get back to the government, and that trust is extremely difficult to achieve because they are absolutely terrified of their government’s ability to influence even their closest friends and family.

        If you honestly believe there’s no public dissent because everyone just loves their oligarchs so much… I don’t know what to say. That’s just fully stupid.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Citation needed, otherwise this is just chauvanism. You just pulled all of this right out of your ass. China doesn’t have oligarchs, they have administrators and government officials, and the CPC itself has over 100 million members.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 hour ago

              China is in the developing stages of socialism. Billionaires exist, but are gradually decreasing in number over time as the working class gradually increases in prosperity. China has not yet achieved communism, where distribution is based on need. Instead, distribution is mostly based on the market for now, according to labor primary.

              If you’re going to quote Marx, the least you could do is read him.

              • JahuteSkye@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                39 minutes ago

                China saw a 60% increase in billionaires between 2020 and 2021 alone. It fell since then but it’s still higher than it was pre-pandemic, and WAY higher than it was in the '70s before China went free market.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  35 minutes ago

                  China never went “free market.” They adopted some market reforms, but even prior to it still had private property and markets. They never once had a fully publicly owned and planned economy.

                  China was also dramatically poor and underdeveloped. I believe I already explained why, the Gang of Four thought it was better to be “pure” and poor than it was to adopt reforms while maintaining socialism in the interests of rapid development. China’s socialist system and strong public ownership while flexibly adopting market mechanisms in controlled manners is what has brought them such success, and is why they are on track to become the world’s most developed and advanced country in the near future.

                  Again, if you’re going to quote Marx, the least you could do is read him.

                  • JahuteSkye@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    25 minutes ago

                    I have read Wage, Labor and Capital in its entirety, as well as Value, Price, and Profit. Both are better than the manifesto, which I’ve also read. His critique of Gotha was also interesting. I think Engels was honestly much more interesting than Marx, though Eugen Dühring was more practical (as demonstrated by the success of SocDems and the Nordic model, while “Marxism” never went anywhere in a practical sense.