this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2026
134 points (77.7% liked)
Memes
56989 readers
891 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments

China is led by a Communist party that aims to progress in the path of Socialism.
Compared to the West, not pro-Capitalist enough for Wikipedia then?
Socialism is not "no private sector," it's a transitional society between capitalism and communism marked by worker control of the state, and public ownership as the principal aspect of the economy. All apply to China. Regarding prolewiki saying that China isn't socialist, that is outright incorrect. You also lied about the CPC saying that socialism is not the backbone of their economy and their goal for further development, you linked a source stating that the private sector presently plays a large but subordinate part of the economy, which is in line with their analysis that they are in the primary stage of socialism:
Then you compare ratios of private to public, which doesn't actually say anything about which sector holds power. The important factor is controlling the commanding heights and critical sectors, and employing marketization in underdeveloped sectors to facilitate growth. Capital is treated in China like a farmer treats wheat, rather than like an uncontrollable force of nature like it is in the US, because China is socialist.
https://www.qiaocollective.com/education/socialism-with-chinese-characteristics
The Chinese government actually does agree with what KimBongUn420 said, you just lied about what the CPC actually said. Here's the article in full:
All this says is that China will continue to rely on the private sector in underdeveloped industries as a means to facilitate continued economic growth, as subordinate to the overall socialist economy. Not a single sentence in there says "China is not socialist" or "communism is not the goal of the CPC" or "China will become socialist in the future, but it isn't today." Those are naked lies on your part because you inserted your own, incorrect, definition of socialism, that being an economy devoid of private property in any capacity.
Actually I provided the work from comrade @dessalines@lemmy.ml's GitHub repo because I was in a hurry 😅
Haha, fair!
Why are you ignoring the wealth of information presented to you? Nowhere in the xinhua news articles you provided does it say that China is capitalist.
Me when the person I disagree with sources their claims: "uhhh gish gallop, strawman, et tu Brutus ad absurdiam, adhummer, slippery slope fallacy"
Is that the reason for Wikipedia's bias against their media?
Europe tags along with USAmerican regime's capitalist-imperialist actions and so their media is given an exemption?
Even if they are currently capitalist, they do not see it as the end stage, like the pro-capitalist regimes do?
So, let's not lie to ourselves, to deny the obvious preference that the Wikipedia page shows for the media from the pro-capitalist regimes.
To be clear, ThirdConsul is lying. China is socialist, and both the CPC and prolewiki agree about that. ThirdConsul is pretending socialism means the absence entirely of private property.
That is actually the aim of Communism, not Socialism, right? For that, there would be a transitionary phase, phase of socialism as an in-between stage, right?
I am not too well-versed on various lines of theory, but from observation, I think some non-Leninist Marxists do not subscribe to a multi phase development plan.
Socialism is a stage in historical development, one Marx referred to as "lower-stage communism." Communism too is a stage in historical development. It isn't necessarily that socialism lacks the aim to collectivize all production and distribution, it's that socialism is that very gradual process of developing into a highly industrial society in all respects at which point this becomes feasible. Communism is the distinct mode of production and distribution where socialism has played its transitional role to completion.
As for the idea that we can skip socialism and go straight to communism, some fringe western Marxists believe this, but this is largely an anarchist conception as it runs counter to Marx.