The title is not accurate. It's better to be called seven ideological threats. Number 6 and 7 are not "western values". Especially number 7 is targeted on far-left. What the CCP really wants is keeping the market economy while maintaining its authoritarian rulings, i.e. money and power.
> ”According to writer and researcher Yasheng Huang and many others, the economic theory in China is not socialism with Chinese characteristics, but the opposite—capitalism with Chinese characteristics.”
This is an interesting point because it’s hard to imagine China would be in their present economic position without embracing “capitalist tendencies” in conducting trade domestically and internationally. Capitalism and privatization seem counterintuitive to Communist socioeconomic principles, yet have yeilded “good economic times” for many millions of Chinese since the late-1980s.
The successive point is how committed is China to the ideals of Socialism? Will the left hand do one thing while the right hand does another, so to speak? Could socialism and capitalism work together symbiotically? Will socialism and capitalism bring out the problems with each other? Will a new “Chinese system” emerge? I don’t know the answers, but it’s an intriguing thought process with far reaching ramifications in a country as large as China.
In Europe, the capitalism is working symbiotically together with socialized healthcare and education. In other areas like agriculture it's hard to discern whether it's more "socialistic" or "capitalist" due to heavy subsidies and other policies.
Even the "real socialism" as implemented in USSR and whole Eastern Bloc is considered to be actually state capitalism by some.
Xi Jinping's political philosophy is a rather inconsistent mix of ideas from Confucianism, liberalism, and Marxism. It is hard to see how it could work in the long term.
What's wrong with creating a new political philosophy? Plenty of old named ones have proven themselves not to work - Confucianism impedes technological growth, Marxism is Marxism, and liberalism doesn't have a long history of steady state to prove itself. Authoritarianism does seem to last, as long as the chain of leaders keep on maintaining it unbroken. Considering China's leaders are selected competitively, not by hereditary, it might have a better chance than old kingdoms.
5 comments
[ 11.3 ms ] story [ 31.9 ms ] threadThen I found this line:
> ”According to writer and researcher Yasheng Huang and many others, the economic theory in China is not socialism with Chinese characteristics, but the opposite—capitalism with Chinese characteristics.”
This is an interesting point because it’s hard to imagine China would be in their present economic position without embracing “capitalist tendencies” in conducting trade domestically and internationally. Capitalism and privatization seem counterintuitive to Communist socioeconomic principles, yet have yeilded “good economic times” for many millions of Chinese since the late-1980s.
The successive point is how committed is China to the ideals of Socialism? Will the left hand do one thing while the right hand does another, so to speak? Could socialism and capitalism work together symbiotically? Will socialism and capitalism bring out the problems with each other? Will a new “Chinese system” emerge? I don’t know the answers, but it’s an intriguing thought process with far reaching ramifications in a country as large as China.
Even the "real socialism" as implemented in USSR and whole Eastern Bloc is considered to be actually state capitalism by some.