Tell me about the PRC Holla Forums. How come they're content with being the world's sweatshop...

China is the future of worldwide capitalism: capitalists can do whatever the fuck they want whereas workers challenging them will be ruthlessly krumped by the State.

It's not hard being the best when your only competition is a country with designated shitting streets.

The Sino-Soviet split happened while Mao was in power you retard

Tell me how Chinese workers own their factories and how a few billionaires more or less tied to te party totally don't make fortunes on their back.

Do explain how the current PRC is even remotely socialist

YPG gets fucked
ami ground whores grinded between everyone

turkey shelling them
USA warning they wont back them if they don't fall back
SAA and russia advancing on all fronts
china will now join in aiding the government forces even further

youtube.com/watch?v=pzuPA5_E6FI

anarchists on suicide watch

dw.com/en/turkeys-syria-offensive-aimed-at-kurdish-ypg/a-19497653

It`s reformed market socialism, naturally there will be some capitalist elements in market economy.

Socialist market economy is kind of reform form market socialism, it falls to the side of socialism in the political spectrum.

And they have been wrong ever since then about everything.

...

Okay, but that just begs the question: what is it about their economic structure that makes it socialist?

Maybe the people should rise up and do something about those "capitalist elements"

market socialism with the level of developed industry is revisionist cancer and doesn't deserve solidarity

just to spite the anarkiddy faggots sucking NATO dick and backing YPG, i am in full support of the glorious PLA supporting the SAA in the struggle against those ethno-"socialist" foreign aided terrorists

Economic planning outside of few independent smaller companies is mostly in the hands of the party. Party represents the workers thus giving them agency&ownership over means of production.

...

People should follow the collective leadership of the party for their own sake. Conditions in China will change once economic development along technological one allows for such reforms to take place.

Fuck, I was hoping if the PRC did get involved they would try and spread communist ideas throughout the middle east.

The fuck they even bothering getting involved for?

this isn't how ML works
and only ML works at all
china is revisionist faggotry

read stalin

Only about 25% of their GDP is generated through state-run enterprises. "Independent smaller companies", my ass.

Does wage labour still exist in China? Yes. Are goods being produced for use instead of profit? No. Saying its economy is socialist because its gubmint does stuff is some conservatard-tier logic.

China is already about as technologically and economically developed as global capitalism will allow. I guess those reforms should be coming any day now if they wish to develop further.

PRC has it`s own internal Muslim separatists too. By doing this PRC is working towards destroying the rising tide of nationalism within it`s own borders.

There has never been a society in last few centuries that would have not operated on basis of wage labor.

We are nowhere near the technological level required for this to happen(automation wise). Also China is not independent when it comes to her natural resources, thus trade with the rest of world more or less forces PRC under the will of markets.

Can't they achieve the same by siding with the YPG though?

ummmmmmmm

YPG are aligned with the US and oppose Iran, China`s close ally so I don`t see reason why they would side with YPG since it would only 1) harm their allies 2) might inspire their own separatists.

"It is said that commodity production must lead, is bound to lead, to capitalism all the same, under all conditions. That is not true. Not always and not under all conditions! Commodity production must not be identified with capitalist production. They are two different things. Capitalist production is the highest form of commodity production. Commodity production leads to capitalism only if there is private owner-ship of the means of production, if labour power appears in the market as a commodity which can be bought by the capitalist and exploited in the process of production, and if, consequently, the system of exploitation of wageworkers by capitalists exists in the country. Capitalist production begins when the means of production are concentrated in private hands, and when the workers are bereft of means of production and are compelled to sell their labour power as a commodity. Without this there is no such thing as capitalist production.

Well, and what is to be done if the conditions for the conversion of commodity production into capitalist production do not exist, if the means of production are no longer private but socialist property, if the system of wage labour no longer exists and labour power is no longer a commodity, and if the system of exploitation has long been abolished - can it be considered then that commodity production will lead to capitalism all the same? No, it cannot. Yet ours is precisely such a society, a society where private ownership of the means of production, the system of wage labour, and the system of exploitation have long ceased to exist.

Commodity production must not be regarded as something sufficient unto itself, something independent of the surrounding economic conditions. Commodity production is older than capitalist production. It existed in slave-owning society, and served it, but did not lead to capitalism. It existed in feudal society and served it, yet, although it prepared some of the conditions for capitalist production, it did not lead to capitalism. Why then, one asks, cannot commodity production similarly serve our socialist society for a certain period without leading to capitalism, bearing in mind that in our country commodity production is not so boundless and all-embracing as it is under capitalist conditions, being confined within strict bounds thanks to such decisive economic conditions as social ownership of the means of production, the abolition of the system of wage labour, and the elimination of the system of exploitation?

It is said that, since the domination of social ownership of the means of production has been established in our country, and the system of wage labour and exploitation has been abolished, commodity production has lost all meaning and should therefore be done away with. […]"
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1951/economic-problems/ch03.htm

There were wages in the Soviet Union, don`t be retarded.

cute

it's only been since the mid-to-late 19th century that wage labour has been dominant as the economic base of the United States. There's still tribes in the world that don't rely on wage labour. You're full of shit.

youtube.com/watch?v=ApZdvz_n4ro

this is called state terrorism, lets see how much you would support assad if , this was your city.

you have to be on another level of tankie to believe that shit

...

Apart from the question of if they are still commies, they are doing the following:

Using foreign capital to build up MoP, employing their massive population, limiting import, exporting a fuck ton and investing massive amounts of government money into infrastructure and in-country development. Currently, they are working on becoming a self-sufficient country, every technology that they have to import, they are trying to make themselves, and they are using foreign capital to build it up and increase their purchasing position in a global market for things they can't buy, while working on reducing that import.

All in all, its pretty smart, though I would still question their "the pie gets bigger for everyone" excuse for their new bourgeois class and their "we will bring socialism we swear!" chants.

Submit yourself t the Big Brother's love, comrade.
He is all, the party is all, he is the party and you can become part of it.

The Sino Soviet split was the most disastrous and suicidal thing that ever happened to the left.

I don't think this is impossible, just because it isn't true in the case of China

The question is not whether the PRC is socialist, the question is whether the people will demand a return to socialism/Maoism once the CCP's strategy of maintaining legitimacy through state capitalist development falters and fails.