• Tavarin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Okay, and what does that have to do with fact China and the USSR aren’t/weren’t communist being convenient?

    • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I just think it’s convenient that communism gets to live in this little “no true scotsman/communism” bubble where if a state adopts communism and fails, it immedietly gets labeled as “not a real communist” state.

      That way, instead of looking if there’s something wrong with communism itself, it can get written off as the fault of the state attempting it.

      • hypelightfly@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s not really convenient. It’s that communism is an ideal that’s literally impossible for large groups of humans to obtain.

        There has never been a communist state because there can’t be with people involved.

      • Tavarin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        state adopts communism

        But no state has actually adopted communism. Communism as a basis of an economy requires communal ownership of all goods; not state ownership, but communal. Which country has ever done that?

        • goat@sh.itjust.worksOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The state can also control everything. In which case, China, Vietnam and Cuba.

          • Tavarin
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            That’s authoritarianism, not communism.

              • Tavarin
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                No it cannot, that’s not communism. China is as communist as North Korea is democratic. Just because a country calls itself something does not make it that thing.

                • goat@sh.itjust.worksOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  Countries can have multiple different systems in place. China for example, is an authoritarian communist state.

                  • Tavarin
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Communism by definition cannot be authoritarian. So no, China is not an authoritarian communist state, it’s just a an authoritarian state.

                    The only way for China to be communist is to give all people direct communal ownership of goods and services.

          • Tavarin
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            None of them even tried to adopt communism, they all tried to adopt authoritarianism, using the word communism to garner support to get elected. Communism is a class-free society with communal ownership, no country has ever tried to be that.