Posted on 08/10/2023 8:23:52 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Labels are useful, though not always totally accurate. The quick, short answer to the question in the title is “no, it’s not,” and I will elucidate further below. The CCP is no more true “communist” than the Democratic Party in America believes in democracy. Calling the CCP “communist” is a misnomer. Just because they have stated a goal—a “communist” society—doesn’t mean they have reached it, or ever want to (and believe me, the CCP doesn’t).
Communism has been attempted often in history but never practiced successfully. As Ronald Regan said, “Communism only works in heaven, where they don’t need it, and in hell, where they already have it.” Indeed, communism is, frankly, impossible because it espouses equality of outcomes, which will never happen.
Despite some conservative claims, neither the CCP or the Democrats are ''communist'' in the true sense of the word. There is no “egalitarianism” in either. The CCP is a totalitarian government with many features of Leftist ideology—control of the economy, censorship and silencing of opposition, dictatorial domination of the people, no respect for human life, etc. These also clearly mark the actions and/or aims of the Democratic Party in America. The CCP and Democrats both believe in Leftist ideology. The Democrats are trying to install it in America but cannot fully do so until they get totalitarian control. But, being Leftists, they WILL do the same things in America that Leftists have done elsewhere, if they ever get the power to do so. If not, why not? A Leftist is a Leftist is a Leftist, no matter what rock he slithers out from under.
Folks, egalitarianism is the great lie of the Left and is one reason it will always fails. People are not “equal.” There should be “equality under the law,” but, otherwise, we all have different abilities, talents, intelligence levels, motivations, etc. Stephen Curry and I are not “equal” on a basketball court and never would be, unless maybe you tied his hands behind his back, broke both his legs, and didn’t let him go across midcourt. Then there might be some sort of “equality of outcome.” But that can only be accomplished by distinctly limiting his freedom. Even Thomas More concluded that “utopia” is impossible without government force. If people are free, they will not be equal. If people are equal, they will not be free. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson’s “all men are created equal” had nothing to do with economic outcomes.
Try this thought experiment. Give everybody in America $100,000 to start with. Within a month (if everyone is allowed freedom to use their money as they wish), some people will have doubled their money, and some will have lost it all, with varying degrees in between. Some people (Elon Musk) have a talent for making money. Some people (Mark Lewis) have a talent for losing it. We aren’t equal in all matters. The only way my bank account and Elon’s will ever be equal is by forcibly taking his money away and giving it to me. That’s not freedom.
And communism, in practicality, recognizes this. There is always the “nomenklatura”—the elite—who rule and are rich while the masses struggle to survive—those who aren’t shot. Marxist “freedom” and “equality” are the greatest chimeras ever concocted.
China is a Leftist totalitarian government, not a communist one. “Rightist” totalitarian governments, usually military dictatorships, have existed, but China is a “Leftist” one, not “Rightist.” American Democrats are “Leftists”; some of their more starry-eyed idealists might think they want “communism,” but it will never happen, as they would quickly discover. What Democrats want is what the CCP has—totalitarian control of their country, not “communism.” The CCP may talk “communist” or “Marxist” rhetoric, but they have never had it and never will.
The man I worked for in China who stole thousands of dollars from me was a greedy, selfish, immoral, “bourgeois capitalist” in Marxist terms, the supposed enemy of communism. I was the “proletarian,” the worker, Marxism’s hero, and I was robbed. And even the Chinese government (the court when I sued him) decided for the “rightist, capitalist roader,” not the “proletarian worker.” Don’t tell me that China is “communist” or “Marxist.” The government is totalitarian, and distinctly favors “party members.” The “Chinese Communist Party,” like the “Democratic Party” in America, is only a useful label, not an accurate description.
China fled any supposed “communist” intentions after the disasters of Mao Zedong, who actually didn’t apply “communism” universally either, certainly not to himself. And looking at the 20th century, we discover no Marxist society that succeeded, at least by using Marxism, to materially or spiritually advance their people. Indeed, can anyone name one single benefit any Marxist government has given to the world? Marxism teaches that government is a tool of the rich and powerful (the “bourgeoisie”) to oppress the masses (the “proletariat”). Once the great “socialist” revolution takes place, and “communism” arises and ushers in a Golden Age of equality, freedom, and plenty, government will no longer be necessary and will fade into oblivion. Government will disappear in the perfect Marxist Utopia. Can you imagine the CCP ever giving up power in the name of “communism”? THAT is a hoot.
Here is why Marxism fails: when I was teaching history, I would always tell my students that “the greatest resource in the world is not oil, or water, or some natural element. The greatest resource in the world is the human mind set free—to create, explore, innovate.” Set free from economic (not moral) restraints, for there will be no economic freedom for all if there are no moral restraints on human behavior. Capitalism, not socialism, provides—has provided—the economic freedoms that have created human prosperity the past 200+ years. The CCP knows that, and that’s why it is not a “communist” system.
Totalitarian, yes. Communist, no. Don’t confuse labels and rhetoric with reality.
Correct. And he and that 'amusing' Dr. Goebbels would often refer to their brand as "anti-capitalist." How up-to-date that is in today's American academe....
Their system is part Marxist and part traditional Chinese which has no western equivalent.
The closest analogy I can think of to describing it for someone from the west to immediately understand is “theocratic slave state”
I should maybe say think in theory communism is good.
From his essay: “Communism has been attempted often in history but never practiced successfully..”
He then cries Reagan whose comment is quite different.
He writes: “China is a Leftist totalitarian government”. which is true and describes communism, but then writes:” not a communist one.”
This is one mixed up boy.
What point is he trying to make? What is he trying to accomplish in writing this?
I’ve never understood how the leaders of a society that was an advanced civilization when Karl Marx’ homeland was nothing more than a collection of barbaric savages, could adopt his form of government. How does the Chinese government reconcile this? “Yeah, we’ve been around much longer than you, but have a much better idea!”
They are the same as the Chinese triads and the former Chinese warlords - criminal group, but unlike regular criminals they are 100% about getting and keeping 100% of the political power in their hands. They get away with not looking like “regular” criminals only because 100% of the police power is in their hands, and they can and do do with it as they wish.
America has been wrong from the beginning in the geopoltical arena when it comes to Taiwan.
It is not a matter if “Chinese” “national” interest, while it is 100% only a matter of CCP political interest. Taiwan is a democracy, the CCP is not. Were the CCP not in charge in China and China was a true democracy like Taiwan, China and Taiwan would have already peacefully resolved any post-1949 issue between China and Taiwan. They haven’t because democratic Taiwan cannot surrender to dictatorship of the CCP.
If the people of mainland China want to reunite with the people of Taiwan, they can easily do so by dumping the CCP.
“What point is he trying to make? What is he trying to accomplish in writing this?”
I don’t know if even he knows.
Yeah.
“No it’s fascist.
Just like the United States’ government.”
Exactly! China is about as non communist as you can get.
The essence of communism is no private property or enterprises. China and the US lead the world in both.
Fascism on the other hand allows both free enterprise and private property, as long as it doesn’t run afoul of the powers that be.
China is a one party fascist dictatorship. We’re not far from that.
And if one really stops and thinks about it, authoritarianism has been the default human governance for most of human history. From tribes, to kingdoms, to empires, to dynasties.
People said the same thing about Stalin. But it's not true. Stalin and Mao definitely sought power for themselves, but they were also convinced believers in Marxism-Leninism (though Mao's understanding may have been more fragmentary or less orthodox than Stalin's). You don't become a dictator without wanting power for yourself -- Lenin certainly did -- but that doesn't mean that the ideology was just a sham.
I would agree. The end goal in both cases isn't ending capitalism and creating a command economy. They don't want to kill the golden goose.
But I'd also note that the current "green" visions -- much more popular in the West than in China -- do have some serious similiarities to communist thought and practice.
The Democrats aren't communist, but there is something in what they say and do that certainly could create that impression.
Of course they are.Marx,Lenin,Stalin,Mao and other top Commies never had to worry about elections and never wavered from their “from those according to their means” attitude.
Yes, but it’s more a National Socialist flavor of Communism. It’s also picking up racist Han-centric ideology now. It will soon be if not already there be a Sino-Nazi state. Example look at Uighur treatment.
Agreed. If you get down to it, Marxism (communism) is just an idea thrown out as PR to get people to agree to totalitarianism or even fascism. And socialism is just a softer sounding version of communism.
Just like Rush often said of the Dims that the Dims' stated goal is never their real goal. The leaders who push the ideals of communism aren't really trying to implement communism in the fake Marx utopian view. That can never happen, especially with god-denying leaders.
Servants are held in their place by the greatest motivator of all, fear.
“ And socialism is just a softer sounding version of communism. ”
Yeah. And this guy didn’t even use the word socialism which the Chicoms use even more than and interchangeably with communism.
Take their idea that their government should be run by eunuchs. Sure, let's test for the smart guys, chop off their balls and put them in charge. What could go wrong?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.