China- communist or fascist?

[NY Hoya]

China and its economic policies have changed dramatically since the "cultural" revolution of the 1960s and 70s, and even more so since Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms in 1978. The country is open to foreign investment from capitalist countries, allows private land and business ownership, and, particularly over the past 10-15 years, has moved to becoming something approximating or at least tolerating a corporate state. Although it lacks the overt racism of some of history's more famous fascist states, China is strongly nationalistic.

I know that many of our resident communists/socialists would say that China has never been a communist state in its purest form, but I think that there is little doubt that for at least a short period of time it certainly looked and acted more communist than anything else.

My question is:

has the Communist Party of China, and therefore the government of China, changed from a communist party to a fascist party?

After visiting the country, I certainly wouldn't say that it is still a communist country, but there is still too much state control for it to be capitalistic. That's what got me thinking.

 

[Fez_Monk]

They are fascist, although ''state capitalist'' might be a better description.

 

[Switch625]

I voted fascist. Good detective work, Hoya.

 

[Hitro]

Rather fascist, certainly not Communist. Fez' "state capitalist" descibes it quite well I think.

 

[tonberry]

I choose communist because they are more close to a communist state that anyting else. "State capitalist" is closer to communism than fascism. Fascism mean the glorification of the "Race" and a fascist government rarely interfere with the economy. So let say they are a socialist-dictatorship governement.

 

[Fez_Monk]

Originally posted by tonberry
and a fascist government rarely interfere with the economy.

Hitler's economic policies were very Keynesian. The fascists were certainly not supporters of the ''free'' market.

 

[tonberry]

Originally posted by Fez_Monk



Hitler's economic policies were very Keynesian. The fascists were certainly not supporters of the ''free'' market.

I'm not sure how Hitler handle the German economy but he has been in power for only 10 years. At the begining he have to re-militarize the country and after that the war begin. What I know is fascist is far right and the more right you are the less you interfere with the people and the economy.

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by tonberry
Fascism mean the glorification of the "Race" and a fascist government rarely interfere with the economy.

Fascism doesn't necessarily require overt racism in the way we think of the Nazis. It has much more to do with the mobilization of the "people" or "volk" toward the goal of the state, without making class distinctions. China is very nationalistic, either go there and visit or look up some articles on the country's effort to win the 2008 Olympic games and then on the aftermath of that effort's success to see it. Much more of the state influence appears aimed at advancing China and Chinese prosperity than toward providing for some underprivileged (the "working) class.

 

[Fez_Monk]

Originally posted by tonberry


What I know is fascist is far right and the more right you are the less you interfere with the people and the economy.

So anarcho-communists are far right? They want the abolition of the state and capitalism, however, they want no restrictions on the affairs of peaceful individuals.

I think it is better to classify Hitler as authoritarian far right.

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by Fez_Monk


So anarcho-communists are far right? They want the abolition of the state and capitalism, however, they want no restrictions on the affairs of peaceful individuals.

I think it is better to classify Hitler as authoritarian far right.

agreed, there is a certain point on the spectrum where it is possible for the far right and the far left to intersect, particularly when we are talking about authoritarian control of the economy.

 

[Incubus0223]

whoa, communist and fascist are total opposites a fascist is an extreme right-winger who wants the old way to come back so if china were fascist they would be wanting to have a tawian-like country communist, is actually the economical term but is also considered to be a government although technically it is marxism, and i think culturally china is communist but their economic ideas and fuctions are starting to switch toward a more socialist type of economy. The reason why is theres so much corruption in marxism because it cannot be perfected although in theroy yes, and so someone has to start doing a capitalist idea or else all their people will not have enough motivation to make money and will just be farmers, instead of trying harder to be a more respected field, not trying to be mean but i think you meant to have this thread relating toward the economic view, and have communism, socialist, or capitalism as the options

a little side note i say although americans would hate it that we are socialist i mean the US government has the power to federalism nearly every type of coroporations, such as energy, gas, food, which again (my view) the WPA was almost this if not toward the middle of communism and socialism (economically speaking)

 

[tonberry]

Excuse me but racism is THE requirement for being fascist. If fascism is just an authoritarian government with some nationalistic ideas then I call this despotism not fascism. China is nationalist but no country isn't.

Anarcho-communist want the elimination of the state. Fascist want to delegate the economy to corporations so they can concentrate on army, security, elimination of "sub-races", etc.

 

[Incubus0223]

tonberry if you are referring to the Nazi fascism then you are correct in a way but the that was the way hitler motivated people to his views the jews were bascially the scapegoats for all the troubles and bad things that happened to germany during WWI and the postWWI era and they brainwashed the people through hitlers charismatic speeches and elobrate party philosphys, but hitler and the rest of the nazi party as well as any fascist extreme right wing government all want to turn the clock back (in a sense) to where times were good and where everything was right the way it was hitler wanted a strong germany with the right to rule to world (his views) and so did the rest of the german people because with the lost of WWI they had to pay damaging retrubutions.

so basically the political spectrum is

Fascism----------right wing----------(old government ideas through force if ness.)

Republican----------(conservative views [no changes)

(Independent)----------middle----------(made for both sides views)

Democratic----------(liberal)

Commies----------left wing----------(dramatic changes)

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by tonberry
Excuse me but racism is THE requirement for being fascist. If fascism is just an authoritarian government with some nationalistic ideas then I call this despotism not fascism. China is nationalist but no country isn't.

Anarcho-communist want the elimination of the state. Fascist want to delegate the economy to corporations so they can concentrate on army, security, elimination of "sub-races", etc.

No, fascism under the Nazis required overt racism, not all fascism does. What fascism requires is nationalism, a belief in the collective nation, advancing the nation's goals. That is slightly different than racism and that nationalism is prevalent in China today. Despotism requires no nationalistic ideas, it is the rule by a person(s) with absolute power. At best, despotism has extreme support for and belief in the specific ruler(s), something separate from nationalism.

For example, there is widespread nationalism in the United States, based upon ideals, not race. This nationalism, if exhibited under an authoritarian regime, could be considered to be fascist. I find that Europeans are often unable to distinguish between the nationalism that exists in the US and the nationalism that existed in European countries throughout much of the 20th century.

 

[amadeus]

Communist. Check out Chinese economic laws.

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by Incubus0223
whoa, communist and fascist are total opposites a fascist is an extreme right-winger who wants the old way to come back so if china were fascist they would be wanting to have a tawian-like country communist, is actually the economical term but is also considered to be a government although technically it is marxism, and i think culturally china is communist but their economic ideas and fuctions are starting to switch toward a more socialist type of economy.

Think of the political spectrum in terms of four quadrants, or preferably 3 axes. There is right-left economically, there is another axis from complete individual freedom to complete government control, and a third covering social freedoms within that personal freedom axis. The communists are left economically while the fascists are right. Both are highly authoritarian on the personal freedom scale, but often differ on some social issues. Freedom of speech and religion are often taboo in both systems, but they may differ on issues like homosexuality or race (but not always).

In any case, I feel the two systems, as evidenced through different governments in the 20th century, are most often primarily separated by their placement on the economic right-left scale. The chinese government has made a decided move away from the economic "justice" of communism toward something more capitalistic. I also think that ideologically speaking, there is not as much separating the governments of the PRC and Taiwan as there once was.

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Communist. Check out Chinese economic laws.

Check out the free economic zones where most of the economic activity in China takes place. It's anything but communist. I'm not saying it's a capitalist country yet, but most of the developed areas are far closer to capitalism than communism.

 

[amadeus]

Let me put it this way, China today is the USSR in the late 80's.

Everyone's poor, but at least now you can dream to be rich.

Note that when I mean capitalism, I mean the ability for their own people to succeed.

 

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Let me put it this way, China today is the USSR in the late 80's.

Everyone's poor, but at least now you can dream to be rich.

Note that when I mean capitalism, I mean the ability for their own people to succeed.

Yes, but your statements are patently untrue. There are loads of people in China making millions of dollars by owning their own businesses, investing in other's businesses, etc. There is definitely a middle class in places like Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, etc., and no, they are not all party members.

China is doing most of the things that the former USSR should have done as it tried to make a transition to a capitalistic society. Instead of going from communism one day to free wheeling capitalism the next, the Chinese are taking the slower road. They aren't making all of the right choices, but they are becoming a capitalist society, albeit slowly. Keep in mind that the Chinese people have a slightly different concept of time than we do in the West. For them, a complete change from communism to capitalism over the course of two generations would be considered quick. I hope they get it right, and wish they could do it without the current persecution...

 

[amadeus]

I'm sure you're right...I don't have much recent knowledge on China. I'm making assumptions of the economic conditions from the political conditions.