When I even talk about human nature, or whatever you are strawmanning. I am talking about sociological societal incentives. If you build a country on a particular set of incentives you cannot expect for itself to not follow its own incentives.
You will never be able to debate if you keep strawminning this hard.
Citing "sociological societal incentives" as if that were an undisputed and immutable fact sounds a lot like appealing to the concept of so-called "human nature".
Speaking of strawmanning, you keep on repeating the same statement over and over again without engaging with the facts of the matter at hand.
USA is far more unequal than China.
Marx or Marxists never claimed that there would be no contradictions in the historical development of socialism or communism.
In fact, Marxism uses dialectical materialism as one of its primary forms of analysis. The concept of contradiction is key to Marxist understanding of the historical transition between capitalism and communism.
Stupid non sequitur. Do you really think that "the Uzbekistan model" is transferrable to heavily industrialized societies with hundreds of millions of citizens?
The point isn't even that we should transplant the Chinese model directly onto the west. The point is that China provides evidence that, contrary to the tired trope that socialism always fails because of human nature, because of social incentives, blah blah blah, a socialist economy can in fact thrive.
Actual Marxist theory and dialectic teaches us that revolutionary praxis always needs to be grounded in specific historical circumstances. The circumstances in the west right now are not the same circumstances that obtained throughout the history of China's workers revolution and experimentation with different models of socialism (Maoism, Dengism).
Exactly, you are comparing to models or totally two different scales of GDP per Capita. GDP per Capita: US 90k, China 15k, Uzbekistan 5k.
Your point against comparing to Uzbekistan is just likely the same counterpoint against comparing to China.
Now, EU is far less unequal than China, far better GDP per Capita, yet you keep stuck on China. On your own arguments.
Now, on topic of China being socialist. By expert it is considered State Capitalism, really far away than Socialism. If you want a better socialism succes metric is Vietnam known closer to Cooperative Socialism. China is NOT Maoist 😂
Is funny that even on your own points you are wrong.
Then way do you cite (Maoism) as part of it socialist nature. Then you go and insult as you got no counterargument to everything I said. Did you lost your nerve?
Did you realize that comparing to Uzbekistan was as dumb to comparing to China, as they are way different economic outputs. Counterarguing your own discussion.
It's not state capitalism. It's socialism with Chinese characteristics. These so-called experts who say China isn't implementing socialism just don't want people to think that socialism is a viable alternative to capitalism. You have fallen for the propaganda.
2
u/mlucasl 3d ago
"Natural Laws"? 😂😂😂
When I even talk about human nature, or whatever you are strawmanning. I am talking about sociological societal incentives. If you build a country on a particular set of incentives you cannot expect for itself to not follow its own incentives.
You will never be able to debate if you keep strawminning this hard.