It isn’t merely wishful thinking, it’s based on actual analysis of socialist countries. Administration is a necessity for large scale production, without which we cannot abolish class, unless you wish to turn to early communalism.
Socialist countries simply do not face the same scale of problems with corruption as capitalist countries.
Corruption is always a problem, but “power” is not a corruptive force. This is why we must return to class analysis, and how this impacts people.
I read the study you linked, not only was it largely based on lab studies and not the real world, it also entirely erased class from the experiments. Much of what it contributed to “power” is in actual fact a result of differences in class, and erasing this essential function from how class dynamics shape differences in individual authority fundamentally paints a massive hole in the experiment and conclusions.
Socialist countries simply do not face the same scale of problems with corruption as capitalist countries.
Hundred of thousands of trials for corruption 63 years after the foundation of the People Republic (this declaration is from 2012)… it does look like a pretty huge scale to me. There’s corruption in my capitalist country, but far less than in China.
is in actual fact a result of differences in class
You’re pointing to China actually punishing corruption in a country of billions, and France deliberately not punishing corruption, as an example of socialist countries being the same as capitalist when it comes to corruption. This is absurd.
As for your study, it equates income to class, which is just wrong.
You pointed to China punishing corruption as evidence of “your capitalist country” having “less corruption.” Capitalism itself is a system where socialized production produces private profits, it’s by definition a “corrupt” system.
As for your study, we are talking about class, not income, which is not useful for our purposes at all.
Also not sure why you abandoned the point about large industry and administration being necessary, did you just silently concede that point?
You pointed to China punishing corruption as evidence of “your capitalist country” having “less corruption.”
No, I didn’t. I say two things but never used the first as a proof of the second. For someone who tries to look like an intellectual, you seem have reading troubles… like when you thought that I said that classes don’t exist while I said the contrary.
we are talking about class, not income, which is not useful for our purposes at all
It is though as, on average, higher classes have higher incomes.
Also not sure why you abandoned the point about large industry and administration being necessary, did you just silently concede that point?
Because it’s irrelevant. The question about the necessity or not of hierarchies is an other debate. Something can be bad and inescapable at the same time.
Wishful thinking, again.
Both are.
It isn’t merely wishful thinking, it’s based on actual analysis of socialist countries. Administration is a necessity for large scale production, without which we cannot abolish class, unless you wish to turn to early communalism.
It’s totally wishful thinking. Even Xi Jinping recognized that corruption was an “existential threat” for China. Or isn’t China socialist?
Corruption is always a problem, but “power” is not a corruptive force. This is why we must return to class analysis, and how this impacts people.
I read the study you linked, not only was it largely based on lab studies and not the real world, it also entirely erased class from the experiments. Much of what it contributed to “power” is in actual fact a result of differences in class, and erasing this essential function from how class dynamics shape differences in individual authority fundamentally paints a massive hole in the experiment and conclusions.
Hundred of thousands of trials for corruption 63 years after the foundation of the People Republic (this declaration is from 2012)… it does look like a pretty huge scale to me. There’s corruption in my capitalist country, but far less than in China.
In fact, both play a role.
You’re pointing to China actually punishing corruption in a country of billions, and France deliberately not punishing corruption, as an example of socialist countries being the same as capitalist when it comes to corruption. This is absurd.
As for your study, it equates income to class, which is just wrong.
It would be right? It’s not what I did.
It’s in theory. In practice it’s a good way to have data. Not perfect data, but meaningful trends.
You pointed to China punishing corruption as evidence of “your capitalist country” having “less corruption.” Capitalism itself is a system where socialized production produces private profits, it’s by definition a “corrupt” system.
As for your study, we are talking about class, not income, which is not useful for our purposes at all.
Also not sure why you abandoned the point about large industry and administration being necessary, did you just silently concede that point?
No, I didn’t. I say two things but never used the first as a proof of the second. For someone who tries to look like an intellectual, you seem have reading troubles… like when you thought that I said that classes don’t exist while I said the contrary.
It is though as, on average, higher classes have higher incomes.
Because it’s irrelevant. The question about the necessity or not of hierarchies is an other debate. Something can be bad and inescapable at the same time.
God I hate Europeans.
Are you for real saying that France has less corruption than China?
Don’t hate who you envy.