Please answer me, where do they manufacture Iphones?
I mean, Iphones are a commercial product which is manufactured and sold by a corporation, are they not? Which country is that manufacturing done in exactly, and how much does the corporation pay those workers?
I think most of your (real) questions would be answered if you read Lenin and Chairman Mao and did some research on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and the socialist market economy alongside the realities of the socialist transitionary period where many of the contradictions of capitalism remain as they are slowly synthesised and worked through. You’re clearly running on vibes for now and it’s leading you to not grasp the situation at hand properly.
None of what you said challenges the fact that China is capitalist in all ways that matter.
I mean, are you trying to claim the workers there aren’t being exploited by corporations?
How long is this “socialist transitionary period” supposed to take? Because it’s been like 50 years so far, and it doesn’t look like it’s ending anytime soon.
P.S. Please tell me how much Apple pays the workers in China to manufacture Iphones. Something tells me it’s less than they would be paid in America.
China is a country where they have to put nets on the roofs of factories to prevent people from throwing themselves over the side because they work 14 hours a day for a slave wage. Factories that make our cheap electronic goods.
Sounds like capitalism to me.
The nets were at foxconn in capitalist occupied Taiwan. You clearly have never been to China or researched China beyond just absorbing western headlines with no scepticism.
The Foxconn suicides were a spate of suicides linked to low pay and brutal working conditions at the Foxconn City industrial park in Shenzhen, China, that occurred alongside several additional suicides at various other Foxconn-owned locations and facilities in mainland China.
Yeah, I mixed up the location of the foxconn factory fair catch. Doesn’t change the core point though.
Those nets were a Foxconn-specific response to a cluster of suicides at one company, not a national symbol of “China.” If you actually look at the data, China’s suicide rate is 8.9 per 100k, ranking around 65th globally. That’s lower than the US (15.6), Canada (9.4), Australia (13.1), UK (9.5), Japan (14.7), South Korea (20.6) and much of mainland Europe.
China makes everything from cheap trinkets to (most likely) the phone you’re typing this on. It’s not a monolith. Yes, working conditions were harsh during the early offshoring boom, that was the brutal calculus of catching up. But that strategy lifted nearly a billion people out of absolute poverty. China now has the world’s largest high-speed rail network, metro systems that dwarf most Western cities, and excess overtime has been explicitly ruled illegal by the Supreme Court, with enforcement ramping up.
On the system itself: China is in the socialist transitional period. Contradictions remain because capitalism is still hegemonic globally, but the commanding heights (finance, energy, telecoms, heavy industry) are publicly owned. The state isn’t a neutral arbiter; it’s the tool through which the dominant class enforces it’s power, in China that is the masses (the proletariat). Harvard’s Ash Center has tracked Chinese public opinion since 2003 and consistently finds approval of the central government above 90%. Chinese people don’t view their system through a Western liberal lens, they see democracy as whole-process people’s democracy: elections, consultation, grassroots feedback, policy adjustment, all integrated. The NPC has nearly 3,000 deputies, including representatives from all 55 minority groups, hundreds of frontline workers (manual labourers) and farmers, and workers from every sector. That’s structural representation. You can critique labor issues without falling back on orientalist tropes that flatten 1.4 billion people into a caricature.
Yeah, I mixed up the location of the foxconn factory fair catch. Doesn’t change the core point though.
I mean, it doesn’t change my point, that being corporations exploit workers in China because China is capitalist in all ways that matter.
It changes the lie you tried to tell me, that it was “Capitialst occupied” Tiawan, and that the glorious CCP would never allow such atrocity, which is clearly not true.
That’s lower than the US (15.6), Canada (9.4), Australia (13.1), UK (9.5), Japan (14.7), South Korea (20.6) and much of mainland Europe.
Those other countries also don’t have workers throwing themselves off of buildings because their jobs crush their will to live, but I guess that’s besides the point.
Yes, working conditions were harsh during the early offshoring boom, that was the brutal calculus of catching up.
On the system itself: China is in the socialist transitional period blah blah blah
Hence, “China is capitalist in all ways that matter.”
You can critique labor issues without falling back on orientalist tropes that flatten 1.4 billion people into a caricature.
You could also stop defending a country of oligarchs which doesn’t care about human rights and clearly exploits it’s population for the benefit of global corporations,
That’s lower than the US (15.6), Canada (9.4), Australia (13.1), UK (9.5), Japan (14.7), South Korea (20.6) and much of mainland Europe.
I want you to really try to make a singular definition of Authoritarianism and Libertarianism that applies to all examples you would classify as authoritarian or libertarian. Is it theoretically possible for them to exist at the same time in the same place? Would that be a common definition? If not, why is your definition different and more importantly do you have enough evidence to justify having a different definition from the majority of people who use those terms?
I want you to really try to make a singular definition of Authoritarianism and Libertarianism that applies to all examples you would classify as authoritarian or libertarian.
It’s good for the working classes to wield state authority against capitalists and fascists. To not do so would be to allow capitalism to reform, and the alternative is capitalist authority used against the working classes.
I’m convinced (based off interactions I’ve had on NextDoor) a lot of people think capitalism=uses money. But also that socialism/communism=failed/corrupted capitalism. China looking better than the USA nowadays means they have to be capitalist since they obviously aren’t failing.
That’s certainly how some people see it! Liberals look at China’s success and some try to twist that into a victory for capitalism, even if that doesn’t actually describe China’s success accurately.
But China is authoritarian.
Yes like every state. Capitalism is entirely based on the violent control of people and things.
China is capitalist in all ways that matter.
Have you considered doing research and applying analysis before just saying things?
Where do they make Iphones again?
Production is not capitalism.
So you haven’t. I would recommend it. It’ll help you void these vibes based politics errors.
Please answer me, where do they manufacture Iphones?
I mean, Iphones are a commercial product which is manufactured and sold by a corporation, are they not? Which country is that manufacturing done in exactly, and how much does the corporation pay those workers?
I think most of your (real) questions would be answered if you read Lenin and Chairman Mao and did some research on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics and the socialist market economy alongside the realities of the socialist transitionary period where many of the contradictions of capitalism remain as they are slowly synthesised and worked through. You’re clearly running on vibes for now and it’s leading you to not grasp the situation at hand properly.
None of what you said challenges the fact that China is capitalist in all ways that matter. I mean, are you trying to claim the workers there aren’t being exploited by corporations?
How long is this “socialist transitionary period” supposed to take? Because it’s been like 50 years so far, and it doesn’t look like it’s ending anytime soon.
P.S. Please tell me how much Apple pays the workers in China to manufacture Iphones. Something tells me it’s less than they would be paid in America.
So the answer to their question is “no”.
That’s a cute opinion. Did Epstein give it to you?
China is a country where they have to put nets on the roofs of factories to prevent people from throwing themselves over the side because they work 14 hours a day for a slave wage. Factories that make our cheap electronic goods.
Sounds like capitalism to me.
The nets were at foxconn in capitalist occupied Taiwan. You clearly have never been to China or researched China beyond just absorbing western headlines with no scepticism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn_suicides
Care to modify your previous misinformation?
Yeah, I mixed up the location of the foxconn factory fair catch. Doesn’t change the core point though.
Those nets were a Foxconn-specific response to a cluster of suicides at one company, not a national symbol of “China.” If you actually look at the data, China’s suicide rate is 8.9 per 100k, ranking around 65th globally. That’s lower than the US (15.6), Canada (9.4), Australia (13.1), UK (9.5), Japan (14.7), South Korea (20.6) and much of mainland Europe.
China makes everything from cheap trinkets to (most likely) the phone you’re typing this on. It’s not a monolith. Yes, working conditions were harsh during the early offshoring boom, that was the brutal calculus of catching up. But that strategy lifted nearly a billion people out of absolute poverty. China now has the world’s largest high-speed rail network, metro systems that dwarf most Western cities, and excess overtime has been explicitly ruled illegal by the Supreme Court, with enforcement ramping up.
On the system itself: China is in the socialist transitional period. Contradictions remain because capitalism is still hegemonic globally, but the commanding heights (finance, energy, telecoms, heavy industry) are publicly owned. The state isn’t a neutral arbiter; it’s the tool through which the dominant class enforces it’s power, in China that is the masses (the proletariat). Harvard’s Ash Center has tracked Chinese public opinion since 2003 and consistently finds approval of the central government above 90%. Chinese people don’t view their system through a Western liberal lens, they see democracy as whole-process people’s democracy: elections, consultation, grassroots feedback, policy adjustment, all integrated. The NPC has nearly 3,000 deputies, including representatives from all 55 minority groups, hundreds of frontline workers (manual labourers) and farmers, and workers from every sector. That’s structural representation. You can critique labor issues without falling back on orientalist tropes that flatten 1.4 billion people into a caricature.
I mean, it doesn’t change my point, that being corporations exploit workers in China because China is capitalist in all ways that matter.
It changes the lie you tried to tell me, that it was “Capitialst occupied” Tiawan, and that the glorious CCP would never allow such atrocity, which is clearly not true.
Those other countries also don’t have workers throwing themselves off of buildings because their jobs crush their will to live, but I guess that’s besides the point.
“Were harsh.” Lol ok. Hey look at this video of these Chinese workers sitting inside of a hydraulic press, it totally doesn’t show harsh working conditions.
Hence, “China is capitalist in all ways that matter.”
You could also stop defending a country of oligarchs which doesn’t care about human rights and clearly exploits it’s population for the benefit of global corporations,
I want you to really try to make a singular definition of Authoritarianism and Libertarianism that applies to all examples you would classify as authoritarian or libertarian. Is it theoretically possible for them to exist at the same time in the same place? Would that be a common definition? If not, why is your definition different and more importantly do you have enough evidence to justify having a different definition from the majority of people who use those terms?
No.
Willful ignorance is not ignorance.
You told me to do something, I said no.
That’s one example of libertarianism for ya.
It’s good for the working classes to wield state authority against capitalists and fascists. To not do so would be to allow capitalism to reform, and the alternative is capitalist authority used against the working classes.
But China is capitalist.
Wrong.
Is China State Capitalist?
No, it isn’t. Public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state, it’s socialist.
I’m convinced (based off interactions I’ve had on NextDoor) a lot of people think capitalism=uses money. But also that socialism/communism=failed/corrupted capitalism. China looking better than the USA nowadays means they have to be capitalist since they obviously aren’t failing.
That’s certainly how some people see it! Liberals look at China’s success and some try to twist that into a victory for capitalism, even if that doesn’t actually describe China’s success accurately.
And all states are authoritarian, so it loses its explanatory value as a useless term to isolate and describe individual states.