Public outrage is mounting in China over allegations that a major state-owned food company has been cutting costs by using the same tankers to carry fuel and cooking oil – without cleaning them in between.
Public outrage is mounting in China over allegations that a major state-owned food company has been cutting costs by using the same tankers to carry fuel and cooking oil – without cleaning them in between.
The scandal, which implicates China’s largest grain storage and transport company Sinograin, and private conglomerate Hopefull Grain and Oil Group, has raised concerns of food contamination in a country rocked in recent decades by a string of food and drug safety scares – and evoked harsh criticism from Chinese state media.
It was an “open secret” in the transport industry that the tankers were doing double duty, according to a report in the state-linked outlet Beijing News last week, which alleged that trucks carrying certain fuel or chemical liquids were also used to transport edible liquids such as cooking oil, syrup and soybean oil, without proper cleaning procedures.
China is a dictatorship, but ultracapitalist with fewer regulations. They do crack down occasionally. Source: lived there. It is both a capitalist and communist shitshow.
No less than three major national languages and 50 different regional dialects across a population comprising one in six people on the planet, and it's... an ethnostate? Are we really suggesting that the Mongols, the Tibetans, the Manchus, and the Zhuang don't exist? These would constitute entire countries elsewhere in the world.
"It's not an ethnostate because people only hold top governmental positions in regions where their ethnicities dominate" is not the argument you think it is.
Feigning ignorance is not going to make your ridiculous argument where ethnic minorities only get government jobs involving their own ethnicity while the Han Chinese, who are an ethnic group whether you like it or not, run the country as a whole is not an ethnostate is not going to help.
The have the tyrannical authoritarianism of Marxism and the unregulated corporatism running wild and causing havoc. It's truly the worst of both worlds.
Ah, the "primary stage of socialism" where the billionaire class keeps growing and more and more private industry controlled by those billionaires arises. Yes, they'll get there any day now.
Maybe they won’t get there. Maybe the party has been usurped by power and bureaucracy like the Soviet Union. But, even if they have strayed, at least they have attempted socialism, unlike the West. Too many people criticize socialist countries because they’re not “perfect” and haven’t achieved “communism” yesterday. Social-political change is messy, and the transition takes time.
Yes! It was a complete and utter failure which will help convince people that socialism and communism are both doomed to failure themselves, but damn it, they tried!
We? Are you the Chinese government? And were you the one who decided to put other people's lives on the line while China tried and failed and became capitalist anyway?
I see, so humanity tried communism and failed and therefore the 45 million people who died in China's Great Leap Forward's deaths were justified. Because China meant well.
The maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry.
China has been a so-called communist country for over half a century and the number of private billionaires has grown, so this whole "billionaires happen during the gradual transition to communism" argument doesn't really work when you start with zero billionaires with Mao and now have 814 billionaires.
Or am I to believe the number of billionaires keeps going up and up and then -bam- elimination of market economies?
But I'm sure Roderic Day, who appears to have no academic credentials, can find all kinds of explanations.
And in 20 years when there are over 1600 billionaires in China? Communism is just around the corner, baby!
Do tell me which workers control Nongfu Spring Water's means of production. Because as far as I can tell, the control rests in the hands of Zhong Shanshan, China's richest man, and not the company's 20,000 employees.
But I'm sure if we wait another half-century, at least two workers can control the means of production at that company.
(Now it's your turn to tell me that the workers controlling the means of production is not something that helps define communism.)
Good read, if a bit long if you’re not expecting it. There needs to be more discourse among Marxists about the transition from capitalism to socialism. Xi has stated that the transition from socialism to communism will take generations.
Please do show me where in Captial or the Manifesto Marx approves of the existence of private owners of corporations to get extremely rich. You can just quote a passage or two. I don't remember any of that from when I read them, but perhaps you can fill me in on how the workers are controlling his means of production.
You might as well be talking to a wall. There's no way in hell you're going to change a tankie's mind... I live in China and everybody here knows it's a capitalist society. The five year plans exist mostly on paper. The government will implement it in the sense of making specific grants available for specific target industries.
As a result you'll have a ton of startups in that field popping up, and then slowly burning through the funds over the next 4 years, rinse & repeat. A few companies make it, most just take the cash and die.
They also change the plans often enough, in reaction to the markets. You know, just like any capitalist regime would.
Not explicitly, but implicitly it’s in the link from SSJMarx.
Marx from the “German Ideology:”
It is only possible to achieve real liberation in the real world and by employing real means, that slavery cannot be abolished without the steam-engine and the mule and spinning-jenny, serfdom cannot be abolished without improved agriculture, and that, in general, people cannot be liberated as long as they are unable to obtain food and drink, housing and clothing in adequate quality and quantity. “Liberation” is an historical and not a mental act, and it is brought about by historical conditions, the development of industry, commerce, agriculture, the conditions of intercourse.
And Engels from the “Principles of Communism:”
Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke? No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity.
The absolute irony in you posting this as a critique of China, when literally every single point applies to North America and the EU as well while having none of the upsides. (At least, no upsides for Americans. The EU is doing a better job.)
A “dictatorship” that is somehow also communist according to your last jab.
Like, do y’all seriously not see how much you’re embarrassing yourselves? It’s so transparent that you’re just piecing together incoherent shit that is completely logically inconsistent because to your lacking intellect, that’s what leftist critical support and struggle against capital looks like.
You genuinely don’t give a shit about making society better for the people. Why are you pretending? Y’all get more pathetic by the day, I swear.
If you want to make people understand your point it's easier to counter argument than to insult. 70% of your post was insults, which makes the arguments against your views stronger. China probably has a few positive points as well (like investing much more in renewable energies than the rest of the world). So why not use stuff like this?