• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    So China must be a paragon of eco-friendly, right?

    If every country was doing as well as China right now, the world would be a much better place. But the Chinese advantage is largely in its cutting edge industrial capacity. A bit unfair to hold Vietnam or Cuba to the standards of a tech giant.

    It must also mean that there aren’t capitalist nations the means and innovation for protection of the environment, right? Right?

    Economic central planning that forecasts the consequences of ecological degradation on a 5, 10, and 50 year time horizon will lead administrators to policies that individual businesses fixated on quarterly profits and annual executive compensation packages don’t want to embrace.

    Past that, a big part of what the Chinese environmentalist project has been about is experimentation. They’ve done manual reforesting along the Gobi Desert. They’ve done nuclear energy R&D. They’ve done carbon capture projects. They’ve invested enormous sums in their space program.

    Most of the western R&D and infrastructure development has been limited by what the O&G industry is willing to directly invest in (carbon capture, converting from coal to nat gas with supplementary wind/solar, carbon credits and other forms of green financialization) all of which are designed to immediately enrich their bottom lines. That’s not even considering the deliberate efforts to maximize fossil fuel usage (the Texas ERCOT grid refusing to buy cheap renewable/nuclear power from outside the state, various states threatening to prohibit/tax electric vehicles and renewable energy power systems).

    To conclude capitalist rent seeking isn’t guiding any of these policies is deeply irrational.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        So, is China capitalist?

        They seem to be employing a central planning model out of a public sector unconcerned with maximizing personal profits. So… No?

        Is it communist?

        Not yet. They appear to be exploring Socialism, but with a particular set of Chinese Characteristics. I think they’re even a book on the subject.

        Thank you for your totally not subjective reply.

        No problem.

        • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          China’s economic system is called authoritarian capitalism. It has more billionaires than the United States.

          Also, please don’t call China “socialist.” It’s offensive and feeds into the false right-wing narrative that socialism is fascistic.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            China’s economic system is called authoritarian capitalism. It has more billionaires than the United States.

            Please read China Has Billionaires. Nobody believes China to have achieved full socialization, but it does have strong central planning.

            Also, please don’t call China “socialist.” It’s offensive and feeds into the false right-wing narrative that socialism is fascistic.

            What is Socialism, and what is Fascism, in your eyes? You don’t appear to be working off of Marxism with respect to Socialism, and you don’t appear to be working off of Ur-Fascism for your point on fascism.

            • yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              I’m always happy to discuss socialism, anarchism, fascism, or any other topic in political philosophy, which I’ve spent half my life studying, but not with people who link PRC authoritarian propaganda. I’ve blocked you so don’t bother replying.

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                You’re literally on a Marxist community, I am going to link Marxists. Red Sails is a Marxist site, and Roderic Day is a Marxist. I know you blocked me, but for anyone else wandering in here, please actually be willing to engage with Marxism, without wrecking and crying about it.

                You evidently were not willing to discuss Socialism or fascism. This is ridiculous, and you are no useful member of any mass Leftist movement if you can’t be willing to confront your previously held biases for even a milisecond, even if to ultimately argue in favor of them.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            China’s economic system is called authoritarian capitalism.

            Under the colonial model, China exported a great deal of its wealth overseas. Post-WW2, they have domesticated their wealth and accumulated capital/infrastructure for the benefit of the local working population. This transition, from colonial expropriation to domestic social development, is a crucial stepping stone towards the Socialist mode of production.

            Also, please don’t call China “socialist.” It’s offensive

            eye-roll

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        China is Socialist, in that it’s a transitional economy. There’s a large and robust Private Sector with strong central planning. It’s nowhere near fully Socialized, and nowhere near Communist, but it is a transitional economy.