| Submit your comments on this article | |
| China-Japan-Koreas | |
| The sad end of Jack Ma Inc. | |
| 2021-06-08 | |
[Forbes]
| |
| Posted by:3dc |
| #8 Probably a better word choice. But you get the point. The funny thing is, I remember it from somewhere, but I don't know where. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2021-06-08 23:41 |
| #7 Communism isn't an economic system. It's an authoritarian political system disguised as an economic system. Totalitarian, but yes. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2021-06-08 23:26 |
| #6 I keep thinking I've read this somewhere else... but I can't find where; it may be an original insight, but I doubt it. Basically, this: Communism isn't an economic system. It's an authoritarian political system disguised as an economic system. Once you realize this, the alleged differences between fascism and communism seem less. It doesn't matter to the people at the bottom if the people at the top are practicing Party Communism or Party Capitalism. They're the same system. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2021-06-08 17:15 |
| #5 Elon Musk to the white courtesy phone! |
| Posted by: Airandee 2021-06-08 08:23 |
| #4 Should be an eye opener for all corporate heads that hitch their wagons to China. Don't count on it, though... |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2021-06-08 07:34 |
| #3 The old difference between the commies, international socialists, and the nazis, national socialists, is that the latter rather than seizing the 'means of production' would allow the old managers who knew how to run the place to remain, at least for a while till it no longer suited the party. The eternal verities of history have been distorted by ideologists stretching their world views and models to the breaking point to accommodate new realities. Xi is just another absolute ruler - an emperor by another name - seeking long-lasting fame for himself. The ideological pap is just stream of consciousness invented on the fly to justify whatever he wants to do. Think Henry VIII and his divorce from the Vatican. Personal aggrandizement and whim are at the heart of most political endeavors - and current day Chinese rulers are no exception to this tendency. In Chinese history, the counter balance to absolute rulers has traditionally been the elite mutiny (Zhao Gao, Xiang Yu, An Lushan, Cao Cao, Zhao Kuangyin, Deng Xiaoping) or armed revolution from below (Liu Bang, Liu Xiu, Liu Bei, Zhu Yuanzhang, Mao Zedong, Li Zicheng, Hong Xiuquan). Each of these names has his own Wiki entry, having been a major player in the unfolding of Chinese history. Why not democracy? No one wants to risk his neck for anything but a shot at absolute power. A gamble with your life as the principal stake to make someone else the ruler has probably always been seen as mildly quixotic, which is why men like Cincinnatus and Washington* are the rare exceptions, whereas Napoleon and Lenin are the rule. * When told by the American artist Benjamin West that Washington was going to resign, King George III of England said "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world." |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2021-06-08 07:11 |
| #2 The New Economic Policy (NEP) (Russian: но́вая экономи́ческая поли́тика (НЭП), tr. nóvaya ekonomícheskaya polítika) was an economic policy of the Soviet Union proposed by Vladimir Lenin in 1921 as a temporary expedient. Lenin characterized the NEP in 1922 as an economic system that would include "a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control," while socialized state enterprises would operate on "a profit basis." ... Joseph Stalin abandoned the NEP in 1928 with the Great Break. Not Winnie-the-Pooh but the man of steel? |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2021-06-08 06:30 |
| #1 The old difference between the commies, international socialists, and the nazis, national socialists, is that the latter rather than seizing the 'means of production' would allow the old managers who knew how to run the place to remain, at least for a while till it no longer suited the party. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2021-06-08 06:22 |