Is it simply over-correcting in response to western anti-communist propaganda? I’d like to think it’s simply memeing for memes sake, but it feels too genuine.

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    24 days ago

    And I responded to that with the list of arguments that the duck might call itself whatever it wants but it’s still the same capitalistic duck (gig economy, 996, almost no proletariat in NPC - like 10% now? 15%?).

    This is bullshit based on vibes. I’ll state it again: The PRC is socialist because public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state. The PRC is not a gig economy, 996 is a problem but doesn’t mean it isn’t socialist, and the NPC is controlled by the proletariat.

    No socialist country can be ruled by beurocracy or bourgeoisie.

    Yep, the PRC is governed by the proletariat.

    You ignored that and instead wrote this shit:

    China is already socialist, it isn’t going to become socialist because it already is. China has worker protections, and the lives of the working classes have been improving year over year.

    Repeating again how I categorized socialism: The PRC is socialist because public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state. When I said China has worker protections, that was a response to your cope about “996” and other nonsense, not a way to say China is socialist.

    As if this is requirement to being a socialist country. If it is, then half of EU fits, including Poland.

    It isn’t a requirement to be socialist, and I never said it was. It took several comments for you to understand that my source was an economist’s review of a work of fiction and not the work of fiction itself, and now you keep pretending I’m defining socialism by saying it has safety nets despite my insistence on the mode of production. Why are you so consistent with butchering my points? Respond to the actual points I make.

    • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      24 days ago

      The PRC is socialist because public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state

      The 13th NPC (2018–2023) included 468 representatives categorized as farmers and workers, representing roughly 15.7% Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20230224112256/http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c30834/202302/be334508d78a41c4bf3b2d2b47a22fd0.shtml

      Dude. How the fuck working class controls the state if 15.7% of NPC are workers according to the NPC

      Like… Literally, how? Like stop for a second. You’re saying you’re from USA. Do you think if 15.7% of USA congress members were from working class, the USA congress would pivot to being pro worker class socialist country?

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        24 days ago

        They were categorized as front-line workers and farmers’ representatives, not as though the remainder were capitalists. Administration is not a class in and of itself, the state is the extension of the ruling class in society, its political force. In China, they have direct elections for local representatives, which elect further “rungs,” laddering to the top. The top then has mass polling and opinion gathering. This combination of top-down and bottom-up democracy ensures effective results. For more on this, see Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance.

        • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          24 days ago

          I believe I asked a very direct question, not asked for an excuse.

          For someone claiming I’m not engaging with what you write you seem to be doing that a lot of?

            • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              24 days ago

              I mean if you believe that a government not made from workers representatives is - or can be - good for the workers right, socialistic and shit, you should change your instance, because Marx would kick your ass. I don’t know about Lenin.

              Actually I think I can now call you a class traitor.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                24 days ago

                The NPC is made up of representatives of the working classes. Administration is not a distinct class, but a subsection of classes. Just like there are bourgeois administrators there are proletarian administrators, the same applies to intellectuals. Marx wouldn’t kick my ass, he’d see that I’m correct here, same as Lenin.

                • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  24 days ago

                  :D are tou sure about it?

                  Administration is not a distinct class, but a subsection of classes.

                  Have you perchance ever read anything by Marx, my sweet Marxists? Or talked about bureaucracy with communists not from China?

                  Since you didn’t, in marxist theory state bureaucracy is distinctly never a part of working class. Iirc the quote, it’s always “appalling parasitic body”.

                  And honestly, thinking that administrations are worker class… Like damn.

                  Unless you claim tautology?

                  NPC not made from working class representatives is socialist, because China is socialist. China is socialist because it’s ruled by socialist government, although not made from working class representatives?

                  (Before talking to you I honestly thought this duck looks less like capitalistic duck).

                  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    24 days ago

                    I’ve read Marx, quite a lot, actually.

                    This executive power with its enormous bureaucratic and military organization, with its vast and ingenious state machinery, with a host of officials numbering half a million, besides an army of another half a million, this appalling parasitic body, which enmeshes the body of French society and chokes all its pores, sprang up in the days of the absolute monarchy, with the decay of the feudal system, which it helped to hasten.

                    He was talking about the French state. You’re actually taking a metaphysical approach to Marx, not a dialectical one, by trying to abstract points away from the necessary context they exist in.

                    Classes are social relations to production and distribution. When production is collectivized and owned by all, it still needs managers, what Engels refers to as the “administration of things.” Further still, between capitalism and communism there is the transition from one to the other, that is still heavily made up of elements of the old as elements of the new grow and overtake it.

                    This is basic dialectics.

    • QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      24 days ago

      On 996: it is way less common than people seems to think. It was a fringe practice in ~40 companies during the tech boom. It has since been made illegal and is declining from it’s already fringe position.

      While overtime pressure which was more common and 996 still does unfortunately exist, the trend is clearly negative. As in, it’s being actively cracked down on. The Supreme Court ruled 996 illegal in 2021, and recent policy pushes like the 2025 Consumption Boost Plan are specifically targeting illegal overtime and pushing for better enforcement of rest/vacation rights among other benefits. It’s not perfect, obviously, but it’s hugely improved from where things were in the 2000s or even 2010s, and honestly it’s just not the omnipresent norm that English-language coverage sometimes makes it sound like.

      • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        24 days ago

        Good for them. It’s 2026 and they finally made illegal a year ago something that Europe made illegal (and enforced) decades ago.

        Now China is almost at the level of USA when it comes to workers rights forced to work vastly too long hours without repayment.

        But since I have you here, what is the gig economy rate and workers protection in China? We’re seeing a boom of gig economy of the worst exploited kind (Uber, Glovo, etc) among immigrants from muslim and asian countries in Poland (first it was gig economy and then migrants were imported en masse).

        • QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          24 days ago

          More on 996: it only became a “major” phenomenon around 2016–2019. It was ruled illegal in 2021. That’s a 3–5 year window, most of which the government spent doing the groundwork to draft enforceable legislation. Comparing that timeline to Europe’s decades of labor law development isn’t a fair metric, it should be about trajectory, not starting point.

          On worker rights: yes, China still has gaps. However it’s important to note it’s rapidly moving in the right direction. While China is tightening overtime enforcement, expanding social insurance coverage, and piloting portable benefits for flexible workers, many US and EU jurisdictions are eroding protections through austerity, gig-classification loopholes, and weakened collective bargaining. Improvement vs. decline isn’t a tie.

          To add to that is the hukou system. It’s extremely flawed in it’s own way, no question. But for rural hukou holders, it does guarantee land use rights and homestead eligibility, a subsistence buffer that doesn’t exist in the same form in the US or Europe. It is a structural fallback against total destitution, which changes the risk calculus for work.

          On China’s gig economy: platforms like Meituan and Didi are now included in pilot programs requiring occupational injury insurance contributions, and several provinces have issued guidelines mandating minimum earnings floors (tied to local minimum wages) and rest periods. Enforcement is uneven and rollout is gradual, but regulatory pressure is moving toward protection, not extraction. The “worst exploited kind” framing ignores that China’s gig workers generally retain rural land-use rights, face lower cost-of-living baselines in hometowns, and operate under a system actively testing mechanisms to curb platform abuse, not one that universally treats them as independent contractors to dodge all liability.

          • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            24 days ago

            Improvement vs. decline isn’t a tie.

            Totally agree. Although it’s like the old saying 瘦死的骆驼比马大, right? Do you remember EU’s Forced Labour Ban that affected Apples companies in China, and that the exploited Chinese workers complained to EU instead of CPC? Or Brazils BYD scandal that for Brazilians Chinese workers treatment by BYD was tantamount to slavery, while for the workers it was an improvement?

            To add to that is the hukou system. It’s extremely flawed in it’s own way, no question. But for rural hukou holders, it does guarantee land use rights and homestead eligibility, a subsistence buffer that doesn’t exist in the same form in the US or Europe

            Lets leave USA on the side. I’m not from there, from what I’ve seen I wouldn’t like to live there as a worker.

            does guarantee land use rights and homestead eligibility

            Let’s call spade a spade. Hukou is system made to stop urbanization. It’s effects are that there’s a lot of rural workers lacking social safety nets in cities that still migrated to the cities looking for better work opportunities, and because of missing social safety net they had no choice but to agree to be exploited by the capitalist class (no matter if privately owned or if state owned, if a company exploits the workforce it’s a capitalistic leech, agreed?).

            Sources: uh… Literally definition and exceptions under which migration was allowed, and the hukou wages are, what, 40% (?) lower for the same job today, see this or one of the sources (too many links opened on the phone, sorry) https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecot.12412#ecot12412-bib-0029

            • QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              24 days ago

              Look, I’m rural minority. I’ve filled the forms. I’ve seen the wage gap. I know the barriers. Saying it has flaws isn’t news. I said that already. But pretending the land-use rights, the homestead eligibility, the hometown fallback don’t materially change a worker’s risk calculation? That’s idealism. That’s ignoring the concrete for the sake of a slogan. You can critique the system and acknowledge its positive material effects.

              I’ve just realised I’ve replied to you on another comment. I don’t have time for people who brag about targeting random Chinese players in games, buying into propaganda to dehumanize us, then show up pretending to champion Chinese workers’ dignity. So I’m just going to stop here and leave it at this.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        24 days ago

        Awesome, thanks for letting me know! I knew it was on the decline, but solid evidence on material movements like declaring it illegal are great to see. I myself once worked a similar schedule for a while, here in the States.

        • QinShiHuangsShlong@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          24 days ago

          Sorry to hear that.

          Something I always find interesting about people bringing up 996 and that era is that at its peak it was about as bad as Japanese work culture while being far less prevalent as a percentage of the population affected.

          Now China is putting multi year plans in place to fix it and support workers and yet is still demonised for it while Japan under the cart titan is continuing to push workers harder and doesn’t get half the blowback especially among westerners.

          I understand propaganda and racism play a big part in it it’s still an interesting sight to behold.

          • ThirdConsul@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            24 days ago

            I understand propaganda and racism play a big part in it it’s still an interesting sight to behold.

            I don’t know about USA. In the Europe it was met with the same disgust (for the companies and the failing country) and pity (for the affected).

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            24 days ago

            Thanks!

            And from a western perspective, a huge amount of why Japan gets a pass even though we are aware of the abysmal working conditions is because anime is so popular here. It has a cultural strangehold among younger generations. The ROK has similar cultural exports. Media from the PRC is gradually becoming more popular, but it takes time for that to actually develop to a higher stage, development isn’t something smooth as we both know, it works in leaps once the new overpowers the old.