Is China Communist? Pop Quiz of Modern China 101

[gambit]

It doesn’t matter how you're screaming and shrieking, or try to find excuses or pretext, the bottom-line fact is that the US government banned the photo, regardless whether Taguba is allowed to work or reporter is prosecuted or not.

Still wrong...No matter how much you would like to play with words. The US government is in possession of certain news worthy items, be it alienn corpses in Area 51 or more prisoner abuse photos out of Abu Grhaib or Gitmo. The US President does not allow its dissemination to the public. For you to say that this is equivalent to 'media control' is like saying just because the US government restrict flights over Area 51, it is the same as 'banning' civil aviation.

Your IQ nonetheless failed you to recognize the simple fact:

Executive, Judiciary, and most of legislature have formed a united front in an open defiant of federal freedom of information laws.

This is a vivid, living example of medium control by US government. It is amazing that in the face of iron fact, somebody will still, in vain though, attempt to deny it clownishly.

If you read Dr. Michael Parenti’s book, there are numerous examples with sources and proofs how the government and corporate control/influence US media when need arises. It doesn’t have to actually organize the publishing companies. (see McCarthyism below)

This is the true 'media control' and intimidation...

Venezuela's Chávez threatens to shut down TV station | csmonitor.com

Caracas, Venezuela - President Hugo Chávez is threatening again to shut down Globovision, the sole television channel in Venezuela that regularly criticizes him — saying it had stirred panic for reporting an earthquake before the government announced it.

"We're not going to tolerate a crazy man with a cannon shooting it at the whole world," Mr. Chávez said on his weekly television and radio show Sunday, referring to Alberto Ravell, the Globovision general manager. "Enough! ... This has to end or I'll stop calling myself Hugo Rafael Chávez Frias."

"You are playing with fire, manipulating, inciting hate and much more. All of you: television networks, radio stations, papers," he said. "Don't make a mistake with me."

Did Clinton made similar threats when the media, from serious news reportage to late night comedians, made fun of his sexual pecadillos? Did you see how Jim Carey on In Living Color caricatured Clinton with thrusting hips in a dance? Why was Bush Sr a one-termer but his son re-elected? Given blatant examples of 'media control' by governments all over the world, INCLUDING CHINA, your attempts to portray the US in similar light borderline on the pathological.

FBI Director can’t serve even a single president if he/she is in conflict with the president: he/she'd then better go Hawaii to type behind screen.

The whole institution is set up for balancing (hopefully) the interest between different interest groups. Ordinary citizen normally can only be represented by/through those interest groups.

Looks like it is YOUR intelligence that should be questioned. The point here is about 'media control' and in order for the Obama administration to be as effective as Chavez down in Venezuela, the President must have governmental institutions, plural, ready made for that task. And if that is true, then we would have seen that power passed from President to President. But that is not the case, we saw how two reporters, Woodward and Bernstein, brought down the Nixon Presidency, we saw how Clinton was ridiculed and eventually his impeachment came to fore, we saw how Bush Sr's approval rating plummeted when he failed to live up to his campaign promise of no new taxes as reported by the media and lost re-election. One US President administration after another came under media attacks. So where is your evidence, other than stretching the definition of 'banning', that there is 'media control' in the US? You have none.

For your reference, this link tells WHO RULES AMERICA

BTW, I saw this website because I found that it actually serves as high school teaching material! I love America that there are more sane people than you.

Give yourself a break this time. There is NOTHING there to support your argument that there is 'media control' by the government in the US. I read the entire summary link. If anything, his summary actually debunked you since according to his thesis, the media is catered to, or 'kissed up' in order for the 'elites' to exercise their 'rule' in America. May be you are in high school?

What all this raving has anything to do with critics that Chomsky made?

Once again your IQ failed to live up to my expectation. So I will attempt to dumb it down a little more.

You claimed that there is 'media control' in the US and trotted out Chomsky to 'prove' it. Anyone who is willing to exercise critical thinking, and apparently you are not on that list, would have found out that for a large part of Chomsky's tenure at MIT, the US DoD indirectly paid for his research. So it would have been logical to ask that IF there is 'media control' in the US to the extent as that of China as you insinuated, THEN WHY THE HELL DID THE US GOVERNMENT NOT SHUT CHOMSKY UP? After all, he was critical of the US, anything from the Vietnam War to how stupid and gullible average Americans are, in the whole time the Pentagon was financing his research. The Pentagon could have sent a couple of goons to arrange an 'accident' for Chomsky at his house or at the very least pressured MIT's administration to shut him up. Far worse have been done to academics in China if they got out of the political line. Is it clear enough on how weak it was to use Chomsky to support your argument?

President Ford pardoned a criminal called Nixon! Please let’s not talk about presidential pardon – another can of worms of the system.

"He did not decide not to run for re-election." Perhaps in your imagination Americans are crazy people who all in a fact-denial status similar to you to support a criminal for president.

How does this support your argument that there is 'media control' in the US by the government?

In addition, bet a young person like you never heard of McCarthyism in US?

And you are old enough?

Buddy...Pressure is not the same as control like when the government have a state media at the exclusion of competetion. McCarthyism was pressure, even wikipedia has it right...

McCarthyism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

McCarthyism is the politically motivated practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence.

Also known as 'smearing' someone's good name. And this does NOT support your argument that there is 'media control' in the US.

We ordianry citizen must watch the behavior of the governement with a vigilant eye!

Try saying that in China or Venezuela. For Venezuela, make it quick before Chavez really crack down.

 

[kungpaochicken]

What can be defined as a "heaven of capitalism"?
1) a mass of free labors (under Deng's regime, Chinese government 'de-post' tens of millions of workers from gov-owned enterprises)
2) no social-security and public welfare system(Under zhu's regime,the health care, retirement plan as well as most of the social benifits were deliberately killed by the government as an effort to "unload the burden")
3) no union ( strictly speaking China never has an independent union)
4) a media controled by interest group (what China has now is a totalitarian of corrupted ccp officials that served as sole representitives of private corps and capitalists, this makes sure that any arbitration on dispute over labor right will eventually favor the capitalists)
Now you guys understand why captialists all over the world like to invest and do business in CHina

 

[kungpaochicken]

Of course, all of these started from the beginning of Sino-US honeymoon back in early 80s, ccp and us interest group made a deal: sell out of Chinese ppls interest for the "acknowledgement from the west".
So what did ordinary American ppl make out of it? They just expose themselves to a globalized competing environment, in which most of their oversea competitor ask for only one tenth of their pay yet still do a better and more efficient job.
Believe it or not, Chinese government and US interest group are on the same boat, Chinese gov not only offer US companies the privilage of unrestricted rights to exploit Chinese worker , it also funded the 2nd gulf war by buying huge amount of US treasury bond.

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

Of course, all of these started from the beginning of Sino-US honeymoon back in early 80s, ccp and us interest group made a deal: sell out of Chinese ppls interest for the "acknowledgement from the west".
So what did ordinary American ppl make out of it? They just expose themselves to a globalized competing environment, in which most of their oversea competitor ask for only one tenth of their pay yet still do a better and more efficient job.
Believe it or not, Chinese government and US interest group are on the same boat, Chinese gov not only offer US companies the privilage of unrestricted rights to exploit Chinese worker , it also funded the 2nd gulf war by buying huge amount of US treasury bond.

You are partially correct, but it's not that simple. China 50 years ago is much different from today, so much has progressed that it is amazing!

China realized that back then they will be exploited, but there was a BIG benefit. That benefit is to be able to be self-dependent. If you are capable of the ENTIRE supply chain from R&D to development to construction to production to distribution to logistics to improvement to brand building ---> you not only provide lots of employment (though at slave labour), but GRADUALLY you will restore yourself to your rightful place. China not long ago was known AS THE QUALITY AND TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF THE WORLD. All world trade went to China from Europe to Middle-east to India to Japan to Africa, all high-quality goods depended on China.

Without going through this tough time, China will have difficulty to regain this admiration and respect she deserves! Instead each and every single Chinese needs to develop the Chinese Brand, and the Chinese Good Reputation! If we do that then instead of getting exploited by foreigners, we help our poor people.

 

[gpit]

...
The US government is in possession of certain news worthy items, be it alienn corpses in Area 51 or more prisoner abuse photos out of Abu Grhaib or Gitmo. The US President does not allow its dissemination to the public.
...

Appreciate your acknowledgement of US governmental media restriction. Medium control or restriction doesn’t have to be blatant. It doesn’t have to kill reporters, imprison journalists, shutdown press organizations, etc., as some naïve brain could only think of. The restriction can also come as governmental withholding of valuable photos or other material to achieve the same results: prohibiting the public from being aware of their contents, from being aware of potential criminal facts.

Try not to digress any further and go back to the topic, it is mostly amazing that some brainwashed criticizer doesn’t event know what communism is. A theory doesn’t have to be perfect, as it can constantly perfect itself via practice. To me, “for each…” is a flaw in the theory, at least based on current knowledge that we possess. There are other flaws in the theory as well. Nonetheless, many developed countries, including US, adopt a lot of communist measurements. For instance,

THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO

...
Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

– In China, land is publicly owned but farmers and city dwellers have the right to use. In US, it is partially implemented. For instance, federal owns 83.1% of NV’s land, 67.9% of AK’s land. In addition, state and county also own big piece of their land. It is claimed (I haven't verified it) that about 90% of US land is publicly owned.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

– Completely realized in US. Somehow implemented in China

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

– Partially realized in US, but not in China.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

– Pretty sure about this for rebels in both countries.

5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

– Financial crisis causes US government to take some measurement like this; Whereas China, mostly having this in place already, doesn’t suffer as much in the crisis.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

– More in China than in US. US have anti-monopoly laws to encourage competition, but still, in many industries, the big players are only handful and pretty much centralized.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

– This is a more complex issue. Privatization caused many Chinese state owned companies to disappear. But it still has more state owned companies than US.

8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

– Affirmative action in US is a typical example of the implementation; whereas in China, labor discrimination is still rampant.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

– Partially implemented in US. Bio giant Monsanto is typical one of such examples. China still can’t compete in this aspect.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

– completely implemented in US, but not quite in China yet.

Tell us who is more communist!

 

[gambit]

Appreciate your acknowledgement of US governmental media restriction. Medium control or restriction doesn’t have to be blatant. It doesn’t have to kill reporters, imprison journalists, shutdown press organizations, etc., as some naïve brain could only think of. The restriction can also come as governmental withholding of valuable photos or other material to achieve the same results: prohibiting the public from being aware of their contents, from being aware of potential criminal facts.

You are basically stretching the definition of 'control' as much as possible, even to beyond the boundaries of common sense. By this line of thinking, by denying 'the media' from access to my health records, I am exerting 'control' on 'the media', not just 'the media' but anyone who wishes to see my health records, my pay, my home phone, etc...etc...

Try not to digress any further and go back to the topic,

Charge of 'media control' is part of the topic on whether China is a communist country or not. No digression here.

...it is mostly amazing that some brainwashed criticizer doesn’t event know what communism is. A theory doesn’t have to be perfect, as it can constantly perfect itself via practice. To me, “for each…” is a flaw in the theory, at least based on current knowledge that we possess. There are other flaws in the theory as well. Nonetheless, many developed countries, including US, adopt a lot of communist measurements. For instance,

<snipped>

Tell us who is more communist!

Fine...If you wish to call the US a 'communist' country, then it begs the question of what happened to the Soviet Union, its empire and now China...? After all, they were the ones who cited Marx the most, not US.



THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

This action is the hallmark of every communist revolution.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

Marx is talking about the HOW of achieving a communist society. A progressive tax scheme is one of the methods as he stated by -- These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. The word is 'measures'. The goal is to eliminate private property and ultimately income altogether in a communist society. By confiscating the most valuable property still known to man -- land. Communists have bypassed one of these measures -- taxes. The results should be instant paradise. Or pretty close to instant, I would say.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

Another method at getting to private property. This time it does not matter if land in involved. By confiscating the most valuable property still known to man -- land -- and now a person's junk or stuff. Communists have bypassed another one of these measures -- eliminate the laws of inheritance. The results should be instant paradise. Or pretty close to instant, I would say.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

Emigrants? That imply movements of people for whatever reasons there might be. By restricting movements, communists have no need to confiscate anything. Rebels? Quite problematic since it begs the question of how to interpret when a person is a 'rebel'. Best to assume that ALL dissent to authority constitute a desire to destabilize the regime which would make any dissension 'rebellious'. Problem solved.

5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

This is another method towards the goal of eliminating private property. But since communists confiscated the most valuable property known to man -- land -- this method is largely irrelevant. Makes one wonder why would any communist country have 'banks' in the first place.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

Aahh...The 'state media' apparatus. All communist countries have this by eliminating competition. This should create near-instantaneous paradise.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

By confiscation of the most valuable property known to man -- land -- communists therefore would own whatever instruments of production that rests on that land. Should be instant or near-instant paradise when this occurs.

8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

Collective farming or collective whatever else. All communist countries so far have enabled this practice.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

Forced relocation of the people to where their labor should be most productive. Communists have done this often.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

Child labor is indeed abhorrent and education is good.

I do not know why would you imply that the US is the more 'communist' than China, after all, communists have largely bypassed most of these methods. Marx said this...

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state, i.e., of the proletariat organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.

In using 'by degree' it would require time and communists eliminated that bottleneck by using violence to quell dissent and exert controls over the people. This is not about theory but about applied engineering. This is social engineering.

 

[GSK]

Well, I would say, China is a grey cat. OK, guys, enough. You are arguing about wether the cat is white or black. But remember, it is a good cat as long as it can catch mouse.

Wether China is communist, Facinist, or Captialist right now, doesn't matter much. The most important thing is: it has the right direction and is changing better. Do you agree and do you like so?

 

[oct605032048]

Well, I would say, China is a grey cat. OK, guys, enough. You are arguing about wether the cat is white or black. But remember, it is a good cat as long as it can catch mouse.

Wether China is communist, Facinist, or Captialist right now, doesn't matter much. The most important thing is: it has the right direction and is changing better. Do you agree and do you like so?

Do you agree and do you like so?
agreed.

 

[&#23792;&#22238;&#36335;&#36716;]

Conclusion: As long as the United States does not intervene in China. China will be very happy! Finished!

 

[Sonyuke_Songpaisan]

Look at the recent Wukan riots in Southern China. I'm wondering if the Chinese soldiers would kill their own people after top leaders determine to crush down the rioters.

Mind yourself. The Japanese soldiers had the experience of killing the Ryukyu locals.

 

[longbrained]

China stopped being a communist economy in 1980's but its political system for sure is and will remain communist. Basically Chinese were smarter than Russians. They decoupled economy from politics and got things going. Russia could not do it and is still lagging behind.

 

[cera]

Let me repeat this again, as long as those so-called democratic countries still invade other countries at will, kill people like animals, fool their own people like idiots, we will treat the so-called "democracy" like BS.

The most horrible nightmare for those countries' leaders is that one day China becomes #1 powerful, prosperous country in the world, and its people enjoy happy life, by the time, those countries' people will finally wake up and challenge their leaders and their propaganda machines. The day will come and it's getting closer.

 

[oct605032048]

Who is questioning that, you are changing the conversation now by including Capitalism. The term la se fair applies universially.

In order to make your bold statement of China not being communist, first you need to understand the meaning of democracy. The more you will read and understand, the more china becomes communist.

Thanks!!!!

One thousand years ago, there was no democracy in China's Song Empire nor in the Frankish Kingdoms in Europe. Do you mean they were communist countries?

---------- Post added at 02:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:10 AM ----------

In your logic, the Europeans became communists after Gaius Julius Caesar's dictatorship and remained communists for the following 1500 years?

 

[ephone]

Why don't you show me the definition of your "Fascist"???

You must be brain-dead to call China "Fascist".

China is politically Fascist, That would be the best definition to describe PRC, Your free to buy what ever you want, but your not free to run for office or vote for office other then a member of the ruling party.

 

[Viva_Viet]

Why don't you show me the definition of your "Fascist"???

You must be brain-dead to call China "Fascist".

China attacked VN without declaration of war like Nazi attacked Soviet and Japan attacked US .China killed her own people in Tienanmen square when those people just simply demand the rights to live as human. China disrespect the international rules in SCS(east sea) too.

It's the way of Fascist, that's why people call you Evil .